From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Thu Jan 1 02:08:07 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:08:07 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] The Open Veins of Wales Message-ID: <495C87F7.3060507@ashisuto.co.jp> Dr Beeching helped turn the country I've come to love into an outpost of empire. Now his legacy can be reversed. by George Monbiot The Guardian {December 30 2008} A strange thing has happened to me over the two years since I moved to Wales. I have become susceptible to a novel and disturbing sensation: pride in my adopted country. England, the land of my birth, means nothing to me. The same goes for Britain. I despise nationalism. But I have been overtaken by an irrational impulse. I find myself supporting Wales in rugby, football (someone's got to do it, and we did beat Liechtenstein) and all its competing claims against other nations. This impulse arises from a number of observations, viz: 1. In two years of walking through the valleys and over the hills here, I have never been shouted at. 2. The cafe in the local leisure centre serves smoothies in measures labelled "small" (about a pint) and "regular" (about two pints). 3. When I wrote to a very active councillor, asking his permission to recommend him for a gong, he replied, "I would prefer not to seek such an honour". Through such observations, I have begun to form the impression that Wales is less socially stratified, less grasping, more liberal than the rest of Britain. Though I am an outsider, from the colonial power, with an unerring ability to wind people up, I have never been made to feel unwelcome here. And it seldom rains here, and then only at night. (That's not strictly true, but this is what nationalism does}. In this spirit I have to record that something is missing. Its absence offends my new-found national pride. It mocks our attempt to become a coherent country. It means that the Gogs (of North Wales) and the Hwntws (of South Wales) will forever be at each other's throats. It means that the greenest nation in the UK is locked into unsustainability. It is also bleeding ridiculous. As far as I can discover, this is the only country in Europe which you cannot traverse by rail without spending most of the journey passing through another. The only rail link which allows you to travel from north to south crosses the border near Llangollen and doesn't re-enter Wales until it approaches Abergavenny, 100 miles away. The railway map of Wales is a classic indicator of an extractive economy. The lines extend either towards London or towards the ports. As Eduardo Galeano established in The Open Veins of Latin America, the infrastructure of a country is a guide to the purpose of its development {1}. If the main roads and railways form a network, linking the regions and the settlements within the regions, they are likely to have been developed to enhance internal commerce and mobility. If they resemble a series of drainage basins, flowing towards the ports and borders, they are likely to have been built to empty the nation of its wealth for the benefit of another. Like Latin America, Wales is poor because it was so rich. Its abundant natural resources gave rise to an extractive system, designed to leave as little wealth behind as possible. Just as the railway network was developed largely for the benefit of another economy, it was dismantled for the same purpose. Wales was hit very hard by the Beeching cuts of the 1960s. Before that, one of the lines which could have been used as part of a North-South railway was flooded by Llyn Celyn, a reservoir which drowned the village of Capel Celyn in order to supply water to Liverpool. It was this act of enclosure which inspired RS Thomas's famous poem Reservoirs, in which he mourned ... the smashed faces Of the farms with the stone trickle Of their tears down the hills' side. The dam wall was built across the Bala to Ffestiniog line. Before Beeching, a handful of minor routes existed, which could have enabled a determined passenger who was prepared to make a few changes to travel from north to south, but there was no line either conceived or used as a long distance railway connecting the nation. Could such a railway be built? Thanks to the efforts of a remarkable man, the idea is beginning to seep into the national consciousness. Archimandrite Deiniol is the only Orthodox priest serving in North Wales. Bull-headed, magnificently bearded, he is the spokesman for Yn Ein Blaenau, a group set up to lobby for the regeneration of Blaenau Ffestiniog, one of the country's poorest communities. Unlike many other depressed Welsh towns, Blaenau has a way out: but it is blocked. It is surrounded - hideously - by the waste from its slate workings. The British government has a policy of replacing virgin building stone with mining spoil and rubble. The slate waste around Blaenau would supply Britain with roadstone for years, but it's stuck there until the Conwy Valley railway line is upgraded. Father Deiniol has been negotiating with the byzantine network of railway companies, authorities and regulators, and has so far been frustrated. But in doing so, he has learnt a good deal about how the railways of the United Kingdom work - or don't. He has also discovered that a railway can be critical to a region's regeneration, and that the north-south roads in Wales are close to gridlock. There are plenty of lobbyists calling for new roads, but Father Deiniol's plan is likely to be cheaper and more sustainable. His survey of the disused railway lines of Wales shows that there is one route - from Rhyl through Denbigh, Rhuthun, Corwen, Newtown, Llanidloes, Rhaeadr and Builth Road to Dowlais - which would require only two miles of new formation to link Holyhead to Cardiff {2}. The rest of the way makes use of current and former railways. He proposes that short feeder lines also be built connecting this trunk route to Mold, Llangollen, Oswestry, Bala, Hay-on-Wye and Brecon {3}. The One-Wales Line could not only offer a much faster journey than the current long detour through England, it would also knit the other railways of Wales into a coherent network, as it uses the north coast railway and crosses the Cambrian line and the Shrewsbury to Swansea line. It would help to regenerate a desperately poor region in the south called the Heads of the Valleys. The project would look rather like the Western Railway Corridor in Ireland, which is reopening 184 kilometres of disused lines between Limerick and Sligo {4}. The least the Welsh Assembly Government should do is to commission a feasibility study and cost-benefit analysis of Father Deiniol's plan. His railway would help Wales looks like a country again, rather than a depot for someone else's empire. www.monbiot.com References: 1. Eduardo Galeano, 1971. Originally published as Las Venas Abiertas de America Latina. Siglo XXI Editores. 2. Tad Deiniol, 3rd February 2008. Proposal for a Direct, All-Wales, Holyhead to Cardiff Fast Rail Link. Yn Ein Blaenau. If you would like a copy of this document, I can send it to you. 3. Tad Deiniol, 2008. Map of Proposed North South Rail Link and Feeder Lines. Yn Ein Blaenau. If you would like a copy of this document, I can send it to you. 4. See http://www.westontrack.com/ Copyright (c) 2006 Monbiot.com | site by Tom Dyson http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/12/30/the-open-veins-of-wales/ TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 13:08:18 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:08:18 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Delusions of victory in Gaza Message-ID: <200901012008.n01K8ICw001122@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/3e22bfc5/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 13:16:46 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:16:46 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Letter to the editor of the Canadian Jewish News Message-ID: <200901012016.n01KGktn006331@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/3f02469b/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 13:20:56 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:20:56 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Molten Lead Message-ID: <200901012020.n01KKuuB009114@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/713d9a4b/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 13:23:05 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:23:05 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Caution: Settlers Ahead Message-ID: <200901012023.n01KN5sH010405@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/f4c4a064/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 13:24:27 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:24:27 -0800 Subject: Mass uprising of Greeceās youth Message-ID: <200901012024.n01KORKr011921@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/bb8ec14e/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 13:23:42 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:23:42 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Party to Murder Message-ID: <200901012023.n01KNgCq011203@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/2e25f899/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 14:07:28 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:07:28 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Al Jazeera - documentary on 'God's Chariot, ' Israel's Merkava Tank Message-ID: <200901012107.n01L7SbX008529@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/4ae266a6/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 14:28:40 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:28:40 -0800 Subject: [R-G] BIG DEMO Saturday, 3.1, in Tel Aviv: STOP THE KILLING! NO TO THE SIEGE! YES TO LIFE FOR BOTH PEOPLES! Message-ID: <200901012128.n01LSeFu022688@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/17ad7965/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 1 14:35:21 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:35:21 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Behind closed doors, U.S. seeks Israel exit strategy Message-ID: <200901012135.n01LZLi7026477@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090101/f4c888d0/attachment.txt From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 1 19:48:13 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 21:48:13 -0500 Subject: [R-G] For Afghans, a Price for Everything, and Anything for a Price Message-ID: January 2, 2009 For Afghans, a Price for Everything, and Anything for a Price By DEXTER FILKINS KABUL, Afghanistan ? When it comes to governing this violent, fractious land, everything, it seems, has its price. Want to be a provincial police chief? It will cost you $100,000. Want to drive a convoy of trucks loaded with fuel across the country? Be prepared to pay $6,000 per truck, so the police will not tip off the Taliban. Need to settle a lawsuit over the ownership of your house? About $25,000, depending on the judge. "It is very shameful, but probably I will pay the bribe," Mohammed Naim, a young English teacher, said as he stood in front of the Secondary Courthouse in Kabul. His brother had been arrested a week before, and the police were demanding $4,000 for his release. "Everything is possible in this country now. Everything." Kept afloat by billions of dollars in American and other foreign aid, the government of Afghanistan is shot through with corruption and graft. From the lowliest traffic policeman to the family of President Hamid Karzai himself, the state built on the ruins of the Taliban government seven years ago now often seems to exist for little more than the enrichment of those who run it. A raft of investigations has concluded that people at the highest levels of the Karzai administration, including President Karzai's own brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, are cooperating in the country's opium trade, now the world's largest. In the streets and government offices, hardly a public transaction seems to unfold here that does not carry with it the requirement of a bribe, a gift, or, in case you are a beggar, "harchee" ? whatever you have in your pocket. The corruption, publicly acknowledged by President Karzai, is contributing to the collapse of public confidence in his government and to the resurgence of the Taliban, whose fighters have moved to the outskirts of Kabul, the capital. "All the politicians in this country have acquired everything ? money, lots of money," President Karzai said in a speech at a rural development conference here in November. "God knows, it is beyond the limit. The banks of the world are full of the money of our statesmen." The decay of the Afghan government presents President-elect Barack Obama with perhaps his most underappreciated challenge as he tries to reverse the course of the war here. Mr. Obama may be required to save the Afghan government not only from the Taliban insurgency ? committing thousands of additional American soldiers to do so ? but also from itself. "This government has lost the capacity to govern because a shadow government has taken over," said Ashraf Ghani, a former Afghan finance minister. He quit that job in 2004, he said, because the state had been taken over by drug traffickers. "The narco-mafia state is now completely consolidated," he said. On the streets here, tales of corruption are as easy to find as kebab stands. Everything seems to be for sale: public offices, access to government services, even a person's freedom. The examples mentioned above ? $25,000 to settle a lawsuit, $6,000 to bribe the police, $100,000 to secure a job as a provincial police chief ? were offered by people who experienced them directly or witnessed the transaction. People pay bribes for large things, and for small things, too: to get electricity for their homes, to get out of jail, even to enter the airport. Governments in developing countries are often riddled with corruption. But Afghans say the corruption they see now has no precedent, in either its brazenness or in its scale. Transparency International, a German organization that gauges honesty in government, ranked Afghanistan 117 out of 180 countries in 2005. This year, it fell to 176. "Every man in the government is his own king," said Abdul Ghafar, a truck driver. Mr. Ghafar said he routinely paid bribes to the police who threatened to hinder his passage through Kabul, sometimes several in a day. Nowhere is the scent of corruption so strong as in the Kabul neighborhood of Sherpur. Before 2001, it was a vacant patch of hillside that overlooked the stately neighborhood of Wazir Akbar Khan. Today it is the wealthiest enclave in the country, with gaudy, grandiose mansions that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Afghans refer to them as "poppy houses." Sherpur itself is often jokingly referred to as "Char-pur," which literally means "City of Loot." Yet what is perhaps most remarkable about Sherpur is that many of the homeowners are government officials, whose annual salaries would not otherwise enable them to live here for more than a few days. One of the mansions ? three stories, several bedrooms, sweeping balconies ? is owned by Abdul Jabbar Sabit, a former attorney general who made a name for himself by declaring a "jihad" against corruption. After he was fired earlier this year by President Karzai, a video began circulating around town showing Mr. Sabit dancing giddily around a room and slurring his words, apparently drunk. Mr. Sabit now lives in Canada, but his house is available to rent for $5,000 a month. An even grander mansion ? ornate faux Greek columns, a towering fountain ? is owned by Kabul's police chief, Mohammed Ayob Salangi. It can be had for $11,000 a month. Mr. Salangi's salary is unknown; that of Mr. Karzai, the president, is about $600 a month. Mr. Ghani, the former finance minister, said the plots of land on which the mansions of Sherpur stand were doled out early in the Karzai administration for prices that were a tiny fraction of what they were worth. (Mr. Ghani said he was offered a plot, too, and refused to accept it.) "The money for these houses was illegal, I think," said Mohammed Yosin Usmani, director general of a newly created anticorruption unit. Often, the corruption here is blatant. On any morning, you can stand on the steps of the Secondary Courthouse in downtown Kabul and listen to the Afghans as they step outside. One of them was Farooq Farani, who has been coming to the court for seven years, trying to resolve a property dispute. His predicament is a common one here: He fled the country in 1990, as the civil war began, and returned after the fall of the Taliban, only to find a stranger occupying his home. Yet seven years later, the title to Mr. Farani's house is still up for grabs. Mr. Farani said he had refused to pay the bribes demanded by the judge in the case, who in turn had refused to settle his case. "You are approached indirectly, by intermediaries ? this is how it works," said Mr. Farani, who spent his exile in Wiesbaden, Germany. "My house is worth about $50,000, and I've been told that I can have the title if I pay $25,000 ? half the value of the home." Tales like Mr. Farani's abound here, so much so that it makes one wonder if an honest man can ever make a difference. Amin Farhang, the minister of commerce, was voted out of Mr. Karzai's cabinet by Parliament earlier last month for failing to bring down the price of oil in Afghanistan as the price declined in international markets. In a long talk in the sitting room of his home, Mr. Farhang recounted a two-year struggle to fire the man in charge of giving out licenses for new businesses. The man, Mr. Farhang said, would grant a license only in exchange for a hefty bribe. But Mr. Farhang found that he was unable to fire the man, who, he said, simply bribed other members of the government to reinstate him. "In a job like this, a man can make 10 or 12 times his salary," Mr. Farhang said. "People do anything to hang on to them." Many Afghans, including Mr. Ghani, the former finance minister, place responsibility for the collapse of the state on Mr. Karzai, who, they say, has failed repeatedly to confront the powerful figures who are behind much of the corruption. In his stint as finance minister, Mr. Ghani said, two moments crystallized his disgust and finally prompted him to quit. The first, Mr. Ghani said, was his attempt to impose order on Kabul's chaotic system of private property rights. The Afghan government had accumulated vast amounts of land during the period of Communist rule in the 1970s and 1980s. And since 2001, the government has given much of it away ? often, Mr. Ghani said, to shady developers at extremely low prices. Much of that land has been sold and developed, rendering much of Kabul's property in the hands of unknown owners. Many of the developers who were given free land, Mr. Ghani said, were also involved in drug trafficking. When he proposed drawing up a set of regulations to govern private property, Mr. Ghani said, he was told by President Karzai to stop. " 'Just back off," he told me,' " Mr. Ghani said. "He said that politically it wasn't feasible." A similar effort to impose regulations at the Ministry of Aviation, which Mr. Ghani described as rife with corruption, was met with a similar response by President Karzai, he said. "Morally the question was, am I becoming the fig leaf to legitimate a system that was deeply corrupt? Or was I there to serve the people?" Mr. Ghani said. "I resigned." Mr. Ghani, who then became chancellor of Kabul University, is today contemplating a run for the presidency. Asked about Mr. Ghani's account on Thursday, Humayun Hamidzada, a spokesman for Mr. Karzai, said he could not immediately comment. The corruption may be endemic here, but if there is any hope in the future, it would seem to lie in the revulsion of average Afghans like Mr. Farani, who, after seven years, is still refusing to pay. "I won't do it," Mr. Farani said outside the courthouse. "It's a matter of principle. Never." "But," he said, "I don't have my house, either, and I don't know that I ever will." Abdul Waheed Wafa and Sangar Rahimi contributed reporting. From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 1 20:16:08 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 22:16:08 -0500 Subject: [R-G] El Al to Operate Direct Flight to Brazil for First Time in a Decade Message-ID: Last update - 17:01 15/12/2008 El Al to operate direct flight to Brazil for first time in a decade By Zohar Blumenkrantz, Haaretz Correspondent Tags: el al, israel news, brazil El Al Airlines will begin operating 9 a direct flight between Tel Aviv to Sao Paolo in spring 2009, for the first time in a decade. The airline will also offer connecting flights to a number of destinations in South America, including Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Ecuador and other cities in Brazil. The flight from Tel Aviv to Sao Paolo takes about 14-and-a-half-hours. El Al plans to operate the flight on a Boeing 777, three or four times a week. The airline will finalize its plans - including flight schedules and fares - over the coming month, pending approval from all the necessary networks. El Al CEO Haim Romano said the new operations would boost the already rising phenomenon of Israeli tourism in South America, as well as serve the large Jewish communities on the continent. "Trade between Israel and South America is one the rise, Israeli tourism to South America is blooming and there are large Jewish communities there," he said, but added: "Investing in a flight line like this, for the first time in ten years, undoubtedly presents El Al with a litany of operational, service and marketing challenges." Israel last year signed a free-trade pact with Mercosur, the South American trade bloc. It was the bloc's first such pact with a country outside of Latin America. The deal followed two years of negotiations to bolster trade ties between South American countries and Israel. 15 December 2008 General Assembly GA/PAL/1108 Department of Public Information ? News and Media Division ? New York UN LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN MEETING ON ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS CALLS FOR HALTING SETTLEMENT EXPANSION, DISMANTLING OF WALL IN WEST BANK (Received from a UN Information Officer.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ARLENE CLEMESHA, Professor of Arab Culture of the University of S?o Paulo and member of the Institute for Arab Culture in Brazil, stated that Latin America and the Caribbean had been incapable of converting their verbal support to the Palestinian cause in concrete and effective actions. Latin American nations continued to sign free trade agreements with Israel and purchase weapons and advanced technology from Israel, and their universities established cooperation agreements with Israel and were proud of the academic and intellectual exchange with Israel, she remarked. In most cases, she added, none of that was based on the intentions of Governments in the region, but rather under corporate pressure. She said Brazil was importing state-of-the-art technology, communications and security equipment developed by Israel to feed its own war industry against the Palestinian people. From aaron at mylists.fastmail.fm Thu Jan 1 22:06:27 2009 From: aaron at mylists.fastmail.fm (Aaron Aarons) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 21:06:27 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Egypt Blocks Gaza Aid Convoy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090102050705.BCF07B8E4@heartbeat1.messagingengine.com> >Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 11:15:26 -0500 >From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" > >To save Gaza, we need, at the very least, a political revolution in Egypt. -- Yoshie While an Anwar Sadat-style retirement of Mubarak would be something to celebrate, it would only be, at best, a small step in the right direction. A working-class-based revolution in Egypt would be a really world-shaking event, but what are the possibilities? - Aaron > >Egypt blocks Gaza aid convoy >Five Palestinians were killed when a tunnel collapsed beneath the >border recently [EPA] > >Egyptian police have blocked an opposition convoy carrying medical >supplies to the Rafah border crossing with the Gaza Strip. > >Abdel Fatah Rizq, who helped co-ordinate the convoy, said police had >arrested 50 activists on Monday when they tried to gather at the >Journalists' Syndicate in downtown Cairo. > >The convoy was preparing for a 300km journey across the Sinai desert >to reach the Palestinian border. > >Conflicting reports from a security official, who chose to speak on >condition of anonymity, said that at least 20 protesters were arrested >after they surrounded campaigners where the convoy was due to depart. > >"Activists from all over the provinces were planning on joining the >convoy on its way through the Sinai to Rafah crossing,'' Abdel Rizq >said. > >Police said three members of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's main >opposition group, were arrested at the Suez Canal on Sunday night >while trying to reach the border. > >Another 14 activists from Kefaya, another Egyptian opposition >movement, had been arrested in Rafah, also on Sunday, while staging a >protest. > >Many Palestinians living in Gaza depend on smuggled goods siphoned >through underground passages between Egypt and Gaza. > >Israel has maintained that the tunnels are used to smuggle arms and >explosives, having sealed off the coastal strip after Hamas seized >power in Gaza in June 2007. > >Continued closure > >Campaigners included judges, independent members of parliament, Muslim >Brotherhood members and other party figures who want to protest the >continued closure of the Rafah crossing by Israel and Egypt. > >Police have set up checkpoints on the road between Ismailiya and the >town of El Arish in northern Sinai, at least 45km from Rafah where >only residents are allowed to enter, a security official said. > >Last month, police blocked a similar convoy headed to the Rafah >crossing, Gaza's only exit to the outside world that is not under the >control of Israel. > >Sympathy for the Palestinians blockaded in Gaza by Egypt and Israel >runs high among Egyptians. > >Egypt occasionally permits people to enter and leave Gaza, but has >refused to open the Rafah crossing permanently. > >Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, said on Monday that Egypt would >not reopen the crossing as long as Hamas controls Gaza. > >State media reported Mubarak as saying: "We are still committed to the >2005 agreement," referring to the agreement under which the Palestinan >Authority, Israel and EU monitors supervise the Rafah crossing. From srobin21 at comcast.net Thu Jan 1 22:33:49 2009 From: srobin21 at comcast.net (Steven L. Robinson) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 21:33:49 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Egypt- Mahalla textile workers to build free trade union Message-ID: <0f2201c96c9b$b29e2890$54f2fea9@noir> Mahalla activists announce attempt to build free union Per Bjorklund A Scandinavian in Egypt January 1, 2009 According to a report in el-badeel today, workers at Misr Spinning and Weaving in Mahalla has started a campaign for building their own free union. An anonymous worker says that the decision was taken by all leading labour activists at a meeting convened last Sunday. It's described as a result both of the inspiring success of the tax collectors in launching their own union, and as a response to recent attempts by the management to quell activism in the factory by arbitrary transfers of radical employees. Last January, 15,000 signatures was collected for a petition where workers declared they had lost confidence in the official union, and in march 3000 workers signed letters of resignation from the general union of textile workers. Recently, a statement was released by "the free union (under construction)" where three demands was put forward: the holding to account of the managers who are responsible for the company's losses, realization of investments in the factory which were promised by the state after the 6 April events, and the return of all the transfered workers to their previous positions. While the desire to build a independent union is not new and propagating for it inside the factory is just a first step in a long and difficult process, one thing that could be really significant is the fact that the leading labour activists in Mahalla seem to have put aside their differences after the split that occurred in the run-up to the 6 April strike. It shows, I guess, that their common interests in the face of cut-backs, anti-union actions by the management, and alleged plans to privatize the plant in Mahalla is stronger than past grudges and political differences. http://scandegypt.blogspot.com/2009/01/mahalla-activists-announce-attempt-to .html This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From tchilds at resist.ca Thu Jan 1 22:34:31 2009 From: tchilds at resist.ca (tchilds at resist.ca) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 21:34:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Letter from climate scientist, James Hansen, to the Obamas Message-ID: <62821.64.85.36.244.1230874471.squirrel@mail.resist.ca> http://carolynbaker.net/site/content/view/915/1/ LETTER FROM CLIMATE SCIENTIST, JAMES HANSEN, TO THE OBAMAS Thursday, 01 January 2009 INTRODUCTION TO LETTER BY JUAN SANTOS Below is a letter from James Hansen, the first scientist to announce the impending dangers of climate change; to this day Hansen is widely renowned and considered a cutting edge scientist in his field. Most recently a study by Hansen and a team from Yale University demonstrated that the climate is already past critical tipping points - the points at which global heating runs away from all human influence and takes on a life of its own, reinforcing itself in positive feedback loops with ever intensifying heat. Such feedback loops can lead to conditions similar to those that prevailed at the time of the Permian Mass Extinction 250 million years ago, when the overwhelming majority of all life on Earth was eradicated by runaway global heating. Scientists call that period "The Great Dying". Hansen's most recent study indicated that the only way to ensure that the climate returns to a stable condition is by reducing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million (ppm) - it's already at 385ppm. (see 350.org ) That is what is in the balance; that is what is at stake in this personal appeal from Hansen and his wife to Michelle and Barack Obama: The future of life on Earth. Hansen has written this letter in response to suggestions from people on his email list. He concludes in a letter to that same list that "if we can get either of them to really focus on the actions that are needed, the planet has a chance." He prefaced the letter to the Obamas with a letter to John Holdren, who heads up Obama's transition team. Holdren has promised Hansen that he will deliver the Hansen's letter to the Obamas. Also see Hansen's Tell Barack Obama the Truth- the whole Truth, here . For those who are short on time, I have excerpted the three main points from Hansen's intro letter to Holdren, and have included those points below ( in italics), before the body of the letter to the Obamas - but it is of crucial importance that as many people as possible actually understand the actual physical realities and limits of the atmosphere and the global ecosystem, and that as many people as possible understand the transformations in policy that are urgently required to maintain the balances - and survival - of life as we know it on our Mother, the Earth: So I urge you to read and consider this entire text. We only have one Mother, and sadly, we only have one system. Another Permian type Great Dying can only be averted here, it can only be averted now, with what we have to work with here and now. This is it. Civilization as we know it cannot be sustained; a fact for which I am personally grateful. But life on this planet can be sustained. Let us do everything in our capacities to ensure that it is so. As Hansen put it in his letter to his email list: "Politicians are happy if scientistsprovide information and then go away and shut up. But science and policy cannot be divorced. What I learned in the past few years is that politicians often adopt convenient policies that can be shown to be inconsistent with long-term success, given readily available scientific data and empirical information on policy impacts. This time we can't afford that. Business as usual is over. Here are the italicized excerpts including Hansen's key points, followed by the letter to the Obamas itself. - Juan Santos - 29 December 2008 Michelle and Barack Obama Chicago and Washington, D.C. United States of America Dear Michelle and Barack, We write to you as fellow parents concerned about the Earth that will be inherited by our children, grandchildren, and those yet to be born. Barack has spoken of `a planet in peril' and noted that actions needed to stem climate change have other merits. However, the nature of the chosen actions will be of crucial importance. We apologize for the length of this letter. But your personal attention to these `details' could make all the difference in what surely will be the most important matter of our times. Jim has advised governments previously through regular channels. But urgency now dictates a personal appeal. Scientists at the forefront of climate research have seen a stream of new data in the past few years with startling implications for humanity and all life on Earth. Yet the information that most needs to be communicated to you concerns the failure of policy approaches employed by nations most sincere and concerned about stabilizing climate. Policies being discussed in national and international circles now, which focus on `goals' for emission reduction and `cap and trade', have the same basic approach as the Kyoto Protocol. This approach is ineffectual and not commensurate with the climate threat. It could waste another decade, locking in disastrous consequences for our planet and humanity. The enclosure, "Tell Barack Obama the Truth ? the Whole Truth" was sent to colleagues for comments as we left for a trip to Europe. Their main suggestion was to add a summary of the specific recommendations, preferably in a cover letter sent to both of you. There is a profound disconnect between actions that policy circles are considering and what the science demands for preservation of the planet. A stark scientific conclusion, that we must reduce greenhouse gases below present amounts to preserve nature and humanity, has become clear to the relevant experts. The validity of this statement could be verified by the National Academy of Sciences, which can deliver prompt authoritative reports in response to a Presidential requesti. NAS was set up by President Lincoln for just such advisory purposes. Science and policy cannot be divorced. It is still feasible to avert climate disasters, but only if policies are consistent with what science indicates to be required. Our three recommendations derive from the science, including logical inferences based on empirical information about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of specific past policy approaches. (1) Moratorium and phase-out of coal plants that do not capture and store CO2. This is the sine qua non for solving the climate problem. Coal emissions must be phased out rapidly. Yes, it is a great challenge, but one with enormous side benefits. Coal is responsible for as much atmospheric carbon dioxide as the other fossil fuels combined, and its reserves make coal even more important for the long run. Oil, the second greatest contributor to atmospheric carbon dioxide, is already substantially depleted, and it is impractical to capture carbon dioxide emitted by vehicles. But if coal emissions are phased out promptly, a range of actions including improved agricultural and forestry practices could bring the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide back down, out of the dangerous range. As an example of coal's impact consider this: continued construction of coal-fired power plants will raise atmospheric carbon dioxide to a level at least approaching 500 ppm (parts per million). At that level, a conservative estimate for the number of species that would be exterminated (committed to extinction) is one million. The proportionate contribution of a single power plant operating 50 years and burning ~100 rail cars of coal per day (100 tons of coal per rail car) would be about 400 species! Coal plants are factories of death. It is no wonder that young people (and some not so young) are beginning to block new construction. (2) Rising price on carbon emissions via a "carbon tax and 100% dividend". A rising price on carbon emissions is the essential underlying support needed to make all other climate policies work. For example, improved building codes are essential, but full enforcement at all construction and operations is impractical. A rising carbon price is the one practical way to obtain compliance with codes designed to increase energy efficiency. A rising carbon price is essential to "decarbonize" the economy, i.e., to move the nation toward the era beyond fossil fuels. The most effective way to achieve this is a carbon tax (on oil, gas, and coal) at the well-head or port of entry. The tax will then appropriately affect all products and activities that use fossil fuels. The public's near-term, mid-term, and long-term lifestyle choices will be affected by knowledge that the carbon tax rate will be rising. The public will support the tax if it is returned to them, equal shares on a per capita basis (half shares for children up to a maximum of two child-shares per family), deposited monthly in bank accounts. No large bureaucracy is needed. A person reducing his carbon footprint more than average makes money. A person with large cars and a big house will pay a tax much higher than the dividend. Not one cent goes to Washington. No lobbyists will be supported. Unlike cap-and-trade, no millionaires would be made at the expense of the public. The tax will spur innovation as entrepreneurs compete to develop and market low-carbon and no-carbon energies and products. The dividend puts money in the pockets of consumers, stimulating the economy, and providing the public a means to purchase the products. A carbon tax is honest, clear and effective. It will increase energy prices, but low and middle income people, especially, will find ways to reduce carbon emissions so as to comeout ahead. The rate of infrastructure replacement, thus economic activity, can be modulated by how fast the carbon tax rate increases. Effects will permeate society. Food requiring lots of carbon emissions to produce and transport will become more expensive and vice versa, encouraging support of nearby farms as opposed to imports from half way around the world. The carbon tax has social benefits. It is progressive. It is useful to those most in need in hard times, providing them an opportunity for larger dividend than tax. It will encourage illegal immigrants to become legal, thus to obtain the dividend, and it will discourage illegal immigration because everybody pays the tax, but only legal citizens collect the dividend. "Cap and trade" generates special interests, lobbyists, and trading schemes, yielding non productive millionaires, all at public expense. The public is fed up with such business. Tax with 100% dividend, in contrast, would spur our economy, while aiding the disadvantaged, the climate, and our national security. (3) Urgent R&D on 4th generation nuclear power with international cooperation. Energy efficiency, renewable energies, and a "smart grid" deserve first priority in our effort to reduce carbon emissions. With a rising carbon price, renewable energy can perhaps handle all of our needs. However, most experts believe that making such presumption probably would leave us in 25 years with still a large contingent of coal-fired power plants worldwide. Such a result would be disastrous for the planet, humanity, and nature. 4th generation nuclear power (4th GNP) and coal-fired power plants with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) at present are the best candidates to provide large baseload nearly carbon-free power (in case renewable energies cannot do the entire job). Predictable criticism of 4th GNP (and CCS) is: "it cannot be ready before 2030." However, the time needed could be much abbreviated with a Presidential initiative and Congressional support. Moreover, improved (3rd generation) light water reactors are available for near-term needs. In our opinion, 4th GNPii deserves your strong support, because it has the potential to help solve past problems with nuclear power: nuclear waste, the need to mine for nuclear fuel, and release of radioactive materialiii. Potential proliferation of nuclear material will always demand vigilance, but that will be true in any case, and our safety is best secured if the United States is involved in the technologies and helps define standards. Existing nuclear reactors use less than 1% of the energy in uranium, leaving more than 99% in long-lived nuclear waste. 4th GNP can "burn" that waste, leaving a small volume of waste with a half-life of decades rather than thousands of years. Thus 4th GNP could help solve the nuclear waste problem, which must be dealt with in any case. Because of this, a portion of the $25B that has been collected from utilities to deal with nuclear waste justifiably could be used to develop 4th generation reactors. The principal issue with nuclear power, and other energy sources, is cost. Thus an R&D objective must be a modularized reactor design that is cost competitive with coal. Without such capability, it may be difficult to wean China and India from coal. But all developing countries have great incentives for clean energy and stable climate, and they will welcome technical cooperation aimed at rapid development of a reproducible safe nuclear reactor. Potential for cooperation with developing countries is implied by interest South Korea has expressed in General Electric's design for a small scale 4th GNP reactor. I do not have the expertise to advocate any specific project, and there are alternative approaches for 4th GNP (see enclosure). I am only suggesting that the assertion that 4th GNP technology cannot be ready until 2030 is not necessarily valid. Indeed, with a Presidential directive for the Nuclear Regulator Commission to give priority to the review process, it is possible that a prototype reactor could be constructed rapidly in the United States. CCS also deserves R&D support. There is no such thing as clean coal at this time, and it is doubtful that we will ever be able to fully eliminate emissions of mercury, other heavy metals, and radioactive material in the mining and burning of coal. However, because of the enormous number of dirty coal-fired power plants in existence, the abundance of the fuel, and the fact that CCS technology could be used at biofuel-fired power plants to draw down atmospheric carbon dioxide, the technology deserves strong R&D support. Summary An urgent iv geophysical fact has become clear. Burning all the fossil fuels will destroy the planet we know, Creation, the planet of stable climate in which civilization developed. Of course it is unfair that everyone is looking to Barack to solve this problem (and other problems!), but they are. He alone has a fleeting opportunity to instigate fundamental change, and the ability to explain the need for it to the public. Geophysical limits dictate the outline for what must be done v. Because of the long lifetime of carbon dioxide in the air, slowing the emissions cannot solve the problem. Instead a large part of the total fossil fuels must be left in the ground. In practice, that means coal. The physics of the matter, together with empirical data, also define the need for a carbon tax. Alternatives such as emission reduction targets, cap and trade, cap and dividend, do not work, as proven by honest efforts of the `greenest' countries to comply with the Kyoto Protocol: (1) Japan: accepted the strongest emission reduction targets, appropriately prides itself on having the most energy-efficient industry, and yet its use of coal has sharply increased, as have its total CO2 emissions. Japan offset its increases with purchases of credits through the clean development mechanism in China, intended to reduce emissions there, but Chinese emissions increased rapidly. (2) Germany: subsidizes renewable energies heavily and accepts strong emission reduction targets, yet plans to build a large number of coal-fired power plants. They assert that they will have cap-and-trade, with a cap that reduces emissions by whatever amount is needed. But the physics tells us that if they continue to burn coal, no cap can solve the problem, because of the long carbon dioxide lifetime. (3) Other cases are described on my Columbia University web site, e.g., Switzerland finances construction of coal plants, Sweden builds them, and Australia exports coal and sets atmospheric carbon dioxide goals so large as to guarantee destruction of much of the life on the planet. Indeed, `goals' and `caps' on carbon emissions are practically worthless, if coal emissions continue, because of the exceedingly long lifetime of carbon dioxide in the air. Nobody realistically expects that the large readily available pools of oil and gas will be left in the ground. Caps will not cause that to happen ? caps only slow the rate at which the oil and gas are used. The only solution is to cut off the coal source (and unconventional fossil fuels). Coal phase-out and transition to the post-fossil fuel era requires an increasing carbon price. A carbon tax at the wellhead or port of entry reduces all uses of a fuel. In contrast, a less comprehensive cap has the perverse effect of lowering the price of the fuel for other uses, undercutting clean energy sources.vi In contrast to the impracticality of all nations agreeing to caps, and the impossibility of enforcement, a carbon tax can readily be made near-global.vii A Presidential directive for prompt investigation and proto-typing of advanced safe nuclear power is needed to cover the possibility that renewable energies cannot satisfy global energy needs. One of the greatest dangers the world faces is the possibility that a vocal minority of anti-nuclear activists could prevent phase-out of coal emissions. The challenges today, including climate change, are great and urgent. Barack's leadership is essential to explain to the world what is needed. The public, young and old, recognize the difficulties and will support the actions needed for a fundamental change of direction. James and Anniek Hansen Pennsylvania United States of America From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Fri Jan 2 02:25:34 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 18:25:34 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] Let the Banks Fail Message-ID: <495DDD8E.9060002@ashisuto.co.jp> Why a Few of the Financial Giants Should Crash The finance industry still owns mountains of bad paper and must absorb these losses - or else we'll face a very long recession. by Joshua Holland AlterNet (December 15 2008) So far, much of Washington's ad hoc, ham-fisted response to the economic crisis has been based on the dictum that the financial institutions must be prevented from taking their losses. That should come as no surprise. Big finance's lobbyists have been all over the "bailout" (it should be bailouts, plural) from the very start, Wall Street pumped piles of cash into the elections - AIG, recipient of tens of billions in taxpayer largesse, ponied up $750,000 for both the Democratic and Republican conventions - and the whole thing's been designed by "free-market" ideologues who came to Washington directly from Wall Street. But the hard reality is that the institutions that created this mess have to take their losses - no doubt huge losses in many cases - if we're to have any chance of avoiding a deep recession that drags on for years. Some will be wiped out in the process, but propping up firms that have massive - and not entirely known - quantities of so-called toxic securities on their books only delays the inevitable day of reckoning. The rot has spread far beyond real estate, but that offers a nice concrete example of the danger of keeping Big Finance from taking its lumps. So far, their lobbyists have fought off attempts to force them to renegotiate mortgages, especially plans that call for writing down the value of the loans to reflect the post-bubble market. This is understandable. But the reality is that there are a lot of homes "under water" - that is, worth less than the value of their mortgages - and a lot of mortgages with "teaser rates" are about to adjust upward. Foreclosures only drive down the value of the whole market further - who wants to pay today's fair value when two other houses on the same street are headed toward foreclosure and might be had for a song in a few months? The justification for creating the big bailout honeypot for Wall Street was that banks are hoarding money, causing a "credit crunch" that's killing the whole economy. But that's only true to a point; while financial institutions are holding cash, including, reportedly, those billions they gouged from the taxpayers, they appear to be doing so to protect their balance sheets, and in some cases, to fund mergers. The bigger problem - one the bailout is hardly touching - is that trillions in home equity and retirement accounts have vanished, and there aren't a lot of people - or firms - looking to borrow money to buy stuff or expand right now. Economist Dean Baker explains the dominance of the "credit crunch" narrative like this: The media "largely ignored the growth of an $8 trillion housing bubble, by far the most important economic phenomenon of the decade. Now that it has burst and sent consumption plummeting, they are blaming the economic collapse on a 'credit crunch' instead of the more obvious problem that consumers just lost $6 trillion of housing wealth and another $8 trillion of stock wealth." We hear a lot about banks not lending to one another these days - another reason we have to buy up shares of their tanking stocks and guarantee their funky securities. But consider that as I write, a benchmark "interbank" lending rate (the LIBOR, if you care) is at its lowest point in history, meaning that banks aren't, in fact, charging each other an arm and a leg for cash. But, at the same time, William Prophet, an analyst at UBS, Switzerland's biggest bank, told Bloomberg News that "the volume of loans apparently is still close to zero, and that hasn't changed". People are just maxed out, and they're not borrowing or buying. Are the Titans of Finance Too Big to Fail? Letting the banks - the ones that went out furthest on the ledge of those newfangled debt-backed securities and indulged in the worst lending practices - take a beating does represent a conundrum. On the one hand, there's an almost visceral satisfaction to the idea of letting high-flying financiers get their comeuppance. It was the titans of Wall Street, after all, who turned a housing bubble into a shaky house of cards worth tens of trillions of dollars based on little more than "irrational exuberance" and a wave of deregulation. But, at the same time, the financial services sector - banking and insurance - employs over six million people. Last month, CitiGroup announced that it would layoff 53,000 employees, the second-largest workforce cut by a single company in American history. That will bring the total number of people out of a finance job to 180,000 this year, and those people will spend less, pay fewer taxes, and many will have trouble paying their mortgages and staying in their homes. The sector's unemployment rate rose from 3.9 percent to 4.6 percent in just four months, between August and November. The assertion that we should do what's necessary to avoid adding to our unemployment and other woes just at the moment would be more persuasive if not for one crucial point: our financial sector has become bloated, swimming in capacity the larger economy doesn't need. That house of cards it built is simply too big to prop up, and spending billions to do so is only throwing good money after bad - saving an industry that has grown out of proportion to the purpose it serves. Here's a fun fact about the finance industry. Historically, it's grown and contracted along with the business cycle. When the economy was going gang-busters and businesses were expanding, it was there to provide capital and insurance and connect investors with entrepreneurs and innovators. Then, when the business cycle took its inevitable turn and the economy slowed down, it would contract. But a funny thing happened on the way to the financial meltdown; as the Associated Press noted, "when the Internet bubble burst in 2000, the sector never stopped growing. Instead, it ballooned over the past eight years to around ten percent of the US economy, puzzling economists." It's not such a puzzle. In large part, the continued growth of the sector was based on the explosion in derivatives - high-value vapor - rather than anything connected to real growth in the "nuts and bolts" economy. (As I explained in more detail here, a derivative is a piece of paper that can be bought and sold for real money but isn't attached to a concrete asset. Its value is simply derived from something tangible - hence the name. It is, in essence, the equivalent of investors making a bet that a company, industry or just about anything else with a tangible value will move up or down.) The recession of 2001 officially started in March, when the financial services sector employed 5.7 million people. At the time, the total value of derivatives held by US commercial banks was estimated to be around $42 trillion. By the third quarter of 2007 - before the crash - the financial sector was employing almost 6.2 million people, and the value of derivatives held by American banks had skyrocketed to almost $170 trillion - almost three times the value of the entire world's economy. During the intervening period, the "real" American economy was in doldrums: between 2000-2007, median household income dropped; the number of families living in poverty grew by almost 11 percent and the economy added jobs at the lowest rate in the post-World War II era. (I should add that those employment numbers look a lot worse when you take out the job growth in government and our uniquely inefficient health sector - between 2001 and 2006, health care added 1.7 million (net) new jobs while the rest of the economy added zero.) As Bloomberg reported, "The bundling of consumer loans and home mortgages into packages of securities - a process known as securitization - was the biggest US export business of the 21st century". So much of the economic output of recent years has been ephemeral, fueled by the ever-growing financial industry and enabled by the deregulation for which it lobbied hard for years. When this "speculation economy" - or at least the big chunk of it built on consumer debt and home mortgages (which I discussed in greater detail here) - began to crash, it drove much of the real economy into the ground with it, and that's where we stand today. But the importance of this analysis goes beyond assigning blame. Today, we have a finance sector that is straining under the weight of a ton of fishy paper - those much-discussed toxic securities - and nobody knows exactly who's holding what. What we do know is that since 2001, $27 trillion worth of bundled, debt-backed securities were issued, and a significant, if equally unknown, portion of those are nearly worthless. This was always the fundamental flaw with the original "Paulson plan" - buying a couple hundred billion worth of crappy paper when there's trillions worth of the stuff on American banks' book is tantamount to trying to bail out the Titanic with a thimble. But more important is what these numbers suggest moving ahead. The hard reality is that these financial institutions must take huge losses on that paper or else this recession will likely deepen and drag out for years. Basic economic theory says that when a business is not sustainable and goes belly-up - or a sector has unnecessary capacity and shrinks - its capital, physical plant and other assets, expertise and employees will become integrated into firms that are productive. When the Financial Tail Wags the Corporate Dog The financial sector's size isn't the only thing to consider as we watch our government take a page from Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez and blow wads of state money purchasing bank stocks and those "troubled assets". The influence of the financial sector on the behavior of the rest of the corporate economy is something that we take for granted - it's business as usual in America - but in a time of crisis, a rethink of the entire financial order is imperative. The modern system of finance developed during the progressive era - from the late 1890s through the 1920s - and its creation was heavily influenced by the prevailing anger at the power of the huge trusts. Dispersed ownership and new forms of finance - through stocks, corporate bonds and other securities - were seen as an antidote to the influence of the robber barons, that handful of dynastic families who controlled key sectors of the American economy. Since then, the original function of the financial markets - to link investors' capital with innovative firms - has been turned on its head. Today, corporate behavior is very much dictated by the markets - quarterly earnings, stock prices and the like - and not the other way around. That's not a good thing. Lawrence Mitchell, a professor of business law at George Washington University, notes in his book, The Speculation Economy (2007), that a recent survey of CEOs running major American corporations revealed that almost eighty percent would have "at least moderately mutilated their businesses in order to meet [financial] analysts' quarterly profit estimates":- Cutting the budgets for research and development, advertising and maintenance and delaying hiring and new projects are some of the long-term harms they would readily inflict on their corporations. Why? Because in modern American corporate capitalism, the failure to meet quarterly numbers almost always guarantees a punishing hit to the corporation's stock price. And corporate managers' own fortunes are tied to their companies' share prices through bonuses, stock options and other incentives. The desire to make the financial sector happy often dwarves other imperatives; Mitchell calls it "short-termism" and suggests that making a company's balance sheet look good quarter to quarter drives CEOs to sacrifice values like worker safety, environmental protection and other social goods. A good example of this financial market-driven short-termism can be seen in a 2004 study of CEO compensation conducted by United for a Fair Economy and the Institute for Policy Studies (PDF). It found, "CEOs at companies that outsource the most US jobs are rewarded with bigger paychecks ... average CEO compensation at the fifty firms outsourcing the most service jobs increased by 46 percent in 2003, compared to a nine percent average increase for all CEOs at the 365 large companies surveyed by Business Week". There's no doubt that offshoring decent jobs that paid living wages was good for those firms' short-term bottom lines, and those corporate managers were rewarded on that basis. But was it good for the economy? With consumer spending in the tank and inequality at levels not seen since the robber barons were tamed, it's hard to argue that such short-term thinking served the nation's economy very well. Let's return a moment to the fact that banks aren't lending money. There are multiple causes for the freeze, including the fact that businesses and individuals aren't in the market to borrow money to purchase goods or expand their operations. Another reason is that, as Bloomberg reported, "With three weeks to go until the end of the year, financial institutions are vying for loans that mature after December 31 to bolster their balance sheets as they prepare to report to investors". As the financial meltdown forces the economic establishment to chart a new course, we should not only let the financial sector contract significantly, but curtail its influence as well. That can be achieved in a number of ways: by banning corporate compensation based on firms' stock values, creating new forms of socially responsible financing or encouraging the expansion of what Bill Gates calls creative capitalism - a nebulous phrase that's been interpreted to mean adding corporate social responsibility to the traditional imperative of maximizing profits over the short term. That won't be easy - and would be politically impossible in a normally functioning economy. But letting a few banking giants sink, and the financial sector as a whole write down massive amounts of the junk it produced during the last decade just might help focus the mind on newer and more creative models of finance. Links: The original version of this article at the URL below contains numerous links to other sources of information. _____ Joshua Holland is an AlterNet staff writer. (c) 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. http://www.alternet.org/story/112166/ TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 12:21:57 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:21:57 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Cynthia McKinney: We Lived to Tell the Story; Lebanon Rescued Us Message-ID: <200901021921.n02JLvBJ003678@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/b0f357a4/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 12:33:00 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:33:00 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Canadian civil society condemns massacre of 400 people in Gaza Message-ID: <200901021933.n02JX02u015925@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/32e01cfd/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 12:49:53 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:49:53 -0800 Subject: [R-G] An open letter to the retired Honorary Consul of Israel in New Zealand Message-ID: <200901021949.n02JnrOc005728@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/93442af4/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 12:58:44 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:58:44 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Rivalry among Israel's leaders at root of row on Gaza cease-fire Message-ID: <200901021958.n02JwitE015285@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/e2d8c6a1/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 12:59:26 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:59:26 -0800 Subject: McKinney to Obama: āSay Somethingā About Gaza Humanitarian Crisis Message-ID: <200901021959.n02JxQ1t015849@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/70ab19ff/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 13:16:31 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 12:16:31 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Catholic Prayers of New Year in Gaza Message-ID: <200901022016.n02KGVmc003489@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/b2e82feb/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 13:18:51 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 12:18:51 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Jews, Palestinians Uniting With Other Canadians to Stop Israeli Massacre in Gaza Message-ID: <200901022018.n02KIq03005968@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/1e48c957/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 13:28:34 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 12:28:34 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israel Has No Intention of Granting a Palestinian State Message-ID: <200901022028.n02KSYwB016297@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/d70d723d/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 13:48:15 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 12:48:15 -0800 Subject: [R-G] U.S. blocks binding UN security council resolution to halt Israeli bombing in Gaza Message-ID: <200901022048.n02KmFPh005281@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/5c9620d6/attachment.txt From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Fri Jan 2 15:30:35 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 07:30:35 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] How the Rise of the Speculation Economy Shaped US Corporate Culture Message-ID: <495E958B.5030803@ashisuto.co.jp> American capitalism is such that a speculative stock market dominates the policies of businesses. by Lawrence E Mitchell AlterNet (December 22 2008) Editor's Note: The following is an edited excerpt from The Speculation Economy: How Finance Triumphed Over Industry (2007), Lawrence Mitchell's definitive history of the rise of American finance and analysis of how it shaped corporate behavior in the modern era. During the rise of the "speculation economy" in the early years of the 20th century, business' focus on production was replaced with business management's focus on stock prices. That goal might be consistent with healthy, sustainable and responsible business practices, but it also might not be. Understanding the complex development of American corporate capitalism can help us better improve and sustain the strength of the American economy. While our current economic crisis is frequently compared to that of the Great Depression, its roots and causes go further back in history - to the development of the modern American stock market at the turn of the 20th century. Contrary to popular belief, the public market for industrial securities didn't finance industrialization - industrialization had already taken place. Instead, it exploded into existence as a result of trust promoters and investment bankers trying to restrain competition through the creation of giant combinations of corporations and at the same time getting rich quick by dumping the overvalued securities of these giant corporate behemoths onto an emerging middle class eager to share the wealth. The first major industrial stock market crash followed fast on the heels of its birth. The formative era of American corporate capitalism took place between 1897 and 1919. The American business landscape of the late 19th century had been characterized by independent factories. No matter what their size, they typically were owned by entrepreneur industrialists, their families and perhaps a few business associates. But in the first decades of the 20th century, American business transformed into a vista of giant combinations of industrial plants owned directly and indirectly by widely dispersed shareholders. Business reasons sometimes justified these combinations. But they might never have come into being if financiers and promoters had not discovered that they could be used to create and sell massive amounts of stock for their own gain. The result is a form of capitalism in which a speculative stock market dominated the policies of American business. The result is the speculation economy. Historians have studied virtually every aspect of the Progressive Era, including the social and philosophical changes that took place in Americans' ways of living and thinking about their world, the dramatic technological and economic developments that occurred, the rise of big business, the growth in importance of the federal government, the fitful creation of American industrial policy, the establishment of the bargain between labor and capital, the changes in political relations between government and big business, the development of new styles of regulation and America's assumption of its turn as the world's dominant economic power. Many have provided rich pictures of different aspects of the dramatic and related economic, social and political transformations that occurred during that period. The story I tell in The Speculation Economy: How Finance Triumphed Over Industry (2007) is the economic equivalent of the political creation of the republic. It is a story that needs to be told for many reasons, not least of which is that the corporate economy that emerged during this era has been beset with problems ranging from short-term management horizons that can damage the long-term health of business to the increasing willingness of corporate managers to "externalize" the costs of production for the benefit of their stockholders. A recent survey of CEOs running major American corporations revealed that almost eighty percent would have at least moderately mutilated their businesses in order to meet financial analysts' quarterly profit estimates. Cutting the budgets for research and development, advertising and maintenance, and delaying hiring and new projects are some of the long-term harms they would readily inflict on their corporations. Why? Because in modern American corporate capitalism, the failure to meet quarterly numbers almost always guarantees a punishing hit to the corporation's stock price. One lesson of the formative period is that meaningful reform can be achieved only by reforming the market, by reforming finance itself to create the incentives for stockholders, and through them the market, to re-learn the lesson that profits come from industrial production, not from the breeze that blows toward tomorrow. It is a lesson that was often forgotten during these early years, and many times since. Finally, the story of the creation of American corporate capitalism illustrates the possibilities of capitalism and the variety of forms it can take. Some of these were present in the American corporate economy of the late 19th century. Closely held industrial capitalism, bank-finance capitalism, capitalism in which publicly held permanent investments like bonds characterized the principal source of corporate finance, even a heavily regulated state-guided capitalism, all were possibilities before the election of Warren Harding. Many of these different forms of capitalism have appeared successfully in different regions, cultures and countries during the 20th century. American corporate capitalism - stock market capitalism - was neither the necessary nor inevitable form of the American economy. The story of the formative period is a story of problems misperceived, transformations not yet understood and misguided regulation. One lesson of this story is that modern American corporate capitalism is the result of human choices. It is a system we maintain out of choice. It is a system that has ramifications beyond the economic that have helped to embed the kind of "hyper-individualism" that interferes with the cooperation necessary for a successful economy and a thriving society. It is within our power either to change it, to modify its rough edges or to accept it as it is. But these choices can only be made with understanding. Several years into my research on the rise of the speculation economy, I began to see in the formation of American corporate capitalism the reasons for a number of contemporary economic and social problems, problems which so many are trying to solve today without grasping some of the important causes that this history helps to identify. Perhaps as important, I started to see the way our speculation economy affects the norms of American society, how it has pushed American social norms from a vision of collective life that achieved some currency during the Progressive Era to a more atomistic form of individualism that has both recalled an earlier American ideal and driven the future. Nowhere in American society is violent, competitive individualism more rampant than in the modern stock market. Finally, the story holds important lessons for citizens of other nations, even as the American form of corporate capitalism has affected the different ways many other countries do business. For somewhat over a decade now, many countries have been at a decision point as to whether they will adopt the American way or pursue their own, or even whether they have much choice in the matter. _____ Lawrence E Mitchell is Theodore Rinehart Professor of Business Law at George Washington University. (c) 2009 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. http://www.alternet.org/story/113385/ TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From suzannedk at gmail.com Fri Jan 2 15:49:53 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 23:49:53 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Jews, Palestinians Uniting With Other Canadians to Stop Israeli Massacre in Gaza In-Reply-To: <200901022018.n02KIq03005968@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> References: <200901022018.n02KIq03005968@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> Message-ID: The planed demonstrations in Amsterdam after the first one Saturday are no allowed to happen, not one other. The country and the main areas are crawling with Israeli and US agents prepared to turn into riot police at a moments notice. They have guns, regular police do not. Gun ownership is not allowed here. Death penalty is not allowed here. The recent agreement with the Dutch government and Israel was signed just days before the attack began in Gaza, over-riding EU Human Rights law....We have the International Criminal Court. Of course the U S and Israel want to control Holland. They have no yet controled the Dutch news TV but every effort will be expended to do so to copy U S TV. The pressure will not be soft pressure. Israel's U S aided Gaza genocide means that the wars generated by the reactions to these horrors, much like the Warsaw Ghetto, will keep U S war empire extinquishing the conflagrations it willfully starts, over and over. S.M. de Kuyper On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Sid Shniad wrote: > > Media Advisory > > > Jews, Palestinians Uniting With Other Canadians to Stop Israeli > Massacre in Gaza > > > Ottawa / January 2, 2009 ? Independent Jewish Voices and the > Association of Palestinian Arab Canadians (APAC) are uniting to call > for protests across Canada this weekend. Thousands are expected to > attend rallies already being planned for several Canadian cities this > weekend, including Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver. > International protests this weekend will also take place in London, > Washington, Tel Aviv, and many other cities around the world. The > Canadian protests will call on Members of Parliament to denounce what > the groups argue is a massacre of Palestinian civilians being waged by > Israel. > > > WHAT: International day of protests against Israel's attacks on Gaza > > > WHEN: Saturday, January 3, 2009. > > > OTTAWA: 1pm, January 3, Parliament Hill > > > VANCOUVER: 1pm, January 3, Vancouver Art Gallery (Robson side - corner > Hornby) > > > TORONTO: 2pm, January 3, Dundas Square > > > MONTREAL: 12:00pm, January 2 at the corner of Ste-Catherine St. and > McGill College Avenue & 12:30pm, Sunday January 4 at Carr? abot > (corner St. Catherine and Atwater, metro Atwater) > > > -30- > > > For More Information: > > > Diana Ralph, Coordinator, Independent Jewish Voices, 613-321-2765, > [1]ijv at magma.ca, [2]www.independentjewishvoices.ca > > > > Munzer Zimmo, Association of Palestinian Arab Canadians (APAC), > 613-792-3941, [3]monzerzimmo at rogers.com, [4]www.apacottawa.com > > References > > 1. mailto:ijv at magma.ca > 2. http://www.independentjewishvoices.ca/ > 3. mailto:monzerzimmo at rogers.com > 4. http://www.apacottawa.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > > From critical.montages at gmail.com Fri Jan 2 16:40:20 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 18:40:20 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Antiwar Activism in Israel, Unseen on TV Message-ID: Unfortunately, the video with English subtitles loads a little slowly, but it's worth watching and passing it onto others. -- Yoshie Antiwar Activism in Israel, Unseen on TV by Rela Mazali Absent from Israeli and most other TV networks are the ongoing activism and protest inside Israel against Israel's siege and, now, war on Gaza. Immediately below is a video report on two of many such actions. From critical.montages at gmail.com Fri Jan 2 18:14:27 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 20:14:27 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Obama's Deadly Silence Message-ID: Obama's deadly silence Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 2 January 2009 Barack Obama is presented with a t-shirt by Sderot mayor Eli Moyal as Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak (left) looks on after inspecting homemade Palestinian rockets during his visit to the southern Israeli town last year. (David Silverman/Getty Images) "I would like to ask President-elect Obama to say something please about the humanitarian crisis that is being experienced right now by the people of Gaza." Former Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney made her plea after disembarking from the badly damaged SS Dignity that had limped to the Lebanese port of Tyre while taking on water. The small boat, carrying McKinney, the Green Party's recent presidential candidate, other volunteers, and several tons of donated medical supplies, had been trying to reach the coast of Gaza when it was rammed by an Israeli gunboat in international waters. But as more than 2,400 Palestinians have been killed or injured -- the majority civilians -- since Israel began its savage bombardment of Gaza on 27 December, Obama has maintained his silence. "There is only one president at a time," his spokesmen tell the media. This convenient excuse has not applied, say, to Obama's detailed interventions on the economy, or his condemnation of the "coordinated attacks on innocent civilians" in Mumbai in November. The Mumbai attacks were a clear-cut case of innocent people being slaughtered. The situation in the Middle East however is seen as more "complicated" and so polite opinion accepts Obama's silence not as the approval for Israel's actions that it certainly is, but as responsible statesmanship. It ought not to be difficult to condemn Israel's murder of civilians and bombing of civilian infrastructure including hundreds of private homes, universities, schools, mosques, civil police stations and ministries, and the building housing the only freely-elected Arab parliament. It ought not to be risky or disruptive to US foreign policy to say that Israel has an unconditional obligation under the Fourth Geneva Convention to lift its lethal, months-old blockade preventing adequate food, fuel, surgical supplies, medications and other basic necessities from reaching Gaza. But in the looking-glass world of American politics, Israel, with its powerful first-world army, is the victim, and Gaza -- the besieged and blockaded home to 1.5 million immiserated people, half of them children and eighty percent refugees -- is the aggressor against whom no cruelty is apparently too extreme. While feigning restraint, Obama has telegraphed where he really stands; senior adviser David Axelrod told CBS on 28 December that Obama understood Israel's urge to "respond" to attacks on its citizens. Axelrod claimed that "this situation has become even more complicated in the last couple of days and weeks as Hamas began its shelling [and] Israel responded." The truce Hamas had meticulously upheld was shattered when Israel attacked Gaza, killing six Palestinians, as The Guardian reported on 5 November. A blatant disregard for the facts, it seems, will not leave the White House with George W. Bush on 20 January. Axelrod also recalled Obama's visit to Israel last July when he ignored Palestinians and visited the Israeli town of Sderot. There, Obama declared: "If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. I would expect Israelis to do the same thing." This should not surprise anyone. Despite pervasive wishful thinking that Obama would abandon America's pro-Israel bias, his approach has been almost indistinguishable from the Bush administration's. Along with Tony Blair and George W. Bush, Obama staunchly supported Israel's war against Lebanon in July-August 2006, where it used cluster bombs on civilian areas, killing more than 1,000 people. Obama's comments in Sderot echoed what he said in a speech to the powerful pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC, in March 2007. He recalled an earlier visit to the Israeli town of Kiryat Shmona near the border with Lebanon which he said reminded him of an American suburb. There, he could imagine the sounds of Israeli children at "joyful play just like my own daughters." He saw a home the Israelis told him was damaged by a Hizballah rocket (no one had been hurt in the incident). Obama has identified his daughters repeatedly with Israeli children, while never having uttered a word about the thousands -- thousands -- of Palestinian and Lebanese children killed and permanently maimed by Israeli attacks just since 2006. This allegedly post-racial president appears fully invested in the racist worldview that considers Arab lives to be worth less than those of Israelis and in which Arabs are always "terrorists." The problem is much wider than Obama: American liberals in general see no contradiction in espousing positions supporting Israel that they would deem extremist and racist in any other context. The cream of America's allegedly "progressive" Democratic party vanguard -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Howard Berman, New York Senator Charles Schumer, among others -- have all offered unequivocal support for Israel's massacres in Gaza, describing them as "self-defense." And then there's Hillary Clinton, the incoming secretary of state and self-styled champion of women and the working classes, who won't let anyone outbid her anti-Palestinian positions. Democrats are not simply indifferent to Palestinians. In the recent presidential election, their efforts to win swing states like Florida often involved espousing positions dehumanizing to Palestinians in particular and Arabs and Muslims in general. Many liberals know this is wrong but tolerate it silently as a price worth paying (though not to be paid by them) to see a Democrat in office. Even those further to the left implicitly accept Israel's logic. Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive, criticized Israel's attacks on Gaza as a "reckless" and "disproportionate response" to Hamas rocket attacks that he deemed "immoral." There are many others who do nothing to support nonviolent resistance to Israeli occupation and colonization, such as boycott, divestment and sanctions but who are quick to condemn any desperate Palestinian effort -- no matter how ineffectual and symbolic -- to resist Israel's relentless aggression. Similarly, we can expect that the American university professors who have publicly opposed the academic boycott of Israel on grounds of protecting "academic freedom" will remain just as silent about Israel's bombing of the Islamic University of Gaza as they have about Israel's other attacks on Palestinian academic institutions. There is no silver lining to Israel's slaughter in Gaza, but the reactions to it should at least serve as a wake-up call: when it comes to the struggle for peace and justice in Palestine, the American liberal elites who are about to assume power present as formidable an obstacle as the outgoing Bush administration and its neoconservative backers. Co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah is author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse (Metropolitan Books, 2006). This essay was first published in The Guardian's Comment is Free and is republished with the author's permission. From srobin21 at comcast.net Fri Jan 2 19:13:57 2009 From: srobin21 at comcast.net (Steven L. Robinson) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 18:13:57 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Free trade at twenty - A Canadian view Message-ID: <135f01c96d48$efcc8240$54f2fea9@noir> Free trade at twenty By Duncan Cameron Rabble January 1, 2009 Twenty years ago on January 1, the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA) came into effect, following a tumultuous national argument in which Canadians debated the nature of Canada, and not just the perennial topics of federalism, the place of English and French, or the role of government. Business lobby groups spent millions, arguing that Canada was strong, and, able to compete with the U.S., in effect saying free trade was the Canadian nationalist policy. Resistance came from everywhere. Women's organizations, farm groups, trade unions, international solidarity NGO's, the churches, and the nascent Council of Canadians, along with many others, banded in the national Pro-Canada (later Action Canada) Network to oppose the deal. The anti-free trade forces won the debate. A majority of Canadians voted for parties that opposed free trade. But the Conservatives won the election, and the deal went into effect, followed five years later by NAFTA. The free trade deal changed everything, and nothing. Everything, because political activists had to rethink what could be accomplished through parliamentary and extra-parliamentary action, given the existing party/electoral system, and the re-balancing of political forces towards naked corporate power. The Canadian left became fragmented, and is divided to this day on what needs to be done. Except in British Columbia the NDP failed to mount an effective campaign against the FTA. Ontario trade union leaders were left to wonder why they supported the NDP, and some, notably at the CAW, no longer do. Nothing changed because the outcome of implanting the FTA was mainly to propel Canada faster along on its prevailing trajectory of dependent resource producer in a world dominated by the U.S. The purpose of the FTA was to re-enforce the status quo, helping business to dominant public life more easily. That the FTA worked for business was seen when exchanging a Conservative government for a Liberal one in 1993 did not produce meaningful change in government policy. In the first five years of the agreement, the Canadian share of the U.S. market (and of the Canadian market) declined. Canadian manufacturing job loss was endemic, as was documented by Bruce Campbell on behalf of the Canadian Labour Congress. The U.S. share of its own market also declined, but the U.S. share of the Canada market increased. The FTA allied Canada to the U.S. on world trade issues, undermining multilateralism, and leaving foreign policy downgraded, along with the then Department of External Affairs, which became subservient to trade promotion goals. The FTA was a commercial union. Canada had agreed to integrate its economy with the U.S. economy. Apart from meaningless tariff reductions, and a supposed dispute settlement mechanism, Canadian exporters did not get improved -- let alone guaranteed -- access to the U.S. market. The CBC failed to object to the obvious surrender of sovereignty under the FTA, and discredited itself in the eyes of many. With free trade, the U.S. won guaranteed access to Canadian resources and corporate assets. U.S. corporations were to receive national treatment in Canada. In effect the trade deal was a corporate charter of rights that overrides the Canadian constitution. The adoption of the FTA hastened the demise of Brian Mulroney, and his Meech Lake Accord. Instead of reaching out to those most damaged by free trade, Mulroney gloated, and his adversaries, including Pierre Trudeau, were able to take advantage of the animosity generated by his indifference to worker [sic] who lost their livelihood, to attack him for proposing to weaken the power of the central government yet again, through the Meech Lake accord. An expatriate academic, writer and broadcaster living in Britain at the time said Canada signed its own economic death warrant when it signed the free trade agreement. His name: Michael Ignatieff. Significantly, the FTA revealed as never before, Canada as a site for class warfare waged by U.S. corporations, and Canadian compradors against the rest of us. The business class was aided and abetted by a compliant media. John Turner the worthy, however unlikely, champion of the anti-free trade electoral forces was the victim of withering personal attacks, including from within the LIberal party, designed to discredit his noble message, by destroying the messenger. The importance of the free trade debate was that there was a debate. Ever since, whether it be on fiscal deficits, interest rates, the WTO, climate change, or the current financial melt down, the business class has been doing everything they can to ensure that an open debate not happen again. On public issues, through ownership of the media, when business manages to control who is allowed to speak, and determine the acceptable range of views, it wins, and the public loses. Twenty years after the FTA, it is more important than ever to make our debates as public, and as continuous, as possible. As we showed then, economic issues matter too much to be left to the business class. http://www.rabble.ca/columnists/free-trade-twenty This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 19:59:04 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 18:59:04 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Rally for Gaza this Sunday 2pm - Melbourne, Australia Message-ID: <200901030259.n032x4U2029999@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/75674f87/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 20:07:37 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:07:37 -0800 Subject: [R-G] CUPE president condemns Israeli military assault on Gaza Message-ID: <200901030307.n0337btv004746@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/d33de06a/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 2 12:34:13 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 11:34:13 -0800 Subject: [R-G] DEMO in San Juan Puerto Rico supporting the people of Gaza Message-ID: <200901021934.n02JYDVH017797@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090102/4b9d00c7/attachment.txt From critical.montages at gmail.com Fri Jan 2 22:52:28 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 00:52:28 -0500 Subject: [R-G] =?windows-1252?q?Raul_Castro=B4s_Speech_on_the_50th_Anniver?= =?windows-1252?q?sary_of_the_Revolution?= Message-ID: Video: Raul Castro?s Speech on the 50th Anniversary of the Revolution Santiago de Cuba, Jan 1 (Prensa Latina) Prensa Latina is posting below the full text of the speech delivered by President Raul Castro at the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Revolution. SPEECH MADE BY ARMY GENERAL RAUL CASTRO RUZ, PRESIDENT OF THE STATE COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS OF CUBA, AT THE COMMEMORATION OF THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CUBAN REVOLUTION. SANTIAGO DE CUBA, JANUARY 1ST, 2009, "YEAR OF THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE REVOLUTIONARY TRUMPH." Men and women from Santiago; People from Oriente; Combatants of the Ej?rcito Rebelde, of the underground struggle and of every combat in defense of the Revolution throughout these 50 years; Compatriots; In a day like this, our first thoughts are for those who fell in this long struggle. They constitute a paradigm and a symbol of the efforts and sacrifices of millions of Cubans. Closely united in the clamor of battle, waging the powerful weapons embodied in Fidel's leadership, his teachings and his example, we have learned how to transform our dreams into a reality; how to keep our heads cool and our confidence in the face of dangers and threats; how to get over the big setbacks; how to turn every challenge into a victory and to overcome adversity, no matter how insurmountable they might have seem. Those of us who have had the privilege to experience the intensity of this stage of our history are well aware of the truth contained in that alert he issued that January 8, 1959, during his first speech after entering the capital: "The tyranny has been overthrown. Our joy is immense. However, much remains to be done. We shall not deceive ourselves believing that in the future everything will be easier, because perhaps everything will be more difficult," he said. For the first time, the Cuban people had attained political power. This time, with Fidel, the mambises entered Santiago de Cuba leaving behind exactly 60 years of absolute domination by the emerging US imperialism, which did not take long to show its real purposes by preventing the Liberation Army from entering this city. The great confusion and above all the enormous frustration caused by the US intervention had been left way behind. But the Mamb? Army, despite its formal dismantling, always preserved its fighting spirit and the ideas that led C?spedes, Agramonte, G?mez, Maceo and so many other heroes and independence combatants to take up arms. For over fifty years our people would endure corrupted governments and new US interventions, the Machado tyranny and the frustrated revolution that overthrew him. Later, in 1952, the coup d'?tat dealt with the support of the US administration, reinstated the dictatorship. This formula was commonly applied in those years to ensure its dominion in Latin America. It was clear to us that the armed struggle was the only way. Again, the revolutionaries would have to face ?as Mart? before us?the dilemma of the necessary war for the independence that was cut short in 1898. Thus, the Ej?rcito Rebelde took up again the weapons of the mambises and after the triumph was forever transformed into the unbeaten Revolutionary Armed Forces. The Centennial Generation, which in 1953 stormed the Moncada's and Carlos Manuel de C?spedes' barracks, was inspired in Marti's important legacy and his humanistic global vision reaching beyond the attainment of national liberation. Speaking in historical terms, a short time would pass from the moment the mambises' dreams were frustrated to the triumph of the War of Liberation. Early in that period, Mella, one of the founding members of our first communist party and of the FEU (University Students Federation), became the legitimate heir and the bridge connecting Marti's thoughts to the most advanced ideas. In those years, the conscience and action of workers and farmers matured and a genuine, valiant and patriotic intelligentsia was formed which has accompanied them to the present. Then, the Cuban school, as a loyal repository of the fighting traditions of its predecessors, planted them in the best of the new generations. Right after the triumph it became evident for every humble man and woman that the Revolution was like a social cataclysm of justice knocking on every door, from the large palaces on the 5th Avenue, in the capital of the country, to the poorest shanty in the remotest mountain or plain field. The revolutionary laws not only fulfilled the program that inspired the Moncada but also went far beyond it in the logical evolution of the process. At the same time, they set a precedent for peoples of Our America, which 200 years back had started the movement for the emancipation from colonialism. But, in Cuba the history of the Americas would take a different turn. Nothing morally valuable has been alien to the turmoil that even before January 1st, 1959, started to sweep away opprobrium and inequity while opening the way to the enormous effort of all the people determined to give itself everything it deserves and that it has built with its own sweat and blood. Millions of Cubans, men and women, have been workers, students or soldiers; sometimes all of these as the circumstances have demanded. Nicolas Guill?n's masterly verses synthesized what the January 1959 triumph brought to our people. "I have what I was meant to have," he said in one of his poems, referring not to material wealth but to being the masters of our own destiny. This victory is twice as worthy for it has been attained despite the unhealthy and vindictive hatred of the powerful neighbor. The promotion and support of sabotage and banditry; the Playa Gir?n [Bay of Pigs] invasion; the blockade and other economic, political and diplomatic aggressions; the permanent slandering campaign aimed at denigrating the Cuban Revolution and its leaders; the October [Missile] Crisis; the hijackings of and attacks on civilian planes and sea crafts; the state terrorism, with its terrible result of 3478 dead and 2099 maimed; the attempts on the life of Fidel and other leaders; the murder of Cuban workers, farmers, fishermen, students, diplomats and combatants; these and many other crimes bear witness to the stubborn insistence on putting out, at any cost, the beacon of justice and honor that January 1st meant to so many. One way or another, with more or less aggressiveness, every US administration has tried to impose a regime change in Cuba. Resistance has been the key word and the explanation of every one of our victories throughout this half century of continued fighting when we have consistently acted on our own and taken our own risks notwithstanding the extensive and decisive solidarity we have received. For many years, Cuban revolutionaries have abided by Mart?'s apothegm: "Freedom is most precious and one must either accept to live without it or be determined to buy it for its price." On the 30th anniversary of the victory, Fidel said at this square: "We are here because we have put up a resistance." Ten years later, in 1999, from this same balcony, he said that the Special Period was "the most extraordinary page of revolutionary and patriotic glory and firmness [?] when we were left absolutely alone in the West, only 90 miles away from the United States, and we decided to continue forward." End of quote. We repeat the same thing today. We have firmly resisted --far from any fanaticism-- based on sound convictions, and on the resolution of all of the people to defend them at any cost. Presently, our glorious Five Heroes are a living example of that unshakable determination. (Applause and exclamations) Today, we are not alone on this side of the ocean facing the empire, as it was the case in the 1960s when in January 1962 the United States of America forced on the OAS the absurd expulsion of Cuba, the country which had shortly before been the victim of an invasion organized by the US administration and escorted to our coasts by its own warships. Actually, as it has been proven, that expulsion was the prelude to a direct military intervention only prevented by the deployment of the Soviet nuclear missiles leading to the October Crisis, known to the world as the Missile Crisis. Today, the Revolution is stronger than ever; it has never failed to stand by its principles, not even in the most difficult circumstances. This truth cannot be changed in the least even if some get tired or even renounce their history as they forget that life is in itself an eternal fight. Does it mean there is less danger? No, it doesn't. Let's not entertain any illusions. As we commemorate this half century of victories, it is time to reflect on the future, on the next fifty years when we shall continue to struggle incessantly. The observation of the current disturbances in the contemporary world tells us that the coming years will not be easier. This is the truth; I am not saying this to scare anyone. We should also keep in mind what Fidel told us all, but especially the youth, at the University of Havana on November 17, 2005: "This country could destroy itself, this Revolution could destroy itself, but they [the enemy] cannot destroy it. We could destroy it ourselves, and it would only be our fault," he argued. In the face of this possibility, I ask myself: What is the guarantee that such a horrible thing would not happen to our people? How could we avoid such a numbing blow that we would need much time to recover from and to attain victory again? I am speaking on behalf of all those who have been fighting from the moment the first shots were fired on the walls of the Moncada barracks 55 years ago and of those who fulfilled heroic internationalist missions. Of course, I am also speaking on behalf of those who fell in the wars of independence and more recently in the War of Liberation. I speak on behalf of them all, and on behalf of Abel and Jose Antonio, of Camilo and Che, when I say that this demands foremost from tomorrow's leaders that they never forget that this is a Revolution of the humble, by the humble and for the humble; (Applause) that they should never be misled by the enemy's siren songs and be aware that, given its very essence, the enemy will never cease to be aggressive, treacherous and dominant; that they should never distance themselves from our workers, our farmers and the people at large; that the party members must prevent the destruction of the Party. Let's learn from history. If they act consistently, they will always have the support of the people, even if they make mistakes which do not breach basic principles. But, if their actions were inconsistent with such principles, they would even lack the strength and the opportunity to rectify, since they would fail to have the moral authority that the masses only grant to those who never back from the struggle. They could end up incapacitated for tackling internal and external dangers and unable to preserve the work that is the fruit of the blood and the sacrifices of many generations of Cubans. Nobody should have any doubt that if that would ever happen our people would put up a fight, and today's mambises would be in the frontline; that they would never be ideologically disarmed nor would they ever let down their sword. (Applause and exclamations) It befits the historical leadership of the Revolution to prepare the new generations to take up the enormous responsibility of continuing to carry forward the revolutionary process. This heroic city of Santiago and all of Cuba witnessed the sacrifices of thousands of compatriots, the rage accumulated for so many lives cut short by crime, the endless pain of our mothers and the sublime courage of its sons and daughters. This was the birthplace of a young revolutionary killed when he was only 22 years old, a man who is a symbol of that willingness to make sacrifices, of that purity, courage and serenity, and of that love for our people: Frank Pa?s Garc?a. This eastern land was the birthplace of the Revolution. It was here that the call of duty was made in La Demajagua and on July 26th; it was here that we landed in the Granma and started the fight on the mountains and the plains, the same that extended later to the entire island. As Fidel said in History Will Absolve Me, "every day here looks like it will be again the day of Yara and Baire." Never again shall poverty, ignominy, abuse and injustice return to our land! Never again shall the heart of our mothers be filled with pain and the soul of every honest Cuban succumb to shame! Such is the firm resolution of a nation on a war footing; a nation that is aware of its duty and proud of its history.(Applause) Our people are well aware of every shortcoming in the work they have built with their own hands and defended with their own lives. We, the revolutionaries are our strongest critics. We have never hesitated to publicly discuss our flaws and mistakes. There are plenty of past and recent examples. Since October 10, 1868, disunity had been the main cause of our defeats. After January 1st, 1959, the unity forged by Fidel has been the guarantee of our victories. Our people have been able to preserve that unity despite all of the ups and downs and the attempts at division, and have rightly placed common aspirations above differences, crushing meanness with the strength of collectivism and generosity. Revolutions can only advance and endure when they are carried forward by the people. The full understanding of this truth and the consistent and unshakable action carried forward have been decisive elements in the victory of the Cuban Revolution over its enemies, and over seemingly insurmountable difficulties and challenges. As we arrive at the first half century of the victorious Revolution, let's pay homage first to our wonderful people and to its exemplary decision, courage, loyalty and internationalist and fraternal vocation; to its extraordinary show of will, its spirit of sacrifice and its confidence in victory, in the Party, in its maximum leader and, above all, in itself. (Applause) I know that I am expressing the feelings of my compatriots and of many revolutionaries in the world, when I pay homage to the Commander in Chief of the Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro Ruz. (Applause and exclamations) We know that a man alone doesn't make history, but some men are indispensable as they can have a decisive influence in the course of events. Fidel is one of them; nobody doubts it, not even his most bitter enemies. Ever since his early youth he adopted as his own one of Mart?'s thoughts: "All of the glory in the world fits in a kernel of corn." This he turned into his shield from everything that is superfluous or transient, into his main weapon to transform praises and honors --even if well-deserved?into greater humility, honesty, fighting spirit and love for truth, which he has invariably placed above all else. He made reference to these ideas 50 years ago in this same square. His words that night are absolutely valid today. At this very special moment when we think of our past journey and particularly of the long way ahead, when we reiterate our commitment to the people and to our martyrs, allow me to conclude by recalling the premonitory alert and the call to combat made by the Commander in Chief in this historic place on January 1st, 1959, as he indicated: "We do not believe that all of the problems can be easily solved; we know that the path is fraught with obstacles, but we are men of faith, we are used to facing great difficulties. Our people can be sure of one thing, and that is that we can make one or many mistakes, but we will never steal and we will never betray you." And he added: "We shall never let ourselves be carried away by vanity or ambition, [?] there can be no greater reward or satisfaction than the fulfillment of our duty," he concluded. On this date full of significance and symbolism, let's reflect on these ideas which constitute a guidance for true revolutionaries; let's do it with the satisfaction of having fulfilled our duty until the present and having behind us a life lived with dignity in the most intense and fruitful half century of our history. Let's do it with the firm commitment that we will always be able to proudly claim in this land: Glory to our heroes and martyrs! (Exclamations) Long live Fidel! (Exclamations) Long live the Revolution! (Exclamations) Long live Free Cuba! (Exclamations) (Ovation). nm PL-2 La Habana, 1 de enero de 2009 ?Jam?s regresar? el dolor al coraz?n de las madres ni la verg?enza al alma de cada cubano honesto! ? Discurso pronunciado por el Presidente de los Consejos de Estado y de Ministros de la Rep?blica de Cuba, General de Ej?rcito Ra?l Castro Ruz, en el acto por el aniversario 50 del triunfo de la Revoluci?n, efectuado en Santiago de Cuba, el 1ro. de enero de 2009, "A?o del 50 aniversario del triunfo de la Revoluci?n". Santiagueras y santiagueros; Orientales; Combatientes del Ej?rcito Rebelde, la lucha clandestina y de cada combate en defensa de la Revoluci?n durante estos 50 a?os; Compatriotas: Ra?l Castro RuzEl primer pensamiento, un d?a como hoy, para los ca?dos en esta larga lucha. Ellos son paradigma y s?mbolo del esfuerzo y el sacrificio de millones de cubanos. En estrecha uni?n, empu?ando las poderosas armas que han significado la direcci?n, las ense?anzas y el ejemplo de Fidel, aprendimos en el rigor de la lucha a transformar sue?os en realidades; a no perder la calma y la confianza frente a peligros y amenazas; a levantar el ?nimo tras los grandes reveses; a convertir en victoria cada reto y a superar las adversidades, por insuperables que pudieran parecer. Los que hemos tenido el privilegio de vivir con toda intensidad esta etapa de nuestra historia, sabemos bien cu?n cierta ha resultado la alerta que nos hizo aquel 8 de enero de 1959, en su primer discurso al entrar a la capital: "La tiran?a ha sido derrocada. La alegr?a es inmensa. Y sin embargo, queda mucho por hacer todav?a. No nos enga?amos creyendo que en lo adelante todo ser? f?cil; quiz?s en lo adelante todo sea m?s dif?cil", concluy?. Por primera vez el pueblo cubano alcanzaba el poder pol?tico. En esta ocasi?n, junto a Fidel, los mambises s? entraron a Santiago de Cuba. Atr?s quedaban 60 a?os exactos de dominaci?n absoluta del naciente imperialismo norteamericano, que no tardar?a en mostrar sus verdaderos prop?sitos, al impedir la entrada a esta ciudad del Ej?rcito Libertador. Atr?s quedaron tambi?n la gran confusi?n y sobre todo la frustraci?n enorme que gener? la intervenci?n norteamericana. Sin embargo se mantuvo en vilo, m?s all? de su disoluci?n formal, la voluntad de lucha del Ej?rcito Mamb? y el pensamiento que gui? las armas de C?spedes, Agramonte, G?mez, Maceo y tantos otros pr?ceres y combatientes por la independencia. Vivimos algo m?s de cinco d?cadas de gobiernos corruptos, de nuevas intervenciones norteamericanas; la tiran?a machadista y la revoluci?n frustrada que la derroc?. M?s tarde, en 1952, el golpe de Estado, con el apoyo del gobierno norteamericano, instaur? nuevamente la dictadura, f?rmula aplicada en esos a?os para asegurar su dominio en Am?rica Latina. Para nosotros qued? claro que la lucha armada era la ?nica v?a. A los revolucionarios se nos planteaba nuevamente, como a Mart? antes, el dilema de la guerra necesaria por la independencia que qued? trunca en 1898. El Ej?rcito Rebelde retom? las armas mambisas y despu?s del triunfo se transform? para siempre en las invictas Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias. La Generaci?n del Centenario, que en 1953 asalt? los cuarteles Moncada y Carlos Manuel de C?spedes, cont? con el importante legado de Mart?, con su visi?n global human?stica que va m?s all? de la consecuci?n de la liberaci?n nacional. En t?rminos hist?ricos, fue breve el tiempo que medi? entre la frustraci?n del sue?o mamb? y el triunfo en la Guerra de Liberaci?n. A comienzos de este per?odo, Mella, uno de los fundadores de nuestro primer partido comunista y creador de la Federaci?n Estudiantil Universitaria (FEU), se convierte en heredero leg?timo y puente que une el pensamiento martiano y las ideas m?s avanzadas. Fueron a?os de maduraci?n de la conciencia y la acci?n de obreros y campesinos, y de formaci?n de una intelectualidad genuina, valiente y patriota que los ha acompa?ado hasta el presente. El magisterio cubano, fiel depositario de las tradiciones de lucha de sus predecesores, las sembr? en lo mejor de las nuevas generaciones. Desde el mismo momento del triunfo, se hizo evidente para cada hombre y mujer humilde que la Revoluci?n era un justiciero cataclismo social que toc? todas las puertas, desde los palacetes de la Quinta Avenida en la capital, hasta el m?s mis?rrimo y apartado boh?o de nuestros campos y monta?as. Las leyes revolucionarias no s?lo dieron cumplimiento al programa del Moncada, lo superaron con creces en la l?gica evoluci?n del proceso. Adem?s sentaron un precedente para los pueblos de nuestra Am?rica que hace 200 a?os iniciaron el movimiento emancipador del colonialismo. En Cuba, la historia americana tom? rumbos diferentes. Nada moralmente valioso ha sido ajeno al torbellino que aun antes del primero de enero de 1959, comenz? a barrer oprobios e inequidades, a la vez que abri? paso al gigantesco esfuerzo de todo un pueblo, decidido a darse a s? mismo cuanto merece y ha logrado levantar con su sangre y su sudor. Millones de cubanas y cubanos han sido trabajadores, estudiantes, soldados, o simult?neamente las tres cosas, cuantas veces las circunstancias lo han exigido. La s?ntesis magistral de Nicol?s Guill?n resumi? el significado para el pueblo del triunfo de enero de 1959: "Tengo lo que ten?a que tener", dice uno de sus versos, refiri?ndose no a riquezas materiales, sino a ser due?os de nuestro destino. Es una victoria doblemente meritoria, porque ha sido alcanzada a pesar del odio enfermizo y vengativo del poderoso vecino. El fomento y apoyo al sabotaje y el bandidismo; la invasi?n de Playa Gir?n; el bloqueo y dem?s agresiones econ?micas, pol?ticas y diplom?ticas; la permanente campa?a de mentiras dirigida a denigrar a la Revoluci?n y sus l?deres; la Crisis de Octubre, los secuestros y ataques a embarcaciones y aeronaves civiles; el terrorismo de Estado, con su terrible saldo de 3 478 muertos y 2 099 incapacitados; los planes de atentados a Fidel y otros dirigentes; los asesinatos de obreros, campesinos, pescadores, estudiantes, diplom?ticos y combatientes cubanos. Esos y otros muchos cr?menes dan fe del tozudo empe?o de apagar a cualquier precio la luz de justicia y decoro que signific? la alborada del Primero de Enero. Una tras otra, todas las administraciones norteamericanas no han cesado de intentar forzar un cambio de r?gimen en Cuba, empleando una u otra v?a, con mayor o menor agresividad. Resistir ha sido la palabra de orden y la clave de cada una de nuestras victorias, durante este medio siglo de ininterrumpido batallar, en que hemos partido invariablemente de jugarnos nuestra propia piel, sin dejar de reconocer la amplia y decisiva solidaridad recibida. Desde hace muchos a?os, los revolucionarios cubanos nos atenemos a la m?xima martiana: "La libertad cuesta muy cara, y es necesario o resignarse a vivir sin ella, o decidirse a comprarla por su precio". En esta plaza, en el 30 aniversario del triunfo, Fidel nos dijo: "Aqu? estamos porque hemos podido resistir". Una d?cada despu?s, en 1999, desde este mismo balc?n, afirm? que el per?odo especial constitu?a "la m?s extraordinaria p?gina de gloria y firmeza patri?tica y revolucionaria, (?) cuando nos quedamos absolutamente solos en medio de Occidente a 90 millas de Estados Unidos y decidimos seguir adelante". Fin de la cita. As? lo repetimos hoy. Ha sido una resistencia firme, ajena a fanatismos, basada en s?lidas convicciones y en la decisi?n de todo un pueblo de defenderlas al precio que sea necesario. Ejemplo vivo de ello en estos momentos es la inconmovible firmeza de nuestros gloriosos Cinco H?roes (Aplausos y exclamaciones de: "?Viva!") . Hoy no estamos solos frente al imperio en este lado del oc?ano, como ocurri? en los a?os sesenta, cuando los Estados Unidos impusieron el absurdo de expulsar de la OEA, en enero de 1962, a Cuba, el pa?s que poco antes hab?a sido v?ctima de una invasi?n organizada por el gobierno norteamericano y escoltada hasta nuestras costas por sus buques de guerra. Precisamente, como se ha demostrado, esa expulsi?n era el preludio de una intervenci?n militar directa, impedida s?lo por el despliegue de los cohetes nucleares sovi?ticos que desemboc? en la Crisis de Octubre, conocida mundialmente como la crisis de los m?siles. Hoy la Revoluci?n es m?s fuerte que nunca y jam?s ha cedido un mil?metro en sus principios, ni en los momentos m?s dif?ciles. No cambia en lo m?s m?nimo esa verdad que algunos pocos se cansen y hasta renieguen de su historia, olvid?ndose de que la vida es un eterno batallar. ?Significa que han disminuido los peligros? No, no nos hagamos ilusiones. Cuando conmemoramos este medio siglo de victorias, se impone la reflexi?n sobre el futuro, sobre los pr?ximos cincuenta a?os que ser?n tambi?n de permanente lucha. Observando las actuales turbulencias del mundo contempor?neo, no podemos pensar que ser?n m?s f?ciles, lo digo no para asustar a nadie, es la pura realidad. Tambi?n debemos tener muy presente lo que Fidel nos dijo a todos, pero especialmente a los j?venes, en la Universidad de La Habana, el 17 de noviembre del 2005: "Este pa?s puede autodestruirse por s? mismo; esta Revoluci?n puede destruirse, los que no pueden destruirla hoy son ellos; nosotros s?, nosotros podemos destruirla, y ser?a culpa nuestra", sentenci?. Ante esta posibilidad, me pregunto: ?cu?l es la garant?a de que no ocurra algo tan terrible para nuestro pueblo? ?C?mo evitar un golpe tan anonadante que necesitar?amos mucho tiempo para recuperarnos y alcanzar de nuevo la victoria? Hablo en nombre de todos los que hemos luchado, desde los primeros disparos en los muros del Moncada, hace 55 a?os, hasta los que cumplieron heroicas misiones internacionalistas. Hablo, por supuesto, tambi?n en nombre de los que cayeron en las guerras de independencia y m?s recientemente en la Guerra de Liberaci?n. En representaci?n de todos ellos, hablo en nombre de Abel y Jos? Antonio, de Camilo y Che, cuando afirmo, en primer lugar, que ello exige de los dirigentes del ma?ana que no olviden nunca que esta es la Revoluci?n de los humildes, por los humildes y para los humildes (Aplausos); que no se reblandezcan con los cantos de sirena del enemigo y tengan conciencia de que por su esencia, nunca dejar? de ser agresivo, dominante y traicionero; que no se aparten jam?s de nuestros obreros, campesinos y el resto del pueblo; que la militancia impida que destruyan al Partido. Aprendamos de la historia. Si act?an as?, contar?n siempre con el apoyo del pueblo, incluso cuando se equivoquen en cuestiones que no violen principios esenciales. Pero si sus actos no estuvieran en consonancia con esa conducta, no contar?n siquiera con la fuerza necesaria ni la oportunidad para rectificar, pues les faltar? la autoridad moral que s?lo otorgan las masas a quienes no ceden en la lucha. Pudieran terminar siendo impotentes ante los peligros externos e internos, e incapaces de preservar la obra fruto de la sangre y el sacrificio de muchas generaciones de cubanos. Si ello llegara a suceder, nadie lo dude, nuestro pueblo sabr? dar la pelea, y en la primera l?nea estar?n los mambises de hoy, que no se desarmar?n ideol?gicamente ni dejar?n caer la espada (Aplausos y exclamaciones). Corresponde a la direcci?n hist?rica de la Revoluci?n preparar a las nuevas generaciones para asumir la enorme responsabilidad de continuar adelante con el proceso revolucionario. Esta heroica ciudad de Santiago, y Cuba entera, fue testigo del sacrificio de miles de compatriotas; de la ira acumulada ante tanta vida tronchada por el crimen; del dolor infinito de nuestras madres y del valor sublime de sus hijas e hijos. Aqu? naci? un joven revolucionario, de s?lo 22 a?os al caer asesinado, que simboliza esa disposici?n al sacrificio, pureza, valent?a, serenidad y amor a la patria de nuestro pueblo: Frank Pa?s Garc?a. En esta tierra oriental naci? la Revoluci?n. Aqu? fue la clarinada de La Demajagua y el 26 de Julio; aqu? desembarcamos en el Granma e iniciamos el combate en monta?as y llanos, que luego se extendi? a toda la isla. Como dijo Fidel en La Historia me Absolver?, aqu? "cada d?a parece que va a ser otra vez el de Yara o el de Baire". ?Nunca m?s volver?n la miseria, la ignominia, el abuso y la injusticia a nuestra tierra! ?Jam?s regresar? el dolor al coraz?n de las madres ni la verg?enza al alma de cada cubano honesto! Es la firme decisi?n de una naci?n en pie de lucha, consciente de su deber y orgullosa de su historia (Aplausos). Nuestro pueblo conoce cada imperfecci?n de la obra que ?l mismo ha levantado con sus brazos y defendido a riesgo de su vida. Los revolucionarios somos nuestros principales cr?ticos. No hemos dudado en dilucidar deficiencias y errores p?blicamente. Sobran los ejemplos pasados y recientes. Desde el 10 de octubre de 1868, la desuni?n fue causa fundamental de nuestras derrotas. A partir del primero de enero de 1959, la unidad, forjada por Fidel, ha sido garant?a de nuestras victorias. Nuestro pueblo logr? mantenerla frente a todos los avatares e intentos divisionistas y ha sabido situar los anhelos comunes por encima de las diferencias, derrotar mezquindades a fuerza de colectivismo y generosidad. Las revoluciones s?lo avanzan y perduran cuando las lleva adelante el pueblo. Haber comprendido esa verdad y actuado invariablemente en consecuencia con ella, ha sido factor decisivo de la victoria de la Revoluci?n cubana frente a enemigos, dificultades y retos en apariencia invencibles. Al arribar al primer medio siglo de Revoluci?n triunfante, llegue el principal tributo a nuestro maravilloso pueblo; a su ejemplar decisi?n, valor, fidelidad, vocaci?n solidaria e internacionalista; a su extraordinaria demostraci?n de voluntad, esp?ritu de sacrificio y confianza en la victoria, en el Partido, en su m?ximo l?der y sobre todo en s? mismo (Aplausos). S? que expreso el sentir de mis compatriotas y de muchos revolucionarios en el mundo, al rendir homenaje en esta hora al Comandante en Jefe de la Revoluci?n Cubana, Fidel Castro Ruz (Aplausos y exclamaciones). Un individuo no hace la historia, lo sabemos, pero hay hombres imprescindibles capaces de influir en su curso de manera decisiva. Fidel es uno de ellos, nadie lo duda, ni aun sus enemigos m?s ac?rrimos. Desde muy joven hizo suyo un pensamiento martiano: "Toda la gloria del mundo cabe en un grano de ma?z". Lo convirti? en escudo contra lo fatuo y lo pasajero, en su principal arma para transformar halagos y honores, por merecidos que fueran, en mayor modestia, honradez, voluntad de lucha y amor por la verdad, que invariablemente ha situado por encima de todo. A estas ideas se refiri?, en esta misma plaza, hace 50 a?os. Sus palabras de aquella noche mantienen absoluta vigencia. En este especial momento que nos hace meditar en el camino recorrido y sobre todo en el a?n m?s largo que est? por delante, cuando ratificamos nuevamente el compromiso con el pueblo y nuestros m?rtires, perm?tanme concluir repitiendo la alerta premonitoria y el llamado al combate que nos hiciera el Comandante en Jefe en este hist?rico lugar, el primero de enero de 1959, cuando se?al?: "No creemos que todos los problemas se vayan a resolver f?cilmente, sabemos que el camino est? trillado de obst?culos, pero nosotros somos hombres de fe, que nos enfrentamos siempre a las grandes dificultades. Podr? estar seguro el pueblo de una cosa, que es que podemos equivocarnos una y muchas veces, lo ?nico que no podr? decir jam?s de nosotros es que robamos, que traicionamos". Y agreg?: "Nunca nos dejaremos arrastrar por la vanidad ni por la ambici?n, (?) no hay satisfacci?n ni premio m?s grande que cumplir con el deber", concluy?. En una fecha de tanto significado y simbolismo, reflexionemos sobre estas ideas que constituyen gu?a para el revolucionario verdadero. Hag?moslo con la satisfacci?n de haber cumplido el deber hasta el presente; con el aval de haber vivido con dignidad el m?s intenso y fecundo medio siglo de historia patria y con el firme compromiso de que en esta tierra siempre podremos exclamar con orgullo: ?Gloria a nuestros h?roes y m?rtires! (Exclamaciones de: "?Gloria!") ?Viva Fidel! (Exclamaciones de: "?Viva!") ?Viva la Revoluci?n! (Exclamaciones de: "?Viva!") ?Viva Cuba libre! (Exclamaciones de: "?Viva!") (Ovaci?n). From suzannedk at gmail.com Sat Jan 3 02:20:30 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 10:20:30 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Antiwar Activism in Israel, Unseen on TV In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Unable to download. Suzanne de Kuyper On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Yoshie Furuhashi < critical.montages at gmail.com> wrote: > Unfortunately, the video with English subtitles loads a little slowly, > but it's worth watching and passing it onto others. -- Yoshie > > > Antiwar Activism in Israel, Unseen on TV > by Rela Mazali > > Absent from Israeli and most other TV networks are the ongoing > activism and protest inside Israel against Israel's siege and, now, > war on Gaza. Immediately below is a video report on two of many such > actions. > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sat Jan 3 05:30:16 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 21:30:16 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] Was the 'Credit Crunch' a Myth Used to Sell a Trillion-Dollar Scam? Message-ID: <495F5A58.9000705@ashisuto.co.jp> Even as the media continue to repeat the claim that credit has frozen up, evidence has emerged suggesting the entire story is wrong. by Joshua Holland AlterNet (December 29 2008) There is something approaching a consensus that the Paulson Plan - also known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP - was a boondoggle of an intervention that's flailed from one approach to the next, with little oversight and less effect on the financial meltdown. But perhaps even more troubling than the ad hoc nature of its implementation is the suspicion that has recently emerged that TARP - hundreds of billions of dollars worth so far - was sold to Congress and the public based on a Big Lie. President George W Bush, fabulist-in-chief, articulated the rationale for the program in that trademark way of his - as if addressing a nation of slow-witted twelve-year-olds - on September 24: "Major financial institutions have teetered on the edge of collapse ... [and] began holding onto their money, and lending dried up, and the gears of the American financial system began grinding to a halt". Bush said that if Congress didn't give Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson the trillion dollars (give or take) for which he was asking, the results would be disastrous: "Even if you have good credit history, it would be more difficult for you to get the loans you need to buy a car or send your children to college. And ultimately, our country could experience a long and painful recession." For the most part, the press has continued to echo Bush's central assertion that there's a "credit crunch" preventing even qualified borrowers - that's the key point - from getting loans, and it's now part of the conventional wisdom. But a number of economists are questionioning the factual basis of the credit crunch narrative. Columnist David Sirota recently looked at those claims and concluded that Americans "had been punk'd" - that "the major claims about a credit crisis that justified Congress cutting a trillion-dollar blank check to Wall Street were demonstrably false", and the threat of a systemic banking crash was used by the Bush administration to overcome popular resistance to the "bailout". It's a reasonable conclusion; this is an administration that used the threat of thousands of al-Qaida sleeper cells in the United States to sell Congress on the Patriot Act, the specter of mushroom clouds rising over American cities to push through the Iraq war resolution and the supposedly imminent crash of the Social Security system to push for privatizing Americans' retirement savings. But the question comes down to what they knew and when they knew it. The analyses that suggest the whole credit crunch narrative is false are based on data that lagged behind the numbers that policymakers had available, in real time, back in September. So the question - probably unanswerable at this point - comes down to whether or not they looked at the situation and in good faith believed that pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into the banking system would contain the damage and save an economy teetering on the brink of collapse. What Else Could Be Happening? Of course, no one disputes the fact that as the economy has tanked, the number of new loans being issued to American families and businesses has plummeted. But is because credit has dried up for qualified borrowers? Economist Dean Baker doesn't think so. He explains the situation in simple terms: The media, he argues, "are blaming the economic collapse on a 'credit crunch' instead of the more obvious problem that consumers just lost $6 trillion of housing wealth and another $8 trillion of stock wealth". It's a commonsense argument: much of the economic growth of the Bush era existed on paper only, built on the rise of a massive bubble in real estate values rather than growth in productive industries. When all that ephemeral wealth vaporized - and with the economy shedding jobs like a dog with dermatitis - consumers stopped buying, and businesses, anticipating a long slowdown, stopped seeking the loans that they might have otherwise tapped to expand their operations. Whether good borrowers can't get credit from banks because the latter are hoarding cash or lending has stopped because of a drop-off in demand for new loans is not some wonky academic debate; it's of crucial significance. Because if lending to qualified parties has truly frozen, then even if the specific implementation of the Paulson Plan was deeply flawed, its broad approach - "recapitalizing" banks in various ways, buying up some of their crappy paper and guaranteeing some of their transactions - is fundamentally sound. If, on the other hand, the primary problem is that people are broke and maxed out on debt, and firms aren't looking for money to expand, then the kind of massive stimulus package being considered by the Obama transition team and congressional Democrats - largely designed to stimulate demand from the bottom up, with public works projects, tax cuts for working families, aid to tapped-out state and municipal governments and new money for unemployment and food stamps - is obviously the best approach to take. Broadly speaking, these are the parameters of the debate in Washington, and that means that properly diagnosing the underlying problem is crucially important. Is the Credit Crunch a Big Lie? There's plenty of evidence that Baker's right. He points out that even though mortgage rates have plummeted, the number of applications for new loans has dropped to very low levels and argues it's "the most glaring refutation of the claim that people are unable to get credit". If creditworthy applicants were being denied loans by banks unable or unwilling to lend, Baker explains, "then the ratio of mortgage applications to home sales should be soaring" as qualified homebuyers apply to multiple banks for a loan. "Since there is no notable increase in this ratio, access to credit is obviously not an issue". Again, this is common sense. Consumer spending drives about seventy percent of the US economy, and in recent years, much of that spending was financed by people taking chunks of home equity out of their properties - people might have been eating in fancy restaurants, but they were essentially eating their living rooms to do so. That the American people don't have the appetite to go deeper into debt than they already are in order to make new purchases is hard to dispute. In November, consumer prices across the board fell at a record rate for the second month in a row. And even with mortgage rates plummeting, so many homeowners are "underwater" - owing more on their homes than they're worth - that they're unable to refinance because the equity isn't there. Paul Schuster, a vice president at Marketplace Home Mortgage, told the Saint Paul Pioneer Press, "What I'm really concerned about is the job picture ... If (people) don't feel good about their jobs, rates aren't going to matter". The National Federal [sic] of Independent Business' November survey of small-business owners found no evidence of a credit crunch to date, concluding that if "credit is going untapped, it's largely because company operators are not choosing to pursue the credit. It's not that companies can't get the extra money, it's that they don't want or need it because of the broader slowdown in economic activity." The credit crunch narrative - and the justification for creating Paulson's $700 billion TARP honeypot - is built on three related assertions: 1) banks, fearing that they'll be unable to meet their own financial obligations, aren't lending money to one another; 2) they're also not lending to the public at large - neither to firms nor individuals; and 3) businesses are further unable to raise money through ordinary channels because investors aren't eager to buy up corporate debt, including commercial paper issued by companies with decent balance sheets. Economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minnesota's research department - V V Chari and Patrick Kehoe of the University of Minnesota, and Northwestern University's Lawrence Christiano - crunched the Fed's numbers in an examination of these bits of conventional wisdom (PDF), and concluded that all three claims are myths. The researchers found that "interbank lending is healthy" and "bank credit has not declined during the financial crisis"; that they've seen "no evidence that the financial crisis has affected lending to non-financial businesses" and that "while commercial paper issued by financial institutions has declined, commercial paper issued by non-financial institutions is essentially unchanged during the financial crisis". The researchers called on lawmakers to "articulate the precise nature of the market failure they see, [and] to present hard evidence that differentiates their view of the data from other views". That finding was backed up by a study issued by Celent Financial Services, a consulting firm, again using the Treasury Department's own data. According to a story on the report by Reuters, Celent's researchers concluded that the "data actually suggest world credit markets are functioning remarkably well". Rather than a widespread banking problem, Celent found that the rot was limited to "a few big, vocal banks and industries such as car manufacturing, which would be in difficulty anyway". There are also some important caveats. Economists at the Boston Federal Reserve responded to the Minnesota Fed's research (PDF), arguing that the use of aggregate data doesn't fully reflect the dysfunction in specific subsectors of the economy, nor does it adequately reflect the decline in new loans. It's also the case that single-cause explanations for complex crises usually fail to hit the mark. Banks, having fueled the housing bubble (and similar bubbles before that) with the creation of ever-shadier "exotic" securities, are probably erring on the side of caution in writing new loans. They're looking at their balance sheets as quarterly reports approach, and the number of foreign investment dollars coming into the US has declined, meaning that some qualified firms may, indeed, have trouble raising cash in the near future. Dean Baker, while arguing that "the main story is that people don't have money and therefore want to spend", acknowledged that "some banks are undoubtedly anticipating more write-offs from other loans going bad, so they will hang on to their capital now rather than make new loans". And, as Sirota notes, some of the institutions that are relatively healthy are reportedly holding cash in anticipation of picking up weaker banks on the cheap. But one thing is clear: the economic crisis may have woken up Washington's political class when it hit the banks, but it remains a product of long-term imbalances in the economy, and the idea that it's primarily a pathology of the banking system in isolation is a misdiagnosis that, if uncorrected, can only result in a longer, deeper and more painful recession than might otherwise be the case. Links: The original version of this article at the URL below contains several links to other sources of information. _____ Joshua Holland is an AlterNet staff writer. (c) 2009 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. http://www.alternet.org/story/115768/ TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org Sat Jan 3 11:06:15 2009 From: hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org (Hunter Gray) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 11:06:15 -0700 Subject: [R-G] Valkyri -- and some further-alongr personal reflections Message-ID: <016c01c96dcd$fbbef990$0400a8c0@computer> NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR [JANUARY 3 2009] The local weather around here -- Eastern Idaho -- has been, as it seems to be nationally, wild and rough. Yesterday afternoon saw us in the midst of rain and snow, along with unusually warm periods followed by a freezing temps, icy slush. When three members of our family, Josie [our youngest daughter] and her Cameron and visiting grandson/son Thomas [he to leave that very evening after an excellent visit] prepared to see Valkyrie -- focused on the last and the best prepared plot to assassinate Hitler -- they urged me to join them. When I sought to politely decline -- it was six years since I was actually in a movie theatre -- Josie, characteristically, pushed with intensity and her usual success. So I went and I'm quite glad I did. It's a good, solid film -- not really, given the focus, enjoyable -- but fascinating. It won't satisfy those who see any Hollywood production as something to be viewed with inherent suspicion nor those who relish especially "arty arty" films, often those with psychiatric subtleties. My film tastes, which as I've previously noted, focus these days on HBO and IFC for the most part, are pretty catholic, diverse. I do make my measure of a flick on such matters as a reasonably worthwhile message [but not necessarily explicit], basic adherence to the primary historical/cultural currents, and good acting. Valkyrie does well on all of those counts. It's a straight-forward, hard-hitting account with -- as was certainly the historical fact -- lots of violence. My personal awareness of the courageous effort in 1944 by some German officers and a few civilians of well-placed social status -- sickened from a number of perspectives by Hitler's irrationality and brutality --- has been mostly limited to my interest in Erwin Rommel and his career and his supportive position in this good Conspiracy. So I learned more about the careful organization of the effort, the plans for an immediate post-Hitler coup, and something of the interesting personalities involved. Tom Cruise does an excellent job as a key participant in The Plan and the key action person -- in his case depicting Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg who, "to the manor born," achieved the status of genuine war hero but whose troubled conscience remained. Other acting is likewise well done. In the end, as many of us are aware, the effort failed and Hitler extracted lethal revenge -- very pervasively. Within a few months, the Allied forces had closed on him and he took the route of suicide. A few critics of Valkyrie have shot at it on the grounds that it seeks to excuse Germany's hideous conduct. That's twaddle. The horrors of Nazism are clearly set forth. When the film was being made in Germany, some Germans objected to it on the grounds that it opens old wounds. But most thoughtful folks would certainly agree that the more we all -- whoever we are -- know about these things, the better -- and the more improved our chances of avoiding those catastrophic socio-political -- and genocidal -- Horrors. Valkyrie is being widely shown in this country and one will hope it is in, say, Israel -- among many others. A couple of personal reflections: Most Americans have never lived in a totalitarian system -- and can obviously be thankful they haven't. The closest thing to this on these shores -- North America [north of Mexico] -- was old Mississippi, a police state complete with official orthodoxy, police power, eager vigilante support -- laced through and through with a numbing fear and a willingness on the part of most white people to "look away" from the endless atrocities. There were plenty of other parts of the South just as bad as Mississippi, but not pervasively so in the state-wide sense -- often because their states had a measure therein of outside-based Northern industry and thus some [relatively] "moderate" influences. Mississippi was a state-wide racist/segregationist complex. I've kept up with Changing Mississippi and some other Southern settings as best I can. In time, I've met some of the old adversaries with whom I've become friends. See a few examples of this in some of my website writings, e.g. http://hunterbear.org/forces_and_faces_along_the_trail.htm A fairly common phenomenon involves white Southerners who, like those contemporary Germans on Valkyrie, simply don't want to hear of The Troubles -- the Bad Old Days. This can be very true if they were adults during that grim epoch. But many younger white Southerners do [and I suspect many young Germans as well] -- often commenting to me that their elders refuse to discuss any of it. To them, I've said, "It was a terrible time, obviously for Blacks -- but also hard, in its own way, for most whites as well. Don't be too tough on your folks. Look ahead -- cut your own trail." Then I'll suggest some solid reading sources, such as Jim Silver's classic, Mississippi: The Closed Society -- along with some of the more thoughtful and personally grounded works by Movement writers. There were a lot of outsiders who came into the South -- and certainly Mississippi -- after the shooting war of the 60s was basically over and things were fairly safe. While many of these were certainly more or less OK, there were two carpetbagger species for whom I've always had quiet contempt. The first were those, best termed "pie-card artists," who came to rip-off the never very flush "Reconstruction" poverty programs. The second species involved generally sectarian presumed leftists who had sat out the Movement safely in the North, coming into, say, Mississippi beginning in the early 70s. In an obvious effort to vicariously experience the Movement they'd missed, they prattled [and some still do] in shrill and sanctimonious terms. Sometimes they liked to "expose" a public official who allegedly once belonged to the white Citizens' Council. Aside from the fact that most of the old Mississippi establishment once belonged to the "White Councils", many of us felt and feel that that "exposure" is simply a pure waste of time. In the end, Real Radicalism focuses on social justice -- now and forevermore. We can learn much from looking thoughtfully back -- but let's not be trapped by old spiderwebs. Personally, I've come to appreciate principled reconciliation -- if and when social justice has, in the matter at hand, actually been essentially achieved. Desmond Tutu has set a fine example on that. Fight hard for justice -- always hard. But, in the last analysis, we can never -- much as our adversaries may -- forget that we, whatever our virtues and whatever our sins, ultimately have to live with one another. Solidarity - Hunter [Hunter Bear] HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR/JOHN R SALTER JR] Mi'kmaq /St. Francis Abenaki/St. Regis Mohawk Protected by Na?shdo?i?ba?i? and Ohkwari' Check out our Hunterbear website Directory http://hunterbear.org/directory.htm [The site is dedicated to our one-half Bobcat, Cloudy Gray: http://hunterbear.org/cloudy_gray.htm For a good feel for some of the civil liberties challenges faced by an effective organizer, see this cluster of four related pages: http://hunterbear.org/a_bizarre__1979_fbi_smear_effort.htm And see Hunter's Movement Life Interview: http://hunterbear.org/HUNTER%20BEAR%20INTERVIEW%20CRMV.htm From critical.montages at gmail.com Sat Jan 3 12:12:46 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:12:46 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Israel Begins Ground Invasion of Gaza Message-ID: Israel confirms its army begins ground operation in Gaza www.chinaview.cn 2009-01-04 02:40:29 JERUSALEM, Jan. 3 (Xinhua) -- The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Saturday evening began its ground operation in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip, an IDF spokesman told Xinhua. The Cast Lead operation starting last Saturday is now entering its second stage, said the spokesman, adding that the purpose of operation is to destroy "terror infrastructure of Hamas". IDF troops has now entered Gaza, he said, adding that the operation will last as long as necessary. From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 3 12:30:16 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 11:30:16 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israel's 'victories' in Gaza come at a steep price Message-ID: <200901031930.n03JUGBK001477@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090103/ff19e98c/attachment.txt From hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org Sat Jan 3 13:56:13 2009 From: hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org (Hunter Gray) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:56:13 -0700 Subject: [R-G] Valkyrie -- and Mississippi Message-ID: <000a01c96de5$b7205e60$0400a8c0@computer> NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR [JANUARY 3 2009] The local weather around here -- Eastern Idaho -- has been, as it seems to be nationally, wild and rough. Yesterday afternoon saw us in the midst of rain and snow, along with unusually warm periods followed by a freezing temps, icy slush. When three members of our family, Josie [our youngest daughter] and her Cameron and visiting grandson/son Thomas [he to leave that very evening after an excellent visit] prepared to see Valkyrie -- focused on the last and the best prepared plot to assassinate Hitler -- they urged me to join them. When I sought to politely decline -- it was six years since I was actually in a movie theatre -- Josie, characteristically, pushed with intensity and her usual success. So I went and I'm quite glad I did. It's a good, solid film -- not really, given the focus, enjoyable -- but fascinating. It won't satisfy those who see any Hollywood production as something to be viewed with inherent suspicion nor those who relish especially "arty arty" films, often those with psychiatric subtleties. My film tastes, which as I've previously noted, focus these days on HBO and IFC for the most part, are pretty catholic, diverse. I do make my measure of a flick on such matters as a reasonably worthwhile message [but not necessarily explicit], basic adherence to the primary historical/cultural currents, and good acting. Valkyrie does well on all of those counts. It's a straight-forward, hard-hitting account with -- as was certainly the historical fact -- lots of violence. My personal awareness of the courageous effort in 1944 by some German officers and a few civilians of well-placed social status -- sickened from a number of perspectives by Hitler's irrationality and brutality --- has been mostly limited to my interest in Erwin Rommel and his career and his supportive position in this good Conspiracy. So I learned more about the careful organization of the effort, the plans for an immediate post-Hitler coup, and something of the interesting personalities involved. Tom Cruise does an excellent job as a key participant in The Plan and the key action person -- in his case depicting Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg who, "to the manor born," achieved the status of genuine war hero but whose troubled conscience remained. Other acting is likewise well done. In the end, as many of us are aware, the effort failed and Hitler extracted lethal revenge -- very pervasively. Within a few months, the Allied forces had closed on him and he took the route of suicide. A few critics of Valkyrie have shot at it on the grounds that it seeks to excuse Germany's hideous conduct. That's twaddle. The horrors of Nazism are clearly set forth. When the film was being made in Germany, some Germans objected to it on the grounds that it opens old wounds. But most thoughtful folks would certainly agree that the more we all -- whoever we are -- know about these things, the better -- and the more improved our chances of avoiding those catastrophic socio-political -- and genocidal -- Horrors. Valkyrie is being widely shown in this country and one will hope it is in, say, Israel -- among many others. A couple of personal reflections: Most Americans have never lived in a totalitarian system -- and can obviously be thankful they haven't. The closest thing to this on these shores -- North America [north of Mexico] -- was old Mississippi, a police state complete with official orthodoxy, police power, eager vigilante support -- laced through and through with a numbing fear and a willingness on the part of most white people to "look away" from the endless atrocities. There were plenty of other parts of the South just as bad as Mississippi, but not pervasively so in the state-wide sense -- often because their states had a measure therein of outside-based Northern industry and thus some [relatively] "moderate" influences. Mississippi was a state-wide racist/segregationist complex. I've kept up with Changing Mississippi and some other Southern settings as best I can. In time, I've met some of the old adversaries with whom I've become friends. See a few examples of this in some of my website writings, e.g. http://hunterbear.org/forces_and_faces_along_the_trail.htm A fairly common phenomenon involves white Southerners who, like those contemporary Germans on Valkyrie, simply don't want to hear of The Troubles -- the Bad Old Days. This can be very true if they were adults during that grim epoch. But many younger white Southerners do [and I suspect many young Germans as well] -- often commenting to me that their elders refuse to discuss any of it. To them, I've said, "It was a terrible time, obviously for Blacks -- but also hard, in its own way, for most whites as well. Don't be too tough on your folks. Look ahead -- cut your own trail." Then I'll suggest some solid reading sources, such as Jim Silver's classic, Mississippi: The Closed Society -- along with some of the more thoughtful and personally grounded works by Movement writers. There were a lot of outsiders who came into the South -- and certainly Mississippi -- after the shooting war of the 60s was basically over and things were fairly safe. While many of these were certainly more or less OK, there were two carpetbagger species for whom I've always had quiet contempt. The first were those, best termed "pie-card artists," who came to rip-off the never very flush "Reconstruction" poverty programs. The second species involved generally sectarian presumed leftists who had sat out the Movement safely in the North, coming into, say, Mississippi beginning in the early 70s. In an obvious effort to vicariously experience the Movement they'd missed, they prattled [and some still do] in shrill and sanctimonious terms. Sometimes they liked to "expose" a public official who allegedly once belonged to the white Citizens' Council. Aside from the fact that most of the old Mississippi establishment once belonged to the "White Councils", many of us felt and feel that that "exposure" is simply a pure waste of time. In the end, Real Radicalism focuses on social justice -- now and forevermore. We can learn much from looking thoughtfully back -- but let's not be trapped by old spiderwebs. Personally, I've come to appreciate principled reconciliation -- if and when social justice has, in the matter at hand, actually been essentially achieved. Desmond Tutu has set a fine example on that. Fight hard for justice -- always hard. But, in the last analysis, we can never -- much as our adversaries may -- forget that we, whatever our virtues and whatever our sins, ultimately have to live with one another. Solidarity - Hunter [Hunter Bear] HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR/JOHN R SALTER JR] Mi'kmaq /St. Francis Abenaki/St. Regis Mohawk Protected by Na?shdo?i?ba?i? and Ohkwari' Check out our Hunterbear website Directory http://hunterbear.org/directory.htm [The site is dedicated to our one-half Bobcat, Cloudy Gray: http://hunterbear.org/cloudy_gray.htm For a good feel for some of the civil liberties challenges faced by an effective organizer, see this cluster of four related pages: http://hunterbear.org/a_bizarre__1979_fbi_smear_effort.htm And see Hunter's Movement Life Interview: http://hunterbear.org/HUNTER%20BEAR%20INTERVIEW%20CRMV.htm From critical.montages at gmail.com Sat Jan 3 16:06:37 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 18:06:37 -0500 Subject: [R-G] "The American School North of Gaza Was Directly Hit and Almost Completely Destroyed" Message-ID: This just in from the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the OPT today (at ): "The American School north of Gaza was directly hit and almost completely destroyed, with one school guard killed. In addition, at least three to five schools were damaged by Israeli shelling of nearby targets." From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sat Jan 3 18:42:09 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 10:42:09 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] Veterans of 1990s Bailout Hope for Profit in New One Message-ID: <496013F1.1060101@ashisuto.co.jp> by Eric Lipton and David D Kirkpatrick The New York Times (December 29 2008) A tight-knit group of former senior government officials who were central players in the savings and loan bailout of the 1990s are seeking to capitalize on the latest economic meltdown, enjoying a surge in new business in their work now as private lawyers, investors and lobbyists. With $700 billion in bailout money up for grabs, and billions of dollars worth of bad debt or failed bank assets most likely headed for sale or auction, these former officials are helping their clients get a piece of the bailout money or the chance to buy, at fire-sale prices, some of the bank assets taken over by the federal government. "It is a good time to be me", said John L Douglas, a partner in Atlanta at the law firm Paul Hastings and a former lawyer for bank regulators who helped create the agency that administered the last federal bailout, the Resolution Trust Corporation. Some of these former federal officials, like L William Seidman, the first chairman of the RTC, are serving as advisers - sharing ideas with Treasury Secretary Henry M Paulson Jr and the transition team for President-elect Barack Obama - even while they are separately directing investors or banks on how to best profit from this advice. "It is an enormous market", said Mr Seidman, who has already joined two such potential money-making efforts and is evaluating proposals to participate in a third. "I am enjoying this". David B Iannarone, a former RTC lawyer who is managing partner at a firm that handles defaulted commercial real estate loans, said, "The people who worked on this back in the early 1990s are back in vogue". The agency was set up by the government in 1989 to sell off what ultimately grew to $450 billion worth of real estate and other assets assembled from 747 collapsed savings banks. What is obvious to former RTC officials is that, like the last go around, a great deal of money will be made by a select group of investors and business operators, particularly those with government contacts. The former government officials said in interviews that much of what is motivating them is a desire to help the nation recover from this latest stumble. But they acknowledge they intend to be among the winners who emerge. "Fortunes will be made here, no doubt about it", said Gary J Silversmith, one of more than a dozen former RTC officials interviewed who now are involved in enterprises seeking to profit from bank bailouts. The busiest money-making arena so far for these RTC alumni is in helping distressed banks line up cash infusions from the Treasury, as they seek a piece of the bailout. Robert L Clarke, controller of the currency under the first President Bush and a former Resolution Trust board member, has been advising banks throughout the South on how to get their share of the bailout money. "I have been absolutely inundated", said Mr Clarke, who now works at Bracewell & Giuliani, the law firm based in Houston affiliated with the former New York mayor and presidential candidate Rudolph W Giuliani. Mr Clarke's labor on behalf of his clients has included calling federal regulators to urge them to reconsider plans to reject applications for federal bailout money. He would not identify the banks, saying it might undermine public confidence in them. But Mr Clarke said his intervention, in at least some cases, has been successful. Eugene Ludwig, the comptroller of the currency under President Bill Clinton during the final stages of the savings-and-loan cleanup, runs Promontory Financial Group, a banking consultant group whose clients include struggling banks. "I must get an e-mail a day from people who I worked with back then about what to do about the current mess", Mr Ludwig said. "It is not so much capitalizing on it as really just, how do we contain the flames?" Many of the former federal officials like Mr Ludwig have stayed in the field, working as lawyers or contractors who buy up and resell seized bank properties. What is remarkable now is just how busy they are. "It is a great time to be a banking lawyer", said Thomas P Vartanian, a partner in the Washington office of Fried Frank, who is the former general counsel to the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, which led a bank bailout effort in the 1980s. The planned sale by the FDIC of the assets of IndyMac, the failed bank, has turned into an alumni event of sorts for veterans of the RTC era, including John J Oros, who was chairman of a financial industry council that advised bank regulators during the savings and loan crisis. Now he is a partner in J C Flowers, one of the private equity firms negotiating to buy part of IndyMac. In the space of one weekend in September he explored buying out the troubled insurer AIG and worked with Bank of America on an aborted acquisition of Lehman Brothers. Then he advised Bank of America on its last-minute switch to buy Merrill Lynch before Lehman's collapse hammered Wall Street. Although the financial meltdown is a disaster for the country, Mr Oros said, "the opportunity going forward is unprecedented. It is fantastic. It is as if I had been training for this for the last forty years of my career." The biggest profits will most likely be made, the former federal bank officials agreed, by those who figure out a way to benefit from what could turn into one of the greatest fire sales of bad debt and bank assets in American history. Through September of this year, 25 banks had failed, compared with three in 2007. An additional 171 are on the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's list of troubled banks, more than double the watch list at the end of last year. As a result of these failures, and other related industry troubles, billions of dollars' worth of real estate or at least mortgage-backed securities and other "illiquid" financial instruments will most likely need to be sold off at discounted prices to investors who stand to profit if they can sell the assets at a higher price once the economy recovers. The question right now is just how this unloading of bad debt will take place. So far, the federal government is relying on financial institutions to find a way on their own to sell off bad debts or assets they end up with as a result of foreclosures. But some financial industry players are arguing that a modern-day RTC should be established, to help set prices for this bad debt, and speed the move toward a recovery. The RTC alumni are prepared to profit through either route. Mr Seidman, for example, has been hired as an adviser to SecondMarket, a company based in New York that early next year will start a virtual marketplace that intends to resell some of the trillions of dollars worth of distressed mortgage-backed securities, the financial instruments that helped fuel the surge in housing prices. Mr Seidman has already set up meetings between company executives and federal regulators, including at the FDIC, said Barry E Silbert, the company's founder. Mr Silversmith, meanwhile, who during the savings and loan crisis helped arrange the sale of thrift assets, has teamed with Barry Fromm, the chief executive of Value Recovery Holding, one of the big government contractors who handled these sales. The two in recent weeks have held meetings with some of Mr Silverstein's former colleagues, including James Wigand, the deputy director in charge of the FDIC division that sells seized assets, to work on a plan to get ahold of some of the new wave of properties the federal government intends to put on the market as a result of recent bank failures. Many of the investors who built legendary fortunes during the savings and loan crisis - like Sam Zell, the chief executive of the Tribune Company, and Joseph E Robert Jr, the chief executive of J E Robert Companies - are also looking for ways to get back into or expand their distressed assets trade. Mr Zell, who has fared less well in his Tribune investment, recalled the instinct for capitalizing on the misfortune of others that earned him the sobriquet "the grave dancer" when he started buying up properties from failed savings and loans. "When I started the first opportunity fund in 1988, I was the only one bidding - if they didn't sell to me, they didn't sell to anyone", Mr Zell recalled. Now, he said, "The best opportunity right now is in the debt area, mortgages. We have been buying all along." RTC experience is certainly no guarantee of success, the agency veterans acknowledge. Peter Monroe, who was president of the RTC oversight board from 1990 to 1993, has already bought about 300 distressed properties in Detroit, through a venture capital company he formed called Wilherst Oxford. Figuring out a way to profit from the investment - even though some of the houses cost him only a few hundred dollars - has proven to be a challenge. "It is like a high-hurdle race: you can get going fast, but you have to jump over one hurdle after the other", Mr Monroe said. "It has turned out to be more complicated than even I expected". Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/us/29bank.html?_r=1 TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From tchilds at resist.ca Sat Jan 3 19:37:15 2009 From: tchilds at resist.ca (tchilds at resist.ca) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 18:37:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] [Fwd: Justice Will Reach All Those Who Are Complicit in War Crimes] Message-ID: <64495.64.85.36.244.1231036635.squirrel@mail.resist.ca> ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Justice Will Reach All Those Who Are Complicit in War Crimes From: "Hanna Kawas" Date: Fri, January 2, 2009 11:50 pm To: "Info CPA" ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following message was sent to Michael Ignatieff, leader of the Liberal Party in Canada, on Jan. 3, 2008. Hanna _________________________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Ignatieff: In the first part of your media release on "the situation in Israel and the Gaza Strip" dated December 29, 2008 you state: "I am greatly concerned by the deepening violence in Israel and the Gaza Strip and the fear and suffering on all sides that this mounting instability has caused. The Liberal Party of Canada unequivocally condemns the rocket attacks launched by Hamas against Israeli civilians and calls for an immediate end to these attacks. We affirm Israel's right to defend itself against such attacks, and also its right to exist in peace and security." http://www.liberal.ca/story_15558_e.aspx Your party "unequivocally condemns" Hamas, but not the government of Israel and its disproportionate military bombardments. Can you not see the double standard in your position? I am sure you are aware of who broke the cease-fire. If you cannot research these basic facts, then Canada is in real trouble if you become our Prime Minister. I do NOT want to burden you with my side of the story, and I am not hopeful that you will change your position. Since your father's involvement (George Ignatieff) in the UN Partition Plan in 1947, official Canadian policies have favored the aggressor (Israel and the Zionist Movement) against the victim (the Palestinian People). However,I would like to remind you that the current Canadian government, as a signatory to the Fourth Geneva Convention, and your Liberal Party in government and in opposition are all complicit in Israeli war crimes by legitimizing and giving cover to these atrocities. History has shown that eventually justice will reach all those who commit and are complicit in war crimes; and just as previous war criminals were brought to the International Court of Justice, so to will Israel's military generals and those who supported them be held accountable for their heinous actions. By supporting these atrocities and war crimes, are you truly standing up "for Canada's best interest"? Just to show you the contrast between your war-mongering position and the position of peace loving Israelis, I would like to forward the following message I just received from them (see below). Hanna Kawas Chairperson, Canada Palestine Association www.cpavancouver.org Co-Host, Voice of Palestine, Canada www.voiceofpalestine.ca -------------------------------------------- From: otherisr at actcom.co.il Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 02:12:59 +0200 CC: Subject: Speaker from Ashdod at anti-war demonstration To: pressme at mailman.gush-shalom.org Press Release Supreme Court clears police obstruction of Tel Aviv anti-war procession Thousands of Jews and Arabs to take part in Tel Aviv march Protest against the Gaza War "Stop the killing! Stop the siege"! Saturday night,January 3, 2009 at 6.30 pm The march will set out form Tel Aviv's Rabin Square (at the corner of Frishman St. and Chen Boulevard) and will culminate at the Tel Aviv Cinemateque. Following an urgent proceeding at the Supreme Court on Friday morning, the way was cleared to holding an mass anti-war march in Tel-Aviv, with judges instructing the police to grant a permit to the demonstration and not to interfere with the political message expressed in it. Specifically, the police had to give up its demand that no Palestinian flags be raised during the procession, should some of the participants wish to do so. There is no law forbidding the raising of Palestinian flags in Israel, and indeed on some occasions such flags were displayed during official ceremonies at the Prime Minster's Residence in Jerusalem. The judges ruled that the fact that raising Palestinian flags might anger some people is no reason to forbid flying them; rather, the police is obliged to protect the demonstrators' freedom of speech and prevent any act of violence against them. Thousands of demonstrators, among them Jewish and Arab Knesset Members and public figures, are expected to take part in the march and call for a cease-fire, for the sake of the inhabitants on both sides of the border, and for immediate removal of the Gaza siege. Marcel Abarjil, a peace activist from Ashdod whose home is within range of the missiles shot from the Gaza Strip, is also joining the demonstration and will address the rally at its end, so as to help disprove the assertion made in the media that all inhabitants of southern Israel are in support of the war and the bombing of Gaza. There will also be read out a special message from Dr. Eyad Sarraj, Palestinian peace activist and head of the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme. We are going out on the streets in these dark days in order to reiterate together: Jews and Arabs refuse to be enemies! We demand ceasefire and the immediate removal of the Gaza siege. Hundreds were killed and thousands wounded in Gaza, and the bombings continue to sow fear and destruction. The siege on Gaza continues ? a lack of vital goods, of medicines, and of fuel harms gravely all inhabitants of the Strip. The government of Israel and the heads of the army threaten to invade the Strip and perpetrate even more destruction, while ignoring all the calls for a cease-fire. We call upon all peace-seekers in Israel to join us for a mass demonstration against the war! The coalition of anti-war groups and organizations: Ahoti, Alternative Information Center (AIC), Anarchists against the Fence, Balad, Banki, Bat Shalom, Coalition of Women for Peace, Combatants for Peace, Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), Da'am ? Workers' Party, Gush Shalom, Hadash, Hithabrut ? Tarabut, Indymedia, Israeli Communist Party (Maki), New Profile, Public Committee Against Torture (PCATI), Ra'am ? Ta'al, Sadaka-Re'ut, Social TV, Student Coalition ? Tel Aviv University, Ta'ayush, Tandi (Democratic Women), The Campus is Not Silent, The Shministim (Highschool Seniors') Letter, Women in Black, Yesh Gvul, Zochrot, Contact: Adi 050-8575730, Einat 052-3554815, Adar 052-5444866, Adam 0506-709603 From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sun Jan 4 06:16:06 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:16:06 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] Don't fix the economy - change it Message-ID: <4960B696.8090903@ashisuto.co.jp> Sticking with the model that is driving us toward ecological catastrophe will eventually kill us by Peter G Brown and Geoffrey Garver TheStar.com (December 26 2008) Amid the discordant clash of solutions being served up to address the global financial crisis, a common refrain can be heard: Most global leaders and their economic advisers key their policy prescriptions to "sustained economic growth". The prevailing debate is how to get there most quickly. In Canada, how this debate plays out could bring down the government in a matter of weeks. Unfortunately, it is the wrong debate. Neither the Conservative minority nor the opposition has proposed anything that will set Canada on a long-term path toward the kind of economy that will both provide for the well-being of Canadians and enhance and preserve the ecological community of which people are but one dependent part. All eyes may now be on the kind of fiscal budget the Conservatives might produce next year, but a more essential budget also demands urgent attention: the global ecological budget. The financial crisis has brought into sharp focus the need to fundamentally change, not merely repair or rebuild, our economy. Because, quite simply, sticking with an economic model that is driving toward ecological catastrophe will kill us. So, it is essential to address the financial and ecological crises together. The ecological budget, on which all life and, consequently, the human economy depends, is already in dramatic deficit. Why is this budget ultimately more important than the fiscal budget? September 23 2008, was Earth Overshoot Day. The period after September 23 represents the time the human population causes an ecological deficit, using up the Earth faster than it can regenerate. Every year, Earth Overshoot Day comes earlier. This moving date tells the story of a global environment rapidly losing its ability to support life: accelerating climate change; the loss of species and habitats; declining fisheries; the proliferation of ocean dead zones; diminishing freshwater resources; and more. Ecological overshoot is climate change on steroids. Here are six steps we can take toward a truly balanced budget that will allow Canadians, and all people on Earth, to live fulfilling, healthy, yet more ecologically compatible, lives. * Recognize that the economy is part of the biosphere. A comprehensive economic plan must be based on the scientific fact that the global economy is a subsidiary of the natural order. Economic policies should be attuned to the limited capacity of Earth's biosphere to provide for humans and other life and to assimilate their waste. Photosynthesis and sunlight are as essential to the framework for economic budgets and expenditures as the laws of supply and demand. * Acknowledge that we need new institutions. An economic renewal tailored to the 21st century would establish institutions committed to fitting the human economy to Earth's limited life-support capacity. Canada, with its token efforts to address climate change, is far off the track. We need something like the central reserve banks, but which look after shares of the Earth's ecological capacity, not just interest rates and the money supply. Money should be recognized as a social licence to use part of Earth's life-support capacity. Some functions of governance would have to operate at a global level, through a federation modelled perhaps on the European Union, with enforceable laws designed to assure that individual nations don't overrun Earth's limits. The rules for the developed countries that are responsible for the current ecological crisis should be different from those for developing ones. * Acknowledge that unlimited growth on a finite planet makes no sense. Most people wrongly believe that unlimited growth and wealth accumulation are the "natural laws" of the economy - inviolable, even though together they undermine the Earth's ecological and social systems. We face a moral challenge: bring the global economy into a right relationship with the planet and its human and non-human inhabitants or suffer the increasing destruction of Earth's finite life-support systems and social structures. Growth in consumption is a nonsensical response to the sharp decline in Earth's biophysical systems that is caused by overconsumption. Our new ecological and climate reality demands new ways to live within the means of the Earth. * Fairness matters. A "right" human-Earth relationship would recognize humans as part of an interdependent web of life on a finite planet. The economy must recognize the rights of the human poor and of millions of other species to their place in the sun. In a world awash in money, addressing poverty only with growth reflects a tragic lack of moral imagination. Indeed, in pushing for more "free" trade as it is currently understood, Canada would entrench an ongoing addiction to consumption, pursued in a manner that often ravages the bio-productivity of developing countries. * Expand the discussion. The new knowledge that will forever mark this period in human history is the overwhelming scientific evidence that we are overconsuming the planet and accelerating toward ecological catastrophe. The short-term approaches of most ministers of finance and professional economists don't account for how the planet works, or even that the economy exists on a finite planet. Scientists morally committed to protecting the global commons and researching ecological limits to the global economy need much more funding and influence in policy-making. * Look beyond technological fixes. Bold new leadership is needed that will focus on all four policy "theatres" relevant to human ecological impact and provide the moral footing that will lead people, individually and collectively, to choose lifestyles with radically lower impact. The four policy variables are: technology; population; wealth and consumption; and morals and customs. These factors should together shape Parliament's rethinking of the current economic system. Technology can increase efficiency of energy and resources use, yet it is overemphasized as a solution. Pushing technological solutions like hydrogen cars and genetically modified agriculture is much easier politically than asking people to consume less or have fewer children. Unfortunately, technology alone cannot solve the ecological crisis. For one thing, efficiency gains often lead to greater, not lower, consumption. An example is the squandering of Quebec's underpriced hydroelectric power. Investments in new "green" technology need to be coupled to a regulatory structure that ensures that efficiency does not result in more impact, along with massive investment in creating or restoring natural systems that build bioproductivity. Economic policy must promote not more affluence as currently defined, but more sufficiency for all Canadians - so that all may live with self-respect, without overconsumption. Perhaps most difficult to come to grips with is that Canada is an overpopulated country - if you compare the individual impact of each Canadian with what the Earth can withstand. We should escape from the current treadmill that considers more people necessary for more growth. Lastly, we must greatly increase investment in educational and civic institutions that teach that we are not "consumers", but citizens of the Earth, and guardians of life's prospect on a small, beautiful and finite planet. _____ Peter G Brown is a professor at McGill University. Geoffrey Garver is an environmental consultant and lectures in law at Universite de Montreal and Universite Laval. They are co-authors of Right Relationship: Building a Whole Earth Economy (February 2009). http://www.thestar.com/article/557976 TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org Sun Jan 4 06:56:43 2009 From: hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org (Hunter Gray) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 06:56:43 -0700 Subject: [R-G] Follow-up on Valkyrie: personal conscience and responsibility Message-ID: <000801c96e74$4b2d2000$0400a8c0@computer> Re some of the discussion on Redbadbear: I have no German forbears on which to fall back for direct, personal knowledge. My maternal grandmother spoke German fluently but that came from her father, a Swiss immigrant [who was also a radical social justice activist in Kansas, beginning in the Territorial days.] So I'm not a personal authority on German society and culture -- though I am aware that, for various historical and sociological reasons, among them monarchial principalities in the pre-unification period and patriarchal family structures, authoritarian strains have traditionally been more pronounced in Germany than in many other settings. Traditionally, again, the German military subordinated itself to -- authoritarian -- civil government. Long before I ever arrived in Mississippi ['61], I had learned via observation and experience that fundamentally good people can not only do bad things -- but, much more commonly, can "look away" rather than directly at nefarious and often downright sanguinary actions initiated by their leaders and even their fellows. I've always recalled the comment made by a colleague of mine, a Jewish refugee from South Africa, who observed that in a "choice" academic setting in that country, "the more intelligent the mind, the more intricate the rationalizations." With all due respect, I'm not inclined to be too harshly judgmental in situations where complex individuals [and all of us are complex] are enmeshed in the complexities of totalitarianism. True, as we fight for social justice, we do have to classify -- even usurp God's role in "sorting souls" -- as we carry our campaigns, large and small, along the Trail. [For all of its many internal challenges, the United States is a vast and diverse country with almost all Americans still recognizing that they are born into a tradition of personal liberty. I have never seen this country -- despite, say, the last eight years -- as even being close to a totalitarian incarnation.] The "road to Damascus" [speaking, of course, in the New Testament sense] is a longer trek for some than for others. I suspect many German officers in the Nazi regime were increasingly troubled by the policies of the Third Reich. I understand Rommel, in North Africa, insisted on good treatment for British prisoners of war and did not honor Hitler's general stricture to murder Jews. There were numerous plots to kill Hitler and I have no problem giving credit for conscience-emergence and great courage on the part of those German officers, depicted in Valkyrie, who tried desperately to fulfill a worthy mission. Hunter Gray [Hunter Bear] HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR/JOHN R SALTER JR] Mi'kmaq /St. Francis Abenaki/St. Regis Mohawk Protected by Na?shdo?i?ba?i? and Ohkwari' Check out our Hunterbear website Directory http://hunterbear.org/directory.htm [The site is dedicated to our one-half Bobcat, Cloudy Gray: http://hunterbear.org/cloudy_gray.htm For a good feel for some of the civil liberties challenges faced by an effective organizer, see this cluster of four related pages: http://hunterbear.org/a_bizarre__1979_fbi_smear_effort.htm And see Hunter's Movement Life Interview: http://hunterbear.org/HUNTER%20BEAR%20INTERVIEW%20CRMV.htm From gmeyerson at triad.rr.com Sun Jan 4 09:07:29 2009 From: gmeyerson at triad.rr.com (Gregory Meyerson) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:07:29 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Inquiry about gaza In-Reply-To: <200901031930.n03JUGBK001477@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> References: <200901031930.n03JUGBK001477@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> Message-ID: when israel "effectively broke the truce" on nov. 4, was this thru the blockade or bombing and blockade? I don't recall and would like the info. g On Jan 3, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Sid Shniad wrote: > > http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0102/p09s01-coop.html > Christian Science Monitor January 2, 2009 > Israel's 'victories' in Gaza come at a steep price > The Jewish ethical tradition means embracing Palestinians, too. > By Sara Roy > Cambridge, Mass. - I hear the voices of my friends in Gaza as > clearly > as if we were still on the phone; their agony echoes inside me. > They > weep and moan over the death of their children, some, little girls > like mine, taken, their bodies burned and destroyed so senselessly. > One Palestinian friend asked me, "Why did Israel attack when the > children were leaving school and the women were in the markets?" > There > are reports that some parents cannot find their dead children > and are > desperately roaming overflowing hospitals. > As Jews celebrated the last night of Hanukkah, the Jewish > festival of > lights commemorating our resurgence as a people, I asked myself: > How > am I to celebrate my Jewishness while Palestinians are being > killed? > The religious scholar Marc Ellis challenges us further by asking > whether the Jewish covenant with God is present or absent in the > face > of Jewish oppression of Palestinians? Is the Jewish ethical > tradition > still available to us? Is the promise of holiness ? so central > to our > existence ? now beyond our ability to reclaim? > The lucky ones in Gaza are locked in their homes living lives that > have long been suspended ? hungry, thirsty, and without light but > their children are alive. > Since Nov. 4, when Israel effectively broke the truce with Hamas by > attacking Gaza on a scale then unprecedented ? a fact now buried > with > Gaza's dead ? the violence has escalated as Hamas responded by > sending > hundreds of rockets into Israel to kill Israeli civilians. It is > reported that Israel's strategy is to hit Hamas military > targets, but > explain that difference to my Palestinian friends who must bury > their > children. > On Nov. 5, Israel sealed all crossing points into Gaza, vastly > reducing and at times denying food supplies, medicines, fuel, > cooking > gas, and parts for water and sanitation systems. A colleague of > mine > in Jerusalem said, "this siege is in a league of its own. The > Israelis > have not done something like this before." > During November, an average of 4.6 trucks of food per day > entered Gaza > from Israel compared with an average of 123 trucks per day in > October. > Spare parts for the repair and maintenance of water-related > equipment > have been denied entry for over a year. The World Health > Organization > just reported that half of Gaza's ambulances are now out of order. > According to the Associated Press, the three-day death toll rose > to at > least 370 by Tuesday morning, with some 1,400 wounded. The UN > said at > least 62 of the dead were civilians. A Palestinian health official > said that at least 22 children under age 16 were killed and more > than > 235 children have been wounded. > In nearly 25 years of involvement with Gaza and Palestinians, I > have > not had to confront the horrific image of burned children ? until > today. > Yet for Palestinians it is more than an image, it is a reality, and > because of that I fear something profound has changed that will not > easily be undone. For how, in the context of Gaza today, does one > speak of reconciliation as a path to liberation, of sympathy as a > source of understanding? Where does one find or even begin to > create a > common field of human undertaking (to borrow from the late, > acclaimed > Palestinian scholar, Edward Said) so essential to coexistence? > It is one thing to take an individual's land, his home, his > livelihood, to denigrate his claims, or ignore his emotions. It is > another to destroy his child. What happens to a society where > renewal > is denied and all possibility has ended? > And what will happen to Jews as a people whether we live in > Israel or > not? Why have we been unable to accept the fundamental humanity of > Palestinians and include them within our moral boundaries? > Rather, we > reject any human connection with the people we are oppressing. > Ultimately, our goal is to tribalize pain, narrowing the scope of > human suffering to ourselves alone. > Our rejection of "the other" will undo us. We must incorporate > Palestinians and other Arab peoples into the Jewish > understanding of > history, because they are a part of that history. We must > question our > own narrative and the one we have given others, rather than > continue > to cherish beliefs and sentiments that betray the Jewish ethical > tradition. > Jewish intellectuals oppose racism, repression, and injustice > almost > everywhere in the world and yet it is still unacceptable ? > indeed, for > some, it's an act of heresy ? to oppose it when Israel is the > oppressor. This double standard must end. > Israel's victories are pyrrhic and reveal the limits of Israeli > power > and our own limitations as a people: our inability to live a life > without barriers. Are these the boundaries of our rebirth after the > Holocaust? > As Jews in a post-Holocaust world empowered by a Jewish state, > how do > we as a people emerge from atrocity and abjection, empowered and > also > humane? How do we move beyond fear to envision something different, > even if uncertain? > The answers will determine who we are and what, in the end, we > become. > Sara Roy is a senior research scholar at the Center for Middle > Eastern > Studies, Harvard University, and the author, most recently, of > "Failing Peace: Gaza and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict." > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green From brandelune at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 09:12:28 2009 From: brandelune at gmail.com (JC Helary) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 01:12:28 +0900 Subject: [R-G] Inquiry about gaza In-Reply-To: References: <200901031930.n03JUGBK001477@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> Message-ID: http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=%22november+4%22+blockade+gaza&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 Jean-Christophe Helary On lundi 05 janv. 09, at 01:07, Gregory Meyerson wrote: > when israel "effectively broke the truce" on nov. 4, was this thru > the blockade or bombing and blockade? From aaron.doncaster at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 09:28:11 2009 From: aaron.doncaster at gmail.com (aaron doncaster) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 08:28:11 -0800 Subject: [R-G] orthodox jes against zionism Message-ID: <164236a30901040828s42366ca4g6d6ff523b204ed83@mail.gmail.com> (This speech was originally delivered in Durban, South Africa by Rabbi Y D Weiss) May our words be pleasing to the Creator and cause His Great Name to be sanctified. Assalaam Aleikhum: The world stands aghast as the atrocities being committed by the Zionist regime in Gaza, becomes known in ever greater and shocking detail. Mere words are insufficient to express the pain that all mankind feels at the plight of the Gaza and Palestinian people. For over one hundred years, they have been subject to a carefully conceived plan, to drive them from their homes and their land. Throughout their history, the Zionists have resorted to intimidation, war, ethnic cleansing and state?sponsored terrorism to achieve their goals. This is, has been and continues to be, the criminal agenda of the Zionist movement. But among this movement's greatest crimes, is that it has claimed to carry out these nefarious actions in the name of holiness, in the name of the Almighty, in the name of Judaism and the Jewish people !! This is a wicked and monstrous lie !! It is a desecration of our religion !! Judaism forbids and rejects Zionism and the existence of the State of "Israel". We have been expressly commanded by the Almighty that we are forbidden to have our own sovereignty in this heavenly decreed exile, we are also forbidden to rebel against any nation. Torah believing Jews, under the leadership of the most esteemed rabbis of the 20th century have always opposed and fought against Zionism and ultimately the State of "Israel". Unfortunately in recent years the Zionists have succeed in seducing and co?opting members of the religious community and some rabbis into support of not allowing the return of the rightful owners, the Palestinian people, to their land, by fear mongering, by appealing to their worst fears, that there is a religious conflict and that the Arabs always have had an ingrained hate for the Jews. Especially, they claim, that because of the many years of the existence of the State of "Israel", if the Palestinians where to return to their land, they would massacre the Jews, may the Almighty protect us. Anyone familiar with the ploys and techniques of the Zionist State is aware of this fact. Before the advent of Zionism, Muslims and Christian, Arabs and Jews, lived peacefully together in the Holy Land, as in all the Muslim lands, ? Ask your grandparents! ? They remember those peaceful days! And in fact it is here the opportune time to thank all the Muslim countries for their extraordinary friendship, hospitality and safe haven that they have provided to the Jewish people throughout the ages! The Zionists rely on the Bible, the Torah, for their imaginary right to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian people and to subjugate them. This is a pathetic joke! The Zionists have always been heretics and rejected all the fundamental tenets of our faith, and yet they have the nerve, the arrogance, the audacity, the chutzpa, to pretend to base their behavior on our holy Torah. We know what our holy writings and our great rabbis have taught us ? that we are forbidden to subjugate or oppress anyone or to desecrate the holiness of the Holy Land with paths of violence, ethnic cleansing, discrimination and military power. Our religion teaches justice. It teaches peace. It teaches compassion. In fact, the greatest and ultimate hope and prayer of the Jewish people is, that when the Messiah comes that then "Nation shall no longer lift up sword against nation, and they will make war no more." All nations will serve God together in peace. To the governments of the world, it is not through your support of the Zionist regime ? the State of "Israel", that the Jewish people are being helped! On the contrary, this tragic historical mistake has led to the killing of Arabs and Jews alike. The governments of the great powers, by supporting the State of "Israel" are not only harming the Palestinian people but they are also unwittingly contributing to the growth of hostility towards Jews worldwide! To our Jewish brethren, we beg! Do not be intimidated by ruthless Zionist bullying and violence!! ? Proclaim loudly and clearly your outrage, pain and sympathy for the people of Gaza and that those who show contempt for the Torah, the teachings of our rabbis, and disregard the ethical and moral basics of our faith, have no right to speak on behalf of the Jewish People or Judaism! We must tell the world that self rule, sovereignty and ALL the rights of the Palestinian people, must be restored throughout historic Palestine! This is a requirement of Jewish ethics and values! Jewish justice demands the return of the Palestinian refugees to their homes, towns, villages and cities throughout Palestine! Tell the world, loudly and clearly, that you support Palestinian statehood over the ENTIRE Holy Land ?? not despite your Jewish identity, but because of it. To our Islamic brethren ? let us speak up for the people of Gaza and please do not judge the Jewish faith or its people, on the basis of this passing lunacy of Zionism. The Jews have always been your friends and cousins. Do not allow your understandable anger to be directed at those who are innocent of wrongdoing, regardless of whether they reside in Occupied Palestine, Europe, or anywhere around the globe. Together, people of all nations, may we be worthy, with God's help, speedily and peacefully, without further suffering and bloodshed of anyone, be it Arab or Jew, to witness the peaceful end of the Zionist occupation over every inch of Palestine. And may we yet merit to see, in the very near future, the revelation of the One God, over the entire world, with all mankind in His servitude, in joyous brotherhood. AMEN Let's Proclaim Together: FREE GAZA ? FREE PALESTINE JUDAISM YES ZIONISM NO ! From fentona at shaw.ca Sun Jan 4 09:49:17 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 08:49:17 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Inside Gaza Message-ID: <0F1F933E-FCD8-40D1-88A1-2C9C10496F7C@shaw.ca> Inside Gaza EYEWITNESS: By Ewa Jasiewicz http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2479079.0.inside_gaza.php WHEN I got there, the gates of Beit Hanoun hospital were shut, with teenage men hanging off them. The mass of people striving to get inside was a sign that there had been an attack. Inside the gates, the hospital was full. Parents, wives, cousins, emotionally frayed and overwhelmed, were leaning over injured loved ones. The Israeli Apache helicopter had attacked at 3.15pm. Witnesses said that two missiles had been fired into the street in Hay al Amel, east Beit Hanoun, close to the border with Israel. With rumours of an imminent invasion this empty scrubland is rapidly becoming a no-man's land which people cross quickly, fearing attack by Israeli jets. But the narrow, busy streets of the Boura area rarely escape the intensifying airstrikes. advertisement Eyewitnesses said children had been playing and waiting in the streets there for their parents to finish praying at the nearby mosque. "We could see it so clearly, it was so close, we looked up and everyone ran. Those that couldn't were soon flat on the ground," said Khalil Abu Naseer, who was lucky to have escaped the incoming missile. "Look at this, take it," insisted men in the street, handing me pieces of the missile the size of a fist, all with jagged edges. "All the windows were blown out, our doors were blown in, there was glass everywhere," explained a neighbour. It was these lumps of missile, rock and flying glass that smashed into the legs, arms, stomachs, heads and backs of 16 people, two of them children, who had been brought to Beit Hanoun Hospital on Thursday afternoon. Fadi Chabat, 24, was working in his shop, a small tin shack that was a community hub selling sweets, cigarettes and chewing gum. When the missile exploded, he suffered multiple injuries. He died on Friday morning in Kamal Adwahn Hospital in Jabaliya. As women attended the grieving room at Fadi Chabat's home yesterday to pay their respects, Israeli F16 fighter jets tore through the skies overhead and blasted four more bombs into the empty areas on the border. Two elderly women in traditional embroidered red and black dresses carrying small black plastic shopping bags moved as quickly as they could; others disappeared behind the walls of their homes, into courtyards and off the streets. At Fadi's house the grief was still fresh. Nearly all the women were crying, a collective outpouring of grief and raw pain with free- flowing tears. "He prayed five times a day, he was a good Muslim, he wasn't part of any group, not Fatah, not Hamas, not one, none of them, he was a good student, and he was different," said one of his sisters. She took me to see Fadi's younger brother, who had been wounded in the same airstrike. Omar, eight, was sitting on his own in a darkened bedroom on a foam mattress with gauze on his back covering his wounds. "He witnessed everything, he saw it all," the sisters explained. "He kept saying, I saw the missile, I saw it, Fadi's been hit by a missile'." The memory sets Omar off into more tears, his sisters, mother and aunts breaking down along with him. Nine-year-old Ismaeel, who had been on the street with his sisters Leema, four, and Haya, 12, had been taking out rubbish when they were struck by the missiles. Ismaeel had been brought into the hospital still breathing and doctors at first though he would pull through, but in the end he died of internal injuries. Within the past six days in Beit Hanoun alone, according to hospital records seven people have been killed, among them three children and a mother of ten other youngsters. Another 75 people have been injured, including 29 children and 17 women. As well as the fatalities and wounded, hundreds of homes have had their windows blown out and been damaged by flying debris and shrapnel. Two homes have been totally destroyed. Nearby the premises of two organisations have been reduced to rubble. One of them, the Sons of the City Charity, associated with Hamas, was blasted with two Apache-fired missiles, gutting a neighbouring apartment in the process and breaking windows at Beit Hanoun Hospital. The Cultural Development Association and the offices of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, were levelled by bombs dropped from F16 jets. It is hard to imagine what the Israeli pilots of these aircraft see from so far up in the sky. Do they see people walking; standing around and talking in the street; kids with sticks chasing each other in play? Or are the figures digitised, micro-people, perhaps just blips on a screen? Whatever is seen from the air, the victims are often ordinary people. Last Thursday night saw volunteers from the Palestinian Red Crescent Society in Beit Hanoun take to the streets in an effort to save lives. Like all emergency medical staff in Gaza, they risk death working in the maelstrom of every Israeli invasion, during curfews and night fighting. In one of the ambulances during an evening of total darkness caused by nightly power cuts, I meet Yusri, a veteran of more than 14 years of Israeli incursions into the Beit Hanoun district of Gaza. Moustachioed, energetic, and gregarious, Yusri is in his 40s and a local hero. Seen by people within the community as a man who rarely sleeps, he is a front-line paramedic who zooms through Gaza's streets to reach casualties, ambulance horn blaring as he shouts through a loudhailer for onlookers and the dazed to get out of the way. "Where's the strike?" Yusri asks locals, as we pick our way through a gutted charred charity office and the house of the Tarahan family. Their home, on the buffer zone, has been reduced to a concrete sandwich. There are six casualties, but miraculously none of them are serious. Beit Hanoun Hospital is a simple, 48-bed local facility with no intensive care unit, decrepit metal stretchers and rickety beds. I drink tea in a simple office with a garrulous crowd of ear, nose and throat specialists, surgeons and paediatricians. The talk is all about politics: how the plan for Gaza is to merge it with Egypt; how Israel doesn't want to liquidate Hamas as it serves their goal of a divided Palestine to have a weak Hamas alienated from the West Bank. The chat is interrupted by lulls of intent listening as news crackles through on Sawt Al Shab ("The Voice Of The People"), Gaza's grassroots news station. Almost everyone here is tuned in. It is listened to by taxi drivers, families in their homes huddled around wood stoves or under blankets and groups of men on street corners crouched beside transistor radio sets. It feeds live news on the latest resistance attacks, interspersed with political speeches from various leaders, and fighter music - thoaty, deep male voices united in buoyant battle songs about standing up, reclaiming al-Quds (Jerusalem) avenging fresh martyrs, and staying steadfast. News is fed through on operations by armed wings of every political group active in Gaza; the Qasam (Hamas), the Abu Ali Mustapha Martyrs Brigade (PFLP), the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (which is affiliated with Fatah) and Saraya al-Quds (Islamic Jihad). One thing is widely recognised - the attack on Gaza has brought all armed resistance groups together. However, everybody adds wryly that "once this is all over, they'll all break apart again". One of the surgeons asks me about whether I'm scared, and whether I really think I have protection as a foreigner here. I talk in detail about Israel's responsibility to protect emergency services; to cease fire; to facilitate movement;, to respect the Geneva Conventions, including protection of civilians and injured combatants. The surgeon talking to me is an intelligent man, highly respected in the community, in his late 40s. He takes his time, explaining to me in detail that all the evidence from everything Gazans have experienced points to Israel operating above the law - that there is no protection, that these laws, these conventions, do not seem to apply to Israel, nor does it abide by them, and that I should be afraid, very afraid, because Gazans are afraid. He recounts a story from the November 2006 invasion which saw more than 60 people killed, one entire family in one day alone. About 100 tanks invaded Beit Hanoun, with one blocking each entrance for six days. He remembers how the Red Cross brought water and food and took away the refuse. All co-ordination was cut off with the Palestinian Authority. The same will happen this time, he insists. He remembers too how one ambulance driver, Yusri, a maverick, a hero, loved by all the staff and community, faced down the tanks to evacuate the injured. Yusri, the surgeon says, just drove up to the tank and started shouting through his loudhailer, telling them to move for the love of God because we had a casualty, then just swerved round them and made off. Yusri has carried the injured and dead in every invasion in the past 14 years. He shows me a leg injury sustained when a tank rammed into his ambulance. The event was caught on camera by journalists, and a case brought against the Israel Occupation Forces, but they ruled the army had acted appropriately in self defence. "Look in the back of the ambulance here, how many people do you think can fit in here? I was carrying 10 corpses at a time after the invasion, there was a man cut in two here in the back, it was horrific. But you carry on. I want to serve my country," he says. During a prolonged power cut in that six-day invasion there was no electricity to power a ventilator, and doctors took turns hand pumping oxygen to keep one casualty alive for four hours before they could be transferred. Roads were bulldozed, ambulances were banned from moving, dead people lay in their homes for days, and when permission was finally given for the corpses' collection, medics had to carry them on stretchers along the main street. Today in Gaza everyone is terrified that such events are now repeating themselves, only worse. Gazans now feel collectively abandoned. The past week's massacres, indiscriminate attacks and overflowing hospitals, and the fact that anyone can be hit at any time in any place, has left people utterly terrorised. No-one dares think of what might become of them in these difficult and unpredictable days. As they say in Gaza, "Bein Allah" - "It's up to God". Ewa Jasiewicz is a journalist and activist. She is currently the co- ordinator for the Free Gaza movement and one of the only international journalists on the ground in Gaza From gmeyerson at triad.rr.com Sun Jan 4 09:53:34 2009 From: gmeyerson at triad.rr.com (gregory meyerson) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:53:34 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Inquiry about gaza In-Reply-To: References: <200901031930.n03JUGBK001477@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <9209b87d542a224ef38504edd489cac7@triad.rr.com> thanks: guess I could have done the google search myself, huh? I thought someone may have had knowledge of specific articles on this but the google did well. On Jan 4, 2009, at 11:12 AM, JC Helary wrote: > http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en- > us&q=%22november+4%22+blockade+gaza&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 > > Jean-Christophe Helary > > On lundi 05 janv. 09, at 01:07, Gregory Meyerson wrote: > >> when israel "effectively broke the truce" on nov. 4, was this thru >> the blockade or bombing and blockade? > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From fentona at shaw.ca Sun Jan 4 10:29:54 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 09:29:54 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israel's fait accompli in Gaza Message-ID: <0D57B0C6-C31E-4888-A7E3-1FEDB75DBF68@shaw.ca> http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/war_on_gaza/2009/01/200914102257130539.html Israel's fait accompli in Gaza By Eric S. Margolis UPDATED ON: Sunday, January 04, 2009 16:49 Mecca time, 13:49 GMT There are two completely different versions of what is currently happening in Gaza. In the Israeli and North American press version, Hamas - 'Islamic terrorists' backed by Iran - have in an unprovoked attack fired deadly rockets on innocent Israel with the intent of destroying the Jewish state. North American politicians and the media say Israel "has the right to defend itself". True enough. No Israeli government can tolerate rockets hitting its towns, even though the casualty totals have been less than the car crash fatalities registered during a single holiday weekend on Israel's roads. The firing of the feeble, home-made al-Qassam rockets by Palestinians is both useless and counter-productive. It damages their image as an oppressed people and gives right-wing Israeli extremists a perfect reason to launch more attacks on the Arabs and refuse to discuss peace. Israel's supporters insist it has the absolute right to drop hundreds of tonnes of bombs on 'Hamas targets' inside the 360sq km Gaza Strip to 'take out the terrorists'. Civilians suffer, says Israel, because the cowardly Hamas hide among them. Actually, it is more like shooting fish in a barrel. Omitting facts As usual, this cartoon-like version of events omits a great deal of nuance and background. Seventy per cent of Palestinian children suffer from psychological trauma [GALLO/GETTY] While firing rockets at civilians is a crime so, too, is the Israeli blockade of Gaza, which is an egregious violation of international law and the Geneva Conventions. According to the UN, most of Gaza's 1.5 million Palestinian refugees subsist near the edge of hunger. Seventy per cent of Palestinian children in Gaza suffer from severe malnutrition and psychological trauma. Medical facilities are critically short of doctors, personnel, equipment, and drugs. Gaza has quite literally become a human garbage dump for all the Arabs that Israel does not want. Gaza is one of the world's most-densely populated places, a vast outdoor prison camp filled with desperate people. In the past, they threw stones at their Israeli occupiers; now they launch home-made rockets. Call it a prison riot, writ large. Eyeing the elections When the so-called truce between Tel Aviv and Hamas expired on December 19, Israeli politicians were in the throes of preparing for the February 10 national elections. Israeli politics are playing a key role in this crisis. Ehud Barak, the defence minister and leader of the Labour party, and Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister and leader of the Kadima party, are trying to prove themselves tougher than Benjamin Netanyahu's hard-line Likud party - and one another. Israel's elections are only six weeks away, and Likud was leading until the air raids on Gaza began. Kadima and Labour are now up in the polls. The heavy attacks on Gaza are also designed to intimidate Israel's Arab neighbours, and make up for Israel's humiliating 2006 defeat in Lebanon, which still haunts the country's politicians and generals. A fait accompli When the air raids on Gaza began, Barak said: "We have totally changed the rules of the game." He was right. By blitzing Hamas-run Gaza, Barak presented the incoming US administration with a fait accompli, and neatly checkmated the newest player in the Middle East Great Game - Barack Obama, the US president-elect - before he could even take a seat at the table. IN DEPTH Latest news and analysis from Gaza and Israel Send us your views and videos Watch our coverage of the war on Gaza The Israeli offensive into Gaza now looks likely to short-circuit any plans Obama might have had to press Israel into withdrawing to its pre-1967 borders and sharing Jerusalem. This has pleased Israel's supporters in North America who have been cheering the war in Gaza and have been backing away from their earlier tentative support for a land-for-peace deal. Israel's successes in having Western media portray the Gaza offensive as an 'anti-terrorist operation' will also diminish hopes of peace talks any time soon. Obama inherits this mess in a few weeks. During the elections, Obama bowed to the Israel lobby, offering a new US carte blanche to Israel and even accepting Israel's permanent monopoly of all of Jerusalem. As he concludes forming his cabinet, his Middle East team looks like it may be top-heavy with friends of Israel's Labour party. Obama keeps saying he must remain silent on policy issues until George Bush, the outgoing US president, leaves office, but his staff appear happy to avoid having to make statements about Gaza that would antagonise Israel's American supporters. Obama will take office facing a Middle East up in arms over Gaza and the entire Muslim world blaming the US for the carnage in Gaza. Unless he moves swiftly to distance himself from the policies of the Bush administration, he will soon find himself facing the same problems and anger as the Bush White House. Arab deal killed Israel's Gaza offensive is also likely to torpedo the current Saudi- sponsored peace plan, which had been backed by all members of the Arab League. The plan, now likely defunct, had called for Israel to withdraw to its 1967 borders and share Jerusalem in exchange for full recognition and normalised relations with the Muslim world. Arab governments will now be unable to sell the deal as they face a storm of criticism from their own people over their powerlessness to help the Palestinians of Gaza. Egypt, in particular, is being widely accused of collaborating with Israel in further sealing off and isolating Gaza. It seems highly unlikely they will be able to advance a peace plan with Israel for now. This is a bonus for right-wing Israelis, who have always been dead set against any withdrawal and strongly supported the attack on Gaza. Other Israeli factions who were always lukewarm about the Saudi peace plan are now unlikely to reconsider it. Israel's security establishment is committed to preventing the creation of a viable Palestinian state, and refuses to negotiate with Hamas. Unable to kill all of Hamas' men, Israel is slowly destroying Gaza's infrastructure around them, as it did to Yasser Arafat's PLO. Israel's hardliners point to Gaza and claim that any Palestinian state on the West Bank would threaten their nation's security by firing rockets into Israel's heartland. Mighty information machine Israel is confident that its mighty information machine will allow it to weather the storm of worldwide outrage over its Biblical punishment of Gaza. Who remembers Israel's flattening of parts of the Palestinian city of Jenin, or the US destruction in Falluja, Iraq, or the Sabra and Shatilla massacres in Beirut? The US media has focused on the rockets being fired on Israel from Gaza [GALLO/GETTY] Though the torment of Gaza is seen across the horrified Muslim world as a modern version of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising by Jews against the Nazis during World War Two, Western governments still appear bent on taking no action. Though Israel's use of American weapons against Gaza violates the US Arms Export Control and Foreign Assistance Acts, the docile US Congress will remain mute. Israel's assault on Gaza was clearly timed for America's interregnum between administrations and the year-end holidays, a well-used Israeli tactic. Hamas refuses to recognise Israel as long as Israel refuses to recognise Hamas and the rights of millions of homeless Palestinian refugees. It calls for a non-religious state to be created in Palestine, meaning an end to Zionism. Ironically, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder and late leader of Hamas, had spoken of a compromise with Tel Aviv shortly before he was assassinated by Israel in 2004. An inherited mess Israel's hopes that it can bomb Gazans into rejecting Hamas are as ill- conceived as its failed attempt in 2006 to blast Lebanon into rejecting Hezbollah. The Fatah regime on the West Bank installed by the US and Israel after Yasser Arafat's suspicious death will be further discredited, leaving the militants of Hamas as the sole authentic voice of Palestinian nationalism. Hamas, the militant but still democratically elected government of Gaza, is even less likely to compromise. The Muslim world is in a rage. But so what? Stalin liked to say "the dogs bark, and the caravan moves on," and as long as the US gives Israel carte blanche, it can do just about anything it wants. The tragedy of Palestine will thus continue to poison US relations with the Muslim world. Those Americans who still do not understand why their nation was attacked on 9/11 need only look to Gaza, for which the US is now being blamed as much as Israel. Unless Israel can make 5 to 7 million Palestinians disappear, it must find some way to co-exist with them. Israeli leaders on the centre and right continue to avoid facing this fact. The brutal collective punishment inflicted on Gaza will likely strengthen Hamas and reverse any hopes of a Middle East peace in the coming years. Eric S. Margolis is an author, syndicated foreign affairs columnist, broadcaster, and veteran war correspondent. His latest book is American Raj: America and the Muslim world. The views expressed by the author are not necessarily those of Al Jazeera. From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 12:02:41 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:02:41 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Inquiry about gaza Message-ID: <200901041902.n04J2fws024755@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/7bd394c4/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 12:16:09 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:16:09 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Photos of 5-6000 strong Gaza rally in Melbourne Message-ID: <200901041916.n04JG9LU003896@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/edf0a1ed/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 12:22:18 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:22:18 -0800 Subject: [R-G] GAZA Protest .... January 3, 2009 VANCOUVER BC CANADA Message-ID: <200901041922.n04JMIUs008044@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/fe6b4bee/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 12:32:36 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:32:36 -0800 Subject: [R-G] 10,000 rally in Toronto against Israeli assault on Gaza Message-ID: <200901041932.n04JWaib015403@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/b88c9245/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 12:37:54 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:37:54 -0800 Subject: [R-G] What Israel is doing to Gaza's civilians Message-ID: <200901041937.n04JbsO8018910@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/8c756cc8/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 12:40:12 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:40:12 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Gaza attacks like war crimes - Tutu Message-ID: <200901041940.n04JeCos020720@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/78d1a224/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 12:42:29 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:42:29 -0800 Subject: [R-G] WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH GAZA? Message-ID: <200901041942.n04JgT8N022257@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/36bec0d6/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 12:49:18 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:49:18 -0800 Subject: Obamaās deadly silence on Gaza Message-ID: <200901041949.n04JnIA8027205@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/88d806e2/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 13:12:59 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 12:12:59 -0800 Subject: [R-G] How the Israel lobby in Britain is funded by a Zionist billionaire Message-ID: <200901042012.n04KCx5C012405@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/46d6c3c9/attachment.txt From suzannedk at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 13:29:05 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 21:29:05 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Inquiry about gaza In-Reply-To: References: <200901031930.n03JUGBK001477@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> Message-ID: From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 13:26:03 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 12:26:03 -0800 Subject: [R-G] For Israel and its backers, the suffering in the south renders everything kosher Message-ID: <200901042026.n04KQ3Ed020610@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/af740aec/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 13:30:18 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 12:30:18 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Protesters across Canada call on Israel to end Gaza assault Message-ID: <200901042030.n04KUInb023852@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/999b7502/attachment.txt From critical.montages at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 13:46:33 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 15:46:33 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Joseph Massad: "the major political loser in all this will be Abbas and his clique of collaborators" Message-ID: The Gaza Ghetto Uprising Joseph Massad, The Electronic Intifada, 4 January 2009 Nazi troops round up Polish Jews during the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in May 1943. (Photographer Unknown) One is often baffled by the ironies of international relations and the alliances they foster. Take for example the Israeli colonial settlement that had declared war on the Palestinian people and several Arab countries since its inception while at the same time it built alliances with many Arab regimes and with Palestinian leaders. While Hashemite-Zionist relations and Maronite Church-Zionist relations have always been known and documented, there has been less documentation of the services that Israel has provided and continues to provide to Arab regimes over the decades. It is now recognized that Israel's 1967 invasion of Egypt aimed successfully to destroy Gamal Abdul-Nasser, the enemy of all US dictatorial allies among the Arab regimes, whom the US and before it Britain and France had tried to topple since the 1950s but failed. Israel thus rendered a great service to Arab monarchies (and a few republics) from "the ocean to the Gulf," whose survival was threatened by Nasser and Nasserism. Israel's subsequent intervention in Jordan in 1970 to help the Jordanian army destroy Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) guerrillas and its final crushing of that organization in its massive invasions of Lebanon in 1978 and 1982 were also important services it rendered to these same regimes threatened by the PLO's "revolutionary" potential and its sometimes recalcitrant positions. Israeli intelligence has also provided over the decades crucial information to several Arab regimes enabling them to crush their political opposition and strengthen their dictatorial rule. Prominent examples among recipients of Israeli intelligence largesse include the Moroccan and the Omani dictatorships. Israel's services to Arab regimes continue apace. Its 2006 invasion of Lebanon, engineered to destroy Hizballah, was cheered by Arab regimes and neoliberal Arab intellectuals hostile to Hizballah and employed exclusively by Saudi media outlets. Though the massive Israeli destruction of southern Lebanon and south Beirut and the massacres of more than a thousand Lebanese strengthened Hizballah and weakened Israel's military standing, the invasion was much appreciated by Israel's Arab allies. Indeed since 2006, Israel's Arab regime allies as well as neoliberal Arab intellectuals have been openly calling on it to neutralize the so-called Iranian "threat" for its own sake and at their behest as well. The US has seen this as an opportune moment to fully integrate Israel in the region, so much so that it signaled to its Gulf allies to make proposals for a new regional alliance that includes Israel in its midst. The Bahraini foreign minister suggested a few weeks ago that Israel join the Arab League. Many such proposals have already been made in the past few months welcoming the colonial settlement to the regional alliance against Iran. Since 2006, Arab regimes, neoliberal Arab intellectuals, as well as the Palestinian Collaborationist Authority (PCA) in Ramallah have reached an understanding that only Israel will be able to save them from Hizballah and Hamas, both organizations constituting a threat to the open alliance Arab regimes have with the US and Israel against Iran and all progressive forces in the region. These were not closely guarded secret hopes, but strategies that were openly discussed in private meetings, which often spilled into the public realm. The discussions in the Arab media and the declarations made by Israeli officials in the context of the ongoing Israeli massacres of the one and a half million Palestinians in Gaza in the last 10 days have left little to the imagination. A veritable open alliance now exists between the Palestinian Collaborationist Authority, Arab regimes, and Israel with the support of neoliberal Arab intellectuals, wherein Israel is subcontracted to decimate the Hamas government -- the only democratically elected government in the entire Arab world. Here let us remember that Hamas was democratically elected in free elections and that its elected officials and members of parliament were kidnapped by the Israeli occupation and have been languishing in Israeli jails for years, and that the Palestinian Collaborationist Authority set their offices on fire, staged strikes against them, and signaled the PCA bureaucracy not to follow their orders. It was after all this failed to dislodge Hamas from power that the US, Israel, and the PCA staged a coup to massacre Hamas leaders in Gaza that backfired on them. The carnage unleashed by Israel in the last 10 days is the latest attempt by Israel to ensure that all Arabs and all Palestinians are ruled by dictators and never by democratically elected officials. Many are wondering how the Arab regimes and the PCA can be so brazen in their "treachery" of the Palestinians. "Don't they fear being overthrown by the people?" is an oft-repeated question. The answer of course is a resounding "no." It is true that collaboration with Israel by Arab regimes is not new, and that what is new is merely their openness about it, but there is a perfectly good reason for this. In the 1940s and the 1950s, these regimes could not declare openly their alliance with Israel, as there were popular and international forces that would have removed them from power had they done so. Indeed, some at the time flirted with alliances that unofficially included Israel, like the Baghdad Pact, but they paid a heavy price for such collaboration. The Cold War, Third World revolutionism, Arab nationalism, the Soviet Union, China, Nasser, were all factors to be considered. While a few of these factors had remained when Egypt's Sadat declared his open alliance with the US and Israel in the late 1970s, none of these factors remains today. The US, Israel, and their major Arab allies have neutralized these forces one by one since 1967, opening the way for this brazen alliance between Israel and the Arab dictatorships, all of which are in the service of US interests in the region. These Arab regimes rule by terror and fear and have at their disposal the best secret police and repressive security apparatus that the US can train and equip and which oil money and US aid can buy. When Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was asked point blank by al-Jazeera's anchorman if Israel had an arrangement with Arab regimes to commit the Gaza massacres, she refused to answer and finally denied such an arrangement existed but could not help but affirm that there are those in the Arab world who "think" as Israel does and that Hamas is their enemy as it is the enemy of Israel. This is, incidentally, the same Tzipi Livni, who only a few weeks ago informed Palestinian citizens of Israel that she has slated them for denationalization and deportation to the Palestinian Bantustans once Israel and the international community grants these West Bank prisons the status of an independent Palestinian state enclosed within the apartheid wall. After her war on Palestinians in Gaza started last week, Livni declared that her war against the Palestinian people is not only about security but also about Israel's "values" which non-collaborator Palestinians (unlike the PCA) do not share. Livni is of course right. Unlike Livni and the Israeli leadership, whose ethnic-cleansing ideals and plans are to make Israel a purely Jewish state that is Pal?stinenser-rein, most Palestinians believe that they should remain present on their lands even and especially if this sullies the purity of a Jewish Israel. Livni has also asserted that Israel's values are shared by the "free world" and by unfree Arab regimes that are allies of the "free world." We can add, that her values are also shared by Saudi-funded neoliberal Arab intellectuals and by the leadership of the Palestinian Collaborationist Authority ensconced in the Green Zone of Ramallah. The civilized values of Israel are not unlike those espoused by the US in its ongoing wars against Arabs and Muslims, and are very much like European colonial values during the high age of colonialism and beyond. Livni and the Israeli leadership speak of human rights, democracy, peace, and justice as universal while applying them only to Jews and denying them especially to Palestinians. This is hardly an Israeli ruse. Let us remember the undying words of Frantz Fanon in this regard: "leave this Europe where they never tire of talking of man, yet murder men everywhere they find them, at the corner of every one of their own streets, in all the corners of the globe." On the Palestinian front, the term of chief Palestinian collaborator and coup leader Mahmoud Abbas ends on 9 January. Israel hopes to extend his collaborationist rule as head of the PCA it set up through the Oslo agreement in 1993. As Palestinians are murdered and injured in the thousands, world powers are cheering on. This is hardly a new development. It happens often in the context of other populations being murdered by allies of the US and Europe, and it even happened during World War II as the Nazi genocide was proceeding. On 19 April 1943, Britain and the US met in Bermuda, presumably to discuss the situation of Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe. That was also the day when the Nazis had launched their war against the remaining Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto but were met with unexpected courageous resistance. Little came out of the Bermuda Conference and the ongoing war against the Warsaw Ghetto proceeded uninterrupted. The Jewish resistance in the Warsaw Ghetto executed Jewish collaborators with the Nazis and bravely faced up to the Nazi army with what little weapons it had before being massacred. Their uprising was always inspirational to the Palestinians. In the heyday of the PLO as a symbol of Palestinian liberation, the organization would lay flower wreathes at the Warsaw Ghetto monument to honor these fallen Jewish heroes. Szmul Zygielbojm was the leader of the Jewish socialist party, the Bund, in Poland and was part of the resistance against the Nazi invasion in 1939. He would later become a hostage held by the Nazis but would later be released and made a member of the Jewish council or judenrat, the Nazi equivalent of the Israeli-created Palestinian Collaborationist Authority, and which was charged with building a Jewish ghetto in Warsaw. Zygielbojm opposed the Nazi order and fled to Belgium, France, the US, and in 1942 ended up in London where he joined the Polish government in exile. On 12 May 1943, after he received word that the resistance in the Warsaw Ghetto was finally crushed and many of its fighters killed, Zygielbojm turned on the gas in his London flat and committed suicide in protest against the indifference and inaction of the Allies to the plight of the Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe. He also felt that he had no right to live after his comrades were killed resisting the Nazis. In his suicide letter, Zygielbojm insisted that while the Nazis were responsible for the murder of the Polish Jews, the Allies, through their inaction, were also guilty: The latest news that has reached us from Poland makes it clear beyond any doubt that the Germans are now murdering the last remnants of the Jews in Poland with unbridled cruelty. Behind the walls of the ghetto the last act of this tragedy is now being played out. The responsibility for the crime of the murder of the whole Jewish nationality in Poland rests first of all on those who are carrying it out, but indirectly it falls also upon the whole of humanity, on the peoples of the Allied nations and on their governments, who up to this day have not taken any real steps to halt this crime. By looking on passively upon this murder of defenseless millions, tortured children, women and men they have become partners to the responsibility ... I cannot continue to live and to be silent while the remnants of Polish Jewry, whose representative I am, are being murdered. My comrades in the Warsaw ghetto fell with arms in their hands in the last heroic battle. I was not permitted to fall like them, together with them, but I belong with them, to their mass grave. By my death, I wish to give expression to my most profound protest against the inaction in which the world watches and permits the destruction of the Jewish people ... The Palestinian Collaborationist Authority that runs the judenrat set up by Oslo has never even attempted to resist Israeli orders. Not one member of the top leadership decided to resign and not serve. Mahmoud Abbas, having provided so many dishonorable services to Israel, lacks Zygielbojm's integrity and noble principles and would never follow in Zygielbojm's footsteps. Meanwhile, the Palestinian people will resist the invading Israelis with all their might and against astronomical odds. The Palestinian people, like Zygielbojm before them, understand very well that Abbas, his clique, the Arab regimes, the US and Europe are all culpable in their slaughter as much as Israel is. In the case of Zygielbojm, he blamed world powers for their indifference and inaction, in the Palestinian case, world and regional powers are co-conspirators and active partners in crime. The crushing of the Gaza Ghetto Uprising and the slaughter of its defenseless population will be relatively an easy task for the giant Israeli military machine and Israel's sadistic political leadership. It is dealing with the aftermath of a strengthened Palestinian determination to continue to resist Israel that will prove much more difficult for Israel and its Arab allies to deal with. While the thousands of dead and injured Palestinians are the main victims of this latest Israeli terrorist war, the major political loser in all this will be Abbas and his clique of collaborators. The test for Palestinian resistance now is to continue to refuse to grant Israel the right to conquer populations, to steal their land, to destroy their livelihoods, to imprison them in ghettos, and to starve them without being resisted. The only constant in Palestinian lives for the last century of Zionist atrocities has been resistance to the Zionist project of erasing them from the face of the earth. While Zionism sought and recruited Arab and Palestinian collaborators since its inception in the hope of crushing Palestinian resistance, neither Israel nor any of its collaborators has been able to stop it. The lesson that Zionism has refused to learn, and still refuses to learn, is that the Palestinian yearning for freedom from the Zionist yoke cannot be extinguished no matter how barbaric Israel's crimes become. The Gaza Ghetto Uprising will mark both the latest chapter in Palestinian resistance to colonialism and the latest Israeli colonial brutality in a region whose peoples will never accept the legitimacy of a racist European colonial settlement in their midst. Joseph Massad is associate professor of modern Arab politics and intellectual history at Columbia University in New York. From fentona at shaw.ca Sun Jan 4 15:44:50 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 14:44:50 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Destroying Gaza, Delaying Palestine References: Message-ID: <18C715A5-784F-4436-ABEE-5F620DECDBEF@shaw.ca> ~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t ))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Socialist Project e-bulletin ... No. 174 ... January 4, 2009 _______________________________________________ Destroying Gaza, Delaying Palestine Bashir Abu-Manneh We watch in horror as Israel unleashes yet another war on the dispossessed and weak. Hundreds are killed (mostly police and civilians, not trained militants), thousands are injured, and a million and a half are terrorized, punished for defying the will of their besiegers and refusing to submit. Again the media colludes and sells a barbaric aggression on a basically defenseless and deprived population as a war between two sides, mystifying fundamental inequalities of power through words like "disproportionate response" and "ceasefire." Again "shock and awe" is bandied about as military currency, as if it worked the first time round in Iraq, or the second in Lebanon 2006. Again we hear a cocksure military commander say that the targeted area will be sent back decades in time, as if Israel has complete control over historical temporality: "In attacking Hamas' regime in the Gaza Strip, the Israel Defense Forces will try to 'send Gaza decades into the past' in terms of weapon capabilities while achieving 'the maximum number of enemy casualties and keeping Israel Defense Forces casualties at a minimum,' GOC Southern Command Yoav Galant said." Israel has tried to habituate the world that killing Arabs is normal, an unexceptional daily event in the time of "the war on terror," and that there is always a justifiable reason to do so. Why? Because Arabs always seem to lack something: goodwill toward their oppressors, peaceful intentions, or, simply, reasonableness, moderation, and humanity. The American elite is certainly convinced of that. Witness their behavior in Iraq, or even Afghanistan and Somalia: a bipartisan consensus that long-term direct or proxy American involvement (read imperialism) is not in question. National sovereignty and self- determination are only for the West. The Israeli elite makes its living off such racist assumptions: the Palestinians thus need to be taught yet another lesson by their colonial masters. As Tom Segev has put it: "Israel is striking at the Palestinians to 'teach them a lesson.' That is a basic assumption that has accompanied the Zionist enterprise since its inception: We are the representatives of progress and enlightenment, sophisticated rationality and morality, while the Arabs are a primitive, violent rabble, ignorant children who must be educated and taught wisdom ? via, of course, the carrot-and-stick method, just as the drover does with his donkey." Continue reading: www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/bullet174.html#continue ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Bullet is produced by the Socialist Project. Readers are encouraged to distribute widely. Comments, criticisms and suggestions are welcome. Write to info at socialistproject.ca If you wish to subscribe: www.socialistproject.ca/lists/?p=subscribe The Bullet archive is available at www.socialistproject.ca/bullet For more analysis of contemporary politics check out 'Relay: A Socialist Project Review' at www.socialistproject.ca/relay ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 16:22:00 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:22:00 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Oxfam supported health worker killed and ambulance destroyed in Israeli shelling Message-ID: <200901042322.n04NM08Z013222@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/d9e0c957/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 16:35:27 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:35:27 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Cartoon on the situation in Gaza Message-ID: <200901042335.n04NZRma021840@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/aa4ff21a/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 16:40:17 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:40:17 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Thousands protest in Tel-Aviv Message-ID: <200901042340.n04NeHBJ025180@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/d07c1cea/attachment.txt From mstainsby at resist.ca Sun Jan 4 19:10:31 2009 From: mstainsby at resist.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:10:31 -0700 Subject: [R-G] =?iso-8859-1?q?Mariela_Castro_Esp=EDn_on_the_Future_of_Sex_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?and_Socialism_in_Cuba?= Message-ID: <49616C17.2060801@resist.ca> http://gaycuba.ca/mariela_interview/ From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sun Jan 4 19:42:38 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:42:38 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] The Fleecing of a Nation Message-ID: <4961739E.2070104@ashisuto.co.jp> by Antony Black PACfiles (March 2004) There was no joy in Mudsville that day. The till had been robbed. It was theft considerably 'over'. And with much gnashing of teeth and writhing of hands the media pundits had converged hyperbolically on a glaring, if isolated, new truth. To wit: our honourable leaders, steely-minded financial wizards one and all, had, indeed, been busy little bees, bending their wizardry to the tidy task of taking the poor unwashed multitudes to the cleaners to the tune of a cool hundred million smackers. Still, all was not lost. Investigations would be launched. Heads would roll. Purification and redemption would follow as surely as day follows night. Peace and trust would be restored. There would be joy in Mudsville again ... * * * * The problem with this little fable, of course, is that by centering our attention on a rather minor peripheral crack in the national financial landscape - an egregious pothole which, nevertheless, can easily and conspicuously be 'fixed' - it serves merely to distract from and gloss over the tectonic fault lines running straight down Main street. Much more instructive would be to do a little forensic accounting of our own. So why don't we take a peek, as it were, at Mudsville's 'books'? You know, the 'other' books, the real ones? Hmm ... Where to start ... Ah! Here we go ... It seems that back in 1950 the total share of federal income taxes collected in Canada was split roughly evenly between corporations and individuals. Fifty - fifty. That sounds fair. Oh, but look ... by 1992 an astonishing shift had occurred: the proportion of such revenue from corporations had dropped to less than ten percent while that from individuals had risen to over ninety percent. Now let's see, add to this the Goods and Services Tax (GST) which transferred billions of dollars of additional tax burden away from the corporations onto Canadian citizens ... and ... ....yes, the tens of billions of tax dollars that, through corporate tax deferrals (deferred indefinitely, apparently), tax credits, tax exemptions et cetera, are, every year, never collected ... and the vast haemorrhaging accruing from the tax havens outside the country .... and, of course, the various tricky-dicky tax dodges like transfer pricing (which allow corporations with operations in the US to 'transfer' their profits south of the border) ... Goldarned, it looks like we're talking perhaps over a hundred billion big ones a year gone AWOL. I wonder if that's why 'there is no money' for health care and education and such? Perhaps an oversimplification. After all, what about our humungous national debt? Thereby, as they say, hangs an interesting tale. It seems that in the three decades from 1965 to 1995 our 'excessive social program spending spree' added $40 billion dollars to the national debt, but the ruinous interest rates charged by the commercial banks added roughly $490 billion to that debt. So social spending only accounted for less than eight percent of it ... Now this doesn't make sense to me. After all, why would we, the citizens of Canada, be borrowing money from the private banking industry at usurious rates of interest when we could be borrowing from the Bank of Canada at rates as low as one percent with all the interest, in any case, remitting back to the country itself? Perhaps we better go further back and get a little more context ... It appears that the Bank of Canada was started up in 1935 in response to the pressures of the Great Depression ... you know, at a time when all that the corporate world could do was run around demanding that spending be cut when, in fact, MORE spending was exactly what was called for. The idea seems to have worked too. During the Second World War the Bank was able to multiply the monetary base eightfold by financing annual deficits that amounted to a quarter of the Gross National Product at interest rates of between 0.4% and 2.5%. Unemployment was virtually wiped out. The land was awash in credit. The Bank instituted wage and price controls combined with foreign exchange controls to control inflation. Following the war the Bank shrewdly started to 'dry up' the excess liquidity in the economy. The Bank of Canada, it seems, was acting as it was designed: that is, as a regulator of the national economy. Expanding when necessary, contracting when necessary. There was peace in Mudsville in those days ... But then something strange happened on the way to the modern era. In 1967 an amendment to the original Bank Act (of 1934) - militated for, among others, by the commercial banks - effectively cleaved the Bank's responsibility to and control by the Canadian government ... and thereby the citizens of Canada. The Governor of the Bank of Canada would thenceforth have almost complete independence from the Minister of Finance. The reasoning given then (and now) for this about-face in the control of the Bank was to 'avoid political influence' on the Bank. Now you have to understand, the central bank of any country is ALWAYS a political institution. The only question is: In whose interests are the bank's policies to serve? Clearly, prior to 1967 the Bank of Canada was serving, more or less, the interests of the citizens of Canada. Afterwards it became, unequivocally, a creature serving the interests of the chartered banks, the wealthy elites and foreign bondholders. It seems the Bank had been, well, hi-jacked ... No doubt about the results either. During the 1980's, for instance, real interest rates in Canada were several points higher than in previous decades; higher, indeed, than any of our trade competitors and among the highest in the developed world. These excessively high interest rates, apart from transferring billions of dollars every year from those who could not afford to save to those who could, served also to stall the economy in mid-flight and create massive unemployment ... Such was part and parcel, it appears, of a new economic creed called 'monetarism' which became enshrined shortly following the hi-jacking of the Bank. Monetarism, in brief, holds to two principal notions: one, that 'free markets' are self-regulating and two, that the key to determining economic activity is through the control of the money supply. Now the problem with the first notion is that the 'free market', as it might have been understood, say, in the 12th century, is an economic fiction. We live in a system of highly regulated markets mediated by oligopolies and monopolies. As for 'self-regulating', if anything is clear over the last 800 years or so, it is that markets, when left to themselves, are entirely unstable causing massive social and economic upheaval and disruption. The problem with the second notion is that much of the so-called money supply today is, itself, entirely fictional ... It's made up. Just figures tapped into a computer somewhere. Indeed, contrary to the belief of many, only five percen or so of the money creation in this country comes in the form of the actual crinkly stuff printed in the government mints. The vast bulk (95%) of the money is, instead, created virtually out of thin air within the bowels of the computers of the five major chartered banks. It's not quite that simple, of course. Among other snags there is (or at least, used to be) a natural break on all this hocus-pocus. These are the banks' 'reserve requirements', the monies that the banks have legally had to keep on hand to cover daily transactions. Traditionally the 'reserves' have equalled eight percent or so of total deposits. The banks have never liked these and not just because it limited how much they could "lend", but because, in the magical world of smoke and mirrors that is the basis of our 'fractional reserve banking system', it limited how much money they could "create". This it did by limiting their notorious 'money multiplier'. I say 'notorious' because it is 'official' ideology today that the multiplier doesn't actually exist. It used to exist in the textbooks of former days, you understand. Now, under 'monetarism' ... it doesn't. In truth it does. When the Bank of Canada decides to 'float' money into circulation, it deposits the money in, say, commercial Bank A which lends it out to Bank B and so on, such that at each 'lending' the bank in question merely extends a line of credit LIMITED ONLY BY THE LEGAL RESERVE REQUIREMENT. The eventual cascade through the system results - after having 'used up' the initial 'float' in the reserve holdings of the successive banks - in the creation of a multiple (of credit) of from fifty to 100 times the original amount. Puff! Seems like magic .... But the effect is real. We know it's real because numerous studies have ascertained that the monies loaned out every year by the banks far exceed the monies deposited by a considerable factor. Now the upshot of all this is that when in the 1970s and 1980s the chartered banks were charging us all outrageous interest rates - including on the national debt - the excuse that they were just 'passing along' the rate of inflation was just a bunch of hooey. For if the money was, for the most part, just made up on the premises (that is, didn't cost them anything) the 'take' was all gravy. It also, by the by, made nonsense of monetarism's second pillar - the 'control of the money supply - since no one today can remotely tell what the money supply really is. In a final twist, the commercial banks, not happy with the traditional reserve requirements, were able, in 1991, to slide through, in the dead of night, a profound amendment to the Bank Act which essentially rid them of much of the pesky reserve requirements. More precisely this new 'risk-based capital reserves' regime, apart from releasing the ('non-existent' you understand) money multiplier genie from its cramped quarters, also effectively served to induce the private banks to further load up on government securities, that is, on the nation's debt. So there we have it Mudvillians ... well, not entirely ... The 'second set of books' are deep. There's another little item over here about how the entire provincial and federal sales tax structure could be replaced by a teensy one quarter of one percent tax on all financial transactions. A sector of the economy that has hitherto escaped the taxman completely - whilst we poor yobs are paying fifteen percent through the nose day in and day out. Then there's ... ... Oh, but I hear the bells ringing. Rosy dawn has returned. There is the clamour of happy voices. Joy has returned to Mudsville ... It appears that ... ... a pothole has been fixed. _____ Antony Black is a teacher and freelance writer based in Hamilton, Ontario. He has written for the independent (and on occasion, the mainstream) print and on-line media for the past two decades. Antony is also the global affairs editor and monthly columnist for 'Mayday' a local progressive magazine sponsored by the Skydragon Cooperative. Mr Black wrote this piece in March 2004 for his local Ontario Secondary Teacher's Federation (OSSTF), District 21 (Hamilton) political action committee publication, "PACfiles", in response to an ongoing government financial scandal (the 'sponsorhip' scandal) involving some $100 million. TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From mstainsby at resist.ca Sun Jan 4 19:44:49 2009 From: mstainsby at resist.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:44:49 -0700 Subject: [R-G] DU used by "Israel" on Palestine Message-ID: <49617421.6010707@resist.ca> http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=80443§ionid=351020202 From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 20:50:39 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:50:39 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Dead end (fwd) Message-ID: <200901050350.n053odVR013576@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/124072fc/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Sun Jan 4 21:50:07 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 20:50:07 -0800 Subject: [R-G] The Politics of An Israeli Extermination Campaign Message-ID: <200901050450.n054o7xk026991@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090104/3bf4b3de/attachment.txt From fentona at shaw.ca Sun Jan 4 23:49:52 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 22:49:52 -0800 Subject: [R-G] This kind of war Message-ID: <6923929F-8576-4207-8E0F-0C0402CEE584@shaw.ca> http://www.killingtrain.com/node/671 This kind of war Justin Podur January 4, 2009 The current crisis in Gaza began with Israel's breaking the ceasefire with Hamas on November 4, 2008. The five-month ceasefire was unsustainable for two reasons. First and most importantly, because it condemned the Palestinians of Gaza to a slow and wasting death: part of the ceasefire was the continuation of Israel's blockade of Gaza. As part of this blockade, Palestinians could not leave the territory. This included, in high-profile cases, students who had obtained admission and visas to study abroad, but also people who later died because they could not receive treatment for cancers and other medical problems. Remember that the Gaza strip is 360 square kilometers, with 1.5 million people. The people have skills, strong social cohesion, and traditions of hospitality, but the area is not self-sufficient and the economy cannot function without free movement of people and goods in and out. Leave aside that the moral right and legal right of Palestinians to self-defense was denied by the prevention of arms supplies (to even mention this as a possibility is to break a taboo). Every other aspect of life was also disrupted by the blockade. Education was disrupted as Israel refused to allow paper, ink, books, and other supplies in. Health care was disrupted as Israel refused to allow medical supplies. Nutrition and normal child development was disrupted both by the refusal of Israel to allow food supplies, but also by the use of sonic booms, which the Israeli air force uses to frighten the population, and periodic bombing and assassinations. At this point, Israel is not even allowing Palestinians to leave, so displacement is not the goal, at least for the time being. On the other hand, when body counts rise into the thousands or tens of thousands, Israel might then allow the Palestinians to flee further massacres, and be lauded for its generousness by the international community. The second reason the ceasefire was unsustainable was deeper. So long as Israel is unwilling to negotiate a political settlement and share the land, with the US on side and with shedding Palestinian blood being a source of political credibility in Israeli society, Palestinians have no choice but to resist. If they are not starved and bombed, they will be more effective at resisting their own displacement and colonization. With each step Israel takes to try to dismantle Palestinian resistance, a genocidal logic advances. Palestinians have been walled in and blockaded. Now they are bombed and invaded. When they have been thrown off their land and into neighbouring countries, they are attacked in those countries, in their refugee camps. Indeed, the people of Gaza are mostly refugees who were thrown off lands in what is now Israel. If they were displaced from Gaza, into Egypt, what would stop Israel from attacking them there? Would being displaced twice offer more protection than being displaced once? Once the ceasefire ended, Israel was at war. This was a war of choice, and a war it had prepared for extensively on diplomatic and military levels. The diplomatic scenario was favourable to Israel in several ways. Palestine had been further divided. The West Bank was controlled by Mahmoud Abbas, whose Palestinian Authority collaborates with Israel. The PA is currently maintained in power because the elected Hamas parliamentarians are in either PA or Israeli prisons and because Israeli security forces, as well as the PA, arrest scores of people in the West Bank every week. Gaza was controlled by the elected Hamas leadership. Israel could focus on one enemy and leave the suppression of the Palestinians of the West Bank to the PA. Israel has rounded up hundreds of Palestinian children in the West Bank and shot and killed many demonstrators there in recent weeks, but these violations have become routine and barely register next to the more spectacular massacres of dozens at a time in Gaza. Hizbollah in Lebanon, who in 2006 interrupted a pattern of massacre and strangulation that Israel was conducting in Gaza (?Summer Rains?), have domestic constraints preventing them from intervening, which would bring more thousands of dead to Lebanon in a new Israeli air campaign, against which Hizbollah has no defenses. Egypt has been more co-operative with Israel than ever before, keeping the Rafah crossing sealed and, at the official level, blaming Hamas for bringing the massacres on themselves. According to Hamas, Egypt also told them that Israel was not planning an attack ? which gave the Israelis the surprise that helped them to massacre over 200 Palestinians in a single day at the start of their air campaign. As usual, Israel can count on unconditional official US support from all parts of the political spectrum, which seems to be enough to prevent any useful intervention by anyone else in the world. Many progressive governments, including that of Venezuela and Bolivia, have condemned the atrocities, but have not taken any further steps to try to diplomatically isolate Israel or support Boycott/Divestment/ Sanctions (BDS), which might be part of a strategy that could stop Israel. Street protests have been large, in some parts of the world unprecedentedly so. But without any official political expression, these protests can be dismissed and ignored as the February 15, 2003 protests against the invasion of Iraq were ignored. On the military level, some basic points. Calling the current conflict a 'war' is more of an analogy than a description, because the word 'war' still evokes the idea of armies meeting on a battlefield and contesting territory. Israel has all of the weapons of war, but it does not really have an opposing army to fight. It can take any territory it wants and easily kill anyone trying to contest it. It can hit, and destroy, any target, anywhere Palestinians live, at will. One compilation by the al-Mezan Centre in Gaza from December 31/08 presented 315 killed (41 children), 939 injured (85 children), and 112 houses, 7 mosques, 38 private industrial and agricultural enterprises, 16 schools, 16 government facilities, 9 charity offices, and 20 security installations. The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) figures to December 31/08 were 334 killed (33 children), 966 injured (218 children), 37 homes, 67 security centres, 20 workshops, as well as 40 invasions in the West Bank, killing 3 Palestinians and arresting/ kidnapping hundreds more. Skimming the IMEMC site, here is some of what Israel destroyed since the attack started. December 27-28/08 -Palestinian Police Headquarters -Rafah Police Station -Saraya Security Compound -Beit Hanoun municipal building -Rafah governorate offices -A police jeep in Gaza City -The Palestinian Ministry of Prisoners' Affairs -Greenhouses in Alqarrara -Charity offices throughout Gaza -A medical storage facility -A fuel station in Rafah -A fuel truck in Rafah -A police station in Gaza City (al-Shujaeyya) -al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City -Houses in Gaza City and Jabaliya refugee camp -Hamas's al-Aqsa TV station in Gaza City -Hamas's Asda' media office in Khan Yunis -Tunnels in Rafah -An apartment in Tal-Alhawa in Gaza City -A car in Nuseirat refugee camp -The Islamic University in Gaza (several buildings, including the female students' residence) -A mosque in Jabaliya -A fishermen's dock at Gaza shore December 29/08 -A house in Jabaliya (killing 5 sisters, all children). -A blacksmith workshop in al-Zeitoun neighbourhood in Gaza City -A house in Khan Younis -A house in Abasan town -The Ministry of the Interior in Gaza December 30/08 -The Ministries Compound -The Popular Resistance Committees center in Gaza City -A house in Beit Lahia -Another fuel truck in northern Gaza -The UNRWA school in al-Qarara -Houses in Rafah -A house in Jabailya -A sports club in Tal AL Hawa -A police station in Beit Hanoun -Bani Suheila City Council -Training grounds for the Al Qassam Brigades -The mosque of Omar Bin Al Khattab Mosque in Al Bureij -Al Khulafa? Mosque in northern Gaza -The governor?s office in northern Gaza -The Ministries Compound in Tal Al Hawa in Gaza completely destroying it (including the Ministry of Finance, Interior, Education) -A military camp that was previously used by Force 17, loyal to President Mahmoud Abbas. -A dairy in Gaza City -A workshop in Beit Lahiya -Another home in northern Gaza (killing two children) -The Rafah-Egypt border crossing -The house of a Fatah leader in al-Mighraqa -A house in Beit Hanoun (killing two children) -A house in al-Maghazi refugee camp December 31/08 -Ambulances in Gaza City (killing a doctor, a driver, and a medic) -The oxygen refilling plant in Gaza City (used by hospitals in Gaza) Jan 1/09 -Palestinian Legislative Council in Gaza City -The Ministry of Education in Gaza City -The Ministry of Justice in Gaza City -A house in Nuseirat refugee camp -A workshop in Rafah -A picnic park in Rafah -Tunnels in Rafah -A clinic in Rafah -A house in al-Maghazi -Nizar Rayan's home, killing him, his wives, and all of their children (16 people total) Jan 2-3/09 -An apartment building in al-Qarara -A house in Jabaliya (killing 2 children) -A house in al-Boreij refugee camp -A mosque in Jabaliya -The American School in Gaza City -A house in al-Shujaeyya -A house in Gaza City -Fishing boats in Gaza City -A car on the Gaza Valley bridge -A police station in Gaza -At least 20 homes in Gaza Israeli bombing strategy has been to bomb the same targets repeatedly. This means not only more thorough destruction of the infrastructure, but also additional killing of medical personnel and residents who try to help the first round of victims. Israel's actions are not constrained by the opposing army but by two political considerations: First, how much killing can it do before it begins to face the threat of diplomatic isolation? Disallowing journalists and observers is part of Israel's strategy to deal with this, as it was for the US in Iraq. Israel's ground invasion has been accompanied by a total blackout even of Israeli reporters. Given the intensity of its intelligence and the precision of its weapons, Israel is able to choose the death toll, with some precision. At least some of the current killing is likely designed to push the limits and see how far Israel can go before eliciting any serious reaction. The second consideration is, can Israeli military casualties be kept low enough that the Israeli public continues to support war? To deal with the latter, Israel uses airpower and artillery to destroy from a distance, and opened its ground invasion at night. Since it has long since dismantled Gaza's electricity infrastructure, its soldiers are the only ones who can see at night through their infrared goggles ? Gaza's people, civilians and anyone who might want to try to defend them, are in complete darkness. Israel's active military is estimated to be some 170,000. With universal conscription, it has some 2.4 million people between 17-49 years old fit for military service and everyone has had some training. Its military budget is 9% of its substantial GDP, totaling some $18.7 billion. It receives about $3 billion per year from the US. It has about 1000 main battle tanks, 1500 lower quality tanks, over 1000 artillery pieces, over 500 warplanes, about 200 helicopters, 13 warships, and 3 submarines. It has the latest unmanned aerial vehicles and can gather very precise intelligence using aerial photography and satellites. Hamas is mainly a political organization, but it has an armed wing that has the capacity to improvise rockets and explosives and to train fighters with small arms. Hizbollah in Lebanon had some success against Israeli ground forces in 2006 partly because of armaments: they were able to destroy Israeli tanks with anti-tank missiles and fight against Israeli soldiers at night with night-vision goggles. Hamas does not have access to such weaponry. In 2002, when Palestinian fighters defended Jenin from Israeli forces, they improvised some explosions but ran out of ammunition and supplies and were ultimately defeated when Israel leveled the central part of the camp with bulldozers. Because calling it 'war' is basically metaphorical, the notion of a 'military casualty', as opposed to a civilian death, on the Palestinian side doesn't make much sense. If a soldier or even a militant is killed in battle, he is counted as a military casualty. If that same soldier is killed in his house by a missile from the sky or a shell from kilometres away, he is the victim of an assassination. If his entire family and various other people are killed because they were in his proximity, they are victims of murder. There are other words that can describe it, such as 'collateral damage', but murder is the most accurate, something that would be clear if racism against Palestinians were not so pervasive. Israel invites us to dehumanize ourselves by estimating how many of its victims were 'militants' and how many 'civilians'. In this game, Israel claims everyone it has killed was a militant and those who were not are victims of the militants because they hide among civilians. The United Nations has accepted the broad parameters of the game, estimating at one point that one fifth of those killed were civilians. The details can then be quibbled over. But no one would accept this game if it were not Palestinians who were being killed. No one tries to divide the victims of Hamas's rockets or, in years past, suicide bombings. No doubt many of these were off-duty soldiers, since Israel has universal conscription. But everyone understands that these were civilians and killing them, a crime (an act of terrorism, no less). Most people understand that subdividing the young victims of a suicide bombing at a cafeteria based on whether they were active duty or reservist soldiers would be a pretty disgusting thing to do. But the same simple logic fails when attempted to extend it to Palestinians at a marketplace or school or hospital or university, all of whom are legitimate targets of murder unless proven otherwise (and Israel allows no one to see the evidence to prove anything in any case). Though there is some uncertainty about Hamas's military capability, the invasion of Gaza will not likely be a replay of Lebanon 2006. Palestinians might be motivated and have little to lose, but they cannot compete with Israel's weaponry. Indeed, the reason the Israelis were surprised in Lebanon was that they had gotten used to fighting lightly armed and helpless opponents. Israel knows how to occupy Gaza. Before the 2005 'disengagement', their forces operated from fortified settlements and cut Gaza in three parts, blocking the three main north- south roads with armor. They used extensive aerial surveillance and cameras from towers to watch every square inch of Gaza and snipe at people, including children, at will. They came out of their bases in massive armored force and with air support to bulldoze houses and neighbourhoods, after first using artillery and air strikes. Helicopter gunships would make short work of any lightly armed militants, who (unlike Hizbollah) have nothing capable of shooting one down. They can create their own no-go zones and minefields using cluster bombs, making even more of Gaza's tiny area uninhabitable ? and making the concentration camp that much more concentrated. If everything goes Israel's way, as it seems to be going, the next question is how Israel will decide if it has won. It can probably destroy many tunnels and, by occupying the area, silence the rockets. It can probably also conduct house-to-house searches and massacres, and will probably attempt to capture or kill the elected Hamas leadership. Since most countries refuse to recognize Hamas's government and many have accepted Israel's request that it be listed as a terrorist organization, there is nothing protecting these leaders' lives any more than the lives of the people who voted for them (or against them). With its soldiers back in Gaza, Israel will be able to return to its noble project of starving the Palestinian population, this time with an even more destroyed infrastructure and from up close. As Alex de Waal pointed out about Darfur, 'starve' is a transitive verb: it is something one people does to another. Justin Podur is a Toronto-based writer. He was in Gaza in 2002. His blog is www.killingtrain.com. From critical.montages at gmail.com Mon Jan 5 03:48:01 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:48:01 -0500 Subject: [R-G] BANGLADESH: Acid Attacks Continue despite New Laws Message-ID: BANGLADESH: Acid attacks continue despite new laws Photo: Contributor/IRIN Workers at the Acid Survivors Foundation express their solidarity with acid victims to raise social awareness against the practice DHAKA, 5 January 2009 (IRIN) - Acid attacks against women and girls are continuing despite legal campaigns to halt their spread. Over 2,600 cases have been reported since 1999, according to the Acid Survivors Foundation (ASF) of Bangladesh. Almost all the attacks have been on women or girls. Many of the victims are under 18, says ASF, which has been working to eliminate acid violence for almost a decade. The main reason for the violence is dowries, refusal of love proposals, or land disputes, ASF said. Bent on revenge, perpetrators throw acid into their victims' faces in an effort to severely disfigure them, often with horrifying results. Nitric or sulphuric acid has a catastrophic effect on human flesh, ASF said, resulting in skin tissue melting, often exposing the bones below the flesh, and even dissolving bone. Scarred for life and badly burned, many survivors also lose their sight in one or both eyes. Others are so psychologically traumatised they never recover. Despite the viciousness of these attacks, many go unreported: "Many incidents are never reported. [The] media covers only those cases that go to court," Rokhsana Akhter, an activist told IRIN in Dhaka, adding: "The poor and powerless do not go to court. Their cases remain unreported." Easy to buy Photo: Shamsuddin Ahmed/IRIN Efforts to raise awareness and push for stronger government measures continue Despite the public outcry, purchasing acid is still not difficult. In Dhaka, sulphuric acid can be readily purchased for just 44 US cents a pound (roughly half a litre), with nitric acid slightly higher at 59 cents a pound. "You just ask the traders for acid. They will provide you with the required quantity," Gopal Das, a goldsmith in the city's Tantibazar area, said. Gopal uses nitric acid to melt gold. Since he only needs a very small amount he has never bothered to obtain the now mandatory license. Like Gopal, many jewellers, especially the small ones, collect and use acid, making effective monitoring of this deadly material all but impossible. "The last time a mobile court raided this area was March 2008," said Kazi Abdul Hamid, a shop owner selling chemicals in Goal Nagar, an acid wholesale market in Dhaka. "We should have a distinct monitoring team to control acid use and sale; the fact is that we do not have one. Normally a mobile court visits specific shops and issues or renews their licenses. I can't tell you when the last visit took place," said Deputy Commissioner of Dhaka Mohammad Zillar Rahman whose office is responsible for controlling and monitoring the acid trade in the city. "Enforcement remains weak. Perpetrators are still able to procure acid on the open market," said ASF executive director Monira Rahman. Legal efforts Efforts to combat the crime have had limited success. In 2002, parliament enacted two laws against acid violence: Under the Acid Control Act of 2002, the unlicensed production, import, transport, storage, sale, and use of acid can result in a prison term of 3-10 years. Those who possess chemicals and equipment for the unlicensed production of acid can get the same prison term. One doctor sounded an optimistic note: "Since then, acid violence has been showing a rapid decline," said Shamanta Lal Sen of the burns and plastic surgery unit at Dhaka Medical College Hospital (DMCH). According to ASF, 221 and 192 people were subjected to acid violence in 2006 and 2007 respectively. In 2000 and 2001 their number was 234 and 349 respectively. Combating the crime A number of organisations are working to combat the crime, or mitigate its effects. ASF and the DMCH burns unit are working to support victims of acid attacks. BRAC (Building Resources Across Communities), Bangladesh's largest NGO, offers survivors logistical assistance with access to health facilities. Legal aid organisations, such as Ain o Salish Kendra, and the Bangladesh National Women Lawyers' Association provide legal aid to acid victims. Prothom Alo, a popular daily, raises funds for the treatment and rehabilitation of victims, as well as campaigning against the crime. According to rights groups, apart from Bangladesh, acid attacks are common in a number of Asian countries, including Pakistan, India, Afghanistan and Cambodia. From critical.montages at gmail.com Mon Jan 5 05:42:12 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 07:42:12 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Israel Rains Fire on Gaza with Phosphorus Shells Message-ID: December 5, 2008 Israel rains fire on Gaza with phosphorus shells Israel is believed to be using controversial white phosphorus shells to screen its assault on the heavily populated Gaza Strip yesterday. The weapon, used by British and US forces in Iraq, can cause horrific burns but is not illegal if used as a smokescreen. As the Israeli army stormed to the edges of Gaza City and the Palestinian death toll topped 500, the tell-tale shells could be seen spreading tentacles of thick white smoke to cover the troops' advance. "These explosions are fantastic looking, and produce a great deal of smoke that blinds the enemy so that our forces can move in," said one Israeli security expert. Burning blobs of phosphorus would cause severe injuries to anyone caught beneath them and force would-be snipers or operators of remote-controlled booby traps to take cover. Israel admitted using white phosphorus during its 2006 war with Lebanon. The use of the weapon in the Gaza Strip, one of the world's mostly densely population areas, is likely to ignite yet more controversy over Israel's offensive, in which more than 2,300 Palestinians have been wounded. The Geneva Treaty of 1980 stipulates that white phosphorus should not be used as a weapon of war in civilian areas, but there is no blanket ban under international law on its use as a smokescreen or for illumination. However, Charles Heyman, a military expert and former major in the British Army, said: "If white phosphorus was deliberately fired at a crowd of people someone would end up in The Hague. White phosphorus is also a terror weapon. The descending blobs of phosphorus will burn when in contact with skin." The Israeli military last night denied using phosphorus, but refused to say what had been deployed. "Israel uses munitions that are allowed for under international law," said Captain Ishai David, spokesman for the Israel Defence Forces. "We are pressing ahead with the second stage of operations, entering troops in the Gaza Strip to seize areas from which rockets are being launched into Israel." The civilian toll in the first 24 hours of the ground offensive ? launched after a week of bombardment from air, land and sea? was at least 64 dead. Among those killed were five members of a family who died when an Israeli tank shell hit their car and a paramedic who died when a tank blasted his ambulance. Doctors at Gaza City's main hospital said many women and children were among the dead and wounded. The Israeli army also suffered its first fatality of the offensive when one of its soldiers was killed by mortar fire. More than 30 soldiers were wounded by mortars, mines and sniper fire. Israel has brushed aside calls for a ceasefire to allow humanitarian aid into the besieged territory, where medical supplies are running short. With increasingly angry anti-Israeli protests spreading around the world, Gordon Brown described the violence in Gaza as "a dangerous moment". White phosphorus: the smoke-screen chemical that can burn to the bone ? White phosphorus bursts into a deep-yellow flame when it is exposed to oxygen, producing a thick white smoke ? It is used as a smokescreen or for incendiary devices, but can also be deployed as an anti-personnel flame compound capable of causing potentially fatal burns ? Phosphorus burns are almost always second or third-degree because the particles do not stop burning on contact with skin until they have entirely disappeared ? it is not unknown for them to reach the bone ? Geneva conventions ban the use of phosphorus as an offensive weapon against civilians, but its use as a smokescreen is not prohibited by international law ? Israel previously used white phosphorus during its war with Lebanon in 2006 ? It has been used frequently by British and US forces in recent wars, notably during the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Its use was criticised widely ? White phosphorus has the slang name "Willy Pete", which dates from the First World War. It was commonly used in the Vietnam era Source: Times archives From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Mon Jan 5 06:44:18 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 22:44:18 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] Borrowing from Peter to Pay Paul Message-ID: <49620EB2.5050700@ashisuto.co.jp> The Wall Street Ponzi Scheme called Fractional Reserve Banking by Ellen Brown, webofdebt.com Global Research (January 03 2009) Cartoon in the New Yorker: A gun-toting man with large dark glasses, large hat pulled down, stands in front of a bank teller, who is reading a demand note. It says, "Give me all the money in my account". Bernie Madoff showed us how it was done: you induce many investors to invest their money, promising steady above-market returns; and you deliver - at least on paper. When your clients check their accounts, they see that their investments have indeed increased by the promised amount. Anyone who opts to pull out of the game is paid promptly and in full. You can afford to pay because most players stay in, and new players are constantly coming in to replace those who drop out. The players who drop out are simply paid with the money coming in from new recruits. The scheme works until the market turns and many players want their money back at once. Then it's game over: you have to admit that you don't have the funds, and you are probably looking at jail time. A Ponzi scheme is a form of pyramid scheme in which earlier investors are paid with the money of later investors rather than from real profits. The perpetuation of the scheme requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors in order to keep it going. Charles Ponzi was an engaging Boston ex-convict who defrauded investors out of $6 million in the 1920s by promising them a 400 percent return on redeemed postal reply coupons. When he finally could not pay, the scam earned him ten years in jail; and Bernie Madoff is likely to wind up there as well. Most people are not involved in illegal Ponzi schemes, but we do keep our money in accounts that are tallied on computer screens rather than in stacks of coins or paper bills. How do we know that when we demand our money from our bank or broker that the funds will be there? The fact that banks are subject to "runs" (recall Northern Rock, Indymac and Washington Mutual) suggests that all may not be as it seems on our online screens. Banks themselves are involved in a sort of Ponzi scheme, one that has been perpetuated for hundreds of years. What distinguishes the legal scheme known as "fractional reserve" lending from the illegal schemes of Bernie Madoff and his ilk is that the bankers' scheme is protected by government charter and backstopped with government funds. At last count, the Federal Reserve and the US Treasury had committed $8.5 trillion to bailing out the banks from their follies {1}. By comparison, M2, the largest measure of the money supply now reported by the Federal Reserve, was just under $8 trillion in December 2008 {2}. The sheer size of the bailout efforts indicates that the banking scheme has reached its mathematical limits and needs to be superseded by something more sustainable. Penetrating the Bankers' Ponzi Scheme What fractional reserve lending is and how it works is summed up in Wikipedia as follows: "Fractional-reserve banking is the banking practice in which banks keep only a fraction of their deposits in reserve (as cash and other liquid assets) with the choice of lending out the remainder, while maintaining the simultaneous obligation to redeem all deposits immediately upon demand. This practice is universal in modern banking ... The nature of fractional-reserve banking is that there is only a fraction of cash reserves available at the bank needed to repay all of the demand deposits and banknotes issued ... When Fractional-reserve banking works, it works because: "1. Over any typical period of time, redemption demands are largely or wholly offset by new deposits or issues of notes. The bank thus needs only to satisfy the excess amount of redemptions. "2. Only a minority of people will actually choose to withdraw their demand deposits or present their notes for payment at any given time. "3. People usually keep their funds in the bank for a prolonged period of time. "4. There are usually enough cash reserves in the bank to handle net redemptions. "If the net redemption demands are unusually large, the bank will run low on reserves and will be forced to raise new funds from additional borrowings (eg, by borrowing from the money market or using lines of credit held with other banks), and/or sell assets, to avoid running out of reserves and defaulting on its obligations. If creditors are afraid that the bank is running out of cash, they have an incentive to redeem their deposits as soon as possible, triggering a bank run." Like in other Ponzi schemes, bank runs result because the bank does not actually have the funds necessary to meet all its obligations. Peter's money has been lent to Paul, with the interest income going to the bank. As Elgin Groseclose, Director of the Institute for International Monetary Research, wryly observed in 1934: "A warehouseman, taking goods deposited with him and devoting them to his own profit, either by use or by loan to another, is guilty of a tort, a conversion of goods for which he is liable in civil, if not in criminal, law. By a casuistry which is now elevated into an economic principle, but which has no defenders outside the realm of banking, a warehouseman who deals in money is subject to a diviner law: the banker is free to use for his private interest and profit the money left in trust ... He may even go further. He may create fictitious deposits on his books, which shall rank equally and ratably with actual deposits in any division of assets in case of liquidation." {3} How did the perpetrators of this scheme come to acquire government protection for what might otherwise have landed them in jail? A short history of the evolution of modern-day banking may be instructive. The Evolution of a Government-Sanctioned Ponzi Scheme What came to be known as fractional reserve lending dates back to the seventeenth century, when trade was conducted primarily in gold and silver coins. How it evolved was described by the Chicago Federal Reserve in a revealing booklet called "Modern Money Mechanics" like this: "It started with goldsmiths. As early bankers, they initially provided safekeeping services, making a profit from vault storage fees for gold and coins deposited with them. People would redeem their "deposit receipts" whenever they needed gold or coins to purchase something, and physically take the gold or coins to the seller who, in turn, would deposit them for safekeeping, often with the same banker. Everyone soon found that it was a lot easier simply to use the deposit receipts directly as a means of payment. These receipts, which became known as notes, were acceptable as money since whoever held them could go to the banker and exchange them for metallic money. "Then, bankers discovered that they could make loans merely by giving their promises to pay, or bank notes, to borrowers. In this way, banks began to create money. More notes could be issued than the gold and coin on hand because only a portion of the notes outstanding would be presented for payment at any one time. Enough metallic money had to be kept on hand, of course, to redeem whatever volume of notes was presented for payment. "Transaction deposits are the modern counterpart of bank notes. It was a small step from printing notes to making book entries crediting deposits of borrowers, which the borrowers in turn could 'spend' by writing checks, thereby 'printing' their own money." If a landlord had rented the same house to five people at one time and pocketed the money, he would quickly have been jailed for fraud. But the bankers had devised a system in which they traded, not things of value, but paper receipts for them. It was called "fractional reserve" lending because the gold held in reserve was a mere fraction of the banknotes it supported. The scheme worked as long as only a few people came for their gold at one time; but investors would periodically get suspicious and all demand their gold back at once. There would then be a run on the bank and it would have to close its doors. This cycle of booms and busts went on throughout the nineteenth century, culminating in a particularly bad bank panic in 1907. The public became convinced that the country needed a central banking system to stop future panics, overcoming strong congressional opposition to any bill allowing the nation's money to be issued by a private central bank controlled by Wall Street. The Federal Reserve Act creating such a "bankers' bank" was passed in 1913. Robert Owens, a co-author of the Act, later testified before Congress that the banking industry had conspired to create a series of financial panics in order to rouse the people to demand "reforms" that served the interests of the financiers {4}. Despite this powerful official backstop, however, the greatest bank run in history occurred only twenty years later, in 1933. President Roosevelt then took the dollar off the gold standard domestically, and Federal Reserve officials resolved to prevent further bank runs after that by flooding the banking system with "liquidity" (money created as debt to banks) whenever the banking Ponzi scheme came up short. "Too Big to Fail": The Government Provides the Ultimate Backstop When these steps too proved insufficient to keep the banking scheme going, the government itself stepped up to the plate, providing bailout money directly from the taxpayers. The concept that some banks were "too big to fail" came in at the end of the 1980s, when the Savings and Loans collapsed and Citibank lost fifty percent of its share price. Negotiations were conducted behind closed doors, and "too big to fail" became standard policy. Bank risk was effectively nationalized: banks were now protected by the government from loss regardless of risk-taking or bad management. There are limits, however, to the amount of support even the government's deep pocket can provide. In the past two decades, the bankers' lending scheme has been kept going by an even more speculative scheme known as "derivatives". This is a complex subject that has been explored in other articles, but the bottom line is that more dollars are now owed in the derivatives casino than exist on the planet. (See Ellen Brown, "It's the Derivatives, Stupid!" and "Credit Default Swaps: Derivative Disaster Du Jour", www.webofdebt.com/articles.) Attempting to fill the derivatives black hole with taxpayer money must inevitably be at the expense of other essential programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. Interestingly, Social Security and Medicare themselves are in some sense Ponzi schemes, since earlier retirees collect their benefits from the contributions of later workers. These programs, too, may soon be facing bankruptcy, in this case because their mathematical models failed to account for a huge wave of Baby Boomers who would linger longer than previous generations and demand expensive drugs and care through their senior years, and because the fund money has have been drawn on by the government for other purposes. The question here is, should the government be backstopping private banks that have mismanaged their investment portfolios at the expense of workers contractually entitled to a decent retirement from a fund they have paid into all their working lives? The answer, of course, is no; but there may be a way that the government could do both. If it were to nationalize the banking system completely - if the government were to assume not just the banks' losses but their profits, oversight and control - it might have the funds both to maintain Social Security and Medicare and to provide a sustainable credit mechanism for the whole economy. Replacing Private with Public Credit Readily available credit has made America "the land of opportunity" ever since the days of the American colonists. What has transformed this credit system into a Ponzi scheme that must continually be propped up with bailout money is that the credit power has been turned over to private parties who always require more money back than they create in the first place. Benjamin Franklin reportedly explained this defect in the eighteenth century. When the directors of the Bank of England asked what was responsible for the booming economy of the young colonies, Franklin explained that the colonial governments issued their own money, which they both lent and spent into the economy: "In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called 'Colonial Scrip'. We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one. You see, a legitimate government can both spend and lend money into circulation, while banks can only lend significant amounts of their promissory bank notes, for they can neither give away nor spend but a tiny fraction of the money the people need. Thus, when your bankers here in England place money in circulation, there is always a debt principal to be returned and usury to be paid. The result is that you have always too little credit in circulation to give the workers full employment. You do not have too many workers, you have too little money in circulation, and that which circulates, all bears the endless burden of unpayable debt and usury." In an article titled "A Monetary System for the New Millennium", Canadian money reform advocate Roger Langrick explains his concept in contemporary terms. He begins by illustrating the mathematical impossibility inherent in a system of bank-created money lent at interest: "[I]magine the first bank which prints and lends out $100. For its efforts it asks for the borrower to return $110 in one year; that is it asks for ten percent interest. Unwittingly, or maybe wittingly, the bank has created a mathematically impossible situation. The only way in which the borrower can return 110 of the bank's notes is if the bank prints, and lends, $10 more at ten percent interest ... The result of creating 100 and demanding 110 in return, is that the collective borrowers of a nation are forever chasing a phantom which can never be caught; the mythical $10 that were never created. The debt in fact is unrepayable. Each time $100 is created for the nation, the nation's overall indebtedness to the system is increased by $110. The only solution at present is increased borrowing to cover the principal plus the interest of what has been borrowed." The better solution, says Langrick, is to allow the government to issue enough new debt-free dollars to cover the interest charges not created by the banks as loans: "Instead of taxes, government would be empowered to create money for its own expenses up to the balance of the debt shortfall. Thus, if the banking industry created $100 in a year, the government would create $10 which it would use for its own expenses. Abraham Lincoln used this successfully when he created $500 million of 'greenbacks' to fight the Civil War." National Credit from a Truly National Banking System In Langrick's example, a private banking industry pockets the interest, which must be replaced every year by a ten percent issue of new Greenbacks; but there is another possibility. The loans could be advanced by the government itself. The interest would then return to the government and could be spent back into the economy in a circular flow, without the need to continually issue more money to cover the interest shortfall. The fractional reserve Ponzi scheme is bankrupt, and the banks engaged in it, rather than being bailed out by its victims, need to be put into a bankruptcy reorganization under the FDIC. The FDIC then has the recognized option of wiping their books clean and taking the banks' stock in return for getting them up and running again. This would make them truly "national" banks, which could dispense "the full faith and credit of the United States" as a public utility. A truly national banking system could revive the economy with the sort of money only governments can issue - debt-free legal tender. The money would be debt-free to the government, while for the private sector, it would be freely available for borrowing at a modest interest by qualified applicants. A government-owned bank would not need to rob from Peter to advance credit to Paul. "Credit" is just an accounting tool - an advance against future profits, or the "monetization" (turning into cash) of the borrower's promise to repay. As British commentator Ron Morrison observed in a provocative 2004 article titled "Keynes Without Debt": "[Today] bank credit supplies virtually all our everyday means of exchange, and this brings into sharp focus the simple fact that modern money is no longer constrained by outmoded intrinsic values. It is pure fiat [enforced by law] and simply a glorified accounting system ... Modern monetary reform is about displacing the current economic paradigm of 'what can be afforded' with 'what we have the capacity to undertake'." {5} The objection to government-issued money has always been that it would be inflationary, but today some "reflating" of the economy could be a good thing. Just in the last year, more than $7 trillion in purchasing power has disappeared from the money supply, including wealth destruction in real estate, stocks, mutual fund shares, life insurance and pension fund reserves {6}. Money is evaporating because old loans are defaulting and new loans are not being made to replace them. Fortunately, as Martin Wolf noted in the December 16 Financial Times, "Curing deflation is child's play in a 'fiat money' - a man-made money - system". The central banks just need to get money flowing into the economy again. Among other ways they could do this, says Wolf, is that "they might finance the government on any scale they think necessary." {7} Rather than throwing money at a failed private banking system, public credit could be redirected into infrastructure and other projects that would get the wheels of production turning again. The Ponzi scheme in which debt is just shuffled around, borrowing from one player to pay another without actually producing anything of real value, could be replaced by a system in which the national credit card became an engine for true productivity and growth. Increased "demand" (money) would come from earned wages and salaries that would increase "supply" (goods and services) rather than merely servicing a perpetually increasing debt. When supply keeps up with demand, the money supply can be increased without inflating prices. In this way the paradigm of "what we can afford" could indeed be superseded by "what we have the capacity to undertake". _____ Ellen Brown developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and "the money trust". She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her earlier books focused on the pharmaceutical cartel that gets its power from "the money trust". Her eleven books include Forbidden Medicine, Nature's Pharmacy (co-authored with Dr Lynne Walker), and The Key to Ultimate Health (co-authored with Dr Richard Hansen). Her websites are www.webofdebt.com and www.ellenbrown.com. Notes 1. Kathleen Pender, "Government Bailout Hits $8.5 Trillion", San Francisco Chronicle (November 26 2008). 2. "Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.6, Money Stock Measures", www.federalreserve.gov (December 18 2008). 3. Robert de Fremery, "Arguments Are Fallacious for World Central Bank", The Commercial and Financial Chronicle (September 26 1963), citing E Groseclose, Money: The Human Conflict, pages 178-79. 4. Robert Owen, The Federal Reserve Act (1919); "Who Was Philander Knox?", www.worldnewsstand.net/history/PhilanderKnox.htm. (1999). 5. Ron Morrison, "Keynes Without Debt", www.prosperityuk.com/prosperity/articles/keynes.html (April 2004). 6. Martin Weiss, "Biggest Sea Change of Our Lifetime", Money and Markets (December 22 2008). 7. Martin Wolf, "'Helicopter Ben' Confronts the Challenge of a Lifetime", Financial Times (December 16 2008). Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article. The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor at yahoo.com www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner. For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com (c) Copyright Ellen Brown, webofdebt.com, 2009 (c) Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11600 TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From fentona at shaw.ca Mon Jan 5 10:09:59 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 09:09:59 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Voices from Gaza Message-ID: <72FDD439-EC00-4F67-BC36-71EA9E55AFB1@shaw.ca> FOCUS: VOICES FROM GAZA Gazans: 'We face a dark destiny' http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/war_on_gaza/2009/01/200915122556916110.html As Israeli forces push deeper into the Gaza Strip and the death toll continues to rise, Al Jazeera hears from some of the Gazans we first spoke to during the aerial bombardment. They describe the humanitarian situation on the ground in Gaza and explain how the Israeli ground offensive is affecting them. - Majed Badra, 23, Gaza City, cartoonist and student at the Islamic University "Last night was difficult - all of Gaza was under darkness. There is no TV because there is no electricity, so all the time we sit and wait and hear news on the radio about what the Israeli forces are doing and what our resistance can do and how many of our people they have killed. I am used to air-raids and hearing the tanks come into Gaza and we are used to hearing reports on the radio in the dark. But we have to focus on the children - my brother's sons are scared all the time and the children are very frightened of the dark and of the military. Yesterday the bread in our house ran out and me and my brother went to the bakery and waited three hours just to buy bread. There is not a lot of food in Gaza. We have water, but we need electricity to power the pump so the water may run out in a few days. This has already happened for some of our neighbours. Of course I worry about this situation and that maybe there will be no food left and we will have to go searching for it. But I don't know what will happen. I don't have any thoughts. I am living in the moment and waiting to see what will happen." - Hamoudi, Tal el Hawa "Our situation is bleak. I wasn't able to get in touch with my family for four days. I'm stuck in the middle of Gaza City and they were at home. Today I met them - fortunately they are still alive. But there is no food, no water, the power has been cut for eight days. Our lives - the decent life that every human being should have - is being taken from us. We are civilians - we haven't done anything to Israel. "It is guerrilla warfare inside the city .... All of the citizens of the so-called free world are watching ... while we're being slaughtered" - Hamoudi, Gaza I do not support Hamas. I hate politics. I've hated it all my life. But Hamas has no other option but to resist. Dying for the Palestinian cause is something noble. They're fighting back fiercely because it is the only option they have. They're an Islamic movement and feel they have nothing to lose, because they'll go to heaven. They fight with everything they've got. It's guerrilla warfare inside the city where the buildings are very close to each other. That's why the battlefield is different to that of Lebanon in 2006. All of the citizens of the so-called free world are watching us on their high definition monitors, while we're being slaughtered. People know what is going on, the international community knows. When are they going to take action? We're in the 21st century - is this what civilisation is all about? As a Palestinian, I don't rely on the international community; they abandoned us. Isn't this what the Security Council and Geneva Conventions are about - fighting to prevent war? When the fuel runs out it's going to be pitch black - we'll lose all communications and no one will know what's going on. We're facing a dark destiny. The situation is going to become really bad - way beyond catastrophic." - Amin Asfour, Gaza City, doctor in a public hospital "Yesterday and today the situation has gotten worse. We have more injured coming in. The ground offensive has begun and they're shooting at anyone they can. I don't know what's going on on the front lines, but here at the hospital we're seeing more and more people who have been shot. The international community is just standing by and watching - people have gone deaf and forgotten how to speak. All we hear are bombs and rockets, no words. There have been demonstrations - the people stand behind us. But the governments can't hear them. International governments can stop this but they're not doing anything. I see convoys of medicine and supplies coming our way on the TV, but I haven't seen any of it with my own eyes yet. We're still working with what we have, but it's all running out." - Ghada Snunu, 30, Gaza City, human rights worker "We're surviving, but last night it was more than a nightmare - the attacks didn't stop at all. There were just a few seconds between attacks from tanks, warplanes and from the sea. We couldn't sleep at all. Many Gazans are concerned about their children's psychological state [GALLO/GETTY] We haven't seen any news because we have no electricity. I have a radio on my mobile phone but the battery died last night. Also, we have no water, no gas, nothing. We have some food but in a few days it will run out. We were more than terrified last night - the artillery from the attacks increased and it is so loud. And the kids - I have no words to describe how they felt. They were screaming and crying and we can't help them because each time they hear more attacks their fear increases. It's getting worse and worse. I am worried because I don't see an end. I am very depressed and everyone in my family is the same: depressed, afraid and sick because the Israelis are becoming more and more crazy. I hope the resistance in Gaza will help us - yesterday I was praying for the resistance movement, for God to give them support and strength. I believe the resistance is strong and brave - facing the Israeli army is not an easy thing. They are sacrificing everything for the sake of their home country and their land. Why doesn't the international community demand that Israel halt its attacks immediately? They are only on the side of Israel, not with us. They want more Palestinian victims in Gaza - people who did nothing and do not deserve to be killed in such an ugly way." - Hatem Shurrab, aid worker in Gaza "The situation is getting worse and worse, day by day. Medical staff are suffering because of the offensive, equipment is more scarce. Two days ago we provided two hospitals with food that should last for a month. Our work is difficult because we are working under constant fire. We keep hearing the sounds of explosions. Planes are flying over us, they are not leaving the sky. Last night was really terrifying. I stayed in the basement with my family. We were in total darkness. It was very cold. Over us there was the sound of huge explosions and planes. Every minute there was a missile. My nephew couldn't stop crying. I hope it stops. Gazans are peaceful people. We don't deserve this. I want all of this to stop so that I can work to help the people." - Adnan Abu Hasna, UNRWA director in Gaza "The situation is very frightening. There is lots of panic and fear, bombing everywhere. There is a great psychological pressure on everyone as we realise the future consequences. The bombing is hurting lots of civilians because it is a densely populated area. This is the reality on the ground. You cannot avoid that even if you want to. The humanitarian situation is deteriorating. There is no electricity in Gaza now - last week we used to get it for two hours a day, now we get nothing. Before we had running water for three hours out of every 48. Now there is no water because it depends on electricity. Also, the sewage system does not work because there is no electricity or spare parts. There is a lack of qualified doctors for the very complicated surgeries and a lack of medicines. There is no wheat or sugar in stores - many essential items are missing. Now they're cutting all electrical lines and destroying the infrastructure. Today the telecom company issued a statement saying that the telecommunications will be cut off because the infrastructure has been changed - we will not have telephones or mobile phones." - Baha' Enaya, Gaza, engineer "The situation is a humanitarian disaster and it keeps worsening. Yesterday the last generator of electricity in Gaza stopped; now this has many implications. For example, I live in a twelve storey building and the electricity cut means that even water pumps will not be able to pump water up to the last floors. In my house I have not had electricity or fuel for a few days. Because of the F-16 strikes I have to leave all the windows in my house open to reduce the pressure on the walls and windows, with no heating we are seriously freezing. There are people living in houses built from tin and asbestos. I am sure that if a specialised committee is to examine all the buildings in the Strip, they will find out that many of them are not suitable for inhabiting anymore or are about to fall apart. "I was one of those people who believed in political solutions and that peace is possible, but what we have seen negates all that" - Baha', Gaza Last night was very harsh - we had air strikes accompanied by bombing from watercrafts and tanks. We have the impression that all the Israeli army is taking part. The bombing clearly aims to terrify people. Why would they use military boats if there are no targets in the sea or on the shore? I also saw something new, that I haven't seen before, a bomb that starts waves of dust mixed with some substance that smells like lead. Bakeries are probably the only places were you can see people gathered. People are not leaving their houses unless they needed bread or medical care, and the streets are full of rubble, in every corner you can see a destroyed building. Most of what we eat now is from cans; and in any case I don't think people have any appetite to eat. This operation is re-emphasising that every Palestinian is a suspect; the war being fought against us proves that there are no moral standards whatsoever, this mentality that is practicing all those brutalities against civilians will only lead to more extremism. I was one of the people who believed in political solutions and that peace is possible, yet what we see negates all that. It is evident now more than at any time that Israel has no interest in peace. Gaza is a big prison and Israel wants to turn us into a model of its hegemony maybe to show the world its deterrent force. What is taking place is not a war; because there is no proportionality between Palestinian resistance and Israeli acts, it's an aggression. I feel like we are living in a type of madness that enhances the radicalism on both sides. I wonder whether we are the Native Americans of the 21st century." Additional reporting by Oscar Ibrahim, Rachel Shabi and Mira Nabulsi From intnsred at golgotha.net Mon Jan 5 10:41:06 2009 From: intnsred at golgotha.net (Intense Red) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 12:41:06 -0500 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] Borrowing from Peter to Pay Paul In-Reply-To: <49620EB2.5050700@ashisuto.co.jp> References: <49620EB2.5050700@ashisuto.co.jp> Message-ID: <200901051241.06793.intnsred@golgotha.net> An excellent article, full of info and interesting ideas. Sadly, I don't see such a system emerging. The ruling class will try to fix the existing system and barring a larger collapse, there exists no large social movements to pressure the gov't to reorganize the system. I would disagree with one point in the article: > Interestingly, Social Security and Medicare themselves are in some sense > Ponzi schemes, since earlier retirees collect their benefits from the > contributions of later workers. These programs, too, may soon be facing > bankruptcy, in this case because their mathematical models failed to > account for a huge wave of Baby Boomers [...] While those programs have been expanded somewhat, the increase in lifespans and retirement of the baby boomers have long been calculated and modeled. This was the key reason for Carter's series of large increases in FICA taxes. He wanted to start saving for their retirement. The key problem was that the SS trust fund money was spent by Reagan, Bush Sr., and succeeding presidents. -- George Bush said the US was "addicted" to oil. Remember, addicts have been known to commit murder to feed their addiction. From aaron.doncaster at gmail.com Mon Jan 5 15:17:10 2009 From: aaron.doncaster at gmail.com (aaron doncaster) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:17:10 -0800 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] Borrowing from Peter to Pay Paul In-Reply-To: <200901051241.06793.intnsred@golgotha.net> References: <49620EB2.5050700@ashisuto.co.jp> <200901051241.06793.intnsred@golgotha.net> Message-ID: <164236a30901051417m7842ae16y91f8c214c0dc11be@mail.gmail.com> Hey, I am a little confused. I am trying to figure out the difference between hedging and derivatives,or are they one in the same?? any good reading material to understand the different tools that these scam artists(bankers and investors)use to make their money?? Aaron On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Intense Red wrote: > An excellent article, full of info and interesting ideas. Sadly, I don't > see such a system emerging. The ruling class will try to fix the existing > system and barring a larger collapse, there exists no large social > movements > to pressure the gov't to reorganize the system. > > I would disagree with one point in the article: > > > Interestingly, Social Security and Medicare themselves are in some sense > > Ponzi schemes, since earlier retirees collect their benefits from the > > contributions of later workers. These programs, too, may soon be facing > > bankruptcy, in this case because their mathematical models failed to > > account for a huge wave of Baby Boomers [...] > > While those programs have been expanded somewhat, the increase in > lifespans > and retirement of the baby boomers have long been calculated and modeled. > This was the key reason for Carter's series of large increases in FICA > taxes. > He wanted to start saving for their retirement. The key problem was that > the > SS trust fund money was spent by Reagan, Bush Sr., and succeeding > presidents. > > -- > George Bush said the US was "addicted" to oil. Remember, addicts have been > known to commit murder to feed their addiction. > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From fentona at shaw.ca Mon Jan 5 16:35:56 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:35:56 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Operation Disrupt Democracy in El Salvador Message-ID: <2006A6A9-CF19-48FA-B9D5-2EA965561CBF@shaw.ca> Operation Disrupt Democracy in El Salvador January 2009 By Erica Thompson http://www.zmag.org/zmag/viewArticle/20127 International observers have denounced recent activities of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as designed to overthrow democratically elected presidents Evo Morales of Bolivia and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. A similar strategy is underway to undermine the electoral process in El Salvador by striking fear and confusion into voters before legislative and presidential elections in 2009. Since November 2007, El Salvador's leftist party, the FMLN (Farabundo Mart? National Liberation Front), has been consistently polling at a 12-14 point advantage for upcoming legislative, municipal, and presidential elections?ahead of the right-wing ARENA (National Republican Alliance) party's presidential candidate and former national civilian police director, Rodrigo Avila, who has peaked at around 38 percent by conservative estimates. Because an FMLN victory could deal a profound loss to Washington and Wall Street by countering attempts to increase the corporate privatization of land and public services, business media and government officials have stepped up attempts to defeat them in the press and behind the scenes. In a recent address to the American Enterprise Institute, Salvadoran Foreign Minister Marisol Argueta implored the U.S. government to intervene in the elections on ARENA's behalf. In addition, international press reports have propagated ridiculous claims of a mounting "terrorist conspiracy" between the FMLN, the FARC in Colombia, and Hugo Chavez. Wall Street Journal editor Mary Anastas?a O'Grady has complained that if the FMLN wins, foreign investors will suffer. Indeed, several countries that participated in the 18th IBERO- American Summit in October agreed that corporate privatization has failed the majority of people in Latin America. Presidents in Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Paraguay, and Guatemala are proposing increased regulation and oversight of corporate expansion. An FMLN victory in El Salvador promises further movement in this direction. FMLN candidate Mauricio Funes has said that an FMLN administration would work to oppose biofuel production and the current profit structure for mining projects in favor of spurring agricultural development. "We have to improve agricultural production. Over the past 19 years of ARENA government, the infrastructure for food production has been neglected and dismantled. It is essential and a priority to allot land use for food production and the harvesting of vegetables and staple grains. This is what the people need. We cannot allow ourselves the luxury of allotting areas of land for biofuel production because we are not going to work to feed machines; we have to work to feed human beings." In its attempt to confuse and ultimately sabotage the FMLN's campaign, right-wing Venezuelan-based pro-U.S. media organization Fuerza Solidaria has released a set of television ads and door-to-door leaflets that assail potential voters with the usual dose of misinformation and scare tactics that accompany every electoral campaign in El Salvador. Designed to suppress votes for the FMLN, one of the ads portrays Funes and the FMLN party as an out-of-touch, antiquated relic rather than a political manifestation of the Salvadoran peoples' historic, and ongoing, broad-based resistance to foreign exploitation. Simplistic "flow chart" arrows on the ad imply that an FMLN-led government would sacrifice remittance money from the U.S. to be a puppet for Chavez's "anti-American expansion project." The intended message is clear and has been the preferred threat of the immigrant-bashing Bush administration to Salvadorans on both sides of the border: those who support the FMLN are against the U.S. If the FMLN wins the election, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will begin massively deporting Salvadorans and the U.S. will cut off remittances. USAID, NED, and Fuerza Solidaria?with the help of corporate-owned media and the U.S. government?have been a major motor behind anti- democratic political strategies in Venezuela and Bolivia since 2001. In April 2002, the United States utilized the NED to channel funds to private organizations that were running covert propaganda campaigns in support of a failed coup in Venezuela, which detained President Chavez and recognized the short-lived, pro-U.S. government. According to the New York Times, the NED "funneled more than $877,000 into Venezuelan opposition groups in the weeks and months before the unsuccessful coup attempt." In the wake of the failed coup, the NED channeled another $53,400 to help create a U.S. backed organization called Sumate, a group designed to unite, strengthen, and mobilize opposition to the popularly elected Chavez government, and which supported Sumate's efforts to disseminate disinformation. In 2004 the group published fake exit polls that claimed Chavez lost the referendum recall vote. While their strategies have mostly failed, the actions of Sumate and NED have effectively cast doubt on the legitimacy and democratic goals of the Chavez government, weakening its image internationally. In Bolivia, investigative journalists Jeremy Bigwood and Benjamin Dangl's inquiries through the Freedom of Information Act and one-on- one interviews showed that the former U.S. embassy there?through USAID and NED?had maintained close relationships with right-wing opposition groups to "promote democracy" by undermining President Morales as well. Through these connections and a USAID Political Party Reform Project, the U.S. has supported forces that could "serve as a counterweight" to Morales's MAS (Movement Toward Socialism) party. In response, Morales recently kicked the U.S. ambassador out of Bolivia. USAID and Fuerza Solidaria were also exposed for their attempts to influence Bolivia's referendum in August 2008. In November 2007, another NED recipient, the International Republican Institute (IRI), presented Salvadoran President Tony Saca of the ARENA party with the "Freedom Award" for promoting U.S. values in El Salvador such as "linking economic growth with democratic governance and vigorously defending freedom at home and abroad." Never mind the re-emergence of death squads, unsuccessful attempts to convict protestors and vendors as "terrorists," and an unprecedented post-war increase in Salvadoran migration to, and deportations from, the U.S. during his term. This exercise in elite back-patting not only unveils the biases of the IRI, which is chaired by Republican Senator John McCain, but also underscores the U.S. government's explicit endorsement of the right-wing ARENA party, another act of intervention and electoral manipulation. In January 2008 U.S.-based CISPES (Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador) received a familiar warning from the Department of Justice accusing the group of "acting as a foreign agent" of the FMLN party, presumably as backlash for its political connections with the leftist social movement in El Salvador. An identical letter 14 years ago signaled the beginning of a massive three-year FBI infiltration project aimed at destroying the organization. When asked to name CISPES's "conspiratorial allies" past and present, Executive Director Burke Stansbury responded: "People and popular movements organized to challenge U.S. sponsored political, economic, and electoral violence are the ones that get our attention and our commitments. Our government has designed and rewarded the brutal repression of countless uprisings in El Salvador, and is still very active in this way." Is the FMLN a CISPES ally? "Absolutely. We have always maintained political solidarity with the FMLN and will continue to do so. What is more, we are committed in every way to challenging U.S. attempts to deny El Salvador its basic rights as a sovereign country. Elections are only the tip of the iceberg." In June the U.S. ambassador to El Salvador, Charles Glazer, told a CISPES delegation that the U.S. government's days of interfering in El Salvador's elections are over. He said that although they did intervene in the 2004 presidential election, they would not do so again in 2009. His aide then explained that the delegation "wouldn't have to worry about fraud this time because the NDI and IRI will be training [Salvadorans] how to conduct a quick count." One has to wonder what the embassy's definition of intervention is. To make the U.S. government and ARENA party alliance even more transparent, Ambassador Glazer appeared publicly in early November with the outgoing Salvadoran president at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, DC. President Saca was on the campaign trail again?with Salvadoran taxpayer money?to raise the profile of ARENA with the ironically titled "Peace and Prosperity" conference. Glazer was at his side, ready to field questions and concerns. There is no doubt that major changes underfoot in the Latin American region have put Washington on edge. Country after country is electing governments who represent the majority of people instead of the financial interests of a few. El Salvador's left appears destined for both an historic victory at the polls and a new phase of struggle against U.S. dominance, as USAID and NED have become the faltering empire's new "diplomatic weapons" of choice. Z Erica Thompson works with CISPES in San Salvador. From nmgoro at gmail.com Mon Jan 5 17:47:25 2009 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:47:25 -0300 Subject: [R-G] [Spanish] The historic dilemma of the Cuban Revolution Message-ID: <4962AA1D.6090806@gmail.com> {Sorry if I can?t translate. Those who can read Spanish will, certainly, enjoy this short essay on the 50 years of the Cuban Revolution. IMHO, this is a masterpiece of political thinking.] El dilema hist?rico de la Revoluci?n Cubana Por Enrique Lacolla /Desgarrada entre la magnitud de su ambici?n liberadora y la exig?idad de su base geogr?fica, la revoluci?n cubana subsiste como precedente de una ola popular latinoamericana que se apronta a tomar su relevo y que deber?a elevarse a instancias superiores de realismo pol?tico y potencia econ?mica./ El primero de Enero la revoluci?n cubana cumpli? medio siglo de existencia. No es poca cosa, en especial si se toma en cuenta que se ha encontrado bajo asedio desde su nacimiento, y nada menos que por la hiperpotencia del Norte. Es de destacar tambi?n que pocas son las revoluciones ?si es que hay alguna- que hayan conseguido mantener una t?nica radical a la vez que realista durante tanto tiempo. Desde luego que ha habido un anquilosamiento parcial, una burocratizaci?n creciente y que la fortuna del movimiento 26 de Julio sigue estrechamente asociada a la vida de sus fundadores supervivientes; pero existe la posibilidad que el ejemplo de su integridad y el prolongado trabajo de educaci?n que la revoluci?n realiz? sobre el cuerpo de la sociedad cubana, preserve lo esencial de ese esp?ritu cuando el tiempo se tome revancha y las figuras de Fidel y Ra?l Castro desaparezcan. La revoluci?n cubana es un hito en la historia de Am?rica latina. Como se lo ha se?alado en otras ocasiones, naci? de un equ?voco: la presunci?n norteamericana de que los j?venes universitarios que se hab?an subido a la Sierra Maestra eran buenos dem?cratas en la acepci?n formal del t?rmino, y que resultaban por lo tanto asimilables a los reto?os de la peque?a burgues?a siempre dispuesta a oponerse a los reg?menes corruptos, pero presta a asimilarse a las prebendas que da el poder una vez que se lo alcanza. El autoenga?o fue mutuo. Los revolucionarios del Granma cre?an en los valores del democratismo radical y en su posibilidad de cambiar el mundo a partir de ellos. Si no hubiera sido as?, Estados Unidos se hubiera ocupado de apretarles el gaznate, en vez de dejarlos hacer y permitir incluso que desde Florida y Centroam?rica se los abasteciera con armas que servir?an, en opini?n de Washington, para derrocar a un dictador al que su corrupci?n hab?a convertido en un socio inc?modo. El reemplazo de Batista por un grupo de j?venes radicales pod?a ser, en el sentir del Departamento de Estado y tambi?n de la CIA, una peripecia manejable, como lo fuera en otras ocasiones. Pero, al rev?s de lo que suele ocurrir cuando ?los j?venes se suben a un caballo desde la izquierda y se bajan por la derecha?, aqu? sucedi? lo contrario. La experiencia de la guerra civil y la pr?ctica de la reforma agraria sobre el terreno aviv? la convicci?n de esos j?venes, ya muy arraigada entre ellos, de la necesidad de acudir a un cambio dr?stico para solventar los problemas de la sociedad cubana. Esta convicci?n justiciera se ali? a un nacionalismo exasperado por las continuas vejaciones sufridas en el curso de la historia ?independiente? cubana de parte de Estados Unidos y a la evidencia de que s?lo a trav?s de las expropiaciones de las empresas norteamericanas y de una reforma agraria a fondo se pod?an cumplir los objetivos que se hab?an fijado los dos Castro, el Che Guevara y otros. El choque sobrevino de inmediato. El desencadenamiento de la propaganda adversa a la revoluci?n en todos los medios de Estados Unidos y la fuga ?condicionada por la casi certidumbre de que ese grupo de locos no tardar?a en ser eliminado por el socio norteamericano- de la burgues?a terrateniente y empresarial cubana, fueron el anticipo de una seguidilla de intentos de desestabilizaci?n del r?gimen, entre los cuales la voladura de un barco cargado de armamento para la revoluci?n, y el desembarco en Playa Gir?n fueron los momentos culminantes. A partir de all? se abri? un per?odo de incertidumbres y asedios que condicion? todo el trayecto de la revoluci?n y desnud? su dilema, que es lo que nos proponemos examinar aqu?. La ambici?n de los revolucionarios cubanos era grande. Aunque fundada en el deseo de transformar su propia sociedad, la similitud entre las condiciones de ?sta y las de muchas otras de Am?rica latina, implicaba que su ejemplo pod?a ser contagioso. La conciencia de este hecho en los dirigentes cubanos y muy en especial en la del m?dico argentino Ernesto Guevara, que se hab?a transformado en el segundo jefe militar y en la figura m?s inspiradora de la revoluci?n despu?s de Fidel Castro, abr?an un espectro de posibilidades que galvanizaba a muchos j?venes en Am?rica latina y que, paralelamente, determinaba a Washington a liquidar esa amenaza. La expulsi?n de Cuba de la OEA y el total aislamiento en que los gobiernos latinoamericanos la dejaron en ocasi?n del desembarco en bah?a de Cochinos impon?an a los dirigentes cubanos la b?squeda de una salida. La orientaci?n ideol?gica de los dirigentes revolucionarios y la naturaleza del momento internacional (se viv?a en plena guerra fr?a) hicieron que Cuba se decantara hacia el bloque comunista, lo que traer?a aparejadas consecuencias que marcar?an el decurso de la revoluci?n por d?cadas. Esta evoluci?n, sin embargo, se produjo por etapas y estuvo determinada en principio por la inveterada hostilidad de Washington al nuevo r?gimen. Cuando Cuba procedi? a la expropiaci?n de las empresas norteamericanas y a la implantaci?n de la reforma agraria sin que, a entender de Estados Unidos, se suministrara una adecuada compensaci?n, la decisi?n norteamericana en el sentido de eliminar la cuota azucarera desequilibr? la econom?a de la isla. La Uni?n Sovi?tica acudi? en ayuda del r?gimen revolucionario ofreci?ndose a comprar, a precios ventajosos, la misma cantidad de az?car, retribuy?ndola con petr?leo, elemento del que la isla estaba muy necesitada pues hab?an cesado los aportes de combustible que antes proven?an de Estados Unidos y de Venezuela. La determinaci?n norteamericana en estrangular la revoluci?n, atestiguada por las incursiones desde el mar, el sabotaje de las cosechas, el activismo de grupos guerrilleros infiltrados desde Florida y los intentos de asesinato de Fidel, no dejaba otra opci?n que bascular hacia el bloque del Este. Y, puesto que se lo hac?a, ?por qu? no dar ese paso provey?ndose de un escudo misil?stico que disuadiera a Estados Unidos de cualquier intento de agresi?n? En toda operaci?n de este tipo, que requiere de la asistencia de un socio, el inter?s de ?ste debe ser tomado en cuenta. Sobre todo si el socio posee un peso determinante sobre los asuntos mundiales como el que la URSS ten?a a principios de la d?cada del ?60. La crisis de los cohetes de 1962 se produjo no tanto por el deseo cubano de protegerse de su enemigo del Norte, como por el c?lculo de los estrategas sovi?ticos en el sentido de que, con la instalaci?n de los misiles nucleares en Cuba pod?an lograr la remoci?n de las bases norteamericanas, de similares caracter?sticas, que estaban alojadas en Turqu?a. En esta negociaci?n, jugada en el filo del abismo, la voluntad cubana cont? poco. En definitiva, la partida se cerr? con un trueque, en parte p?blico y en parte secreto. El p?blico fue que la URSS retir? sus bases en Cuba a cambio de la renuncia norteamericana a invadir la isla; y el secreto fue el quid pro quo que determin? que, a la vuelta de seis meses m?s o menos, los norteamericanos desmantelaran sus bases en Turqu?a. *Realpolitik y revoluci?n Los dirigentes cubanos no estaban muy felices de tener que acomodarse a las exigencias de la realpolitik. La dirigencia cubana estaba dividida respecto de la t?nica que hab?a tomado la relaci?n con la Uni?n Sovi?tica. Quiz? no en el terreno pr?ctico, pues todos entend?an que no exist?a otra opci?n que consintiera la supervivencia del fen?meno revolucionario que su adhesi?n al bloque socialista, pero hab?a quienes se adecuaban m?s o menos inc?modamente a la situaci?n y otros que deseaban experimentar otras salidas. A estar por los testimonios que se han filtrado, el car?cter fosilizado, burocr?tico y mezquino del r?gimen sovi?tico era rechazado en especial por el Che, quien propugnaba la b?squeda de opciones que garantizasen la pervivencia de la premisa en la cual se hab?a inspirado la revoluci?n: esto es, que el movimiento irradiara hacia el conjunto del continente irredento de Am?rica latina, para generar en ?l un cambio profundo, similar al operado en Cuba. ?Que los Andes sean la Sierra Maestra de Am?rica latina? era el precepto ?enunciado por Fidel Castro en primer t?rmino- de esta corriente. Durante la d?cada de los sesenta y parte de los a?os setenta se intent? poner en pr?ctica este principio. La conciencia de la historia es indispensable a la acci?n pol?tica, cuando esta se encuentra inspirada en algo m?s que en el oportunismo y el af?n cremat?stico. Representarse con claridad lo ocurri? en esos a?os es, por lo tanto, un elemento esencial para evaluar las posibilidades de liberaci?n y los niveles en los que debe acomodarse un accionar transformador en Am?rica latina. Manteniendo en todo caso que, aunque Iberoam?rica es un mismo cuerpo, tiene realidades que ofrecen opciones no necesariamente id?nticas en todo momento. ?La revoluci?n no puede imponerse a punta de bayoneta? dec?a Robespierre, y sab?a bien de lo que hablaba. Desde un principio la revoluci?n cubana afront? un problema esencial: la contradicci?n que se establec?a entre la ambici?n ?o, si se quiere, la esperanza- de quienes la animaban, y la exig?idad del territorio donde se asentaba. Un territorio amenazado, aislado, sujeto al hostigamiento implacable del coloso del Norte. Una isla como Cuba, con escasos recursos, agr?colas en su mayor parte, y con una poblaci?n peque?a, ten?a poca esperanza de expandir su movimiento al resto del continente, enajenado como estaba por el fantasma de la guerra fr?a y por preponderancia de los sectores econ?micos enfeudados al imperialismo. Este dilema no pod?a ser solucionado a trav?s de la alianza con la Uni?n Sovi?tica, que propend?a justamente a mantener todos los movimientos antiimperialistas dentro de una ?rbita que no interfiriese los intereses de la pol?tica exterior rusa. Esa alianza, sin embargo, era indispensable si se quer?a que el r?gimen se encontrara relativamente al reparo de la amenaza norteamericana y contara con los recursos energ?ticos e industriales necesarios para desarrollar en su propio suelo una experiencia de rescate y superaci?n sociales como la que efectivamente ha tenido lugar a lo largo de estas cinco d?cadas, tanto en el campo de la salud como en el de la educaci?n. La necesidad de encontrar las formas de superar este dilema condicion? la experiencia cubana. Tanto Fidel Castro como el Che Guevara nutr?an la esperanza de una revoluci?n iberoamericana que rescatar?a a Cuba de su aislamiento, de la misma manera en que Lenin, Trotsky y los bolcheviques esperaban que Rusia fuera rescatada de su atraso a trav?s de la expansi?n de la revoluci?n de Octubre a Alemania primero, y a los otros pa?ses de Europa despu?s. Ambas expectativas no se cumplieron, aunque hay que convenir que, en el caso cubano, a un costo mucho menor, tanto por las dimensiones del escenario donde la experiencia se llev? a cabo, como por una moderaci?n inducida por la naturaleza en ?ltima instancia abierta de estas sociedades, cuya elasticidad y tumulto han servido para preservarlas en buena medida de la sombr?a ejecutoria de los procesos revolucionarios verificados en potencias informadas por un pasado de opresi?n feudal o bien totalitaria. Como quiera que sea, la comprensi?n de los l?deres del proceso cubano de la necesidad de escapar al encerramiento insular haciendo contacto con la tierra firme del continente, dio prueba de su intrepidez revolucionaria, as? como de su comprensi?n de su propia revoluci?n como parte constitutiva de la revoluci?n iberoamericana. Esta inteligencia estrat?gica, sin embargo, no encontr?, en los a?os de auge del proceso revolucionario, una correspondencia t?ctica que permitiese aplicar en el terreno de los hechos esa creencia. El Che fue el exponente m?s definido tanto de esa comprensi?n estrat?gica como de ese fracaso t?ctico. Este ?ltimo marc?, a un elevado coste, un l?mite al per?odo heroico de esa experiencia. La b?squeda de una salida al encierro que significaban el bloqueo norteamericano y el abrazo de oso de la URSS, llev? a la elucubraci?n de la __teor?a del foco__, con la que los dirigentes cubanos entendieron que pod?an llevar adelante su proyecto. Un escritor franc?s, Regis Debray, que se aproxim? a la isla muy en el talante del intelectual progresista que se compromete en causas ajenas porque no est? muy seguro de tener una propia, fue el encargado de difundir el proyecto. ?ste, sin embargo, nac?a no tanto de la mente de un progresista decidido a encontrar la imagen del ?buen revolucionario? en alg?n lugar para ?l ex?tico, sino de las necesidades objetivas de la experiencia cubana. El problema consist?a en que esas necesidades requer?an, m?s que del voluntarismo que impregnaba a sus dirigentes a partir del ?xito alcanzado en Sierra Maestra -?xito que, como hemos dicho, era en buena medida el resultado de un equ?voco monumental-, sino de pol?ticas capaces de penetrar en las capas medias y bajas de nuestras sociedades atendiendo a sus peculiaridades y a la experiencia proveniente del pasado. No se puede fabricar a una revoluci?n a partir de una f?rmula universal, no se puede reducir ?sta a un militarismo que, por su misma naturaleza, tiende a rechazar o a enfriar a los sectores populares, que perciben la inadecuaci?n de ese m?todo en sus propios pa?ses, si en estos ha florecido el capitalismo industrial, por deformado que su crecimiento haya sido. El cambio por la v?a b?lica s?lo es posible ?y no siempre- en el marco de una sociedad en descomposici?n, que requiera __org?nicamente__ ese tipo de renovaci?n quir?rgica. *La aventura Animado sobre todo por el Che, el experimento se puso en pr?ctica, sin embargo. Consist?a, en teor?a, en instalar un n?cleo guerrillero en alg?n lugar de dif?cil acceso para el ej?rcito regular y, a partir de all?, ir concitando la adhesi?n de la poblaci?n rural hambreada y humillada, sometida al pongaje y a los abusos de los terratenientes. El movimiento no pudo engranar en ning?n lado, fuera de Colombia, donde ya exist?a una guerrilla campesina de poderoso arraigo. Los resultados de la implementaci?n pr?ctica de esta teor?a fueron catastr?ficos. El Che Guevara, que condujo la primera tentativa de crear un foco insurreccional en Bolivia, cay? al poco tiempo abatido por los Rangers bolivianos, con asesor?a de la CIA; el cura Camilo Torres Restrepo, pionero de la teolog?a de la liberaci?n, muri? en Colombia en circunstancias similares y los restantes intentos de fomentar una guerrilla rural fueron reprimidos unos despu?s de otros. La elecci?n de Bolivia como primer objetivo por Ernesto Guevara, y la entrega de ?ste en la empresa, dieron prueba de su hero?smo y de su mirada estrat?gica, pero tambi?n de sus limitaciones como te?rico de la revoluci?n latinoamericana. Bolivia, en efecto, es una zona nuclear de la geopol?tica suramericana, pero? ?ven?a de cumplir su reforma agraria! Con todo lo parcial, timorata y tramposa que ?sta pueda haber sido, no hab?an pasado muchos a?os desde que el gobierno del Movimiento Nacional Revolucionario (MNR) la implementara despu?s de la ?pica sublevaci?n de 1952. Los campesinos no estaban en disposici?n al llamado guerrillero, por lo tanto, y a poco de andar el grupo termin? abandonado y acorralado en medio de la selva, hasta que se produjo el tr?gico desenlace. Muerto Guevara no muri? su teor?a y otros j?venes intentaron trasladar sus principios de las ?reas rurales a las urbanas, donde se puede aprovechar el anonimato de la gran ciudad, la mayor capacidad que en ella existe para disimularse y la probabilidad de acceder a fuentes de dinero, sea por v?a de los asaltos, de los secuestros extorsivos o de las donaciones de un n?mero m?s o menos importante de simpatizantes. Pero el resultado fue el mismo, con la diferencia de que el traslado del eje de la acci?n empeor? los costados m?s violentos de esta, haciendo m?s subrepticias y sangrientas tanto las operaciones de la guerrilla como la represi?n brutal que de ella efectuaron unas fuerzas armadas aut?ctonas, no necesariamente desprovistas de nervio, como en cambio suced?a en el caso de las ?guardias nacionales?, consumidas por la corrupci?n, que Estados Unidos hab?a montado en el Caribe. El ultraizquierdismo de esos n?cleos guerrilleros y sus alas pol?ticas, peg? bien en unas juventudes nutridas por el ejemplo del Mayo franc?s, una especie de sublevaci?n de corte an?rquico y l?dico de las juventudes metropolitanas, que al ser transferido a escenarios donde las relaciones sociales eran mucho m?s problem?ticas que en Europa, se desdobl? en un activismo de corte militar. Al intentar estos movimientos enancarse al ascenso popular que se estaba dando por esos a?os en varios pa?ses suramericanos (Argentina y Chile entre ellos), terminaron minando desde dentro a esas corrientes, al propiciar su divisi?n y suministrar a la reacci?n el pretexto que necesitaba para poner en pr?ctica un proyecto represivo que contaba con el aval del imperialismo y con una superioridad militar abrumadora, no contrabalanceada por un cuestionamiento social que abarcase a capas importantes de la poblaci?n. ?sta m?s bien tendi? a contemplar con indiferencia, pasmo o rechazo al accionar subversivo, abriendo paso as? a las t?cnicas demoledoras de la guerra sucia, necesarias para romper la ya bastante exigua capacidad de resistencia de estos pa?ses a la implantaci?n del capitalismo salvaje, atributo primario de la globalizaci?n neoliberal. La matanza fue generalizada e hicieron falta dos generaciones para que Am?rica latina empezase a intentar librarse de la morsa neoliberal. Hoy la etapa por la que se est? pasando registra diferencias notables respecto de las que primaban en los a?os ?60 y ?70, cuando el intento revolucionario patrocinado por Cuba se aventur? a buscar la Utop?a. El mundo bipolar se ha hundido y, para asombro de muchos, la implosi?n de la URSS no signific? el final de la revoluci?n cubana. M?s bien al contrario: tras el ?per?odo especial? de transici?n a las nuevas circunstancias, el r?gimen de Castro parece haberse reafirmado y, lo que es aun m?s importante, su mensaje parece haber calado profundamente en las masas latinoamericanas. El reclamo de igualdad social y la exigencia de soberan?a preexist?an a la revoluci?n cubana, desde luego, pero la formulaci?n original que le dio esta y el denuedo de sus jefes al ponerlos en pr?ctica son datos que no han ca?do en el vac?o. El escenario actual es complejo, el futuro esconde tantas oportunidades como emboscadas y no ser? Cuba la que ejerza ?ni pretenda ejercer- un rol dirigente en la marcha de los acontecimientos, pero la isla ya no est? sola: ha ingresado al grupo de R?o y de alguna manera es reconocida como precursora por varios gobiernos iberoamericanos. Su esp?ritu, despu?s de tantas batallas, ha escapado de la c?rcel insular y ha tocado la Tierra Firme. (www.enriquelacolla.com) From aaron at mylists.fastmail.fm Mon Jan 5 21:28:26 2009 From: aaron at mylists.fastmail.fm (Aaron Aarons) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 20:28:26 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israel Rains Fire on Gaza with Phosphorus Shells In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090106042836.09BCBA08C@heartbeat1.messagingengine.com> Regardless of what weapons are being used by the ZioNazis in their war against the Palestinian people, they have clearly established one thing: *** By the Israeli standards for determining what is a legitimate military target, a standard that is defended by their imperialist allies, every person or entity that gives aid to the Zionist Occupation Regime (ZOR) in Palestine is a legitimate military target. *** If our side were to use such loose standards, we would be bombing Israel-supporting synagogues even when there were children inside -- something I most definitely don't want to see happen! - Aaron >Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 07:42:12 -0500 >From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" >Subject: [R-G] Israel Rains Fire on Gaza with Phosphorus Shells > > >December 5, 2008 >Israel rains fire on Gaza with phosphorus shells From fentona at shaw.ca Tue Jan 6 09:22:45 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 08:22:45 -0800 Subject: [R-G] White Phosphorus, Hasbara and International Alibis Message-ID: <8F3690A5-EEF9-45E9-925E-0DFFCD9EE8EF@shaw.ca> White Phosphorus, Hasbara and International Alibis Israel assaulting Palestinian society beneath deadly smokescreens January 06, 2009 By Dan Freeman-Maloy http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/20175 On the fifth day of the latest Israeli assault on Gaza, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a leading US-based Israel advocacy think tank, ran a commentary by senior analyst David Makovsky which concluded as follows: "Whether the Palestinian intifada between 2000 and 2004, the Hizballah war in 2006, or the Gaza conflict in 2008, this changing nature of warfare against civilians needs to be squarely addressed." As Israel orients itself towards continuously waging such warfare on a number of fronts in the years ahead, these comments ring true (albeit not in the sense intended by Makovsky). While the massacre-with-impunity initiated by the Israel Air Force (IAF) in Gaza on Saturday December 27 encountered broad domestic support in Israel, a few days and a few hundred Palestinian fatalities later, Aluf Benn, diplomatic correspondent for the Israeli daily Ha'aretz, explained that "the magical aerial solutions that do not involve loss of soldiers are coming to an end." This impression reportedly became the consensus opinion within the Israeli military establishment by the middle of last week, and on Saturday -- a second consecutive shabbat shalom -- the Israel Defense Force (IDF) launched a massive ground assault "meant to serve as a supplement to the aerial bombardment" (alongside continuous naval attacks). "The ground invasion was preceded by large-scale artillery shelling from around 4pm," Ha'aretz reported, "intended to 'soften' the targets as artillery batteries deployed along the Strip in recent days began bombarding Hamas targets and open areas near the border. Hundreds of shells were fired, including cluster bombs aimed at open areas." Closely attuned to the diplomatic requirements of warfare against civilians, Israeli spokespeople will no doubt find a way to explain not only why the Palestinian/Israeli death toll in this "conflict" maintains its staggering balance of 100/1, but also the "pinpoint" nature of Israeli naval bombardment, artillery shelling and cluster bombing of the densely populated Gaza Ghetto. Perhaps they will also explain away their reported use of deadly white phosphorus, whose "telltale shells could be seen spreading tentacles of thick white smoke to cover the troops' advance," according to a joint report of The Times and Agence France-Presse ("These explosions are fantastic looking, and produce a great deal of smoke that blinds the enemy so that our forces can move in," the story quotes an unnamed "Israeli security expert" as saying of napalm's devastating heir).[1] Indeed, one of the lessons which Israel has apparently drawn from its experience with warfare against civilians is that, with disciplined public relations and a heavy dose of hypocrisy, much of the liberal West can be brought behind it. "The Gaza attack is the first major demonstration of Israel's total overhaul of its 'hasbara' [bluntly translated, 'propaganda'] operation following the Second Lebanon War," Anshel Pfeffer writes supportively. "While the military aspects of the operation were meticulously planned, a new forum of press advisers was also established which has been working for the past six months on a PR strategy specifically geared to dealing with the media during warfare in Gaza."[2] Public calls for (or expressions of satisfaction with) assaults on the Palestinian people at large, for example, are being kept to a minimum. "Ministers have been ordered by the Cabinet Secretary not to give interviews without authorisation," Pfeffer continues, "so as not to repeat the PR disaster of a year ago, when deputy defence minister Matan Vilnai threatened the Palestinians with a 'holocaust.'" Military commanders, Amir Oren adds, are also being (rhetorically) restrained: "The IAF and the Southern Command, which have been doing most of the work, have been forbidden to speak to the media." International journalists, for their part, have encountered barriers to entering and reporting from Gaza which the Associated Press has described as "unprecedented" (and given Israel's long history of severe restrictions on the press, that's saying a lot).[3] Writing for Ha'aretz, Gili Izikovich elaborates: "Keeping the foreign journalists in Israel, sources say, is good for Israel's image because the media is experiencing the war from the Israeli side." The Gaza offices of China's Xinhua News Agency have themselves suffered bombardment, though it is unclear whether this resulted from direct targeting or merely reflected the danger facing anyone in the Gaza Strip.[4] The targeted destruction of Gaza's Al-Aqsa television station, for its part, has been openly endorsed within the Jerusalem Post, the article in question dismissing International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) criticism of "attacks on unarmed media installations" in light of "the inflammatory material [Al-Aqsa television] broadcasts regularly," while at the same time -- apparently unaware of the obvious implications -- joining in defense of Israeli journalistic war- readiness: "the media here weren't drafted by the government, but rather volunteered in the service of the country." But notably, even war-eager Israeli correspondents have been excluded from covering the latest ground assault. While independent Israeli reporting faces predictable restrictions, even Israel's loyal journalist corps has been consigned to reporting or cheering from the sidelines. As Dennis Zinn, military correspondent for Israel Broadcasting Authority (IBA) TV, reported Sunday, "This is a war that the Israeli press has been left out of. There are no embedded reporters and the officers have been warned not to talk to the media without explicit permission. This is a policy of the current chief of staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, who is critical of the open relationship that has existed between the military and the media up to now."[5] Nonetheless, notwithstanding all the hasbara echoing among Israel's many PR hacks, it remains a fact that Israeli spokespeople are on record effectively dismissing distinctions between civilian and combatant. If, as so many spokespeople and commentators have suggested, we are to believe that Israeli planners have meticulously drawn lessons from the 2006 invasion of Lebanon in planning this assault, then it is worth recalling what those stated lessons were. Consider the threats that have since been made by General Gadi Eisenkot, head of Israel's Northern Command, regarding the Lebanese south: "We will wield disproportionate power against every village from which shots are fired on Israel, and cause immense damage and destruction"; "From our perspective, these are military bases."[6] Very similar comments have been made about Gaza (see this previous article for details). Moreover, given that Hamas dominated the last round of Palestinian parliamentary elections in the West Bank and Gaza alike, and is particularly strong in Gaza (where its social services fulfill an indispensible function), Israeli operational parameters as stated by foreign minister Tzipi Livni -- "We are targeting Hamas, we are not looking for civilians to kill more than that" -- are clearly not reassuring.[7] Unfortunately, the policies of the United States and the European Union have constituted what The Guardian rightly describes as "a green light for Israel to continue unavoidably indiscriminate attacks on the most densely populated territory in the world."[8] The Czech government, which on Thurday assumed the rotating EU presidency, has retreated from spokeperson Jiri Potuznik's characterization of the Israeli ground invasion as "defensive, not offensive," but with commentators like Pfeffer musing on whether the shift in EU leadership helped to dictate the Israeli assault's timing, the signs from the EU are deeply troubling.[9] Having apparently called for the Israeli assault, so-called "Quartet" envoy Tony Blair is "on holiday at the moment," as British prime minister Gordon Brown puts it.[10] This is as good a time as any to blow the mythology of the "Quartet" -- supposedly comprised of the US, EU, Russia, and the rubber-stamp of the UN Secretary General -- out of the water. "There is no getting around the reality that the Quartet ... provides a shield for what the US and the EU do," as Alvaro de Soto (former UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process) rightly observed -- and while "the Quartet's evenhandedness deficit is not a recent phenomenon," as De Soto noted more than a year and a half ago, "evenhandedness has been pummeled into submission in an unprecedented way since the beginning of 2007," and effective authorization of this offensive via Blair needs to be the final straw. Anti-war and progressive civil society forces may not presently be in a position to stop this massacre, but let this spectacular display of brutality at least effect a broad reorientation. The point needs to be made clearly: if Hamas members are legitimate targets for assassination, then so too are the members of the parties responsible for these ongoing massacres, including at a minimum Labor and Kadima; if this logic is rejected, as it clearly should be, then an inclusive political process is required. Any consistent criteria by which Hamas could be excluded from parliamentary politics would also necessitate exclusion of the major Israeli players from the elections scheduled for February. Any political settlement which excludes Hamas is no political settlement at all. Israel, rejecting negotiations with any Palestinians who will not accept their orders, will take this rejection to its natural conclusion. To the degree permitted by the diplomatic context and military developments, they will seek to kill those associated with Hamas or any other resistance groupings. Facing a devastated civilian population and a lightly armed resistance, such killing is likely to be widespread, and Israeli planners hope to follow this up with "methodical arrest campaigns" (while 1 Israeli fatality may be balanced with 100 Palestinian deaths, it seems that even at 1 to 10,000, the ratio of Israeli to Palestinian prisoners held hostage is insufficient for Israeli taste). But we can make no mistake: this is the natural extension (effectively genocidal, but an inexorable progression nonetheless) of excluding Hamas from the political process. More than half a century ago, Hannah Arendt noted the glaring contradictions of purported left Zionists in groups like Hashomer Hatzair, avowed radicals who "express themselves only by abstention when it comes to vital questions of Palestine foreign policy," and "hide under officials protests their secret relief at having the majority parties do the dirty work for them."[11] Similar comments apply to those in the West who, while happy to help force the Palestinian party with a parliamentary majority out of their own electoral process, now express misgivings about the extrajudicial killings, collective punishment and mass political imprisonment which in varying degrees have accompanied this policy from its inception. This applies even to some quite decent people. In Canada, to take a widely replicated example, the New Democratic Party (NDP), relatively moderate in its foreign policy by North American standards, has yet to engage Hamas as a diplomatic actor despite the results of the Palestinian legislative elections of January 2006. When Hamas, in part conceding its freely won electoral mandate, signed on to the creation of a national unity government in February 2007, the NDP decided to deal with the unity government solely through its non-Hamas representatives, as US and allied (including Canadian) policy sought to drive wedges among factions and further fracture the Palestinian national movement. Subject to international sabotage, the unity government resolutely collapsed with the Hamas counter-coup of June 2007 (another much-lied-about-episode, see Gary Leupp's piece on Dissident Voice for details), intensifying the dangerous isolation of Gaza. The danger is now greater than ever. In the last week and a half, Israel has destroyed Gaza's infrastructure to a point where returning to status quo policies of sanctions and isolation -- which Israel would no doubt sell as a concession, if only by virtue of the temporary cessation of direct massacres -- is an option incompatible with Palestinian survival (let alone dignity) in Gaza. Hamas, meanwhile, can at this point only be excluded from the Palestinian political and broader diplomatic process by the utter corruption of an international community too cruel or cowardly to maintain a trace of moral or legal integrity, and by the waves of killings, imprisonment and collective punishment which Israel will orchestrate under its cover. Israel has gambled with this invasion. It is betting on the sort of international complicity which will allow it to disenfranchise the Palestinians of Gaza not only from the Israeli system which governs the whole of Israel/Palestine, but even from administration of the enclaves into which Palestinians have been pushed and confined. Its planners aim to abdicate responsibility for the 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza while still controlling their borders and their skies, perhaps with the support of international allies, while retaining "ongoing freedom for military action" against them (indeed, Ha'aretz reported Monday that Israel is formally seeking "a Security Council agreement that will grant Israel the right to respond to Hamas violations" of a ceasefire agreement to which Hamas will not even be a signatory). Palestinians in Gaza and the political groupings with the broadest support among them will thus be disenfranchised, confined, and disarmed while at the same time subject to explicit policies of assassination and military assault. This gamble needs to backfire. Israel cannot be allowed to shift the terms of discussion by -- having added to the crime of its suffocating siege on Gaza an assault on its essential infrastructure and a massacre of hundreds of its inhabitants -- now using its potential willingness to slow its massacres as leverage to secure an international rubber-stamp for harsher sanctions or more strict colonial rule (enforced with allies' support). Those who would diplomatically push Hamas out of Palestinian politics share responsibility with Israel when it takes this policy to its military conclusion. A ceasefire must come, and it must come soon, but if it is to amount to anything more than a pause in the killing, it cannot serve as an instrument for such criminal and failed policies. Notes: [1] Michael Evans and Sheera Frenkel, "'Phosphorus smokescreen' hid army," January 6 2009, The Times and AFP, as published in The Australian. [2] Anshel Pfeffer, "Israel claims success in the PR war," January 2 2009, The Jewish Chronicle. [3] Diaa Hadid, "Israel bans foreign journalists from entering Gaza despite court order to let them in," January 2 2009, Associated Press Newswires. [4] "Chinese news agency's Gaza office said hit by Israeli bombing, 'no casualties,'" December 29 2008, BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific. [5] Dennis Zinn reporting, "Day one of IDF ground op in Gaza," January 4 2009, IBA News. [6] Nicholas Kimbrell, "War of words between Israel, Lebanon escalated in 2008," December 31 2008, The Daily Star. [7] Sharon Otterman, "Israeli Foreign Minister Says Hamas 'Needs to Be Condemned,'" December 29 2008, The New York Times. [8] Editorial, "Europe must take the initiative," January 4 2009, The Guardian. [9] "Gaza statement a misunderstanding - Czech minister," January 4 2009, Reuters News. [10] Anshel Pfeffer, "Sarkozy wants more," January 5 2008, Ha'aretz. [11] Hannah Arendt, "Zionism Reconsidered" (October 1944), in The Jew as Pariah: Jewish Identity and Politics in the Modern Age (Ron Feldman, ed.), Grove Press, Inc., 1978, p. 154. Incidentally, according to Ilan Papp?, these purported leftists proved to be among the "most avaricious" of the Zionist parties when it came to dividing the agricultural lands of Palestinians ethnically cleansed in 1948: "Hashomer Ha-Tza'ir members were not content only with lands from which the people had already been expelled, but also wanted the lands whose Palestinian owners had survived the onslaught and who were still clinging onto them." (The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, OneWorld Publications Ltd., 2006, pp. 215-216.) From critical.montages at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 10:01:05 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 12:01:05 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Why Aren't More Americans Dancing to Israel's Tune? Message-ID: We have only one poll to go by, but responses to local protests (measured by the number of cars honking for instance) haven't been poor either. It's possible that the sheer brutality of the latest Israeli attack on Palestinians, as well as the overall costs of US Middle East policy in recent years (driven home by the economic crisis, too), is beginning to cost Israel some American hearts and minds, despite the continuing MSM support for Israel. -- Yoshie Why Aren't More Americans Dancing To Israel's Tune? Max Blumenthal Senior Writer for The Daily Beast Posted January 5, 2009 | 08:17 AM (EST) Almost as soon as the first Israeli missile struck the Gaza Strip, a veteran cheering squad suited up to support the home team. "Israel is so scrupulous about civilian life," Charles Krauthammer claimed in the Washington Post. Echoing Krauthammer, Alan Dershowitz called the Israeli attack on Gaza, "Perfectly 'Proportionate.'" And in the New York Times, Israeli historian Benny Morris described his country's airstrikes as "highly efficient." While the cheerleaders testified to the superior moral fiber of their team, the Palestinian civilian death toll mounted. Israeli missiles tore at least fifteen Palestinian police cadets to shreds at a graduation ceremony, blew twelve worshipers to pieces (including six children) while they left evening prayers at a mosque, flattened the elite American International School, killed five sisters while they slept in their beds, and liquidated 9 women and children in order to kill a single Hamas leader. So far, Israeli forces have killed at least 500 Gazans and wounded some two thousand, including hundreds of children. Yesterday, the IDF blanketed parts of Gaza with white phosphorus, a chemical weapon Saddam Hussein once deployed against Kurdish rebels. "It was Israel at its best," Yossi Klein Halevi declared in the New Republic. By New Year's Day, Israel's cheering squad had turned the opinion pages of major American newspapers into their own personal romper room. Of all the editorial contributions published by the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times since the Israel's war on Gaza began, to my knowledge only one offered a skeptical view of the assault. But that editorial, by Israeli novelist David Grossman, contained not a single word about the Palestinian casualties of IDF attacks. Even while calling for a cease fire, Grossman promised, "We can always start shooting again." Israeli public relations agents fanned out to broadcast studios from the US to Europe, fulfilling an aggressive strategy conceived after the country's catastrophic 2006 attack on Lebanon. An analysis by Israel's foreign ministry of eight hours of coverage across international broadcast media concluded that Israeli representatives received a whopping 58 minutes of airtime compared to only 19 minutes for Palestinians. "Quite a few outlets are very favorable to Israel, namely by showing [its] suffering. I am sure it is a result of the new co-ordination," said Major Avital Leibovich, an IDF spokesperson who has become a fixture on cable news in the past weeks. But while Israel's PR machine cranked its Mighty Wurlitzer to full blast, drowning out all opposing voices with its droning sound, a surprisingly substantial portion of the American public decided to dance to its own tune. According to a December 31 Rasmussen poll [LINK: ] (so far the only measure of US opinion on the Gaza assault), while Americans remained overwhelmingly supportive of Israel, they were split almost evenly on the question of whether Israel should attack Gaza -- 44% in favor of the assault and 41% against it. The internals are even more remarkable. While Republicans supported the assault on Gaza by a large margin, a predictable finding, only 31% of Democrats did. Members of the Democratic base thus stood in sharp contrast to most of their elected representatives (freshman Rep. Donna Edwards is a notable exception), who backed the latest Israeli assault in lockstep, and seem to support Israel no matter what it does. The rift between the progressive base and the party played out on Barack Obama's Change.gov site, which was deluged in recent days with demands for a statement condemning Israel's assault on Gaza. So what accounts for the surprising trend in American opinion on Gaza? The proliferation of progressive online media and social networking sites could be a factor, but I have another theory: The same pundits who are cheerleading Israel's assault on Gaza once sold the occupation of Iraq to America, and with a nearly identical set of arguments. In their voices and those of the grim Israeli PR agents carted out for cable news, many Americans hear echoes of the Bush administration's most fantastical lies. When they see images of Gazans under withering bombardment, they flash back to Fallujah and the assorted horrors of Iraq. When they look at Israel, they see themselves during the darkest days of the Bush era. Now, an increasing share of Americans know what Israel is doing to Gaza. And they reject it, even when Israel is "at its best." From realiteee1 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 6 12:12:15 2009 From: realiteee1 at yahoo.com (james m nordlund) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:12:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Friends Digest Vol. 2, No. 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <479712.77571.qm@web111508.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> ????????????????? *'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'* "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."--George Orwell ????????????????? *'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'* * Where are the FBI Files Relating to Myrtle Poor Bear? * In 1976, American Indian Movement (AIM) activist, Leonard Peltier, was extradited from Canada to the United States to stand trial for the shooting deaths of FBI Special Agents Jack R. Coler and Ronald A. Williams that occurred at the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota on June 26, 1975. Peltier was extradited back to the United States based in large part on the affidavits of Myrtle Poor Bear. Read an update by Peltier Attorney Mike Kuzma: * Program Note * On December 4th, 2002 , the Cambridge Democratic City Committee (CDCC) passed a unanimous resolution to free Leonard Peltier. The presentation, regarding his innocence, made by Amnesty International, will be broadcast, beginning on Friday, January 2nd at 10 pm on CCTV/Channel 10, Cambridge, MA. This matter will be placed before the Cambridge City Council in the near future. It is hoped that the Council will follow suit and pass a resolution calling for justice for Leonard Peltier. * Parole Letters * Write your letter in support for Leonard's bid for parole. A sample letter can be found at .? Please note that a personal letter is likely more effective, so we encourage you to adapt the sample letter, as needed. Mail your letter to: United States Parole Commission 5550 Friendship Boulevard Suite 420 Chevy Chase, MD 20815-7286 Re: LEONARD PELTIER #89637-132 Please also write a letter in support of Leonard's transfer to the Turtle Mountain Reservation or to the Sandstone, MN, or Oxford, WI, correctional facility. See for details. * Oglala Commemoration Video * See a video of the 2008 Oglala Commemoration at . * Emergency Assistance Needed * Donations are desperately needed to meet the demand for heaters, heating oil, wood, etc., on South Dakota reservations. Please do what you can. Send a check or money order to: Link Center Foundation P.O. Box 576 Firestone, CO 80520-0576 NOTE: Make your check or money order payable to the Link Center Foundation Utility and Heating Fund. You also can donate securely online at . ????????????????? *'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'* "Never cease in the fight for peace, justice, and equality for all people. Be persistent in all that you do and don't allow anyone to sway you from your conscience." -- Leonard Peltier ????????????????? *'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'* ----- Please circulate to family and friends and otherwise widely post our listserv announcements. Also frequently visit our Blog at or receive our blog postings by Web feed (download a free newsfeed reader at ): Atom: RSS: Or register to receive e-mail announcements. It's easy. Go to our homepage at . Scroll down the page until you see "Join Us" on the left sidebar. Enter your e-mail address in the text box. Then point to and click on "Subscribe". Or send a blank e-mail message to . You also can Bookmark our home page and/or blog. Click on the Bookmark button provided at each of these sites to use any program you wish by which to save the sites to your list of browser favorites. Visit us often to learn more about efforts to win Leonard's freedom and find out what you can do to help. We encourage other sites to link to our Web site and blog. No prior permission is required. Feel free to use one of our banner ads at to link to our resources. Visit us on MySpace (); Facebook (); and Bebo (), too. -----? Time to set him free... Because it is the RIGHT thing to do. Friends of Peltier http://www.FreePeltierNow.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe,?? send a blank message to freepeltiernow-on at mail-list.com To contact the list owner, send your message to?? freepeltiernow-list-owner at mail-list.com mail-list.com??? 1302 Waugh Dr. #438??? Houston, Texas??? 77019??? USA james m and YouthAIDS help Stop Global AIDS with replyforall and funds from our sponsors. Join the mission at replyforall From fentona at shaw.ca Tue Jan 6 12:19:43 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:19:43 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Haitians Celebrated, not without pain, Day of Independence Message-ID: January 5th, 2009 Haitians Celebrated, not without pain, Day of Independence http://www.haitianalysis.com/2009/1/5/haitians-celebrated-not-without-pain-day-of-independence By: Wadner Pierre - HaitiAnalysis.com The dream of the heroic liberators is still - in many ways - far from becoming a reality - the dream that every Haitian without distinction should live comfortably and without any fear; a dream in which the father of the country, Jean-Jacques Dessalines, declared that no foreign soldier violate the soil of Haiti. After defeating the largest and most powerful army at the time, the army of Napoleon, on November 18, 1803 in Cap-Haitien, Haiti became the first Independent Republic of black people and the second country in the Americas to declare its Independence. However, the powerful countries branded Haiti an outlaw nation and France extorted a payment of 90 million francs in "compensation" for its lost "property" which included 600,000 slaves. Haitian artist and political activist Farah Juste ("La Reine Soleil") organized a concert in the Haitian community in Miami to honour those who fought to liberate the Haitians of slavery. This year (2009) marks the twentieth year of the great traditional concert. "My brothers and sisters you represent the second largest ethnic community in Florida, you represent a force both socially and politically. We must unite" said Farah Juste. This year's concert was dedicated to the famous Haitian singer Martha Jean-Claude. Martha Jean- Claude fled from Haiti to Cuba in 1952. She incurred the wrath of Haitian president Paul Eugene Magloire for publishing a journal entitled "Avrinette". Her son, Richard Mirabal Jean-Claude, was in attendance at the celebration. Also in attendance were various Haitian artists, politicians the Rev. Gerard Jean-Juste of Saint Claire's parish of Ti Plas Kazo, well-known as the father of the Haitian community in Florida-as well as a famous political prisoner after the coup that ousted Haiti's democratically elected government in 2004 and, it is widely hoped, a future candidate in Haiti's next presidential election. Amidst the distinctive Haitian Creole one could sometimes hear "Happy New Year" uttered happily. It seems that this date is celebrated by not only Haitians, but also by many other peoples on this earth. The great day of Haitian Independence provides just further inspiration. "A year 2009 for a new Haiti," said Father G?rard Jean-Juste. From fentona at shaw.ca Tue Jan 6 15:02:01 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:02:01 -0800 Subject: [R-G] The Blame Game in Gaza References: <860499484.170776427@org.orgDB.mail.democracyinaction.org> Message-ID: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3667 Media Advisory The Blame Game in Gaza Erasing Israeli actions to fault only Hamas 1/6/09 The Israeli attacks in the Gaza Strip that began in late December have reportedly killed over 500 Palestinians, many of them civilians and children. As is often the case, U.S. corporate media's presentation of the events leading up to this dramatic escalation in violence have laid the blame for the violence mostly with Hamas, whose rocket attacks on Israel are often cited as the cause for the current Israeli attacks. In many media discussions about the events that led to the fighting, emphasis is placed on Hamas' decision in late December to allow a cease-fire agreement with Israel to expire, or the group's failure to adequately suppress rocket attacks into Israel during the cease-fire. A USA Today timeline (1/5/09) explained, "In November, the truce frays as Hamas rockets continue to land in Israel, which closes several border crossings and kills militants building tunnels Hamas was using to smuggle weapons and other goods into Gaza." On NBC Nightly News (12/27/08), Martin Fletcher explained that "a six-month truce ended this week and Palestinians fired rockets into Israel, as many as 60 a day. Israeli leaders said enough is enough." [1] A Washington Post editorial (12/28/08) announced that Hamas "invited the conflict by ending a six-month-old ceasefire," while Post columnist Richard Cohen (1/6/09) was much blunter: "It took no genius to see the imminence of war. It takes real stupidity to blame it on Israel." [2, 3] The Dallas Morning News (12/30/08) agreed emphatically in an editorial titled, "Blood on Hamas' Hands": "The pictures of the civilian victims of Israeli airstrikes-- especially children-- are heart-rending. But let's keep straight whose fault this tragedy is: Hamas, the fanatical Islamists who rule Gaza and who have used the land as a launching pad for firing rockets into Israel." [4] The New York Times' December 28 lead declared, "The Israeli Air Force on Saturday launched a massive attack on Hamas targets throughout Gaza in retaliation for the recent heavy rocket fire from the area." The next day,Times reporter Stephen Farrell asked (12/29/08), "Why did Hamas end its six-month cease-fire on December 19?" He argued that the "rejectionist credo" of Hamas made this step all but inevitable. [5] These accounts fail on several grounds. For starters, the cease-fire agreement from June through mid-December was credited by many for ratcheting down the violence-- rocket fire into Israel dropped significantly and claimed no Israeli lives during the truce. (Prior to that, rocket and mortar attacks since the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in late 2005 had killed 10 Israelis-- theisraelproject.org.) After the cease-fire expired, rocket attacks increased, though no Israelis were killed until after the Israeli attacks were launched; four have been killed since then (Agence France-Presse, 1/6/09). Interestingly, as the truce expired, the New York Times published an article (12/19/08) that began with a typical corporate media formulation-- Palestinians are attacking, Israel is retaliating-- before noting that Hamas was "largely successful" in curtailing rocket fire into Israel: "Hamas imposed its will and even imprisoned some of those who were firing rockets. Israeli and United Nations figures show that while more than 300 rockets were fired into Israel in May, 10 to 20 were fired in July, depending on who was counting and whether mortar rounds were included. In August, 10 to 30 were fired, and in September, 5 to 10." [6] The Times article, by Ethan Bronner, noted that what Hamas expected in return from the Israelis never arrived: But the goods shipments, while up some 25 to 30 percent and including a mix of more items, never began to approach what Hamas thought it was going to get: a return to the 500 to 600 truckloads delivered daily before the closing, including appliances, construction materials and other goods essential for life beyond mere survival. Instead, the number of trucks increased to around 90 from around 70. Bronner also added that "Israeli forces continued to attack Hamas and other militants in the West Bank, prompting Palestinian militants in Gaza to fire rockets," which produced Hamas response attacks. The Times continued: While this back-and-forth did not topple the agreement, Israel's decision in early November to destroy a tunnel Hamas had been digging near the border drove the cycle of violence to a much higher level. Israel says the tunnel could have been dug only for the purpose of trying to seize a soldier, like Cpl. Gilad Shalit, the Israeli held by Hamas for the past two and a half years. Israel's attack on the tunnel killed six Hamas militants, and each side has stepped up attacks since. This straightforward recitation of events is rarely heard in much of the rest of the media coverage of the violence in Gaza-- including in the Times, since Israel began its full-scale assault. But for many consumers of U.S. media, history is made irrelevant; a Time magazine piece (1/12/09) began: Two sounds dominate the lives of Israelis living near Gaza: the wail of a siren and, 25 seconds later, the whistling screech of an incoming rocket fired by the Palestinian militant group Hamas. That gives Israeli families just enough time to dive for cover-even as they pray the rocket will miss. At 11:30 a.m. on December 27, a new sound filled the azure Mediterranean sky: the rolling boom of Israeli bombs and missiles slamming into Gaza. [7] Israeli airstrikes in Gaza are anything but "new," but presenting them as such--and pairing that presentation with an Israeli family sheltered against an incoming Hamas rocket--gives a wildly misleading impression of a conflict where the deaths and suffering are overwhelmingly on the Palestinian side. References [1] http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-01-04-gaza-sunday_N.htm [2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/27/AR2008122700976.html [3] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/05/AR2009010502343.html) [4] http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-israel_30edi.State.Edition1.279cf92.html [5] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/world/middleeast/30hamas.html [6] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/world/middleeast/19gaza.html [7] http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1869152,00.html Feel free to respond to FAIR ( fair at fair.org ). We can't reply to everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate documented examples of media bias or censorship. And please send copies of your correspondence with media outlets, including any responses, to fair at fair.org. Unsubscribe from the FAIR list If you would prefer to receive these messages in text format, please visit our website to change your email preferences. If you were forwarded this message and you want to receive future FAIR alerts delivered directly to you, subscribe by clicking here. Home | Contact Us | Support Us | RSS | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy -------------- next part -------------- This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Site designed by the May First Technology Collective Email list services by Democracy in Action From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jan 6 15:23:40 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:23:40 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Norwegian Doctor Decries Israeli Attacks Message-ID: <200901062223.n06MNeKq023092@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090106/54bc0415/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jan 6 15:26:32 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:26:32 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israel Rains Fire on Gaza With Phosphorus Shells Message-ID: <200901062226.n06MQWK4026831@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090106/1c757f39/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jan 6 15:47:56 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:47:56 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Amnesty International says U.S. response to Gaza 'lopsided' Message-ID: <200901062247.n06MluF7026392@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090106/255f6883/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jan 6 15:55:01 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:55:01 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Saving the Detroit Three, Finishing Off the UAW: Learning From the Auto Crisis Message-ID: <200901062255.n06Mt1ok006171@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090106/94cc9369/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jan 6 16:39:07 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:39:07 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israeli citizens calling upon international community to stop Israel Message-ID: <200901062339.n06Nd7I8003689@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090106/2eb01854/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jan 6 16:44:51 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:44:51 -0800 Subject: [R-G] HRM Queen Rania on the children of Gaza Message-ID: <200901062344.n06Nipvj011545@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090106/9e491b97/attachment.txt From fentona at shaw.ca Tue Jan 6 17:13:26 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 16:13:26 -0800 Subject: [R-G] The New Iraqi Sovereignty: Just Like the Palestinians Have in Gaza Message-ID: January 6, 2009 Just Like the Palestinians Have in Gaza The New Iraqi Sovereignty By RON JACOBS http://counterpunch.org/jacobs01062009.html There's got to be some irony in the US transference of control to Iraqi security forces while the Israelis pound Gaza. Why? Because, despite the hoopla in the US press and its Iraqi clones, the nature of the control being "given back" to the Iraqis seems quite similar to the control over Gaza that was given them by the Israelis when they withdrew their forces in 2005. In other words, any control the Iraqi government and its security forces might now have can be removed at any time by US forces. Indeed, the US forces are not even withdrawing. They are merely turning the security details they performed for the past five years or so to Iraqi security forces whose essential existence depends on the presence of US forces populating bases around Iraq. According to the Washington Post article about the transfer, "the long- term plan, which could change if security deteriorates, is to maintain a handful of heavily secured American compounds," which would facilitate support, intelligence and other such functions on an ongoing basis. In addition, the US forces will also be available for raids and other police and military actions when the US-approved government in Baghdad asks for their help. While it is safe to assume that many of these actions will be at the genuine request of that government, it is also safe to expect that some will be at the behest of the US command. While no one has suggested that this transfer of control is tantamount to the evacuation of US and allied forces from Saigon in 1975, the overall tone of the US mainstream media is that it is a step in that direction. This is patent nonsense. The nation of Iraq will not be rid of US military influence until every last US soldier is gone. This means troops considered combat forces along with those in support, intelligence and advisory roles. In case Americans have missed it, this fact will not exist on the ground for a long time. This means, quite simply, that there is plenty of time for things to go in a direction unfavorable to Washington's designs. Should this occur, the likelihood of the recently negotiated Status of Forces Agreement existing in its current status diminishes rather quickly. For those unfamiliar with the actualities of the agreement, there is a section that allows either Washington or any Iraqi government to abrogate the agreement at any time. As for the rest of the agreement, US military officials are already on record calling into question elements of the agreement that limit their troops' ability to conduct raids, move freely about the country, and defend US bases. When it comes to Washington, the Bush administration has also questioned the interpretation of various parts of the agreement and has left it open for its successor to do the same. These questions seem to stem from the Pentagon's resistance to the limitations on its mobility and perceived mission a strict interpretation of the agreement would require. Unless the Obama administration makes it clear that it will listen to US voters and begin the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq immediately, then the Pentagon will continue the occupation despite the opposition of the US and Iraqi people. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama has made no indication that he will fulfill the hopes of those that want all US troops home now. Like every other president of the US, he seems to have tuned out the voters and tuned in the generals. It is up to us to reverse that situation. Only a few hours after the United Nations mandate for Iraq expired and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) went into effect, US forces opened fire on a female staffer for Iraq?s Biladi TV, critically wounding her. The reason for the attack was unclear. This incident could be the first test of the SOFA. After all, US forces are not supposed to do anything in Iraq without coordinating with the Iraqi government and aren?t supposed to have anything to do with civilians outside of an Iraqi court issued warrant. The possibility exists that this may be treated as a criminal assault and the US forces involved will be tried in an Iraqi court. The greater likelihood, however, is that nothing will happen and that US forces will continue to operate like the occupying forces they are. Kind of like the way the Israeli military operates in Gaza. Ron Jacobs is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs' essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch's collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. His first novel, Short Order Frame Up, is published by Mainstay Press. He can be reached at: rjacobs3625 at charter.net From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jan 6 17:02:43 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:02:43 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israel's Historical Mistake Message-ID: <200901070002.n0702hSX004792@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090106/5af4770d/attachment.txt From fentona at shaw.ca Tue Jan 6 17:42:11 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 16:42:11 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Venezuela expels Israel envoy over Gaza attacks Message-ID: <2866F84D-2BDC-49DC-B558-07E3E1BAC23E@shaw.ca> Venezuela expels Israel envoy over Gaza attacks Tue Jan 6, 2009 4:40pm EST http://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSN06444577 CARACAS, Jan 6 (Reuters) - Venezuela expelled the ambassador to Israel on Tuesday in protest over the offensive in Gaza only hours after leftist President Hugo Chavez called the attacks a Palestinian "holocaust." The socialist Chavez, a harsh critic of Israel and the United States, in recent years has frequently withdrawn Venezuela's diplomatic envoys amid bilateral disputes and last year kicked out the U.S. ambassador over a conflict involving allied Bolivia. The OPEC nation's Foreign Ministry said in a statement that Israel's campaign constituted "flagrant violations of International Law" and the use of "state terrorism." "For the reasons mentioned above, the government of Venezuela has decided to expel the Ambassador of Israel and part of the personnel of the Embassy of Israel," the statement said. The Israeli embassy did not respond to phone calls requesting comment. Chavez in 2006 threatened to break ties with Israel over its military campaign in Lebanon in a war of words that led both nations to withdraw their envoys. On Monday he accused Washington of poisoning the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to destabilize the Middle East and justify U.S.- backed Israeli incursions into Arab countries. Israel is under international pressure to reach a ceasefire with Hamas militants and halt an offensive that has killed nearly 600 Palestinians, including more than 40 in a U.N. school sheltering civilians. "The Holocaust, that is what is happening right now in Gaza," Chavez said in televised comments earlier on Tuesday. "The president of Israel at this moment should be taken to the International Criminal Court together with the President of the United States." The United States, which Chavez describes as a decadent empire, firmly backs Israel -- its principal ally in the region. (Reporting by Brian Ellsworth; Editing by Sandra Maler) From tchilds at resist.ca Tue Jan 6 18:05:17 2009 From: tchilds at resist.ca (tchilds at resist.ca) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 17:05:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Israel continues to get unshakable support from Harper - Linda McQuaig Message-ID: <65447.64.85.36.244.1231290317.squirrel@mail.resist.ca> http://www.lindamcquaig.com/Columns/ViewColumn.cfm?REF=90 Israel continues to get unshakable support from Harper by Linda McQuaig Problematic nature of promises takes on a new dimension with intense attack on Gaza Strip. Dateline: Monday, January 05, 2009 On Israel's 60th anniversary last April, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised Canada's "unshakable" support for Israel. At the time, this struck me as odd. It would be understandable for a prime minister to offer Canada's "unshakable" support for the principles of democracy, the rule of law, human rights, etc. But for a country? A country is led by a government, and a government is always fallible. Why would Canada promise its unqualified support for any country? Such unqualified support is particularly problematic when the country is locked in a bitter struggle with millions of people whose land it has held under military occupation for more than forty years. The problematic nature of Harper's promise has taken on a new dimension with Israel's intense bombing of the Gaza Strip, which has left more than 400 Palestinians dead. Even before the bombing began on Saturday, the 2-year-old Israeli blockade had largely sealed Gaza's borders, creating one of the world's worst humanitarian crises. Early this month, UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk reported that Israel's siege of Gaza was allowing "only barely enough food and fuel to enter to stave off mass famine and disease." He described Israel's action as "collective punishment". Falk, a Jewish-American law professor, called on the world community to take action to protect the 1.5 million people in Gaza, noting that "[s]ome governments of the world are complicit by continuing their support politically and economically for Israel's punitive approach." Canada, with its "unshakable" support, seems to fit into this category. Indeed, last March Canada signed an agreement with Israel establishing co-operation in "border management and security". On Saturday, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon blamed the current violence squarely on militant Palestinian groups firing rockets into southern Israel. Cannon offered no criticism of Israel for dropping bombs on the densely populated Palestinian territory. Ottawa's stance resembles that of the Bush administration, which has put all blame for the current bloodshed on Palestinians. But, according to Falk, it was actually Israel that broke the truce between Israel and Hamas, the elected Palestinian government in Gaza. The truce had held for several months, Falk noted, until an Israeli incursion into Gaza last month killed several people. After that, Palestinian militants resumed their rocket attacks, which have killed two Israelis. Ottawa and Washington have emphasized Israel's right to defend itself. Neither government has suggested any comparable right for the Palestinians even though it is the Palestinians, not the Israelis, who are acutely vulnerable. Israel has total air supremacy, and a large nuclear arsenal. The Palestinians are without any means of self-defence (beyond the crude rockets they fire into Israel). This extreme military imbalance means that the current fighting is not really a military conflict (as it's often portrayed in the media), but rather a turkey shoot. South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu expressed outrage at the lopsided nature of the fight: "In the context of total aerial supremacy, in which one side in a conflict deploys lethal aircraft against opponents with no means of defending themselves, the bombardment bears all the hallmarks of war crimes." The Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel should also be condemned. They are violent acts against civilians, and Israel has a right to defend itself. But this isn't an open-ended right. It doesn't include the right to impose collective punishment or to bomb a defenceless population. The Harper government, in providing "unshakable" support for well-armed Israel, is helping facilitate the turkey shoot. From critical.montages at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 18:15:15 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 20:15:15 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Venezuela Expels Israeli Ambassador Message-ID: News Americas Venezuela expels Israeli ambassador Venezuela has expelled the Israeli ambassador to protest against the country's assault on Gaza, after the Venezuelan president described it as a "holocaust". The move on Tuesday came hours after 40 Palestinians were killed at a UN school where civilians had taken shelter amid the offensive. "The Holocaust, that is what is happening right now in Gaza," Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, said in televised comments. "The president of Israel at this moment should be taken to the International Criminal Court together with the president of the United States." At least 660 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since Israel began its offensive on December 27, in what it says is an attempt to halt Palestinian rocketfire from Gaza. 'State terrorism' Venezuela's foreign ministry said in a statement that Israel's campaign constituted "flagrant violations of international law" and the use of "state terrorism". "For the reasons mentioned above, the government of Venezuela has decided to expel the ambassador of Israel and part of the personnel of the embassy of Israel," the statement said. On Monday, Chavez, a strong critic of Israel and the US, had accused Washington of poisoning Yasser Arafat, the late former Palestinian president, to destabilise the Middle East and justify US-backed Israeli incursions. The United States, which Chavez describes as a decadent empire, firmly backs Israel, its principal ally in the region. On Tuesday, the White House said it would support an "immediate" ceasefire in Gaza but only if it was likely to be "durable". From fentona at shaw.ca Tue Jan 6 18:45:56 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 17:45:56 -0800 Subject: [R-G] The Gaza Ghetto Message-ID: <5B31EDD3-54BB-45FA-BFBB-389CDA50B557@shaw.ca> http://www.killingtrain.com/node/673 The Gaza Ghetto Justin Podur Jan 6/08 The Warsaw/Gaza Ghetto Joseph Massad from Columbia University has an article called "The Gaza Ghetto Uprising" , where he compares the current Israeli attack on Gaza to the Nazi attack on the Jewish Ghetto in Warsaw. Any relative analogy can be broken. To make an analogy is not to say two things are the same. Just that they are the same in important respects. In this case, the gigantic disparity between the victims and the aggressors and the complicity of the rest of the world. A note here. In this analogy, Palestinians are the Jews. And I do think of blaming the Palestinians for supposedly bringing this on themselves or discussing how poor their strategy is, is at about the same moral level as blaming the Jews during the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. The Jews were heroes, facing unstoppable enemies and the indifference of the world. In those respects, the analogy applies. In any case, Joseph Massad is not the first to make this comparison. It was made in 2002 before Israel massacred hundreds of people in the West Bank and Gaza in what Tanya Reinhart described as Israel's moral low point (to that date - since then Israel has gone much lower). That quote from an Israeli military officer inspired an artist friend of mine to create this piece. Please feel free to use it or share it. From yolandatsangarakis at hotmail.com Tue Jan 6 18:47:37 2009 From: yolandatsangarakis at hotmail.com (Yolanda Tsangarakis ) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 01:47:37 +0000 Subject: [R-G] Venezuela expels Israel envoy over Gaza attacks Message-ID: Sweet. Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network -----Original Message----- From: Anthony Fenton Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 00:42:11 To: Subject: Venezuela expels Israel envoy over Gaza attacks Venezuela expels Israel envoy over Gaza attacks Tue Jan 6, 2009 4:40pm EST http://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSN06444577 CARACAS, Jan 6 (Reuters) - Venezuela expelled the ambassador to Israel? on Tuesday in protest over the offensive in Gaza only hours after? leftist President Hugo Chavez called the attacks a Palestinian? "holocaust." The socialist Chavez, a harsh critic of Israel and the United States,? in recent years has frequently withdrawn Venezuela's diplomatic envoys? amid bilateral disputes and last year kicked out the U.S. ambassador? over a conflict involving allied Bolivia. The OPEC nation's Foreign Ministry said in a statement that Israel's? campaign constituted "flagrant violations of International Law" and? the use of "state terrorism." "For the reasons mentioned above, the government of Venezuela has? decided to expel the Ambassador of Israel and part of the personnel of? the Embassy of Israel," the statement said. The Israeli embassy did not respond to phone calls requesting comment. Chavez in 2006 threatened to break ties with Israel over its military? campaign in Lebanon in a war of words that led both nations to? withdraw their envoys. On Monday he accused Washington of poisoning the late Palestinian? leader Yasser Arafat to destabilize the Middle East and justify U.S.- backed Israeli incursions into Arab countries. Israel is under international pressure to reach a ceasefire with Hamas? militants and halt an offensive that has killed nearly 600? Palestinians, including more than 40 in a U.N. school sheltering? civilians. "The Holocaust, that is what is happening right now in Gaza," Chavez? said in televised comments earlier on Tuesday. "The president of Israel at this moment should be taken to the? International Criminal Court together with the President of the United? States." The United States, which Chavez describes as a decadent empire, firmly? backs Israel -- its principal ally in the region. (Reporting by Brian Ellsworth; Editing by Sandra Maler) From fentona at shaw.ca Tue Jan 6 23:48:55 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 22:48:55 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Bush Plan Eliminated Obstacle to Gaza Assault Message-ID: <99435D8C-7DD3-4F82-A8A5-A4362C1FDA74@shaw.ca> POLITICS: Bush Plan Eliminated Obstacle to Gaza Assault Analysis by Gareth Porter* http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45297 WASHINGTON, Jan 5 (IPS) - Until mid-2007, there was a serious political obstacle to a massive conventional war by Israel against Hamas in Gaza: the fact that Hamas had won free and fair elections for the Palestinian parliament and was still the leading faction in a fully legitimate government. But the George W. Bush administration helped Israel eliminate that obstacle by deliberately provoking Hamas to seize power in Gaza. That plan was aimed at getting Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to dissolve the democratically elected Hamas government -- something Bush had tried unsuccessfully to do for many months. Hamas won 56 percent of the seats in the Palestinian parliament in the January 2006 elections, and the following month, the Palestinian Legislative Council voted for a new government under Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. The Bush administration immediately began to use its control over the "Quartet" (the U.S., European Union, United Nations and Russia), to try to reverse the results of the election. The Quartet responded to the Hamas victory by demanding that Hamas renounce all armed resistance to Israel and even "disarm" before a political solution was reached. That was in effect a demand that Israel be allowed to use its military and economic controls over the West Bank and Gaza to impose its own unilateral solution on the Palestinians. Meanwhile, the Bush administration and the Europeans cut off all financing for the Palestinian government, while Israel refused to hand over to the Palestinian authorities the VAT and customs duties it collected on behalf of the Palestinians under the Paris Protocol signed with the PLO as part of the Oslo Accords. When Abbas continued to resist U.S. demands for an end to the elected government, both Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told him at the United Nations in September 2006 that they would not accept a Palestinian government with Hamas participation. Then Rice was dispatched to Ramallah in early October 2006 to tighten the screws on the Palestinian president. She demanded a commitment from Abbas to dissolve the Haniyeh government within two weeks, and then accepted his promise to do so within four weeks, according to a later U.S. State Department memorandum published in Vanity Fair magazine. There was one problem, however, with the U.S. demand: under Article 45 of the Palestinian Authority's "Basic Law", Abbas could fire the prime minister, but he could not appoint a new one who did not represent the majority party in the Palestinian Legislative Council. Abbas failed to act on the dissolution promise, so the Bush administration gave him a memo demanding that Hamas be given a "clear choice, with a clear deadline" to accept or reject "a new government that meets the Quartet principles". The memo, published in part last January in Vanity Fair, said that if Hamas refused that demand, "you should make clear your intention to declare a state of emergency and form an emergency government explicitly committed to that platform." It further demanded that Abbas "strengthen his team" by bringing in "credible figures of strong standing in the international community". That was a reference to the long-time director of Fatah's paramilitary forces, Muhammad Dahlan, who had long been regarded as the candidate of the Bush administration and its allies. In April 2003, Yasser Arafat had been under pressure from British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to name Dahlan as head of Palestinian security. In late 2006, Rice got Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to agree to provide covert military training and money to equip a major increase in Dahlan's militia. But there was another element of the Bush administration plan. It encouraged Dahlan to carry out attacks against the Hamas security and political infrastructure in Gaza, which were well-known to be far stronger than that of Abbas's Fatah faction. In a later interview with Vanity Fair, Dahlan admitted that he had carried out "very clever warfare" against Hamas in Gaza for many months. Other sources said that Dahlan's militia was carrying out torture and kidnappings of Hamas security personnel. Alvaro de Soto, then U.N. Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, wrote in his confidential End of Mission Report that the U.S. "clearly pushed for a confrontation between Fatah and Hamas..." He recalled that the "U.S. envoy" to a Feb. 2, 2007 meeting of the Quartet in Washington had twice declared, "how much I like this violence", because "it means that other Palestinians are resisting Hamas." That U.S. envoy was Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The Bush administration seemed to want Hamas to know about its plan to help Fatah use force against the Hamas organisation in Gaza. A Jan. 5, 2007 Reuters story datelined Jerusalem revealed an internal U.S. document showing that the United States had pledged 86 million dollars to "strengthen and reform elements of the Palestinian security sector controlled by the PA presidency" and "dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism and establish law and order in the West Bank and Gaza". When Abbas negotiated a new agreement with Hamas in Mecca in February 2007 on a Palestinian unity government, the Bush administration responded by drafting a secret "action plan for the Palestinian presidency" which threatened that the "international community" would "no longer deal exclusively with the Presidency" if it did not go along with U.S. demands, and that "[m]any countries in the EU and the G8" would "start looking for more credible interlocutors on the Palestinian side who can deliver on key issues of security and governance". The plan, dated Mar. 2, 2007, called for Abbas to "start taking necessary action against groups undermining the ceasefire with the goal of ensuring all armed groups within Palestine security institutions in stages (between 2007 and 2008)..." It promised to help Abbas to "impose necessary order on the Palestinian street" through "superiority" of Fatah forces over Hamas, after which there would be new elections in autumn 2007. Again that U.S. plan was not kept secret but was leaked in April 2007 by the Jordanian newspaper Al-Majd. That could only have happened if Jordanian intelligence services, which cooperative very closely with the United States, made the decision to leak it to the press. Then, on Jun. 7, 2007 the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz revealed that Israel had been asked to authorise the shipment of dozens of Egyptian armoured cars and hundreds of rockets and thousands of hand grenades for the Fatah security forces. The leaked plans for a military buildup were an open invitation to Hamas to take preemptive action. The day after the Haaretz story, Hamas launched a campaign which eliminated the Fatah security presence in Gaza in five days. The day after the complete defeat of Dahlan's forces in Gaza, Abbas dissolved the Haniyeh unity government and named his own prime minister, in violation of the Palestinian charter. The rout of Dahlan's forces was a predictable consequence of the Bush administration's policy. As the commander of Fatah's al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, Khalid Jaberi, told Vanity Fair's David Rose, "We can only conclude that having Hamas in control serves [the Bush administration's] overall strategy, because their policy was so crazy otherwise." But the Bush administration had not only accomplished its goal of eliminating a Hamas-dominated government; it had also set up a new argument that could later be used to justify an all-out Israeli offensive in Gaza: that Hamas had mounted an "illegal coup" in Gaza. That was the term that Rice used on Jan. 2 in justifying the Israeli operations against Gaza. *Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in 2006. (END/2009) From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Wed Jan 7 00:50:39 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:50:39 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] The 1930s Chicago Plan and The American Monetary Act Message-ID: <49645ECF.5000301@ashisuto.co.jp> by Stephen Zarlenga AMI Monetary Reform Conference, Chicago (October 2005) CP refers to the Chicago Plan, by Nichols EP refers to Economic Policy for a Free Society by Henry Simons Why is monetary reform so critically important? Because the money power has more impact on citizens day to day lives than the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches. It's really a fourth branch of government - or should be - and leaving it in private hands is dangerous and unacceptable - it negates the balancing of powers principle of our constitution and creates an aristocracy - a plutocracy - the rule by wealth. A privately controlled money system can nullify hard-won reforms in other areas such as the environment, medical care, or peace initiatives because such concentration of wealth and power will eventually overwhelm and be used against the people to unwind whatever other gains we've achieved. Witness the attack on Roosevelt's social security reform. You can't secure real progress, with the private control of society's money system behind your lines. WHAT DOES MONETARY REFORM REALLY MEAN? It means establishing a fair system that doesn't give special privileges to some and disadvantage to others - that doesn't concentrate wealth and power. It means helping the society create values for living well. You received a draft of The American Monetary Act, Version 9. Comments are invited in tomorrow's session and by letter. Your views may help shape this initiative. Specialists will also be asked, and good points will be written into Version 10 which will become public inviting comment. Until then its not for further distribution. If you think someone should see it, please ask me to forward a copy. We're not seeking commitment to this now - we're writing what it would take to legally implement the three-part reform in Chapter 24 of The Lost Science of Money (2002). Its vitally important to be ready with a workable plan - WHEN NOT IF - the next financial meltdown occurs. No one knows when that will be since there's tremendous power in the control over a money system, but warning signs have been there for years. It could be triggered by a couple of bad hurricanes! This American Monetary Act is part of a long reform tradition going back to the Chicago Plan of the Great Depression (and that plan was close to one advanced independently by the great scientist Frederick Soddy in Britain in 1926). Lets start in December 1932. It's been only twenty years since the Federal Reserve was created by Americas banking "elite" (See The Lost Science of Money, Chapter 19). But in those brief twenty years the Fed brought America to its knees: * Farms were wrecked with huge debt and falling land prices; * factories were closed; * exchanges were destroyed; * banks were closing; * the economy collapsed - people couldn't find work and many were hungry. >From 1929 to 1932: * National income dropped 52% * Industrial production fell 47% * Wholesale prices fell 32% * The real value of debt rose 140% * Unemployment rose 329% from 3.5 million to fifteen million people, over a quarter of our workforce was unemployed. All that destruction in less than twenty years! In that horrendous climate many economists were aware that the banking system caused the problem and major changes were needed. One fear of bankers and economists was that all the banks would simply be nationalized, because people were angry. They feared violent revolution might be sparked. In this atmosphere the best economic minds in the country devised a reform plan. Henry Simons from the University of Chicago created the proposal and prominent economists from other universities joined him in what became known as the "Chicago Plan". Economists like Paul Douglas of the Univesity of Chicago; Frank Graham and Charles Whittlesley of Princeton; Irving Fisher of Yale; Earl Hamilton of Duke; and Willford King of New York University, to name a few. One version was sent to all the academic economists - about a thousand total. Of those responding, 235 from 157 universities agreed with the proposal; another forty approved it with reservations and only 45 disapproved. So the plan had broad professional support. Variants of the Chicago Plan usually started by condemning the banking structure as foolish and harmful: "If the purpose of money and credit were to discourage the exchange of goods and services, to destroy periodically the wealth produced, to frustrate and trip those who save, our present monetary system (does that) most effectively!" They dispensed with the gold standard as not a real standard, because the value of gold had changed violently up and down against commodities. >From 1914 to 1917 wholesale prices rose 65% and, then increased another 55% to May 1920, So gold coins lost over 75% of their value against wholesale prices in the Fed's first six years. Then by June 1921 wholesale prices fell 56% against gold. "Hard money" advocates who believe that gold money has been stable should study these facts. One version of the plan quoted Roosevelt's referring to gold as an "old fetish of so-called international bankers". The main features of the Chicago Plan were that: FIRST: Only the government would create money. The Federal Reserve banks would be nationalized, but not the individual member banks. The power to create money was to be removed from private banks by abolishing fractional reserves - the mechanism through which the banking system creates money. So the plan called for 100% reserves on checking accounts which simply meant banks would be warehousing and transferring the money and charging fees for their services. SECOND: The Plan separated the loan-making function, which can belong in private banks, from the money-creation function, which belongs in government. Lending was still to be a private banking function, but lending deposited long-term savings money, not created credits. In this way they'd restrict an unstable practice known as borrowing short and lending long - making long term loans with short term deposits. Some variations proposed this be done through mutual fund-like mechanisms, or by chartering entirely new types of banks. THIRD: The proposal recognized the distinction between money and credit, which had been confused through fractional reserves and what was called the "real bills doctrine". The confusion was seen as one of the causes of the depression, because when businesses reduced their borrowings on commercial bills which occurs during any downturn, parts of the money supply had been automatically liquidated. The Chicago Plan saw the instability of this - that it aggravates a downturn. Simon made this grand observation which still afflicts us today: "The mistake ... lies in fearing money and trusting debt. Money itself is highly amenable to democratic, legislative control, for no community wants a markedly appreciating or depreciating currency ... but money is not easily manageable alongside a mass of private debt and private near-moneys ... or alongside a mountain of public debt". (EP, page 199) Some variations of the plan had the US Government lending banks all or part of newly printed cash needed to achieve 100% reserves. This was a crucial part of the plan, because depositors were going to the banks and withdrawing their accounts, deflating the system. This loaning of reserves feature also elegantly converted all the previously monetized bank credits into real US money on which the banks paid interest to our government. It post facto made them intermediaries, earning some reasonable spread for their loaning work. The best economic minds supported the Chicago Plan: Paul Douglas wrote: "This proposal will of course be opposed by the bankers from whom it takes the lucrative privilege of creating purchasing power. It would however insure the safety of deposits, give large revenues to the government, provide complete social control over monetary matters and prevent abnormal fluctuations in the capital market. At the same time it would permit the allocation of productive resources ... to remain primarily in private hands. All in all it seems the most promising program for the reform of our monetary and credit system ... " (CP, page 141) Frank Graham wrote it was self evident that the right of issuing money belongs in government, and that banks seignorage profits were a kind of tax on the community. "This privilege that the banks enjoy is in no way essential to the lending process". Marinner Eccles who became Fed Chairman under Roosevelt testified that the best course would be for the government to nationalize the Federal Reserve banks. Congressman Jerry Voorhis made the case for 100% reserves and putting money into circulation by paying pensions and disabled persons. As late as 1945 Voorhis introduced legislation for a US Monetary Authority as our sole creator of money. (CP, page 162) James Angell who disagreed with parts of it still wrote that "it would go far toward making economic activity reasonably stable". (CP, page 144) Maurice Allais the great French economist backed the plan and published a book on it in 1948. Irving Fisher of Yale, wrote on it extensively and popularly well into the 1940s. [ John Hotson and COMER advocated it in 1985 (CP, page 174) ] The young Milton Friedman was the best known advocate for the Chicago Plan in the postwar period, writing: "Henry Simons held the view ... which I share - that the creation of fiat currency should be a government monopoly". Friedman testified on this before Congress as late as 1975 and in 1985 wrote: "I have not given up advocacy of one-hundred percent reserves". Friedman thought the transition to 100% reserves would not be difficult - "say 25% a year from now, 50% two years from now, et cetera" (CP pages 173, 181). But turning the Chicago Plan into law proved elusive. When University of Chicago's Chancellor Maynard Hutchins sent a copy of the plan to Senator Bronson Cutting in December 1933, Cutting asked him to draft a bill. Four months later he telegrammed Hutchins asking where it was, and Simons went to present the essentials of the plan to Cutting, who introduced it in the Senate on June 6th 1934 (S. 3744). Wright Patman introduced it in the House (HR9855). The bill required 100% reserves on checking accounts, which it separated from savings accounts which had to keep five percent reserves. It set up a Federal Monetary Authority to control the supply of currency and the buying and selling of government securities. The American Monetary Act, a three part reform to bring our money system under proper public control agrees in its main features with the Chicago Plan {1}: First: It incorporates the Federal Reserve banks into the US Treasury where money will be created by the government as money, not as private interest-bearing debt; and will be spent into circulation to promote the general welfare and monitored to be neither inflationary nor deflationary. Second: It removes the banks' privilege to create purchasing media through the fractional reserve system. Fractional reserves are elegantly ended by the US government initially loaning banks enough money at interest to bring reserves to 100%, converting all the past monetized credit, into US government money. Banks then act as intermediaries accepting deposits and loaning them out to borrowers, what people think they do now. Third: It spends newly created money into circulation on infrastructure, including education and healthcare needed for a growing society, starting with the $1.5 trillion that the American Society of Civil Engineers estimate is needed for infrastructure repair; creating good jobs across our nation, re-invigorating local economies and re-funding all levels of government. The false specter of inflation is always raised against such suggestions that our government fulfill its responsibility to furnish the nation's money supply. But that knee jerk reaction is the result of decades, even centuries of propaganda against government. When one actually examines the monetary record, as The Lost Science of Money does, it becomes clear that government has a superior record issuing and controlling money than the bankers have. So both plans envision taking over the Federal Reserve System and regional Federal Reserve banks. Both separate the money creation and money-lending functions, placing the money creation function in government and leaving the lending function in banks. Both set up national monetary authorities to control the money supply. One difference between the plans is their greater awe of the "free market". But the empirical nourishment we've received since they wrote calls for greater care in defining what's meant by "free market" terminology. They strongly supported free markets, but their definition differed from the present conception. For example Henry Simons thought only stiff governmental regulation could create free market conditions: "The presentation of laissez faire as a do nothing policy is misleading ... its an obvious responsibility of the state ... to maintain the legal and institutional framework within which competition can function effectively ... the state (must have) ... heavy responsibilities and large control functions". (EP, pages 42-43) Like the great 19th century reformer Henry George, Simons strongly believed that companies like railroads and utilities should all be government owned: "The state should face the necessity of actually taking over, owning and managing directly both the railroads and the utilities, and all other industries in which it is impossible to maintain effectively competitive conditions". (EP, pages 50-51) Greater attention to defining "free markets" might have avoided their current degeneration into mere forms of kleptocracy falsely promoted under the banner of freedom. Better yet, instead of misusing the term FREE, the word FAIR is what people really have mind. Some groups equated free markets with no governmental regulation - just the opposite of what's needed to have "free markets". Another difference was their preference for an automatic system with little discretion. We are not so worried about that. The American Monetary Act goes beyond the Chicago plan in three important improvements derived from the lessons of history - experience with the Bank of England's nationalization in 1946, and our American experience of the past fifty years: First, the Act proposes that infrastructure expenditures, including education and health and farming parity be used as mechanisms to get newly created money spent into circulation to promote the general welfare. We've observed that the privately controlled money system can't or won't make the necessary infrastructure expenditures. Second the Act introduces considerations of fairness, sustainability, sound environmental practice and social cohesion as values in monetary decision making. In other words moral considerations are explicitly considered. I wish we were the first to do this but Article Two of the treaty protocols establishing the European System of Central Banks and the EURO beat us to it, and it's already operational in the EURO system. The provision is quoted In Chapter 23 of The Lost Science of Money: "To promote throughout the Community a Harmonious and balanced development of economic activities, sustainable and non-inflationary growth respecting the environment, a high level of employment and of social protection, the raising of the standard of living and quality of life, and economic and social cohesion and solidarity among Member States". (However, it says this is to be done "without prejudice to the objective of price stability", by which they mean less than 2% inflation.) Third the American Monetary Act places more reasonable nationwide legal limits on the charging of interest, with an eight percent cap - about what it was in most state laws until 1980 or 1981. It's obscene that people are being forced to pay 29% a year interest. Friends have told us that economists and bankers will strongly object to that and to other parts of this proposal. But we didn't expect them as allies in this fight - a fight we didn't start, but are involuntary participants in. Remember billionaire speculator Warren Buffet's warning remark "If there is class war in the United States, my class is winning". He was being facetious - Buffet would never describe the purposeful destruction of our most vulnerable fellow citizens and their children, by the most clever, as "winning!" He'd probably join me in calling it cannibalism and agree that indigestion and worse is coming. Finally let's remember that Warren Buffet's role as a speculator is largely negative and not creative. WHY DIDN'T THE CHICAGO PLAN PASS First there was no understanding or support for the proposal among the electorate. Only Irving Fisher seems to have understood the necessity for popularizing the matter. Simons himself got cold feet and shied away from promoting the plan, desiring to remain on a level of professorial discussion. He even threw a wet towel on Fisher who was promoting the reform suggesting that Fisher avoid popularizing the idea! Simon was demanding perfection from his own proposal and was being overly cautious. The proper goal was not perfection, but should have simply been substantial improvement that the Chicago Plan clearly represented. Instead Simons became obsessed with how banks would evade the reforms. Second the Plan was mishandled politically. Cutting appears to have misunderstood his own bill, and incorrectly said in interviews that credit as well as money creation was also to be a sole function of government. Third, the bill suffered a major setback when Senator Cutting died in an airplane crash in May 1935 while being forced to defend his election results in New Mexico by challenges from the Roosevelt Administration which was then held responsible for his death. The last attempt at 100% reserves was when Senator Nye of North Dakota tried to place it in part of the Administration's 1935 banking reform legislation, but his amendment was defeated. The FDR administration had its own banking reform bill and remained ambiguous on the Chicago Plan, never commenting on it even though the political climate and professional support for the plan was sufficient to get it passed, had they made some effort. Instead his Treasury Secretary Morganthau was trying to make minor adjustments without fundamentally challenging the banking system. The brilliant economist Lauchlin Currie had taken up the fight for hundred percent reserves from within the administration. Currie pointed out that economists had not really agreed on the nature of money and focused his attention to defining what is money in our system. But he made two political errors: First he thought he could "sneak" 100% reserves through in the administration's 1935 banking legislation with a provision giving the Fed the power to raise reserves. He thought "we'll just get them raised to 100%". But Senator Carter Glass representing Banker interests easily blocked this by putting in a provision in the conference committee limiting the reserve requirement to double what they were at that time, which was about fifteen percent. Curries other error was to compromise in advance writing: "An advisor in Washington is of limited usefulness unless he acquires some sense of what is feasible and how projects and policies should be presented to have the best chance of being adopted". (CP, page 128) I disagree. Promoting the reform in terms of morality rather than mechanics and economics is the better approach. Perhaps if it had been more clearly stated, in terms of ending that special bankers' privilege rather than solely in terms of technical considerations, there would have been greater public understanding and support. We have to learn from the mistakes these fellows made. Can we learn from what John Maynard Keynes was doing during all this? He was squarely behind the bankers and against such real reform. Yet he knew that he had to break out of orthodox economics or the whole system was in danger of being overturned. Keynesianism was a way to allow banks not government to keep control over the money-creation process, and while the more narrow minded economists fought Roosevelt's attempts to create money and jobs as inflationary, during the nations worst deflation, Keynes knew better. Keynes' approach was direct to the public: The New York Times in December 1933, working with Felix Frankfurter (who wrote a rather poor book called Other People's Money, and later became a Supreme Court Justice), got Keynes to write an open letter to Roosevelt, which they published. Keynes wisely advised Roosevelt that "Only the expenditures of public authority" could turn the tide of depression. Well, that was obvious enough! {2} However, Keynes inappropriately warned Roosevelt not to create the money for this, but only to borrow it, and wrongly advised him that there was already enough money in circulation, and that: "increasing the quantity of money ... is like trying to get fat by buying a larger belt". Several times, his letter attempted to influence Roosevelt to drop his program of necessary reforms, and to concentrate on short range actions: " ... even wise and necessary reform may, in some respects impede recovery ... NIRA [National Industrial Recovery Act of June 1933] which is essentially reform and impedes recovery ... " (See The Lost Science of Money, Chapter 20) Keynes was therefore not "revolutionary" except in relation to the utter backwardness of the financial establishment. He didn't come close to a real solution, but essentially protected his class. The real question has always been whether the nation's money should be created under law, by government, or under the private caprice of bankers What were the Austrian economists up to? Frederich Hayek was arguing against national currencies - arguing for in effect an international control over all economies through the gold system, incredibly writing: "There is no rational basis for the separate regulation of the quantity of money in a national area that remains part of a wider economic system"; arguing that independent national currencies cannot insulate a country from foreign shocks; and that fluctuating exchange rates would be bad. Hayek tried to twist hundred percent reserves to covering them 100% with gold. A deflationist. This is the position supporting the creditors and usury and plutocracy; the normal outcome of Austrian Economics. They talk a freedom game, but promote serfdom. Psychologically they remind me of those Middle Ages cults that used to whip their own backs with chains. Always remember, had we followed the ideas of the Austrian School, there would have never been a United States of America. If we follow their ideas now, there will soon not be a United States of America. Unfortunately the present administration has made this seem like a worthy goal to many of the world's oppressed peoples. Roosevelt's 1935 bank legislation, though an improvement over what had existed, wasn't considered the final word in banking reform - additional laws were expected. Over and over we see the better economists calling for an end to fractional reserves - ending the bankers' privilege to create money. Such was the effect of the horrendous experience with banking. Most of the efforts to enact Chicago Plan reforms ended with World War II as the country went onto a war footing. HOW THE AMERICAN MONETARY ACT CAN GET ENACTED INTO LAW >From the experience with the Chicago plan we learn the importance of: First - having an informed body of people among the electorate to promote and intelligently echo such proposals in their own cities, in meetings, with lawmakers and with media. Second - being ready with an intelligently thought out program. Third - staying on message and not shying away from the politics of it. Fourth - not being afraid of not having all the answers. Some of it requires Aristotle's method - we learn by doing - but we learn. Fifth - Not compromising in advance or trying to sneak through important provisions. The great reformer Henry George wrote in the late 1800s that there are many ways to argue the principles of political economy, but his preference was to examine it from a moral viewpoint. This is one reason we are still reading and hearing about Henry George today. This is one of the best ways to proceed today - showing the unfairness - that is the immorality - of granting special privileges within our society. Who is going to dare argue for special treatment in principle? For what justification? There is none. Their position is untenable. Their focus on mechanics and ill-defined, and therefore confusing, concepts can be VIEWED as a diversion. They are happy to argue over those things forever, so long as they are holding the special privilege - the money power - in the meantime. In terms of facts, the under funding of American infrastructure by $1.5 trillion remains an unanswerable indictment of our present money system. It has been unable or unwilling to fulfill this crucial responsibility. It must be cast aside. It is a danger and an insult to our country, and to humanity - even to the planet earth. Back in the thirties there was the thought that the Chicago plan represented an ideal system of control and as such represented a goal for future evolution. Well folks, the AMI is presenting the American Monetary Act as that future evolution. Thank you for your attention. Links: {1} The latest formulation of the The American Monetary Act is viewable at http://www.monetary.org/amacolorpamphlet.pdf {2} Totten thinks Zarlenga meant Louis D. Brandeis. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_People%27s_Money_and_How_the_Bankers_Use_It. _____ American Monetary Institute Dedicated to the independent study of monetary history, theory, and reform Post Office Box 601 Valatie, New York12184 ami at taconic.net http://www.monetary.org Stephen Zarlenga, Director http://www.monetary.org/chicagoplan.html TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From fentona at shaw.ca Wed Jan 7 08:34:26 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 07:34:26 -0800 Subject: [R-G] The Costly Compromises of Oil From Sand Message-ID: January 7, 2009 The Costly Compromises of Oil From Sand By IAN AUSTEN http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/business/07oilsands.html?_r=1&em OTTAWA ? The oil that is extracted from Canadian dirt is being portrayed as saving America from energy dependence on the unstable Middle East, or an environmental catastrophe in the making ? depending on the perspective. As Barack Obama prepares to take office in two weeks, the debate is no longer academic. The president-elect has promised to move forward with an ambitious program aimed at fighting climate change. Not all oil is alike when it comes to environmental impact, and many environmentalists single out production from the oil sands as the epitome of ?dirty oil.? In a recent study, the RAND Corporation estimated that oil from the oil sands generates about 10 to 30 percent more greenhouse gases than conventional crude. Canada, in large part because of the production capacity of its oil sands, is now the largest oil supplier to the United States. But environmental groups in both countries are pushing for a slowdown or even a halt to further oil sands development, which is concentrated in northern Alberta. Operators of oil sands projects and Canadian governments are eager to point to its potential to reduce America?s dependence on oil from politically unstable regions. Canadian oil sands produce about 1.2 million barrels a day, or about 9 percent of the imported oil consumed in the United States. Production was headed toward 3.5 million barrels a day by 2015 before the economic slowdown; with the vast reserves available, Canadian oil sands have the potential to produce the equivalent of 1.7 trillion barrels of oil. The oil sands companies, however, have been scaling back as falling oil prices and the general market turmoil create a significant economic challenge for the projects. The entire process adds up to the world?s most capital-intensive method for extracting oil. A tiny example: each of the tires on the cartoonishly oversize dump trucks used in oil sands mining costs about $60,000. While no one is about to park their giant dump trucks, several companies have recently announced delays in future oil sands investments. In November, a consortium led by Petro-Canada said it would temporarily stop 23.8 billion Canadian dollars ($19.5 billion) worth of expansions to its oil sands operations in Alberta. ?We?re not in megaproject mode anymore,? Steve W. Laut, the president and chief executive of Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., said to analysts after cutting his company?s capital spending plans in half. And as Washington prepares to deal with climate change, environmentalists, who generally prefer to use the deposits? traditional name of tar sands, are already pressing for restrictions on the projects. ?It?s one of the most destructive projects on earth,? said Susan Casey- Lefkowitz, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington. ?It would be strongly resisted in the United States to exempt the tar sands from any climate agreement.? Transforming the tar, more properly known as bitumen, which is mixed with sand, into petroleum is energy intensive and creates significant carbon emissions. Steam created by burning natural gas separates the semisolid bitumen. Then, more natural gas is needed to turn the bitumen into synthetic crude, which can be processed by refineries. The development of oil sands projects has created North America?s greatest boomtown in recent years, Fort McMurray, Alberta. Its outsize economic importance has prompted Canada?s Conservative government, led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, to champion the industry. After the November election in the United States, Mr. Harper said he would seek to devise a continental climate change pact with the Obama administration. Mr. Harper suggested that any such agreement would include an apparent escape hatch for the oil sands because, he argued, of the energy security benefits they offer the United States. Since then, however, Mr. Harper avoided an early defeat of his government, which does not control a majority of seats in the House of Commons, by shutting Parliament. Even if the Obama administration is willing to hold talks with Canada, Mr. Harper?s grip on power is now uncertain. Recent environmental assessments, including the RAND study, also do not further the cause of the oil sands industry. While climate change is the current focus, it is not the only environmental issue surrounding the projects. Spent water used in oil sands projects is placed in lake-size tailings ponds, one of which killed about 500 migrating birds in April. Seepage from the ponds is polluting rivers in northern Canada, some scientists argue. In December, Environmental Defence, an environmental lobby group based in Toronto, estimated that about four billion liters of contaminated water leaked from the ponds each year. (The Alberta government and the oil industry dispute that finding.) Strip mining of the oil sands, the most common method of extraction, has destroyed large swaths of boreal forest, an important habitat for migratory birds and other wildlife. In December, a study published by the Natural Resources Defense Council and two other groups found that six million to 166 million birds could be lost over the next 30 to 50 years because of that disruption. Producers say they are making efforts to address environmental concerns. Mr. Laut?s company, which recently completed a 110,000- barrel-a-day oil sands project, is developing systems to capture and store much of the carbon dioxide it emits. It has applied for government grants to test a system that will trap some of its carbon dioxide output by bubbling the exhaust gases from an upgrading plant through the spent water from a strip mine?s steam. Large-scale programs to capture and store carbon dioxide are not yet in place. The demonstration project of Canadian Natural Resources, for example, is not scheduled to begin until 2010. With oil prices around $49 a barrel, profitability is fast eroding at oil sands projects and may already be vanishing at some operations. Producers have widely differing cost structures and varying definitions of profitability. But Andrew J. Leach, a professor of environmental economics at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, estimates that long-established plants can operate with prices as low as $30 a barrel. But he said newer operations need $60 to $70 a barrel for acceptable returns, and no one will proceed with proposed projects until prices return to the $80 to $90 range. Exactly how Canada could participate in the shaping of an American strategy for climate change is unclear. Mr. Harper, who is from Alberta, initially dismissed concerns about climate change. After taking power in 2006, he abandoned commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions made by the previous Liberal government when it signed the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Instead, Mr. Harper?s government has promised a 20 percent reduction in Canada?s greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. What is more significant, however, is that the proposal wants to use as a baseline 2006 ? a year with more pollution ? rather than the Kyoto standard of 1990. In addition, the new plan requires companies, including oil sands operators, only to reduce the rate at which they emit greenhouse gases. If they achieve those efficiencies, they will still be allowed to raise their total emissions through increased production. Even if Canadian producers dislike American climate change policies, they will be hard-pressed to sell their oil elsewhere. Canada?s pipeline network takes oil sands production south and offers no routes to ports for export to other countries. But some people are optimistic about the prospect of a two-nation climate pact. ?It would be a big mistake for Congress to impose restrictions on the oil sands,? said Paul Cellucci, a former governor of Massachusetts and former United States ambassador to Canada who now works on energy issues for the law firm McCarter & English, in Boston. ?That would not be good for the United States.? From menecraj at shaw.ca Wed Jan 7 09:06:07 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 10:06:07 -0600 Subject: [R-G] Al Jazeera broadcasting from Gaza (they couldn't be denied entry; they were already there) Message-ID: <06D00F6FD3644145B52492657F23B902@agingCHS072729> Al Jazeera via Livestation If you click here (http://www.livestation.com/downloads?tracker=main_menu), you can download an application called "Livestation" (for Mac, Windows, or Linux) which allows you to watch Al Jazeera (and other channels, e.g., BBC World Service) live on your computer. Al Jazeera at this time is the only international broadcaster with a team inside Gaza; other reporters have been denied entry by Israel (but Al Jazeera was already there). ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From news at ckut.ca Wed Jan 7 10:34:01 2009 From: news at ckut.ca (CKUT Community News Collective) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:34:01 -0500 Subject: [R-G] AUDIO from Today's Occupation by Jewish Women of Israeli Consulate in Toronto Message-ID: <4964E789.1010602@ckut.ca> "The people of Gaza are not alone!" MP3 Audio: http://www.ncra.ca/business/admin_ncra/progex/programFiles/53/occupation070109.mp3 AUDIO from Today's Occupation by Jewish Women of Israeli Consulate in Toronto Toronto, Canada: Wednesday January 8, 2009 Time: 10:25 am A diverse group of Jewish Canadian women occupied the Israeli consulate at 180 Bloor Street West in Toronto. This action is in protest against the on-going Israeli assault on the people of Gaza. The group is carrying out this occupation in solidarity with the 1.5 million people of Gaza and to ensure that Jewish voices against the massacre in Gaza are being heard. They are demanding that Israel end its military assault and lift the 18-month siege on the Gaza Strip to allow humanitarian aid into the territory. Israel has been carrying out a full-scale military assault on the Gaza Strip since December 27, 2008. At least 660 people have been killed and 3000 injured in the air strikes and in the ground invasion that began on January 3, 2009. Israel has ignored international calls for a ceasefire and is refusing to allow food, adequate medical supplies and other necessities of life into the Gaza Strip. Protesters are outraged at Israel's latest assault on the Palestinian people and by the Canadian government's refusal to condemn these massacres. They are deeply concerned that Canadians are hearing the views of pro-Israel groups who are being represented as the only voice of Jewish Canadians. The protesters have occupied the consulate to send a clear statement that many Jewish-Canadians do not support Israel's violence and apartheid policies. They are joining with people of conscience all across the world who are demanding an end to Israeli aggression and justice for the Palestinian people. The group includes: Judy Rebick, professor; Judith Deutsch, psychoanalyst and president of Science for Peace; B.H. Yael, filmmaker; Smadar Carmon, an Canadian Israeli peace activist and others. Just before Noon, CKUT Radio interviewed Judy Rebick inside the Israeli Consulate and Mariam Garfinkle on the outside. AUDIO WEB LINKS: http://www.ncra.ca/exchange/dspProgramDetail.cfm?programID=79393 http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/31020 From fentona at shaw.ca Wed Jan 7 11:09:31 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 10:09:31 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Fwd: For Immediate Release: Jewish Women Occupy Israeli Consulate in Toronto References: <9f5bd2d70901071006w4678586cr21089880a8a4ca26@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: fwd: most updated news. all 8 women have been arrested. please call the israeli consulate to express your outrage: (416) 640-8500 also visit this link to condemn the canadian government for its hardline position: http://www.caiaweb.org/node/969 for more information see the release pasted below Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 10:34:56 -0500 Subject: Jewish Women Occupy Israeli Consulate in Toronto Jewish Women Occupy Israeli Consulate in Toronto Toronto: Wednesday January 8, 2009 Time: 10:25 am A diverse group of Jewish Canadian women are currently occupying the Israeli consulate at 180 Bloor Street West in Toronto. This action is in protest against the on-going Israeli assault on the people of Gaza. The group is carrying out this occupation in solidarity with the 1.5 million people of Gaza and to ensure that Jewish voices against the massacre in Gaza are being heard. They are demanding that Israel end its military assault and lift the 18-month siege on the Gaza Strip to allow humanitarian aid into the territory. Israel has been carrying out a full-scale military assault on the Gaza Strip since December 27, 2008. At least 660 people have been killed and 3000 injured in the air strikes and in the ground invasion that began on January 3, 2009. Israel has ignored international calls for a ceasefire and is refusing to allow food, adequate medical supplies and other necessities of life into the Gaza Strip. Protesters are outraged at Israel's latest assault on the Palestinian people and by the Canadian government's refusal to condemn these massacres. They are deeply concerned that Canadians are hearing the views of pro-Israel groups who are being represented as the only voice of Jewish Canadians. The protesters have occupied the consulate to send a clear statement that many Jewish-Canadians do not support Israel's violence and apartheid policies. They are joining with people of conscience all across the world who are demanding an end to Israeli aggression and justice for the Palestinian people. The group includes: Judy Rebick, professor; Judith Deutsch, psychoanalyst and president of Science for Peace; B.H. Yael, filmmaker; Smadar Carmon, an Canadian Israeli peace activist and others. Spokespersons for the group: Judy Rebick: 647-388-1053 Mariam Garfinkle: 416-731-6605 Release is online at http://www.sources.com/Releases/NR135.htm > > From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 11:46:02 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:46:02 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Jewish Women Occupy Israeli Consulate in Toronto Message-ID: <200901071846.n07Ik2iH004359@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/6440131f/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 11:51:41 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:51:41 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Letter from Canadian Labour Congress president Ken Georgetti to Canadian PM regarding Gaza crisis Message-ID: <200901071851.n07Ipf1o013159@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/75ca03da/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 12:05:24 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:05:24 -0800 Subject: [R-G] AJJP Petition To Israeli Soldiers: Please Distribute Message-ID: <200901071905.n07J5O5t003333@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/5833bbcf/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 12:19:44 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:19:44 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Support the women who occupied the Israeli consulate in Toronto Message-ID: <200901071919.n07JJiTx022848@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/236d646d/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 12:24:13 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:24:13 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Message from Nurit Peled-Elhanan Message-ID: <200901071924.n07JODQh029487@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/1f1b5b86/attachment.txt From critical.montages at gmail.com Wed Jan 7 12:57:09 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 14:57:09 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Havana Lifts Restrictions on Some Economic Data Message-ID: Havana lifts restrictions on some economic data By Marc Frank in Havana Published: January 6 2009 02:00 | Last updated: January 6 2009 02:00 Communist Cuba is slowly lifting the veil of secrecy surrounding its people and economy as demands from a more educated public, the information age and the need to better manage its affairs erode concerns about US snooping and the secretive instincts of bureaucrats. Just a few years ago hardly any Cuban statistics were available online. Land use, sales at agricultural markets and monthly tourism arrivals, among other reports, were restricted. It took months to obtain a few initial printed figures covering the previous year's economic and social performance. A statistical abstract of domestic information on one year was not published until the end of the next. But Ra?l Castro has demanded more accurate information since he stepped in for Fidel Castro, his ailing brother, in July 2006 and officially became president in February last year. In a speech to parliament in 2006 he attacked shoddy data as "preventing us from knowing what has been done and what remains to be done". A relative deluge of readily available information has since appeared, at the centre of which is the website of Cuba's National Statistics Office, www.one.cu, reinforced by graduates of its University of Information Sciences. "Without a doubt the government is looking more at different phenomena, from demographics to social and economic issues," says Oscar Maderos, the young director of the NSO. With celebrations on Thursday marking the 50th anniversary of Fidel's triumphant arrival in Havana during the Cuban revolution, the information on the site is one of the more tangible signs of thawing government control under Ra?l's presidency. Last year the initial data for 2007 were released in January and the statistical abstract made available online in June. October 2008 agricultural market sales and November tourism data are already on the site, along with dozens of previously secret reports, such as a study of internal migration. Mr Maderos says the increasing skill of local webmasters and domestic demand were driving the improvement, rather than outside users. "We were swamped with demands for national, provincial and even municipal information due to the universalisation of higher education," he says. Few students have computers, internet access or even phone lines, but they can view the website using the government-controlled intranet at work, school and state-run computer clubs. Controversy still swirls over the reliability of the information coming to light and important data remain secret: for example, the most recent nickel production figures, debt and some balance of payments information, crime statistics and details of the countries from which overseas health workers - Cuba's most important source of foreign exchange - send back service revenues. Mr Maderos insists the information published by his office is credible and gives a detailed, computer-aided explanation on how thousands of his employees gather it across the land. "We have more offices than anyone else in Cuba except the association of small farmers," he says. Even so, users differ about the usefulness of the information on the website. "I do use the page and find it surprisingly good because it's Cuba and I wouldn't have thought they would make so much information available," says a London-based debt broker, who wished to remain anonymous. Pavel Videl at the University of Havana's Centre for the Study of the Cuban Economy says: "The page has improved a lot. There is more transparency for us to work with. What's strange is that they seem to be alone because you do not see similar progress with other institutions that manage statistics, for example the central bank's page." G.B. Hagelberg, an international agriculture and sugar industry analyst, who often uses the website, says: "Government statistics across the world are not immune to manipulation. The only way to keep them reasonably honest is by creating competition within the system . . . and there is none in Cuba." In a country where the state still dominates economic activity, Mr Maderos admits that his office has two roles: "To serve and control." Information remains restricted because of US sanctions, he says. "Why would the information we do release be false? You can't forget our situation. We are under siege. It would be great if some day that changed, but for now we remain vigilant." From suzannedk at gmail.com Wed Jan 7 13:14:00 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 21:14:00 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Israel's Historical Mistake In-Reply-To: <200901070002.n0702hSX004792@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> References: <200901070002.n0702hSX004792@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> Message-ID: This is the beginning of the end of Israel. de Kuyper On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Sid Shniad wrote: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t ))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > A Socialist Project e-bulletin ... No. 175 ... January 6, 2009 > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Israel's Historical Mistake > > > > Hamas must be understood as a creature of the occupation. It is a > response to the occupation, to years of failed peace processes > neglecting the basic demands and legally enshrined rights of the > Palestinian people. > > > Shourideh Cherie Molavi > > > No matter how the current war plays out, it is certain that Israel has > made a big historical mistake in entering Gaza. > > > On Saturday night, one week after the start of Operation Cast Lead in > the Gaza Strip, the Israeli ground operation began. Israeli Forces > began deploying combat units to surround Hamas' main power base, the > declared goal of which is "not to chase after and destroy every last > rocket launcher, but rather to break the Hamas' resistance." Israel > believes that the ground incursion into Gaza will significantly damage > Hamas' standing army and give its leadership a clear sense of the > threat to their rule. > > > Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was clear from the beginning. > "The state of Israel, and a government under me, will make it a > strategic objective to topple the Hamas regime in Gaza," she said at a > meeting of her Kadima party almost a week before the war began. > Indeed, the call to remove Hamas is reiterated by most of Israel's > prominent political figures. > > > The Israeli operation poses a serious risk to Hamas' hold on Gaza. In > addition to eleven days of intense military pressure, Hamas is also > contending with political and economic difficulties from an 18-month > siege imposed by Israel. That said, it is not safe to assume that > Hamas will collapse under the Gaza blitzkrieg. > > > However broken and destabilized by the pressure, all Hamas really has > to do is survive. > > > Even after suffering for 18-months under a brutal blockade, the > majority of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip support the Hamas regime. > According to a public opinion survey conducted by the Al-Mustiqbal > Center in Gaza a week before the invasion began, 52% of those surveyed > said they "would vote for Hamas" in the upcoming elections for the > Palestinian Legislative Council. Only 13% of those surveyed said they > would vote for Fatah. Indeed, most public opinion surveys that have > been conducted as of recent in the West Bank and Gaza indicate this > trend. Considered the most senior Hamas official in the West Bank, > Sheikh Hassan Yousef: > > > It should be said that we don't live in the clouds. We're not > disconnected from the ground, but live among the people and are well > aware of the reality. We read the situation in Israel, the region and > the world very well, and we are well connected to the reality and > assess it... A government can be removed by force, just as Saddam > Hussein's government was removed in Iraq. You can't get rid of us. > > > Sheikh Yousef's words are echoed by the head of the Lebanese political > group Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, who notes that the social and > political reality of the Hamas regime will prove extremely difficult > for Israel's ground invasion "because of the one and a half million > residents who are embracing the resistance." > > > In the meantime, it looks like Israel's plan for Gaza is progressing > as planned. Over 500 dead. Over 2800 injured. Chaotic scenes in > hospitals with entire families killed in the attacks. The damage done > to Israel by Hamas since its inception is nothing compared to what > Israel did in the first 3.4 minutes of the Gaza blitzkrieg. > > > The question is how much time the army has left. On the diplomatic > front, the UN Security Council has proved inadequate to deal with > Israeli aggression as the U.S. has thus far effectively blocked two > calls for a ceasefire. Remarkably, at a time when the military > invasion is escalating on the ground and civilian casualties are > swiftly rising, the Security Council has actually downgraded its > response, refusing even to grant a formal press statement. Further, > the international community mostly the U.S. and Egypt is giving Israel > time to carry out the ground offensive, to severely damage Hamas' hold > on Gaza. Indeed, Israeli diplomats report that Egypt's support for > Israel in the war with Hamas has "been a pleasant surprise for > Jerusalem." Like other regional actors, Egypt wants to see Hamas bleed > before it assumes the role of mediator. > > > While a weakened Hamas may improve the chances of achieving an > agreement of interest to these states once the fighting settles, the > cost of giving Israel free reign to conduct its genocidal attacks may > be too much for the region to handle. Hamas must be understood as a > creature of the occupation. It is a response to the occupation, to > years of failed peace processes neglecting the basic demands and > legally enshrined rights of the Palestinian people. In fact, most of > Hamas senior leadership was raised under the occupation. They were the > Children of the Stone of the Intifada. And while the Children of the > Stone are not made of stone, no Fatah leadership would last if it > rolls into Gaza on Israeli tanks. > > > So who will fill the power vacuum in the potential absence of Hamas? > What type of regime will emerge after this brutal military incursion? > Whatever party that comes into power in Gaza will inhabit a political > and social environment void of restrictions imposed by international > law or principles of human rights and dignity. Through their blatant > disregard for human life, Israel and its allies have effectively > placed Gaza outside the human rights discourse. They have ensured that > similar to the hundreds of innocent civilians with scars documenting > the Gaza blitzkrieg, the faction that seizes control over the Strip > will carry the political scars of this grotesque invasion. > > > Operation Cast Lead has thus far succeeded in creating a "new security > reality" in the region, but this reality may not be one Israel is able > to contend with. > > > Shourideh Cherie Molavi writes regulary on, and reports from, > Palestine, and also lives in Toronto. > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > DEMONSTRATE AGAINST > > THE ISRAELI ASSAULT ON GAZA! > > LIFT THE SIEGE! > > > > WHEN: 11am Saturday January 10, 2009 > > WHERE: Israeli Consulate, 180 Bloor St West, Toronto. > > > As the Israeli ground, air and sea assault continues on the civilian > population of Gaza we need to continue mobilizing against these war > crimes. > > > At least 540 Palestinians have been killed and thousands injured in > the single largest massacre in Gaza since Israel illegally occupied > the area in 1967. > > > These latest war crimes occur in the context of official Canadian > complicity with Israel's illegal siege, bombardment and starvation of > the civilian population in Gaza. We must denounce this on-going > support - including the intensification of bilateral military, > political and economic links between Canada and Israel. Palestinian > civil society continues to urge solidarity in the form of a boycott, > divestment and sanctions campaign until Israel complies with > international law. This is the time for people of conscience to take > up this call from Palestine. > > > Last Saturday, over 10,000 people rallied in Toronto in the largest > Palestine solidarity demonstration in decades. This coming Saturday, > millions of people across the globe will return to the streets in > internationally coordinated demonstrations against the Israeli > onslaught. > > > Join us this Saturday to demand that the Canadian government call for > an immediate halt to Israel's attacks and an end to the siege of Gaza! > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From suzannedk at gmail.com Wed Jan 7 13:45:43 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 21:45:43 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Al Jazeera broadcasting from Gaza (they couldn't be denied entry; they were already there) In-Reply-To: <06D00F6FD3644145B52492657F23B902@agingCHS072729> References: <06D00F6FD3644145B52492657F23B902@agingCHS072729> Message-ID: Thanks! de Kuyper On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Richard Menec wrote: > > > > Al Jazeera via Livestation > > If you click here (http://www.livestation.com/downloads?tracker=main_menu > ), > you can download an application called "Livestation" (for Mac, Windows, or > Linux) which allows you to watch Al Jazeera (and other channels, e.g., BBC > World Service) live on your computer. Al Jazeera at this time is the only > international broadcaster with a team inside Gaza; other reporters have > been > denied entry by Israel (but Al Jazeera was already there). > > ============== > Fresh Ink is an alternative news service > and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. > Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink > ============== > > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From suzannedk at gmail.com Wed Jan 7 15:13:11 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:13:11 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Letter from Canadian Labour Congress president Ken Georgetti to Canadian PM regarding Gaza crisis In-Reply-To: <200901071851.n07Ipf1o013159@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> References: <200901071851.n07Ipf1o013159@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> Message-ID: Letter to Harper about Israeli assault on Gaza is not available on what you sent. Please resend! Thank you! Suzanne de Kuyper On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Sid Shniad wrote: > > From: Ken Georgetti > To: CLC Mailing List > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:09 PM > Subject: from Ken Georgetti re letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper > Fran?ais ? suivre > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > January 6, 2009 > Greetings: > Please find attached a letter to Prime Minister Harper regarding the > military assault by Israel on the people of Gaza, along with our > statement "Canadian Labour Congress Calls for Support of United > Nations Peace Process in Middle East". > In solidarity, > Ken Georgetti > KVG/GDL*COPE-225 > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > > From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 15:23:41 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 14:23:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Urgent Appeal for Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <196423517.532391231367021735.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> From: "Helping Hands" Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 6:20:21 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Urgent Appeal for Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza Gaza Appeal Donations: +44(0)20 8539 5353 Donations (USA & Canada): 1 866 467 8816 Donate Online Click here to donate now! Death, Destruction & Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza Assallamu'Alaikum ( May the Peace & Blessings of God Be Upon You) International aid agencies have confirmed that the situation in Gaza is now a full-blown humanitarian crisis. Schools, hospitals, homes and markets have all been targetted by the Israeli bombardment. Food, medicines, water and electricity are all in short supply. Over 640 Palestinians have been slaughtered and nearly 3000 maimed and injured. We need your urgent support and finacial assistance to allieviate the pain and suffering being endured by the brave people of Gaza. Please donate wholeheartedly. Donations: +44(0)20 8539 5353 Donations (USA & Canada): 1 866 467 8816 Donate Online Address PO Box 939, Harrow, Middlesex, United Kingdom HA3 3GY Bank Details for UK Donors Title: Helping Hands Bank: HSBC Bank Plc Sort Code: 40-15-17 Account No: 01673033 www.helpinghandsworldwide.com Charity Reg. No. 1094509 ? ? To Send to a Friend Click Here To Unsubscribe Click Here From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 15:42:18 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 14:42:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Letter from Canadian Labour Congress president Ken Georgetti to Canadian PM regarding Gaza crisis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <17489182.540511231368138168.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> It was a pdf attachment that may have been stripped by the listserv. I can't send a text version. Sid ----- Original Message ----- From: "Suzanne de Kuyper" To: "Sid Shniad" , "Radical anti-capitalist environmental discussion." Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 2:13:11 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [R-G] Letter from Canadian Labour Congress president Ken Georgetti to Canadian PM regarding Gaza crisis Letter to Harper about Israeli assault on Gaza is not available on what you sent. ?Please resend! ?Thank you! ?Suzanne de Kuyper On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Sid Shniad < shniad at sfu.ca > wrote: ? From: Ken Georgetti ? To: CLC Mailing List ? Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:09 PM ? Subject: from Ken Georgetti re letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper ? Fran?ais ? suivre ? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ? January 6, 2009 ? Greetings: ? Please find attached a letter to Prime Minister Harper regarding the ? military assault by Israel on the people of Gaza, along with our ? statement "Canadian Labour Congress Calls for Support of United ? Nations Peace Process in Middle East". ? In solidarity, ? Ken Georgetti ? KVG/GDL*COPE-225 _______________________________________________ Rad-Green mailing list Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 16:01:45 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:01:45 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Jewish Human Rights Group Praises Women Who Sat in at Israeli Consulate in Toronto Message-ID: <200901072301.n07N1jCR009092@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/342e154c/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 16:16:49 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:16:49 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israeli envoy to Caracas expelled Message-ID: <200901072316.n07NGn1B003033@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/6fc514dd/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 16:32:34 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:32:34 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Ottawa parrots Israel, blames Hamas for civilian deaths at school Message-ID: <200901072332.n07NWYxJ027569@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/e3b356bd/attachment.txt From shniad at sfu.ca Wed Jan 7 16:54:26 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:54:26 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Media conference: Prominent Canadians speak out against the war on Gaza Message-ID: <200901072354.n07NsQUV028975@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/rad-green/attachments/20090107/9b2a1949/attachment.txt From news at ckut.ca Wed Jan 7 20:56:41 2009 From: news at ckut.ca (news at ckut.ca) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 22:56:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: [R-G] Occupation Update more AUDIO from Today's Occupation by Jewish Women of Israeli Consulate in Toronto Message-ID: <32927.206.248.172.30.1231387001.squirrel@secure.ckut.ca> An update was recorded with Cathy Garfinkle just after 5pm. This report from CKUT Radio is now available online. MP3: http://www.ncra.ca/business/admin_ncra/progex/programFiles/53/updateOccupation.mp3 AUDIO WEB LINKS: http://www.ncra.ca/exchange/dspProgramDetail.cfm?programID=79393 http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/31020 --- "The people of Gaza are not alone!" MP3 Audio: http://www.ncra.ca/business/admin_ncra/progex/programFiles/53/occupation070109.mp3 AUDIO from Today's Occupation by Jewish Women of Israeli Consulate in Toronto Toronto, Canada: Wednesday January 8, 2009 Time: 10:25 am A diverse group of Jewish Canadian women occupied the Israeli consulate at 180 Bloor Street West in Toronto. This action is in protest against the on-going Israeli assault on the people of Gaza. The group is carrying out this occupation in solidarity with the 1.5 million people of Gaza and to ensure that Jewish voices against the massacre in Gaza are being heard. They are demanding that Israel end its military assault and lift the 18-month siege on the Gaza Strip to allow humanitarian aid into the territory. Israel has been carrying out a full-scale military assault on the Gaza Strip since December 27, 2008. At least 660 people have been killed and 3000 injured in the air strikes and in the ground invasion that began on January 3, 2009. Israel has ignored international calls for a ceasefire and is refusing to allow food, adequate medical supplies and other necessities of life into the Gaza Strip. Protesters are outraged at Israel's latest assault on the Palestinian people and by the Canadian government's refusal to condemn these massacres. They are deeply concerned that Canadians are hearing the views of pro-Israel groups who are being represented as the only voice of Jewish Canadians. The protesters have occupied the consulate to send a clear statement that many Jewish-Canadians do not support Israel's violence and apartheid policies. They are joining with people of conscience all across the world who are demanding an end to Israeli aggression and justice for the Palestinian people. The group includes: Judy Rebick, professor; Judith Deutsch, psychoanalyst and president of Science for Peace; B.H. Yael, filmmaker; Smadar Carmon, a Canadian Israeli peace activist and others. Just before Noon, CKUT Radio interviewed Judy Rebick inside the Israeli Consulate and Mariam Garfinkle on the outside. From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 00:30:44 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 02:30:44 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Obama Says He Will Seek Overhaul of Retiree Spending Message-ID: January 8, 2009 Obama Says He Will Seek Overhaul of Retiree Spending By JEFF ZELENY and JOHN HARWOOD WASHINGTON ? President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday that overhauling Social Security and Medicare would be "a central part" of his administration's efforts to contain federal spending, signaling for the first time that he would wade into the thorny politics of entitlement programs. As the Congressional Budget Office projected a record $1.2 trillion budget deficit for this year even before the costs of the nearly $800 billion economic stimulus package being taken up by the House and the Senate, Mr. Obama stepped up his effort to reassure lawmakers and the financial markets that he plans a vigorous effort to keep the government's finances from deteriorating further. Speaking at a news conference in Washington, he provided no details of his approach to rein in Social Security and Medicare, which are projected to consume a growing share of government spending as the baby boom generation ages into retirement over the next two decades. But he said he would have more to say about the issue when he unveiled a budget next month. Should he follow through with a serious effort to cut back the rates of growth of the two programs, he would be opening up a potentially risky battle that neither party has shown much stomach for. The programs have proved almost sacrosanct in political terms, even as they threaten to grow so large as to be unsustainable in the long run. President Bush failed in his effort to overhaul Social Security, and Medicare only grew larger during his administration with the addition of prescription drug coverage for retirees. Mr. Obama also promised a more intensive effort to weed inefficient and bloated programs out of the federal budget in the short run, creating a White House position to "scour this budget, line by line, eliminating what we don't need, or what doesn't work, and improving the things that do." He named Nancy Killefer to the post, called chief performance officer. "If we do nothing," Mr. Obama said, "then we will continue to see red ink as far as the eye can see." In an interview later in the day with CNBC and The New York Times, Mr. Obama suggested that he would hold his economic stimulus proposal to the low end of the amounts that economists think will be necessary because it was likely to grow in size as it moved through Congress. He said that he intended to propose a broad overhaul of financial regulation by April, and that he was working with Congressional leaders on his promised plan to limit foreclosures in the wake of the mortgage crisis. "We've got to prevent the continuing deterioration of the housing market," he said. Mr. Obama met privately on Wednesday with Mr. Bush, then had lunch at the White House with Mr. Bush and the three living ex-presidents, Jimmy Carter, George Bush and Bill Clinton. In the interview, Mr. Obama said the other presidents had offered him good advice about the job: "How do you make sure that you get good information?" he said. "How do you make sure that people aren't just telling you what you want to hear?" The bad fiscal news underscored how, on his first week in Washington since the election, Mr. Obama is being challenged by a broad array of problems, some inherited and some a result of his own missteps, a departure from a transition that until now had been praised as orderly and swift. The fighting between Israelis and Palestinians will present him with a complex foreign policy challenge immediately upon taking office. The week opened with the first casualty among Mr. Obama's cabinet appointments, as Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico withdrew as his choice for commerce secretary amid questions about whether he had been adequately vetted. Then Mr. Obama had to apologize to Senate leaders for not informing them of his choice to lead the Central Intelligence Agency, Leon E. Panetta. On Wednesday, Mr. Obama backed away from his opposition to seating Roland W. Burris as his successor in the Senate, after initially saying that Mr. Burris was unacceptable because he had been chosen by Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich of Illinois, who has been accused of trying to sell the seat. These events are testing the resilience of Mr. Obama's honeymoon, the depth of public support for him and how much people are willing to move beyond the familiar partisan rancor because of the gravity of the crises when he assumes power. "When you hit a bump, it may not be obvious at the time whether it's a mountain or a molehill, but they are rarely mountains," said David Axelrod, a senior adviser to Mr. Obama. "There are going to be things that go better than other things. The question is, Are we moving in the right direction? The answer is yes." The dustup over Mr. Obama's selection of Mr. Panetta to lead the C.I.A. appeared to cool Wednesday. Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat and incoming chairwoman of the Select Committee on Intelligence, dropped her criticism, saying, "I believe all systems are go." Mr. Obama also was poised to name Cass R. Sunstein, an American legal scholar, to an existing White House post as the administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. A transition official said late Wednesday that Mr. Sunstein would oversee government regulations and devise new approaches for government efficiencies. For now, Mr. Obama is seeking to keep the spotlight focused on the economic recovery plan he is urging Congress to pass. He is set to offer a campaignlike address explaining the proposal on Thursday at George Mason University in Virginia, his first speech since winning the election. In the interview, he offered some soothing words to Republicans and the financial markets about his ideological approach, saying it was only the scale and urgency of the economic crisis that led him to support a huge stimulus plan. "I'm not out to increase the size of the government long- term," he said. "My preference would be that the private sector was doing this all on their own." On Capitol Hill, some Republicans warned that the deficit would be even larger than the Congressional Budget Office has projected, perhaps as much as $1.8 trillion once additional spending bills are approved. Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, the senior Republican on the Budget Committee, and his House counterpart, Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, said the extensive borrowing by the government could be a disaster if Congressional Democrats and the new Obama administration did not also work on long-term solutions including changes to Social Security and Medicare. From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 01:26:11 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 03:26:11 -0500 Subject: [R-G] China Losing Taste for Debt From the U.S. Message-ID: January 8, 2009 China Losing Taste for Debt From the U.S. By KEITH BRADSHER HONG KONG ? China has bought more than $1 trillion of American debt, but as the global downturn has intensified, Beijing is starting to keep more of its money at home, a move that could have painful effects for American borrowers. The declining Chinese appetite for United States debt, apparent in a series of hints from Chinese policy makers over the last two weeks, with official statistics due for release in the next few days, comes at an inconvenient time. On Tuesday, President-elect Barack Obama predicted the possibility of trillion-dollar deficits "for years to come," even after an $800 billion stimulus package. Normally, China would be the most avid taker of the debt required to pay for those deficits, mainly short-term Treasuries, which are government i.o.u.'s. In the last five years, China has spent as much as one-seventh of its entire economic output buying foreign debt, mostly American. In September, it surpassed Japan as the largest overseas holder of Treasuries. But now Beijing is seeking to pay for its own $600 billion stimulus ? just as tax revenue is falling sharply as the Chinese economy slows. Regulators have ordered banks to lend more money to small and medium-size enterprises, many of which are struggling with lower exports, and to local governments to build new roads and other projects. "All the key drivers of China's Treasury purchases are disappearing ? there's a waning appetite for dollars and a waning appetite for Treasuries, and that complicates the outlook for interest rates," said Ben Simpfendorfer, an economist in the Hong Kong office of the Royal Bank of Scotland. Fitch Ratings, the credit rating agency, forecasts that China's foreign reserves will increase by $177 billion this year ? a large number, but down sharply from an estimated $415 billion last year. China's voracious demand for American bonds has helped keep interest rates low for borrowers ranging from the federal government to home buyers. Reduced Chinese enthusiasm for buying American bonds will reduce this dampening effect. For now, of course, there seems to be no shortage of buyers for Treasury bonds and other debt instruments as investors flee global economic uncertainty for the stability of United States government debt. This is why Treasury yields have plummeted to record lows. (The more investors want notes and bonds, the lower the yield, and short-term rates are close to zero.) The long-term effects of China's using its money to increase its people's standard of living, and the United States' becoming less dependent on one lender, could even be positive. But that rebalancing must happen gradually to not hurt the value of American bonds or of China's huge holdings. Another danger is that investors will demand higher returns for holding Treasury securities, which will put pressure on the United States government to increase the interest rates those securities pay. As those interest rates increase, they will put pressure on the interest rates that other borrowers pay. When and how all that will happen is unknowable. What is clear now is that the impact of the global downturn on China's finances has been striking, and it is having an effect on what the Chinese government does with its money. The central government's tax revenue soared 32 percent in 2007, as factories across China ran at full speed. But by November, government revenue had dropped 3 percent from a year earlier. That prompted Finance Minister Xie Xuren to warn on Monday that 2009 would be "a difficult fiscal year." A senior central bank official, Cai Qiusheng, mentioned just before Christmas that China's $1.9 trillion foreign exchange reserves had actually begun to shrink. The reserves ? mainly bonds issued by the Treasury, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ? had for the most part been rising quickly ever since the Asian financial crisis in 1998. The strength of the dollar against the euro in the fourth quarter of last year contributed to slower growth in China's foreign reserves, said Fan Gang, an academic adviser to China's central bank, at a conference in Beijing on Tuesday. The central bank keeps track of the total value of its reserves in dollars, so a weaker euro means that euro-denominated assets are worth less in dollars, decreasing the total value of the reserves. But the pace of China's accumulation of reserves began slowing in the third quarter along with the slowing of the Chinese economy, and appeared to reflect much broader shifts. China manages its reserves with considerable secrecy. But economists believe about 70 percent is denominated in dollars and most of the rest in euros. China has bankrolled its huge reserves by effectively requiring the country's entire banking sector, which is state-controlled, to take nearly one-fifth of its deposits and hand them to the central bank. The central bank, in turn, has used the money to buy foreign bonds. Now the central bank is rapidly reducing this requirement and pushing banks to lend more money in China instead. At the same time, three new trends mean that fewer dollars are pouring into China ? so the government has fewer dollars to buy American bonds. The first, little-noticed trend is that the monthly pace of foreign direct investment in China has fallen by more than a third since the summer. Multinationals are hoarding their cash and cutting back on construction of new factories. The second trend is that the combination of a housing bust and a two-thirds fall in the Chinese stock market over the last year has led many overseas investors ? and even some Chinese ? to begin quietly to move money out of the country, despite stringent currency controls. So much Chinese money has poured into Hong Kong, which has its own internationally convertible currency, that the territory announced Wednesday that it had issued a record $16.6 billion worth of extra currency last month to meet demand. A third trend that may further slow the flow of dollars into China is the reduction of its huge trade surpluses. China's trade surplus set another record in November, $40.1 billion. But because prices of Chinese imports like oil are starting to recover while demand remains weak for Chinese exports like consumer electronics, most economists expect China to run average trade surpluses this year of less than $20 billion a month. That would give China considerably less to spend abroad than the $50 billion a month that it poured into international financial markets ? mainly American bond markets ? during the first half of 2008. "The pace of foreign currency flows into China has to slow," and therefore the pace of China's reinvestment of that foreign currency in overseas bonds will also slow, said Dariusz Kowalczyk, the chief investment officer at SJS Markets Ltd., a Hong Kong securities firm. Two officials of the People's Bank of China, the nation's central bank, said in separate interviews that the government still had enough money available to buy dollars to prevent China's currency, the yuan, from rising. A stronger yuan would make Chinese exports less competitive. For a combination of financial and political reasons, the decline in China's purchases of dollar-denominated assets may be less steep than the overall decline in its purchases of foreign assets. Many Chinese companies are keeping more of their dollar revenue overseas instead of bringing it home and converting it into yuan to deposit in Chinese banks. Treasury data from Washington also suggests the Chinese government might be allocating a higher proportion of its foreign currency reserves to the dollar in recent weeks and less to the euro. The Treasury data suggests China is buying more Treasuries and fewer bonds from Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, with a sharp increase in Treasuries in October. But specialists in international money flows caution against relying too heavily on these statistics. The statistics mostly count bonds that the Chinese government has bought directly, and exclude purchases made through banks in London and Hong Kong; with the financial crisis weakening many banks, the Chinese government has a strong incentive to buy more of its bonds directly than in the past. The overall pace of foreign reserve accumulation in China seems to have slowed so much that even if all the remaining purchases were Treasuries, the Chinese government's overall purchases of dollar-denominated assets will have fallen, economists said. China's leadership is likely to avoid any complete halt to purchases of Treasuries for fear of appearing to be torpedoing American chances for an economic recovery at a vulnerable time, said Paul Tang, the chief economist at the Bank of East Asia here. "This is a political decision," he said. "This is not purely an investment decision." Buying Fewer Bonds From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 01:29:29 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 03:29:29 -0500 Subject: [R-G] =?windows-1252?q?Rockets_Fired_From_Lebanon_Into_Israel=92s?= =?windows-1252?q?_North?= Message-ID: January 9, 2009 Rockets Fired From Lebanon Into Israel's North By STEVEN ERLANGER JERUSALEM ? Israel's conflict with Hamas in Gaza threatened to broaden on Thursday as at least three rockets were fired into the north of Israel from Lebanon. The rockets, presumably launched in support of Hamas, could presage the opening of a second front. The Israeli Army, in a brief statement, said it "responded with fire against the source of the rockets," which landed near the town of Nahariya. Two Israelis were slightly wounded, the police said. Lebanese security sources told Reuters that they believed it was unlikely that the rockets were fired under instructions from the militant group Hezbollah. But there was no confirmation or denial from Hezbollah itself. In 2006, after the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier just outside Gaza, a large Israeli operation there was overshadowed by Israeli's massive response to an attack in the north by Hezbollah, which turned into what is known as the Second Lebanon War. On Wednesday, Israel had said that it would send senior officials to talk with Egypt about halting the conflict in Gaza, but there were no immediate signs of a diplomatic breakthrough, and fighting between Israel and Hamas militants continued after a three-hour lull for humanitarian aid to be distributed. International pressure for a negotiated cease-fire intensified after Israeli shells killed some 40 people at a United Nations school in Gaza on Tuesday. Israel said Hamas militants had fired mortar shells from the school compound prior to Israel's shelling. Israel suspended its military operations in Gaza for three hours on Wednesday to allow humanitarian aid and fuel for power generation to reach Gazans, who used the afternoon break to shop. But fighting resumed soon afterward. In the evening, the Israeli Army dropped leaflets warning the citizens of Rafah, next to the border with Egypt, to leave their homes. Israel has been bombing the tunnel networks through which arms and consumer goods are smuggled from Egypt into Gaza. The rockets from Lebanon fell in residential areas. Shimon Koren, head of the northern district police, instructed residents of Nahariya and Kabri to enter bomb shelters and he instructed residents in nearby localities to open their shelters. School was cancelled in Nahariya and nearby Shlomi. The Israeli government said it welcomed the efforts of France and Egypt to work out a durable cease-fire. It said it would end its assault if Hamas stopped firing rockets into Israel and ended the smuggling of weapons from Egypt. It said that if a durable cease-fire took hold, it would reopen border crossings into Gaza for goods and people. But Israeli and Hamas officials both denied an assertion by the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, that a cease-fire had been agreed upon. "There is an agreement on general principles, that Hamas should stop rocket fire and mustn't rearm," a senior Israeli official said Wednesday evening. "But that's like agreeing that motherhood is a good thing. We have to transform those agreed principles into working procedures on the ground, and that's barely begun." The government spokesman, Mark Regev, said that "the challenge now is to get the details to match the principles." There were early signs that a formal diplomatic negotiation could begin after 12 days of fighting. Egypt's chief of intelligence, Omar Suleiman, is expected to serve as a go-between for Israel and Hamas. Two Israeli officials ? a senior aide to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Shalom Turgeman, and a senior defense official, Amos Gilad ? are expected to go to Egypt on Thursday to begin discussions, Israeli officials said. The United States has been involved behind the scenes, senior Israeli and French officials said, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice "constantly on the phone" with Mr. Olmert, according to one Israeli official. In Washington, the White House spokeswoman, Dana M. Perino, said of talks about a cease-fire: "As I understand, the Israelis are open to the concept, but they want to learn more about the details; so do we." At the United Nations, several Arab delegates said Wednesday night that they thought they now had enough votes to approve a Security Council resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire. That would likely put the United States and other Western powers, which oppose a binding resolution, in the awkward position of having to veto a cease-fire. A senior French official in Paris said that Mr. Sarkozy's earlier comment about an agreement on a cease-fire was misunderstood: "The plan is not a cease-fire; the plan is a road map toward a cease-fire." One crucial aspect of any deal is how to prevent new smuggling tunnels from being built under Egypt's border with Gaza. The senior Israeli official raised the possibility of reaching "tacit agreements" with Hamas to end rocket fire, while also persuading Egypt to allow American and perhaps European army engineers to help seal its border with Gaza above and below ground. Hamas is insisting that any new arrangement include the reopening of border crossings for trade with Israel and the reopening of the Rafah crossing into Egypt for people. President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt has said that a 2005 agreement on the Rafah crossing, reached with Israel and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah, must be respected. That agreement called for a Palestinian Authority presence at the crossing, supervision by European Union monitors and Israeli video surveillance of who entered and left. Hamas wants to control the crossing itself and is not eager to cooperate with Fatah, its -rival. In Washington, President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday that upon taking office he would "engage immediately" in the Middle East crisis and that he was "deeply concerned" about the loss of life on both sides. "I am doing everything that we have to do to make sure that the day I take office we are prepared to engage immediately in trying to deal with the situation there," he said at a news conference. "Not only the short-term situation but building a process whereby we can achieve a more lasting peace in the region." In Gaza, John Ging, the director of Gazan operations for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, visited the school in the Jabaliya refugee camp where Israeli shells fell Tuesday. He denied that Hamas militants had fired mortar shells from within the school compound and called for an international investigation into the attack, which he said had killed 40 people. Israeli officials said they were continuing to investigate, but reiterated that Hamas had been using the school as a base. Mr. Gilad, the defense official, told Israeli Army radio: "This school served as a base for Hamas men whose identity we know. They fired from inside the school compound, and the army fired back at the source. The time was after school hours, and this school is an example of the cynical and cruel use Hamas does with civilian facilities." Casualty figures are hard to verify, but officials at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City and the Gazan Ministry of Health said 683 Palestinians had died since the conflict began Dec. 27, including 218 children and 90 women. They said 3,085 had been wounded. The Palestinian Center for Human Rights in Gaza said 130 children age 16 or under had died. The United Nations estimated a few days ago that a quarter of the dead were civilians. But Palestinian residents and Israeli officials say that Hamas is tending its own wounded in separate medical centers, not in public hospitals, and that it is difficult to know the number of dead Hamas fighters, many of whom were not wearing uniforms. Israel says it has killed at least 130 Hamas fighters. Ten Israelis have been killed during the offensive, including three civilians. Most of the seven dead Israeli soldiers were killed in so-called friendly fire. From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 01:46:13 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 03:46:13 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Israelis Watch the Fighting in Gaza From a Hilly Vantage Point: They Come With Binoculars and Lawn Chairs; Nurse Znaty: 'I'm Sorry, but I'm Happy' Message-ID: JANUARY 8, 2009 Israelis Watch the Fighting in Gaza From a Hilly Vantage Point They Come With Binoculars and Lawn Chairs; Nurse Znaty: 'I'm Sorry, but I'm Happy' By CHARLES LEVINSON GAZA BORDER -- Moti Danino sat Monday in a canvas lawn chair on a sandy hilltop on Gaza's border, peering through a pair of binoculars at distant plumes of smoke rising from the besieged territory. An unemployed factory worker, he comes here each morning to watch Israel's assault on Hamas from what has become the war's peanut gallery -- a string of dusty hilltops close to the border that offer panoramic views across northern Gaza. He is one of dozens of Israelis who have arrived from all over Israel, some with sack lunches and portable radios tuned to the latest reports of the battle raging in front of them. Some, like Mr. Danino, are here to egg on friends and family members in the fight. Others have made the trek, they say, to witness firsthand a military operation -- so far, widely popular inside Israel -- against Hamas, the militant group that controls the Gaza Strip. Over the weekend, four teenagers sat on a hill near Mr. Danino's, oohing and aahing at the airstrikes. Nadav Zebari, who studies Torah in Jerusalem, was eating a cheese sandwich and sipping a Diet Coke. "I've never watched a war before," he said. A group of police officers nearby took turns snapping pictures of one another with smoking Gaza as a backdrop. "I want to feel a part of the war," one said, before correcting himself with the official government designation for the assault. "I mean operation. It's not a war." The spectators share hilltop space with an army of camera-toting Israeli and foreign journalists, who have so far been banned by the Israeli military from entering Gaza to report on the conflict. Mr. Danino has a personal link to the fighting. His 20-year-old son, Moshe, is a soldier in an infantry unit fighting somewhere below his hilly perch. From the sidelines, he is here to root for his son the soldier, he says, just as he once sat on the sidelines of soccer fields cheering for his son the high-school athlete. "The army took all the soldiers' cellphones away before the attack, so this is my way of staying in contact," he says. On another hilltop overlooking Gaza, Sandra Koubi, a 43-year-old philosophy student, says seeing the violence up close "is a kind of catharsis for me, to get rid of all the anxiety we have inside us after years of rocket fire" from Hamas. Jocelyn Znaty, a stout 60-year-old nurse for Magen David Adom, the Israeli counterpart of the Red Cross, can hardly contain her glee at the site of exploding mortars below in Gaza. "Look at that," she shouts, clapping her hands as four artillery rounds pound the territory in quick succession. "Bravo! Bravo!" Ms. Znaty lives in Sderot, the immigrant community on Gaza's border that has long been a target for rockets fired from Gaza by Palestinian militants. Her daughter lives on Kibbutz Yad Mordechai, an Israeli community even closer to the Gaza Strip. Last year, Gaza-launched rockets struck Ms. Znaty's home twice in a single week. She escaped both attacks unscathed but has a simmering anger for those living on the other side of the Gaza fence. She acknowledges an uncomfortable, self-conscious awareness that she is cheering on a deadly war. Israeli planes, ships and artillery have blasted the small, sealed-off territory for more than a week, killing more than 680 Palestinians and injuring about 3,000. Ten Israelis have been killed, including three civilians, according to U.N. officials. The weekend ground assault has sent civilian casualties climbing, overwhelming hospitals and triggering the International Committee of the Red Cross to declare a humanitarian crisis inside the small, seaside enclave of 1.5 million. On Tuesday, the UN said one of its schools in Gaza was hit by an Israeli strike, killing 43 civilians who had sought refuge from the attacks and injuring about 100. "It's weird that we have to take lives in order to save lives," Ms. Znaty says. "But we were held hostage by Hamas while our government ignored us, and now we fight back. I am sorry, but I am happy." War watching is not a new phenomenon. Up until World War I, when more powerful weapons began to be used on the battlefield, it was common for civilians to perch on grassy lookouts on a battlefield's periphery. Nor is it unique to Israelis in the current conflict. On the Egyptian side of the border, across from southern Gaza, Arabs, too, were coming from miles away to watch the aerial bombardment. But at Gaza's border crossing in the dusty town of Rafah, the mood was of anger and somber resignation amid the punishing Israeli attacks. Egyptians in Rafah, and many of the Arab aid workers who have flocked there to help evacuate Gaza's wounded, share deep ethnic, family and economic ties with the territory. Over the weekend, as ambulances ferried out bloodied Palestinian casualties, plumes of black smoke, accompanied by dull thuds and trembling earth, rose across the border, just a hundred yards across a no man's land marking the border with Egypt. "We feel helpless. We feel like we are so close but we can't do anything," said Rami Ibrahim Shahin, a 20-year-old mechanic, whose family is originally Palestinian. His brother lives on the other side of the border, now under Israeli fire. They talk every day, when phone connections work. Each evening, Mr. Shahin walks several miles to reach the border crossing, where he can get a better view of the attacks. "All day long, it's like this, we see the attacks with our own eyes," shrugs Rafah resident Osama Al-Beyali, a 51-year-old porter in torn gray coveralls. As blasts ring out across the border, onlookers swear at Israel or offer prayers for victims. A father of six, Mr. Al-Beyali says he thinks of the Palestinian children suffering in the cold, with little food or safety, under the barrage. "When I see my children, I feel ashamed and guilty. I feel like I should find a way to go over there and fight the Israelis." "Injustice, injustice," he mumbles. Many Israelis see the Gaza offensive as a welcome change. "I come here because our army is finally doing something, showing the world that we are not weak," says Mr. Danino, the unemployed factory worker. On his hilltop overlooking Gaza, Mr. Danino has taken to quarterbacking the assault from his folding chair. Having sat here for much of the past week, he now fancies himself something of an expert. He says, for example, that Palestinian militants are fond of firing rockets from the cover of a distant block of greenhouses. When a plume of smoke -- the result of an Israeli attack -- rose from what appears to be empty farmland Monday, Mr. Danino shook his head. "No, no, no," he said. "We should be hitting the greenhouses." ?Farnaz Fassihi in Rafah, Egypt and Margaret Coker in Tel Aviv contributed to this article. From menecraj at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 08:24:49 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:24:49 -0600 Subject: [R-G] CLIMATE CHANGE: Arctic Peoples Claim Their Right to Cold Temperatures Message-ID: http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45215 CLIMATE CHANGE: Arctic Peoples Claim Their Right to Cold Temperatures Stephen Leahy interviews MARY SIMON* QUEBEC CITY, Dec 24 (Tierram?rica) - "Terrifying" is the word that best describes the situation of a hunter who is lost on shifting ice, or of the homeowner whose house splits in two when its foundation sinks, says Canadian indigenous leader Mary Simon when asked about the effects of global warming on the Inuit people. Climate change is rapidly changing the ecology of the Arctic and creating a crisis for the 160,000 indigenous people in the region, collectively known as Inuit, who are thinly spread along the edges of the Arctic Ocean in Canada, Greenland, Norway, Russia and the U.S. state of Alaska. The region is too cold for trees, and only grass and small bushes can survive the short three-month summer where temperatures average 6 to 8 degrees Celsius. During the nine-month cold season the land and sea are snow-covered and frozen. In winter, because the sun does not rise over the horizon, darkness reigns 24 hours a day and the average temperature is -30 degrees C, reaching -60 C on the coldest of days. Despite these challenging conditions, the Inuit have survived there for thousands of years, hunting seals, walrus, whales and caribou. They once lived in houses made of whalebone and thick clumps of grass and earth, as well as houses made of snow. Today they live in wooden houses made of materials imported from thousands of kilometres away. But their land of snow and ice that sustained them for so long is melting as average temperatures climb two to three times faster than anywhere else in the world. "We live off the land hunting and fishing for our food, but that is getting harder and harder because everything is changing," Simon told Tierram?rica. Leader of Canada's Inuit and former Canadian ambassador to Denmark, Simon was born in the village of Kangiqsualujjuaq, in the extreme north of Quebec province. Tierram?rica spoke with her in Quebec City. TIERRAM?RICA: How is climate change affecting the Inuit? MARY SIMON: Rapid climate change in the Arctic has affected the permafrost (the permanently frozen surface layer of the soil) and our communities which are built on the permafrost. Climate change is accelerating the erosion of our coasts, causing floods and introducing insects that Inuit have never seen before. The scientific predictions for what we can expect in the Arctic region in the not so distant future are alarming. No, "alarming" is not a strong enough word; "terrifying" is better suited for the hunter who is lost on shifting ice and the homeowner whose house is splitting in half as the foundation sinks. TIERRAM?RICA: What would you say to world leaders, who in December 2009 are to approve a climate agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol and establish emissions reductions for climate-changing greenhouse gases? MS: They are not making the connection with what is happening in the Arctic. Climate change is a human issue first and foremost. We Inuit have to live with the effects of climate change every single day. We live off the land hunting and fishing for our food, but that is getting harder and harder because everything is changing. We have to buy more food from the south (southern Canada), and it is very expensive, so people are forced to buy the cheapest food, which is usually junk food. There rarely is fresh produce or meat in our stores and this is affecting our health. For the Inuit, a conversation on climate change takes a broad, holistic view that touches on the interconnections between our environment, our politics and our social, economic and cultural well-being. TIERRAM?RICA: What is the way forward on tackling the global issue of climate change? MS: Shallow fixes won't do it. We need to re-think, re-tool and re-engineer the way we do things so that we are less dependent on fossil fuels. We need a suite of inter-related polices, including an energy policy, an industrial policy, a transportation, and an urban policy, to make us radically less dependent on greenhouse gas fuels. We need real action on required emissions cuts and we need leadership. TIERRAM?RICA: What should Canada be doing about climate change? MS: Hard emissions reductions targets are essential, as are effective national policies, backed up by federal spending priorities. Proposed Canadian greenhouse gas policies should be understandable and accountable. Complexity brings two dangers: First, it risks diverting efforts into finding clever ways to "beat the system," and profit from policies through searching for ingenious loop-holes, rather than striving to make investments and develop technologies that reduce emissions. Second, it makes it very difficult to sustain public confidence, learn from our mistakes, and retain a clear sense of core objectives. TIERRAM?RICA: Do people in southern Canada, where 99 percent of the population lives, understand what is happening in the north? MS: They only hear about our social problems, alcoholism and youth suicides. They don't know that a lot of people are trying very hard to have a better life, but there are so many obstacles. For instance ,our culture isn't taught as part of the education system. Children are still punished for speaking their own language. And climate change wasn't even an issue during the October federal elections. That's just shocking. TIERRAM?RICA: What do you think about the Canadian government's new interest and promised investments in the Arctic? MS: The Harper government only talks about sovereignty (territorial claims) and resource extraction, not about the health of communities. There is a desperate lack of housing in the north resulting in overcrowding. That has knock-on effects where kids don't do well in school because they have to sleep in shifts. And overcrowding has led to outbreaks of TB (tuberculosis). Housing costs are three times higher and there are few jobs. While the government provides social housing, it is in short supply and the houses are poorly made and don't last long. We need healthy communities in the north in order to assert our sovereignty. Canada needs to invest in our communities. (*This story was originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierram?rica network. Tierram?rica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme and the World Bank.) (END/2008) ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From menecraj at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 08:24:57 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:24:57 -0600 Subject: [R-G] Fix For Global Warming? Message-ID: <7E97007267F4429295B4BC66031757AD@agingCHS072729> Science News Fix For Global Warming? Scientists Propose Covering Deserts With Reflective Sheeting ScienceDaily (Dec. 23, 2008) - A radical plan to curb global warming and so reverse the climate change caused by our rampant burning of fossil fuels since the industrial revolution would involve covering parts of the world's deserts with reflective sheeting, according to researchers writing in the International Journal of Global Environmental Issues. Engineers Takayuki Toyama of company Avix Inc in Kanagawa, Japan, and Alan Stainer of Middlesex University Business School, London, UK, complain that there have been very few innovative remedies discussed to combat the phenomenon of global warming caused by human activities, despite the widespread debate of the last few decades. They now suggest that uncompromising proposals are now needed if we are to avert ecological disaster. Finding a way to 'stop', or at least minimise, global warming and to even cool the Earth can be achieved by focusing on the primary heat balance between the amount heat produced by human activities and the loss of heat to outer space. They emphasise that efforts to reduce atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, are not likely to work soon enough. Pessimism that minimising carbon dioxide will no longer solve the problem seems to be spreading among environmental specialists," they say. As such, a lateral-thinking approach that acknowledges the fact that the heat created by human activities does not even amount to 1/10,000th of the heat that the earth receives from the sun. Toyama and Stainer suggest that heat reflecting sheets could be used to cover arid areas and not only reflect the sun's heat back into space by increasing the Earth's overall reflectivity, or albedo, but also to act as an anti-desertification measure. The technology would have relatively minimal cost and lead to positive results quickly. They add that the same approach might also be used to cover areas of the oceans to increase the Earth's total heat reflectivity. The team's calculations suggest that covering an area of a little more than 60,000 square kilometres with reflective sheet, at a cost of some $280 billion, would be adequate to offset the heat balance and lead to a net cooling without any need to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide. However, they caution that it would be necessary to control the area covered very carefully to prevent overcooling and to continue with efforts to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Journal reference: Toyama et al. Cosmic Heat Emission concept to 'stop' global warming. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 2009; 9 (1/2): 151 DOI: http://www.inderscience.com/offer.php?id=22093 Adapted from materials provided by Inderscience (http://www.inderscience.com/), via AlphaGalileo (http://www.alphagalileo.org/). ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From menecraj at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 08:25:01 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:25:01 -0600 Subject: [R-G] Global warming experiment: UK scientists to seed sea with iron sulphate Message-ID: Amazing discovery of green algae which could save the world from global warming By Jo Macfarlane Last updated at 12:47 AM on 04th January 2009 Melting icebergs, so long the iconic image of global warming, are triggering a natural process that could delay or even end climate change, British scientists have found. A team working on board the Royal Navy's HMS Endurance off the coast of Antarctica have discovered tiny particles of iron are released into the sea as the ice melts. The iron feeds algae, which blooms and sucks up damaging carbon dioxide (CO2), then sinks, locking away the harmful greenhouse gas for hundreds of years. The team think the process could hold the key to staving off globally rising temperatures. Lead researcher Professor Rob Raiswell, from Leeds University, said: 'The Earth itself seems to want to save us.' As a result of the findings, a ground-breaking experiment will be held this month off the British island of South Georgia, 800 miles south east of the Falklands. It will see if the phenomenon could be harnessed to contain rising carbon emissions. Researchers will use several tons of iron sulphate to create an artificial bloom of algae. The patch will be so large it will be visible from space. Scientists already knew that releasing iron into the sea stimulates the growth of algae. But environmentalists had warned that to do so artificially might damage the planet's fragile ecosystem. Last year, the UN banned iron fertilisation in the Great Southern Ocean. However, the new findings show the mechanism has actually been operating naturally for millions of years within the isolated southern waters. And it has led to the researchers being granted permission by the UN to move ahead with the experiment. The scientist who will lead the next stage of the study, Professor Victor Smetacek, said: 'The gas is sure to be out of the Earth's atmosphere for several hundred years.' The aim is to discover whether artificially fertilising the area will create more algae in the Great Southern Ocean. That ocean is an untapped resource for soaking up CO2 because it doesn't have much iron, unlike other seas. It covers 20million square miles, and scientists say that if this could all be treated with iron, the resulting algae would remove three-and-a-half gigatons of carbon dioxide. This is equivalent to one eighth of all emissions annually created by burning fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal. It would also be equal to removing all carbon dioxide emitted from every power plant, chimney and car exhaust in the rapidly expanding industries of India and Japan. However, the experts warn it is too early to say whether it will work. The team from ice patrol ship HMS Endurance used sledgehammers to chip deep into the interior of a 33ft-long mass of polar ice from half-a-dozen house-sized icebergs that had blown ashore in Antarctica. Once back in the UK, they used a special microscope to analyse the samples, which revealed what they had been looking for - tiny iron particles, only a few millionths of a millimetre wide, embedded deep within the ice. Until now, it was thought that the only source of iron in the Southern Ocean was wind blowing in metal compounds from the deserts of nearby continents like Australia. But the research has disproved this. Prof Raiswell said: 'These particles measure only a fraction of a millimetre, but they have great importance for the global climate.' Rising global temperatures, particularly over the past 50 years, have increased the rate at which polar ice melts, causing sea levels to rise. Ten of the warmest years on record have been since 1991, with experts predicting that 2009 could be the hottest year yet. The climate-change effect is set to substantially increase over the coming decades, as developing industrial nations pump out more CO2. Temperatures along the Antarctic Peninsula alone have increased by 2.5C over the past 50 years. But for every percentage point increase in the amount of ice that breaks off, Prof Raiswell calculates that a further 26million tons of CO2 is removed from the atmosphere. Polar expert Professor Smetacek and a 49-strong German research team is due to set sail from Cape Town in the icebreaker Polarstern in the next few days to conduct their groundbreaking experiment. Crucially, the scientists want to know how much algae will sink to the bottom of the ocean where the CO2 will be safely trapped. Algae that falls a couple of miles below the surface will remain there for hundreds of years; algae that remains only a few hundred metres from the surface releases carbon back into the atmosphere. Dr Phil Williamson, scientific co-ordinator of the Surface Ocean Lower Atmosphere study, funded by the UK's National Environment Research Council, called the research 'exciting'. 'We have images from satellites which show the ocean stays green for weeks afterwards but the key will be whether it stays that way,' said Dr Williamson. Schemes to fertilise the seas with iron have in the past been driven by commercial interests. This is the biggest ever scientific attempt. Last May, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity called a halt to fertilisation around the Antarctic until there was more detailed scientific data. But the British findings led to the go-ahead for Professor Smetacek's team from the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Bremerhaven, Germany. Nonetheless, even Prof Raiswell has called the project 'highly controversial'. He said: 'Oceans aren't isolated boxes and it would affect the surrounding areas as well. 'We don't know what effect that would have. The ecosystems are very complicated. If the iceberg iron is useful, then it will just buy us more time. 'The Earth might have fightback mechanisms but we must still try to reduce our CO2 emissions.' Prof Smetacek said the issue is too complex not to be explored by scientists. He warned: 'Objections will be swept away when our powerlessness in the face of climate change becomes apparent.' ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From fentona at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 09:59:05 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 08:59:05 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Inside Gaza: An Eyewitness Report Message-ID: Inside Gaza: An Eyewitness Report January 08, 2009 By Ewa Jasiewicz http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/20192 WHEN I got there, the gates of Beit Hanoun hospital were shut, with teenage men hanging off them. The mass of people striving to get inside was a sign that there had been an attack. Inside the gates, the hospital was full. Parents, wives, cousins, emotionally frayed and overwhelmed, were leaning over injured loved ones. The Israeli Apache helicopter had attacked at 3.15pm. Witnesses said that two missiles had been fired into the street in Hay al Amel, east Beit Hanoun, close to the border with Israel. With rumours of an imminent invasion this empty scrubland is rapidly becoming a no-man's land which people cross quickly, fearing attack by Israeli jets. But the narrow, busy streets of the Boura area rarely escape the intensifying airstrikes. Eyewitnesses said children had been playing and waiting in the streets there for their parents to finish praying at the nearby mosque. "We could see it so clearly, it was so close, we looked up and everyone ran. Those that couldn't were soon flat on the ground," said Khalil Abu Naseer, who was lucky to have escaped the incoming missile. "Look at this, take it," insisted men in the street, handing me pieces of the missile the size of a fist, all with jagged edges. "All the windows were blown out, our doors were blown in, there was glass everywhere," explained a neighbour. It was these lumps of missile, rock and flying glass that smashed into the legs, arms, stomachs, heads and backs of 16 people, two of them children, who had been brought to Beit Hanoun Hospital on Thursday afternoon. Fadi Chabat, 24, was working in his shop, a small tin shack that was a community hub selling sweets, cigarettes and chewing gum. When the missile exploded, he suffered multiple injuries. He died on Friday morning in Kamal Adwahn Hospital in Jabaliya. As women attended the grieving room at Fadi Chabat's home yesterday to pay their respects, Israeli F16 fighter jets tore through the skies overhead and blasted four more bombs into the empty areas on the border. Two elderly women in traditional embroidered red and black dresses carrying small black plastic shopping bags moved as quickly as they could; others disappeared behind the walls of their homes, into courtyards and off the streets. At Fadi's house the grief was still fresh. Nearly all the women were crying, a collective outpouring of grief and raw pain with free- flowing tears. "He prayed five times a day, he was a good Muslim, he wasn't part of any group, not Fatah, not Hamas, not one, none of them, he was a good student, and he was different," said one of his sisters. She took me to see Fadi's younger brother, who had been wounded in the same airstrike. Omar, eight, was sitting on his own in a darkened bedroom on a foam mattress with gauze on his back covering his wounds. "He witnessed everything, he saw it all," the sisters explained. "He kept saying, I saw the missile, I saw it, Fadi's been hit by a missile'." The memory sets Omar off into more tears, his sisters, mother and aunts breaking down along with him. Nine-year-old Ismaeel, who had been on the street with his sisters Leema, four, and Haya, 12, had been taking out rubbish when they were struck by the missiles. Ismaeel had been brought into the hospital still breathing and doctors at first though he would pull through, but in the end he died of internal injuries. Within the past six days in Beit Hanoun alone, according to hospital records seven people have been killed, among them three children and a mother of ten other youngsters. Another 75 people have been injured, including 29 children and 17 women. As well as the fatalities and wounded, hundreds of homes have had their windows blown out and been damaged by flying debris and shrapnel. Two homes have been totally destroyed. Nearby the premises of two organisations have been reduced to rubble. One of them, the Sons of the City Charity, associated with Hamas, was blasted with two Apache-fired missiles, gutting a neighbouring apartment in the process and breaking windows at Beit Hanoun Hospital. The Cultural Development Association and the offices of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, were levelled by bombs dropped from F16 jets. It is hard to imagine what the Israeli pilots of these aircraft see from so far up in the sky. Do they see people walking; standing around and talking in the street; kids with sticks chasing each other in play? Or are the figures digitised, micro-people, perhaps just blips on a screen? Whatever is seen from the air, the victims are often ordinary people. Last Thursday night saw volunteers from the Palestinian Red Crescent Society in Beit Hanoun take to the streets in an effort to save lives. Like all emergency medical staff in Gaza, they risk death working in the maelstrom of every Israeli invasion, during curfews and night fighting. In one of the ambulances during an evening of total darkness caused by nightly power cuts, I meet Yusri, a veteran of more than 14 years of Israeli incursions into the Beit Hanoun district of Gaza. Moustachioed, energetic, and gregarious, Yusri is in his 40s and a local hero. Seen by people within the community as a man who rarely sleeps, he is a front-line paramedic who zooms through Gaza's streets to reach casualties, ambulance horn blaring as he shouts through a loudhailer for onlookers and the dazed to get out of the way. "Where's the strike?" Yusri asks locals, as we pick our way through a gutted charred charity office and the house of the Tarahan family. Their home, on the buffer zone, has been reduced to a concrete sandwich. There are six casualties, but miraculously none of them are serious. Beit Hanoun Hospital is a simple, 48-bed local facility with no intensive care unit, decrepit metal stretchers and rickety beds. I drink tea in a simple office with a garrulous crowd of ear, nose and throat specialists, surgeons and paediatricians. The talk is all about politics: how the plan for Gaza is to merge it with Egypt; how Israel doesn't want to liquidate Hamas as it serves their goal of a divided Palestine to have a weak Hamas alienated from the West Bank. The chat is interrupted by lulls of intent listening as news crackles through on Sawt Al Shab ("The Voice Of The People"), Gaza's grassroots news station. Almost everyone here is tuned in. It is listened to by taxi drivers, families in their homes huddled around wood stoves or under blankets and groups of men on street corners crouched beside transistor radio sets. It feeds live news on the latest resistance attacks, interspersed with political speeches from various leaders, and fighter music - thoaty, deep male voices united in buoyant battle songs about standing up, reclaiming al-Quds (Jerusalem) avenging fresh martyrs, and staying steadfast. News is fed through on operations by armed wings of every political group active in Gaza; the Qasam (Hamas), the Abu Ali Mustapha Martyrs Brigade (PFLP), the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (which is affiliated with Fatah) and Saraya al-Quds (Islamic Jihad). One thing is widely recognised - the attack on Gaza has brought all armed resistance groups together. However, everybody adds wryly that "once this is all over, they'll all break apart again". One of the surgeons asks me about whether I'm scared, and whether I really think I have protection as a foreigner here. I talk in detail about Israel's responsibility to protect emergency services; to cease fire; to facilitate movement;, to respect the Geneva Conventions, including protection of civilians and injured combatants. The surgeon talking to me is an intelligent man, highly respected in the community, in his late 40s. He takes his time, explaining to me in detail that all the evidence from everything Gazans have experienced points to Israel operating above the law - that there is no protection, that these laws, these conventions, do not seem to apply to Israel, nor does it abide by them, and that I should be afraid, very afraid, because Gazans are afraid. He recounts a story from the November 2006 invasion which saw more than 60 people killed, one entire family in one day alone. About 100 tanks invaded Beit Hanoun, with one blocking each entrance for six days. He remembers how the Red Cross brought water and food and took away the refuse. All co-ordination was cut off with the Palestinian Authority. The same will happen this time, he insists. He remembers too how one ambulance driver, Yusri, a maverick, a hero, loved by all the staff and community, faced down the tanks to evacuate the injured. Yusri, the surgeon says, just drove up to the tank and started shouting through his loudhailer, telling them to move for the love of God because we had a casualty, then just swerved round them and made off. Yusri has carried the injured and dead in every invasion in the past 14 years. He shows me a leg injury sustained when a tank rammed into his ambulance. The event was caught on camera by journalists, and a case brought against the Israel Occupation Forces, but they ruled the army had acted appropriately in self defence. "Look in the back of the ambulance here, how many people do you think can fit in here? I was carrying 10 corpses at a time after the invasion, there was a man cut in two here in the back, it was horrific. But you carry on. I want to serve my country," he says. During a prolonged power cut in that six-day invasion there was no electricity to power a ventilator, and doctors took turns hand pumping oxygen to keep one casualty alive for four hours before they could be transferred. Roads were bulldozed, ambulances were banned from moving, dead people lay in their homes for days, and when permission was finally given for the corpses' collection, medics had to carry them on stretchers along the main street. Today in Gaza everyone is terrified that such events are now repeating themselves, only worse. Gazans now feel collectively abandoned. The past week's massacres, indiscriminate attacks and overflowing hospitals, and the fact that anyone can be hit at any time in any place, has left people utterly terrorised. No-one dares think of what might become of them in these difficult and unpredictable days. As they say in Gaza, "Bein Allah" - "It's up to God". Ewa Jasiewicz is a journalist and activist. She is currently the co- ordinator for the Free Gaza movement and one of the only international journalists on the ground in Gaza From intnsred at golgotha.net Thu Jan 8 10:17:35 2009 From: intnsred at golgotha.net (Intense Red) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:17:35 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Fix For Global Warming? In-Reply-To: <7E97007267F4429295B4BC66031757AD@agingCHS072729> References: <7E97007267F4429295B4BC66031757AD@agingCHS072729> Message-ID: <200901081217.36139.intnsred@golgotha.net> > Fix For Global Warming? Scientists Propose Covering Deserts With > Reflective Sheeting Wow. Was this article supposed to be some sort of humor? What an idea. No doubt covering deserts in tin foil would appeal to Americans' worship of technology, but I hardly think it solves the problem. The problem, of course, is our unsustainable, growth-based capitalist economic system and the American lifestyle. But rather than address those systemic cultural/economic issues, I guess it is easier to believe in "clean coal" and that covering deserts in shiny sheeting will solve the problem -- that way no capitalist need sacrifice any of their hard "earned" money and we can still all pack our fat asses into our cars and drive to McDonalds... -- Fast fact: Today's American worker works 160 hours longer per year than 25 years ago. The average American now works more hours per year than the Japanese. From menecraj at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 11:10:41 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:10:41 -0600 Subject: [R-G] Fix For Global Warming? References: <7E97007267F4429295B4BC66031757AD@agingCHS072729> <200901081217.36139.intnsred@golgotha.net> Message-ID: <6E4154313D0F4C5BA95BB4E16C850887@agingCHS072729> Are you suggesting that the field of science (including Science journals such as International Journal of Global Environmental Issues) is immune from creeping capitalism, or the cold hard "cash nexus" that Herr Doktor Professor Marx so succinctly wrote about? Or that Engineers Takayuki Toyama of company Avix Inc in Kanagawa, Japan, and Alan Stainer of Middlesex University Business School, London, UK, have absolutely no thought about somehow profiting from such an idea? I can assure you they are quite serious about all this. At least as serious as those UK scientists that will later this month be seeding part of the ocean off the British island of South Georgia with iron sulphate in order to create artificial blooms of algae, hoping that this experiment will prove useful in sucking up (or down in this case) carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and burying it at the bottom of the ocean. In the final analysis, since so many moneyed interests have stakes in the current system, these sorts of experiments are much easier (and more profitable) to perform than stopping our wasteful lifestyles, or of ending capitalism. Richard Menec ----- Original Message ----- From: "Intense Red" To: "Richard Menec" Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:17 AM Subject: Re: [R-G] Fix For Global Warming? > > Fix For Global Warming? Scientists Propose Covering Deserts With > > Reflective Sheeting > > Wow. Was this article supposed to be some sort of humor? What an idea. > No > doubt covering deserts in tin foil would appeal to Americans' worship of > technology, but I hardly think it solves the problem. > > The problem, of course, is our unsustainable, growth-based capitalist > economic system and the American lifestyle. > > But rather than address those systemic cultural/economic issues, I guess > it > is easier to believe in "clean coal" and that covering deserts in shiny > sheeting will solve the problem -- that way no capitalist need sacrifice > any > of their hard "earned" money and we can still all pack our fat asses into > our > cars and drive to McDonalds... > > -- > Fast fact: Today's American worker works 160 hours longer per year than 25 > years ago. The average American now works more hours per year than the > Japanese. > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green From fentona at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 11:11:44 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:11:44 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Our myopic view of Gaza conflict Message-ID: <51966E24-4D5F-409D-B626-7E1706744D66@shaw.ca> Our myopic view of Gaza conflict Haroon Siddiqui http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/563405 I was holidaying in India when the Israeli onslaught on Gaza began Dec. 27. There were banner headlines coupled with editorial outrage in the Urdu media, the language of Muslims, and dispassionate but balanced coverage in the English media and the regional language newspapers. Across the Arab Middle East, Al-Jazeera and others were providing one- sided, wall-to-wall coverage of death and destruction in Gaza. Travelling through Europe, one could appreciate the powerful reporting and commentary, which conveyed the scale of the tragedy, without crossing the line into propaganda for either side. It didn't take long upon landing here to be reminded how much the political and media establishment ? in the U.S. and, lately, Canada as well ? are divorced from reality. The Stephen Harper Conservatives, as well as many editorialists and pundits, seem to inhabit a make-believe world into which no inconvenient facts are allowed to intrude. Their mantra is that Israel has a right to defend itself, has to protect its citizens from Hamas rockets, and had to retaliate for the breaking of the ceasefire by Hamas Dec. 19. True. But deprived of other truths, this performs the desired magic of absolving Israel of any culpability. According to this view, hundreds of Palestinian civilians, including women and children and seniors, being bombed and shelled to death in schools ? even clearly marked United Nations schools ? mosques, refugee camps, streets and homes are acceptable collateral damage. Few tears need be shed, especially since Hamas is to blame, anyway. There's amnesia about the brutal 40-year-old occupation. There's nary a mention that in Israeli military operations in 2008, 420 Palestinians had been killed prior to Dec. 28 vs. five Israelis, according to B'Tselem, the Israeli human rights body, And Israel's crippling economic blockade had prompted the UN special rapporteur Richard Falk to say on Dec. 9 that Israel's collective punishments amounted to "a crime against humanity," and that the International Criminal Court ought to investigate whether Israeli leaders and military commanders should be indicted. He noted that the last time there had been "such a flurry of denunciations by normally cautious UN officials" was during the reign of the apartheid government in South Africa. On Nov. 21, the chief of UN Relief and Works Agency, Karen Abu Zayd, said supplies had run out. She reported "a chronic anemia problem" and "the stunting of children." All this was long before the latest carnage, which foreign journalists have been prevented from witnessing. Dead, as of yesterday, were 650 Gazans, a fifth of them civilians. What our political and media establishment are telling us is this: Israel must not be provoked but the Palestinians can be. The trauma suffered by Israelis in the border area along Gaza is not acceptable. But 60 per cent of 1.5 million Gazans suffering from post- traumatic stress disorder is. Israeli politicians, facing an election Feb. 10, have to be sensitive to electoral concerns, but Palestinians elected in a fair election Jan. 2006 must be isolated and jailed. There's an equivalency between Hamas's handmade, ill-targeted rockets and the lethal hi-tech Israeli arsenal, some of it of American origin. Palestinians must pay heed to Israeli/American/Canadian demands but Israel may ignore calls for a ceasefire by the UN, the European Union and even allies France, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc. Israeli lives matter, Arab ones don't. In fact, it is worth prolonging the bloodshed in Gaza, as in Lebanon in 2006, to allow Israel time to achieve one or two more of its objectives. Arab blood is cheap. "Unfortunately, all this plays into the hands of those Palestinians and Arabs, and more generally, Muslims, who say, `the West is against us because of who we are and is engaged in a civilizational war against us,'" says Jim Reilly, professor of Near Eastern Studies at the University of Toronto. "If we include Iraq and Afghanistan, it reinforces the message of Al Qaeda and co-thinkers that they are waging war against a predatory and rapacious enemy. "All this makes it that much harder for us to argue back against the militants and the zealots." Haroon Siddiqui's column appears Thursday and Sunday. hsiddiq at thestar.ca From fentona at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 12:05:46 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 11:05:46 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Gaza war extends into psychological real Message-ID: Gaza war extends into psychological realm by Paul Schemm / Associated Press Wednesday January 07, 2009, 7:02 PM http://www.cleveland.com/world/index.ssf/2009/01/israels_gaza_war_extends_into.html AP, FileIn this Saturday, Jan. 3, 2009, photo, leaflets dropped by Israeli planes fall on the northern Gaza Strip as seen from the Israel side of the border with Gaza. The day before a massive Israeli airstrike killed hundreds of Hamas militants in their barracks, Israeli military radio channels broadcast talk of a "lull" and pulled troops back from the border. Israeli defense officials now say it was a psychological warfare tactic to lure Hamas fighters into the open at the start of the massive offensive against the militant group in Gaza. JERUSALEM -- Images of triumphant masked militants and bloodstained hospitals abruptly disappeared from the screen of the Hamas Al Aqsa television station one day during the Israeli offensive into Gaza, to be replaced by a message in Arabic telling the militant group's leaders to turn themselves in. The faces of Hamas' top leadership appeared against a black background, before being shot down one by one, followed by an image of a clock informing the organization that time is running out. Even as Israel's armor and foot soldiers push into the Gaza Strip in an effort to stop militants from launching rockets into Israel, the war is also being waged with psychological operations designed to sap morale on both sides. Over at Islamic Jihad's Voice of Jerusalem radio station in Gaza City, broadcaster Kamal Abu Nasser said that at least once an hour, the Israeli military breaks into his signal and broadcasts messages blaming Hamas for everyone's problems. Hamas, for its part, said it has broadcast messages on Israeli military walkie talkies threatening to kidnap and kill Israeli soldiers. The army said it had no information on such transmissions. The fate of Sgt. Gilad Schalit, who was captured by Hamas-linked militants in 2006 and whose whereabouts remain unknown, is repeatedly evoked in broadcasts and statements by Hamas, which has several times has threatened to nab more Israeli soldiers. Hamas tried to spread rumors that it had captured several. At least one actual attempt failed, the military said. Israeli military spokesman Brig. Gen. Ilan Tal said he would not comment on psychological operations. "If we're talking about psychological warfare, we have to learn from what Hamas is doing," he said. "We expect Hamas to intensify and increase those sort of rumors (of kidnappings) as the situation gets more critical." Israel's army formed a psychological operations unit three years ago, though its initial efforts in the 2006 Lebanon war were largely restricted to drawing satirical cartoons of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and dropping them as leaflets over southern Lebanon. More chilling at the time for Beirut residents, however, were the strange phone calls they received during the war telling them that their woes were due to Hezbollah and they should turn against the guerrillas. That particular technique has reappeared in the current Gaza onslaught, with phone calls and leaflets telling Gazans that their problems were due to Hamas. The leaflets include a phone number and e-mail address to call in tips about the whereabouts of militant leaders and weapons caches. Ephraim Kam, the deputy director of Tel Aviv University's Institute of National Security Studies, said the role of psychological operations loomed large in this offensive, more so than in the past. "I think we did this in former wars, but in this case we had a lot of time, relatively speaking, and so much more emphasis was given to psychological warfare." Lacking the resources of the Israelis, Hamas' psychological efforts have been largely restricted to the propaganda broadcasts on its own Al Aqsa TV channel, including Hebrew language messages asking Israelis to "choose between a peace that gives us back our rights or a war that will smash you down." There have also been reports of threatening text messages sent to the inhabitants of Israel's southern towns telling them to hide underground because Hamas is coming for them. The biggest weapon in Hamas' psychological arsenal is also its best known actual weapon -- the homemade rockets it sends on erratic paths into southern Israeli towns. During the conflict, militants have also used longer-range Grad rockets, hitting cities that used to be out of range. The thousands of rockets have only killed only a handful of Israelis, yet life across Israel's south has been paralyzed. The greatest disinformation coup of the conflict so far, however, came right at the beginning of the offensive when Israeli bombers caught hundreds of Hamas security men inside their compounds. The day before a massive Israeli airstrike, Israeli military radio channels broadcast talk of a "lull" and pulled troops back from the border. Israeli defense officials now say it was a psychological warfare tactic or a "con" to lure Hamas fighters into the open. _____ Associated Press Writers Ian Deitch in Jerusalem, Ben Hubbard in Ramallah and Ibrahim Barzak in Gaza City contributed to this report. From menecraj at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 12:36:33 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:36:33 -0600 Subject: [R-G] Is the Gaza Catastrophe a Resource Conflict? Message-ID: <70A1F6C550F4437093736FD9A5438597@agingCHS072729> http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21670.htm Gaza Catastrophe: Resource Conflict? Natural Gas, Palestinian Elections, and Israel's Subversion of the 'Peace Process' By Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed January 07, 2009 "Information Clearinghouse" -- Israel claims it is fighting in Gaza to stop Hamas rocket-fire against Israel, the continuation of which constituted a flagrant breach of the six-months ceasefire. Hence, the objective of the military operation is limited by the aim of putting an end to the rocket-fire. In fact, the current outbreak of violence cannot be understood without analysing the asymmetries in military violence between the two parties; the dynamic structure of the conflict in the context of the character of the Israeli occupation; the central role of recent discoveries of substantial natural gas reserves in Gaza; and joint Anglo-American and Israeli attempts to monopolise the lucrative (and strategic) energy resources through a political process tied to a corrupt Palestinian Authority run by Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah Party. Hamas' unprecedented victory in democratic elections in 2006 fundamentally threatened these plans. Operation Cast Lead, the concurrent Israeli military venture, was operationalised as a war plan in early 2008, and already finalised in detail as far back as 2001 by Israeli military intelligence. Its execution in late December 2008 into January 2009 is designed to head-off not only domestic Israeli elections, but more significantly, the outcome of further incoming Palestinian democratic elections likely to consolidate Hamas' power, to permanently shift the balance of geopolitical and economic power in its favour. The long-term goal is the "cantonization" of the Occupied Territories making way for increased Israeli encroachment, and ultimately the escalation of Palestinian emigration. Disproportionate Violence - 700: 4 Who bears primary responsible for the violence? You decide: Nearly 700 Palestinians are dead, and 3,00 Palestinians injured. At least 13,000 civilians - half of them children - have been forced to flee their homes, now turned to rubble. (Save the Children Alliance, 02.01.09 - ) Israeli human rights groups, like B'Tselem (The Israeli Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories) based in Jerusalem, confirm that the Israeli military is committing war crimes by intentionally targeting the civilian population in Gaza. As I write, here comes news of example: "Israeli shelling kills dozens at UN school in Gaza" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/06/gaza-israel-death-un) the London Guardian. More than 40 Palestinians were killed "after missiles exploded outside a UN school" in Jabaliya refugee camp by two Israeli tank shells, "where hundreds of people were sheltering from the continuing Israeli offensive." Several dozen civilians were wounded. The school was clearly marked according to officials. And elsewhere, "at least 12 members of an extended family, including seven young children, were killed in an air strike on their house in Gaza City." Hours earlier, "three young men - all cousins - died when the Israelis bombed another UN school, the Asma primary school in Gaza City," where about 400 Palestinians had sought shelter "after fleeing their homes in Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza." As foreign journalists remain banned from entry into Gaza for for no plausible reason (), Israeli human rights groups like B'Tselem are reporting extensively on the deliberate mass destruction of civilian life and infrastructure by Israeli forces. B'Tselem points out that Israeli officials have described how the entirety of Palestinian society can be considered as providing a support network to Hamas, and is therefore a legitimate target (). But worse, the stories that B'Tselem brings to light, ignored by mainstream media pundits, are deeply horrifying. Here are some examples: On 1 Jan. 2009, the Israeli army killed four women and eleven children () in the Jabalya refugee camp. B'Tselem comments: "Such extensive loss of civilian life constitutes a grave breach of international humanitarian law and cannot be justified on military grounds." (B'Tselem, 4.01.09) The Israeli human rights group documents dozens of eye-witness testimonies confirming. On 4th January, "soldiers opened fire from a tank toward a passenger taxi outside Gaza City. The four children in the taxi witnessed their mother and another woman killed." (http://www.btselem.org/english/Testimonies/20090104_Women_killed_in_car_by_tankfire.asp) On 27th December, two Palestinian toddlers "aged three and six, stepped out of their home to feed chickens in the yard. Before they reached the coop, the house was hit by the bombing of a nearby building." The three year old was killed. () This barely scratches the surface of what has been done. Other Israeli human rights groups, UN agencies, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, Save the Children, along with dozens of other credible independent organizations confirm that Israeli forces are indiscriminately targeting the entire Palestinian civilian population (), blowing up residential areas, destroying power plants, bombing sewage facilities, annihilating hospitals, pummelling roads, all into bloody rubble. Compare the hundreds of Palestinians killed, thousands injured, and tens of thousands made homeless, to the fact that only 4 Israelis have been killed due to Hamas rocket-attacks since the outbreak of conflict in December. (Guardian, 03.01.09 () Of course, these deaths are condemnable and outrageous. But they are not cases of massive, systematic massacres of civilians - which are precisely what Palestinians have been experiencing under Israeli politico-territorial domination for the last decade. The Long-Term View - 5000: 14 Consider, for instance, that on 19th September 2007, Israel's security cabinet unanimously declared the entire Gaza Strip an "enemy entity" - solely due to ongoing Hamas rocket-fire. Yet that rocket-fire was and is a response to continued indiscriminate Israeli military bombardments. In January 2007, Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) staged three days of air strikes killing 30 Palestinians, and on the 17th, the Gaza strip was placed under total closure. In response, over 150 rockets and mortars were fired into Israel between the 15th and 18th of that month by Hamas. Yet while these caused no injuries or fatalities to any Israelis, in that same period, nearly 700 Palestinians (including 224 civilians of whom 78 were children) were killed by Israeli extra-judicial executions. Indeed, over the last 7 years of conflict, a grand total of 14 Israelis were killed by Hamas' rocket-fire, compared to an estimated 5,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces () with advanced American and British-supplied military equipment (Guardian, 30.12.08) "Among those killed in the first wave of strikes", reports the Guardian, "were eight teenage students waiting for a bus and four girls from the same family in Jabaliya, aged one to 12 years old." Who Broke the Ceasefire? It is a matter of historical record that the tentative six-month ceasefire was broken by Israel. On 4th November 2008, Israeli forces raided Gaza late at night killing 6 Palestinians, eliciting Hamas rocket-fire. (Guardian, 05.11.08 - ) By late December, Israel called for a 48-hour truce in retaliatory attacks. An official from the UN Relief and Works Agency reported that Israel flagrantly violated the lull, exploiting the opportunity to drop 100 tonnes of bombs on Hamas government installations. (Ha'aretz, 30.12.08 ). Root Cause of Palestinian Resistance: Structural Genocide () in the Occupied Territories After Hamas came to power in democratic elections, Israel imposed a brutal siege on Gaza in 2005, denying 1.5 million Palestinians electricity, fuel, food imports, medical supplies, and vital maintenance goods and spare parts. As water and sanitation services deteriorated, hunger and ill-health intensified, and mortality rates increased. International aid agencies like Oxfam warned of a major public health crisis (). The UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories, Richard Falk, said that the siege of Gaza warned that the Israeli siege of Gaza, threatening the lives of an entire civilian population, expressed genocidal intent: "Is it an irresponsible overstatement to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not. The recent developments in Gaza are especially disturbing because they express so vividly a deliberate intention on the part of Israel and its allies to subject an entire human community to life-endangering conditions of utmost cruelty. The suggestion that this pattern of conduct is a holocaust-in-the-making represents a rather desperate appeal to the governments of the world and to international public opinion to act urgently to prevent these current genocidal tendencies () from culminating in a collective tragedy... But it would be unrealistic to expect the UN to do anything in the face of this crisis, given the pattern of US support for Israel and taking into account the extent to which European governments have lent their weight to recent illicit efforts to crush Hamas as a Palestinian political force." "Here's One I Prepared Earlier." The siege was a strategy to prepare the ground for a protracted military operation, known as "Cast Lead". Although justified on the grounds of stopping Hamas rocket-fire, the operation was planned over six months before () the launch of the operation at the end of 2008. Canadian analyst Professor Michel Chossudovsky from the University of Ottawa has revealed that Operation Cast Lead is in fact the legacy of "a broader military-intelligence agenda first formulated by the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2001", aiming to produce a "planned humanitarian disaster," () designed to inflict mass civilian casualties and terror - that is, to weaken resistance, increase Israeli control, and encourage Palestinian emigration. Contrary to Israeli official rhetoric, military targets are secondary to this principal objective. In this respect, operation beginning in December 08 actually implements what was known as the "Dagan Plan" in 2001 - Operation Justified Vengeance, named after known its founder, retired general and current Mossad commander, Meir Dagan. The operation planned to destroy "the infrastructure of the Palestinian leadership" and collect the arms of "various Palestinian forces and expelling or killing its military leadership." The cumulative impact of this strategy would be to eliminate the viability of Gazan political and military resistance to Israeli penetration, permitting the forcible "cantonization" of the Occupied Territories under the nominal rule of the politically-coopted Fatah faction. Hints that the scope of the operation, already killing and injuring thousands of Palestinian civilians, would be far broader than hitherto admitted, came when Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai told Israeli Army Radio that the Palestinians would "bring upon themselves a bigger Holocaust () because we will use all our might to defend ourselves." Post-1999: Gaza as Locus of Resource Conflict The question, of course, is why now? Pundits have pointed at the telling coincidence of imminent Israeli elections, requiring the Olmert cabinet to find new ways to regain some semblance of credibility after the disastrous Hizbullah defeat in southern Lebanon, not to mention the impact of domestic scandals. Yet even more significant is the role of imminent Palestinian elections. As of September 2008, Israeli political observes noted an erupting "constitutional crisis" (comment no longer available at ) in the Occupied Territories due to disagreement "between Hamas and Fatah over when the next Palestinian elections will be held." Hamas officials stated that they would "not acknowledge Abu Mazen's legitimacy as President of the Palestinian Authority (PA) after January 2009, when it believes his term in office is due to finish." According to Hamas, "new elections should be held in January 09' since according to the PA's Basic Law (which also serves as its temporary constitution) Abu Mazen finishes his Presidential term after 4 years." In the event of failure to do so, the Presidency "temporarily passes to the Speaker of the Parliament, Abd al-'Aziz Dweik." As he is currently imprisoned by Israeli authorities, Hamas would resort to appointing Dweik's deputy "who is also a Hamas member." Given the growing weakness of Abbas and the increasing popularity of Hamas, it was far from likely that the PA would be able to forestall elections until January 2010, as it had wanted to, without severe recriminations and domestic opposition. Both presidential and parliamentary elections were therefore likely in 2009 (), and would have allowed Hamas to consolidate its power in the Occupied Territories. Israeli military and policy planners clearly recognized that this would create significant difficulties for Israel's own plans for the Occupied Territories. A decade back, the British the oil firm BG International discovered a huge deposit of natural gas just off the Gaza coast () containing 1.2 trillion cubic feet of gas valued at over $4 billion. Controlling security over air and water around Gaza, Israel quickly moved to negotiate a deal with BG to access Gaza's natural gas at cheap rates. The incentives for Israel are obvious - as the Telegraph reports: "Israel's indigenous gas fields - north of the Gaza Marine field - could run out within a few years (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643848/Gaza-doesn't-need-aid-it-has-a-andpound2bn-gas-field.html>) and the only other long-term source will be a pipeline from neighbouring Egypt." The British Foreign Office, described the reserves as "by far the most valuable Palestinian natural resource." Tel Aviv journalist Arthur Neslen cites an informed British source saying, "The UK and US, who are the major players in this deal, see it as a possible tool to improve relations between the PA and Israel. It is part of the bargaining baggage." () The project could provide up to 10 per cent of the Israel's energy needs, at around half the price the same gas would cost from Egypt. The Gaza Strip would be effectively circumvented, as the gas would be piped directly onshore to Ashkelon in Israel. Neslen reports another informed source noting "an obvious linkage" between the BG-Israel deal and "attempts to bolster the Olmert-Abbas political process." Yet this process is designed precisely to marginalise the Palestinian people, as Neslen reports that "up to three-quarters of the $4bn of revenue raised might not even end up in Palestinian hands at all. While the PIF officially disputes the percentages, it will provide no others for fear of a public backlash." The "preferred option" of the US an UK is that the gas revenues would be held in "an international bank account over which Abbas would hold sway." No wonder then, that Ziad Thatha, the Hamas economic minister, had denounced the deal as "an act of theft" that "sells Palestinian gas to the Zionist occupation." Things didn't go quite according to plan. In fact, before any deal could be finalised, Hamas won the 2006 elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council, provoking a bitter power struggle between Hamas and the pro-west Fatah, fuelled by the input of US and Israeli arms to the latter. Ultimately, the Palestinian Authority split in 2007, with Hamas taking control of Gaza and Fatah taking control of West Bank. Having been excluded from the US-UK brokered gas deal between Israel and the PA, one of the first things that Hamas did after getting elected was to declare that the natural gas deal was void, and would have to be renegotiated (). With Hamas declaring the constitutional imperative to hold elections in 2009, as early as January if possible, Israeli military and policy planners recognized the probability of a Hamas win - with all its political implications. At one time even stating its willingness to recognise Israel's right to exist () within its 1967 borders, a consolidated Hamas government in control of Gaza's natural resources would fundamentally alter the balance of power in the region, granting Palestinians the prospects of sustained economic growth, foreign investment, unprecedented infrastructure development, and thereby the prospect of a far more equal relationship with Israel, who in coming years needs to increasingly diversify energy supplies. Meanwhile Israel's original Anglo-America sponsored plans for the Occupied Territories - a docile Fatah-controlled patchwork of underdeveloped cantonized Bantustans whose natural resources are controlled by Israel and profited by Anglo-American companies - would be thrown into the sea. Israeli Military Objectives Pundits, slavishly quoting Israeli defence sources, claim that Israel is trying to stop the Hamas rocket-fire, and will keep the operation rolling until they believe that they have degraded Hamas military capabilities sufficiently so as to forever prevent Hamas from firing rockets at Israel again. Ever. Failing this, pundits tend to be confused about the scope of Israel's objectives, noting that the state aim is rather vague and intrinsically impossible to measure. Given the preceding analysis, Israel's official war aim is difficult to take seriously. On the contrary, there is thus little doubt that Operation Cast Lead is aimed at obliterating Hamas as a viable source of politico-military resistance in the Palestinian Territories, paving the way for the "cantonization" of the latter under the erection of the corrupt Abbas-led PA, before imminent 2009 Palestinian elections could consolidate Hamas' socio-political entrenchment. The operation thus has two major objectives: 1) The short-term objective is to allow Israeli and Anglo-American unchallenged monopolisation of the Gaza gas reserves, and continued apartheid-style domination of the Territories. 2) The long-term objective is to create permanent conditions facilitating Israel's re-encroachment on the Territories, encouraging Palestinian emigration and expulsion from their homes, and absorbing their remaining lands under renewed Israeli settler-colonisation programmes. The attack on Gaza is, therefore, a war on democracy; a war on the right of peoples to self-determination; a war on the right of peoples' to utilise their own resources for their own benefit. It continues and extends the policies of repression and discrimination () perpetrated by Israel in the Occupied Territories since 1948, when three quarters of a million Palestinians were forced from their homes, and hundreds massacred, by Israeli forces in the Nakba (Catastrophe). Since then, Israel has continued to violate UN resolutions, attempted to grab as much territory as possible from the Palestinians, denied them the right to statehood and self-determination, and instituted racist laws to deprive them of civil liberties and human rights. Even Israeli officials like Ami Ayalon, the retired head of Shin Bet, Israel's domestic security service, have condemned these policies as a form of "apartheid"(): "The things a Palestinian has to endure, simply coming to work in the morning, is a long and continuous nightmare that includes humiliation bordering on despair. We have to decide soon what kind of democracy we want here. The present model integrates apartheid and is not commensurate with Judaism." (Ma'ariv, 05.12.00) Israel's illegal occupation of Palestine is supported by the US, Britain, and Western Europe, through financial aid, extensive supplies of arms and military equipment, diplomatic support. The global social justice movement needs to extend its support for Gaza far beyond marching and demonstrations, by pressuring media, government and civil society institutions (http://www.iprd.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=21&Itemid=51) to recognize that the Gaza crisis is an outcome of long-term policies that can only be understood in the context of recognizing the reality of Israel as a Setter-Colonial Apartheid regime sponsored by Anglo-American power. Thus, the global social justice movement should look to widening and deepening public understanding of the origins of the current crisis in the contemporary conjuncture of the global imperial system. Yet just as South African apartheid required a massive international campaign of diplomatic and economic boycotting to bring it down, so too will the Israeli Settler-Colonial Apartheid regime require a comprehensive campaign of diplomatic and economic boycotts to weaken the nexus that ties Anglo-American power to Israel, and move toward a meaningful resolution of the conflict based on democracy and equality for Jews and non-Jews, together. Where can we start, practically? An outstanding example is to call for the establishment of an International Criminal Tribunal for Israel (ICTI) under UN Charter Article 22, as has been advocated by the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC), a London-based NGO with Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. As IHRC Chairman Massoud Shadjareh observed, "The setting up of such a tribunal is long-overdue, and is desperately needed to address the war crimes perpetrated not only in the current attacks on Gaza but in previous campaigns against the Lebanese and Palestinians. The relevant procedures and precedents are in place. It is time for the UN to act if it hopes to regain a shred of credibility amongst the outraged peoples of the world." The IHRC's call () for a tribunal resonates with numerous comments from independent experts on Israeli war crimes, such as Francis Boyle, Professor of International Law at the University of Illinois: "The establishment of ICTI would provide some small degree of justice to the victims of Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide against the Peoples of Lebanon and Palestine--just as the ICTY has done in the Balkans. Furthermore, the establishment of ICTI by the U.N. General Assembly would serve as a deterrent effect upon Israeli leaders such as Prime Minister Olmert, Foreign Minister Livni, Defense Minister Barak , Chief of Staff Ashkenazi and Israel's other top generals that they will be prosecuted for their further infliction of international crimes upon the Lebanese and the Palestinians." So here's something you can do to make the establishment of an ICTI a real possibility - write to the UN General Assembly President (), demanding the creation of an Israeli war crimes tribunal under UN Charter Article 22. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, Executive Director Institute for Policy Research & Development - http://www.globalcrisis.org.uk Last Updated ( Thursday, 08 January 2009 ) ? Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From fentona at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 12:46:54 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 11:46:54 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Hamas: We will win war in Gaza Message-ID: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/01/200918155333111890.html Hamas: We will win war in Gaza Israel's war on Gaza has left more than 700 Palestinians dead - nearly a third of them women and children - and more than 3,000 injured. But at the organisation's headquarters in Damascus, 100km miles from the territory, Musa Abu Marzouq, the deputy head of Hamas' political bureau, told Al Jazeera why he believes his organisation is on the verge of victory against Israel. Al Jazeera: Under what conditions will Hamas agree a ceasefire with Israel? Abu Marzouq: We have three conditions for any peace initiative coming from any state. First, the aggression of the Israelis should stop. All of the gates should be opened, including the gate of Rafah between the Gaza Strip and Egypt. Finally, Israel has to withdraw from the Gaza Strip. We are not saying we will stop firing rockets from the Gaza Strip to Israel - we are only talking about stopping the aggression from the Israelis against the civilian population in the Gaza Strip. When others talk about a ceasefire, they are saying all military operations should stop. But we are sending a message [by firing rockets]: "We will not surrender. We have to fight the Israelis and we will win this battle." We know we are going to lose a lot of people from our side, but we are going to win, inshallah. Members of Hamas have said that Israel is using collective punishment by targeting civilians who support Hamas. But is Hamas' targeting of Israeli civilians also not a type of collective punishment? We are defending ourselves. When you talk about any occupation, people should resist the soldiers and the army who occupy their country. We don't have weapons sophisticated enough to launch at exact targets. We are sending a message: "You can't provide security to your side until you bring security to the Palestinian side." We are looking for freedom and for security for the Palestinian people. This is our message to Israel. They need to understand that we are working for an independent state. How do you think Israel's war on Gaza will affect Hamas' position? The Israeli push against Hamas has increased our popularity sharply among the Palestinian people and throughout the Muslim world. After the Israelis killed Hamas leaders like Ahmed Yassin and Ismail Abu Shanab, Hamas won the elections with 76 seats out of a 132-seat parliament. Using these means doesn't decrease the popularity of Hamas, it increases it. What exactly would you consider to be "victory" for Hamas? A victory for Hamas would mean the Israelis did not accomplish their objectives. If they can't stop rockets from coming into Israel, that means they failed. But the real reason for Israel's aggression is to change the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip - they have been thinking about this since Hamas won the elections - it is not because of the rockets. They failed to lead the people in an uprising against Hamas in the Gaza Strip with their economic embargo. They tried to push Fatah to stand and fight Hamas, but we defeated them in the Gaza Strip, so the Israelis have taken action themselves. Why, at the beginning of this conflict, did Hamas decide not to renew the six-month ceasefire? We agreed to this ceasefire under Egyptian mediation with certain conditions. IN DEPTH Latest news and analysis from Gaza and Israel Track the war and submit your own reports Send us your views and eyewitness videos Watch our coverage of the war on Gaza All military operations were to be stopped by June 19. All of the six gates between Israel and Gaza were to remain open. In the first 10 days of the truce, 30 per cent of the goods coming from Israel to the Gaza Strip were to be allowed in and, after that 10- day period, all supplies were to be allowed to enter. Also, there was to be a meeting between the Europeans, Egyptians, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas to discuss how to open the Rafah gate. Finally, the ceasefire was supposed to be extended to the West Bank. During those six months, the Israelis kept the border crossings closed most of the time. Only 15 per cent of goods were allowed to enter the Gaza Strip from Israel. They killed more than 40 people in the last month of the ceasefire, eight of which were in the last week. On many occasions, the Egyptians told us that the Israelis were not respecting the agreement. Their refusal to allow supplies to enter was a type of slow killing of the Palestinians. The Palestinians eventually asked: "What is the use of this ceasefire for us?" For that reason, we didn't renew that agreement. Khalid Meshaal, the leader of Hamas, in December called for a "military intifada against the Zionist enemy" and as a "peaceful intifada internally". What did he mean by an internal peaceful intifada? I think he meant that there needs to be internal change among the Palestinians. Right now the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank controls everything. This is not acceptable. We need to peacefully change these conditions. How are relations between Hamas and Fatah now? Now the priority for Hamas, Fatah or any Palestinian organisation is to stand against the Israeli aggression. After we finish with this battle, I guess we can talk about reconciliation or reuniting with Fatah. We openly welcome any kind of negotiation or dialogue between Fatah and Hamas to end the separation of the Palestinians. When French president Nicolas Sarkozy met with Syrian president Bahsar al-Assad, many said he tried to encourage Damascus to put pressure on Hamas to stop firing rockets. Have you faced any kind of pressure from Syria? We haven't seen any pressure from Syria. They respect our independence. They respect our choices. They respect the policies we chose for our people. Has Hamas had any contact with the administration of Barack Obama, the US president-elect? No, we haven't had any direct contact. Do you have any expectations regarding the approach of Hillary Clinton, the US nominee-designate for the post of US secretary of state? We cannot evaluate something that lies in the future. We know that in the US senate, Hillary Clinton's vote was always with Israel, but maybe there will be some differences when she becomes secretary of state. From fentona at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 12:49:10 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 11:49:10 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Venezuelan firm says it never ended deal with Citizens Energy Message-ID: Citgo continues support of free heating oil plan Venezuelan firm says it never ended deal with Citizens Energy By Nicole C. Wong and Todd Wallack Globe Staff / January 8, 2009 http://www.boston.com/business/personalfinance/articles/2009/01/08/citgo_continues_support_of_free_heating_oil_plan/ It turns out you'll be able to call Joe for free oil after all. Venezuelan company Citgo Petroleum Corp. said yesterday it plans to continue supporting a program run by Joseph P. Kennedy II that provides free heating oil to 200,000 low-income households in 23 states, including Massachusetts - just two days after Kennedy said Citgo was indefinitely suspending the program. On Monday, Kennedy, the president of Citizens Energy Corp., said Citgo had to suspend contributions because of plunging oil prices and the widening recession, which hurt its revenue. As a result, Kennedy warned, he might have to cut the program by one-fifth in Massachusetts and shutter it completely in other states this year unless he could raise other contributions or persuade Citgo to change its mind. He also said Citizens would lay off 20 staffers and delay the contracts for operating its application processing call centers. Both companies said Citgo told Citizens in December that it had to reevaluate all of its charitable commitments - a process that was still underway this week. But that's where the agreement ends. "We never stopped the program," Citgo chief executive Alejandro Granado said twice at a press conference yesterday in Citizens Energy's office in South Boston. Citizens, which had publicized it would start taking applications on Jan. 5 from people who needed help heating their homes, said it thought Citgo's indecision meant the program would be suspended. "We were put in a position where we were unable to take the applications," Kennedy said. "It took a few days longer than we could manage." Since Kennedy said the program would be suspended, Citgo and Venezuelan President Hugo Ch?vez have been swarmed by political pressure. The Venezuelan government owns Citgo, the US distribution arm of Venezuela's state oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela, which Ch?vez indirectly controls. Kennedy would not say whether he talked to Ch?vez this week, but the former Massachusetts congressman said he discussed the situation with several members of Congress and "did what was necessary to make this work." US Representative Bill Delahunt, Democrat from Quincy, who helped negotiate the original deal with Ch?vez at a meeting in Caracas several years ago, said he and other members of Congress personally contacted Ch?vez after learning the program was in jeopardy. "It's really important to continue the program," Delahunt said. "In New England, it has been extraordinarily helpful to get low-income people through the tough winters we have had." Delahunt said he thought the program could also pave the way for better relations between the United States and Venezuelan governments. Ch?vez has been a critic of the US government. Granado said he talked to Ch?vez yesterday morning and was given the go-ahead to continue the program. Citizens said it will start accepting applications on Jan. 19 and expects home deliveries to begin two to three days later. Kennedy has frequently touted this three-year-old program in television commercials, urging people to call 1-877-JOE-4-OIL. Under the program, residents in 16 states were able to obtain up to 100 gallons of free heating oil last year. The program also provides grants to Native American tribes in other states to help members heat their homes. But social service groups point out Citizens' program is just one of many to help low-income families heat their homes. For instance, residents can call the state heating assistance hotline at 800-632-8175, and the Salvation Army and Massachusetts energy companies run the Good Neighbor Energy Fund to help residents pay their electric, gas, and oil bills. A coalition of state utilities and community programs also runs a website, www.energybucks.com, which points consumers to other resources. Nicole C. Wong can be reached at nwong at globe.com; Todd Wallack at twallack at globe.com From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 12:51:35 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:51:35 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Nasrallah: Arabs Have Much to Learn from Chavez Message-ID: Nasrallah: Arabs have much to learn from Chavez Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:51:55 GMT Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, dubbed as the most popular leader in the Arab world, addressed a crowd of Lebanese supporters in a videoconference on January 07, 2008. The following is part of his speech. The brutal truth, the truth of the brutality and hostility and racism of Israel should be an additional motive to continue our refusal to recognize the Zionist entity. My dear brothers and sisters, Cutting relations with Israel and halting any normalization of ties with Israel and describing the appropriate massacres it has committed in Gaza today is the easiest thing we can do as our duty. This is the easiest thing that the leaders and the people of the region can do. Yesterday, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced that he would expel the Israeli ambassador in Venezuela. He, of course, did this in order to show his support for the Palestinians. Venezuela is very close to America, it is a neighbor of America. This is Chavez. He did this because of his humanity, his sense of revolution and, in this way, he dealt a severe blow to those who are now hosting the ambassadors of Israel in their capitals and do not have enough courage to even think about telling them to leave. Today, Arab leaders need to take lessons from this Latin American leader. They have to learn how to show support for the people of Palestine. My dear brothers and sisters, This criminal entity must be punished for the murders it is committing and should not be rewarded. This entity must not be given benefits after committing so many crimes in Gaza and after killing so many people, women and children. I assure you that the people of our Ummah will punish this entity and will punish the leaders of this entity because of the crimes they have committed. These people, these leaders have always taken Israeli acts lightly. The people of this region cannot forgive Israel and the responsibility of Arab governments today is to stand side by side with the people and the resistance in Palestine and to refrain from playing a role of mediation between the Palestinians and the occupiers. Arab leaders must help the resistance to achieve its aims, to stop the military campaign and to lift the siege and must not put pressure on the resistance to accept the humiliating Israeli conditions. Yesterday, an Egyptian official said something interesting. He asked 'Does the Security Council need more than 650 martyrs and more than 2,500 wounded to make its decision and act in a responsible manner?' These are nice words to hear and I would like to ask this Egyptian official whether the Egyptian regime needs more than 650 martyrs and more than 2,500 people wounded before it permanently opens the Rafah border crossing to help the people of Gaza stand with perseverance and achieve victory? The same question that you ask from the Security Council, I am asking you. I am here talking to the Egyptian official. What is required from Egypt is only to open the border crossing, not to declare war. I was told by some of my colleagues yesterday that a group of Egyptian lawyers, who are loyal to the Egyptian regime, have actually filed a lawsuit against me personally. They filed a lawsuit at the International Court of Justice because of my speech on the first night of the commemoration of Ashura when I called on the Egyptian leadership to open the Rafah border crossing and called on the Egyptian people and the Egyptian army to pressure the Egyptian regime to take a positive step. They considered what I said as unjust and as a call for a revolution and the toppling of the Egyptian regime. It was only a call to open the Rafah border crossing but, anyway, I am proud of the call I made. I am proud that this lawsuit was filed against me, especially because it came from those who did not take any steps after all these Israeli massacres were committed in Lebanon and in Jabaliya and in Palestine and even when Zionists brought massacres against Egyptian soldiers, those heroic Egyptian soldiers. When a lawsuit is filed against me because a position I took and because I stood side by side with those oppressed and killed in Gaza, this is something that makes me proud. I am proud that these people filed a lawsuit against me because I took this position. I am proud of this now and I will be proud of this in the afterlife. But I would like to tell you very frankly we are not trying to create hostilities. We are not enemies. We will not make hostile ties with those who collaborated against us, the Arabs who collaborated against us during the July 2006 war and with those who accused us and took part in the shedding of our blood. We will not be their enemies but we will be the enemies of those who collaborate against the people of Gaza. I repeat, we will be enemies of those who collaborate against Gaza and against the people of Gaza and against the resistance of Gaza. We will be enemies of those who take part in shedding the blood of the people of Gaza and those who close the doors of life to the people of Gaza. My dear brothers and sisters, We also heard yesterday from John Bolton, a Zionist who was formerly in the American administration and is now frustrated. John Bolton pointed out the real aim of the Americans and the Zionists. The real aim, as he said, was to destroy the Palestinian cause. He spoke about separating the West Bank from Gaza. He spoke about ending the two-state proposal by keeping the state of Israel and giving part of the West Bank to Jordan and giving the Gaza Strip to Egypt. I would like to tell you this is the real American-Zionist plan. All the talk we heard previously about two states is nothing. Such claims are mere lies and trickery because whenever they come down to actually determining the boundaries of a Palestinian state, they do not give the Palestinians any territories with which a country can be established. They then say we can not establish two states and so the solution is to abolish the Palestinian cause. This requires, on the first level, once again a call for unity. Once again, we stress the importance of Palestinian unity in all its forms, all the Palestinian factions, Hamas, Fatah, the Islamic Jihad, all the Palestinian factions must stand unified because the cause has now become the target. They are now making efforts to destroy this cause, but God willing it will not happen. They are not trying to destroy the government of Fatah, of Hamas and other factions. They are now trying to destroy the whole Palestinian cause and so this requires, once again, for us to stress on the necessity of supporting the resistance and perseverance in Gaza. My dear brothers and sisters, The experience of the July 2006 war and the experience of the Palestinian resistance in the Gaza Strip until now have provided clear indication that a proper defense strategy is necessary, whether it be in Palestine or Lebanon. One of the strongest armies in the world, the Israeli army, which has the strongest air force in the region, is incapable of achieving its aims even though it stands against a very very small resistance force that lacks capabilities but has strong will and operates in a very very small geographic area. This shows that the alternative of popular armed resistance based upon faith, determination and popular support is the best way to confront even the strongest armies in the world should such an army occupy the territories of a country. This increases our conviction and influences us on the path we are walking on. Look my dear brothers and sisters, even the Security Council and the decisions it has made and even the international community have proved that they are incapable of protecting the Palestinian people in Gaza and incapable of condemning a massacre which was committed in a school that belongs to one of the committees of the United Nations? How can the Security Council, which is incapable of condemning the massacres committed by the Zionists against women and children, protect people and how can it actually show itself to be just in relation to a specific cause. My dear brothers and sisters, What is happening today concerns us all. I know that in Lebanon the eyes of a region are on you. We are all in a sensitive stage in history. I tell you that we do not yet know the magnitude of the plan, the far-reaching effects of the Zionist-American plan and the magnitude of the collaboration. We must all be vigilant at all times as anything is possible. We must be cautious and watch the developments. Yesterday, as well, Olmert was quoted that today there is war against Hamas and tomorrow there will be war against Hezbollah. I would like to tell Olmert, the person who failed in Lebanon, that you will not be able to destroy Hamas and you will not be able to destroy Hezbollah. A few days ago and even a few weeks ago and even before the offensive into Gaza and after the military offensive into Gaza, during all this time, we have been hearing threats. One person says he wants to destroy us in days and the other person says he wants to destroy us in hours. I tell all these people that we cannot be weakened and we cannot be afraid and we cannot give up and we will not give up. We will not be afraid of your air force and threats. We will not be terrorized by your warplanes. We are here and we are ready for any development, event or any offensive that can be launched. And I will not repeat what I said before. If you come to our territories, if you come to our villages, alleys and houses, I will respond with a simple sentence -- Zionists will discover that if they take the step they did in the July (2006) war, the next war will be a cakewalk compared to that war. We are here and we will not give up our arms. Our resistance will still be the main theme of our sacrifices and the blood of our martyrs and I would have hoped for all those voices which were raised in Lebanon to actually give Israel a sigh of relief. Certain people had said Hezbollah would act against Israel. I would have preferred to hear those Lebanese people responding to the threats of Israel against Lebanon and against the resistance in Lebanon and against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Why is it that when the Zionists take any steps and display aggression, we do not hear any responses, but when some people speak about the chances of war, many intervene hastily and try to relieve Israel and convince Israel that Hezbollah will not take any steps. These voices, these responses are being heard at a time when Lebanon is being threatened and the people in Palestine are being killed. My dear brothers and sisters, On the tenth day of Muharram, in the light of all these challenges, we need the spirit, vision and wisdom of Hussein (PBUH). We also need Hussein and Allah to accept us. We need Hussein to keep our feet firm on the ground. We need to have the spirit of Hussein, his love for martyrdom. As we said during previous decades, we were with Hussein always and we were ready to sacrifice ourselves and our souls just like our brothers sacrifices themselves. We were always ready to endure the hardships of the death of ours sons and loved ones for the sake of the cause which we believe in, for the sake of defending dignified and honorable lives. The passage of these years have proved our firmness and that our direction is the right direction, that our alternative is the right alternative. We once again pay tribute to Imam Hussein's sacrifices and say that the generations of men and women who everyday repeat the known slogan cannot be defeated and cannot be terrorized by any threats as long as their voices always call. We say we will answer to your request Imam Hussein. Israel is our enemy and the enemy of the Ummah and will always be its enemy even if some reconcile with Israel. America created Israel and protects Israel and is therefore the enemy of the Ummah and will always be the enemy even if some reconcile with America. I thank you once again for your faithful participation. We once again would like to raise our voices to the enemy and let the enemy know that the Ummah, and we will always be an Ummah, when asked whether "we will be humiliated or stand against them with dignity?" The answer will always be that our position is to never be humiliated. Peace be upon the Imam Abu Abdullah Al-Hussein, son of the Prophet, peace be upon all those who gave themselves to your cause. Once again, I pay tribute and I shall always pay tribute to you and shed light on your memory. Peace be upon Imam Hussein and Ali, the son of Hussein and all the children and friends of Hussein. From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:06:46 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:06:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Oakland Education Association Condemns Israeli Assault On Gaza In-Reply-To: <763788071.688631231375791472.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <1040622569.375981231445206506.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Oakland Education Association Condemns Israeli Assault On Gaza The OEA unreservedly condemn the murderous Israeli assault on Gaza, their deliberate targeting of the civilian population, including schools and hospitals, and Israels ongoing collective punishment of the Palestinian people which has been carried out with the strong support of the U.S. government. We support the Right to Return and call for the establishment of a bi-national secular state in Israel-Palestine. In line with this motion, we encourage teachers to open their classrooms to discussion and teaching on the crisis in Gaza.? Oakland Education Association From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:08:59 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:08:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Red Cross slams Israel over access to Gaza wounded Message-ID: <487685199.378691231445339695.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> International Herald Tribune ?????????????????????????????? Thursday, January 8, 2009 ? Red Cross: Israel delayed access to Gaza wounded ? UN halting aid deliveries to Gaza, citing Israeli military actions against its premises and personnel ? Geneva ? The international Red Cross accused Israel on Thursday of "unacceptable" delays in letting rescue workers reach three Gaza City homes hit by shelling where they eventually found 15 dead and 18 wounded, including young children too weak to stand. ? The Geneva-based International Committee of the Red Cross said the Israeli army refused rescuers permission to reach the site in the Zeitoun neighborhood for four days. Ambulances could not get to the neighborhood because the Israeli army had erected large earthen barriers that blocked access. ? Israel said the delay was caused by fighting in the area and accused Hamas of using Palestinian civilians as human shields. Since Wednesday, Israel has observed a daily three-hour halt in operations to allow humanitarian evacuations and aid deliveries throughout Gaza. ? Eventually, rescuers from the international Red Cross and Palestine Red Crescent received permission to go into the shelled houses on Wednesday, four days after the buildings were hit by Israeli shells. ? "This is a shocking incident," Pierre Wettach, head of the ICRC for the region, said. ? The rescue team "found four small children next to their dead mothers in one of the houses. They were too weak to stand up on their own. One man was also found alive, too weak to stand up," the statement said. "In all, there were at least 12 corpses lying on mattresses" in one of the houses, it added. ? The Geneva-based organization said the children and the wounded had to be transported by donkey cart to ambulances. ? "The Israeli military must have been aware of the situation but did not assist the wounded," the international Red Cross said. "Neither did they make it possible for us or the Palestine Red Crescent to assist the wounded." ? The ICRC normally conducts confidential negotiations with warring parties, and the statement was a rare public criticism of one party to a conflict over a specific incident. ? The organization said it believes "in this instance, the Israeli military failed to meet its obligation under international humanitarian law to care for and evacuate the wounded." ? "It considers the delay in allowing rescue services access unacceptable," the Red Cross statement said. ? The organization alleged Israel also refused requests to go to other destroyed houses in the same neighborhood of Gaza City, where they had reports of more wounded people. ? Red Cross medics in Gaza could not be reached for comment on the condition of the children rescued from Zeitoun on Wednesday. The Palestine Red Crescent said the children are in the Shifa and al-Quds hospitals in Gaza City. ? The Associated Press was not able to visit the hospitals because of the dangers of moving around Gaza, and it has been difficult to obtain information from the hospitals about the children because staff are overwhelmed with casualties and unable to talk with reporters. ? Red Cross spokesman Iyad Nasr said emergency crews evacuated 105 more injured people from Zeitoun on Thursday and were struggling to find shelter for them. Also Thursday, a Palestinian health official said the bodies of 35 people have been found in the rubble of bombed out building in Gaza City during a three-hour pause in fighting, many of them in Zeitoun neighborhood. ? The Israeli military did not comment on the specifics of the Red Cross allegations, but said it is closely cooperating with international aid organizations during the Gaza fighting to assist civilians caught in the crossfire. ? "The Israel Defense Forces are engaged in a battle with the Hamas terrorist organization that has deliberately used Palestinian civilians as human shields," a military statement said. "The IDF in no way intentionally targets civilians and has demonstrated its willingness to abort operations to save civilian lives and to risk injury in order to assist innocent civilians." ? Israel said it would investigate any formal complaint against the army's conduct within the constraints of the current military operation. ? Israel's ambassador in Geneva, Aharon Leshno-Yaar, denied his country was failing in its humanitarian obligations. ? "Once the military activity was over, then it was possible for humanitarian teams to evacuate the wounded," he told The Associated Press. ? Leshno-Yaar said Israel respects international humanitarian law and is working with aid groups to allow the wounded to be removed and in some cases transferred to hospitals in Israel. ? But aid groups say safe passage around Gaza remains a problem. ? On Thursday, the United Nations said it was halting all aid deliveries to Gaza, citing Israeli military actions against its premises and personnel. ? The World Health Organization said 21 Palestinian medical workers have been killed and 30 injured since Israel launched its offensive on Dec. 27. ? The Associated Press ? ? From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:09:51 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:09:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] An Unnecessary War - Jimmy Carter Message-ID: <186531588.379701231445391943.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/07/AR2009010702645.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 ? Washington Post ???????????? ???????????????????????? Thursday, January 8, 2009; Page A15 ? An Unnecessary War ? By Jimmy Carter ? I know from personal involvement that the devastating invasion of Gaza by Israel could easily have been avoided. ? After visiting Sderot last April and seeing the serious psychological damage caused by the rockets that had fallen in that area, my wife, Rosalynn, and I declared their launching from Gaza to be inexcusable and an act of terrorism. Although casualties were rare (three deaths in seven years), the town was traumatized by the unpredictable explosions. About 3,000 residents had moved to other communities, and the streets, playgrounds and shopping centers were almost empty. Mayor Eli Moyal assembled a group of citizens in his office to meet us and complained that the government of Israel was not stopping the rockets, either through diplomacy or military action. ? Knowing that we would soon be seeing Hamas leaders from Gaza and also in Damascus, we promised to assess prospects for a cease-fire. From Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman, who was negotiating between the Israelis and Hamas, we learned that there was a fundamental difference between the two sides. Hamas wanted a comprehensive cease-fire in both the West Bank and Gaza, and the Israelis refused to discuss anything other than Gaza. ? We knew that the 1.5 million inhabitants of Gaza were being starved, as the U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food had found that acute malnutrition in Gaza was on the same scale as in the poorest nations in the southern Sahara, with more than half of all Palestinian families eating only one meal a day. ? Palestinian leaders from Gaza were noncommittal on all issues, claiming that rockets were the only way to respond to their imprisonment and to dramatize their humanitarian plight. The top Hamas leaders in Damascus, however, agreed to consider a cease-fire in Gaza only, provided Israel would not attack Gaza and would permit normal humanitarian supplies to be delivered to Palestinian citizens. ? After extended discussions with those from Gaza, these Hamas leaders also agreed to accept any peace agreement that might be negotiated between the Israelis and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who also heads the PLO, provided it was approved by a majority vote of Palestinians in a referendum or by an elected unity government. ? Since we were only observers, and not negotiators, we relayed this information to the Egyptians, and they pursued the cease-fire proposal. After about a month, the Egyptians and Hamas informed us that all military action by both sides and all rocket firing would stop on June 19, for a period of six months, and that humanitarian supplies would be restored to the normal level that had existed before Israel's withdrawal in 2005 (about 700 trucks daily). ? We were unable to confirm this in Jerusalem because of Israel's unwillingness to admit to any negotiations with Hamas, but rocket firing was soon stopped and there was an increase in supplies of food, water, medicine and fuel. Yet the increase was to an average of about 20 percent of normal levels. And this fragile truce was partially broken on Nov. 4, when Israel launched an attack in Gaza to destroy a defensive tunnel being dug by Hamas inside the wall that encloses Gaza. ? On another visit to Syria in mid-December, I made an effort for the impending six-month deadline to be extended. It was clear that the preeminent issue was opening the crossings into Gaza. Representatives from the Carter Center visited Jerusalem, met with Israeli officials and asked if this was possible in exchange for a cessation of rocket fire. The Israeli government informally proposed that 15 percent of normal supplies might be possible if Hamas first stopped all rocket fire for 48 hours. This was unacceptable to Hamas, and hostilities erupted. ? After 12 days of "combat," the Israeli Defense Forces reported that more than 1,000 targets were shelled or bombed. During that time, Israel rejected international efforts to obtain a cease-fire, with full support from Washington. Seventeen mosques, the American International School, many private homes and much of the basic infrastructure of the small but heavily populated area have been destroyed. This includes the systems that provide water, electricity and sanitation. Heavy civilian casualties are being reported by courageous medical volunteers from many nations, as the fortunate ones operate on the wounded by light from diesel-powered generators. ? The hope is that when further hostilities are no longer productive, Israel, Hamas and the United States will accept another cease-fire, at which time the rockets will again stop and an adequate level of humanitarian supplies will be permitted to the surviving Palestinians, with the publicized agreement monitored by the international community. The next possible step: a permanent and comprehensive peace. ? The writer was president from 1977 to 1981. He founded the Carter Center, a nongovernmental organization advancing peace and health worldwide, in 1982. From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:08:11 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:08:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Victims in school bombing were all civilians, says UN Message-ID: <483032352.377591231445291841.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> The Province ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? January 8, 2009 ? Victims in school bombing were all civilians, says UN ? By Adel Zaanoun Agence France-Presse ? United Nations - Israel was slammed yesterday by the United Nations, which demanded an inde?pendent investigation after military strikes on tluee UN-nm schools in Gaza on Thesday killed 48 people. ? The Israeli army said militants had fired at Israeli forces from inside one school, at Jabaliya refugee camp, and Hamas militants were among those killed. ? But the the UN agency for Palestinian refugees adamantly denied that claim. ? "Following an initial investigation, we are 99.9 per cent sure that there were no militants or militant activities in the school and the school compound," said Christopher Gunness, spokesman for UNRWA. ? The 43 Jabaliya victims included women and children. ? Meanwhile, Israeli jet fighters bombed suspected arms-smuggling tunnels in southern Gaza early today; as diplomats worked to secure a ceasefire in an offen?sive that has killed 700 Palestinians. ? After a brief lull yesterday to allow Gaza's beleaguered population to gath?er food, Defence Minister Ehud Barak was given the green light for a deeper offensive into Gaza as part of the cam?paign to halt Hamas rocket attacks. ? A senior Barak aide was due in Cairo today to get details on an Egyptian ceasefire plan, which secured wide?spread international backing amid mounting concern about the scale of civilian casualties. ? Warplanes hit a house and a suspect?ed tunnel in an open area ofRafah near the Egyptian border. ? The army confirmed that strikes were taking place in Rafah, which has already been targeted repeatedly since an Israeli air offensive began on Dec. 27 and was followed up by a ground operation on Saturday. ? Israeli planes had dropped thousands of leaflets in the Rafah area, warning residents to leave their houses or face air strikes. People were told they could returil to their homes at 8 a.m. today. ? The area is crisscrossed by what the Israeli army estimates to be some 300 tunnels from Gaza into Egypt. ? They are used to smuggle supplies and arms into Gaza. ? Ending the smuggling is a key element of a ceaseflre plan proposed by Egypt?ian President Hosni Mubarak. ? It calls for an immediate ceasefire, Israeli - Palestinian talks on securing Gaza's borders, reopening border cross?ings and possible Egyptian-mediated Palestinian reconciliation talks. ? The Israeli offensive has so far killed 702 Palestinians and wounded 3,100, according to Gaza medics. ? Rockets fired into Israel over the past 12 days have killed four people. Six Israeli soldiers have died in combat. From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:07:12 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:07:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Israel continues to get unshakable support from Harper In-Reply-To: <2077872087.684261231375191179.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <1569201011.376251231445232791.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.harperindex.ca/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=00180 Israel continues to get unshakable support from Harper Problematic nature of promises takes on a new dimension with intense attack on Gaza Strip. by Linda McQuaig On Israel's 60th anniversary last April, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised Canada's "unshakable" support for Israel. At the time, this struck me as odd. It would be understandable for a prime minister to offer Canada's "unshakable" support for principles democracy, the rule of law, human rights, etc. But for a country? A country is led by a government, and a government is always fallible. Why would Canada promise its unqualified support for any country? Such unqualified support is particularly problematic when the country is locked in a bitter struggle with millions of people whose land it has held under military occupation for more than forty years. The problematic nature of Harper's promise has taken on a new dimension with Israel's intense bombing of the Gaza Strip, which has left more than 400 Palestinians dead. Even before the bombing began on Saturday, the 2-year-old Israeli blockade had largely sealed Gaza's borders, creating one of the world's worst humanitarian crises. Early this month, UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk reported that Israel's siege of Gaza was allowing "only barely enough food and fuel to enter to stave off mass famine and disease." He described Israel's action as "collective punishment." Falk, a Jewish-American law professor, called on the world community to take action to protect the 1.5 million people in Gaza, noting that "[s]ome governments of the world are complicit by continuing their support politically and economically for Israel's punitive approach." Canada, with its "unshakable" support, seems to fit into this category. Indeed, last March Canada signed an agreement with Israel establishing co-operation in "border management and security." On Saturday, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon blamed the current violence squarely on militant Palestinian groups firing rockets into southern Israel. Cannon offered no criticism of Israel for dropping bombs on the densely populated Palestinian territory. Ottawa's stance resembles that of the Bush administration, which has put all blame for the current bloodshed on Palestinians. But, according to Falk, it was actually Israel that broke the truce between Israel and Hamas, the elected Palestinian government in Gaza. The truce had held for several months, Falk noted, until an Israeli incursion into Gaza last month killed several people. After that, Palestinian militants resumed their rocket attacks, which have killed two Israelis. Ottawa and Washington have emphasized Israel's right to defend itself. Neither government has suggested any comparable right for the Palestinians even though it is the Palestinians, not the Israelis, who are acutely vulnerable. Israel has total air supremacy, and a large nuclear arsenal. The Palestinians are without any means of self-defence (beyond the crude rockets they fire into Israel). This extreme military imbalance means that the current fighting is not really a military conflict (as it's often portrayed in the media), but rather a turkey shoot. South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu expressed outrage at the lopsided nature of the fight: "In the context of total aerial supremacy, in which one side in a conflict deploys lethal aircraft against opponents with no means of defending themselves, the bombardment bears all the hallmarks of war crimes." The Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel should also be condemned. They are violent acts against civilians, and Israel has a right to defend itself. But this isn't an open-ended right. It doesn't include the right to impose collective punishment or to bomb a defenceless population. The Harper government, in providing "unshakable" support for well-armed Israel, is helping facilitate the turkey shoot. [Journalist and best-selling author Linda McQuaig has developed a reputation for challenging the establishment. As a reporter for The Globe and Mail, she won a National Newspaper Award in 1989 for writing a series of articles, which sparked a public inquiry into the activities of Ontario political lobbyist Patti Starr, and eventually led to Starr's imprisonment. In 1991, she was awarded an Atkinson Fellowship for Journalism in Public Policy to study the social welfare systems in Europe and North America. She is author of seven books on politics and economics all national bestsellers including Shooting the Hippo (short-listed for the Governor General's Award for Non-Fiction), The Cult of Impotence, All You Can Eat and It's the Crude, Dude: War, Big Oil and the Fight for the Planet. Her most recent book is Holding the Bully's Coat: Canada and the US Empire. Since 2002, McQuaig has written an op-ed column for the Toronto Star. This article, which appears here with permission, previously appeared in The Star.] From news at ckut.ca Thu Jan 8 13:14:14 2009 From: news at ckut.ca (CKUT Community News Collective) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:14:14 -0500 Subject: [R-G] AUDIO: 30 Occupy lobby of Israeli Consulate in Montreal, Protest Massacres in Gaza Message-ID: <49665E96.1030704@ckut.ca> AUDIO report recorded by CKUT Radio (www.ckut.ca) just after 11am on Wednesday, January 8th. MP3: http://www.ncra.ca/business/admin_ncra/progex/programFiles/53/MontrealOccupation.mp3 AUDIO WEB LINKS: http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/31038 http://www.ncra.ca/exchange/dspProgramDetail.cfm?programID=79399 MONTREAL, January 8, 2009 -- Approximately 30 people entered the lobby of the Israeli consulate this morning to serve an eviction notice to consular staff, demanding the expulsion of the Consular General and an immediate end to the Israeli invasion and siege of Gaza. "The Canadian government's support for the ongoing atrocities in Gaza is totally unacceptable. Canada should immediately end diplomatic ties with the Israeli apartheid regime, starting with the expulsion of Israeli representatives from Canada. Since the Canadian government has refused to do so, we are taking action ourselves," said Aaron Lakoff, one of the participants. Demonstrators arrived at the Consulate on the 6th floor of Westmount Square in Montreal, condemning consular officials in English, French and Hebrew for the massacres committed in Gaza. They blocked access to the consulate for almost two hours before being physically expelled by police. Journalists were denied access to the lobby, and two CTV and Radio-Canada cameramen were shoved into an elevator by police. During the action, demonstrators chanted slogans such as "Fight the power, turn the tide, end Israeli apartheid!" calling for a boycott of Israel, and addressed consular officials through the intercom. "Since the Israeli assault began, over 700 Gazans have been killed and nearly 3100 have been injured, with no place to escape the relentless bombing of schools, homes, mosques, and places of refuge. The besieged hospitals in Gaza are overwhelmed," said Sophie Schoen, another organizer. "This devastating level of violence has defined Israel since its inception, and goes hand in hand with its apartheid system. We must not forget that the vast majority of Gazans are refugees who were ethnically cleansed from other parts of Palestine with the founding of the state of Israel in 1948," said Meg Leitold to participants. "Israeli apartheid could not continue without moral and economic support from Canada and Quebec," she said, calling for a boycott of Israel. As police pushed them out, demonstrators left chanting "Boycottons Israel, liberez Palestine!" Similar actions will take place until Canada and Quebec cease their support for Israeli violence and apartheid. Media contacts: Mostafa Henaway (514) 659-0106 (English / Arabic); Matan Cohen (514) 848-7583 (English / Hebrew) ; Sophie Schoen (514) 998-7243 (French) For additional high resolution photos and videos please contact us. www.tadamon.ca From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:07:29 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:07:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Hamas speaks - Los Angeles Times In-Reply-To: <199323764.681711231374871103.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <582978285.376361231445249232.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-oe-marzook6-2009jan06,0,1824904.story Los Angeles Times ?????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????? January 6, 2009 Hamas speaks A Hamas official insists that a 'legacy of suffering' under Israel is what fuels Palestinian resistance. By Mousa Abu Marzook From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:10:24 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:10:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Holocaust Denied Message-ID: <215313135.380521231445424950.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21680.htm ? Information Clearinghouse ?????????????????????????????? January 8, 2009 ? Holocaust Denied ? The lying silence of those who know ? By John Pilger ? "W hen the truth is replaced by silence," the Soviet dissident Yevgeny Yevtushenko said, "the silence is a lie." It may appear the silence is broken on Gaza. The cocoons of murdered children, wrapped in green, together with boxes containing their dismembered parents and the cries of grief and rage of everyone in that death camp by the sea, can be viewed on al-Jazeera and YouTube, even glimpsed on the BBC. But Russia's incorrigible poet was not referring to the ephemeral we call news; he was asking why those who knew the why never spoke it and so denied it. Among the Anglo-American intelligentsia, this is especially striking. It is they who hold the keys to the great storehouses of knowledge: the historiographies and archives that lead us to the why. ? They know that the horror now raining on Gaza has little to do with Hamas or, absurdly, "Israel's right to exist." They know the opposite to be true: that Palestine's right to exist was canceled 61 years ago and the expulsion and, if necessary, extinction of the indigenous people was planned and executed by the founders of Israel. They know, for example, that the infamous "Plan D" resulted in the murderous depopulation of 369 Palestinian towns and villages by the Haganah (Jewish army) and that massacre upon massacre of Palestinian civilians in such places as Deir Yassin, al-Dawayima, Eilaboun, Jish, Ramle and Lydda are referred to in official records as "ethnic cleansing." Arriving at a scene of this carnage, David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, was asked by a general, Yigal Allon, "What shall we do with the Arabs?" Ben-Gurion, reported the Israeli historian Benny Morris, "made a dismissive, energetic gesture with his hand and said, ?Expel them'. The order to expel an entire population "without attention to age" was signed by Yitzhak Rabin, a future prime minister promoted by the world's most efficient propaganda as a peacemaker. The terrible irony of this was addressed only in passing, such as when the Mapan Party co-leader Meir Ya'ari noted "how easily" Israel's leaders spoke of how it was "possible and permissible to take women, children and old men and to fill the roads with them because such is the imperative of strategy ? who remembers who used this means against our people during the [Second World] war ? we are appalled." ? Every subsequent "war" Israel has waged has had the same objective: the expulsion of the native people and the theft of more and more land. The lie of David and Goliath, of perennial victim, reached its apogee in 1967 when the propaganda became a righteous fury that claimed the Arab states had struck first. Since then, mostly Jewish truth-tellers such as Avi Schlaim, Noam Chomsky, the late Tanya Reinhart, Neve Gordon, Tom Segev, Yuri Avnery, Ilan Pappe and Norman Finklestein have dispatched this and other myths and revealed a state shorn of the humane traditions of Judaism, whose unrelenting militarism is the sum of an expansionist, lawless and racist ideology called zionism. "It seems," wrote the Israeli historian Ilan Pappe on 2 January, "that even the most horrendous crimes, such as the genocide in Gaza, are treated as desperate events, unconnected to anything that happened in the past and not associated with any ideology or system ? Very much as the apartheid ideology explained the oppressive policies of the South African government, this ideology ? in its most consensual and simplistic variety ? has allowed all the Israeli governments in the past and the present to dehumanize the Palestinians wherever they are and strive to destroy them. The means altered from period to period, from location to location, as did the narrative covering up these atrocities. But there is a clear pattern [of genocide]." ? In Gaza, the enforced starvation and denial of humanitarian aid, the piracy of life-giving resources such as fuel and water, the denial of medicines and treatment, the systematic destruction of infrastructure and the killing and maiming of the civilian population, 50 per cent of whom are children, meet the international standard of the Genocide Convention. "Is it an irresponsible overstatement," asked Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and international law authority at Princeton University, "to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not." ? In describing a "holocaust-in-the making," Falk was alluding to the Nazis' establishment of Jewish ghettos in Poland. For one month in 1943, the captive Polish Jews led by Mordechaj Anielewiz fought off the German army and the SS, but their resistance was finally crushed and the Nazis exacted their final revenge. Falk is also a Jew. Today's holocaust-in-the-making, which began with Ben-Gurion's Plan D, is in its final stages. The difference today is that it is a joint US-Israeli project. The F-16 jet fighters, the 250-pound "smart" GBU-39 bombs supplied on the eve of the attack on Gaza, having been approved by a Congress dominated by the Democratic Party, plus the annual $2.4 billion in war-making "aid," give Washington de facto control. It beggars belief that President-elect Obama was not informed. Outspoken on Russia's war in Georgia and the terrorism in Mumbai, Obama's silence on Palestine marks his approval, which is to be expected, given his obsequiousness to the Tel Aviv regime and its lobbyists during the presidential campaign and his appointment of Zionists as his secretary of state, chief of staff and principal Middle East advisers. When Aretha Franklin sings "Think," her wonderful 1960s anthem to freedom, at Obama's inauguration on 21 January, I trust someone with the brave heart of Muntadar al-Zaidi, the shoe-thrower, will shout: "Gaza!" ? The asymmetry of conquest and terror is clear. Plan D is now "Operation Cast Lead," which is the unfinished "Operation Justified Vengeance." The latter was launched by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2001 when, with Bush's approval, he used F-16s against Palestinian towns and villages for the first time. In the same year, the authoritative Jane's Foreign Report disclosed that the Blair government had given Israel the "green light" to attack the West Bank after it was shown Israel's secret designs for a bloodbath. It was typical of New Labor Party's enduring, cringing complicity in Palestine's agony. However, the 2001 Israeli plan, reported Jane's, needed the "trigger" of a suicide bombing which would cause "numerous deaths and injuries [because] the 'revenge' factor is crucial." This would "motivate Israeli soldiers to demolish the Palestinians." What alarmed Sharon and the author of the plan, General Shaul Mofaz, the Israeli Chief of Staff, was a secret agreement between Yasser Arafat and Hamas to ban suicide attacks. On 23 November, 2001, Israeli agents assassinated the Hamas leader, Mahmud Abu Hunud, and got their "trigger"; the suicide attacks resumed in response to his killing. ? Something uncannily similar happened on 5 November last, when Israeli special forces attacked Gaza, killing six people. Once again, they got their propaganda "trigger." A ceasefire initiated and sustained by the Hamas government ? which had imprisoned its violators ? was shattered by the Israeli attack and homemade rockets were fired into what used to be Palestine before its Arab occupants were "cleansed." Then on 23 December, Hamas offered to renew the ceasefire, but Israel's charade was such that its all-out assault on Gaza had been planned six months earlier, according to the Israeli daily Ha'aretz. ? Behind this sordid game is the "Dagan Plan," named after General Meir Dagan, who served with Sharon in his bloody invasion of Lebanon in 1982. Now head of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence organization, Dagan is the author of a "solution" that has seen the imprisonment of Palestinians behind a ghetto wall snaking across the West Bank and in Gaza, effectively a concentration camp. The establishment of a quisling government in Ramallah under Mohammed Abbas is Dagan's achievement, together with a hasbara (propaganda) campaign relayed through a mostly supine, if intimidated western media, notably in America, that says Hamas is a terrorist organization devoted to Israel's destruction and to "blame" for the massacres and siege of its own people over two generations, long before its creation. "We have never had it so good," said the Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Gideon Meir in 2006. "The hasbara effort is a well-oiled machine." In fact, Hamas's real threat is its example as the Arab world's only democratically elected government, drawing its popularity from its resistance to the Palestinians' oppressor and tormentor. This was demonstrated when Hamas foiled a CIA coup in 2007, an event ordained in the western media as "Hamas's seizure of power." Likewise, Hamas is never described as a government, let alone democratic. Neither is its proposal of a ten-year truce as a historic recognition of the "reality" of Israel and support for a two-state solution with just one condition: that the Israelis obey international law and end their illegal occupation beyond the 1967 borders. As every annual vote in the UN General Assembly demonstrates, 99 per cent of humanity concurs. On 4 January, the president of the General Assembly, Miguel d'Escoto, described the Israeli attack on Gaza as a "monstrosity." ? When the monstrosity is done and the people of Gaza are even more stricken, the Dagan Plan foresees what Sharon called a "1948-style solution" ? the destruction of all Palestinian leadership and authority followed by mass expulsions into smaller and smaller "cantonments" and perhaps finally into Jordan. This demolition of institutional and educational life in Gaza is designed to produce, wrote Karma Nabulsi, a Palestinian exile in Britain, "a Hobbesian vision of an anarchic society: truncated, violent, powerless, destroyed, cowed ? Look to the Iraq of today: that is what [Sharon] had in store for us, and he has nearly achieved it." ? Dr. Dahlia Wasfi is an American writer on Palestine. She has a Jewish mother and an Iraqi Muslim father. "Holocaust denial is anti-Semitic," she wrote on 31 December. "But I'm not talking about World War Two, Mahmoud Ahmedinijad (the president of Iran) or Ashkenazi Jews. What I'm referring to is the holocaust we are all witnessing and responsible for in Gaza today and in Palestine over the past 60 years ? Since Arabs are Semites, US-Israeli policy doesn't get more anti-Semitic than this." She quoted Rachel Corrie, the young American who went to Palestine to defend Palestinians and was crushed by an Israeli bulldozer. "I am in the midst of a genocide," wrote Corrie, "which I am also indirectly supporting and for which my government is largely responsible." ? Reading the words of both, I am struck by the use of "responsibility." Breaking the lie of silence is not an esoteric abstraction but an urgent responsibility that falls to those with the privilege of a platform. With the BBC cowed, so too is much of journalism, merely allowing vigorous debate within unmovable invisible boundaries, ever fearful of the smear of anti-Semitism. The unreported news, meanwhile, is that the death toll in Gaza is the equivalent of 18,000 dead in Britain. Imagine, if you can. ? Then there are the academics, the deans and teachers and researchers. Why are they silent as they watch a university bombed and hear the Association of University Teachers in Gaza plea for help? Are British universities now, as Terry Eagleton believes, no more than "intellectual Tescos, churning out a commodity known as graduates rather than greengroceries"? ? Then there are the writers. In the dark year of 1939, the Third Writers' Congress was held at Carnegie Hall in New York and the likes of Thomas Mann and Albert Einstein sent messages and spoke up to ensure the lie of silence was broken. By one account, 3,500 jammed the auditorium and a thousand were turned away. Today, this mighty voice of realism and morality is said to be obsolete; the literary review pages affect an ironic hauteur of irrelevance; false symbolism is all. As for the readers, their moral and political imagination is to be pacified, not primed. The anti-Muslim Martin Amis expressed this well in Visiting Mrs. Nabokov: "The dominance of the self is not a flaw, it is an evolutionary characteristic; it is just how things are." ? If that is how things are, we are diminished as a civilized society. For what happens in Gaza is the defining moment of our time, which either grants the impunity of war criminals the immunity of our silence, while we contort our own intellect and morality, or gives us the power to speak out. For the moment I prefer my own memory of Gaza: of the people's courage and resistance and their "luminous humanity," as Karma Nabulsi put it. On my last trip there, I was rewarded with a spectacle of Palestinian flags fluttering in unlikely places. It was dusk and children had done this. No one told them to do it. They made flagpoles out of sticks tied together, and a few of them climbed on to a wall and held the flag between them, some silently, others crying out. They do this every day when they know foreigners are leaving, believing the world will not forget them. From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:36:47 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:36:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Stop the Bombing | End the Siege of Gaza | Demonstrations across Canada Message-ID: <667064848.424381231447007253.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.acp-cpa.ca/en/GazaEvents.html ? Stop the Bombing End the Siege of Gaza ? Demonstrations across Canada Calgary ? FREE PALESTINE, END THE OCCUPATION Demonstration in solidarity with Gaza ? Saturday, January 10, 2009 @ 12:00pm Starts on the steps of City Hall (800 Macleod Trail SE) with a small march to Harry Hays Federal Building (220 - 4 Avenue SE) ? For more info: pcss-at-pcsscalgary.org Chatham-Kent ? The Chatham-Kent Peace coalition will hold a Peace event on the sidewalk in front of Chatham City Hall on King St, on Saturday January 10, at 1:00PM. ? The event is in response to the fighting in GAZA part of the Palestinian Territory. ? For more information call Derry McKeever at 519-352-4198home or 519-359-6271cell Edmonton ? Stop the Assault on Gaza! End the Siege! Free Palestine! ? Rally and March Saturday January 10th at 1:00 p.m. Winston Churchill Square (102 Avenue and 100 Street) ? Organized by the Edmonton Coalition Against War and Racism and the Canada-Palestine Cultural Association ? www.ecawar.org Fredericton ? Saturday, Jan. 10: Solidarity Rally with Gaza Where: City Hall, corner of Queen and York. When: 1pm, Saturday, Jan. 10. Stand in solidarity with Gaza. Bring placards, banners and your voice. ? For more info, contact info-at-frederictonpeace.org Hamilton ? Protest the War on Gaza Demonstration in Hamilton, this saturday(January 10) from 1 - 4 pm at Gore Park, ? Event InfoHost: Palestinian Association of Hamilton,ON Time and PlaceDate: Saturday, January 10, 2009 Time: 1:00pm - 4:00pm Location: 105 Main street east Hamilton, Downtown ? Contact InfoEmail: palestineham-at-gmail.com Montreal ? Manifestation: Qu?bec en solidarit? avec Gaza Mettez fin ? l'apartheid isra?lien! ? SAMEDI 10 JANVIER 13h00 Carr? Dorchester angle Peel et Ren?-L?vesque(metro Peel) ? http://www.tadamon.ca/post/2437 Ottawa ? STOP ISRAEL?S MASSACRE IN GAZA! END THE SIEGE NOW! ? *WHEN: 1pm, Saturday January 10, 2009 *WHERE: Parliament Hill ? ORGANIZED BY: The Association of Palestinian Arab Canadians (APAC), Independent Jewish Voices (IJV - Canada) and the Ottawa Palestine Solidarity Network (OPSN). www.apacottawa.com , www.independentjewishvoices.ca , and www.ottawapalestine.blogspot.com . Quebec ? Manifestation de solidarit? avec Gaza ? ? Qu?bec ? Le samedi 10 janvier, 13 h D?part au Centre Lucien-Borne Coalition de Qu?bec pour la paix Saskatoon ? Rally at City Hall Saturday January 10 at 2.30 p.m to call for peace in Gaza. Sudbury ? Stop the Assault on the People of Gaza ? Call on MP Glenn Thibeault to take a strong public stand against the Isreali bombing and ground campaign. ? Friday, January 9, at 4pm gather in front of the main entrance to the downtown Rainbow Center Mall before visiting MP Glenn Thibeault's office to urge a strong stand against the assault on the people of Gaza. Everyone is encouraged to bring signs and wear black. ? For more information about the event, contact Gary Kinsman at 705-523-2205 or at gkinsman at laurentian.ca. For more information about SAWO, please call 705-675-8479 or email suduryawo at gmail.com." Toronto ? DEMONSTRATE AGAINST THE ISRAELI ASSAULT ON GAZA! LIFT THE SIEGE! ? *WHEN: 11am Saturday January 10, 2009 *WHERE: Israeli Consulate, 180 Bloor St West, Toronto. ? CONTACT: Palestine House info-at-palestinehouse.com ? Followed by: Free Gaza: A Teach-In Saturday, January 10 1:00-5:30 pm United Steelworkers Hall 25 Cecil Street (1 block south of College, 2 blocks east of Spadina) For more info see: http://www.palestinehouse.com/ Vancouver ? RALLY TO END THE SIEGE ON GAZA & PROTEST ISRAELI WAR CRIMES Saturday Jan 10 @ 1 pm Vancouver Art Gallery For info email vancouver.gazaprotest-at-gmail.com Victoria ? Protest Rally Against the Gaza Invasion & for the End of the Israeli Occupation ? Time: 12 noon, Sat., Jan.10, 2009 Place: in front of the Victoria Visitor Centre, opposite the Empress Hotel Winnipeg ? Rally - Saturday, Jan. 10, 2009 ? The Canadian Peace Alliance has called on all members and supporters to support existing demonstrations, or organize their own, this Saturday, January 10 to demand that the Canadian government call for an immediate end to the massacre in Gaza. ? PAW and CanPalNet will be holding a rally at the Federal Building this Saturday, and on each successive Saturday until further notice. ? Please plan to participate and please encourage others to join you. ? Date: Saturday, Jan. 10, 2009 Time: 2:00 p.m. Place: Federal Building (Water Avenue and Main Street), Winnipeg ? For more info: www.peacealliancewinnipeg.ca ? ? From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 13:43:00 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:43:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Montrealers lay siege to Israeli Consulate Message-ID: <186369911.426861231447379988.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Montreal: Breaking news:?January 8th? ? Montrealers lay siege to Israeli Consulate ? Second consecutive day of Israeli Consulate blockades in Canada ? Montreal -- ? Early Thursday , January 8th?Montrealers blockaded the Israeli Consulate in Montreal in protest against the on-going Israeli assault on the people of Gaza. The demonstrators were acting in solidarity with the 1.5 million people of Gaza, demanding Israel end its military assault and lift the 18-month siege on the Gaza Strip to allow humanitarian aid into the territory. Protesters are outraged at Israel's latest assault on the Palestinian people and by the Canadian government's refusal to condemn these massacres that have left 700 dead and over 3000 wounded since December 27, 2008 . In the past 24 hours Israeli has bombarded three U.N. schools in Gaza killing dozens of internally displaced refugees inside Gaza. "Canada's lack of response to recent war crimes in Gaza speaks volumes about their support for Israeli apartheid," said Sophie Schoen, a spokesperson for the action. "The Conservative government should expel all Israeli Consular officials from Canada, as other countries have done," said Amanda Dorter. "Until Ottawa ends its support for Israel we will continue to disrupt the workings of Israeli-Canadian cooperation." "We demand the Canadian government cut all ties with the apartheid regime of Israel," said Mostafa Henaway. ? The action in Montreal comes on the heels of countless protests worldwide against Israeli war crimes, including an occupation of the Israeli Consulate in Toronto by Jewish women yesterday . ? Media contacts: Mostafa Henaway (English/Arabic): 514.659.0106 Sophie Schoen (French): 514.998.7243 Matan Cohen (Hebrew): 514.476.1132 ? From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 15:01:03 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 17:01:03 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Egypt Bars Doctors from Entering Gaza Strip Message-ID: Isn't it time for Mr. Mubarak to meet his maker? Egypt bars doctors from entering Gaza Strip 01.06.2009 | Haaretz By The Associated Press RAFAH - Frustration is mounting at Egypt's border with the Gaza Strip, where many local and foreign doctors are stuck after Egyptian authorities denied them entry into the coastal area now under an Israeli ground invasion. Anesthesiologist Dimitrios Mognie from Greece idles his time at a cafe near the border, drinking tea and chatting with other doctors, aid workers and curious Egyptians. "This is a shame," said Mognie, who decided to use his vacation time to try help Gazans. He thought entering through Egypt, which has a narrow border with the Hamas-ruled strip, was his best bet. "That in 2009 they have people in need of help from a doctor and we can go to help and they won't let us; this is crazy," he added. Gaza's few hospitals have been swamped by the numbers of injured; health officials there reported more than 550 Palestinians dead and 2,500 wounded, including 200 civilians, since Israel embarked upon its military campaign designed to stop Gaza's Islamic Hamas from launching rockets at Israel on December 27. Mognie and a colleague, both part of the Greek organization Doctors for Peace, came to Rafah four days ago, loaded with instruments and medical supplies. Egyptian border guards turn them back daily. Mognie, who said he has worked in conflict zones such as Iraq, Angola and Somalia, added that he understood worries over security but that he was willing to take the risk to help the people in Gaza. Along with Israel, Egypt has maintained the closure of the Gaza border, imposed after Hamas took control of the area in June 2007. However, the Egyptian closure has been seen by some as abetting Israel's siege of the crowded strip, home to 1.4 million people. Since Israel's offensive, Egypt has taken in a trickle of wounded Palestinians from Gaza through the crossing in the border town of Rafah. Cairo, the main mediator between Israel and Hamas, has said it would only open Rafah if moderate Palestinian forces of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas are in charge of the crossing. Calls to Egypt to ease the border bottleneck - where aid convoys first have to have their cargo unloaded from Egyptian trucks before it's loaded onto Palestinian ones and taken into the strip - have increased, including from Hamas allies such as Iran. Although Egypt allowed two Norwegian doctors into Gaza on Dec. 31, the majority of physicians are frustrated at their inability to get in. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi said Monday the his government submitted a formal request to Egypt to set up a desert hospital on Egyptian territory near the Gaza Strip to receive wounded Gazans. Palestinian doctor Abed el-Qader Lubbad, who works in the intensive care at Shifa Hospital in Gaza, arrived in one of the ambulances transporting patients to Egypt on Monday. Out of the eight patients he ferried, one seriously wounded died on the way to the border, Lubbad said. The Palestinian ambulances are not allowed to continue driving through Egypt. At the crossing, patients are taken out of the often poorly equipped Palestinian ambulances and transferred on gurneys to Egyptian ambulances. On Monday, at least 18 Palestinian patients were brought to Egypt, according to Mohammad Arafat, a Palestinian representative in Rafah. The wounded included a man missing both legs and another who lost his eye and fractured his skull. Another physician at Rafah was obstetrician Jemilah Mahmood from Mercy Malaysia. She said her group worked with the Egyptian Red Crescent to bring around $100,000 worth of medical supplies to the border for transport to Gaza.And while equipment eventually got through, Mahmoud said neither she nor her colleagues are allowed to cross. "Can you imagine how many women are hurt and how few women doctors there are?" she asked. "All of us are sitting at the border." From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 14:57:03 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:57:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Please join me in calling for peace in Gaza In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1635588918.511581231451823215.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> ? amnesty international canada ? ? ? The body of a Palestinian boy who was killed early on January 6, 2009 is carried to Gaza City's al-Shifa hospital mortuary. MAHMUD HAMS/AFP/Getty Images ? ? Speak out for peace in Gaza: Sign Amnesty's Open Letter to the Government of Canada Gaza is on the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe. Since 27 December the escalating conflict in Gaza has led to the deaths of nearly 700 Palestinians, including 150 children, in Israeli air strikes, and the deaths of eleven Israelis, including civilians killed in rocket attacks launched by Palestinian armed groups. Amnesty is gravely concerned for the safety of civilians and is urging political leaders to take immediate action to protect lives, ensure the enforcement of international law, and allow for the necessary flow of humanitarian aid to alleviate the suffering of victims of this escalating conflict. Please act now to help end the bloodshed in Gaza and southern Israel. 1. Sign Amnesty's Open Letter to Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs 2. Support Amnesty?s critical role in this emerging crisis by making a donation ? ? From suzannedk at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 15:11:56 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 23:11:56 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Please join me in calling for peace in Gaza In-Reply-To: <1635588918.511581231451823215.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> References: <1635588918.511581231451823215.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Sid Shniad wrote: > > > > > amnesty international canada > > > The body of a Palestinian boy who was killed early on January 6, > 2009 is carried to Gaza City's al-Shifa hospital mortuary. > MAHMUD HAMS/AFP/Getty Images > Speak out for peace in Gaza: > Sign Amnesty's Open Letter to the Government of Canada > > Gaza is on the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe. > > Since 27 December the escalating conflict in Gaza has led to the deaths of > nearly 700 Palestinians, including 150 children, in Israeli air strikes, and > the deaths of eleven Israelis, including civilians killed in rocket attacks > launched by Palestinian armed groups. > > Amnesty is gravely concerned for the safety of civilians and is urging > political leaders to take immediate action to protect lives, ensure the > enforcement of international law, and allow for the necessary flow of > humanitarian aid to alleviate the suffering of victims of this escalating > conflict. > > Please act now to help end the bloodshed in Gaza and southern Israel. > > 1. Sign Amnesty's Open Letter to Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs > 2. Support Amnesty's critical role in this emerging crisis by making a > donation > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From suzannedk at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 15:14:05 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 23:14:05 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Please join me in calling for peace in Gaza In-Reply-To: <1635588918.511581231451823215.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> References: <1635588918.511581231451823215.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: There was no way to sign any petition, none was included! suzannedk at yahoo.com On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Sid Shniad wrote: > > > > > amnesty international canada > > > The body of a Palestinian boy who was killed early on January 6, > 2009 is carried to Gaza City's al-Shifa hospital mortuary. > MAHMUD HAMS/AFP/Getty Images > Speak out for peace in Gaza: > Sign Amnesty's Open Letter to the Government of Canada > > Gaza is on the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe. > > Since 27 December the escalating conflict in Gaza has led to the deaths of > nearly 700 Palestinians, including 150 children, in Israeli air strikes, and > the deaths of eleven Israelis, including civilians killed in rocket attacks > launched by Palestinian armed groups. > > Amnesty is gravely concerned for the safety of civilians and is urging > political leaders to take immediate action to protect lives, ensure the > enforcement of international law, and allow for the necessary flow of > humanitarian aid to alleviate the suffering of victims of this escalating > conflict. > > Please act now to help end the bloodshed in Gaza and southern Israel. > > 1. Sign Amnesty's Open Letter to Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs > 2. Support Amnesty's critical role in this emerging crisis by making a > donation > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From fentona at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 15:26:31 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:26:31 -0800 Subject: [R-G] U.S. Weaponry Facilitates Killings in Gaza Message-ID: <7E19FAED-3881-4165-B0C5-7CE62DBE796E@shaw.ca> POLITICS: U.S. Weaponry Facilitates Killings in Gaza By Thalif Deen Israel's two-week military onslaught has resulted in the deaths of over 700 Palestinians, including more than 300 civilians, mostly victims of U.S. weaponry. http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45337 UNITED NATIONS, Jan 8 (IPS) - The devastating Israeli firepower, unleashed largely on Palestinian civilians in Gaza during two weeks of fighting, is the product of advanced U.S. military technology. The U.S. weapons systems used by the Israelis -- including F-16 fighter planes, Apache helicopters, tactical missiles and a wide array of munitions -- have been provided by Washington mostly as outright military grants. The administration of President George W. Bush alone has provided over 21 billion dollars in U.S. security assistance over the last eight years, including 19 billion dollars in direct military aid as freebies. "Israel's intervention in the Gaza Strip has been fueled largely by U.S. supplied weapons paid for with U.S. tax dollars," says a background briefing released Thursday by the Arms and Security Initiative of the New York-based New America Foundation. "The Bush administration has been unwilling to use its considerable influence -- as Israel's major military and political backer -- to dissuade the government in Tel Aviv from its pattern of claiming self- defence while perpetrating collective punishment, human rights violations and undertaking massively disproportionate attacks that harm and kill civilians," Frida Berrigan, senior programme associate at the New America Foundation, told IPS. Besides military aid, the United States has contracted more than 22 billion dollars in arms sales to Israel in 2008 alone, including a proposed deal for 75 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, nine C-130J-30 military transport aircraft and four combat ships. "So, when Israeli forces engage in combat in Gaza or the West Bank, they are more often than not using U.S.-designed systems that were either made in the United States or produced under licence in Israel," says the New America Foundation. The two-week military onslaught has resulted in the deaths of over 700 Palestinians, including more than 300 civilians, mostly victims of U.S. weaponry. In comparison, the Israeli death toll is about seven soldiers and four civilians, primarily due to "friendly fire", or victims of rocket attacks by Hamas. Mouin Rabbani, contributing editor at the Washington-based Middle East Report, says the intimacy of the U.S.-Israeli military relationship, and the frequency with which Israel launches wars, means that the Israeli military also performs the function of testing newly-developed weapons systems in actual warfare, which is of value to both Israel and the United States. "Twice over, in fact, because less effective versions of these same weapons systems are subsequently sold at hugely inflated prices to Arab states, which effectively subsidises the U.S. weapons industry and U.S. military grants to Israel," he told IPS. Tracing historical links, Rabbani said Israel replaced South Vietnam as the primary recipient of U.S. foreign military aid in the 1970s and has maintained that status ever since. With consistently fewer exceptions over the years, he pointed out, Israel has the run of the U.S. arsenal, particularly with regard to obtaining new and advanced weapons that are not sold (or, as in the present case, given) to non-NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) allies. He said that Israel is also permitted to participate in various U.S. weapons development programmes, meaning that in addition to weapons deliveries it benefits enormously from the transfer of military technologies. "Israel also has access to various U.S. intelligence programmes and data, and the list goes on for quite some length," Rabbani added. Last week, U.S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich (Democrat of Ohio) wrote a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pointing out that Israel's use of U.S. weapons in Gaza may constitute a violation of the requirements of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) of 1976. The AECA outlines the conditions under which countries may use U.S. weapons systems, primarily for "internal security" or "legitimate self defence". The letter says that Israeli forces have used U.S.-supplied F-16 fighter planes and Apache helicopters "to precede and to support ongoing ground actions such as the one in which 40 Palestinians were killed while taking shelter in a U.N. facility." "Israel is not exempt from international law and must be held accountable," he added. Berrigan said that with the onslaught about to enter its third week, hundreds of Gazans killed and wounded, 10 Israelis killed and more wounded, Hamas continuing to launch rocket attacks and a grave danger that the conflict will widen to include Lebanon, President-elect Barack Obama "will step into a bed of molten hot quicksand on Jan. 20." "It will be difficult for the new administration to turn the tide of U.S.-Israeli relations and challenge Israeli exceptionalism, but it is urgently necessary," she added. Rabbani pointed out that given the level of U.S. military assistance to Israel, the deployment of these weapons in the current onslaught against the Gaza Strip, and U.S. political support for Israel during this crisis, Palestinians could be forgiven for insisting the U.S. shares direct responsibility. "While I would by no means dismiss the issue of U.S. military transfers to Israel in their various forms and dimensions, the key issue is nevertheless the impunity with which these are used," he added. It is this impunity, rather than the weapons transfers in and of themselves, that accounts for Israel's ability to sow widespread death and destruction throughout the Gaza Strip at will. Asked if there would a change in policy under an Obama administration, Rabbani said: "I don't see any indication that things are set to change once Obama takes office". He has attempted to wrap his silence in a cloak of decorum and statesmanship, "claiming he was left with no choice because he is not yet president, then -- in view of his constant pronouncements since Nov. 4 regarding the financial meltdown -- rather too cleverly in my view elaborated that this only applies to foreign policy." "So we are supposed to believe that if instead 600 Israelis had been killed by Palestinian suicide bombers in the space of 10 days, or Russia had decided to suddenly advance on Tbilisi, you could still hear a pin drop in Washington? Unlikely." From menecraj at shaw.ca Thu Jan 8 15:53:57 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 16:53:57 -0600 Subject: [R-G] Please join me in calling for peace in Gaza References: <1635588918.511581231451823215.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: > There was no way to sign any petition, none was included! > suzannedk at yahoo.com Petition: http://www.amnesty.ca/urgentappeal/2009/gaza/ Donations: https://www.amnesty.ca/secure/urgentappeal/2009/gaza.php From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 15:50:28 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:50:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Flood them with emails. It can work. In-Reply-To: <862611036.2112397270@org.orgDB.mail.democracyinaction.org> Message-ID: <846785507.586401231455028499.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> From: "Cecilie Surasky, Jewish Voice for Peace" Sent: Thursday, January 8, 2009 9:26:47 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Flood them with emails. It can work. Go here to write your Congressional representative! salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/301/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26397 Tell everyone you know to write a letter now. Live outside of the US? Call the US embassy and demand an immediate ceasefire and end to the blockade. I am outraged. I just read the text of a bill being voted on in the Senate today - a bill we cannot let pass. The bill, introduced by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), puts the all blame for the current violence between Israel and Gaza entirely on Hamas. It offers unconditional support to Israel's attack on Gaza, tacitly endorsing the raining down of bombs on the heads of Gazan civilians, a tactic which has led to the deaths of over 700 Palestinians in just a few weeks. I am dumbstruck by how one-sided this bill is. The US should condemn Hamas. They are deliberately targeting civilians with Qassam rockets and 9 Israelis have died since Israel started bombing Gaza. But they should also hold Israel accountable. Accountable for denying Palestinians access to badly needed medicine, fuel and food through their year-long blockade of Gaza; accountable for endangering the lives of Israelis by repeatedly violating ceasefires and refusing to negotiate with Hamas, a group, which facts show, can maintain a ceasefire*; accountable for the destructive US-made weaponry they are using on dense population centers, which has now drawn rocket fire from southern Lebanon and threatens to enflame the rest of the Mideast; and accountable for Israel's illegal 40-year occupation. But it does no such thing. Instead, it reads like a press release written by AIPAC, giving Israel carte blanche to do whatever it wants whenever it wants, without legal or moral restraint. It does not call for an immediate ceasefire, or an end to Gaza's blockade, which is also an act of war. And after the Senate, its going to the House. Write your representative now and tell her or him that you expect the United States to take a balanced approach. Tell them that it is in the best interests of Americans, Israelis, and Palestinians for Israel to accept a ceasefire, end the blockade, and achieve peace through an end to Israel's 40-year old occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Cecilie Surasky, Jewish Voice for Peace * Reigniting Violence: How Do Ceasfires End? Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-kanwisher/reigniting-violence-how-d_b_155611.html ? From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 15:53:03 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:53:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] CNN Confirms Israel Broke Ceasefire First In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <863462997.587461231455183224.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> CNN Confirms Israel Broke Ceasefire First http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4 From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 16:17:49 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 15:17:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Civilized Barbarism ... Gangsters with Nuclear Bombs -- warning: contains graphic photos In-Reply-To: <303070671.597071231456301225.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <447484710.599811231456669507.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION (EAFORD) 5 route des Morillons, CP 2100.? 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland Telephone: (022) 788.62.33 Fax: (022) 788.62.45? e-mail: info at eaford.org www.eaford.org The Face of ?Civilized? Barbarism ? Gangsters with Nuclear Bombs __________________________________________________________________________________ Pictures CNN and BBC will Never Show December 30, 2008 PNN -Israeli forces killed two girls in an air attack on Beit Hanoun in the northern Gaza Strip early last week. Local sources report that a missile destroyed a house belonging to Talal Hamdan in Beit Hanoun, killing his two daughters of 12 and 4 years old. A son is reported seriously injured. Israeli forces killed four sisters and a four year old boy. Over 40 children have been killed since the attack of the Israeli Occupation Forces began on Gaza. The bodies of two girls, aged four and 11, who were killed in an Israeli air strike in Beit Hanun in the northern Gaza Strip Strip December 30, 2008. Palestinians carry the body of 4-year-old Lama Hamdan during her funeral in the town of Beit Hanoun in the northern Gaza Strip December 30, 2008. Palestinians bury the body of 4-year-old Lama Hamdan at Beit Hanoun cemetery in the northern Gaza Strip December 30, 2008. Palestinians mourn beside the bodies of three children in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip December 29, 2008. Three Palestinian children from the Balosha family, of five who were all killed in the same Israeli missile strike, are seen in the morgue before their burial at Kamal Edwan hopsital in Beit Lahiya, northern Gaza Strip, Monday, Dec. 29, 2008 Palestinian children from the Balosha family, who were all killed in the same Israeli missile strike, are seen in the morgue before their burial at Kamal Edwan hopsital in Beit Lahiya, northern Gaza Strip, Monday, Dec. 29, 2008. Palestinian women mourn over the bodies of three Palestinian children from the Balosha family, of five who were all killed in the same Israeli missile strike, in the morgue before their burial at Kamal Edwan hopsital in Beit Lahiya, northern Gaza Strip, Monday, Dec. 29, 2008. A Palestinian man buries the body of 4-year-old Dena Balosha at Beit Lahiya cemetery in the northern Gaza Strip December 29, 2008. ? A Palestinian man carries the body of his 4-year-old daughter Dena Balosha during the funeral for her and her four sisters in Jabalya refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip December 29, 2008. A Palestinian mourner shouts as he lifts the body of a child from the Balosha family, of which three children and two teenagers, were killed in an Israeli missile strike,durng their funeral in the Jebaliya refugee camp, northern Gaza Strip, Monday, Dec. 29, 2008. A Palestinian man buries the body of 5-year-old Sodqi al-Absi in Rafah cemetery in the southern Gaza Strip December 29, 2008. A Palestinian mourner carries the body of 4-year-old Dena Balosha, foreground, one of five members of the same family including three children and two teenagers who were killed in an Israeli missile strike, during their funeral in the Jebaliya refugee camp, in the northern Gaza Strip, Monday, Dec. 29, 2008 The father of Palestinian Dena Balosha, 4, left, one of five members of the same family including three children and two teenagers who were killed in an Israeli missile strike, carries her body during their funeral in the Jebaliya refugee camp, in the northern Gaza Strip, Monday, Dec. 29, 2008. bedroom of 5 killed girls Samera Baalusha (34) carries her surving child Mohamad (15 months) while she waits to see the body of her daughter Jawaher Baalusha (aged 4) during the funeral held for her and four of her sisters who were killed in an Israeli missile strike, on December 29, 2008 in the Jebaliya refugee camp, in the northern Gaza Strip Palestinian mourners bury 8 children killed in Israeli air strikes Dec 29 - Palestinian mourners on Monday (December 29) buried 8 children who were killed in Israeli air strikes on Gaza Strip. In the northern Gaza town of Jabalya, hundreds took to the streets to attend a funeral procession for five girls of the same family who were killed in one Israeli strike. ? In this image taken from APTN video, Palestinian men carry two injured children into hospital after Israeli aircraft struck Hamas security compounds across Gaza in Gaza City on Saturday Dec. 27, 2008. A wounded Palestinian boy is carried by his father following an Israel air strike in Gaza December 28, 2008. A Palestinian boy is carried to al-Shifa hospital following an Israel air strike in Gaza December 28, 2008 A Palestinian security force officer carries a wounded girl into the emergency room at Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Saturday, Dec. 27, 2008. A Palestinian girl wounded in an Israeli missile strike is carried into the emergency area at Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Saturday, Dec. 27, 2008. A Palestinian man carries his wounded child to the treatment room of Kamal Edwan hospital following an Israeli missile strike in Beit Lahiya, northern Gaza Strip, Monday, Dec. 29, 2008. ? ? From shniad at sfu.ca Thu Jan 8 16:32:18 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 15:32:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Please vote on AOL War Resisters Poll In-Reply-To: <49658C04.2050000@edcorrigan.ca> Message-ID: <1732816958.606511231457538758.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Please vote and forward to your friends. PLEASE VOTE: http://news.aol.ca/article/us-war-deserter-must-leave-canada/476461/ From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 19:52:49 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 21:52:49 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Peace Groups Lose First Major Gaza Challenge On Capitol Hill Message-ID: Peace Groups Lose First Major Gaza Challenge On Capitol Hill Attempts by Activists To Shape Resolution Come Up Short By Nathan Guttman Thu. Jan 08, 2009 Washington ? As Israel's military campaign in Gaza entered its second week, Capitol Hill became the latest battleground where Jewish hawks and doves are trying to shape the American response to the ongoing violence. Dovish groups bombarded lawmakers with calls and e-mails in an attempt to influence the wording of pro-Israel resolutions being shaped in the House and Senate. The groups' line in the sand on those resolutions was straightforward: Unless the House and Senate included a call for an immediate cease-fire, the dovish groups would call on their supporters to actively oppose them. For the Jewish peace camp, the first Middle East crisis of the new Congress and administration was an opportunity to flex its muscles and show presence on the national scene. But in the end, they lost. On January 7, Senate leaders introduced a resolution that only called for President Bush to "work actively to support a durable, enforceable, and sustainable cease-fire in Gaza, as soon as possible." The resolution issued no call for a lifting of the commercial blockade Israel has imposed on Gaza, which has contributed to widespread poverty, as part of a cease-fire. The crisis demonstrated the difficulties facing the Jewish community's dissenting voices: refusal, even in the moderate sectors of the Jewish community, to criticize Israel at a time of war; large pockets of support for Israel's actions; and limited efficacy when faced with the powerful political clout of establishment Jewish groups. Activists for the four major dovish Jewish groups ? J Street, Americans for Peace Now, Brit Tzedek v'Shalom and the Israel Policy Forum ? had put whatever power they had to sway members of Congress into adopting what they call a "more nuanced approach" toward the conflict, one that would express support for Israel, but at the same time call for an international effort to end military operations. In a January 5 memo to congressional offices, APN even directly took on the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Washington's legendary pro-Israel lobby. "Unfortunately," the APN memo stated, Aipac's position "fails to mention any need to work to end the crisis." "This approach is regrettable," APN added. The IPF held meetings with Hill staffers, stressing the need to think beyond the issue of Israel's right of self-defense. "I try to put things in context, to show that it is not black and white," said M.J. Rosenberg, director of the group's Washington Policy Center. "It is very dangerous when members of Congress see the Jewish community speaking in one voice. They are offended by it." Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, which focuses more on grass-roots operations, put out an action alert urging supporters to phone their representatives and ask for their support in an immediate cease-fire. "The U.S. must support conflict resolution, not escalation," the alert read. Diane Balser, executive director of Brit Tzedek, said the calls also served as a reminder to lawmakers "that there is a new administration that has pledged itself to diplomacy." In Los Angeles, a group of liberal Jewish activists wrote a letter to the local Jewish paper, arguing that Israel is practicing its right of self-defense in a manner that is "ill-advised and morally questionable, causing considerable loss of life and grave damage." And J Street, which became a lightning rod for criticism from other pro-Israel activists, alerted its nearly 100,000 online supporters to sign a memo sent to Capitol Hill and to make phone calls to their representatives. The J Street memo states that "military action that is seen to be disproportionate to the threat and escalatory in nature will prove to be counterproductive." The group lists seven members of Congress who issued statements supportive of a quick halt to hostilities ? though not necessarily an immediate cease-fire, as J Street is pressing for. Most were among 41 members and candidates who had received funds from J Street's political action committee during this election cycle. Democratic Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak told the Forward he agreed with J Street's broad position that the United States must take a more active role in brokering a halt to hostilities in the region. "The military will stop a problem, but it's not going to fix it," said Sestak, a retired admiral. The "comprehensive diplomatic approach that's needed there is J Street's overarching point ? that at the end of the day, war is not going to give Israel greater security." Still, as the Forward went to press, it was not clear that J Street's financial support was always influential. Many of the other members of the endorsed group remained silent, and at least one, Democratic Florida Rep. Robert Wexler, issued a statement more in line with Aipac's appeal than with J Street's. Aipac has listed on its Web site more than 100 members of Congress and elected officials who came out with statements expressing unconditional support for Israel's actions. The difficulty in getting the dovish message through on Capitol Hill became apparent as the House and Senate moved forward on formulating their pro-Israel resolutions. These resolutions have long been a congressional tradition and are passed, with the support of the pro-Israel lobby, whenever Israel reaches a military or diplomatic crossroad. Attempts to include a direct call for an immediate cease-fire in the House resolution also seemed to be falling short as preparations reached their final stage. California Democrat Howard Berman, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told the Forward on January 6 that the resolution "supports Israel and the peace process." Berman, whose aides were in charge of writing the resolution, said the important message is that any agreement will ensure that the cease-fire is durable and sustainable. "We don't want to see what happened in Lebanon happening here," Berman said, referring to the 2006 cease-fire that was sponsored by the United Nations and halted combat between Israel and the Lebanese Shi'ite group Hezbollah. It did not succeed in preventing Hezbollah from regrouping and rearming. For dovish Jewish groups, Congress was only one front of the battle. The other, and not less challenging, was the front within the Jewish community itself. Activists with J Street were surprised by the negative reactions to their call for cease-fire, especially that of the Reform movement's leader, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, who argued in a Forward opinion column January 9 that "J Street got it very wrong." Since Yoffie comes from the heart of the liberal-dovish stream in which J Street swims, his criticism seemed more hurtful than that of others. Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street's executive director, issued a lengthy response to Yoffie's critique and later said he was "always happy to have a disagreement with my best friends." But anger over J Street's statement did not stop with Yoffie. Though they were unwilling to go on the record, officials from some of the other dovish groups voiced fury with Ben-Ami. "He should have his head handed to him," one said, fuming. In an hour-long conference call January 5, leaders of the Jewish dovish groups tried to coordinate their message and iron out any differences. Attempting to create a broader coalition, the groups were joined by representatives of two non-Jewish organizations that support a two-state solution: the Arab American Institute and Churches for Middle East Peace. These organizations, while critical of Israel's military operation, oppose Hamas rule in Gaza. In contrast to such organizations as StandWithUs, one tactic the dovish groups are not pursuing is street demonstrations. That has been left to anti-war and anti-Zionist groups much further to their left. The Answer Coalition, an organization that was behind many of the demonstrations against the Iraq War and that has campaigned against American intervention in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, leads most of those groups. With reporting by Anthony Weiss. Thu. Jan 08, 2009 From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 20:55:01 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 22:55:01 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Cuba Says Exports of Services Tops $9 Billion Message-ID: Cuba says exports of services tops $9 billion Thu Jan 8, 2009 8:53pm GMT By Marc Frank HAVANA, Jan 8 (Reuters) - Cuban exports of services grew by 6.2 percent in 2008, topping the $9 billion mark for the first time and consolidating their position as Cuba's most important source of foreign exchange, the government said this week. The mounting services income --officials say more than half comes from leftist ally Venezuela-- has enabled Cuba to more or less balance its external finances in recent years despite a huge trade deficit that soared to $11.6 billion in 2008. The National Statistics Office, in preliminary figures posted on its Web site (http://www.one.cu), reported 2008 service exports at $9.2 billion, up from $8.6 billion in 2007. Cuba does not specify what it includes within the service export category, though officials have said tourism and related revenues, the export of medical and other technical services,and donations fall within it. Cuba said it received $2.5 billion from tourism in 2008. Revenues from pharmaceutical and other joint ventures abroad may also be included, according to local economists, as well as the training of foreign students. Non-tourism related service exports began increasing dramatically after a 2004 accord with Venezuela, under which the oil-rich South American oil-producing country pays Cuba for massive health care assistance and other services. Cuba reported 40,000 of its citizens worked in Venezuela last year, 30,000 of them in the health sector. Before the 2004 agreement with Venezuela, Cuba's service exports totaled less than $4 billion a year, with tourism and related activities accounting for more than half of that. The government reports foreign exchange data in the convertible peso which it pegs at $1.08 U.S. (Editing by Jeff Franks and Anthony Boadle) From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 22:29:39 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 00:29:39 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Porn Industry Seeks Federal Bailout Message-ID: January 7, 2009 Porn industry seeks federal bailout Posted: 05:27 PM ET From critical.montages at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 22:42:56 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 00:42:56 -0500 Subject: [R-G] CNN Interview with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad Message-ID: From critical.montages at gmail.com Fri Jan 9 00:08:56 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 02:08:56 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Krugman: The Obama Plan "Nowhere Near Big Enough to Fill" Output Gap Message-ID: January 9, 2009 Op-Ed Columnist The Obama Gap By PAUL KRUGMAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . But Mr. Obama's prescription doesn't live up to his diagnosis. The economic plan he's offering isn't as strong as his language about the economic threat. In fact, it falls well short of what's needed. Bear in mind just how big the U.S. economy is. Given sufficient demand for its output, America would produce more than $30 trillion worth of goods and services over the next two years. But with both consumer spending and business investment plunging, a huge gap is opening up between what the American economy can produce and what it's able to sell. And the Obama plan is nowhere near big enough to fill this "output gap." Earlier this week, the Congressional Budget Office came out with its latest analysis of the budget and economic outlook. The budget office says that in the absence of a stimulus plan, the unemployment rate would rise above 9 percent by early 2010, and stay high for years to come. Grim as this projection is, by the way, it's actually optimistic compared with some independent forecasts. Mr. Obama himself has been saying that without a stimulus plan, the unemployment rate could go into double digits. Even the C.B.O. says, however, that "economic output over the next two years will average 6.8 percent below its potential." This translates into $2.1 trillion of lost production. "Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity," declared Mr. Obama on Thursday. Well, he was actually understating things. To close a gap of more than $2 trillion ? possibly a lot more, if the budget office projections turn out to be too optimistic ? Mr. Obama offers a $775 billion plan. And that's not enough. Now, fiscal stimulus can sometimes have a "multiplier" effect: In addition to the direct effects of, say, investment in infrastructure on demand, there can be a further indirect effect as higher incomes lead to higher consumer spending. Standard estimates suggest that a dollar of public spending raises G.D.P. by around $1.50. But only about 60 percent of the Obama plan consists of public spending. The rest consists of tax cuts ? and many economists are skeptical about how much these tax cuts, especially the tax breaks for business, will actually do to boost spending. (A number of Senate Democrats apparently share these doubts.) Howard Gleckman of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center summed it up in the title of a recent blog posting: "lots of buck, not much bang." The bottom line is that the Obama plan is unlikely to close more than half of the looming output gap, and could easily end up doing less than a third of the job. From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Fri Jan 9 04:19:11 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:19:11 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] Shell's Game Message-ID: <496732AF.6000208@ashisuto.co.jp> Why good people do bad things by George Monbiot The Guardian (January 06 2009) For a while it seemed that Shell had stopped pretending. The advertisements which filled the newspapers in 2006, featuring technicians with perfect teeth and open-necked shirts explaining how they were saving the world {1, 2, 3}, vanished. After being slated by environmentalists for greenwash, after two adverse rulings by the Advertising Standards Authority {4, 5}, Shell appeared to have accepted the inescapable truth that it was an oil company with a minor sideline in alternative energy, and that there was no point in trying to persuade people otherwise. The interview I conducted with its chief executive, Jeroen van der Veer, broadcast on the Guardian's website today {6}, contains what appears to be an interesting admission. I asked him whether Shell had now stopped producing ads extolling its investments in renewable energy. Mr van der Veer does not express himself clearly at this point, but he seems to admit that his company's previous advertising was not honest. "If we are very big in oil and gas and we are so far relatively small in alternative energies, if you then every day only make adverts about your alternative energies and not about ninety per cent of your other activities I don't think that - then I say transparency, honesty to the market, that's nonsense". So, I asked, Shell did not intend to return to that kind of advertising? "Probably not", he told me. "I'm very much keep your feet on the ground, tell them who you are and explain why you are who you are". But since the interview was filmed, Shell's messianic tendencies appear to have resurfaced. In December the company ran a series of ads in the Guardian suggesting again that it had come to save the world. "Tackling climate change and providing fuel for a growing population seems like an impossible problem, but at Shell we try to think creatively", one of these advertisements boasts {7}. It features a diagram of a human brain, divided into sections labelled "fuel from algae", "fuel from straw", "fuel from woodchips", "hydrogen fuels", "windfarm", "gas to liquids" and "coal gasification". This suggests progress of a kind, in that the company is acknowledging that it sometimes dabbles in fossil fuels, but its core business - oil - and its massive investments in tar sands are missing from the corporate mind. Could Shell be having a senior moment? The confusion deepens when you watch its latest publicity film. It's called "Clearing the Air", and it does just the opposite {8}. It is supposed to tell an inspirational tale of discovery, but the script and the acting are so gobsmackingly bad that it inspires you only to rip your clothes off and run screaming down the street. The lasting impression it leaves is that Shell's staff are chaotic and incompetent. Perhaps the clean-cut corporate clones featured in the ads of 2006 put people off. Mr van der Veer is neither an incompetent nor an automaton. He is charming, friendly and smart. But he refused to answer some of the questions I had prepared. Reading Shell's reports and publicity material, I kept stumbling on an absence. In 2000, the company boasted that it would be investing $1 billion dollars in renewable energy between 2001 and 2005. But since then it appears to have produced no figures for its renewables budget. The company now claims that "we're investing significantly in wind energy" {9}, but it doesn't say what significantly means. Of the ten wind farms listed on its website, only one appears to be in the planning or development stage: the others are already in operation {10}. Where is the evidence of new money? When Shell pulled out of Britain's biggest windfarm, the London Array, last year, did this represent the end of its major investments? I asked Mr van der Veer a simple question - fifteen times. (Only a few of these attempts feature in the edited film). "What is the value of your annual investments in renewable energy?". He waffled, changed the subject, admitted that he knew the figure, then flatly refused to reveal it. Nor could he give me a convincing explanation of why he wouldn't tell me, claiming only that "those figures are misused and people say it is too small" and it "is not the right message to give to the people". It strikes me that there is only one likely reason for these evasions: that Shell's spending on renewables has fallen sharply from the figure it announced in 2000. It's a fair guess that the current investment would look microscopic by comparison to its spending on the Canadian tar sands, and would make a mockery of its new round of advertising. I challenge Shell - for the sixteenth time - to prove me wrong. Nor would Mr van der Veer give me a straight answer to another straight question: "is there any investment you would not make on ethical grounds?". I asked this six times. He was unable to furnish me with an example. It's not hard to see why. As well as exploiting the tar sands, which means destroying forest and wetlands, polluting great quantities of water and producing more carbon dioxide than conventional petroleum, Shell is still flaring gas in Nigeria, at great cost to both local people and the global climate. It has been fiercely criticised for its secret negotiations with the Iraqi government, which led last year to the first major access for a western company to Iraq's gas reserves {11}. It is prospecting for oil in some of the Arctic's most sensitive habitats. All this makes my question difficult to answer. Aside from the greenwash, it is not easy to spot the practical difference between this civilised, progressive company and the Neanderthals at Exxon. Like all oil companies, Shell simply follows the opportunities. Shut out of the richest fields by state companies, struggling to extract the dregs from its declining reserves, it has been turning to ever more difficult oil, some of which lies beneath rare and fragile ecosystems. When the price of oil was high, it announced massive investments in the tar sands. Now that the price has dropped again, it has cancelled further spending {12}. It has even less of an incentive to invest in renewables. Shell does what the market demands. I don't blame Shell or van der Veer for this: they are discharging their duty to their shareholders. I do blame them for creating the impression that the company has a different agenda, and I blame governments for allowing them to drift into whatever fields they find profitable, regardless of the consequences for people or the environment. On this issue Jeroen van der Veer and I agree. Oil companies, he says, should not seek to determine a country's energy mix: that is for the government to decide. Saving the biosphere, in other words, cannot be left to goodwill and greenwash: the humanity of pleasant men like van der Veer will always be swept aside by the imperative to maximise returns. Good people in these circumstances do terrible things. Companies like Shell will pour big money into alternative energy only when more lucrative or immediate opportunities are blocked. Where is the government that is brave enough to block them? www.monbiot.com References: 1. The three examples I have in my files are: Shell, 30th May 2006. The world wants more energy, the planet wants less pollution. Page 10, Financial Times. 2. Shell, 29th April 2006. One energy company is going further to make hydrogen a reality. New Scientist. 3. Shell, 22nd May 2006. How can we produce more energy but lower carbon emissions? Page 23, New Statesman. 4. ASA, 7th November 2007. Adjudication: Shell Europe Oil Products Ltd. http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/non_broadcast/Adjudication+Details.htm?Adjudication_id=43476 5. ASA, 13th August 2008. Adjudication: Shell International Ltd. http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_44828.htm 6. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/video/2009/jan/06/george-monbiot-jeroen-van-de-veer 7. Shell, 20th December 2008. In the New Energy Future, if it doesn't exist we'll need to invent it. Page 21, The Guardian. 8. http://realenergy.shell.com/?lang=en&page=homeFlash&access=false&site_version=flash&promo=shellbanner#ClearingTheAir 9. http://www.shell.com/home/content/innovation/alternative_energy/wind/wind.html 10. http://www.shell.com/home/content/shellgasandpower-en/products_and_services/wind/project_case_studies/dir_case_0605.html 11. eg Terry Macalister, 24th September 2008. Shell's $4bn Iraq breakthrough could boost Britain's natural gas supplies. The Guardian. 12. Kristen Hays, 13th December 2008. Petroleum companies delay expansion, new projects Houston Chronicle. http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/01/06/shells-game/ TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From menecraj at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 06:51:28 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 07:51:28 -0600 Subject: [R-G] Tens of thousands flee Rafah Message-ID: http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=82280 IRIN - humanitarian news and analysis UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs ISRAEL-OPT: Tens of thousands flee Rafah TEL AVIV, 9 January 2009 (IRIN) - Independent confirmation of the situation in Gaza, particularly in Rafah on the border with Egypt, is difficult as Israel's ban on journalists entering the Strip remains in place. Telephone lines are overloaded and affected by power cuts. Rafah residents told IRIN by phone that tens of thousands had fled heavy Israeli bombardments, with some seeking refuge at UN institutions or at homes of friends and relatives in areas further from the border but still in the south. IRIN was told of the case of one woman from Rafah who said she and her children had to sleep on the street as she could not find any refuge and simply ran as far away from the border with Egypt as possible, as Israel was conducting air strikes against smuggling tunnels in the area. Max Gaylord, the UN's humanitarian coordinator in the occupied Palestinian territories, said earlier in the week that Palestinians had nowhere to seek refuge from the fighting. UNRWA stops aid deliveries The UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) on 9 January stopped virtually all aid deliveries after one of its drivers was shot. It also suspended staff movements after two separate incidents of Israeli fire on its convoys on 8 January. Two contracted aid workers were killed as they brought humanitarian supplies into the enclave. "We will continue to deliver services wherever possible, but there is a complete restriction on movement," Chris Gunness, the spokesman for UNRWA, said. Gunness later added: "UNRWA would resume activities only once it had clear assurances from the Israeli army that a mechanism was in place to make sure its staff would not be fired upon." Officials from other UN agencies said they too would probably have their work curtailed, particularly as UNRWA was supplying them with logistical support. UNRWA said the two convoys had coordinated their movements with the Israeli military, which, for its part, continued to have no comment on the incidents. Four UN local relief workers have been killed since Israel began its offensive on 27 December. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon condemned the deaths, shortly before the Security Council passed resolution 1860 calling for a ceasefire. Grim Aid workers say the humanitarian situation is grim. Electricity and water services have been severely limited for two-thirds of the population since the offensive began. The World Bank warned on 7 January about an impending sewage crisis. Electricity services improved slightly on 9 January after Israel let in supplies of fuel. Medical officials in Gaza said hospitals were under-stocked and overcrowded, with doctors insisting they need drugs and surgical equipment, as well as more doctors to help them cope with the influx of patients. Surgeons told IRIN they were exhausted and reaching breaking point. ICRC The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) issued one of its most harshly worded statements on 8 January, slamming Israel for not allowing ambulances free access to the wounded, saying it had violated international humanitarian law. The ICRC said it had taken advantage of a "humanitarian lull" Israel offered for three-hours on 7 January to reach areas that had previously been inaccessible and found, together with the Palestinian Red Crescent, about 16 emaciated and weakened wounded people as well as well many bodies. In one case, four children, weak but alive, were found in rubble with their dead mothers. "This is a shocking incident," said Pierre Wettach, the ICRC's top official for the region. "The Israeli military must have been aware of the situation but did not assist the wounded. Neither did they make it possible for us or the Palestine Red Crescent to assist the wounded." UNRWA's Gunness said a three-hour lull was a "drop in the ocean" and demanded a permanent ceasefire to halt the continued heavy impact on the civilian population. Death toll Palestinian medical officials in Gaza said the death toll has exceeded 770 people, with over 3,250 wounded. A doctor at Gaza's main Al-Shifa hospital said that in recent days 80 percent of the dead and wounded were women and children, and officials estimated that over half of all those killed in the military campaign were civilians. Nine Israeli soldiers have died and three civilians were killed by rockets fired from Gaza. shg/ar/cb [ENDS] ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 09:44:52 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:44:52 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Turn off the Canadian Media, Please Message-ID: Turn off the Canadian Media, Please January 09, 2009 By Justin Podur http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/20209 If national media help make a nation, then we all need to stop reading and listening to conventional Canadian media if we want to make a decent Canada. Benedict Anderson, perhaps the leading scholar of nationalism, wrote that the daily newspaper (along with other innovations like novels, maps, censuses, museums) played a key role in creating national consciousness. People in a country like Canada use their own media - public (CBC) and private (CanWest, TorStar, CTVglobemedia) - to know what is happening in their own country. Media are also an important part of forging a national identity. They are supposed to represent the broad spectrum of Canadian opinion. When they present information on the rest of the world, they do so from a Canadian perspective and have the Canadian audience in mind. And today, if you want to have the first idea what is happening in Israel/Palestine (or most of the rest of the world), the best thing to do would be to turn them off completely. In the face of a major ongoing crime like that of Israel's siege and assault on Gaza, Canadians turn to the Canadian media in good faith to try to learn and understand what is happening, who is to blame, and what they might be able to do to help the victims. On each of these counts, the Canadian media fails. But the days when Canadians would be stuck listening to local radio, picking up the local print newspaper, or watching local television packaged by Canadian media corporations for their consumption are over. There is, for the time being, media choice. And given the choice, on Israel/Palestine, it would be foolish to turn to the Canadian media. These days I actually don't have the stomach to do an exhaustive survey of Canadian coverage of these massacres. I have done such surveys in the past (see my letter to the Toronto Star's Mitch Potter from a few years back)[1], and I spent a lot of time and energy thinking about how to democratize the mainstream Canadian media and pressure it to be more open. These days, though, I mainly follow my own advice. A friend of mine, Brooks Kind, spent some time going through the least biased of the Canadian media, CBC radio, over the past two weeks. He found that the CBC suppressed crucial facts, presented an unrepresentative spectrum of opinion, and falsified the historical record. The suppressions and omissions are in the service of the perspective of the US and Israeli governments (and Canadian politicians), but they are no less false for that. With the reminder that I am picking on the CBC not because it is the worst, but because it is by far the best, here are just a few examples. First, remember that the pretext for Israel's attack is that Hamas refused to renew the June 19/08 ceasefire and started rocket attacks in December/08. But Israel violated the ceasefire in two ways. First, by continuing to starve Gaza (as Israeli officials openly admit and have done for years), and second, by attacking Gaza on November 4/08 and killing six Hamas people. Why is this important? There is a pattern here: Israel has repeatedly broken truces, ceasefires, and peace talks with spectacular assassinations that involve killing large numbers of people. This has been a pattern for many years, and has included the assassinations of many of Hamas's leaders (Abd-el-Aziz Rantisi, Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, and many, many others). It is an explicit part of Israel's strategy to provoke its opponents and get pretexts for further attacks. But this timeline, and the November 4/08 attack by Israel, is not part of the 'boilerplate' provided when the attack on Gaza is reported in the Canadian media. Second, Richard Falk, the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, has been making very strong statements about Gaza in recent months. Falk is an acclaimed scholar and a highly credible source. He works for the United Nations, which Canadians supposedly have special respect for. When Falk traveled to Israel, he was detained, strip searched, and deported. Israel's contempt for the United Nations could hardly have been more starkly revealed. Except, perhaps, when the Israelis killed a Canadian UN observer (Paeta Derek Hess-von Kruedener) in Lebanon in 2006, along with 3 others (Du Zhaoyu of China, Jarno Makinen of Finland, and Hans-Peter Lang of Austria). Or, perhaps, when the Israelis bombed the UNRWA school in Jabaliya on Jan 3/09, killing 43 Palestinians and wounding 100. Unlike much of the UN, whose main response to these killings might as well be to apologize for getting in the way of the bombs, Falk has provided urgent warnings to the world about the seriousness of the situation. But Falk's story is not given any prominence in any Canadian media. An entire story on the UN aspects of the situation [2] quotes Israel's envoy to the UN and Palestinian Prime Minister Abbas, the UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon and others, but not the important and strong voice of the UN's Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Territories. And then, of course, there are the cliches, the horrible cliches of this conflict. Like this story [3] about how "World leaders call for Mideast ceasefire as more civilians die." They just "die", these civilians. The lead reads "World leaders called for a ceasefire in the fighting between Israeli forces and Hamas as civilian casualties climbed in the Gaza Strip." The "casualties climbed", the "civilians died", of their own accord, with no help from the Israelis. Israeli officials are allowed the grace of their titles ("Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak") but Mahmoud Zahar from the elected Hamas government is called "Gaza's Hamas strongman" (there are no Western strongmen). Just before the current massacres, on December 8/08, Radio Canada's ombudsman found that the CBC had erred in running a very factual documentary called "Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land" (3PL). The ombudsman Radio Canada erred in broadcasting because "militant pro- Palestinian groups were involved in researching" it. Who were these groups? FAIR (www.fair.org), or Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, whose principal activity is to act more or less as Radio Canada's ombudsman should, pointing out inaccuracies and unfairness in US media coverage of critical topics. "Factual errors" pointed out by the ombudsman include that the film "speaks of the occupation as being illegal, but Miville-Dechene points out that this has never been clarified by the courts". This merely suggests that the ombudsman lacks the most cursory understanding of international law. And possibly, an understanding of what constitutes a factual error. In any case, the Quebec Israel Committee (QIC) said that, by changing its policies to prevent documentaries like these from being seen by Canadians, "Radio-Canada has strengthened its credibility and has become a better news organization." The more "credible" a media outlet is to an outfit like the QIC, the better off Canadians would be in turning it off altogether. What is good about this situation is that all Radio-Canada can really do is prevent Canadians from seeing 3PL on Radio-Canada. They can't prevent Canadians from seeing it altogether (in fact, you can watch it at the Media Education Foundation [4] site or on Google Video [5]). The natural response is the right one: turn off Radio-Canada. A last example. The rally against the Gaza massacres that happened in Toronto (as well as many cities in the world) on January 3, 2009. I was at the rally. I have been to a lot of rallies over the years. Many of these, I must admit, have been very small. Activists learn how to assess (and yes, unfortunately, sometimes to inflate) numbers at demonstrations. But to say that the January 3, 2009 rally had "more than 1000 people", as CBC did [6], is simply preposterous. They may as well have said "more than one". There were easily 10,000 people there - unless someone can show me how you can fill Yonge Street between Bloor Street and College Street in Toronto with a thousand people. And no, at no point was the march single file. In the past, when I, and others like me, have made points like these to Canadian journalists, they reply that we are leftists and biased and merely want them to be biased the way we are. But the above are mostly matters of fact and of professionalism, not of analysis or opinion. I am willing to declare my biases. I write for ZNet (www.zcommunications.org/znet) and work as an editor for it. I wouldn't do either if I didn't think people should read it, and I wouldn't criticize the mainstream media if I thought it did a good job. ZNet is a site for analysis. It features analysts who write on other sites, like the Electronic Intifada's (www.electronicintifada.net) Ali Abunimah, Phyllis Bennis from the Institute for Policy Studies (http://www.ips-dc.org/staff/phyllis ), Jonathan Cook, Ha'aretz's own Gideon Levy and Amira Hass, other Israelis like Neve Gorden and Jeff Halper, as well as folks who write mainly for ZNet. If you're distrustful of the "alternative media" and fear that folks from the region will be biased, try the mainstream (liberal) UK papers, whose openness to diverse analysis puts the Canadian press to shame. Guardian's Comment is Free (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ) section has had Leila el-Haddad, Nir Rosen, Seamus Milne, and plenty of others that don't see the light of day in the Canadian press. Reading these analysts reveals the incredible mediocrity of the Canadian punditry when it addresses international affairs. But analysis is not news, and people do need news. Not only do they need news, but they need a variety of perspectives, and the Israeli perspective is a very important one. There is, however, a difference between what the public relations line of a state at war and the actual perspective and debates in that state. In other words, if you want the Israeli perspective, you can get it directly, in the Israeli press: read Haaretz (www.haaretz.com) and the Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com ). They are available in English, and they are much more frank about Israel's aims and practices than the Canadian media are. Why read what the Israeli military wants Canadians to read, when you can read what they want Israelis to read? If you want news about how Israeli destruction looks to its victims, there is nothing better than the IMEMC (www.imemc.org), which is a genuine news outlet run by Palestinians, in the Occupied Territories, with as high professional standards as you could want. These are journalistic heroes, and the first place I go. If you want news that is actually balanced, with "supporters of Israel" and "pro-Palestinian" voices represented, as well as actual reporting from the ground, use al-Jazeera (www.aljazeera.net/en). [Aside: I can't use the phrase "supporters of Israel" without reminding readers of Chomsky's note in Fateful Triangle, where he said "supporters of Israel" should more aptly be called "supporters of the moral degradation and eventual destruction of Israel". "Pro- Palestinian" is another strange term, since it seems that thinking that a group of human beings are, in fact, human beings, makes you "pro-Palestinian", rather like how agreeing with the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change makes you an "environmentalist".] If you want to make your own decision about how many people were at a demonstration or what its message was, you might as well go directly to the people involved: they all have their own websites. The Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid (www.caiaweb.org) has one, the Canadian Arab Federation (www.caf.ca) has one, and so on. Let me rephrase my point here. Modern Western armies, like those of Israel, the US, and Canada, think of information as part of warfare. They expend tremendous time and resources mobilizing support for their violence. They do this by controlling information, disallowing independent journalists (as Israel is doing), using embedded journalists, and running a massive public relations machinery designed specifically to deliver arguments and propaganda for the foreign press and for foreign consumption. There is a special machinery just for Canadians, and a special strategy to sell war in Canada. There was one for the Iraq war, there is one for the Afghanistan war, and one for Israel's wars as well. What is so unusual about the media environment today is that all this expense, all this media machinery, can be circumvented by anyone in its target audience by the simple click of a mouse. So click away. The Canadian media are a biased little niche of pro-Israeli spin, and should be seen that way. There are times when the Canadian media are useful for news about Canada, if read critically. Even for Canada, there are reasonably good alternatives for analysis, commentary, and features (dominionpaper.ca, rabble.ca, briarpatch.ca), and plenty of direct information from politicians (the political parties have their own sites, as do many individual polticians, activist groups, and so on). Still, read critically, the Canadian media can be a good source on goings on in the country. But on Israel/Palestine, please, find more serious sources. Justin Podur is a Toronto-based writer. His blog is www.killingtrain.com. References: [1] http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/2049 [2] http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/01/06/gaza-attacks.html [3] http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/01/05/gaza-attacks.html?ref=rss&loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r2:c0.195922:b20613139 [4] http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=117&template=PDGCommTemplates/HTN/Item_Preview.html [5] http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6604775898578139565 [6] http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/01/03/gaza-protests.html?ref=rss From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 09:53:46 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:53:46 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Israel: Boycott, Divest, Sanction Message-ID: Israel: Boycott, Divest, Sanction Lookout By Naomi Klein This article appeared in the January 26, 2009 edition of The Nation. January 7, 2009 http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090126/klein/print It's time. Long past time. The best strategy to end the increasingly bloody occupation is for Israel to become the target of the kind of global movement that put an end to apartheid in South Africa. In July 2005 a huge coalition of Palestinian groups laid out plans to do just that. They called on "people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era." The campaign Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions--BDS for short--was born. Every day that Israel pounds Gaza brings more converts to the BDS cause, and talk of cease-fires is doing little to slow the momentum. Support is even emerging among Israeli Jews. In the midst of the assault roughly 500 Israelis, dozens of them well-known artists and scholars, sent a letter to foreign ambassadors stationed in Israel. It calls for "the adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions" and draws a clear parallel with the antiapartheid struggle. "The boycott on South Africa was effective, but Israel is handled with kid gloves.... This international backing must stop." Yet many still can't go there. The reasons are complex, emotional and understandable. And they simply aren't good enough. Economic sanctions are the most effective tools in the nonviolent arsenal. Surrendering them verges on active complicity. Here are the top four objections to the BDS strategy, followed by counterarguments. 1. Punitive measures will alienate rather than persuade Israelis. The world has tried what used to be called "constructive engagement." It has failed utterly. Since 2006 Israel has been steadily escalating its criminality: expanding settlements, launching an outrageous war against Lebanon and imposing collective punishment on Gaza through the brutal blockade. Despite this escalation, Israel has not faced punitive measures--quite the opposite. The weapons and $3 billion in annual aid that the US sends to Israel is only the beginning. Throughout this key period, Israel has enjoyed a dramatic improvement in its diplomatic, cultural and trade relations with a variety of other allies. For instance, in 2007 Israel became the first non-Latin American country to sign a free-trade deal with Mercosur. In the first nine months of 2008, Israeli exports to Canada went up 45 percent. A new trade deal with the European Union is set to double Israel's exports of processed food. And on December 8, European ministers "upgraded" the EU-Israel Association Agreement, a reward long sought by Jerusalem. It is in this context that Israeli leaders started their latest war: confident they would face no meaningful costs. It is remarkable that over seven days of wartime trading, the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange's flagship index actually went up 10.7 percent. When carrots don't work, sticks are needed. 2. Israel is not South Africa. Of course it isn't. The relevance of the South African model is that it proves that BDS tactics can be effective when weaker measures (protests, petitions, back-room lobbying) have failed. And there are indeed deeply distressing echoes: the color-coded IDs and travel permits, the bulldozed homes and forced displacement, the settler-only roads. Ronnie Kasrils, a prominent South African politician, said that the architecture of segregation that he saw in the West Bank and Gaza in 2007 was "infinitely worse than apartheid." 3. Why single out Israel when the United States, Britain and other Western countries do the same things in Iraq and Afghanistan? Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the BDS strategy should be tried against Israel is practical: in a country so small and trade- dependent, it could actually work. 4. Boycotts sever communication; we need more dialogue, not less. This one I'll answer with a personal story. For eight years, my books have been published in Israel by a commercial house called Babel. But when I published The Shock Doctrine, I wanted to respect the boycott. On the advice of BDS activists, I contacted a small publisher called Andalus. Andalus is an activist press, deeply involved in the anti- occupation movement and the only Israeli publisher devoted exclusively to translating Arabic writing into Hebrew. We drafted a contract that guarantees that all proceeds go to Andalus's work, and none to me. In other words, I am boycotting the Israeli economy but not Israelis. Coming up with this plan required dozens of phone calls, e-mails and instant messages, stretching from Tel Aviv to Ramallah to Paris to Toronto to Gaza City. My point is this: as soon as you start implementing a boycott strategy, dialogue increases dramatically. And why wouldn't it? Building a movement requires endless communicating, as many in the antiapartheid struggle well recall. The argument that supporting boycotts will cut us off from one another is particularly specious given the array of cheap information technologies at our fingertips. We are drowning in ways to rant at one another across national boundaries. No boycott can stop us. Just about now, many a proud Zionist is gearing up for major point- scoring: don't I know that many of those very high-tech toys come from Israeli research parks, world leaders in infotech? True enough, but not all of them. Several days into Israel's Gaza assault, Richard Ramsey, the managing director of a British telecom company, sent an e- mail to the Israeli tech firm MobileMax. "As a result of the Israeli government action in the last few days we will no longer be in a position to consider doing business with yourself or any other Israeli company." When contacted by The Nation, Ramsey said his decision wasn't political. "We can't afford to lose any of our clients, so it was purely commercially defensive." It was this kind of cold business calculation that led many companies to pull out of South Africa two decades ago. And it's precisely the kind of calculation that is our most realistic hope of bringing justice, so long denied, to Palestine. Further Reading: Disengagement and the Frontiers of Zionism * Get The Nation at home (and online!) for 75 cents a week! * If you like this article, consider making a donation to The Nation. About Naomi Klein Naomi Klein is an award-winning journalist and syndicated columnist and the author of the international and New York Times bestseller The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism (September 2007); an earlier international best-seller, No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies; and the collection Fences and Windows: Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Globalization Debate (2002). more... From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 10:18:48 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:18:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Talk about the power of the Zionist Lobby! In-Reply-To: <864514076.2007209769@org.orgDB.mail.democracyinaction.org> Message-ID: <217302135.1149971231521528595.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Act NOW!? Right NOW! Yesterday , the Senate passed a secretly drafted and fast-tracked resolution co-sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Republican Senator Mitch McConnell by unanimous voice vote (meaning there will be no written record of who voted yes or who abstained) "recognizing the right of Israel to defend itself against attacks from Gaza and reaffirming the United States' strong support for Israel in its battle with Hamas, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process." ( You can read the full text of the bill here ) There was nothing in this one-sided legislation, which was familiarly referred to by Senate staffers we spoke to as "The AIPAC bill," that will help the 1.5 million Gazans who are currently under siege. And there is nothing in this bill that will do anything to support "the Israeli-Palestinian peace process." Congress is expected to vote on similar legislation within the next few days. Please call your Representative TODAY to ask him or her to vote no on any legislation that fails to call for an for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire -- as well as for unimpeded access for humanitarian aid into Gaza and a lifting of Israel's blockade. If you don't know who represents you in Congress, then you can find out at Congress.org (enter your zip code in the upper right corner of the website). Once you know who represents you call 202-224-3121 and the operator will connect you to your Representative*. Please amplify your impact on Congress by forwarding this email to your friends. Calling for Peace, Gael, Jodie, and Medea PS. Today , CODEPINK, along with Jewish and Muslim women, will deliver a flood of white roses to Obama's Washington, DC hotel, with the message, "Please do not be silent. The children of Gaza need your help." For $5, you can add a white rose to the bouquet and a voice to the chorus of those who speak out! * When you are connected to your Representative's office, keep your message short and to the point. Tell them: Congress should be calling for an immediate, unconditional, comprehensive ceasefire. The assault on Gaza must stop and Hamas's firing of rockets into Israel must stop. The blockade of Gaza must be lifted so that medicine, food, fuel and other necessities can flow freely into the territory. With close to 800 killed and over 3,000 wounded, the carnage must end before any diplomatic settlement can be achieved. It is vitally important that Congress hears from us! A Representative's voting choice can be swayed by as few as 20 phone calls. Your call WILL make a difference -- call 202.224.3121 NOW DEMAND A VOTE TO END THE SIEGE OF GAZA! CALL CONGRESS? NOW at ( 202) 224-3121 unsubscribe from this list From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 10:53:47 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:53:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Photos not easy to look at In-Reply-To: <0495B21F679147AEB2BDF8352158A471@twubby.com> Message-ID: <1475104480.1214761231523627176.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> ? Pri?re de diffuser ce message? Please circulate?this message? Por favor difundir este mensaje Photos not easy to look at - Compare the Palestinian?side and the Israeli Photos difficiles ? regarder - Comparez le c?t? palestinien?et le c?t? isra?lien Photos not easy to look at - Compare the Palestinian?side and the Israeli Photos difficiles ? regarder - Comparez le c?t? palestinien?et le c?t? isra?lien Pri?re de diffuser ce message? Please circulate?this message? Por favor difundir este mensaje Photos not easy to look at - Compare the Palestinian?side and the Israeli Photos difficiles ? regarder - Comparez le c?t? palestinien?et le c?t? isra?lien Photos not easy to look at - Compare the Palestinian?side and the Israeli Photos difficiles ? regarder - Comparez le c?t? palestinien?et le c?t? isra?lien The Other Side of the Story! We have heard the Palestinian side of the story, as you can see from the images below: Now, let's see the other side of the story, shall we? The carnage, the destruction, the annihilation, the pain, and the horror caused by qassam rockets: From suzannedk at gmail.com Fri Jan 9 11:31:31 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 19:31:31 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Photos not easy to look at In-Reply-To: <1475104480.1214761231523627176.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> References: <0495B21F679147AEB2BDF8352158A471@twubby.com> <1475104480.1214761231523627176.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: The images you thought you sent were unavailable, completely. Can you resend so thay are available? de Kuyper On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Sid Shniad wrote: > > > > > > Pri?re de diffuser ce message > > Please circulate this message > > Por favor difundir este mensaje > > > > Photos not easy to look at - Compare the Palestinian side and the Israeli > > > Photos difficiles ? regarder - Comparez le c?t? palestinien et le c?t? > isra?lien > > > > > Photos not easy to look at - Compare the Palestinian side and the Israeli > > > Photos difficiles ? regarder - Comparez le c?t? palestinien et le c?t? > isra?lien > > > Pri?re de diffuser ce message > > Please circulate this message > > Por favor difundir este mensaje > > > > Photos not easy to look at - Compare the Palestinian side and the Israeli > > > Photos difficiles ? regarder - Comparez le c?t? palestinien et le c?t? > isra?lien > > > > > Photos not easy to look at - Compare the Palestinian side and the Israeli > > > Photos difficiles ? regarder - Comparez le c?t? palestinien et le c?t? > isra?lien > > > > > > > > The Other Side of the Story! > > We have heard the Palestinian side of the story, as you can see from the > images below: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, let's see the other side of the story, shall we? > > The carnage, the destruction, the annihilation, the pain, and the horror > caused by qassam rockets: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From suzannedk at gmail.com Fri Jan 9 11:38:10 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 19:38:10 +0100 Subject: [R-G] Talk about the power of the Zionist Lobby! In-Reply-To: <217302135.1149971231521528595.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> References: <864514076.2007209769@org.orgDB.mail.democracyinaction.org> <217302135.1149971231521528595.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: I left the US after a lifetime there because of what and who the US has become. Since my renunciation of citizenship could open me up to revenge punishment by the US against me, I will wait to do that when Habeous Corpus is again international law. Maybe in ten years? S.M de Kuyper On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Sid Shniad wrote: > > > > > > > > Act NOW! Right NOW! > > > > > Yesterday , the Senate passed a secretly drafted and fast-tracked > resolution co-sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Republican > Senator Mitch McConnell by unanimous voice vote (meaning there will be no > written record of who voted yes or who abstained) "recognizing the right of > Israel to defend itself against attacks from Gaza and reaffirming the United > States' strong support for Israel in its battle with Hamas, and supporting > the Israeli-Palestinian peace process." ( You can read the full text of the > bill here ) > > There was nothing in this one-sided legislation, which was familiarly > referred to by Senate staffers we spoke to as "The AIPAC bill," that will > help the 1.5 million Gazans who are currently under siege. And there is > nothing in this bill that will do anything to support "the > Israeli-Palestinian peace process." > > Congress is expected to vote on similar legislation within the next few > days. Please call your Representative TODAY to ask him or her to vote no on > any legislation that fails to call for an for an immediate and unconditional > ceasefire -- as well as for unimpeded access for humanitarian aid into Gaza > and a lifting of Israel's blockade. > > If you don't know who represents you in Congress, then you can find out at > Congress.org (enter your zip code in the upper right corner of the website). > Once you know who represents you call 202-224-3121 and the operator will > connect you to your Representative*. > > Please amplify your impact on Congress by forwarding this email to your > friends. > > Calling for Peace, > > Gael, Jodie, and Medea > PS. Today , CODEPINK, along with Jewish and Muslim women, will deliver a > flood of white roses to Obama's Washington, DC hotel, with the message, > "Please do not be silent. The children of Gaza need your help." For $5, you > can add a white rose to the bouquet and a voice to the chorus of those who > speak out! > > > * When you are connected to your Representative's office, keep your message > short and to the point. Tell them: > > Congress should be calling for an immediate, unconditional, comprehensive > ceasefire. The assault on Gaza must stop and Hamas's firing of rockets into > Israel must stop. The blockade of Gaza must be lifted so that medicine, > food, fuel and other necessities can flow freely into the territory. With > close to 800 killed and over 3,000 wounded, the carnage must end before any > diplomatic settlement can be achieved. > > It is vitally important that Congress hears from us! A Representative's > voting choice can be swayed by as few as 20 phone calls. Your call WILL make > a difference -- call 202.224.3121 NOW > > > > > > DEMAND A VOTE TO END THE SIEGE OF GAZA! > > CALL CONGRESS NOW at > ( 202) 224-3121 > > > > > > unsubscribe > from this list > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From critical.montages at gmail.com Fri Jan 9 11:58:58 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:58:58 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Iran Bans Daily for Labeling Hamas Terrorist Message-ID: Iran bans daily for labeling Hamas terrorist Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:30:44 GMT An Iranian newspaper has been banned after publishing an article which authorities say has condoned Israel's attacks on the Gaza Strip. The Iranian Culture Ministry banned the publication of the centrist daily Kargozaran, after it published a statement by a radical group blaming pro-resistance factions and countries for the current situation in the Gaza Strip. The newspaper's recent move was in clear violation of Iran's press law, said Mohammad Parvizi of the Culture and Islamic Guidance Ministry on Wednesday. He added that Iran's Press Supervisory Board will refer the newspaper's case to court. Parvizi said the statement portrayed Palestinian fighters as terrorists who take shelter in kindergartens and hospitals and provoke Israeli bombardments leading to the death of children and civilians. Kargozaran Managing Director Morteza Sajjadian on Wednesday acknowledged that publishing the statement was a mistake. "In the past week most of the articles and material published by this newspaper had been in support of Gaza's civilians and the publication of this statement was an unintentional mistake," he said. According to Sajjadian, the daily was to publish a public apology in its Thursday issue. Iran shuts down leading reformist newspaper Dec 31, 2008 TEHRAN (AFP) ? The Iranian press watchdog shut down leading reformist newspaper Kargozaran on Wednesday over publication of a piece criticising Palestinian militants, the official IRNA news agency reported. "Kargozaran has been banned over a media offence and the case has been referred to the court," Mohammad Parvizi, who is in charge of domestic media at the culture ministry, told IRNA. He said the ban was ordered over "a piece yesterday which justifies the Zionist regime's crimes against humanity in Gaza and portrays the Palestinian resistance as terrorists who cause the deaths of children and civilians by taking up position in kindergartens and hospitals." Kargozaran's director Morteza Sajadian confirmed the closure and said the piece in question was a statement by a radical pro-reform student group, the Office to Consolidate Unity. "The statement was not supposed to be carried, it was mistakenly printed," he told AFP, hoping the ban would be only temporary. Kargozaran's licence holder is the Executives of Construction, a political party close to former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The paper, which started publication three years ago, has been a frequent target of attack from rival hardline media over its content, which has been perceived as hostile to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Under Ahmadinejad, Iranian newspapers, websites and news agencies of all political persuasions have been hit by a string of closures. Iran is a staunch supporter of the Islamist Hamas movement which controls Gaza and does not recognise its archfoe Israel, which has been pounding the territory with a deadly air blitz for the past five days. From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 12:12:09 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:12:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Our myopic view of Gaza conflict In-Reply-To: <1253945359.720621231460601902.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <2134461587.1298851231528329345.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.thestar.com/article/563405 Toronto Star ???????????????????????????????????????? January 8, 2009 Our myopic view of Gaza conflict H aroon Siddiqui I was holidaying in India when the Israeli onslaught on Gaza began Dec. 27. There were banner headlines coupled with editorial outrage in the Urdu media, the language of Muslims, and dispassionate but balanced coverage in the English media and the regional language newspapers. Across the Arab Middle East, Al-Jazeera and others were providing one-sided, wall-to-wall coverage of death and destruction in Gaza. Travelling through Europe, one could appreciate the powerful reporting and commentary, which conveyed the scale of the tragedy, without crossing the line into propaganda for either side. It didn't take long upon landing here to be reminded how much the political and media establishment ? in the U.S. and, lately, Canada as well ? are divorced from reality. The Stephen Harper Conservatives, as well as many editorialists and pundits, seem to inhabit a make-believe world into which no inconvenient facts are allowed to intrude. Their mantra is that Israel has a right to defend itself, has to protect its citizens from Hamas rockets, and had to retaliate for the breaking of the ceasefire by Hamas Dec. 19. True. But deprived of other truths, this performs the desired magic of absolving Israel of any culpability. According to this view, hundreds of Palestinian civilians, including women and children and seniors, being bombed and shelled to death in schools ? even clearly marked United Nations schools ? mosques, refugee camps, streets and homes are acceptable collateral damage. Few tears need be shed, especially since Hamas is to blame, anyway. There's amnesia about the brutal 40-year-old occupation. There's nary a mention that in Israeli military operations in 2008, 420 Palestinians had been killed prior to Dec. 28 vs. five Israelis, according to B'Tselem, the Israeli human rights body, And Israel's crippling economic blockade had prompted the UN special rapporteur Richard Falk to say on Dec. 9 that Israel's collective punishments amounted to "a crime against humanity," and that the International Criminal Court ought to investigate whether Israeli leaders and military commanders should be indicted . He noted that the last time there had been "such a flurry of denunciations by normally cautious UN officials" was during the reign of the apartheid government in South Africa. On Nov. 21, the chief of UN Relief and Works Agency, Karen Abu Zayd, said supplies had run out. She reported "a chronic anemia problem" and "the stunting of children." All this was long before the latest carnage, which foreign journalists have been prevented from witnessing. Dead, as of yesterday, were 650 Gazans, a fifth of them civilians. What our political and media establishment are telling us is this: Israel must not be provoked but the Palestinians can be. The trauma suffered by Israelis in the border area along Gaza is not acceptable. But 60 per cent of 1.5 million Gazans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder is. Israeli politicians, facing an election Feb. 10, have to be sensitive to electoral concerns, but Palestinians elected in a fair election Jan. 2006 must be isolated and jailed. There's an equivalency between Hamas's handmade, ill-targeted rockets and the lethal hi-tech Israeli arsenal, some of it of American origin. Palestinians must pay heed to Israeli/American/Canadian demands but Israel may ignore calls for a ceasefire by the UN, the European Union and even allies France, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc. Israeli lives matter, Arab ones don't. In fact, it is worth prolonging the bloodshed in Gaza, as in Lebanon in 2006, to allow Israel time to achieve one or two more of its objectives. Arab blood is cheap. "Unfortunately, all this plays into the hands of those Palestinians and Arabs, and more generally, Muslims, who say, `the West is against us because of who we are and is engaged in a civilizational war against us,'" says Jim Reilly, professor of Near Eastern Studies at the University of Toronto. "If we include Iraq and Afghanistan, it reinforces the message of Al Qaeda and co-thinkers that they are waging war against a predatory and rapacious enemy. "All this makes it that much harder for us to argue back against the militants and the zealots." Haroon Siddiqui's column appears Thursday and Sunday. hsiddiq at thestar.ca From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 12:12:27 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:12:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Excellent TV reportage on Gaza from Britain's Channel 4 In-Reply-To: <204898572.668721231459042649.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <625984547.1299111231528347713.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> This is the video of the report from Channel 4's Alex Thomson, including a blistering exchange with?Ehud Ohlmert's spokesman, Mark?Regev: http://www.tamuchly.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AT_MR.wmv (right-click to save) (Regev was once again was wheeled out to try to excuse the barbarism of Israel and its army and Thomson hammered him.) From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 12:11:46 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:11:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Israel: Boycott, Divest, Sanction - Naomi Klein In-Reply-To: <1944137947.730251231460826858.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <144597857.1298671231528306055.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> The Nation ???????????????? January 7, 2009 ????????????????????????? ( January 26, 2009 edition) Israel: Boycott, Divest, Sanction By Naomi Klein It's time. Long past time. The best strategy to end the increasingly bloody occupation is for Israel to become the target of the kind of global movement that put an end to apartheid in South Africa. In July 2005 a? huge coalition of Palestinian groups ?laid out plans to do just that. They called on "people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era." The campaign? Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions --BDS for short--was born. Every day that Israel pounds Gaza brings more converts to the BDS cause, and talk of cease-fires is doing little to slow the momentum. Support is even emerging among Israeli Jews. In the midst of the assault roughly 500 Israelis, dozens of them well-known artists and scholars, sent a? letter to foreign ambassadors stationed in Israel. It calls for "the adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions" and draws a clear parallel with the antiapartheid struggle. "The boycott on South Africa was effective, but Israel is handled with kid gloves.... This international backing must stop." Yet many still can't go there. The reasons are complex, emotional and understandable. And they simply aren't good enough. Economic sanctions are the most effective tools in the nonviolent arsenal. Surrendering them verges on active complicity. Here are the top four objections to the BDS strategy, followed by counterarguments. 1. ? Punitive measures will alienate rather than persuade Israelis. ?The world has tried what used to be called "constructive engagement." It has failed utterly. Since 2006 Israel has been steadily escalating its criminality: expanding settlements, launching an outrageous war against Lebanon and imposing collective punishment on Gaza through the brutal blockade. Despite this escalation, Israel has not faced punitive measures--quite the opposite. The weapons and $3 billion in annual aid that the US sends to Israel is only the beginning. Throughout this key period, Israel has enjoyed a dramatic improvement in its diplomatic, cultural and trade relations with a variety of other allies. For instance, in 2007 Israel became the first non-Latin American country to sign a free-trade deal with Mercosur. In the first nine months of 2008, Israeli exports to Canada went up 45 percent. A new trade deal with the European Union is set to double Israel's exports of processed food. And on December 8, European ministers "upgraded" the EU-Israel Association Agreement, a reward long sought by Jerusalem. It is in this context that Israeli leaders started their latest war: confident they would face no meaningful costs. It is remarkable that over seven days of wartime trading, the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange's flagship index actually went up 10.7 percent. When carrots don't work, sticks are needed. 2. ? Israel is not South Africa. ?Of course it isn't. The relevance of the South African model is that it proves that BDS tactics can be effective when weaker measures (protests, petitions, back-room lobbying) have failed. And there are indeed deeply distressing? echoes : the color-coded IDs and travel permits, the bulldozed homes and forced displacement, the settler-only roads. Ronnie Kasrils, a prominent South African politician, said that the architecture of segregation that he saw in the West Bank and Gaza in 2007 was " infinitely worse than apartheid ." 3. ? Why single out Israel when the United States, Britain and other Western countries do the same things in Iraq and Afghanistan?? Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the BDS strategy should be tried against Israel is practical: in a country so small and trade-dependent, it could actually work. 4. ? Boycotts sever communication; we need more dialogue, not less. ?This one I'll answer with a personal story. For eight years, my books have been published in Israel by a commercial house called Babel. But when I published? The ? Shock Doctrine , I wanted to respect the boycott. On the advice of BDS activists, I contacted a small publisher called? Andalus . Andalus is an activist press, deeply involved in the anti-occupation movement and the only Israeli publisher devoted exclusively to translating Arabic writing into Hebrew. We drafted a contract that guarantees that all proceeds go to Andalus's work, and none to me. In other words, I am boycotting the Israeli economy but not Israelis. Coming up with this plan required dozens of phone calls, e-mails and instant messages, stretching from Tel Aviv to Ramallah to Paris to Toronto to Gaza City. My point is this: as soon as you start implementing a boycott strategy, dialogue increases dramatically. And why wouldn't it? Building a movement requires endless communicating, as many in the antiapartheid struggle well recall. The argument that supporting boycotts will cut us off from one another is particularly specious given the array of cheap information technologies at our fingertips. We are drowning in ways to rant at one another across national boundaries. No boycott can stop us. Just about now, many a proud Zionist is gearing up for major point-scoring: don't I know that many of those very high-tech toys come from Israeli research parks, world leaders in infotech? True enough, but not all of them. Several days into Israel's Gaza assault, Richard Ramsey, the managing director of a British telecom company, sent an e-mail to the Israeli tech firm MobileMax. "As a result of the Israeli government action in the last few days we will no longer be in a position to consider doing business with yourself or any other Israeli company." When contacted by? The Nation , Ramsey said his decision wasn't political. "We can't afford to lose any of our clients, so it was purely commercially defensive." It was this kind of cold business calculation that led many companies to pull out of South Africa two decades ago. And it's precisely the kind of calculation that is our most realistic hope of bringing justice, so long denied, to Palestine. Further Reading: ? Disengagement and the Frontiers of Zionism About Naomi Klein Naomi Klein is an award-winning journalist and syndicated columnist and the author of the international and? New York Times ?bestseller? The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism ?( September 2007); an earlier international best-seller,? No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies ; and the collection? Fences and Windows: Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Globalization Debate ?(2002).? From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 12:11:57 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:11:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] A Call from Within - signed by Israeli citizens In-Reply-To: <761694414.725631231460644879.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <1772727902.1298771231528317635.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> A Call from Within - signed by Israeli citizens Thursday, 08 January 2009 Written by 540 Israeli citizens In support of the Palestinian Human Rights Community Call for International Action As if the occupation was not enough, the brutal ongoing repression of the Palestinian population, the construction of settlements and the siege of Gaza - now comes the bombardment of the civilian population: men, women, old folks and children. Hundreds of dead, hundreds of injured, overwhelmed hospitals, and the central medicine depot of Gaza bombed. The ship Dignity of the Free Gaza movement which brought emergency medical supplies and a number of physicians was also attacked. Israel has returned to openly committing war crimes, worse than what we have seen in a long time. Israeli media do not expose their viewers to the horrors and to the voices of severe criticism of these crimes. The story told is uniform. Israeli dissidents are denounced as traitors. Public opinion including that of the Zionist left supports the Israeli policy uncritically and without reservation. Israel's destructive criminal policy will not cease without a massive intervention by the international community. However, except for some rather weak official condemnation, the international community is reluctant to intervene,. The United States openly supports the Israeli violence and Europe, although voicing some condemnation, is unwilling to seriously consider withdrawing the "gift" it handed Israel by upgrading its relations with the European Union. In the past the world knew how to fight criminal policies. The boycott on South Africa was effective, but Israel is handled with kid gloves: its trade relations are flourishing, academic and cultural cooperation continue and intensify with diplomatic support. This international backing must stop. That is the only way to stop the insatiable Israeli violence. We are calling on the world to stop Israeli violence and not allow the continuation of the brutal occupation. We call on the world to Condemn and not become an accomplice in Israel's crimes. In light of the above, we call on the world to implement the call by Palestinian human rights organizations which urges: ? "The UN Security Council to call an emergency session and adopt concrete measures, including the imposition of sanctions, in order to ensure Israel's fulfillment of its obligations under international humanitarian law. ? The High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions to fulfil their obligation under common Article 1 to ensure respect for the provisions of the Conventions, taking appropriate measures to compel Israel to abide by its obligations under international humanitarian law, in particular placing pivotal importance on the respect and protection of civilians from the effects of the hostilities. ? The High Contracting Parties to fulfil their legal obligation under Article 146 of the Fourth Geneva Convention to prosecute those responsible for grave breaches of the Convention. ? EU institutions and member states to make effective use of the European Union Guidelines on promoting compliance with international humanitarian law (2005/C 327/04) to ensure Israel complies with international humanitarian law under paragraph 16 (b), (c) and (d) of these guidelines, including the adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions, as well as cessation of all upgrade dialogue with Israel. " Signed by 540 Israeli citizens (first list): Avital Aboody, Sami Abu Shehadeh, Moshe Adler, Haim Adri, Gali Agnon, Bilha Aharoni, Hagit Aharoni, Saida Ahmed, Danny Aisner, Orna Akad, Aviv Aldema, Ra'anan Alexandrowicz, Joseph Algazy, Omer Allon, Dan Almagor, Orly Almi, Tali Almi, Tamar Almog, Udi Aloni, Yuli Aloni-Primor, Colman Altman, Janina Altman, Ahmad Amara, Eitan Amiel, Nitza Aminov, Gish Amit, Yossi Amitay, Naama Arbel, Tal Arbel, Rana Asali, Maisoon Assadi, Keren Assaf, Zohar Atai, Najla Atamnah, Rutie Atsmon, Michal Aviad, Hanna Aviram, Jasmin Avissar, Amira Bahat, Noam Bahat, Daniela Bak, Abeer Baker, Saleh Bakri, Rim Banna, Oshra Bar, Yoav Barak, Daphna Baram, Michal Bareket, Hila Bargiel, Ronny Bar-Gil, Yoram Bar-Haim, Ronnie Barkan, Osnat Bar-Or, Racheli Bar-or, Yossi Bartal, Raji Bathish, Dalit Baum, Shlomit Bauman, Esther Ben Chur, Hagit Ben Yaacov, Tal Ben Zvi, Yael Ben-Zvi, Avner Ben-Amos, Ronnen Ben-Arie, Ur Ben-Ari-Tishler, Ofra Ben-Artzi, Yotam Ben-David, Smadar Ben-Natan, Shmuel Ben Yitzchak, Avi Berg, Daniel Berger, Tamar Berger, Anat Biletzki, Itai Biran, Rotem Biran, Shany Birenboim, Rozeen Bisharat, Yafit Gamilah Biso, Liran Bitton, Simone Bitton, Yahaacov Bitton, Rani Bleier, Yempa Boleslavsky, Hagit Borer, Ido Bornstein, Irith Bouman, Haim Bresheeth, Aya Breuer, Shlomit Breuer, Dror Burstein, Smadar Bustan, Shai Carmeli-Pollak, Smadar Carmon, Zohar Chamberlain-Regev, Sami Shalom Chetrit, Chassia Chomsky-Porat, Arie Chupak, Isadora Cohen, Kfir Cohen, Matan Cohen, Nahoum Cohen, Raya Cohen, Ron Cohen, Stan Cohen, Yifat Cohen, Alex Cohn, Scandar Copti, Adi Dagan, Yael Dagan, Yasmeen Daher, Silan Dallal, Tamari Dallal, Leena Dallasheh, Eyal Danon, Uri Davis, Hilla Dayan, Relli De Vries, Maoz Degani, Ruti Divon, Diana Dolev, Yfat Doron, Ettie Dotan, Keren Dotan, Ronit Dovrat, Daniel Dukarevich, Arnon Dunetz, Maya Dunietz, Udi Edelman, Shai Efrati, Neta Efrony, Rani Einav, Asa Eitan, Danae Elon, Ruth El-Raz, Noam Enbar, Amalia Escriva, Anat Even, Gilad Evron, Ovadia Ezra, Basma Fahoum, Avner Faingulernt, Ghazi-Walid Falah, Naama Farjoun, Yvonne Fattal, Dror Feiler, Pnina Feiler, Micky Fischer, Sara Fischman, Nadav Franckovich, Ofer Frant, Ilil Friedman, Maya Galai, Dafna Ganani, Gefen Ganani, Yael Gazit, Yoram Gelman, Yakov Gilad, Amit Gilboa, Michal Ginach, Rachel Giora, Michal Givoni, Ednna Glukman, Angela Godfrey-Goldstein, Bilha Golan, Neta Golan, Shayi Golan, Tsilli Goldenberg, Vardit Goldner, Tamar Goldschmidt, Lymor Goldstein, Dina Goor, Shelley Goral, Joel Gordon, Ester Gould, Inbal Gozes, Inbal Gozes-Sharvit, Erella Grassiani, Adar Grayevsky, Gill Green, David Greenberg, Ela Greenberg, Dani Grimblat, Lev Grinberg, Yosef Grodzinsky, Hilik Gurfinkel, Galia Gur-Zeev, Anat Guthmann, Amos Gvirtz, Maya Gzn-Zvi, Yoav Haas, Iman Habibi, Connie Hackbarth, Uri Hadar, Mirjam Hadar Meerschwam, Rayya Haddad, Osnat Hadid, Dalia Hager, Tami Hager, Hava Halevi, Yasmine Halevi, Jeff Halper, Yuval Halperin, Rula Hamdan-Atamneh, Rania Hamed, Rola Hamed, Anat Hammermann Schuldiner, Doron Hammermann-Schuldiner, Ben Handler, Tal Haran, Elad Harel, Nir Harel, Shuli Hartman, Lihi Hasson, Amir Havkin, Shira Havkin, Amani Hawari, Areen Hawari, Iris Hefets, Ada Heilbronn, Ayelet Heller, Sara Helman, Ben Hendler, Aref Herbawi, Tamara Herman, Avi Hershkovitz, Yael Hersonski, Galit Hess, Hannan Hever, Ala Hlehel, Gil Hochberg, Tikva Honig-Parnass, Tikva Honig-Parnass, Inbar Horesh, Veronique Inbar, Rachel Leah Jones, Noga Kadaman, Ari Kahana, Dafna Kaminer, Aya Kaniuk, Ruti Kantor, Liad Kantorowicz, Dalia Karpel, Rabia Kassim, Amira Katz, Shai Katz, Uri Katz, Giora Katzin, Dror Kaufman, Adam Keller, Yehudit Keshet, Lana Khaskia, Efraim Kidron, Alisa Klein, Sylvia Klingberg, Yana Knopova, Ofra Koffman, Yael Korin, Alina Korn, Rinat Kotler, Meira Kowalsky, Noa Kram, Miki Kratsman, Rotem Kuehnberg, Assia Ladizhinskaya, Michal Lahav, Roni Lahav, Idan Landau, Yitzhak Laor, Orna Lavi, Ruti Lavi, Shaheen Lavie-Rouse, Yigal Laviv, Tamar Lehahn, Ronen Leibman, Miki Lentin, Ronit Lentin, Yael Lerer, Chava Lerman, Noa Lerner, Yair Lev, Yudith Levin, Abigail Levine, Eyal Levinson, Dana Levy, Inbal Lily-Koliner, Moran Livnat, Omri Livne, Amir Locker-Biletzki, Yael Locker-Biletzki, Yossi Loss, Yael Lotan, Guy Lougashi, Irit Lourie, Orly Lubin, Joseph Lubovsky, Aim Deuelle Luski, Naomi Lyth, Moshe Machover, Aryeh Magal, Liz Magnes, Noa Man, Ya'acov Manor, Arabiya Mansour, Roi Maor, Adi Maoz, Eilat Maoz, Yossi Marchaim, Alon Marcus, Esti Marpet, Ruchama Marton, Nur Masalha, Anat Matar, Doron Matar, Haggai Matar, Oren Matar, Samy Matar, Rela Mazali, Naama Meishar, Rachel Meketon, Yitzhak Y. Melamed, Remy Mendelzweig, Racheli Merhav, Yael Meron, Juliano Merr-Khamis, Esti Micenmacher, Maya Michaeli, Avraham Milgrom, Jeremy Milgrom, Elisheva Milikowski, Erez Miller, Katya Miller, Limor Mintz-Manor, Ariel Mioduser, Dror Mishani, Eedo Mizrahi, Avi Mograbi, Liron Mor, Magi Mor, Susan Mordechay, Susanne Moses, Haidi Motola, Ahuva Mu'alem, Ben Tzion Munitz, Norma Musih, Dorit Naaman, Michal Naaman, Gil Naamati, Haneen Naamnih, Naama Nagar, Dorothy Naor, Regev Nathansohn, Shelly Nativ, Salman Natour, Judd Ne'eman, Dana Negev, Smadar Nehab, Shlomit Lola Nehama, Ofer Neiman, David Nir, Eyal Nir, Tali Nir, Alex Nissen, Tal Nitzan, Joshua Nouriel, Yasmine Novak, Nira Nuriely, David Ofek, Tal Omer, Adi Ophir, Anat Or, Yael Oren Kahn, Norah Orlow, Gal Oron, Akiva Orr, Dorit Ortal, Noam Paiola, Il'il Paz-el, Michal Peer, Miko Peled, Nirit Peled, Nurit Peled-elhanan, Leiser Peles, Orna Pelleg, Tamar Pelleg-Sryck, Sigal Perelman, Amit Perelson, Nadav Pertzelan, Erez Pery, Tom Pessah, Dani Peter, Shira Pinhas, Yossi Pollak, Gil Porat, Dror Post, Eyal Pundik, Yisrael Puterman, Ilya Ram, Nery Ramati, Amit Ramon, Avi Raz, Ayala Raz, Hili Razinsky, Amnon Raz-Krakotzkin, David Reeb, Hadas Refaeli, Shlomo Regev, Dimi Reider, Noa Reshef, Amit Ron, Roee Rosen, Illit Rosenblum, Maya Rosenfeld, Danny Rosin, Yehoshua Rosin, Ilana Rossoff, Ilani Rotem, Natalie Rothman, Areej Sabbagh, Ahmad Sa'di, Sidki Sadik, Walid Sadik, Hannah Safran, Hiba Salah, Sana Salame-Daqa, Galit Saporta, Sima Sason, Sagi Schaefer, Tali Schaefer, Oded Schechter, Agur Schiff, Nava Schreiber, Idit Schwartz, Michal Schwartz, Noa Schwartz, Eran Segal, Keren Segal, Irit Segoli, Irit Sela, Dan Seltzer, Yael Serry, Shaul Setter, Meir Shabat, Aharon Shabtai, Michal Shabtay, Itamar Shachar, Erella Shadmi, Ilan Shalif, Hanna Shammas, Ayala Shani, Uri Shani, Arik Shapira, Bat-Sheva Shapira, Yonatan Shapira, Omer Sharir, Yael Shavit, Noa Shay, Fadi Shbita, Adi Shechter, Oz Shelach, Adi Shelesnyak, Mati Shemoelof, Ehud Shem-Tov, Yehouda Shenhav, Nufar Shimony, Khen Shish, Hagith Shlonsky, Tom Shoval, Sivan Shtang, Tal Shuval, Ivy Sichel, Ayman Sikseck, Shelly Silver, Inbal Sinai, Eyal Sivan, Ora Slonim, Kobi Snitz, Maja Solomon, Gideon Spiro, Neta Stahl, Talila Stan, Michal Stoler, Ali Suliman, Dored Suliman, Marcelo Svirsky, Yousef Sweid, Ula Tabari, Yael Tal, Lana Tatour, Doron Tavory, Ruth Tenne, Idan Toledano, Eran Torbiner, Osnat Trabelsi, Lily Traubmann, Naama Tsal, Lea Tsemel, Ruth Tsoffar, Ehud Uziel, Ivan Vanney, Sahar Vardi, Roman Vater, Ruth Victor, Yaeli Vishnizki-Levi, Roey Vollman, Roy Wagner, Michael Warschawski, Michal Warshavsky, Ruthy Weil, Sharon Weill, Shirly Weill, Elian Weizman, Eyal Weizman, Einat Weizman Diamond, Elana Wesley, Etty Wieseltier, Yossi Wolfson, Oded Wolkstein, Ayelet Yaari, Smadar Yaaron, Roni Yaddor, Sarah Yafai, Galia Yahav, Sergio Yahni, Niza Yanay, Amnon Yaron, Tamar Yaron, Mahmoud Yazbak, Oren Yiftachel, Sarit Yitzhak, Sharon Zack, Uri Zackhem, Jamal Zahalka, Sawsan Zaher, Adva Zakai, Edna Zaretsky, Beate Zilversmidt, Amal Zoabi, Haneen Zoubi, Himmat Zu'bi, Mati Zuckerman Contact: gazabfw at gmail.com From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 12:10:58 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:10:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Gaza Crisis Spills Onto Basketball Court Message-ID: <1324152830.1298311231528258019.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> The Nation ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? January 8, 2009 ? Southpaw ? Gaza Crisis Spills Onto Basketball Court ? By Dave Zirin ? We have officially entered uncharted waters. Never before in my years of reporting has a sports team been forced to abandon the field of play due to political protest from fans. Never before have fans become the central actors in turning a sporting event into a political melee. ? But Tuesday evening in Ankara, Turkey, the Israeli basketball team, Bnei Hasharon, had to flee the wrath of what the Associated Press described as "hundreds of fist-pumping, chanting Turkish fans." What exploded was yet another protest against Israel's bombardment of Gaza. The shock here is the setting, a sports arena, and the target, a basketball team. ? It may be surprising that this came to pass in such a supposedly apolitical environs--a Eurocup game against a team called Turk Telekom--but local officials knew this could happen and took every precaution. Thousands of police officers surrounded the court, and street demonstrations of 4,000 people were already taking place outside the arena. Protesters shouted, "Israeli murderers, get out of Palestine!" and "Allah-u Akhbar!" as the Hasharon team bus entered the arena. ? Only 500 fans were even let into the arena and were also subject to intense searches, but it wasn't enough. Police made the mistake of not confiscating the shoes. ? Before the game could begin, angry chants of "Israeli killers!" came down from the crowd as smuggled Palestinian flags were unfurled. Then, in a scene that would look familiar to a certain sitting president, off came the shoes as footwear rained down from the stands (the shoes didn't hit any players). ? As both teams looked at the crowd, frozen in place, battles began between police officers and Turkish fans, as the fans surged forward to take the court. Both Hasharon and Turk Telecom were rushed off and spent two hours in the locker rooms while the battle for control of the arena raged on. ? Hashoran captain Meir Tapiro spoke about the fear and chaos he felt around him to the Jerusalem Post : "The fans raced on to the court and ran towards us like madmen, but the police stopped them. It was really scary." ? After ninety minutes all the fans were expelled, arrested or dragged from the arena. The referees attempted to get the teams back onto the court to play before an empty arena, but Bnei Hasharon, after two hours of being prisoners in their locker room, had no desire to play. Referees called it a forfeit, and the Turks were declared winners of the game by the official forfeit score of 20-0. ? Hasharon team chairman Eldad Akunis was understandably incensed. "After such a trying ordeal, there was simply no point in playing. The players were just concerned for their safety. We were also given instructions by the Israeli embassy staff, who were monitoring the situation, not to play," said Akunis. ? There is no doubt that it was "a trying ordeal," a frightening experience that not even Red Sox fans would wish on the Yankees. ? But to put it mildly, it pales in comparison to the situation in Gaza itself. With more than 500 deaths, 3,000 injuries and 100 tons of bombs dropped on one of the impoverished regions of the world, the trials of a basketball team seem trivial. ? It's certainly true that none of the players--two of whom are African, five of whom are American-born--bear a hint of responsibility for any of this carnage. But it's difficult not to remember the famous telegram sent by playwright Arthur Miller to President Lyndon Johnson. Miller was invited for a gala of some kind and refused, saying, "When the guns boom, the arts die." Perhaps when the guns boom, sports should die as well. ? We may recall January 2008, when soccer star Mohamed Aboutreika lifted his shirt to reveal the slogan "Sympathize with Gaza." He wanted people to stand up and notice that an economic blockade had triggered, for the Palestinians in Gaza, a humanitarian crisis. The new year begins with another instance where the reality of Gaza has unexpectedly interrupted the field of play. Only this time--fitting the new moment--it was altogether more livid, more dangerous and more desperate. No sympathy has meant no peace. ? About Dave Zirin ? Dave Zirin is the author of Welcome to the Terrordome: the Pain Politics and Promise of Sports (Haymarket) and the forthcoming A People's History of Sports in the United States (The New Press). and his writing has appeared in the Los Angeles Times , Sports Illustrated.com, New York Newsday and The Progressive . He is the host of XM Radio's Edge of Sports Radio . ? Contact him at edgeofsports at gmail.com. ? ? From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 12:30:50 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:30:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Fwd: Israeli Intel Targets Israeli Protesters In-Reply-To: <2DB41483F204412E895C795268B7EB08@twubby.com> Message-ID: <1873381791.1306751231529450495.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> The Real News Israeli Intel Targets Israeli Protesters Video: http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=3065&updaterx=2009-01-09+12%3A02%3A03 Video Description: As the Israeli attack on the Gaza Strip continues, so does opposition from the Israeli public. Protesters all across the country have been clashing with police in both Arab-Israeli and Jewish cities. Jesse Rissin Rosenfeld, Freelance Journalist based in Tel-Aviv and Ramallah has reported that the Israeli intelligence Agency, Shabak/Shin-Bet, has been cracking down on dissenters. He also reports that protest to the Israeli offensive has grown significantly since Israel's attack on Lebanon and this time around Israeli protests in support of the war are also starting. BIO: Jesse Rosenfeld is a Canadian freelance journalist who has been based in Ramallah since 2007. A former news editor at the McGill Daily and a founding editor of the Montreal Magazine Siafu, Rosenfeld has written for NOW Magazine, The Montreal Mirror, THIS Magazine and the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. Video Description: As the Israeli attack on the Gaza Strip continues, so does opposition from the Israeli public. Protesters all across the country have been clashing with police in both Arab-Israeli and Jewish cities. Jesse Rissin Rosenfeld, Freelance Journalist based in Tel-Aviv and Ramallah has reported that the Israeli intelligence Agency, Shabak/Shin-Bet, has been cracking down on dissenters. He also reports that protest to the Israeli offensive has grown significantly since Israel's attack on Lebanon and this time around Israeli protests in support of the war are also starting. BIO: Jesse Rosenfeld is a Canadian freelance journalist who has been based in Ramallah since 2007. A former news editor at the McGill Daily and a founding editor of the Montreal Magazine Siafu, Rosenfeld has written for NOW Magazine, The Montreal Mirror, THIS Magazine and the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. From critical.montages at gmail.com Fri Jan 9 13:38:19 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:38:19 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Egypt Pulls Down the Shutters on Aid Message-ID: Egypt Pulls Down the Shutters on Aid By Adam Morrow and Khaled Moussa al-Omrani CAIRO, Jan 8 (IPS) - Egyptian authorities have almost fully sealed the border with Gaza, preventing delivery of desperately needed humanitarian aid. "The government has expressly forbidden the entry of aid convoys laden with food into the Gaza Strip," Emmad al-Din Moustafa, member of the Popular Committee for Aiding Gaza told IPS. "The continued border closure -- like the Israeli assault itself -- constitutes a crime against humanity." Israel began a series of devastating air strikes on targets throughout the Gaza Strip Dec. 27, followed by a ground offensive launched Jan. 3. According to Israeli officials, the campaign, which has included thousands of air strikes and naval bombardment, comes in retaliation for rockets fired at Israel by Gaza-based Palestinian resistance factions. Since the campaign began, humanitarian aid -- donated by sympathisers from across the Arab and Islamic world -- has flown into the city of Al-Arish, 40 km west of Egypt's border with the Gaza Strip. But according to local sources, Egyptian authorities are preventing the transportation of food and medicine into the besieged territory. "The crossing has only been opened briefly five or six times to allow the entry of limited amounts of aid," Hatem Al-Bulk, political activist from Al-Arish told IPS. "About 1,000 tonnes of food have been delivered so far, but the population of Gaza needs an estimated 1,500 tonnes per day to survive." Even before the Israeli onslaught, the Gaza Strip had been subject to a crippling, internationally sanctioned 'embargo' that destroyed its economy and brought it to the brink of humanitarian disaster. Since Palestinian resistance movement Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2007, after winning elections in 2006, Egypt -- like Israel -- has kept its border with the enclave tightly shut. In tandem with the neutralisation of airports and maritime ports, the border closures have deprived Gaza's 1.5 million inhabitants of most essential goods, including food, medicine and fuel. Egypt says it cannot reopen the Rafah crossing -- the sole transit point along its roughly 14-kilometre border with the Gaza Strip -- in the absence of Palestinian Authority (PA) officials and EU observers, under a 2005 security agreement. "Egypt doesn't want to sanctify the division (between the Hamas run Gaza Strip and the Palestinian Authority run West Bank) by opening the Rafah crossing in the absence of the PA and European observers," President Hosni Mubarak said Dec. 30. According to some Egyptian officials, the border has been opened when it has been safe to do so. "The Rafah crossing is open for the entry of humanitarian aid and to receive the injured," North Sinai Governor Gen. Mohamed Abdel Fadil was quoted as saying in the Wednesday (Jan. 7) edition of state daily Al-Gomhouriya. "The crossing is only being closed during heavy Israeli bombardment of the Palestinian side." Fadil added that Egypt had received 130 injured Palestinians for treatment in Egyptian hospitals since the outset of the campaign, and was prepared to receive many more. More than 3,000 people are lying injured in Gaza, besides more than 700 killed. Local sources confirm that the Palestinian side of the Rafah crossing has come under frequent Israeli attack since the campaign began. "The Palestinian side has been hit several times with earth-penetrating munitions, " said Al-Bulk. "Egyptian Rafah has become a ghost town because so many residents have left for Al-Arish and other cities in the Sinai Peninsula." Meanwhile, local activists say the situation in the Gaza Strip has become dire. "Many Gazans can't find food," said Moustafa, who is in regular contact by telephone with several families across the border. "If the situation doesn't drastically improve in the next three days, people will starve to death. Meanwhile 50,000 tonnes of food is sitting in Al-Arish, awaiting the authorities' permission to make the crossing. Where are the international humanitarian institutions, like the UN?" Doctors and medical experts have been barred from entering the Gaza Strip. On Tuesday (Jan. 6), a group of 55 Egyptian medical volunteers of varying specialties from universities throughout the country were prevented from crossing into Gaza. "Although we signed a statement saying we were responsible for our own safety, the border authorities at Rafah refused us entry without explanation," Yasser Mohamed, a heart surgery specialist at Cairo University and one of the medical volunteers, told IPS from Al-Arish. "Shortly afterwards, the minister of health -- who happened to be in the area -- told us we couldn't enter Gaza because 'Israel had not given its approval'. "Doctors in Gaza, who are usually trained only in general medicine, are in desperate need of our skills," added Mohamed. "If we were let in, we could save lots of lives." According to Al-Bulk, security forces on the Egyptian side of the Rafah crossing are leaving nothing to chance. "Police forces in Rafah and Al-Arish have been beefed up substantially since the Israeli campaign began," he said. "And they have orders to fire on anyone attempting to breach the border." (END/2009) From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 13:59:00 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:59:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] The Anti-Semitism Canard Message-ID: <922795371.1436501231534740686.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.counterpunch.org/fenton01092009.html ? CounterPunch ??????????????????????????????????????????????????? January 9-11, 2009 ? The Anti-Semitism Canard ? The American Peace Movement and Israel ? By Catherine Fenton ? As the local peace group I belong to begins to stumble on the question of Israel's invasion of Gaza, I happen to be reading Rick Perlstein's "Nixonland". ? D?j? vu whirled through my mind as I read the following description of events at the 1967 National Conference for a New Politics, after a thirteen-point manifesto was introduced: ? "?another clause ordered condemnation of 'the imperialistic Zionist war' in the Middle East. The Reverend William Sloane Coffin Jr., chaplain of Yale University, was among those who insisted the thirteen points be adopted without discussion as a gesture of interracial unity. Jewish delegates who considered the Six Day War a struggle for national survival walked out." ? Has anyone or anything been as effective at wreaking havoc within the anti-war movement, as Israel's wars? ? In 2006, Israel invaded Lebanon and the images of Lebanese children wrapped in plastic as they were pulled out of the bombed earth hurt my mind. The Jewish members of my group refused to march. As Condi Rice was on television, juxtaposed in my mind with the dead children, she talked nonsense about wanting a "lasting peace". When someone is bleeding, first thing you do? Stop The Bleeding. Worry about forging a "lasting" solution to what caused the bleeding later. I became enraged by Rice's words, but the Jewish members of my group still would not march. We were all new to the group, and no one wanted to make waves, so no one marched. ? On the internet, I found that a group called the "ad-hoc coalition" was having a demonstration against Israel's attack on Lebanon in Union Square Park. I went, alone. ? Two-and-a-half years later, here we are again. ? My group is having our monthly meeting this weekend. Already, two of our Jewish members are not attending. One of them emailed that she knew we would be "talking about Israel" and that this "hurt her too much." I do not know what is going to happen when we discuss upcoming demonstrations against Israel's invasion of Gaza. But early signs are not promising. And we are not alone. I know of other peace groups having the same issues. ? How is the Peace movement going to deal with this? American Jews have long been at the forefront of liberal movements in this country. We need only look to the civil rights movement to see this. Yet, it is always upon Israel which we stumble. ? What conversation can we have? What can each of us say? I know that I would like an explanation on how it is not anti-American to march in protests against America's wars, and to chant things like "George, pull out, just like your daddy shoulda" (I know, it's my favorite too). Yet it is anti-Semitic to criticize Israel's foreign policy. They either both are, or neither are, but you cannot have it both ways. ? And perhaps there are things my Jewish friends in the peace movement would like to say to me. As long as it doesn't start with "you don't understand what it's like to be Jewish" I'm willing to listen. I don't need to understand what it's like to be Jewish. Let's face it; you don't understand what it's like to be Palestinian. We can both understand what it is like to be human. To watch your child die. ? There needs to be some way for people in the peace movement to talk about this. At this point, I feel that if you are happy to march against the United States, but feel comfortable accusing myself and others of "anti-Semitism" if we protest Israel's foreign policy, then you must be anti-American. What other conclusion can I draw? ? And I don't want to march with people who are actually anti-American, rather than critical of American foreign policy. It's bad PR and plays right into the hands of the hard-right. ? Catherine Fenton is a freelance writer. She can be reached at: cathfenton at gmail.com From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 14:55:41 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:55:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Shocking cynicism of a poisoned homeland In-Reply-To: <772949486.1438951231535048001.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <1894861922.1515531231538141055.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/shocking-cynicism-of-a-poisoned-homeland/2009/01/07/1231004100045.html?page=2 Sydney Morning Herald ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? January 8, 2009 Shocking cynicism of a poisoned homeland Sara Dowse It has taken me days to begin writing this, so horrified have I been by Israel's latest actions. My sense of justice, however - as a mother, a Jew, and above all as a human being - impels me to try. The massacre in Gaza has its roots in virulent European anti-Semitism and the 1917 Balfour declaration, when the British government promised Zionists that Jewish people would have a homeland in Palestine if Britain was victorious in World War I. The key word here is homeland, and it should be remembered that the promise was qualified by the condition that such a homeland would "not be to the detriment" of the Palestinians. The steady increase in Jewish immigration under the British mandate provoked riots and protests, but Palestinians were still in majority until, in the aftermath of the Holocaust, the Zionists unilaterally declared an Israeli state. Despite the suffering of the Palestinians, whose land was taken from them, for many years the sympathy of the developed world was with Israel, refuge for the survivors of the Nazi slaughter of European Jews, and beleaguered by surrounding hostile Arab states. With the 1967 occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, Israel could no longer be accepted as a victim. Yet it has continued to play on the sympathies of Western governments, most particularly the US, and Jews of the diaspora. In reality, Israel has been a colonising state, masquerading as the most democratic, most humane, most modern nation in the region. It has served the Western powers to have such a proxy in the Middle East, and most recently, under the Bush Administration and in concert with the Israelis, they have played a cynical game of divide and rule, encouraging the Israelis in their blind refusal to negotiate with Hamas, just as for years Israel refused to negotiate with the Palestine Liberation Organisation, the forerunners of Fatah, whom they now support. Hamas is not a terrorist organisation, but the legitimate, democratically elected government of the Palestinian Authority. We may not like what it stands for, but that is no reason for sidelining it. Undermining that government by Israel and the West is but one of a string of cynical actions on their part. The rationale that Hamas has refused to accept Israel's existence or to eschew violence is yet another example of how the truth has been twisted. What Hamas rejected was the continued, barbaric Israeli occupation of the West Bank, and the laying down of arms against an aggressive military occupation. I have heard with my own ears the Hamas Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh, say exactly that. Is he to be trusted? It would have been worth a try. And who now would trust Israel? So here we have it: a tough, technocratically savvy, nuclear power with the backing of the largest military power the world has known, bombing, then invading, a territory the size of a small city, with a population of 1.5 million, most of whom are civilians, to "defend our citizens". The ceasefire was meant to lift the Israeli blockade on Gaza, but it didn't. It was meant to facilitate the release of Palestinian prisoners, many of whom were members of the elected Hamas Government, but it didn't. Israeli planes raided southern Gaza in November. The Hamas rockets continued. Which side broke the ceasefire? Hamas may not be blameless, but the situation is far more complex than Israel claims. The fact that more than 600 people have died because in a couple of weeks the US will have a new government and next month Israel will have an election, is the most shocking form of cynicism the Palestinian people have yet faced. Since the 2006 invasion of Lebanon I have undergone what for me, as a Jew, has been an agonising realignment of my feelings about Israel. I have come to believe that a specifically Jewish state has been a terrible mistake. A homeland is different from a state. There have been examples throughout history and there are in our own time polities with mixed ethnic populations and official sanction for their living in harmony together. Australia is one. I don't know how it will come about - I hope with as little bloodshed as possible - but I look forward to the distant day when the land becomes a multicultural country again, perhaps as a federation, perhaps in another form, but similar to what it was before it was destroyed with the poison of ethnic territorial nationalism. Sara Dowse is an author who wrote Sapphires , a novel about three generations of Jewish women From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 15:33:09 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:33:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] PGFTU: Justice and Support for poor and working families in Gaza In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <229957556.1581381231540389483.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Palestine General Federation of Trade Unions Justice and Support for poor and working families in Gaza A message from The Palestine General Federation of Trade Unions Sisters and Brothers: ? The PGFTU has been working at all levels in Palestine and in its international relations to mobilize international support for peace in the region.? This is the ultimate goal for our working families in Palestine, who labored in every way possible to bring about an end to the Israeli occupation of all Palestinian territories.? This occupation is the longest and worst in the modern history.?? ? Over the years and even at this moment, these efforts have been met only with terrorism against our people by the Israeli army of occupation which has indiscriminately destroyed homes and worksites, slaughtered our people, confiscated our land, established and expanded illegal settlements, and limited the movement of workers who are only trying to feed their families. These measures have affected every member of Palestinian society. The recent construction of the Apartheid Wall stands as a symbol of the extent of Israel's brutal aggression against the Palestinian people and denial of their legitimate rights, dignity and human needs. ? We call upon all peace-loving people in the world: ? You are now witness to the criminal aggression by the Israeli army in its offensive in the Gaza Strip, bringing a new wave of killings and massacres against the Palestinian people by Israel as the occupying state.? ?These are war crimes according to international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions. ? As our families in Gaza (the poorest in the Middle East) are being slaughtered nonstop for a week now, many of us are reliving what occurred in the summer of 2006 during the Israeli aggression against the people of Lebanon.? ? We witnessed then as we experience now waves of support and solidarity and similar anger and energy against this brutal injustice.?? We cannot afford to let this surge of support pass us by without utilizing the moment to build our movement to face future challenges.? The most important thing is to be aware and equipped. ? ?We urgently ask you and your sister labor organizations to help us spread the message that ? " WE ARE ALL GAZA " ?- that this war is against all poor workers and families of the world.? ?These are not just crimes against the people of Palestine.? They are crimes against humanity. ? ?Help us create a strong voice for the working families of Gaza by building coalitions with unions, faith groups, antiwar movements and all social justice organizations. ? ?We join you in the hope that in the election of Barack Obama, he will fulfill his reputation as a pro-union antiwar candidate, and that he understands that the CHANGE he spoke about during the campaign must include a fundamental change in U.S foreign policy so that? "FREE GAZA. ?FREE PALESTINE" becomes more than just a slogan. ? We support and encourage your Boycott, Divestment and Sanction (BDS) efforts against Israel around the world , but especially in Europe and most particularly in the United States as a response to the harsh economic conditions, violations of labor and human rights, and other forms of oppression imposed by the illegal and immoral Israeli Apartheid occupation. ? We ask you to stop U.S aid to Israel. ? This becomes not only necessary but also a duty of international solidarity among labor unions around the world.? It is U.S. government aid that provides Israel with the weapons of oppression and U.S. government support that enables them to use those weapons against our people. ? ?Help us create a strong voice for the working families of Gaza by building coalitions with unions, faith groups, antiwar movements and all social justice organizations. ? ?We join you in the hope that in the election of Barack Obama, he will fulfill his reputation as a pro-union antiwar candidate, and that he understands that the CHANGE he spoke about during the campaign must include a fundamental change in U.S foreign policy so that? "FREE GAZA. ?FREE PALESTINE" becomes more than just a slogan. ? We support and encourage your Boycott, Divestment and Sanction (BDS) efforts against Israel around the world , but especially in Europe and most particularly in the United States as a response to the harsh economic conditions, violations of labor and human rights, and other forms of oppression imposed by the illegal and immoral Israeli Apartheid occupation. ? We ask you to stop U.S aid to Israel. ? This becomes not only necessary but also a duty of international solidarity among labor unions around the world.? It is U.S. government aid that provides Israel with the weapons of oppression and U.S. government support that enables them to use those weapons against our people. ? We ask you to be an active player in raising funds to meet the bare necessities of food, medicine and medical supplies for the people of Gaza. [See below for information on how to ?send financial contributions to the PGFTU for Gaza Aid ] With your solidarity with our struggle for human rights and justice, we can transform this moment of crisis into a turning point for an end to the brutal occupation and a step toward the liberation of the people of Palestine. ? With the will and determination of all the people, we can say "FREE PALESTINE ? YES WE CAN. ? Manawell Abdel Al, Executive Committee Member Palestine General Federation of Trade Unions (PGFTU) ??????? Bab El Zahryeih ????????P.O.Box 38903 ??????? Jerusalem ????????Website: ? www.pgftu.org ???????? E-mail:? pgftu at pgftu.org From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 16:08:55 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:08:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Slideshow of suffering in Gaza In-Reply-To: <003701c97235$46c81280$d5263060@dake001> Message-ID: <751814499.1597411231542535725.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.slide.com/r/XpzqRCsx6D--AnrLEULHs8VIgPtY8ksr?cy=wp ??????? [Justified? You decide] From aaron.doncaster at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 14:57:06 2009 From: aaron.doncaster at gmail.com (aaron doncaster) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 13:57:06 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Understanding the Gaza Catastrophe Message-ID: <164236a30901061357v43bbf335t60297fdcbc1b4346@mail.gmail.com> *Understanding the Gaza Catastrophe* By Richard Falk United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories January 2, 2009 For eighteen months the entire 1.5 million people of Gaza experienced a punishing blockade imposed by Israel, and a variety of traumatizing challenges to the normalcy of daily life. A flicker of hope emerged some six months ago when an Egyptian arranged truce produced an effective ceasefire that cut Israeli casualties to zero despite the cross-border periodic firing of homemade rockets that fell harmlessly on nearby Israeli territory, and undoubtedly caused anxiety in the border town of Sderot. During the ceasefire the Hamas leadership in Gaza repeatedly offered to extend the truce, even proposing a ten-year period and claimed a receptivity to a political solution based on acceptance of Israel's 1967 borders. Israel ignored these diplomatic initiatives, and failed to carry out its side of the ceasefire agreement that involved some easing of the blockade that had been restricting the entry to Gaza of food, medicine, and fuel to a trickle. Israel also refused exit permits to students with foreign fellowship awards and to Gazan journalists and respected NGO representatives. At the same time, it made it increasingly difficult for journalists to enter, and I was myself expelled from Israel a couple of weeks ago when I tried to enter to carry out my UN job of monitoring respect for human rights in occupied Palestine, that is, in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, as well as Gaza. Clearly, prior to the current crisis, Israel used its authority to prevent credible observers from giving accurate and truthful accounts of the dire humanitarian situation that had been already documented as producing severe declines in the physical condition and mental health of the Gazan population, especially noting malnutrition among children and the absence of treatment facilities for those suffering from a variety of diseases. The Israeli attacks were directed against a society already in grave condition after a blockade maintained during the prior 18 months. As always in relation to the underlying conflict, some facts bearing on this latest crisis are murky and contested, although the American public in particular gets 99% of its information filtered through an exceedingly pro-Israeli media lens. Hamas is blamed for the breakdown of the truce by its supposed unwillingness to renew it, and by the alleged increased incidence of rocket attacks. But the reality is more clouded. There was no substantial rocket fire from Gaza during the ceasefire until Israel launched an attack last November 4th directed at what it claimed were Palestinian militants in Gaza, killing several Palestinians. It was at this point that rocket fire from Gaza intensified. Also, it was Hamas that on numerous public occasions called for extending the truce, with its calls never acknowledged, much less acted upon, by Israeli officialdom. Beyond this, attributing all the rockets to Hamas is not convincing either. A variety of independent militia groups operate in Gaza, some such as the Fatah-backed al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade are anti-Hamas, and may even be sending rockets to provoke or justify Israeli retaliation. It is well confirmed that when US-supported Fatah controlled Gaza's governing structure it was unable to stop rocket attacks despite a concerted effort to do so. What this background suggests strongly is that Israel launched its devastating attacks, starting on December 27, not simply to stop the rockets or in retaliation, but also for a series of unacknowledged reasons. It was evident for several weeks prior to the Israeli attacks that the Israeli military and political leaders were preparing the public for large-scale military operations against the Hamas. The timing of the attacks seemed prompted by a series of considerations: most of all, the interest of political contenders, the Defense Minister Ehud Barak and the Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, in demonstrating their toughness prior to national elections scheduled for February, but now possibly postponed until military operations cease. Such Israeli shows of force have been a feature of past Israeli election campaigns, and on this occasion especially, the current government was being successfully challenged by Israel's notoriously militarist politician, Benjamin Netanyahu, for its supposed failures to uphold security. Reinforcing these electoral motivations was the little concealed pressure from the Israeli military commanders to seize the opportunity in Gaza to erase the memories of their failure to destroy Hezbollah in the devastating Lebanon War of 2006 that both tarnished Israel's reputation as a military power and led to widespread international condemnation of Israel for the heavy bombardment of undefended Lebanese villages, disproportionate force, and extensive use of cluster bombs against heavily populated areas. Respected and conservative Israeli commentators go further. For instance, the prominent historian, Benny Morris writing in the *New York Times* a few days ago, relates the campaign in Gaza to a deeper set of forebodings in Israel that he compares to the dark mood of the public that preceded the 1967 War when Israelis felt deeply threatened by Arab mobilizations on their borders. Morris insists that despite Israeli prosperity of recent years, and relative security, several factors have led Israel to act boldly in Gaza: the perceived continuing refusal of the Arab world to accept the existence of Israel as an established reality; the inflammatory threats voiced by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad together with Iran's supposed push to acquire nuclear weapons, the fading memory of the Holocaust combined with growing sympathy in the West with the Palestinian plight, and the radicalization of political movements on Israel's borders in the form of Hezbollah and Hamas. In effect, Morris argues that Israel is trying via the crushing of Hamas in Gaza to send a wider message to the region that it will stop at nothing to uphold its claims of sovereignty and security. There are two conclusions that emerge: the people of Gaza are being severely victimized for reasons remote from the rockets and border security concerns, but seemingly to improve election prospects of current leaders now facing defeat, and to warn others in the region that Israel will use overwhelming force whenever its interests are at stake. That such a human catastrophe can happen with minimal outside interference also shows the weakness of international law and the United Nations, as well as the geopolitical priorities of the important players. The passive support of the United States government for whatever Israel does is again the critical factor, as it was in 2006 when it launched its aggressive war against Lebanon. What is less evident is that the main Arab neighbors, Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, with their extreme hostility toward Hamas that is viewed as backed by Iran, their main regional rival, were also willing to stand aside while Gaza was being so brutally attacked, with some Arab diplomats even blaming the attacks on Palestinian disunity or on the refusal of Hamas to accept the leadership of Mamoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority. The people of Gaza are victims of geopolitics at its inhumane worst: producing what Israel itself calls a 'total war' against an essentially defenseless society that lacks any defensive military capability whatsoever and is completely vulnerable to Israeli attacks mounted by F-16 bombers and Apache helicopters. What this also means is that the flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, as set forth in the Geneva Conventions, is quietly set aside while the carnage continues and the bodies pile up. It additionally means that the UN is once more revealed to be impotent when its main members deprive it of the political will to protect a people subject to unlawful uses of force on a large scale. Finally, this means that the public can shriek and march all over the world, but that the killing will go on as if nothing is happening. The picture being painted day by day in Gaza is one that begs for renewed commitment to international law and the authority of the UN Charter, starting here in the United States, especially with a new leadership that promised its citizens change, including a less militarist approach to diplomatic leadership. *Richard Falk is Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University and Visiting Distinguished Professor in Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. His most recent book, The Great Terror War (2003), considers the American response to September 11, including its relationship to the patriotic duties of American Citizens. In 2001 he served on a three person Human Rights Inquiry Commission for the Palestine Territories that was appointed by the United Nations, and previously, on the Independent International Commission on Kosovo. He is the author or coauthor of numerous books, including Religion and Humane Global Governance; Human Rights Horizons; On Humane Governance: Toward a New Global Politics; Explorations at the Edge of Time; Revolutionaries and Functionaries; The Promise of World Order; Indefensible Weapons; Human Rights and State Sovereignty; A Study of Future Worlds; This Endangered Planet; coeditor of Crimes of War. He serves as Chair of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation's Board of Directors and as honorary vice president of the American Society of International Law.* From aaron.doncaster at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 22:26:24 2009 From: aaron.doncaster at gmail.com (aaron doncaster) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 21:26:24 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Last night at 3:00 a.m. we attacked the police station across the street from Ashby BAR Message-ID: <164236a30901082126o1e9e7270ha1121b4aaabf3900@mail.gmail.com> smashy smashy Last night at 3:00 a.m. we attacked the police station across the street from Ashby BART. All of its front windows were smashed out with bricks. If the pigs think they can keep getting away with murder; they've got another thing coming. May this small action help to fuel the fires of the uprising spawned by the most recent murder at the hands of the armed thugs of capital. On January 1st, 22 year old Oscar Grant was executed by Officer Johannes Mehserle of the BART police in plain view of a number of people while he was laying face down on the ground with his hands behind his back and reportedly handcuffed. Had his death not been captured on film and viewed by millions of people, this would undoubtedly be covered up and justified like the countless others murdered by the pigs in this country every year. Unfortunately for officer Mehserle, this cold blooded execution inspired hundreds of people to fight back against the pigs and the fucked up system they attempt to protect. We wanted to let everyone know how easy this was to pull off in case you find yourself walking the streets at night and need some ideas how to safely take file your complaint against the pigs. With gloved hands we grabbed some bricks from the neighborhood around the corner. We approached out of view of any cameras, as to not leave them with any identifying images. Pulling on our masks, we casually approached when no cars were driving by and spent a total of 15 seconds hurling the bricks through their thick plate glass windows. We quickly got off the main street and disappeared into the night. This communiqu? was written so our attack would not go unreported and was originally posted from a public computer to a website that does not store IP information. Smash things up in the night! Don't get caught! From shniad at sfu.ca Fri Jan 9 12:30:22 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:30:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] CUPW Letter to Stephen Harper regarding the Middle East Crisis In-Reply-To: <0EEDF5BC78F14BAEB5BC21D31D5B3E63@twubby.com> Message-ID: <1329645772.1306571231529422290.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> CUPW ?Letter to Stephen Harper regarding the Middle East Crisis From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 18:06:54 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:06:54 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Jordanians show appreciation for Venezuelan Israel rebuff Message-ID: Jordanians show appreciation for Venezuelan Israel rebuff Middle East News http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/middleeast/news/article_1452330.php/Jordanians_show_appreciation_for_Venezuelan_Israel_rebuff_ Jan 8, 2009, 12:40 GMT Amman - Hundreds of Jordanians, some of them carrying flowers, demonstrated outside the Venezuelan embassy Thursday to thank Caracas for severing ties with Israel in protest over the high casualty toll of civilians in the ongoing attack on the Gaza Strip. The participants chanted slogans and raised placards praising the step taken by President Hugo Chavez and urging Arab countries with diplomatic ties with the Jewish state to follow Venezuela's lead. Jordan's largest political party, the Islamic Action Front (IAF), has praised Venezuela's rupture of diplomatic ties with Israel. 'Your decision represents a spotlight in the middle of a wide area of black collusion by forces of arrogance and their subservient parties,' IAF Secretary General Zaki Bani Ershaid said in a letter to Chavez. He said that Venezuela's move represented a 'slam to those governments which maintain silence over the killing of children' in the Gaza Strip. Jordanian trade unions and opposition parties planned to stage a massive demonstration on Friday with the intention of proceeding to the Israeli embassy in Amman which has been under unprecedented security measures, since the start of the Israeli offensive 13 days ago. Jordanian demonstrations have been pressing the government to sever ties with Israel and abrogate the peace pact Jordan concluded with Israel in 1994. Prime Minister Nader Dahabi dropped strong hints earlier this week that the diplomatic ties with Israel could be affected as a result of the Israeli attack on the Gaza Strip. From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 18:23:15 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:23:15 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Flashpoints Gaza Coverage Message-ID: <0D8B2D75-9386-4AB6-A25C-964F0F13DC7F@shaw.ca> - Lots of on-the-ground reporting, including from Canadian journo/ ISM activist Eva Bartlett http://aud1.kpfa.org/data/20090108-Thu1700.mp3 Thursday, January 8, 2009 Today on Flashpoints: Tens of thousands of Gazans still on the run with nowhere to hide, as Israeli occupation forces continue to bomb mosques, UN aid workers, and schools, farms and private houses; we'll feature reports from the north to the south, and hear from activists in Montreal who invaded the Israeli Consulate there, and served them with a symbolic eviction notice for crimes against Humanity. Israeli Attacks Against the UN and Red Crescent Medics ISM activist and observer accompanying medics in Gaza, Eva Bartlett, describes attacks against medics, and also her visit to the site of the massacre at a UN school in Jabaliya. View other recent interviews with Eva Bartlett on palcast.org and aol video 17:00 On-the-Ground Report from Rafah, Southern Gaza Fida Qishta, freelance journalist and activist 27:00 Report from Gaza City Photojournalist, humanitarian and peace activist, Sameh Habeeb continues his series of reports from Gaza on day 13 of the Israeli siege. www.gazatoday.blogspot.com 32:00 Attacked Humanitarian Aid Shipment Tries Again Huwaida Arraf with the Free Gaza Movement reports on efforts to deliver humanitarian workers and aid to Gaza. Montreal police escort protestors away from the Israeli consulate Thursday. (CBC - www.cbc.ca) Montreal police escort protestors away from the Israeli consulate Thursday. (CBC) 40:00 Israeli Consulate served an Eviction Notice in Montreal Matan Cohen, activist and protester in Montreal, Canada, describes today's action at the Israeli consulate. For more details on the eviction notice visit news.infoshop.org http://flashpoints.net/ From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 18:25:59 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:25:59 -0800 Subject: [R-G] When in Doubt, Bomb Afghanistan Message-ID: <104D70A8-0FCD-4BCA-92E4-A4E980348643@shaw.ca> January 7, 2009 When in Doubt, Bomb Afghanistan America's Other Glorious War By WILLIAM BLUM http://www.counterpunch.org/blum01072009.html The Pentagon pushes hard for a large increase in troops for Afghanistan. Barack Obama has been calling for the same since well before the November election. Listen to the drumbeats telling us that the security of the United States and the Free World necessitates increased action in this place called Afghanistan. As urgent as Iraq 2003, it is. Why? What is there about this backward, reactionary, woman-hating, failed state that warrants hundreds of deaths of American and NATO soldiers? That justifies tens of thousands of Afghan deaths since the first US bombing attacks in October 2001? In early December, reports the Washington Post, "standing at Kandahar Air Field in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said the United States is making a 'sustained commitment' to that country, one that will last 'some protracted period of time'." The story goes on to discuss $300 million in construction projects at this one base to house additional American forces, erecting guard stations and towers and perimeter fencing around the barracks area, putting in vehicle inspection areas, administration offices, cold-storage warehouse, a new power plant, electrical and water distribution systems, communications lines, housing for 1,500 personnel who sustain the systems, maintenance shops, warehouses ... America's wealth bleeds out endlessly. Back in April Maj. Gen. David Rodriguez, commander of the US Army's 82nd Airborne Division, when asked how long it would take to create "lasting stability" in Afghanistan, replied: "In some way, shape or form ... I think it's a generation." "Stability", it should be noted, is a code word used regularly by the United States since at least the 1950s to mean that the regime in power is willing and able to behave the way Washington would like it to behave. It is remarkable, and scary, to read the US military writing about how it goes around the world bringing "stability" to (often ungrateful) people. This past October the Army published a manual called "Stability Operations". It discusses numerous American interventions all over the world since the 1890s, one example after another of bringing "stability" to benighted peoples. One can picture the young American service members reading it, or having it fed to them in lectures, full of pride to be a member of such an altruistic fighting force. For those members of the US military in Afghanistan the most enlightening lesson they could receive is that their government's plans for that land of sadness have little or nothing to do with the welfare of the Afghan people. In the late 1970s through much of the 1980s, the country had a government that was relatively progressive, with full rights for women; even a Pentagon report of the time testified to the actuality of women's rights in the country. And what happened to that government? The United States was instrumental in overthrowing it. It was replaced by the Taliban. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, US oil companies have been vying with Russia, Iran and other energy interests for the massive, untapped oil and natural gas reserves in the former Soviet republics of Central Asia. The building and protection of oil and gas pipelines in Afghanistan, to continue farther to Pakistan, India, and elsewhere, has been a key objective of US policy since before the 2001 American invasion and occupation of the country, although the subsequent turmoil there has presented serious obstacles to such plans. A planned Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline has strong support from Washington because, amongst other reasons, the US is eager to block a competing pipeline that would bring gas to Pakistan and India from Iran. But security for such projects remains daunting, and that's where the US and NATO forces come in to play. In the late 1990s, the American oil company, Unocal, met with Taliban officials in Texas to discuss the pipelines.[6] Zalmay Khalilzad, later chosen to be the US ambassador to Afghanistan, worked for Unocal[7]; Hamid Karzai, later chosen by Washington to be the Afghan president, also reportedly worked for Unocal, although the company denies this. Unocal's talks with the Taliban, conducted with the full knowledge of the Clinton administration, and undeterred by the extreme repression of Taliban society, continued as late as 2000 or 2001. As for NATO, it has no reason to be fighting in Afghanistan. Indeed, NATO has no legitimate reason for existence at all. Their biggest fear is that "failure" in Afghanistan would make this thought more present in the world's mind. If NATO hadn?t begun to intervene outside of Europe it would have highlighted its uselessness and lack of mission. ?Out of area or out of business? it was said. In June, the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives published a report saying Taliban and insurgent activity against the US-NATO presence in Kandahar province puts the feasibility of the pipeline project in doubt. The report says southern regions in Afghanistan, including Kandahar, would have to be cleared of insurgent activity and land mines in two years to meet construction and investment schedules. "Nobody is going to start putting pipe in the ground unless they are satisfied that there is some reasonable insurance that the workers for the pipeline are going to be safe," said Howard Brown, the Canadian representative for the Asian Development Bank, the major funding agency for the pipeline. If Americans were asked what they think their country is doing in Afghanistan, their answers would likely be one variation or another of "fighting terrorism", with some kind of connection to 9-11. But what does that mean? Of the tens of thousands of Afghans killed by American/ NATO bombs over the course of seven years, how many can it be said had any kind of linkage to any kind of anti-American terrorist act, other than in Afghanistan itself during this period? Not one, as far as we know. The so-called "terrorist training camps" in Afghanistan were set up largely by the Taliban to provide fighters for their civil conflict with the Northern Alliance (minimally less religious fanatics and misogynists than the Taliban, but represented in the present Afghan government). As everyone knows, none of the alleged 9-11 hijackers was an Afghan; 15 of the 19 were from Saudi Arabia; and most of the planning for the attacks appears to have been carried out in Germany and the United States. So, of course, bomb Afghanistan. And keep bombing Afghanistan. And bomb Pakistan. Especially wedding parties (at least six so far). William Blum is the author of Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, Rogue State: a guide to the World's Only Super Power. and West-Bloc Dissident: a Cold War Political Memoir. He can be reached at: BBlum6 at aol.com From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 18:37:21 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:37:21 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Gaza war also waged online Message-ID: Gaza war also waged online By our correspondent David Poort* 06-01-2009 http://www.radionetherlands.nl/currentaffairs/region/middleeast/090106-Gaza-propaganda The Israeli army includes a well-oiled propaganda apparatus. Women are the gender of choice for spokespersons because of their supposed softer image. And foreign journalists are bombarded with emails and text messages providing news coverage from an Israeli perspective. Pro-Israel YouTube videoWar also rages on the internet. A tough on- line battle to influence public opinion is being fought in the shadow of the Israeli offensive. Both sides have become masters in the art of cyber warfare. Without let-up, photographs, videos and text are posted on the internet. However, it is the Arab digital world which has perfected the production of on-line propaganda to an art form. Thousands of e-mails including the most horrific photographs of the Gaza Strip conflict are circulating in the Arab world. They also include photographs of dead Palestinian children, their small bodies completely destroyed. The captions read "Zionists are Nazis. Facebook Web sites such as Facebook, Twitter en YouTube are used as weapons in the propaganda war. On the Facebook site, kindred spirits can join special groups; one of them is called : "I bet I can find one million people who support Israel". So far, only 76,000 people have joined. Another group, named F**k Israel, has nearly 20,000 members. The Israeli army recently launched its own YouTube channel featuring videos of Israeli strikes on the Gaza Strip. The videos are intended to show that Isra?l is not simply firing into the strip at random. One of the videos shows a group of men filmed from great altitude while loading long tubes in the boot of a car; Israel claims the tubes are Qassam rockets. A few seconds later, the car explodes and the men disappear in a cloud of smoke. Army spokesperson Avital Leibovitch says: "The new media and the blogosphere form a whole new battlefield in the war for world opinion. It is vital Israel fights on this front as well". Twitter Last week, the Israeli consulate in New York for the first time used Twitter to organise a press conference on the Gaza Strip offensive. Twitter users from all around the globe fired about 400 questions at the consulate. More than 3,000 Twitters followed the discussion. The al-Jazeera news channel has also opened a Twitter channel, where users can follow the latest development in the Gaza Strip. The Twitter channel qassamcount keeps track of the number of Qassam rockets fired by Hamas at Israel. Hackers But that is not the full extent of the on-line war. Hackers have attacked and taken over hundreds of web sites since the start of the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip. The site of Israel's main newspaper Yediot Ahronot was hacked on Friday. People who surfed to the paper's URL were redirected to a black page featuring anti-Israel propaganda and an Arab battle song. It took the newspaper at least half a day to regain control of its website. At first glance, this sort of attack appears fairly harmless, but internet experts say they do constitute a threat. Research shows improved coordination of the attacks. Access to Gaza At present, al-Jazeera is the only international news channel with correspondents in the Gaza Strip. Israel has blasted al-Jazeera's coverage of the conflict as hostile and biased. However, Israel still refuses to admit foreign journalists to the area, in spite of a Supreme Court decision ruling the blockade illegal. This means only Arab television images are broadcast from the Gaza Strip. *RNW translation (gsh) From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 18:38:05 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:38:05 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Iran TV says Israel strikes Gaza office, two hurt Message-ID: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/DAH962484.htm Iran TV says Israel strikes Gaza office, two hurt 09 Jan 2009 19:25:02 GMT Source: Reuters (Adds Israel comment, paragraph four) TEHRAN, Jan 9 (Reuters) - An Iranian state television station said two people were wounded by an Israeli rocket strike on the building housing its office in Gaza on Friday. "Israeli rocket strikes Gaza media building, wounding two," Press TV said in a breaking news headline, after initially reporting no casualties in the incident. "Israeli forces have targeted Press TV and al-Alam television stations in the Gaza Strip," the English-language satellite station said. Al- Alam is Iran's Arab-language television station. An Israeli military spokesperson said the building had not been targeted, though it may have sustained "collateral damage". Equipment, including satellite transmission devices installed on the roof, was damaged, Press TV said on its website. It did not identify the wounded or say if other media outlets were based in the same building. A Press TV news presenter said Israel knew the building's coordinates and had given assurances it would not be attacked. Its website said staff had kept light projectors working on the roof of the building to mark it. Iran has condemned Israel's 14-day-old offensive against Gaza, which Israel said it launched to end rocket attacks by the Palestinian militant group Hamas on southern Israel. Israel has accused Iran of supplying arms to Hamas. Tehran, which does not recognise the Jewish state, says it gives moral, financial and humanitarian support to its Palestinian ally. (Reporting by Fredrik Dahl; editing by Michael Roddy) From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 18:40:19 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:40:19 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Report: US military re-supplying Israel with ammunition through Greece Message-ID: <8D01313A-D4FC-4778-87A2-7ACA12D27047@shaw.ca> Report: US military re-supplying Israel with ammunition through Greece author Thursday January 08, 2009 22:04author by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC News http://www.imemc.org/article/58374 As the Israeli military continues to pound the crowded, impoverished and imprisoned population of the Gaza Strip with the full force of its military might, Israel's strongest ally, the United States, announced plans to ship large amounts of ammunition to the Israeli forces ? as it did during Israel's 2006 invasion of Lebanon, when the Israelis ran out of (internationally-banned) cluster bombs, and the US shipped them tens of thousands more. US-made ammunition en route to Israel US-made ammunition en route to Israel The US Military Sealift Command, on December 31st, published a solicitation for bids from shipping companies to ship two boats, each containing 168 TEU's (twenty-foot equivalent container units) of ammunition, from Greece to Israel. The description of the vessels required was brief: ?Required: Request US or foreign flag container vessel (coaster) to move approximately 168 TEU's [standard twenty-foot containers] in each of two consecutive voyages both containing ammunition.? Bids were requested by January 5th, but it is unclear whether bids were submitted or if a contract was awarded by January 8th. According to the US Military's solicitation, "Funds are not currently available for this procurement. In the event funds remain unavailable, this procurement will be cancelled without an award being made." During the Israeli assault on Lebanon in the summer of 2006, in which 1,200 Lebanese people were killed, 90 percent of whom were civilians (and 168 Israelis were killed, 10 percent of whom were civilians), the US Congress approved funding for an 'emergency' shipment of cluster bombs to Israel, after Israel had dropped their entire store of the banned weapon on civilian population centers in southern Lebanon. Over one million cluster bomblets were dropped in southern Lebanon, largely due to the US 'emergency' shipment. Many of those bomblets remain on the ground in Lebanon, unexploded two years later. They continue to kill and maim Lebanese civilians, mainly children and farmers, who come across the unexploded bomblets and step on them or pick them up. According to Wired magazine's security correspondent Nathan Hodge, the current solicitation for a shipment bid is the first such solicitation in several months. He said that, according to his research, the most recent announcement of a potential arms delivery to Israel was posted by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency on Sept. 29 -- for sale of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters. Earlier that month, the agency notified Congress of the pending upgrades to Israeli Patriot missile fire units as well as sales of the GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb. Israel has long used US weapons in its attacks on the civilian population of the two Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories, the West Bank and Gaza. In addition to $3 billion in direct aid a year, the US government supplies around $3 billion in weapons transfers to Israel, and $6 billion in loan guarantees (none of which have ever been repaid by Israel). category gaza strip | international politics | news report author email saed at imemc dot org Related Link(s): https://www.procurement.msc.navy.mil/procurement/contra...033-0 From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 18:42:22 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:42:22 -0800 Subject: [R-G] A propaganda war can be disproportionate too Message-ID: ANALYSIS: A propaganda war can be disproportionate too Posted January 8th, 2009 http://www.menassat.com/?q=en/news-articles/5673-propaganda-war-can-be-disproportionate-too MENASSAT's Saseen Kawzally looks at the propaganda war being waged during the Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip. By SASEEN KAWZALLY IDF YOUTUBE SCREENSHOT A screenshot of the Israeli military's YouTube site launched during Operation Cast Lead. Following the popular mantra "YouTube is today's television," the Israeli military has ventured into new territory by utilizing the Internet to wage a propaganda war to accompany its on-going war in the Gaza Strip. Amid escalating casualties?700 total dead and rising?and as international condemnation of Israel's offensive mounts with each new day of bombing, Israel finds itself in urgent need to justify the apparent disproportionate use of force. In the process, Israel has managed to brand practically all of Gaza's men as Hamas militants, thus making them legitimate military targets in the eyes of the world. Using the same logic, any building described by Israel as "Hamas- associated" becomes a legitimate target as well, be it a mosque, a hospital, or even apartment blocks or schools. This bombing then becomes acceptable regardless of the ensuing "collateral damage," a military euphemism for women, children and, yes, civilian men. Is it any surprise then that the Israeli military became the first national army to set up an official YouTube channel, featuring its own military videos? Various military spokesmen have said that the channel is meant to verify Israel's claims of surgical bombing accuracy and impeccable intelligence on targets. As the Arab media beams horrific images of civilians, women and children and body parts scattered over bomb sites, the YouTube channel is meant to counter these "sensational" images?a target of official Israeli criticism. The YouTube channel was set up by the Israeli Defense Force's (IDF) spokespersons unit on the second day of Israel's air campaign against Gaza. It promises to provide "documentation of the IDF's humane action and operational success in Operation Cast Lead." 'The blogosphere and new media are another war zone' ? Major Avital Leibovich, Israeli army spokeswoman And the channel is attracting lots of visitors, with 14,000 subscribers so far and 996,139 views of some 37 clips?most of them cockpit videos of Israeli air strikes on Gaza. "The blogosphere and new media are another war zone," said Foreign Press Branch head Maj. Avital Leibovich at the launch of the channel. "We have to be relevant there." BBC questions YouTube videos But these efforts were almost immediately undermined and discredited by none other than the BBC. In a January 5 BBC article titled "Propaganda war: Trusting what we see?" World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds questioned how we "see" videos taken from the air and how they are interpreted. "Israel released video of an air attack on 28 December, which appeared to show rockets being loaded onto a lorry. The truck and those close to it were then destroyed by a missile," Reynolds wrote. "This was clear evidence, the Israelis said, of how accurate their strikes were and how well justified... The YouTube video has a large caption on it saying 'Grad missiles being loaded onto the Hamas vehicle.' As of Saturday morning UK time, more than 260,000 people had watched it." But then the Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem released testimony by a 55-year-old Gaza resident named Ahmed Sanur who claimed that the truck was his and that he and members of his family and his workers were moving oxygen cylinders from his workshop. Sanur?whose son was one of the eight people killed in the attack?denied any connection to Hamas militants or military activity. "The incident shows how an apparently definitive piece of video can turn into something much more doubtful," said Reynolds. "The Israeli propaganda effort is being directed to achieve two main aims," he continued. "The first is to justify the air attacks. The second is to show that there is no humanitarian calamity in Gaza." No revision of the official Israeli story took place, and the video remains on YouTube. Limiting coverage Israel's efforts to convince the world that it is acting "humanely" in Gaza are helped along by its banning of the international media from the Gaza Strip, during and ahead of the latest offensive?under the cynical pretext of concern for the safety of foreign journalists. The ban has left the job of reporting the situation in Gaza mainly to those Arab or international media who had correspondents on the ground before the offensive started. But many of these media?including Al-Jazeera?had previously and routinely been branded by Israel as "Hamas associated." In fact, Al- Jazeera was banned from official Israeli press conferences and interviews with Israeli officials well ahead of Operation Cast Lead. As far as the Arab media are concerned, Palestinian journalists have done a pretty good job of replacing the vacuum left by Israel's ban on foreign media. Al Jazeera has been reporting exhaustively on the Israeli siege of Gaza for the past eight months, and Lebanon's NEW TV's reporting from Gaza has been outstanding. It is fair to conclude then that only the "western" media, and thus public opinion in the West, are feeling the impact of Israel's control over the flow of information?both on the Internet and in the mainstream media?which was probably Israel's goal in the first place. 'Online war, online resistance" If there is obvious disproportion in the number of victims caused by either side, the Palestinian side is equally at a disadvantage in the online war being waged by Israel over Gaza. Pro-Palestinian hackers did hack or deface some 300 Israeli websites in the first 48-hours of the attack on Gaza, but such efforts paled in comparison to the influence of the official Israeli message that was being delivered through the mainstream media. Facing battalions of public relations experts and lobbyists with almost endless financial and technological resources, pro-Palestinian hackers are firing "virtual Qassam rockets" into a predominantly pro- Israeli cyber-world, and they are having about as much effect as the real Qassam rockets being fired at Israel by Hamas. Hamas' Media Warfare Division, a branch of the Al-Qufs Brigade, claimed in a statement that is was able to hack and take over several Israeli websites, posting pictures of Palestinian leaders and resistance videos there to replace the Israeli narrative. But Israel's Ynet news website, one of the sites hit by the pro- Palestinian hackers, was dismissive about the Palestinian cyber-war efforts. "Website defacement of this nature requires only basic programming know-how and usually boils down to changing the main page?a file easy to reconstruct.? A more sophisticated and elaborate internet attack was claimed by a Moroccan hackers group calling itself Team Evil. Team Evil hacked into DomainTheNet's registration system server, effectively hijacking various prominent domain names like ynetnews.com and Bank Discount, and rerouted visitors to a page condemning Israel, and showing images of children killed in Gaza bombings, as well as images of Abu-Ghraib prisoners being tortured. Team Evil has previously hacked other Israeli brands such as Cellcom, Shilav and BlueSquare. If Hamas' own cyber-warfare is the equivalent of a Qassam rocket, then the Moroccan initiative was the virtual Grad rocket attack. Preemptive strike Gary Warner, director of research in computer forensics at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, was the first to use the term "Propaganda war" on his blog referring to cyber-actions taken by both sides of the conflict, in support of their fighting on the ground. The objective here is limiting and hindering "third party" media coverage of the war. The assumption is Israel's credibility on the international scene should be enough for people to believe its official story. But the numbers and images are not playing in their favor, a sad fact, when it takes high civilian casualties to cast doubts on to the veracity of Israeli claims. Still, the widening ground offensive is making it harder for Israel to maintain the moral high ground. In an article published on New Year?s Eve at Times Online, Lucy Bannerman cites a pro-Israeli lobbyist as saying, "The problem is that the numbers are not very flattering." "The Jewish state is mindful of the public relations disaster of the 34-day offensive during the Lebanon war of 2006 and took one early measure to avoid a repeat," Bannerman wrote. "The Israelis have prevented foreign journalists from entering and reporting from Gaza, thereby limiting the scope of the coverage from the Palestinian side." During the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the United States decided to embed journalists with the troops. Israel, it seems, has decided to embed the entire Western public opinion?controlling most of the narrative while labeling the Arabic and much of the English-speaking press as naturally biased, partial, or even out right propagandistic for the other side. Those who choose to believe sanitized media releases such as Israel's Youtube channel, will continue to do so. But remember to draw from the experience of the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq. In the five years of war, it turns out that the U.S. also needed to sanitize the effects of war to galvanize public opinion around what has clearly been a public relations nightmare. Thus, the media faces a historic moment of truth concerning its duties and responsibilities?reporting on behalf of the more than 700 Palestinians killed by Israel in Gaza, as much as on behalf of the ten Israelis, seven soldiers and three civilians, killed by Hamas. From fentona at shaw.ca Fri Jan 9 23:21:22 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:21:22 -0800 Subject: [R-G] SNC-Lavalin hired to repair 'signature' dam in Kandahar province Message-ID: <248E5723-3E17-44AC-B8A1-DB2523834933@shaw.ca> SNC-Lavalin hired to repair 'signature' dam in Kandahar province KANDAHAR, Afghanistan ? Canada's biggest engineering firm, which for decades has operated in some of the world's hot spots, has been selected to refurbish a derelict Afghan dam that has been billed as one of Canada's "signature projects" in Afghanistan. Montreal-based engineering giant SNC-Lavalin confirmed Friday it has been chosen to oversee the repair of the Dahla dam on the Arghandab River in northern Kandahar province. "I can confirm that SNC-Lavalin in joint venture with Hydrosult has been awarded this contract," company spokeswoman Gillian MacCormack told The Canadian Press in an e-mail. SNC-Lavalin has been in Afghanistan for years doing logistics work under a Defence Department program. Earlier in the day, Canada's top civilian official in Kandahar, Elissa Golberg, confirmed a company had been awarded the contract, but declined to name the firm or give an exact date for the announcement. Last year, a blue-ribbon panel headed by former Liberal deputy prime minister John Manley urged the Conservative government to pursue at least one signature "Canadian" project easily identifiable to the Afghans that coalition forces are trying to win over. The Dahla dam's repair is one of three major projects the Tories subsequently announced. Canada will spend up to $50 million to refurbish the dam to improve irrigation and open up new, fertile soil for farmers deep into the Arghandab River Valley. Other international partners, including USAID, could also contribute to the project. CIDA has said the project will provide Afghan farmers with 10,000 hectares of irrigated land. It is also expected to employ up to 10,000 seasonal workers. However, repair work on the dam itself has been stalled by a drawn-out bidding process. As a result, only a fraction of the 10,000 workers have been hired so far to build roads and bridges leading to the dam so heavy machinery and trucks can get to it, and to build an outpost at the top of the dam for Afghan police officers to stand guard. Golberg said she expects work on the dam to begin in a few months. "I would imagine towards the spring. The contractor needs to be able to come down and start doing their planning and their technical analysis," she said. The Dahla dam - the second-largest dam in the country - suffers from years of war and neglect. But its location on the Arghandab River, which winds through Afghanistan's parched southern landscape, is of strategic importance for coalition forces. The dam will irrigate large tracts of land in the Arghandab River Valley. The river is the lifeblood of local farmers who live in the dozens of small villages along the riverbanks. Bringing a stable water supply to each of these villages avoids the perception of favouring some over others. The dam project is also expected to please the local Alokozai tribe, many of whom live in the Arghandab River Valley and who have generally been supportive of the mission in Afghanistan. There have been signs of unrest in the region following the death of a powerful pro-government tribal leader, Mullah Naqib, a former warlord who was an enemy of the Taliban. Since October 2007, Arghandab has been the site of two major clashes with the Taliban as the insurgents sought to win back their former stronghold, which would provide the group with an easy conduit to smuggle fighters and weapons into Kandahar city. The area is still contested, however, and tender documents released last summer by the federal government warned companies bidding on the Dahla dam reconstruction they would be largely responsible for their own security. From realiteee1 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 10 00:32:54 2009 From: realiteee1 at yahoo.com (james m nordlund) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 23:32:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] LPDOC Action: Urgent Message: Peltier's Transfer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <22047.19277.qm@web111507.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Urgent Message: Peltier's Transfer Forwarded on behalf of the Leonard Peltier Defense Offense Committee 09 Jan 2009, 7:30 p.m. Thursday afternoon, we were notified that Leonard would be transferred on Monday. We don't know which facility he will be assigned to, but we want to ask everyone to email/fax the officials at the Federal Bureau of Prisons Designation and Sentence Computation Center (DSCC) in Grand Prairie, TX. Email: GRA-DSC/PolicyCorrespondence&AdminRemedies at bop.gov Fax to: 972-352-4395 Re: Leonard Peltier 89637-132 Inform them the Turtle Mountain Tribal Council has passed a resolution to have Leonard there. In addition, there are two other federal facilities, Sandstone, MN & Oxford, WI, which Leonard could be assigned to which will allow his relatives to come and see him. This transfer will offset his parole hearing scheduled for February, and we won't have any information until Leonard has arrived at his next facility. I would also ask you to send up a prayer for my brother, along with your messages supporting his transfer to these locations. We still have his parole and clemency to concentrate on after he arrives at what our family hopes will be the last stop of our 33-year-old nightmare. I can't begin to imagine the insanity of being locked away for so long, and the whole time you know you are innocent as the rest of the world outside of America does. This nightmare has to end now and it is going to take each and everyone one of you to make an active stand to help end it. For years we have said that Leonard could have been any one of you. Anyone with a conscience, heart and soul who dares to speak up against the government could end up falsely imprisoned or dead. My brother was in South Dakota that day to help provide safety to a community of Elders and traditional people. He and his friends in the American Indian Movement were asked to come there. Leonard didn't have to, but he is a very unselfish person, so without regard to his own safety, he went to Oglala. Everyone can see the Robert Redford film "Incident at Oglala", and Leonard's trials, for all of the details about what happened there. This February 6th will mark 33 years since his arrest and so much has happened. A generation has been born and is having children, many of Leonard's friends and family has passed on, and the world has moved on. Maybe that is a way to understand what it feels to be falsely imprisoned and to live a nightmare. A life sentence is really a sentence of death. And being innocent is a 24/7 torture. All you have to look forward to is another day like yesterday with tomorrow being no better. My brother has two life sentences to look forward through, and it is his belief, as well as mine, that he will come home. Keep sending us your prayers and support so that we can break down those walls! Thank you, Betty Ann Peltier-Solano Executive Coordinator Leonard Peltier Defense Offense Committee ---- Time to set him free... Because it is the RIGHT thing to do. Friends of Peltier http://www.FreePeltierNow.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe,?? send a blank message to freepeltiernow-on at mail-list.com To contact the list owner, send your message to?? freepeltiernow-list-owner at mail-list.com mail-list.com??? 1302 Waugh Dr. #438??? Houston, Texas??? 77019??? USA james m and YouthAIDS help Stop Global AIDS with replyforall and funds from our sponsors. Join the mission at replyforall From critical.montages at gmail.com Sat Jan 10 03:10:54 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 05:10:54 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Gaza Strikes Reverberate in Egypt Message-ID: The article makes it sound as if Hamas being an Islamic movement had anything to do with the Mubarak regime's policy, but if Hamas were a revolutionary secular communist movement, the regime's policy would still be the same. -- Yoshie Gaza Strikes Reverberate in Egypt Mubarak Resists Calls at Home, in Region to Admit Palestinians Fleeing Violence By Sudarsan Raghavan Washington Post Foreign Service Saturday, January 10, 2009; A01 CAIRO, Jan. 9 -- Rarely has an Arab leader been so widely perceived as backing Israel and the United States against the Palestinians, whose struggle has been a fundamental rallying point for Arabs and Muslims for more than six decades. But Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has rejected popular and regional pressure to open the Gaza-Egypt border and toughen his stance against Israel. In recent days, his government has voiced support for Palestinians in an effort to defuse mounting criticism, but officials continue to suppress anti-Israeli demonstrations. On Friday, as Israeli forces continued a two-week-old offensive against Hamas, the armed Islamist movement that controls Gaza, scores of Egyptian doctors emerged from their union building in downtown Cairo. They clutched posters reading "Gaza Is Dying" and banners demanding the opening of the Rafah border crossing. One demonstrator held a baby doll, symbolizing a Palestinian child, in a white sheet covered with fake blood. Black-clad riot police stood before them, grim-faced in their black helmets. Brandishing clubs, they blocked the protesters from entering the street. "O Hamas, O Hamas, you are for all the people. We are behind you," the protesters chanted. Then they went after Mubarak. "O Mubarak, Mubarak, make a decision. Open the crossing. Remove the siege," they chanted. "O Mubarak, Mubarak. Are you with us or against us?" Egyptian analysts say Mubarak fears Hamas and wants to do everything possible to weaken the movement. Hamas has close ideological and historical ties to Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, a banned but tolerated Islamist opposition group. Radical Islamists assassinated Mubarak's predecessor, Anwar Sadat, in 1981. Mubarak, who has ruled Egypt for nearly three decades with U.S. backing, also wants to avoid taking sides in the war and to protect the country's tourism-reliant economy, the analysts said. Hamas has turned for support to Iran in recent years, and Mubarak, like other Sunni Muslim leaders, opposes the Shiite republic's widening influence in the region. "It is a very serious crisis. And Egyptian public opinion is divided," said Abdel Raouf El Reedy, a former ambassador to the United States. "The more Israel becomes brutal in Gaza, the more pressure there will be on the Egyptian government. It is a challenge to the government." While many Egyptians celebrate Hamas for fighting Israel in an attempt to achieve Palestinian self-determination, Egypt's secular middle class, including those who oppose Mubarak's autocratic rule, are wary of the movement's ideology and tactics. Many Egyptians are also disillusioned about schisms between Palestinian leaders and worried about the economic and political impact that a huge influx of Palestinians might cause. "This isn't the Palestinian cause," said Hisham Kassem, a human rights activist and critic of Mubarak. "Hamas has taken Gaza hostage. Now, they want to take the Sinai and the rest of Egypt hostage. "Mubarak can't have an Islamic terrorist emirate on his border. And it is not in the best interest of anybody in the region. So he has taken a tough position," Kassem said. Most of the anger toward Mubarak centers on the Rafah crossing, which he has opened only to admit the most serious Palestinian casualties and to allow some aid to enter Gaza. But Egyptians have also demanded that Mubarak's government stop selling natural gas to Israel and expel Israel's ambassador. "He is not opening the crossing because America and Israel are not letting him," said Awad Abdul Salem, 68, an engineer, in a courtyard of the lawyers' syndicate building Thursday. "The regime is a traitor," yelled another man next to him. Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of the Shiite Lebanese movement Hezbollah, has called for Egyptians to rise up against Mubarak. "Can the Egyptian police kill millions of Egyptians? Of course not," Nasrallah declared on the militia's al-Manar satellite television channel Dec. 28. "You, the Egyptian people, go and open the border. I am calling for a revolution in Egypt." Senior Egyptian officials accuse Nasrallah of inciting violence in their country. Editorials have gone further, criticizing Iran's Shiite theocracy for fueling the assaults on Mubarak. Egypt and Jordan are the only Arab states to have signed peace treaties with Israel. And Egypt has always straddled the delicate line between being a staunch American ally, receiving $1.4 billion in U.S. aid annually, and its leadership role in an Arab world resentful of American policies, especially since the 2003 Iraq invasion. Still, Egypt has supported the Palestinian struggle for statehood. During the Palestinian uprising that began in 2000, Egypt withdrew its ambassador from Israel to protest the military tactics used against Palestinians. Today, many Egyptians would like to see similar measures. They view Mubarak's efforts with French President Nicolas Sarkozy to negotiate a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas as a temporary remedy that will do little to stop Israeli dominance in Gaza or provide a haven for Palestinians. "These efforts are superficial," said Fatima Ahmed, 17, a commerce student at Cairo University. "The real effort will be to open the crossing." Mubarak's opponents charge that the 80-year-old president is more interested in preserving his grip on power and ensuring that his son, Gamal, succeeds him by shattering any threats, external or internal, to his rule. "He says it's about Arab national security, but it's about protecting his own regime," said Mohammed Habib, the Muslim Brotherhood's first deputy chairman. Before Friday's demonstration, more than 1,000 doctors and medical professionals had gathered inside an auditorium of the medics' syndicate. To enter the hall, they had to walk over a 20-foot-long Israeli flag. Speakers denounced the government for keeping Egyptian doctors and food shipments out of Gaza. "How can we not allow food through? What is the logic of this?" one speaker asked. Some attacked Egypt's state-run media for asserting that Hamas was responsible for the current crisis and for not excoriating Israel. Muslim Brotherhood leaders called for the government to release members it has detained and to broaden the struggle against Mubarak, seeing in the crisis an opportunity to bolster their group's popularity. "We have to act politically, not only in the health sector," Mohammed al-Beltagy, a Muslim Brotherhood official, declared from the lectern. Hossam Zaki, Egypt's chief Foreign Ministry spokesman, described the attacks on Mubarak as the latest manifestation of a rift in the Middle East -- one that has widened since the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon -- between groups that favor violent resistance to solve Arab-Israeli conflicts and those, led by Egypt, who favor political settlement. "They are after Egypt's credibility. They are after Egypt's role as a stabilizer," Zaki said. "They know that if they can undermine us, it would be much easier to go ahead with their agenda. "We don't want the Arab street to identify more and more with issues promoted by the Islamist movements," Zaki said. "This is extremely dangerous, and it has serious consequences." Mubarak's supporters say he is a pragmatist who understands that Israeli-Palestinian tensions cannot be stopped through emotion alone. Many are rallying around Mubarak out of patriotism, angered by the Arab world's attacks on their nation's credentials as a supporter of Palestinian self-determination. Sarah Abd al-Fattah, 24, an accounting student at Cairo University, questioned why Persian Gulf governments have not threatened to withdraw assets from the United States. "Why is all the talk about Hosni Mubarak? We have our own large population to worry about. Our economy is in crisis. Mubarak is under a lot of pressure from outside and inside Egypt," she said. "We need to talk about the Gulf states. Financial power brings real power. They should be supporting us, not standing against us." Her classmate Mahmoud Ahmed, 20, nodded. "I feel Egypt is doing what it can. If we do anything else, Egypt becomes a party to war. Nobody wants that," he said. Ahmed Yousry, another student, said he cared passionately about the Palestinian people. But he has grown disgusted with fractures between Hamas and Fatah, which runs the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. "At the end of the day, they have to rely on themselves," said Yousry, 21. "They have to take their rights with their own hands." The trio said they had no plans to demonstrate for Palestinians. "It won't achieve anything," Yousry said. The three said they didn't want the Rafah crossing opened up, fearing the prospect of tens of thousands of Palestinians flowing into Egypt. "We are already overpopulated," Abd al-Fattah said. "And," Ahmed said, "there will be no one left to fight for Palestine." From critical.montages at gmail.com Sat Jan 10 03:14:46 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 05:14:46 -0500 Subject: [R-G] =?windows-1252?q?Rashid_Khalidi=3A_What_You_Don=92t_Know_Ab?= =?windows-1252?q?out_Gaza?= Message-ID: January 8, 2009 Op-Ed Contributor What You Don't Know About Gaza By RASHID KHALIDI NEARLY everything you've been led to believe about Gaza is wrong. Below are a few essential points that seem to be missing from the conversation, much of which has taken place in the press, about Israel's attack on the Gaza Strip. THE GAZANS Most of the people living in Gaza are not there by choice. The majority of the 1.5 million people crammed into the roughly 140 square miles of the Gaza Strip belong to families that came from towns and villages outside Gaza like Ashkelon and Beersheba. They were driven to Gaza by the Israeli Army in 1948. THE OCCUPATION The Gazans have lived under Israeli occupation since the Six-Day War in 1967. Israel is still widely considered to be an occupying power, even though it removed its troops and settlers from the strip in 2005. Israel still controls access to the area, imports and exports, and the movement of people in and out. Israel has control over Gaza's air space and sea coast, and its forces enter the area at will. As the occupying power, Israel has the responsibility under the Fourth Geneva Convention to see to the welfare of the civilian population of the Gaza Strip. THE BLOCKADE Israel's blockade of the strip, with the support of the United States and the European Union, has grown increasingly stringent since Hamas won the Palestinian Legislative Council elections in January 2006. Fuel, electricity, imports, exports and the movement of people in and out of the Strip have been slowly choked off, leading to life-threatening problems of sanitation, health, water supply and transportation. The blockade has subjected many to unemployment, penury and malnutrition. This amounts to the collective punishment ? with the tacit support of the United States ? of a civilian population for exercising its democratic rights. THE CEASE-FIRE Lifting the blockade, along with a cessation of rocket fire, was one of the key terms of the June cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. This accord led to a reduction in rockets fired from Gaza from hundreds in May and June to a total of less than 20 in the subsequent four months (according to Israeli government figures). The cease-fire broke down when Israeli forces launched major air and ground attacks in early November; six Hamas operatives were reported killed. WAR CRIMES The targeting of civilians, whether by Hamas or by Israel, is potentially a war crime. Every human life is precious. But the numbers speak for themselves: Nearly 700 Palestinians, most of them civilians, have been killed since the conflict broke out at the end of last year. In contrast, there have been around a dozen Israelis killed, many of them soldiers. Negotiation is a much more effective way to deal with rockets and other forms of violence. This might have been able to happen had Israel fulfilled the terms of the June cease-fire and lifted its blockade of the Gaza Strip. This war on the people of Gaza isn't really about rockets. Nor is it about "restoring Israel's deterrence," as the Israeli press might have you believe. Far more revealing are the words of Moshe Yaalon, then the Israeli Defense Forces chief of staff, in 2002: "The Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people." Rashid Khalidi, a professor of Arab studies at Columbia, is the author of the forthcoming "Sowing Crisis: The Cold War and American Dominance in the Middle East." From mstainsby at resist.ca Sat Jan 10 03:17:33 2009 From: mstainsby at resist.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 03:17:33 -0700 Subject: [R-G] Report: US military re-supplying Israel with ammunition through Greece In-Reply-To: <8D01313A-D4FC-4778-87A2-7ACA12D27047@shaw.ca> References: <8D01313A-D4FC-4778-87A2-7ACA12D27047@shaw.ca> Message-ID: <496875BD.3060103@resist.ca> This makes sense, since as I recall Israel supplied extra tear gas to Greece while Greece was trying to crush that recent rebellions. Anthony Fenton wrote: > Report: US military re-supplying Israel with ammunition through Greece > author Thursday January 08, 2009 22:04author by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC > News > http://www.imemc.org/article/58374 > > As the Israeli military continues to pound the crowded, > impoverished and imprisoned population of the Gaza Strip with the full > force of its military might, Israel's strongest ally, the United > States, announced plans to ship large amounts of ammunition to the > Israeli forces From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:43:15 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:43:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Vatican compares Gaza to Nazi camp In-Reply-To: <2112752107.1741431231548518516.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <229494082.1994671231605795677.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/papal-response-vatican-compares-gaza-to-nazi-camp-1242608.html ? The Independent ?? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????? 9 January 2009 ? Papal response: Vatican compares Gaza to Nazi camp ? By Peter Popham in Rome ? ? The pope's minister for peace and justice was accused yesterday of speaking like a Holocaust denier after comparing Gaza to a "big concentration camp". ? Cardinal Renato Martino, a veteran Vatican diplomat with years of experience as the Pope's delegate to the United Nations, told an interviewer for L'Avvenire, the daily paper of the Italian bishops, that "nobody" in the Israel-Hamas dispute "sees the interests of the other, but only their own". He continued: "But the consequences of egoism are hatred for the other, poverty and injustice. The ones who pay are always the defenceless populations. Look at the conditions in Gaza: more and more it resembles a big concentration camp." ? He added that "both sides" were to blame for the dispute and must be separated like feuding brothers. "The world cannot just look on, doing nothing," said Cardinal Martino. His comments were later echoed by Pope Benedict XVI, who said "the military option is not a solution and violence from whichever side must be firmly condemned". ? But Israel and its supporters reacted angrily to the cardinal's implied comparison of Gaza to the concentration camps of Nazi Germany. "We are astounded to hear from a spiritual dignitary words that are so far removed from truth and dignity," said Yigal Palmor, a Foreign Ministry spokesman. ? Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, went further, saying such comments "are only used against Israel by terrorist organisations and Holocaust deniers". ? The row cast doubt on the Pope's tentative plan to visit the Holy Land in May. From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:42:26 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:42:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Scathing indictment by former Israeli true believer In-Reply-To: <1506550342.1748101231550104456.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <204718803.1994581231605746623.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> The Guardian ?????????????????????????????????????????? 7 January 2009 ? How Israel brought Gaza to the brink of humanitarian catastrophe ? Oxford professor of international relations Avi Shlaim served in the Israeli army and has never questioned the state's legitimacy. But its merciless assault on Gaza has led him to devastating conclusions ? Avi Shlaim ? The only way to make sense of Israel's senseless war in Gaza is through understanding the historical context. Establishing the state of Israel in May 1948 involved a monumental injustice to the Palestinians. British officials bitterly resented American partisanship on behalf of the infant state. On 2 June 1948, Sir John Troutbeck wrote to the foreign secretary, Ernest Bevin, that the Americans were responsible for the creation of a gangster state headed by "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". I used to think that this judgment was too harsh but Israel's vicious assault on the people of Gaza, and the Bush administration's complicity in this assault, have reopened the question. ? I write as someone who served loyally in the Israeli army in the mid-1960s and who has never questioned the legitimacy of the state of Israel within its pre-1967 borders. What I utterly reject is the Zionist colonial project beyond the Green Line. The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the June 1967 war had very little to do with security and everything to do with territorial expansionism. The aim was to establish Greater Israel through permanent political, economic and military control over the Palestinian territories. And the result has been one of the most prolonged and brutal military occupations of modern times. ? Four decades of Israeli control did incalculable damage to the economy of the Gaza Strip. With a large population of 1948 refugees crammed into a tiny strip of land, with no infrastructure or natural resources, Gaza's prospects were never bright. Gaza, however, is not simply a case of economic under-development but a uniquely cruel case of deliberate de-development. To use the Biblical phrase, Israel turned the people of Gaza into the hewers of wood and the drawers of water, into a source of cheap labour and a captive market for Israeli goods. The development of local industry was actively impeded so as to make it impossible for the Palestinians to end their subordination to Israel and to establish the economic underpinnings essential for real political independence. ? Gaza is a classic case of colonial exploitation in the post-colonial era. Jewish settlements in occupied territories are immoral, illegal and an insurmountable obstacle to peace. They are at once the instrument of exploitation and the symbol of the hated occupation. In Gaza, the Jewish settlers numbered only 8,000 in 2005 compared with 1.4 million local residents. Yet the settlers controlled 25% of the territory, 40% of the arable land and the lion's share of the scarce water resources. Cheek by jowl with these foreign intruders, the majority of the local population lived in abject poverty and unimaginable misery. Eighty per cent of them still subsist on less than $2 a day. The living conditions in the strip remain an affront to civilised values, a powerful precipitant to resistance and a fertile breeding ground for political extremism. ? In August 2005 a Likud government headed by Ariel Sharon staged a unilateral Israeli pullout from Gaza, withdrawing all 8,000 settlers and destroying the houses and farms they had left behind. Hamas, the Islamic resistance movement, conducted an effective campaign to drive the Israelis out of Gaza. The withdrawal was a humiliation for the Israeli Defence Forces. To the world, Sharon presented the withdrawal from Gaza as a contribution to peace based on a two-state solution. But in the year after, another 12,000 Israelis settled on the West Bank, further reducing the scope for an independent Palestinian state. Land-grabbing and peace-making are simply incompatible. Israel had a choice and it chose land over peace. ? The real purpose behind the move was to redraw unilaterally the borders of Greater Israel by incorporating the main settlement blocs on the West Bank to the state of Israel. Withdrawal from Gaza was thus not a prelude to a peace deal with the Palestinian Authority but a prelude to further Zionist expansion on the West Bank. It was a unilateral Israeli move undertaken in what was seen, mistakenly in my view, as an Israeli national interest. Anchored in a fundamental rejection of the Palestinian national identity, the withdrawal from Gaza was part of a long-term effort to deny the Palestinian people any independent political existence on their land. ? Israel's settlers were withdrawn but Israeli soldiers continued to control all access to the Gaza Strip by land, sea and air. Gaza was converted overnight into an open-air prison. From this point on, the Israeli air force enjoyed unrestricted freedom to drop bombs, to make sonic booms by flying low and breaking the sound barrier, and to terrorise the hapless inhabitants of this prison. ? Israel likes to portray itself as an island of democracy in a sea of authoritarianism. Yet Israel has never in its entire history done anything to promote democracy on the Arab side and has done a great deal to undermine it. Israel has a long history of secret collaboration with reactionary Arab regimes to suppress Palestinian nationalism. Despite all the handicaps, the Palestinian people succeeded in building the only genuine democracy in the Arab world with the possible exception of Lebanon. In January 2006, free and fair elections for the Legislative Council of the Palestinian Authority brought to power a Hamas-led government. Israel, however, refused to recognise the democratically elected government, claiming that Hamas is purely and simply a terrorist organisation. ? America and the EU shamelessly joined Israel in ostracising and demonising the Hamas government and in trying to bring it down by withholding tax revenues and foreign aid. A surreal situation thus developed with a significant part of the international community imposing economic sanctions not against the occupier but against the occupied, not against the oppressor but against the oppressed. ? As so often in the tragic history of Palestine, the victims were blamed for their own misfortunes. Israel's propaganda machine persistently purveyed the notion that the Palestinians are terrorists, that they reject coexistence with the Jewish state, that their nationalism is little more than antisemitism, that Hamas is just a bunch of religious fanatics and that Islam is incompatible with democracy. But the simple truth is that the Palestinian people are a normal people with normal aspirations. They are no better but they are no worse than any other national group. What they aspire to, above all, is a piece of land to call their own on which to live in freedom and dignity. ? Like other radical movements, Hamas began to moderate its political programme following its rise to power. From the ideological rejectionism of its charter, it began to move towards pragmatic accommodation of a two-state solution. In March 2007, Hamas and Fatah formed a national unity government that was ready to negotiate a long-term ceasefire with Israel. Israel, however, refused to negotiate with a government that included Hamas. ? It continued to play the old game of divide and rule between rival Palestinian factions. In the late 1980s, Israel had supported the nascent Hamas in order to weaken Fatah, the secular nationalist movement led by Yasser Arafat. Now Israel began to encourage the corrupt and pliant Fatah leaders to overthrow their religious political rivals and recapture power. Aggressive American neoconservatives participated in the sinister plot to instigate a Palestinian civil war. Their meddling was a major factor in the collapse of the national unity government and in driving Hamas to seize power in Gaza in June 2007 to pre-empt a Fatah coup. ? The war unleashed by Israel on Gaza on 27 December was the culmination of a series of clashes and confrontations with the Hamas government. In a broader sense, however, it is a war between Israel and the Palestinian people, because the people had elected the party to power. The declared aim of the war is to weaken Hamas and to intensify the pressure until its leaders agree to a new ceasefire on Israel's terms. The undeclared aim is to ensure that the Palestinians in Gaza are seen by the world simply as a humanitarian problem and thus to derail their struggle for independence and statehood. ? The timing of the war was determined by political expediency. A general election is scheduled for 10 February and, in the lead-up to the election, all the main contenders are looking for an opportunity to prove their toughness. The army top brass had been champing at the bit to deliver a crushing blow to Hamas in order to remove the stain left on their reputation by the failure of the war against Hezbollah in Lebanon in July 2006. Israel's cynical leaders could also count on apathy and impotence of the pro-western Arab regimes and on blind support from President Bush in the twilight of his term in the White House. Bush readily obliged by putting all the blame for the crisis on Hamas, vetoing proposals at the UN Security Council for an immediate ceasefire and issuing Israel with a free pass to mount a ground invasion of Gaza. ? As always, mighty Israel claims to be the victim of Palestinian aggression but the sheer asymmetry of power between the two sides leaves little room for doubt as to who is the real victim. This is indeed a conflict between David and Goliath but the Biblical image has been inverted - a small and defenceless Palestinian David faces a heavily armed, merciless and overbearing Israeli Goliath. The resort to brute military force is accompanied, as always, by the shrill rhetoric of victimhood and a farrago of self-pity overlaid with self-righteousness. In Hebrew this is known as the syndrome of bokhim ve-yorim, "crying and shooting". ? To be sure, Hamas is not an entirely innocent party in this conflict. Denied the fruit of its electoral victory and confronted with an unscrupulous adversary, it has resorted to the weapon of the weak - terror. Militants from Hamas and Islamic Jihad kept launching Qassam rocket attacks against Israeli settlements near the border with Gaza until Egypt brokered a six-month ceasefire last June. The damage caused by these primitive rockets is minimal but the psychological impact is immense, prompting the public to demand protection from its government. Under the circumstances, Israel had the right to act in self-defence but its response to the pinpricks of rocket attacks was totally disproportionate. The figures speak for themselves. In the three years after the withdrawal from Gaza, 11 Israelis were killed by rocket fire. On the other hand, in 2005-7 alone, the IDF killed 1,290 Palestinians in Gaza, including 222 children. ? Whatever the numbers, killing civilians is wrong. This rule applies to Israel as much as it does to Hamas, but Israel's entire record is one of unbridled and unremitting brutality towards the inhabitants of Gaza. Israel also maintained the blockade of Gaza after the ceasefire came into force which, in the view of the Hamas leaders, amounted to a violation of the agreement. During the ceasefire, Israel prevented any exports from leaving the strip in clear violation of a 2005 accord, leading to a sharp drop in employment opportunities. Officially, 49.1% of the population is unemployed. At the same time, Israel restricted drastically the number of trucks carrying food, fuel, cooking-gas canisters, spare parts for water and sanitation plants, and medical supplies to Gaza. It is difficult to see how starving and freezing the civilians of Gaza could protect the people on the Israeli side of the border. But even if it did, it would still be immoral, a form of collective punishment that is strictly forbidden by international humanitarian law. ? The brutality of Israel's soldiers is fully matched by the mendacity of its spokesmen. Eight months before launching the current war on Gaza, Israel established a National Information Directorate. The core messages of this directorate to the media are that Hamas broke the ceasefire agreements; that Israel's objective is the defence of its population; and that Israel's forces are taking the utmost care not to hurt innocent civilians. Israel's spin doctors have been remarkably successful in getting this message across. But, in essence, their propaganda is a pack of lies. ? A wide gap separates the reality of Israel's actions from the rhetoric of its spokesmen. It was not Hamas but the IDF that broke the ceasefire. It di d so by a raid into Gaza on 4 November that killed six Hamas men. Israel's objective is not just the defence of its population but the eventual overthrow of the Hamas government in Gaza by turning the people against their rulers. And far from taking care to spare civilians, Israel is guilty of indiscriminate bombing and of a three-year-old blockade that has brought the inhabitants of Gaza, now 1.5 million, to the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe. ? The Biblical injunction of an eye for an eye is savage enough. But Israel's insane offensive against Gaza seems to follow the logic of an eye for an eyelash. After eight days of bombing, with a death toll of more than 400 Palestinians and four Israelis, the gung-ho cabinet ordered a land invasion of Gaza the consequences of which are incalculable. ? No amount of military escalation can buy Israel immunity from rocket attacks from the military wing of Hamas. Despite all the death and destruction that Israel has inflicted on them, they kept up their resistance and they kept firing their rockets. This is a movement that glorifies victimhood and martyrdom. There is simply no military solution to the conflict between the two communities. The problem with Israel's concept of security is that it denies even the most elementary security to the other community. The only way for Israel to achieve security is not through shooting but through talks with Hamas, which has repeatedly declared its readiness to negotiate a long-term ceasefire with the Jewish state within its pre-1967 borders for 20, 30, or even 50 years. Israel has rejected this offer for the same reason it spurned the Arab League peace plan of 2002, which is still on the table: it involves concessions and compromises. ? This brief review of Israel's record over the past four decades makes it difficult to resist the conclusion that it has become a rogue state with "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction and practises terrorism - the use of violence against civilians for political purposes. Israel fulfils all of these three criteria; the cap fits and it must wear it. Israel's real aim is not peaceful coexistence with its Palestinian neighbours but military domination. It keeps compounding the mistakes of the past with new and more disastrous ones. Politicians, like everyone else, are of course free to repeat the lies and mistakes of the past. But it is not mandatory to do so. ? ? Avi Shlaim is a professor of international relations at the University of Oxford and the author of The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World and of Lion of Jordan: King Hussein's Life in War and Peace. From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:42:59 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:42:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Losing the PR war and the Diaspora In-Reply-To: <622956128.1741961231548634086.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <1369604493.1994641231605779123.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=1158883 ? National Post? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? January 9, 2009 ? Losing the PR war and the Diaspora ? Jeet Heer ? Wars can be won on the battlefield while being lost in the realm of public opinion. In Vietnam, the United States army was victorious in every combat operation but the overall war was lost when the American public became convinced that the cost of fighting far outweighed any benefit. In the Middle East today, we see the same dichotomy between battlefield success and public relations failure. ? Israel, one of the world's most militarized nations with every weapon at its disposal up to the nuclear bomb, is having no problem crushing Hamas, a raggedy half-starved guerrilla force whose homemade missiles are usually as dangerous as firecrackers. The casualty numbers speak for themselves: As of Wednesday Israel had lost about a dozen lives (mostly soldiers, often due to friendly fire) while more than 600 Palestinians, including scores of women and children, had been killed. ? Yet for all its tactical skills in turning Gaza into a charnel house, Israel is facing a serious strategic loss on the battlefield of public perception. As it did in earlier wars where Israel killed large numbers of civilians, global public opinion is cooling toward the Jewish state, which runs the risk of becoming an international pariah. ? This shift in public opinion is most striking when we look at young Jews in North America, who are much more critical of Israel than their parents and grandparents. Given the fact that Israel has always relied heavily on support, both financial and moral, from the Diaspora, the loss of loyalty of young Jews is a dangerous trend. ? Evidence of the turn against Israel by large parts of the Diaspora can be seen everywhere, from protests to comedy shows. In Toronto, a group of Jewish women briefly occupied the Israeli consulate in protest against the war. In Los Angeles, young Jews wearing keffiyehs marched outside the Israeli consulate carrying signs reading "Difference Between Warsaw Ghetto & Gaza? 70 Years." ? No TV personality has a better sense of the pulse of the young than Jon Stewart, himself Jewish and hitherto a staunch supporter of Israel. On the Daily Show when commenting on Gaza, Stewart mocked politicians like New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg for criticizing the Palestinians while failing to acknowledge their legitimate grievances. The show's studio audience laughed in agreement at Stewart's complaint that the American media and political elite were offering a one-sided pro-Israel perspective on the conflict. ? Increasing Jewish alienation from Israel is part of a long-running trend. A 2006 survey sponsored by the Andrea and Charles Bronfman philanthropies found that many young Jews were at best lukewarm about Israel. Only 48% of young Jews surveyed said that they would regard the destruction of Israel as a personal tragedy, as against 77% of Jewish senior citizens. Among Jews old enough to collect a pension, 81% were comfortable with the idea of a Jewish state; this number dropped dramatically to 54% among Jews in the much-coveted under 35 demographic. ? Events like the war in Gaza are likely to intensify the post-Zionism of young Jews. In the public debate in America, it is striking that the strongest supporters of Israel tend to be writers like Alan Dershowitz (age 70), Marty Peretz (also 70) and William Kristol (a sprightly 56). As against this Geritol brigade, a group of young Jewish writers, many of them working for progressive think-tanks that are helping to shape the Obama administration, have been admirably sharp-witted in attacking the Gaza offensive as a moral and strategic failure. ? It's worth listening to some of these young Jewish writers. Here is Ezra Klein, age 24: "There is nothing proportionate in this response. No way to fit it into a larger strategy that leads towards eventual peace. No way to fool ourselves into believing that it will reduce bloodshed and stop terrorist attacks. It is simple vengeance. There's a saying in the Jewish community: 'Israel, right or wrong.' But sometimes Israel is simply wrong." ? Spencer Ackerman, age 28: "The Jewish writers who consider Palestinian life to be worth a fraction of an Israeli life will start braying about anti-Semitism, because when Palestinian bodies are charred in the streets, the real victim is a sensitive Jew's sense of collective guilt." ? Matthew Yglesias, age 28: "The Israeli government, seemingly dissatisfied with the results of their earlier effort to just make life as miserable as possible for residents of the Gaza strip[,] went and killed a couple of hundred people in retaliatory airstrikes." ? Dana Goldstein, age 24: "Asking young Jews to fight and die in a ground war, one whose perpetration inflames anti-Semitic sentiments, is not the best way to make Israel, or the world at large, safe for the Jewish people." ? Klein, Ackerman, Yglesias and Goldstein are among the most widely read political writers on the Internet. Their blogs have millions of readers. They've worked for think-tanks and magazines that have played a major role in creating the Obama presidency. For Israel to lose the support of a rising generation of Jewish intellectuals and policymakers is a grave problem. (This trend of young Jews becoming alienated from Israel has been extensively documented by Philip Weiss on his blog Mondoweiss.) ? Why are young Jews so harsh in their criticism of Israel? The only honest answer is Israel's terrible human rights record. The wanton slaughter in Gaza is merely the latest in a long litany of Israeli atrocities, all of which help the Jewish state win some short-term victories while making long-term peace impossible. If Israel is to survive it needs to listen to these critical voices, rather than the false friends who urge a continuation of the cycle of violence and retribution. And if Israel doesn't listen to its critics in the Diaspora, then it will face a friendless future. ? jeetheer at hotmail.com From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:42:03 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:42:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Is Israeli Policy Crazy? In-Reply-To: <1365885642.1756211231551182187.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <8003733.1994551231605723016.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=2400 ? The Independent Institute ????????????????????????????????????????? ? January 2, 2009 ? Commentary ? Is Israeli Policy Crazy? ? If the definition of insanity is repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different result, Israel?s policy has to be deemed ?crazy.? ? By Ivan Eland ? The ?Israeli model? has long been held up by hawks in the United States as the gold standard for dealing with adversarial nation-states, guerrillas, and terrorists. The storyline goes that Israel is a small country surrounded by aggressive enemies that use unfair measures (including terrorism) to try to wipe it off the face of the map. Therefore, the thinking in Israel is that to survive, the Israelis must use disproportionate tactics to show how tough they are to instill fear in their vicious enemies. This paradigm, practiced by Israel since its inception in 1948, has been tactically sound and strategically disastrous. ? It is a myth that throughout its history Israel has been outgunned by the Arabs. During and since the war over its creation in 1948, the Israelis have always had superior military power, resources, and training compared to the Arab states. As a result, oftentimes, Israel has been able to successfully deliver overwhelming and disproportionate blows to its enemies. Despite this tactical strength, Israel?s enemies just seem to keep coming back and getting angrier. In other words, overwhelming tactical military victories don?t deal with the social and political causes of the intense hate that Israel engenders. Because these root causes remain, Israel will continue to need to take draconian measures to ensure its security?for example, conducting the current heavy military attacks on Gaza. ? Israel doesn?t seem to understand that superior power doesn?t buy security as long as the adversary?s grievance lingers. The enemy just gets more desperate and resorts to terrorism?either the suicide bombing of civilians or the firing of inaccurate rockets into Israeli towns from outside. Enlightened opinion in Israel should see the strategic idiocy in decades of living as a powerful armed camp and using a dominant military to either tactically defeat your enemies or quarantine them into giant pens?the West Bank and Gaza?and suppress them. If Israel would settle this 60-year state of war with its neighbors by giving up control over land that was taken by force from the Arabs in 1967, the Arabs and Israelis could grow rich together by conducting cross-border trade and investment and luring lucrative foreign investment from outside the region. ? Of course, it is easy for observers outside the region to see how such a settlement of the Palestine problem could be reached on paper; it is much harder to overcome the decades of hatred to actually implement it. And Israel has no incentive to give up control over the land because it has overwhelming tactical military superiority and the support of a superpower. Yet Israel needs to put aside hatred of Arabs and solve the underlying grievance, or violence will continue even if Israel launches a ground invasion of Gaza to take out Hamas. ? Military attacks by Israel may cripple its enemies in a tactical military sense, but they only strengthen the Arab hatred and will for revenge. Ironically, Israel?s current onslaught on Gaza, coming before the Israeli elections, aims to demonstrate to the Arabs that Israel is still tough subsequent to its last military debacle against the group Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006. In that campaign, the Israelis used Hezbollah?s rocket attack on northern Israel and the kidnapping and killing of a few Israeli soldiers as an excuse to pummel the entire country of Lebanon with air attacks and conduct a limited ground invasion. Hezbollah?s military capabilities were significantly reduced, but its stature and political strength were increased by doing better than expected against the vaunted Israeli military. In the Arab world, you don?t have to win, but just do better than expected. ? This wasn?t the first time that Israeli military action had had a counterproductive effect. In 1982, the Israelis invaded Lebanon to wipe out PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) infrastructure in that country. The Israelis sent the PLO packing, but the continuing Arab grievance then took a more sinister form in the creation of the Islamist group Hezbollah. Hezbollah burnished its resistance credentials by eventually kicking Israel out of Lebanon in 2000. ? After the disastrous wars on Lebanon in 1982 and 2006, in which Israel won militarily but ultimately lost politically, one would think Israel would have avoided yet another disastrous disproportionate military response in response to Hamas?s rocket attacks on southern Israel. But no such luck. If the definition of insanity is repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different result, Israel?s policy has to be deemed ?crazy.? ? Even the best outcome for Israel is grim. If the Israeli military invades Gaza on the ground to wipe out Hamas and its military infrastructure and Egypt does not allow Hamas fighters to escape to its territory, the Arab grievance will likely merely morph into a more angry and virulent form after the almost certain eventual Israeli withdrawal. Alternatively, if Hamas is not completely wiped out?either because some fighters successfully melt back into Gaza?s population or because Israel merely threatens a ground invasion but doesn?t follow through?Hamas?s stature will grow in Gaza and the Arab world for successfully withstanding the Israeli goliath?as Hezbollah?s did after the Israeli onslaught against and withdrawal from Lebanon in 2006. ? Instead of making peace with the Palestinians and Syrians by eliminating the underlying grievance and giving back their land, or at least answering minor provocations with limited tit-for-tat responses, Israel will likely continue flailing disproportionately against its enemies. This Israeli government policy will make the long-term security situation worse for the Israeli people?with the United States subsidizing and giving the green light to such irresponsible behavior. Same stuff, different year. ? ? Ivan Eland is Senior Fellow and Director of the Center on Peace & Liberty at The Independent Institute . Dr. Eland is a graduate of Iowa State University and received an M.B.A. in applied economics and Ph.D. in national security policy from George Washington University. He has been Director of Defense Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, and he spent 15 years working for Congress on national security issues, including stints as an investigator for the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Principal Defense Analyst at the Congressional Budget Office. He is author of the books, Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty , The Empire Has No Clothes: U.S. Foreign Policy Exposed , and Putting ?Defense? Back into U.S. Defense Policy . ? ? New from Ivan Eland! THE EMPIRE HAS NO CLOTHES: U.S. Foreign Policy Exposed (Updated Edition) Most Americans don?t think of their government as an empire, but in fact the United States has been steadily expanding its control of overseas territories since the turn of the twentieth century. In The Empire Has No Clothes , Ivan Eland, a leading expert on U.S. defense policy and national security, examines American military interventions around the world from the Spanish-American War to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. ? From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:43:41 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:43:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Why do they hate the West so much, we will ask In-Reply-To: <1261535423.1738151231548052216.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <1430747382.1994701231605821320.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-why-do-they-hate-the-west-so-much-we-will-ask-1230046.html ? The Independent ????????????????????????????????? 7 January 2009 ? Why do they hate the West so much, we will ask ? Robert Fisk ? So once again, Israel has opened the gates of hell to the Palestinians. Forty civilian refugees dead in a United Nations school, three more in another. Not bad for a night's work in Gaza by the army that believes in "purity of arms". But why should we be surprised? ? Have we forgotten the 17,500 dead ? almost all civilians, most of them children and women ? in Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon; the 1,700 Palestinian civilian dead in the Sabra-Chatila massacre; the 1996 Qana massacre of 106 Lebanese civilian refugees, more than half of them children, at a UN base; the massacre of the Marwahin refugees who were ordered from their homes by the Israelis in 2006 then slaughtered by an Israeli helicopter crew; the 1,000 dead of that same 2006 bombardment and Lebanese invasion, almost all of them civilians? ? What is amazing is that so many Western leaders, so many presidents and prime ministers and, I fear, so many editors and journalists, bought the old lie; that Israelis take such great care to avoid civilian casualties. "Israel makes every possible effort to avoid civilian casualties," yet another Israeli ambassador said only hours before the Gaza massacre. And every president and prime minister who repeated this mendacity as an excuse to avoid a ceasefire has the blood of last night's butchery on their hands. Had George Bush had the courage to demand an immediate ceasefire 48 hours earlier, those 40 civilians, the old and the women and children, would be alive. ? What happened was not just shameful. It was a disgrace. Would war crime be too strong a description? For that is what we would call this atrocity if it had been committed by Hamas. So a war crime, I'm afraid, it was. After covering so many mass murders by the armies of the Middle East ? by Syrian troops, by Iraqi troops, by Iranian troops, by Israeli troops ? I suppose cynicism should be my reaction. But Israel claims it is fighting our war against "international terror". The Israelis claim they are fighting in Gaza for us, for our Western ideals, for our security, for our safety, by our standards. And so we are also complicit in the savagery now being visited upon Gaza. ? I've reported the excuses the Israeli army has served up in the past for these outrages. Since they may well be reheated in the coming hours, here are some of them: that the Palestinians killed their own refugees, that the Palestinians dug up bodies from cemeteries and planted them in the ruins, that ultimately the Palestinians are to blame because they supported an armed faction, or because armed Palestinians deliberately used the innocent refugees as cover. ? The Sabra and Chatila massacre was committed by Israel's right-wing Lebanese Phalangist allies while Israeli troops, as Israel's own commission of inquiry revealed, watched for 48 hours and did nothing. When Israel was blamed, Menachem Begin's government accused the world of a blood libel. After Israeli artillery had fired shells into the UN base at Qana in 1996, the Israelis claimed that Hizbollah gunmen were also sheltering in the base. It was a lie. The more than 1,000 dead of 2006 ? a war started when Hizbollah captured two Israeli soldiers on the border ? were simply dismissed as the responsibility of the Hizbollah. Israel claimed the bodies of children killed in a second Qana massacre may have been taken from a graveyard. It was another lie. The Marwahin massacre was never excused. The people of the village were ordered to flee, obeyed Israeli orders and were then attacked by an Israeli gunship. The refugees took their children and stood them around the truck in which they were travelling so that Israeli pilots would see they were innocents. Then the Israeli helicopter mowed them down at close range. Only two survived, by playing dead. Israel didn't even apologise. ? Twelve years earlier, another Israeli helicopter attacked an ambulance carrying civilians from a neighbouring village ? again after they were ordered to leave by Israel ? and killed three children and two women. The Israelis claimed that a Hizbollah fighter was in the ambulance. It was untrue. I covered all these atrocities, I investigated them all, talked to the survivors. So did a number of my colleagues. Our fate, of course, was that most slanderous of libels: we were accused of being anti-Semitic. ? And I write the following without the slightest doubt: we'll hear all these scandalous fabrications again. We'll have the Hamas-to-blame lie ? heaven knows, there is enough to blame them for without adding this crime ? and we may well have the bodies-from-the-cemetery lie and we'll almost certainly have the Hamas-was-in-the-UN-school lie and we will very definitely have the anti-Semitism lie. And our leaders will huff and puff and remind the world that Hamas originally broke the ceasefire. It didn't. Israel broke it, first on 4 November when its bombardment killed six Palestinians in Gaza and again on 17 November when another bombardment killed four more Palestinians. ? Yes, Israelis deserve security. Twenty Israelis dead in 10 years around Gaza is a grim figure indeed. But 600 Palestinians dead in just over a week, thousands over the years since 1948 ? when the Israeli massacre at Deir Yassin helped to kick-start the flight of Palestinians from that part of Palestine that was to become Israel ? is on a quite different scale. This recalls not a normal Middle East bloodletting but an atrocity on the level of the Balkan wars of the 1990s. And of course, when an Arab bestirs himself with unrestrained fury and takes out his incendiary, blind anger on the West, we will say it has nothing to do with us. Why do they hate us, we will ask? But let us not say we do not know the answer. From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:42:44 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:42:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] We're all Hamas now - supporters of Fatah unite behind enemy In-Reply-To: <724823982.1743631231548977448.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <1457866017.1994611231605764860.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-west-bank-were-all-hamas-now--supporters-of-fatah-unite-behind-enemy-1242606.html ? The Independent ????????????????????????????? 9 January 2009 ? The West Bank: We're all Hamas now - supporters of Fatah unite behind enemy ? By Ben Lynfield in Ramallah ? Even if Israel wins on the battlefield or in the diplomatic corridors it is already paying the price of its Gaza onslaught in intensified hatred in the hearts of its Palestinian neighbours in the West Bank. The campaign also appears to be increasing public scepticism about the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's chosen path of negotiations as the way to establish an independent state alongside Israel. ? The diplomacy championed by Mr Abbas has for years been difficult to sell to Palestinians because it has brought little or no relief from occupation or improvement in their daily lives, only the expansion of Israeli settlements. This existing frustration ?which helped Hamas defeat Mr Abbas's Fatah movement in the 2006 elections ? is now combined with popular anger and dismay at the carnage among fellow Palestinians in Gaza. ? Palestinian Authority security forces are keeping a tight lid on protests, preventing confrontations with Israeli troops and arresting anyone raising Hamas banners at rallies. But displays of identification with the beleaguered Gazans are everywhere. Nine-year-old green-kerchiefed girl Scouts, their foreheads marked with the word Gaza in red ink, were among those who marched through the main al-Manara square in a protest. They held up pictures of bandaged toddlers, and dozens of demonstrators chanted, "With blood and spirit, we will redeem you, O Gaza". ? Leaders of Fatah, which lost control of Gaza to Hamas fighters in June 2007, are torn between their own hopes that Hamas, which they view as a usurper and agent of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Jordan, is defeated, and the people's anger over the Israeli campaign. There is a great deal at stake for them. "If Hamas is victorious and the Israelis raise the white flag there will be a problem in the West Bank, more people will support Hamas, and the Arab regimes will have problems too," said Ziad Abu Ein, the deputy minister of prisoner affairs and a veteran of 13 years in Israeli prisons. ? Bassem Khoury, the president of the Palestinian Federation of Industries, launched the PA-supported National Palestinian Campaign to Relieve Gaza by holding up a picture from the al-Ayyam daily newspaper showing the head of a Palestinian girl buried in the rubble of an Israeli attack. "This is unbelievable," he said. "How will this help the Israelis? It only generates more recruits for Hamas." ? Unlike the people, who seem less concerned as yet with apportioning Palestinian blame, some Fatah leaders couple calls for national unity with accusing Hamas of causing the suffering in Gaza. Tawfik al-Tirawi, an adviser to Mr Abbas and a former security chief, said: "The political leadership that miscalculated has brought catastrophe on itself and its people." ? Palestinians in the West Bank have their own long-standing grievances against Israel: the ongoing occupation, checkpoints Israel says are needed for security but that hamper their movement, often humiliate them and paralyse economic life, the expropriation of Palestinian land, and the threat of Israeli army incursion or arrest. The images from Gaza are being layered onto a collective memory of being expelled at Israel's creation in 1948. ? A teacher in a PA school talked of the Israeli attack on a UN school in Gaza that killed at least 40 people and other killings of civilians. "The feeling is of severe anger," he said. "We are angry at the Jews and the hatred of them inside of us has increased. This is more than people can bear. We are mad at the Palestinian Authority and we are mad at the Arab regimes. When there is a call to convene an Arab meeting it looks like they are giving Israel a free hand to do whatever it wants" ? Another PA employee, from the northern West Bank city of Nablus, said: "I want to educate my kids to hate Israel. If I can't do something maybe my kids can. I will educate them to fight the Israelis." From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:44:46 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:44:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] =?utf-8?q?Obama=E2=80=99s_Neocon?= In-Reply-To: <2000381025.1616431231544200593.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <411966179.1994821231605886022.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2009/01/obama%E2%80%99s-neocon/ ? Dissident Voice ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????? January 9th, 2009 ? Obama?s Neocon ? by Gary Leupp ? It?s been reported that Dennis Ross has accepted an invitation to become Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton?s ?top advisor on a wide range of Middle East issues, from the Arab-Israeli peace process to Iran? and to serve as Special Envoy to Iran. ? As one blogger wrote: ?Appointing extremely anti-Iran Dennis Ross as ?Special Envoy to Iran? is like appointing a pedophile as kindergarten teacher.? ? Ross is co-founder of AIPAC; neoconservative ideologue; big-time supporter of the Iraq War; foreign affairs commentator for Fox News; fellow with Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), sister organization of AIPAC described by one distinguished scholar (Columbia?s Rashid Khalidi) as ?the most important Zionist propaganda tool in the United States;? a man who has stated (in defiance of the U.S. intelligence consensus) that Iran will ?be a nuclear power, if not a nuclear weapon state? by April 2009 if not forcibly deterred. ? The only reason to make him envoy to Iran is to have him repeat the Bush-Cheney ultimatum: cease enriching uranium (something the Non-Proliferation Treaty allows all signatory nations to do, and which Iran does under tight IAEA monitoring) or face a U.S. strike. ? As the leader of the U.S. negotiating team during the Israeli-Palestinian talks in 1999-2000, Ross was described by fellow U.S. diplomat Aaron David Miller (also Jewish) as ?Israel?s lawyer? and criticized for not ?critically examining? what following ?Israel?s lead? would mean for U.S. interests. He is widely believed to have authored Obama?s fawning AIPAC speech presented last June. ? In short his appointment does not mean CHANGE or HOPE for any so na?ve as to suppose that an Obama presidency might bring either. It likely means more war, based on more false pretexts, to further reconfigure Southwest Asia. ? On Oct. 2, 2002, Barack Obama told an antiwar crowd in Chicago that he opposed ?the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.? ? Now he?s in bed with the neocons. His supporters ought to ask, ?What happened?? ? Gary Leupp is a Professor of History, and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion at Tufts University, and author of numerous works on Japanese history. He can be reached at: gleupp at granite.tufts.edu . From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:44:24 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:44:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Norway: unions mobilize against Israeli war crimes in Gaza In-Reply-To: <1384201024.1744871231549235956.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <373415543.1994751231605864963.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> Norway: unions mobilize against Israeli war crimes in Gaza ========================================================== De: Omar Barghouti Date: 8 janvier 2009 16:10:56 GMT+01:00 Norway - historical mobilization against Gaza massacres - unions on political strike A most impressive, EFFECTIVE solidarity with Palestine is sweeping Norway. ? Demonstrations have now been held in at least 28 cities: Oslo, Stavanger, Sandnes, Fredrikstad, Trondheim, Hamar, Sortland, Namsos, Arendal, Norheimsund, Mosj?en, Bergen, Sarpsborg, T?nsberg, Harstad, Troms?, Kristiansand, Notodden, Vads?, Mo i Rana, Alta, Kirkenes, R?ros, Volda, Halden, Gj?vik, Lillehammer, Selbu. ? The numbers of participants have never been? bigger. ? Union activities: ? POLITICAL STRIKE: Thursday ALL trains in the whole of Norway, and all trams and subways in Oslo, will stand still for two minutes as a result of a political strike organized by the Norwegian Locomotive Union and the Oslo Tram Workers Union in protest of the Israeli invasion of Gaza. ? A large selection of Norwegian trade unions and organizations has endorsed a new campaign for the withdrawal of all State investments in Israel. The call is endorsed by so far 6 of the largest national trade unions. ? The Union of Trade and Office Workers calls on all members to ask their employers to remove Israeli products from stores. The union is the by far largest union of workers in all types of private and public stores in Norway. ? The confederation of Norwegian Trade Unions (LO), with apr . 1/5 of the whole Norwegian population as members, condemns the Israeli bombing and invasion in Gaza and calls for demonstrations. ? The Norwegian Church has protested Israels invasion of Gaza and was, according to media, "called to the carpet" by the Israeli embassador. ? 22.000 supports the Facebook-group demanding the embassador to be expelled from Norway. The Facebook-group has got attention in all major newspaper and was hacked by a Zionist hacker-group but is now back on track. ? 31% of Norwegians supports the boycott of Israel, in a survey by the pro-Israel tabloid VG today . The question was politicaly charged "Do you support the Socialist Left's boycott of Israel?" If not mentioning the Socialists the number would probably be much higher. The vast majority in all groups in the survey is against the Israeli invasion of Gaza. From menecraj at shaw.ca Sat Jan 10 09:55:54 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 10:55:54 -0600 Subject: [R-G] UN: IDF officers admitted there was no gunfire from Gaza school which was shelled Message-ID: <36119F36E16A4AB3B6B63CE1F11DDF94@agingCHS072729> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054009.html UN: IDF officers admitted there was no gunfire from Gaza school which was shelled By Barak Ravid and Akiva Eldar, Haaretz Correspondent The United Nations is claiming Israeli military officers have admitted there was no Palestinian gunfire emanating from inside an UNRWA school in Gaza which was shelled by an IDF tank. Dozens of Palestinians were killed in the shelling. In addition, UNRWA Thursday announced it will cease activities in the Strip due to the death of an UNRWA staffer in an IDF shelling during Thursday morning's humanitarian hiatus. UNRWA spokesman Chris Gunness told Haaretz yesterday that the army had conceded wrongdoing. "In briefings senior [Israel Defense Forces] officers conducted for foreign diplomats, they admitted the shelling to which IDF forces in Jabalya were responding did not originate from the school," Gunness said. "The IDF admitted in that briefing that the attack on the UN site was unintentional." He noted that all the footage released by the IDF of militants firing from inside the school was from 2007 and not from the incident itself. "There are no up-to-date photos," Gunness said. "In 2007, we abandoned the site and only then did the militants take it over." The UNRWA is now demanding an objective investigation into whether the school shelling constituted a violation of international humanitarian law, and if so, that those responsible stand trial. The UN reported Thursday that a Palestinian working for the UNRWA was killed by an IDF tank shell while driving an aid truck at the Erez border crossing. The organization claims the UN truck was well-marked and the incident took place during the humanitarian hiatus slated to allow Gaza residents to acquire supplies. ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:53:11 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:53:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] US Senate Unanimously Approves Resolution Backing Israel in Hamas Conflict In-Reply-To: <000801c972d7$1a7e7500$4101a8c0@domain.invalid> Message-ID: <2047895520.1995181231606391547.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> ? ? http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090108/pl_bloomberg/auhdubfcxloe_1/print From shniad at sfu.ca Sat Jan 10 09:53:52 2009 From: shniad at sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:53:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] U.S. seeks to ship hundreds of tons of arms to Israel In-Reply-To: <000a01c972d5$fa86ab60$4101a8c0@domain.invalid> Message-ID: <1379274061.1995211231606432652.JavaMail.root@jaguar8.sfu.ca> w w w . h a a r e t z . c o m ???????????? 10/01/2009 ? U.S. seeks to ship hundreds of tons of arms to Israel ? The United States is seeking to hire a merchant ship to deliver hundreds of tons of arms to Israel from Greece later this month, tender documents seen by Reuters show. ? The U.S. Navy's Military Sealift Command said the ship was to carry 325 standard 20-foot containers of what is listed as "ammunition" on two separate journeys from the Greek port of Astakos to the Israeli port of Ashdod in mid-to-late January. ? A "hazardous material" designation on the manifest mentions explosive substances and detonators, but no other details were given. ? "Shipping 3,000-odd tons of ammunition in one go is a lot," one broker said, on condition of anonymity. ? "This (kind of request) is pretty rare and we haven't seen much of it quoted in the market over the years," he added. ? The U.S. Defense Department, contacted by Reuters on Friday in Washington, had no immediate comment. ? The MSC transports armor and military supplies for the U.S. armed forces aboard its own fleet, but regularly hires merchant ships if logistics so require. ? The request for the ship was made on Dec. 31, with the first leg of the charter to arrive no later than January 25 and the second at the end of the month. ? The tender for the vessel follows the hiring of a commercial ship to carry a much larger consignment of ordnance in December from the United States to Israel ahead of air strikes in the Gaza Strip. ? A German shipping firm which won that tender confirmed the order when contacted by Reuters but declined to comment further. ? Shipping brokers: Charters are 'rare' ? Shipping brokers in London who have specialized in moving arms for the British and U.S. military in the past said such ship charters to Israel were rare. ? Israel is one of America's closest allies and both nations regularly sell arms to each other. ? A senior military analyst in London who declined to be named said that, because of the timing, the shipments could be "irregular" and linked to the Gaza offensive. ? The ship hired by the MSC in December was for a much larger cargo of arms, tender documents showed. ? That stipulated a ship to be chartered for 42 days capable of carrying 989 standard 20-foot containers from Sunny Point, North Carolina to Ashdod. ? The tender document said the vessel had to be capable of "carrying 5.8 million pounds (2.6 million kg) of net explosive weight", which specialist brokers said was a very large quantity. ? The ship was requested early last month to load on December 15. ? In September, the U.S. Congress approved the sale of 1,000 bunker-buster missiles to Israel . The GPS-guided GBU-39 is said to be one of the most accurate bombs in the world. ? Reuters From fentona at shaw.ca Sat Jan 10 10:53:47 2009 From: fentona at shaw.ca (Anthony Fenton) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:53:47 -0800 Subject: [R-G] Gaza, and Israel's Wars of Forced Regime Change Message-ID: <1689C36F-F4FF-4075-A8A0-0A6135F563EB@shaw.ca> MIDEAST: Gaza, and Israel's Wars of Forced Regime Change Analysis by Helena Cobban* http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45352 WASHINGTON, Jan 9 (IPS) - The war that Israel launched on Gaza Dec. 27 is the seventh war of choice Israel has launched against its neighbours since 1973, the last year in which it fought a war that was forced upon it. Of the seven wars one -- in Lebanon, 1978 -- had the goal of establishing an Israeli-controlled "security zone" running inside Lebanon's border with Israel. The other six, including the present war on Gaza, all aimed at imposing a "forced regime change" on Arab communities neighbouring Israel through the violent physical dismantlement of politico-military structures then present in, or on occasion dominating, those societies. The five earlier attempts at forced regime change all had interesting -- and quite unintended -- consequences that might have given Israel's leaders serious pause before they launched the present war. The first of those "forced regime change" (FRC) wars was the one Ariel Sharon, as defence minister, planned and launched against the PLO's structures in Lebanon in 1982. The PLO mounted a spirited defence. But after seven weeks of terrible destruction, pressure from their Lebanese allies forced the PLO leaders to agree to an internationally mediated ceasefire that mandated the evacuation of the entire PLO security force to distant Arab lands. From a military viewpoint, Sharon's war had "worked". But it had two intriguing political-strategic consequences. Regarding Palestine, Palestinians in the occupied territories who previously had waited to be "saved" by PLO forces from outside realised after 1982 that they needed to work for their own liberation. They launched their first intifada against Israel in 1987. In Lebanon, meanwhile, the IDF was left as a badly over-stretched occupation force, unable to counter the emergence of a new, indigenous Islamist- nationalist organisation that hadn't even existed before 1982: Hizbullah. In 1992, Hizbullah's political wing ran in Lebanon's parliamentary election, winning four seats and considerable additional legitimacy in national politics. The next year the IDF launched another FRC war in Lebanon, this time against Hizbullah. That war, the IDF was unable to win. It ended in a fairly fragile -- because unmonitored -- ceasefire. In 1996, Prime Minister Shimon Peres, worried about his chances in an impending Israeli election, ordered the IDF to try again. That FRC war was even less satisfactory for Israel. Hizbullah's resilient military and mass-organisation structures withstood the IDF's repeated attempts to bomb them into either annihilation or submission. The IDF's violence and the mass killings it inflicted proved politically counter-productive to Israel at both the Lebanese and international levels. After some weeks Peres had to agree to a ceasefire resolution in which the subsequent actions of both sides would be subject to international monitoring. The IDF returned to the "security zone" demoralised. (And Peres lost his election.) Regarding Palestine, the first intifada had led to the Oslo Agreement which led to the establishment of a somewhat autonomous "Palestinian Authority" (PA) in the occupied Palestinian territories. Oslo also mandated that negotiations on a final-status Israeli-Palestinian peace would be finished by 1999. As Israel stalled on those key negotiations and continued to plant settlers in the Occupied Territories, Palestinian frustration grew. In September 2000, the second intifada erupted. That eruption was sparked when Ariel Sharon very provocatively entered Jerusalem's holiest Islamic space, the Haram al-Sharif, accompanied by more than 1,000 armed police. By then, Sharon was leader of the opposition Likud Party, despite his earlier exclusion from high office in line with the recommendation of the Kahan Commission regarding his actions in the 1982 war in Lebanon. Elections were getting ever closer in Israel. They were held in February 2001. Likud won, and Sharon became prime minister. In 2002, he ordered Israel's fourth FRC war of the modern era. This one was against the PA's structures in the Occupied Territories -- both the security forces and those delivering social and economic services. Sharon largely succeeded in smashing the PA's infrastructure, but once again the political-strategic consequences proved counter-productive. Hamas, a militant Islamist-national group that Israel had once incubated, had always criticised the PLO for giving away too much in its never-ending peace talks with Israel. Now, with the PLO both incapacitated and humiliated, Hamas saw considerable new growth. In January 2006 it ran for the first time in PA legislative elections -- and won. Sharon had recently suffered a stroke. He was replaced by Ehud Olmert, a much younger figure who seemingly needed to prove his military toughness. In June 2006, Olmert unleashed another FRC war, this one against Lebanon's Hizbullah. Hizbullah withstood that one, too. It, and the whole of Lebanon, suffered badly in 2006. But by the middle of 2008 Hizbullah's political position in Lebanon was stronger than ever. For his part, Olmert was badly damaged politically by the strategic ineptitude he and the IDF displayed in 2006. He clung to office, his power much diminished. At the end of 2008, as foreign minister Tzipi Livni and defence minister Ehud Barak were squaring off to fight each other and Likud's Binyamin Netanyahu in the February 2009 election, the Israeli cabinet decided on Israel's sixth FRC war: this one against Hamas in Gaza. The history of Israel's FRC wars deserves close study. All have been "wars of choice" in that the "unbearable" situations that Israeli leaders have cited, each time, as giving them "no alternative" but to fight can all be seen as having been very amenable to negotiation -- should Israel have chosen that path instead. Also, all these wars were planned in some detail in advance, with the Israeli government just waiting for -- or even, on occasion, provoking -- some action from the other side that they could use as a launch pretext. All have received strong financial, rearming, and political support from the U.S., not least because they were waged in the name of counter-terrorism. But the outcomes are important, too. At a purely military level, the two FRC wars against the PLO were the ones that Israel was able to "win", in terms of being largely able to dismantle the structures it targeted. But the longer term, political-strategic outcomes of both those wars were distinctly counter-productive for Israel since they paved the way for the emergence of much tougher minded and better organised movements. By contrast, Israel was unable to win any of its three FRC wars against Hizbullah. In each, Hizbullah withstood Israel's assault long enough to force it into a ceasefire. All these wars ended up strengthening Hizbullah's position inside Lebanese politics. So how will Israel's current attempt to inflict forced regime change on the Gaza Palestinians work out? If history is a guide, as it is, then this war will bring about either Hamas's dismantling or a ceasefire on terms that will lead to (or at least allow) Hamas's continued political strengthening. A dismantling is unlikely, since Hamas's leadership is located outside Gaza and has links throughout the Arab and Islamic worlds that ensure that annihilation of Hamas in Gaza would have serious global consequences. But if Hamas is dismantled in Gaza, it is most likely to be replaced there -- faster or slower -- by groups that are even more militant and more Islamist than itself. Meantime, the high human costs of the war continue to mount daily. *Helena Cobban is a veteran Middle East analyst and author. She blogs at www.JustWorldNews.org (END/2009) From menecraj at shaw.ca Sat Jan 10 11:31:49 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:31:49 -0600 Subject: [R-G] Maps showing Palestine Land Loss Message-ID: <77F091E5000148AAB92B25CDED1AA0E9@agingCHS072729> I first saw these on the website of Occupation Magazine (http://www.kibush.co.il ), and I grabbed them for a slide show on my website. http://item.slide.com/r/1/60/i/VATlTBWl8gxPAK5MNiOqXw6oVd1TYnxH/ Since 2000 (date of the last map), the apartheid wall has shrunk the original territory of the Palestinians even further. A new map needs to be drawn.... Richard Menec ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sat Jan 10 17:29:10 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 09:29:10 +0900 Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] The 'Chicago Plan' and New Deal Banking Reform Message-ID: <49693D56.4030507@ashisuto.co.jp> by Ronnie J Phillips The Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard College Working Paper No 76 (June 1992) The history of the legislative changes in the financial system which occurred during the 28 months from Franklin D Roosevelt's inauguration in March 1933 until the passage of the Banking Act of 1935 has been well documented [Burns 1974; Kennedy 1973]. This period saw the enactment of the Emergency Banking Act, the Banking Acts of 1933 and 1935, as well as reforms of the stock market and agricultural credit. The existing histories have given us detailed examinations of the political maneuvering involved in the passage of the legislation, but they have neglected the role of the "Chicago Plan" - the 1933 proposal put forward in a series of memoranda by economists at the University of Chicago to abolish the fractional reserve system and impose 100% reserves on demand deposits. The proposal was known to the Roosevelt administration prior to the passage of the Banking Act of 1933 and later led directly to legislation introduced by Senator Bronson Cutting of New Mexico, and other Progressives, as part of the debate over the Banking Act of 1935. The influence of the Chicago Plan was felt even before Irving Fisher's more widely known, and largely unsuccessful, efforts to enlist Roosevelt's support for the 100% reserve plan [Allen 1977, 1991]. The Chicago Plan was a proposal to radically change the structure of our financial system, and as such its best chance of passage was in the period of the early New Deal. The objective of this paper is to document the role of the Chicago Plan in the debates over New Deal banking legislation, and provide an assessment of why the Chicago Plan ultimately lost out to the alternative measures embodied in the Banking Act of 1935. The failure of the Chicago Plan in the 1930s is also of interest in the contemporary debates over banking reform. The Chicago Plan, by restricting bank assets, would not have saddled the taxpayers with an enormous liability from federal deposit insurance. Recently, proposals have been put forward for "narrow" or "core" banks, which restrict bank assets, and embody many of the components of the Chicago Plan [Tobin 1985, 1987; Bryan 1988, 1991]. The Banking Crisis and the March Memorandum The stock market crash of October 1929 was followed one year later by a banking crisis lasting from October to December 1930. As deposits in failed banks rose, a contagion spread to convert demand and time deposits into currency and, to a lesser extent, postal savings deposits [Friedman and Schwartz 1963: 308]. In December, the failure of the Bank of United States, though a private commercial bank, furthered damaged confidence in the banking system [Friedman and Schwartz 1963: 3113. After a brief respite, this was followed by the second banking crisis in March 1931 which peaked in June with $200 million in deposits of suspended banks [Friedman and Schwartz 1963: 314]. In January 1932, President Hoover asked Congress for legislation to reform the banking system. Hoover asked for a strengthening of the Federal Land Bank System, the creation of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, the creation of Home Loan Discount Banks, an enlargement of the discount privileges of the Federal Reserve Banks, and a plan to safeguard depositors and a swifter means of paying off those who held deposits in closed banks [Krooss 1969: 2670-2671]. During the same month, the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) was created and authorized to loan to banks and railroads [Friedman and Schwartz 1963: 321]. The Glass-Steagall Act, passed on February 27 1932, allowed the Federal Reserve to hold government securities against Federal Reserve notes and widened the circumstances under which member banks could borrow from the Fed [Friedman and Schwartz 1963: 321]. In July 1932, the Federal Home Loan Bank Act, which attempted to respond to the problems of home mortgage financing institutions by allowing advances to be made to those institutions on the basis of first mortgages, was passed [Friedman and Schwartz 1963: 321-322]. The only piece of legislation which did not pass was a bill for temporary deposit insurance introduced in May by Congressman Henry Steagall, which was not reported out of committee [Friedman and Schwartz 1963: 321]. In January 1933, the RFC made public the list of financial institutions that it had loaned to (Hoover had insisted they not be public). One state (Nevada) had already declared a banking holiday in October 1932, and was followed by Iowa in January, Louisiana and Michigan in February, and by March 3rd, there were bank holidays declared in about half the states. The pressure intensified on the New York banks and on March 4th, a banking holiday was declared in New York state [Friedman and Schwartz 1963: 324-327]. When Roosevelt came into office, he faced a myriad of problems related to the economy. Farmers, workers, bankers, politicians, were all demanding action. On the financial front, there were three critical issues which had to be dealt with: (1) the safety of the medium of exchange; (2) the financing of the capital development of the economy; and (3) the control of money and credit by the Federal Reserve. In response to the widespread bank holidays which had already been declared by many states, Franklin Roosevelt's first act as President was to declare a national bank holiday for the period March 4-9 1933. In his inaugural address, Roosevelt, referring to the financial collapse, stated that "The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization" [Schlesinger 1957: 7; Tugwell 1957: 289]. Despite the eloquent rhetoric against bankers, Helen Burns observed, Roosevelt never definitively set forth his own views own banking [Burns 1974: 183]. {1} Roosevelt was against federal deposit insurance, at least when he took office. During his first press conference he was asked to comment on federal deposit insurance and he did so, but asked that his remarks be kept off the record. Roosevelt said of federal deposit insurance: The general underlying thought behind the use of the word 'guarantee' with respect to bank deposits is that you guarantee bad banks as well as good banks. The minute the Government starts to do that the Government runs into a probable loss ... We do not wish to make the United States Government liable for the mistakes and errors of individual banks, and put a premium on unsound banking in the future [Roosevelt 1939: 37]. {1} During the period of the banking holiday, Roosevelt proposed to his advisors a plan for converting all government bonds ($21 billion at the time) directly into cash at par. His advisors thought it would be a disaster, but Roosevelt told them to come up with an alternative. Also discussed was the issuing of script or a direct printing of Federal Reserve Notes to provide the banks with enough cash to meet withdrawal demands. This plans were not needed because at the end of the bank holiday, widespread runs had ended [Burns 1974: 45]. Roosevelt's concern over the plight of debtors, especially farmers, was also evident. Writing a few months later to his Secretary of Treasury William Woodin, Roosevelt blasted the bankers and economists for their neglect of the problem: I wish our banking and economists friends would realize the seriousness of the situation from the point of view of the debtor classes, - ie, ninety per cent of the human beings in this country - and think less from the point of view of the ten per cent who constitute the creditor classes [Roosevelt to Woodin, September 30 1933]. The Emergency Banking Act, which was passed in less than an hour, did not provide any permanent solutions to the problem, it only gave the Congress and the President a breathing spell in which to formulate a plan. During his first fireside chat that Roosevelt explained his reasons for closing the banks and announced their reopening. It is a tribute to Roosevelt's charisma that when the banks reopened on Monday, March 13th, the runs had virtually ended. Walter Lippmann remarked that "In one week, the nation, which had lost confidence in everything and everybody, has regained confidence in the government and in itself" [Schlesinger 1958: 13]. Raymond Moley, one of the original Brain Trusters wrote: "Capitalism was saved in eight days" [Moley 1939: 155]. In is within this historical context that economists at the University of Chicago presented their proposal for reform of the banking system. The six page memorandum on banking reform which was given limited and confidential distribution to about forty individuals on March 16 1933 [Knight 1933]. A copy of the memorandum was sent to Henry A Wallace, then Secretary of Agriculture, with a cover letter signed by Frank Knight. The letter listed the following supporters of the plan: F H Knight, L W Mints, Henry Schultz, H C Simons, G V Cox, Aaron Director, Paul Douglas, and A G Hart.{2} The authors anticipated skepticism about their plan as evidenced by a typed postscript which stated: "We hope you are one of the forty odd who get this who will not think we are quite looney (sic), I think Viner really agrees but doesn't believe it good politics". {2} After the passage of the Glass-Steagall bill in February 1932, there were two other proposals on the legislative agenda intended to stimulate the economy. The first was an amendment by Wright Patman to pay the remaining portion of the veterans' bonus in the form of a direct issue of $2.4 billion in fiat currency. The second was the Goldsborough Bill which would direct the Federal Reserve to take appropriate actions to raise the price level [Barber 1985: 155]. In mid-April, Congressman Samuel B Pettengill solicited responses to the Patman proposal from leading economists. Twelve members of the economics faculty at the University of Chicago responded in a lengthy statement which advocated federal expenditures financed by deficit spending, unless the gold standard could be abandoned and a direct issue of currency could be utilized to increase purchasing power. The document included concerns about the role of credit and price in flexibility in the economy [Barber 1985: 156-157]. A group of eleven Chicago economists signed a memoranda in January 1933 which advocated deficit spending as a way out of the depression [Schlesinger 1960: 237]. The proposal opens with the statement: "It is evident that drastic measures must soon be taken with reference to banking, currency, and federal fiscal policy". The general recommendations were: (a) federal guarantee of deposits; (b) the guarantee only be taken as part of a drastic program of banking reform which will certainly and permanently prevent any possible recurrence of the present banking crisis; and (c) the Administration announce and pursue a policy of bringing about, and maintaining a moderate increase in the level of wholesale prices, not to exceed fifteen per cent [Knight 1933: 1]. The detailed suggestions advocated outright ownership of the Federal Reserve Banks; the guarantee of the deposits of member banks which were open for business March 3rd 1933 but subject to full supervisory control over the management of these banks by the Fed. They advocated the issue of Federal Reserve Notes, which should be declared legal tender, in any amounts which may be necessary to meet demands for payment by depositors. Further, the Federal Reserve Banks should liquidate the assets of all member banks, pay off liabilities, and dissolve all existing banks and new institutions should be created which accepted only demand deposits subject to a 100% reserve requirement in lawful money and/or deposits with the Reserve Banks. Saving deposits would be handled through the incorporation of investment trusts. Present banking institutions would continue deposit and lending functions under Federal Reserve supervision until the new institutions can be put into place. The government should then undertake to raise the price level by fifteen per cent by fiscal and currency means but further inflation (beyond fifteen per cent) be prevented. Finally, there should be suspension of free-coinage of gold, embargo upon gold import, prohibition of private export of gold, call in all gold coins in exchange for Federal Reserve notes, suspension of the gold-clause in all debt contracts, and substantial government sale and export of gold abroad [Knight 1933]. Henry Wallace, then Secretary of Agriculture, gave the Chicago Plan to Roosevelt less than a week after it was distributed. Wallace hoped FDR would give the plan serious consideration, though the plan was a radical break with the past. Wallace wrote to Roosevelt: The memorandum from the Chicago economists which I gave you at [the] Cabinet meeting Tuesday, is really awfully good and I hope that you or Secretary Woodin will have the time and energy to study it. Of course the plan outlined is quite a complete break with our present banking history. It would be an even more decisive break than the founding of the Federal Reserve System [Wallace to Roosevelt, March 23 1933]. Though Roosevelt's views on the Chicago Plan are unknown, the plan addressed his concerns of deposit safety, the separation of investment and commercial banking, and reflation. it also provided an alternative to those who advocated branch banking, which Roosevelt was very much against because he thought it would mean domination of the small banks by the larger banks. The recommendation for deposit insurance was that it only be a temporary measure as part of permanent reform. During the first 100 days of the Roosevelt administration, numerous measures were passed to deal with the economic situation, and especially the crisis of the banking system and agricultural. On March 20, the Economy Act was passed; on March 31, the Civilian Conservation Corp was created; and on April 19, the US went off the gold standard. These measures were followed by the sweeping reforms of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) in May which sought to raise agriculture prices through output restrictions. An amendment to the AAA gave the President the power to issue greenbacks and to monetize gold [Schlesinger 1958: 199-200]. Congress also passed the Emergency Farm Mortgage Act in May which provided for the refinancing of farm mortgages. The month of June saw the passage of the Home Owners's Loan Act, providing for the refinancing of home mortgages, the National Industrial Recovery Act (which included a public works program), the Farm Credit Act, the joint resolution by Congress to suspend the gold standard and abrogate the gold clause, and perhaps most importantly, the Banking Act of 1933, which separated investment and commercial banking, established temporary federal deposit insurance, and made an official body the previously informal Federal Open Market Committee. Thus by June, many of the proposals contained in the March memoranda had been enacted. Though there was a separation of commercial and investment banking, 100% reserve deposit banks had not been created. Federal Reserve notes had not been declared legal tender, and though liberalized, the Federal Reserve still did not have full use of its policy tools to affect monetary aggregates. The Fed had long had the discount rate, though it could vary regionally, and now as a result of the Thomas Amendment to the AAA, the suspension of the gold standard, and the Banking Act of 1933, it could issue Federal Reserve notes. However, the Fed was not yet totally free to set reserve requirements. Though Roosevelt had opposed deposit insurance, there was strong support for it within Congress and the general public. As Carter Golembe has argued, federal deposit insurance was neither requested nor supported by the Roosevelt administration. Deposit insurance was purely a creation of Congress where for nearly fifty years there had been attempts to introduce it. Its adoption in 1933 was, according to Golembe, due to a uniting of two groups: those that wished to end the destruction of circulating medium due to bank failures and those who sought to preserve the existing bank structure [Golembe 1960: 182]. Deposits up to $2,500 were insured 100%, up to $5,000 insured 75%, and over $10,000, fifty per cent. There was also widespread support for the separation of commercial and investment banking because it was believed that bankers had speculated with depositors' funds in the stock market, and when the stock market speculation spree ended, many banks became insolvent. The separation of investment and commercial banking was supported by prominent bankers such as Winthrop Aldrich [Leuchtenburg 1963: 60]. The two proposals, for federal insurance and separation of commercial and investment banking, were linked in the Banking Act of 1933. The linking of these two reforms is vital in the understanding of the subsequent evolution of the debates and reforms. Though they became identified as administration measures, the crisis nature of 1933, and the support of a new administration, merely facilitated their passage. Deposit insurance made banks "safe" not by direct restrictions on their assets, but rather by the promise that the government would guarantee all banks, both good and bad. The separation of commercial and investment banking removed some abuses resulting from the use of depositors' funds in stock market speculations, but it did not address directly the issue of financing for the capital development of the economy. On passage of the Act, J P Morgan predicted that the separation would have dire effects on his firm's ability to supply capital "for the development of the country" [Schlesinger 1958: 443]. William O Douglas observed that the Act was a nineteenth century piece of legislation which ignored the need the problem of capital structure and the need to manage investment [Schlesinger 1958: 445]. While it is true that the RFC had undertaken the role of providing capital funds for industry, the banking legislation attempted to restore credit availability by restoring confidence in the medium of exchange, and therefore an increase in bank deposits. The Banking Act of 1933 attempted to kill two birds with one stone. Though it succeeded in stopping bank runs, the fractional reserve nature of the banking system, coupled with a lack of power on the part of the Federal Reserve Board, effectively undermined the ability of the financial system to supply adequate investment funds. In 1929, the ratio of loans to total assets for all commercial banks was 58%. By 1934, that ratio had fallen to 38%, as total bank assets began increasing after falling steadily from 1929 to 1933. This was also in spite of the fact that total bank failures went from 4,000 in 1933 to 61 in 1934. Clearly, though bank numbers were increasing and total assets were increasing, bank loans remained at about the same level from 1933 to 1936. The economy was in a credit crunch. In late October 1933, Roosevelt began the gold purchase program, operating through the RFC, in an attempt to raise agricultural prices through the purchase of domestically held gold. According to Arthur Schlesinger, the gold-purchase program set the financial community in an uproar and the result was a national debate over monetary policy that had not been seen since the William Jennings Bryan campaign of 1896 [Schlesinger 1958: 244-245]. With the 73rd Congress meeting for a second session, it was clear that 1934 was to be the decisive year for debate on monetary reform. However, after the introduction of deposit insurance, bank failures dropped from 4,000 in 1933 to 61 in 1934. Federal deposit insurance was a program which had worked to restore to confidence in the banking system and assured little opposition to the establishment of permanent deposit insurance. Though much had been accomplished by November 1933, the central problem which remained was the Federal Reserve's ability to use all means available to it to affect monetary aggregates. In order to do this, changes would have to be made to the Federal Reserve Act which would restrict the power of individual Reserve Banks, especially New York, while strengthening the power of the Federal Reserve Board in Washington. This was the focus of the November Chicago memoranda, and it was to become the crucial issue in the Banking Act of 1935. The November 1933 Memoranda During the period March to November, the Chicago economists received comments from a number of individuals on their proposal and in November 1933 another memorandum was prepared. {3} The memorandum was expanded to thirteen pages, there was a supplementary memorandum on "Long-time Objectives of Monetary Management" (seven pages) and an appendix titled "Banking and Business Cycles" (six pages). Though signed by the same group of economists, this document was evidently written by Henry Simons. {4} The proposal began by noting that government had failed in its primary function of controlling currency by allowing banks to usurp this power. Such "free banking" in deposit creation "gives us an unreliable and inhomogeneous medium; and it gives us a regulation or manipulation of currency which is totally perverse". What was necessary was a "complete reorientation of our thinking and a redefinition of the objectives of reform". [Simons 1933:1] The solution was the "outright abolition of deposit banking on the fractional-reserve principle". [Simons 1933: 2] {3} In April Simons circulated a revised version of the last three pages of the March proposal. This material was later expanded and used in the November version. {4} In a letter to Paul Douglas, Simons wrote: The memorandum, as I consider it now, has so many faults that there should be no quarrels over "proprietorship". Actually I did write the thing alone; but it would never have been written except for my conversations with other people, Mr Director especially; and it never would have been circulated without favorable critical reports from yourself and the other members of the group. So, what is uniquely my own is merely the phrasing [Simons to Paul Douglas, October 2 1934]. The proposal included many of the items in March reform: (i) Federal ownership of the Federal Reserve Banks; (ii) exclusive Congressional powers to grant charters for deposit banking; (iii) suspension of all powers of existing corporations to engage in deposit banking within two years; (iv) creation of a new type of deposit bank with 100% reserves in the form of notes and deposits at the Federal Reserve Banks; (v) abolition of reserve requirements for Federal Reserve Banks; (vi) replacement of private-bank credit with Federal Reserve bank credit over a two- year transition period; and restricting currency to only Federal Reserve notes. However, they went on to add: (vii) enacting a simple rule of monetary policy; (viii) and achievement of a price-level specified by Congress. There is no mention of federal deposit insurance which had already gone into effect in June. As before, the plan would displace existing commercial banks by two types of institutions: deposit banks and investment trusts. If private companies failed to provide new deposits, then government through the extension of a postal savings system could offer such deposits. [Simons 1933: 6] Investment trust banks would acquire funds exclusively by sale of their own securities, thereby limiting-their lending capacity to the funds so obtained. Investment trust banks would provide a service by bringing borrowers and lenders together, and could therefor charge for this service. [Simons 1933: 7] The memorandum also evaluated a return to the gold standard (which was rejected unless it was a 100% gold standard) and various rules to guide monetary policy, including price-level stabilization. [Simons 1933: 8-11] The proposal noted that a monetary rule which set money supply growth could be carried out by conversion of interest-bearing federal debt into non-interest bearing debt, open market operations by the Reserve banks, an increase in federal expenditures, or a reduction in federal taxes. [Simons 1933: 12] In summary, the memoranda stated that the Federal Reserve Act had faulty objectives because commercial paper offered no real liquidity, and that the answer lay in the abolition of fractional reserve banking, so that a reconstituted Federal Reserve would have precise power over the money supply. However, monetary management was not to be discretionary, but subject to definite rules laid down by Congress. This version of the proposal which was given to Gardiner C Means, who worked for Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, Rexford G Tugwell. Means's responded to the Chicago Plan in a three page, single spaced memo [Means, "Comment", C1933]. Given the Administration's concern over the relationship between farmers and bankers, it is no surprise that the Agriculture Department would be interested in monetary reform. Mean's praised the Chicago memorandum's primary objective of placing control of the monetary medium in the exclusive hands of government, and the method by which the transition would be effected [Means 1933: 1]. He thought the Chicago proposal provided a "relatively simple and direct method of dealing with the deposits aspect of our banking system", though it would likely be opposed by bankers [Means 1933: 2]. Means's only disagreements with the plan was that he would allow the Federal Reserve banks to purchase high grade commercial paper in order to establish 100% reserves, and Means argued that monetary policy should be discretionary, and not subject to a rule [Means 1933: 3]. It is interesting that the Chicago proposal had found greatest favor with Rexford Tugwell (who advocated a similar scheme to expand the postal savings system) and Gardiner Means, both institutional economists and planners. With the onset of severe erosion problems in a number of western states in 1934, Agriculture Department attention focused on the immediate concerns of conservation. As output fell prices of agricultural products rose, thus further easing financial pressures on farmers. Between 1932 and 1936, gross farm income increased fifty per cent, and cash receipts from marketing, including government payments, nearly doubled. The relative price of agricultural products rose as farm debt decreased dramatically. Thus at a time when the economy was still experiencing high unemployment, agriculture was beginning to recover [Schlesinger 1958: 71] In January 1934, Roosevelt sent a message to Congress asking for legislation to organize a sound and adequate currency system. Roosevelt requested that Congress enact legislation to vest in the United States Government sole title to all American owned monetary gold and "other monetary matters [which] would add to the convenience of handling current problems in this field". FDR furthered indicated that the Secretary of the Treasury was prepared to submit information concerning changes to the appropriate committees of the Congress [Krooss 1969: 2791]. It was soon after FDR's address to Congress that there was direct involvement by the Chicago group in the drafting of legislation to enact the Chicago Plan for banking reform. Legislating the Chicago Plan Robert M Hutchins, the President of the University of Chicago, mailed a copy of the November Chicago Plan to Senator Bronson Cutting of New Mexico in December 1933. Cutting was a progressive Republican in the mode of Robert LaFollette, Sr He was highly critical of the role of private bankers in the economy and an advocate of greater government involvement in banking and credit and national planning. As Schlesinger has noted, this emphasis on planning and the role of government was very much in line with New Dealer's such as Tugwell, Means, Adolph Berle, and others [Schlesinger 1960: 389-391]. Cutting was one of the radicals in the Senate, mostly old Progressives, which included: George Norris, Robert La Follette, and Gerald P Nye, all Republicans, and Democrats Burton K Wheeler of Montana, Edward P Costigan of Colorado and Homer Bone of Washington, all of whom started as Progressive Republicans [Schlesinger 1960: 134-5]. Cutting was quite interested in the Chicago proposal and largely in agreement. He replied to Hutchins: I may say at once that I agree decidedly with most of the views expressed by the members of your faculty. I wonder if any of them has considered the idea of drafting a bill embodying their views? I suspect that Bob La Follette would be as much interested in this matter as I am, and if we could get a draft in tangible shape, it would at least give us something to shoot at [Cutting to Hutchins, December 15 1933]. Hutchins replied "we'll set to work drafting a bill" [Hutchins to Cutting, December 22 1933], however, in March 1934, Cutting wired Hutchins inquiring about the status of the proposed bill [Cutting to Hutchins, March 7 1934]. As a result, Henry Simons traveled to Washington and met with Cutting on March 16 to discuss the essential features of a bill [Simons to Cutting, March 10 1934; Cutting to Simons, March 14 1934]. Simons did not feel that he was qualified to draft an entire bill since he would not be familiar with many of its technical features. His outline for a bill was given to Cutting and Senator Robert La Follette, Jr. The actual bill was written by Robert H Hemphill, a writer for the Hearst newspapers. {5} To kick off the campaign for his bill, Cutting published an article in the March 31 1934 issue of Liberty magazine entitled "Is Private Banking Doomed?" Cutting's answer, of course, was that it was doomed by the New Deal because government should control money and credit, without the interference of private banks. Cutting remarked that unless the administration introduced such legislation to deprive private bankers of this power, that he would introduce such a measure [Cutting 1934: 10]. Banks could remain, in Cutting's view, if they held 100% reserves against deposits, but they would not be allowed to create credit. Cutting expected a battle against the bankers would not be easy, and lamented FDR's failure to nationalize the banks in March 1933. Cutting wrote: The fight against the abolition of the credit power of private banks will be a savage one, for their power as a unit is without equal in the country. Knowing this is why I think back to the events of March 4 1933, with a sick heart. For then, with even the bankers thinking the whole economic system had crashed to ruin, the nationalization of banks by President Roosevelt could have been accomplished without a word of protest. It was President Roosevelt's great mistake. Now the bankers will make a mighty struggle [Cutting 1934: 12]. {5} "While in Washington, I prepared for Senators Cutting and LaFollette a rough outline of some features of a possible bill. I am enclosing a copy of this outline - although it is too crude for critical examination." [Simons to Irving Fisher, March 29 1934] In a later letter to Fisher, Simons wrote: "The Cutting Bill, for present purposes at least, is much better than I had anticipated. It was written by Robert Hemphill, of the Hearst staff and formerly with the Richmond (?) Reserve Bank." [Simons to Fisher, July 4 1934]. Simons reluctance to become more involved in the legislative battle apparently reflected his growing reservations about "crucial details of the scheme as I had outlined it" [Simons to Frank Taussig, November 12 1934]. On May 19 1934, Senator Cutting gave a speech to the People's Lobby in which he announced his intention to introduce a bill to create a national bank which would have a monopoly of credit and that private bankers should not make profits from credit. Cutting was quoted as saying: The bankers are collecting tribute from the community on the community's credit ... Commercial banking and issuing of credit should be exclusively a government function. Private financiers are not entitled to any profit on credit [New York Times, May 20 1934, 32:1]. Business Week, noting that radical ideas for banking reform were receiving wide support, wrote in reference to Cutting's remarks: The fact that the more radical opinions are so widespread as to be reflected in the House indicates that the banks have not resold themselves to the public ... But unless the banks convince the people the present system is best or unless business picks up markedly by the start of 1935, Congress may go beyond the small changes of the deposits insurance bill and alter the whole banking setup - despite the anguished wails of established banks. [Business Week, June 2 1934, page 27] The bill, S 3744, was introduced by Cutting and Congressman Wright Patman of Texas (HR 9855) on June 6 1934 and had as its stated objective to "provide an adequate and stable monetary system; to prevent bank failures; to prevent uncontrolled inflation; to prevent depressions; to provide a system to control the price of commodities and the purchasing power of money; to restore normal prosperity and assure its continuance". [US Congress 1934] To achieve these goals, the bill proposed to (1) segregate demand from savings deposits; (2) require the banks to keep 100% reserves against their demand deposits; (3) require them to keep 5% reserves against their savings deposits; (4) set up a Federal Monetary Authority with full control over the supply of currency, the buying and selling of government securities, the gold price of the dollar; (5) have the FMA take over enough of the bonds of the banks to provide 100% reserve against their demand deposits; and (6) have the FMA raise the price level to its 1926 position and keep it there by buying and selling government bonds. {6} As a consequence of this bill, the only money that would exist would be either currency issued by the Federal Monetary Authority, or in demand deposits backed 100% by lawful money (gold) or government securities. The legislative bill would retain squarely within the federal government the power given to it in the Constitution to create money and maintain its value. This bill would also achieve the other long-run New Deal objectives of raising the price level and to strengthen government's influence on economic activity, in this case, through monetary policy. {6} For favorable comments on the bill from Canada, see S H Abramson "A Proposal for Banking Reform", The Canadian Forum, October 1934. Cutting, who shared Roosevelt's background as a graduate of Groton and Harvard, and should have been a natural political ally, had alienated Roosevelt over the issue of payment of the veteran's pensions. Cutting had worked hard against Roosevelt's attempt to reduce veterans' pensions [Schlesinger 1960: 140]. Whether warranted or not, Roosevelt personally disliked Cutting, who was the only Progressive that Roosevelt failed to endorse for reelection in 1934. There is little doubt that the animosity between Roosevelt and Cutting would mean little likelihood of administration support for Cutting's bill. It is also clear that Cutting did not view the measure as one that would be politically acceptable at the time, but it would help set the agenda. He wrote: The bill which I introduced is merely tentative, and there is no intention of pressing it at the present session, when, you will understand, passage would be impossible. I introduced it largely as a target for criticisms and suggestions, such as yours [Cutting to E W Mason, June 16 1934]. Robert Hemphill, who drafted the bill, was convinced that the 100% reserve plan was the only real solution. In an article in the November 1934, Magazine of Wall Street, he stated that he knew of no valid argument against the Cutting bill's reforms and in fact believed that they were inevitable [Hemphill 1934: page 109]. Hemphill was optimistic that the bill he had drafted for Cutting would play an important role in the debates on banking reform and intended to garner wide support for the plan. He wrote of its importance to Cutting: I have a hunch this bill is going to inaugurate a prolonged battle which you will finally win, and I regard this legislation as the most important that has been offered in a century ... I am going to use every effort and every avenue, and believe we can assemble a very powerful and influential group behind this legislation. I am going to cable Mr Hearst, and am sure he will get right in behind the movement, and am also going to keep closely in touch with the Treasury and the study they propose to make of this guestion this summer [Hemphill to Cutting, June 7 1934]. Hemphill's reference to the forthcoming Treasury study undoubtedly reflected his view that the 100% reserve plan would be given serious consideration. The studies undertaken during the summer and fall of 1934 by the Treasury formed the backbone research for the Administration's version of the Banking Act of 1935. The studies were undertaken in a context that sweeping reform of the system, especially the Federal Reserve, was necessary and politically possible for the next Congressional session. The November election results were very favorable to the New Deal and FDR was in a strong position to complete the overhauling of the banking system. Cutting's bill served to put the Roosevelt administration on notice that there were those in Congress prepared to take drastic and extreme measures if the administration's reforms did not go far enough toward complete government control of money and credit. The goal of the bill was to correct the shortcomings of the Banking Act of 1933. The Act had not addressed the problem of the availability of credit, nor had it dealt with the issue of the Federal Reserve's control over the money supply. The Cutting bill sought to make both the money supply and credit availability subject to government control. In 1934, the New York Fed, and therefore the New York banks, still held substantial power with respect to monetary policy [Schlesinger 1960: 293]. Though the price level was rising in 1933-34, it was still about thirty to forty per cent below the 1926 level. In October 1934 Roosevelt made a speech to the bankers convention imploring them to aid the recovery and begin making loans (FDR Public Papers, pages 435-440, speech October 24 1934). There was clearly more to be done with respect to banking reform in 1935. The Banking Act of 1935 According to Rexford G Tugwell, an original member of FDR's Brain Trust, the objectives for banking reform as they developed within the New Deal were: (1) making deposits safe; (2) separating deposits from investments so that bankers could not speculate with the depositors' funds; (3) to raise and stabilize the price level; and (4) to strengthen central management so that governmental influence could be brought to bear on business activity [Tugwell 1957: 368]. As already discussed, the Banking Act of 1933 addressed the first two objectives: deposit safety and separation of deposit and investment banking. The remaining goals were interconnected: centralize control of the monetary policy in Washington, and undertake an expansionary policy to raise the price level. As the legislative battle unfolded, the administration found itself between the radicals and the Progressives who wanted complete centralization and government control of money and credit, and Carter Glass, one of the architects of the Federal Reserve Act, who was against any changes in the Act. The Administration strategy for the final phase of banking reform began with studies directed under Jacob Viner. William Woodin was Roosevelt's first Secretary of the Treasury, but when he resigned for health reasons in November 1933, Roosevelt nominated an old friend, Henry Morgenthau, to take his place. The appointment was confirmed in January 1934, and soon afterward Morgenthau suggested to Jacob Viner, who was a special assistant to the Secretary, that he assemble a group of the best minds he could find in monetary, banking, and public finance, to see what they could come up with. {7} {7} Albert G Hart in a letter to Henry Simons encouraging wide distribution in government of the Chicago proposal, noted: "Viner complained to us this summer that before he went there (Treasury) he was deluged with circulars on policy, but that there seemed to be a tabu among economists against writing on policy to people who might conceivably be in positions of some power" [Albert Hart to Henry Simons, December 9 1934]. The group would include Viner, four senior staff, four junior research staff, and clerical and secretarial staff. On June 27 1934, Secretary Morgenthau announced that the Treasury was undertaking a number of studies in preparation for next year's legislative program in the areas of currency and banking and taxation and revenue [Treasury Department Press Release, June 27th 1934]. Those temporarily employed by the Treasury to work on the Monetary and Banking Survey studies were: Lauchlin Currie, Harry D. White, Albert G Hart, Benjamin Caplan, Virginius F Coe, and Edward C Simmons. {8} It is important to note, that two of this group, Currie and Hart were already known advocates of the 100% reserve plan, while Viner appears to have been at least strongly sympathetic. {8} The reports were: Edward C Simmons, "The Currency System"; Benjamin Caplan, "Branch Banking"; A G Hart, "Federal Credit Institutions"; Lauchlin Currie, "Monetary Control in the United States" and "Deposit Insurance"; Alan R Sweezy, "Objectives and Criteria of Monetary Policy"; H D White, "Selection of a Monetary Standard for the United States"; and H W Riley, "Bank Examinations and Bank Reports". [Mrs Belsley to Mr Viner, Inter Office Communication, Department of Treasury, December 20 1934, FDR Library, Morgenthau Papers, Correspondence, Box 301, File Viner 1933-34] In his book, The Supply and Control of Money in the United States (1934), Currie presented a model of the money supply mechanism in which the major source of variation in the money supply was the level of excess reserves, while the Federal Reserve's primary means of control of the money supply was the level of required reserves [Steindl 1992: 452-3]. At the time Currie wrote, the Federal Reserve did not have the power to change reserve requirements. The Federal Reserve actions were firmly grounded in the "real bills doctrine". The Fed was allowed to discount only real bills, and thus its monetary policy was pro-cyclical. Currie saw this as a major limiting factor in effective monetary control. Currie then went on to discuss the "ideal conditions" for monetary, control which he argued was a system with 100% reserve requirements on demand deposits. {9} In a footnote in his book, Currie stated that Albert Hart had brought the Chicago proposal to his attention after the book had gone to press [Currie 1968: 156]. {9} In his book The Supply and Control of Money in the United States, and stated in a footnote that he learned of the Chicago proposal after he had written his book [Currie 1934: 156]. Simons greatly admired Currie's book on the supply of money and reviewed it in the Journal of Political Economy. In a letter from Simons to Fisher, Simons says: "I'm interested in your mentioning the Currie book. It's the only book on banking, and almost the only decent book in American economics, which makes me genuinely envious of the author for having written it." [Simons to Fisher, November 9 1934] In September 1934, Lauchlin Currie submitted a comprehensive proposal for monetary reform to the Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau. The fundamental faulty working of the monetary system Currie attributed to the unsatisfactory nature of the compromise between private creation of money with governmental control [Currie 1968: 197]. Currie did not provide an elaborate theoretical rationale, as the Chicago economists had in their appendix on "Banking and Business Cycles", but rather noted that the monetary system had been acting as a "maladjustment-intensifying factor" due to the "unsatisfactory nature of the compromise of private creation of money with government control" [Currie 1968: 197]. Currie proposed that the reserve ratio for checkable deposits be 100%, for non-checkable deposits 0%, and an end to interbank deposits unless subject to 100% reserves. During the transition to the new system, Currie sought to insure that banks would not see a loss of income with the increase in the reserve reguirements. When the new policy was announced, banks would initially meet the 100% requirement with a non-interest bearing note from the Reserve banks. This note might be left outstanding indefinitely, or only retired upon suspension or merging of the bank. Alternatively, the debt might be retired over a period of time from five to twenty years by the member banks turning over to the reserve banks Government bonds. [Currie 1968: ZOO-2013] Any excess reserves held at the time of the imposition of 100% reserves may be loaned out, but there will be no multiplier effect because of the 100% reserve requirement. [Currie 1968: 202] Assuming the reserve ratio was initially fifteen per cent, once the 100% reserve policy goes into effect, a typical balance sheet might look as follows: ASSETS: Required Reserves.......100 Excess Reserves...........0 Loans....................85 LIABILITIES: Checkable Deposits......100 Note payable to Fed......85 There would be no impact on the current earning capacity of the bank, nor would there be a significant increase in expenses, since the note payable to the Fed would be non-interest bearing and with negligible transactions costs. However, if banks experienced an increase in deposits, say in the amount of ten, then under 100% reserves, they could not acquire any earning assets. Currie proposed that under these circumstances banks be paid interest on that portion of the addition to reserves that could have been loaned out under the fractional reserve system. Thus for example, if deposits increased by ten, Currie would propose that interest be paid to the banks by the Reserve banks on 8.5 of the addition to reserves. The interest rate paid would be that on specified government bonds. [Currie 1968: 202] Of course, if deposits declined, then the process is reversed and banks would pay the Reserve banks a comparable amount. If it is decided that banks must repay the Fed loans made at the time of the implementation of the 100% reserve system, the interest earned on those bonds would be paid to the commercial banks. Again, there would be no impact on the current income/expense situation of the bank. However, once those initial loans are repaid, banks could no longer acquire earning assets by selling checkable deposits. As a final policy recommendation, Currie proposed that banks be allowed to make service charges for their checkable accounts to avoid incurring a loss. [Currie 1968: 204] In the event that the implementation of the 100% reserve plan created a shortage of loanable funds in a particular area, then the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) would be empowered to subscribe to the capital of local loaning agencies, to make secured loans, or to establish loaning agencies [Currie 1968: 219]. Currie's views are important, because he was soon to become intimately involved with drafting the administration version of the Banking Act of 1935. The key figure in the administration's strategy for banking reform in 1935 was Marriner Eccles, a Morman banker who had impressed Tugwell and Henry Morgenthau, and had been brought to Washington in early 1934 to work in the Treasury Department. It was Morgenthau who suggested to Roosevelt that Eccles who [sic] be the perfect choice as the head of a restructured Federal Reserve System. Eccles agreed to take the job if certain changes were made to enhance the power of the Federal Reserve Board and therefore reduce the power of the regional banks. Roosevelt agreed and Eccles, along with Lauchlin Currie, prepared a memorandum for Roosevelt with their desirable reforms in the Federal Reserve System [Eccles 1951: 166]. The central concern of the memorandum was the Federal Reserve's ability to monetary aggregates, precisely the problems Currie had addressed in his book. Eccles are shared the view that the real bills constraint on the Federal Reserve was absolutely the crucial constraint on any attempt to undertake an appropriate monetary policy. The memorandum was drafted by Currie and generally reflected his views on the problems of controlling the money supply. Sandilands notes that one point was added by Eccles that he considered important, but Currie was less interested in. Eccles thought that an extension of bank assets available for rediscount by the Fed was vital. This point boiled down to the substitution of "sound assets" for the Federal Reserve Act's "eligible paper". The significance of this is that it would allow banks to continue making long term loans, but at the same time provide some incentive to assure the quality of those loans since such loans could potentially be available for rediscount in the event of a run on the bank [Eccles 1951: 173; Sandilands 1990: 63]. Though Eccles appointment was announced in late 1934, he was not confirmed until April 1935. Roosevelt, in selecting Eccles, had not conferred with Carter Glass, Chairman of the Senate banking committee. Glass was a powerful senator and a Jacksonian Democrat who feared increased centralization of government. Glass held up the confirmation of Eccles and in the end was not present when the Committee voted to confirm him and Glass was lone dissenting vote when the matter was voted on by the entire Senate. The sometimes strained and confrontational relationship between Eccles and Glass undoubtedly had an impact on the ability of the administration to get its bill passed. Eccles himself recognized this in his memoirs [Eccles 1951: 177-181; Schlesinger 1960: 291-301]. With the Eccles and Currie move to the Federal Reserve in late 1934, the impetus for banking reform shifted to the Federal Reserve. A Legislative Committee was formed composed of E A Goldenweiser, Chester Morrill, Walter Wyatt, and Lauchlin Currie. The plan of action was to have the Committee's report sent to the Federal Reserve Board, to the FDIC, the Comptroller of the Currency, to Morgenthau at Treasury, to Roosevelt, and finally presented in Congress [Eccles 1951: 193]. Eccles, though respected by bankers and businessman, had never been to college and found it difficult to formalize his ideas in writing. Currie, on the other hand, had written for both academic and nonacademic audiences [Sandilands 1990: 62], The actual writing of the Banking Act of 1935 was left largely to Currie with substantial input from Eccles on the ideas to be incorporated in the bill [Sandilands 1990: 64]. The important amendments to the Federal Reserve Act which were contained in the so-called Eccles bill on banking reform were with regard to the makeup of the Federal Reserve Board (section 4), expansion of assets which could be discounted by the Fed (section 13), legal tender status for Federal Reserve notes (section 6), and power to change reserve requirements (section 19). In amending section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act with regard to reserve requirements, Section 209 of Title II of the bill stated: Notwithstanding the other provisions of this section, the Federal Reserve Board, in order to prevent injurious credit expansion or contraction, may by regulation change the requirements as to reserves to be maintained against demand or time deposits or both by member banks in any or all Federal Reserve districts and/or any or all of the three classes of cities referred to above. In line with his Treasury proposal for reform, according to Sandilands, Currie intended that the Board be given unlimited power to alter reserve requirements with the view of eventually raising them to 100% [Sandilands 1990: 66]. The Administration bill was introduced by Senator Duncan Fletcher in the Senate (S 1715) and Congressman Steagall in the House (HR 5357) on February 5 1935. Title I of the bill made Federal Deposit Insurance permanent, Title II contained amendments to the Federal Reserve Act, and Title III included technical amendments. The debate over the bill centered on Title II which sought to give greater powers to a revised Federal Reserve Board whose members would be appointed by the President. Senator Carter Glass denounced the Eccles's bill as the most dangerous and unwarranted measure of the entire New Deal [Sandilands 1990: 64]. On March 4, Senator Fletcher asked to have a statement by Frank Vanderlip on Senate bill 1715 read into the Congressional Record. Vanderlip pointed out that in a country with a highly developed banking system, the volume of purchasing medium included not only currency but the volume of bank credit turned into bank deposits. He noted: "This principle is recognized in the bill, and an effective means for the control of the volume of bank credit is set up in section 209 [Congressional Record, 1934: 2820]. Vanderlip believed that these powers were necessary in order to regulate the value of the currency, but that Congress should define its objective in exercising the power to regulate the value of currency. Further, he states, "Congress must itself designate the price level which it desires to establish and maintain". Finally, he said: The regulation of the value of currency is not properly a banking function. It has, in fact, far too long remained a banking prerogative. There should be clear differentiation between the business of granting bank credits and the fundamentally important policy of regulating the value of currency [ibid]. Also on March 4, Senator Cutting reintroduced his bill to create a Federal Monetary Authority and require 100% reserve banking [S. 2204]. Just a few days before, the New York Herald Tribune ran an article entitled: "Many Withhold Opposition to Present Banking Bill Lest Legislators Put Forward Measure Requiring 100% Reserves for Demand Deposits" [New York Herald Tribune on February 25 1935, page 41] The article stated that many on Wall Street, though opposed to Title II of the bill, were reluctant to voice their opposition. The fear was that a "worse bill" would be put forward which "might be a bill embodying the theories of that group advocating 100 per cent reserves for demand deposits". The article went on to note that the plan had gained wide academic support. Though no one in the Administration had gone on record in support of the plan, the paper noted that "should there be a resurgence of New Dealism the 100 per cent reserve scheme might possibly get some attention in the high quarters". Though some might view the proposed bill as radical, according to the Tribune article, "Compared with the 100 per cent reserve plan, it will be seen, the banking act of 1935 is weak tea" [New York Herald Tribune on February 25 1935, page 41]. A revised version of-the Banking Act of 1935 was introduced on April 19 1935 by Congressman Steagall (HR 7617). The version introduced by Steagall included section 209 unchanged from the earlier version. Fletcher, as Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, was deluged with letters opposing Title II of the proposed Banking Act of 1935 (HR 5357 and S 1715). In a statement read into the Congressional Record, Fletcher asserted that the changes in the Federal Reserve System embodied in Title II did not "involve a radical change in the present powers and functions of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve System as it is now constituted" [Congressional Record, April 22 1935, page 6103]. He explicitly stated that this applied unequivocally to section 209 granting the Board the power to change reserve requirements. Fletcher was clearly concerned that the banking system remained subject to wild fluctuations as a result of bankers influence on the creation and destruction of credit. He stated: It is common knowledge, however, that there now lies within the hands of bankers the potential makings for one of the most stupendous inflations this or any other Nation has ever experienced. And experience teaches us that banker control of monetary policy will probably give us an equally devastating financial whirlwind when that bubble is pricked [Congressional Record, April 22 1935, page 6104]. In May, Eccles testified that the most effective way to achieve the goals of centralization, without undue political influence or banker influence, would be to have outright ownership of the Federal Reserve banks [Schlesinger 1960: 299]. Though not advocated by Currie, it was part of the Chicago Plan for banking reform. A significant blow to the Chicago Plan came in May when Senator Bronson Cutting died in an airplane crash. Cutting's reelection in 1934 turned out to be a very dirty campaign, with the actively opposing him. After Cutting emerged as the apparent victor over Dennis Chavez by slightly over one thousand votes, the election results, with Roosevelt administration approval, were contested. In was during a trip back to New Mexico to get affidavits in connection with the contested election that Cutting's plane crashed in Missouri. Schlesinger reports that some of the Progressives blamed Roosevelt for Cutting's death [Schlesinger 1960: 140-1]. Currie was optimistic that a banking bill would be passed which would include what he viewed as the crucial reforms. Currie wrote to Viner: The prospects for the banking bill are looking better all the time. You may have noticed that I got my objective in the bill as reported by the House Committee. I admit that the word "unstabilizing" in it is not elegant, but I couldn't think of a good synonym. I know that you will derive an enormous amount of comfort out of the assurance that we will have perfect stability in the future [Currie to Viner, May 3 1935]. The bill passed easily in the House in early May, where Alan Goldsborough had assumed responsibility for Title II, and then went to the Senate where hearings were held [Burns 1974: 169]. In the House, the only significant amendments were Alan Goldsborough's proposals to create a Federal Monetary Authority along the lines presented by Cutting and to mandate an explicitly declared policy of the United States to restore the average purchasing power of the dollar to level of the period 1921-1929 [Leuchtenburg 1963: 159; Burns 1974: 130]. After this restoration, the purchasing power of the dollar would be maintained substantially stable in relation to a suitable index of basic commodity prices [Congressional Record, May 8 1935: 7163]. The amendment was defeated by a vote of 128 to 122 [Congressional Record, May 8 1935: 7185]. The last attempt to explicitly introduce 100% reserves in the Senate as part of the overhaul of the Federal Reserve System came on July 25th when Senator Nye .of North Dakota introduced a substitute for Title II of HR 7617 (the revised Banking Act of 1935). The amendment embodied most of the Cutting bill (S 2204) introduced in March. In addition to the 100% reserves and the creation of a central monetary authority, price stabilization was also included, as it had been in the original Cutting bill outlined by Simons. The amendment was defeated on a vote of ten yes, 59 no, and 27 not voting [Congressional Record, July 25-26 1935, pages 11842-11906]. Roosevelt signed the Banking Act of 1935 into law on August 22 1935, and established the basic framework of the financial system which continues today. Glass set out to rewrite HR 7617 to remove those elements which he thought increased unduly the government's role. As an example, the final version of the Banking Act of 1935 limited the Fed's ability to change reserve requirements by adding the following to section 209: but the amount of the reserves required to be maintained by any such member bank as a result of any such change shall not be less than the amount of the reserves required by law to be maintained by such bank on the bank of enactment of the Banking Act of 1935 nor more than twice such amount [Section 207 of HR 7617]. This effectively prohibited any move to raise reserve requirements to 100%. {10} Glass also had removed a statement which mandated the government to "promote conditions conducive to business stability" in so far as it was possible with the "scope of monetary action and credit administration" [Egbert 1967: 152]. {10} As an historical note, on August 16 1948, in a Joint Resolution of Congress (SJ Res No 157, 80th Congress, 2nd session., the Banking Act of 1935 was temporarily amended (1) in order to prevent injurious credit expansion; (2) raised the limit on time deposit reserves to a maximum of 7 1/2 per cent, and the maximum reserves against demand deposits in central reserve cities to thirty per cent [Krooss 1969: 2999-3000]. The increased reserve requirements of the resolution expired on June 30 1949. As the debate on the bill came to a close, Senator Glass in remarks to remarks to the Senate stated: I may say that repeated references to the bill as an administration bill have no justification whatsoever. It is not an administration bill. The President of the United States has never read a word of it, unless he has done so very recently. The Secretary of the Treasury is on record in the printed hearings of the Appropriations Committee as saying that he had not read it. Every member, except one, of the Federal Reserve Board testified before the committee that he had not seen the bill until it was introduced and printed ... I speak of it simply as the Eccles bill, because nobody, with a single exception, who appeared before the Banking and Currency Committee of the House or of the Senate has advocated this bill [Congressional Record, July 25 1935: 11824]. When asked if he was referring to Title II, Glass said "Yes; only to title II". Despite Glass's later boast that "We did not leave enough of the Eccles bill with which to light a cigarette", the bill provided for a significant shift toward centralization of monetary policy and thus achieved what Currie believed to be a necessary reform if monetary policy was to be effective [Leuchtenburg 1963: 160]. The administration had achieved its goal of enhancing the Federal Reserve's ability to manage the money supply, and therefore, hopefully the economy [Schlesinger 1960: 301]. Conclusion The Chicago Plan for radical banking was well known at the highest levels of government during the period 1933-35 and, though the plan called for radical changes, the early New Deal probably offered the best chance for radical reforms to be undertaken. The question is thus why did the Chicago Plan lose out? The answer, on one level, should be of no surprise: it lost as a matter of pure political expediency. It is important to note that it did not lose because the principles of the plan were rejected. In fact, the banking legislation passed during the period moved in part toward the Chicago Plan reforms. Tugwell thought that radical reform seemed like such a remote possibility, that Roosevelt abandoned any such attempts and opted for "simple restoration of a system people understood under conditions which would assure them of future safety" [Tugwell 1957: 264]. The Banking Act of 1933 was successful in restoring confidence in the banking system. It did so by institutionalizing Federal Deposit Insurance and by the separation of commercial and investment banking. By 1935, few politicians opposed doing away with deposit insurance. The economy did not recover fully in 1934, and the administration was convinced that it was due to a lack of centralized control over monetary policy. Given the determined resistance of Carter Glass, the administration got as much as it could in the Banking Act of 1935 in the way of enhanced Federal Reserve Board control. The Chicago Plan played a role here by being viewed as an extreme position, and therefore bolstered the administration bill. The key player for the administration appears to be Lauchlin Currie, who though an advocate of 100% reserves, sought to achieve measures that would be politically acceptable. In doing so, he compromised on the 100% reserve goal, and in the end, his compromise prohibited any possibility that such reform could be achieved in the future. There is evidence that Currie believed that Hemphill and Fisher were politically naive. In his unpublished memoirs, Currie, reflecting on the battle over the Banking Act of 1935, says: "An adviser in Washington is of limited usefulness unless he acquires some sense of what is feasible and how projects and policies should be presented to have the best chance of being adopted" [Sandilands 1991: 65]. In a letter to Viner written in early 1935, Currie stated: You will be tickled by Hemphill's childlike naivete in suggesting that instead of his bill being introduced and then sent to the Board for comments it would save time if we drafted the bill together at the Board! I pointed out that such a procedure would make his bill in effect an administration measure, and he said very seriously he would not mind that! [Currie to Viner January 18 1935] The fact that the Chicago Plan was supported by the early New Deal planners, and then by the Progressives, though it may have helped the administration, at the same time reduced the possibility that the legislation would have been passed. However, there were attempts, especially after Cutting's death, to create both a Federal Monetary Authority, reflation, and price-level stabilization. This indicates that support for the ideas embodied in the plan went beyond the radical and Progressive members of Congress. Roosevelt came into office with the intent of restoring the safety of the banks and increasing government control over monetary policy. The legislation passed during the period 1933-35 gave Roosevelt most of what he wanted: safety of the payments system, separation of commercial and investment banking, and enhanced control over monetary policy by a reconstituted Federal Reserve. Safety of the bank deposits came at the price of a system of contingent liabilities with inherent problems which all came to a head decades later. The separation of commercial and investment banking eliminated the problem of banks using depositors funds to speculate in the stock market, but it did not prevent banks from making risky loans. Still, the legislation passed in the early New Deal must be viewed as a success as judged by the fact that little change was made in the system for nearly fifty years. Though passage of the Chicago Plan might have advocated the large scale bailouts of financial institutions we are seeing today, there is no guarantee that it would have been equally successful. The Chicago Plan without an appropriate transition period could have worsened the credit crunch. The crucial action would have been the supplanting of fractional reserve bank credit with the credit of new investment trusts, and if necessary, credit supplied by the RFC. One possible evolution could have been the complete socialization of investment as Bronson Cutting and others advocated. Control of M-1 could have accelerated the expansion of money substitutes and deposit banking could have been reborn, perhaps in a relatively short period of time. However, one response to this is that technology seems to have driven the developments of near monies in recent years and it is unlikely that 100% reserve banking could have affected the development of computers which, as we have seen in recent years, enable the creation of financial assets which would have been technologically impossible in the past. The problems we face today are in large part a direct result of the programs that were implemented during the early New Deal. The first and most obvious is federal deposit insurance. The amount of money necessary to pay off all depositors is unknown. We have done nothing to fundamentally change the situation. Even modest reforms to limit the amount of federal deposit insurance have been difficult to implement. The 100% reserve idea did not disappear after the passage of the Banking Act of 1935, in fact, Irving Fisher spent the remainder of his life lobbying Congress and the public on the need for 100% reserves [Allen 1991]. It is also not surprising that in recent years, we have seen the emergence of "narrow banking" or "core banking" proposals which are in the tradition of the 100% reserve plan. If we are ever again faced with economic, and particularly financial, problems on the level of the Great Depression, the clamor for the separation of the depository and lending functions of banks may reappear. It is also clear that the Federal Reserve can do little to cajole banks into lending when they do not wish to do so. What we are seeing is banks buying more government debt, which is available today on a scale far beyond the 1930s. The Federal Reserve can effectively restrain activity during a boom, but during a business downturn can do little to stimulate the economy beyond cutting interest rates to historically low levels. This is precisely the situation we face today. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abramson, S H, "A Proposal for Banking Reform", The Canadian Forum, October 1934. Allen, William R, "Irving Fisher and the 100% Reserve Proposal". UCLA, unpublished, 1991. Allen, William R. "Irving Fisher, FDR, and the Great Depression". History of Political Economy 9:4 (1977): 560-587. Barber, William J. From New Era to New Deal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Bryan, Lowell L. Breaking Up the Bank Homewood, Illinois: Business One Irwin, 1988. Bryan, Lowell L. Bankrupt: Restoring the Health and Profitability of Our Banking System. New York: Harper Collins, 1991. Burns, Helen. The American Banking Community and New Deal Banking Reforms: 1933-1935, Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1974. Business Week, June 2 1934, page 27. Chicago. The University of Chicago Law Library. The Henry Simons Papers. Currie, Lauchlin. 1934. A Proposed Revision of the Monetary System of the United States Submitted to the Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, September. Reprinted in Currie [1968]. Currie, Lauchlin. 1968. The Supply and Control of Money in the United States, New York: Russell and Russell, (originally published by Harvard University Press, 1934) Cutting, Bronson. "Is Private Banking Doomed?" Liberty. May 1934. Egbert, Arch 0. Marriner S Eccles and the Banking Act of 1935. PhD Dissertation, Brigham Young University, May 1967. Eccles, Marriner. Beckonins Frontiers. New York: Knopf, 1951. Franklin D Roosevelt: His Personal Letters. New York: Duell, SLoan and Pearce, 1950. Friedman, Milton and Anna J Schwartz. A Monetary History of the United States, 1863-1960. Princeton University Press, 1963. Friedman, Milton. A Program for Monetary Stability. New York: Fordham University Press, 1960. Fusfeld, Daniel. The Economic Thousht of Franklin D Roosevelt. New York, Columbia University Press, 1956. Gayer, A D. "The Banking Act of 1935", Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol 50 (1935) : 97-116. Golembe, Carter. "The Deposit Insurance Legislation of 1933", Political Science Ouarterly, vol 76, no 2 (1960): 181-200. Hemphill, Robert H. " ". Magazine of Wall Street, November 1934. Hyde Park. The Franklin D Roosevelt Library. President's Official Files (Box 230) Hyde Park. The Franklin D Roosevelt Library. The Papers of Gardiner C Means. Hyde Park. The Franklin D Roosevelt Library. The Papers of Rexford G Tugwell. Hyde Park. The Franklin D Roosevelt Library. The Papers of Henry Morgenthau Jr. Jacob Viner to Henry Morgenthau, Interdepartmental Communication, Department of the Treasury, May 10 1934. FDR Library. Morgenthau Papers, Box 301, File Jacob Viner 1933-34. Kennedy, Susan The Banking Crisis of 1933. Louisville: University of Kentucky Press, 1973. Knight, Frank. "Memorandum on Banking Reform", March 1933. Krooss, Herman E, editor, Documentary History of Banking and Currency in the United States (4 volumes). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1969. Lester, Richard A. "Are Small Depositors Over-Charged", Bankers Masazine, vol 129, no 2 (August 1934), pages 161-163. Leuchtenburg, William E. Franklin D Roosevelt and the New Deal. New York: Harper and Row, 1963. Means, Gardiner C. "Comment on the Chicago Plan for Banking and Currency Reform", nd Box 1 The Papers of Gardiner C Means, Franklin Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park. Moley, Raymond C. After Seven Years New York: Harper and Brothers, 1939. New York Herald Tribune February 25 1935, page 41. New York Times May 20 1934, 32:1. Princeton, New Jersey. Mudd Library, Princeton University, The Jacob Viner Papers. The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D Roosevelt New York: 1938-1950. Sandilands, Roger J. The Life and Political Economy of Lauchlin Currie. Durham: Duke University Press, 1990. Schlesinger, Arthur M. The Crisis of the Old Order. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1957. Schlesinger, Arthur M. The Coming of the New Deal. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1958. Schlesinger, Arthur M. The Politics of Upheaval. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1960. Simons, Henry et al, 1933. "Banking and Currency Reform", Manuscript, reprinted in Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, edited by Warren Samuels, JAI Press, 1990. Simons, Henry. "Review: Lauchlin Currie, The Supply and Control of Money in the United States", Journal of Political Economy, vol 63, no 4 (August 1935): 555-558. Stein, Herbert. The Fiscal Revolution in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,19?? Steindl, Frank G. "The Monetary Economics of Lauchlin Currie", Journal of Monetary Economics, volume 27 (1991) : 445-461. Tobin, James. "Financial Innovation and Deregulation in Perspective". Bank of Japan Monetary and Economic Studies Vol 3, No 2. (1985): 19-29. Tobin, James. 1987. "The Case for Preserving Regulatory Distinctions", in Restructuring the Financial System, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, pages 167-183. Tugwell, Rexford G. The Democratic Roosevelt. New York: Doubleday and Son, 1957. US Congress. Senate. A Bill to Regulate the Value of Money. S 3744, 73rd Congress, 2nd session, June 6 1934. US Congress. House. A Bill to Provide for the sound, effective, and uninterrupted operation of the banking system. HR 5357, 74th Congress, 1st session, February 5 1935. US Congress. Senate. A Bill to Provide for the sound, effective, and uninterrupted operation of the banking system. S 1715, 74th Congress, 1st session, February 5 1935. US Congress. House. A Bill to Provide for the sound, effective, and uninterrupted operation of the banking system (Banking "Act of 1935). HR 7617, 74th Congress, 1st session, February 5 1935. US Congress. Senate. A Bill to Regulate the Value of Money. S 2204, 74th Congress, 1st session, March 4 1935. US Congress. Senate. Statement by F A Vanderlip on S 1715, 74th Congress, 1st session, March 4, 1935. Congressional Record. US Congress. House. Radio Address by Congressman Steagall regarding HR 5357, 74th Congress, 1st session, January 24 1935. Congressional Record. US Congress. Senate. Text of Senate bill 1715, 74th Congress, 1st session, February 6 1935. Congressional Record. US Congress. Senate. Text of Article by Senator Cutting "Is Private Banking Doomed?", 73rd Congress, 1st session, May 4?, 1935. Congressional Record. US Congress. Senate. Statement by Senator Fletcher on S 1715, 74th Congress, 1st session, April 22 1935. Congressional Record. US Congress. Senate. Text of article "Fletcher Attacks Bankers", New York Times, April 21 1935., 74th Congress, 1st session, April 22 1935. Congressional Record. US Congress. House. Amendment by Senator Goldsborough to HR 7617 (Banking Act of 1935), 74th Congress, 1st session, May 8 1935. Congressional Record. US Congress. Senate. Statement by Senator Glass on HR 7617 (Banking Act of 1935), 74th Congress, 1st session, July 25 1935. Congressional Record. US Congress. Senate. Amendment by Senator Nye to HR 7617 (Banking Act of 1935), 74th Congress, 1st session, July 25 1935. Congressional Record. Washington, DC. National Archives, US Treasury. Press Release, June 27th, 1934. Washington, DC, Library of Congress Manuscript Collection. Bronson Cutting Papers. Endnote The text of the letter reads as follows: During the past week, we have tried to formulate and agree upon a specific program which would provide, both for emergency relief, and for permanent banking reform. The results of this effort are contained in the five-page statement which we enclose. This document is strictly for your private use; and we request that every precaution be taken against mention of it in the press. The program defined in the statement is one which we believe to be sound, even ideal, in principle. What its merits may be, in the light of political consideration, we frankly do not know. We are sensitive, moreover, of an obligation not to broadcast publicly any statement which might impair confidence in Administration measures, or impair their chances of successful operation. On the other hand, we feel that our statement may deserve thoughtful consideration, among people of interests like our own; also, that it may suggest measures which might usefully be incorporated in other, and perhaps less impractical, schemes. Moreover, most of us suspect that measures at least as drastic and "dangerous" as those described in our statement can hardly be avoided, except temporarily, in any event. Please feel free to use the document in any manner consistent with complete avoidance of newspaper publicity. If you feel disposed to send us your comments, favorable and adverse, upon the proposals, we shall be grateful indeed for your cooperation. Communications may be addressed to any member of the group. _____ The Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard College Post Office Box 5000 Annandale-on-Hudson, New York 12504 Work 914-758-7448 Fax 9 14-758-1 149 Home 914-758-5299 Internet: phillips at levy.bard.edu http://www.levy.org/pubs/wp76.pdf TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ From tchilds at resist.ca Sat Jan 10 19:07:51 2009 From: tchilds at resist.ca (tchilds at resist.ca) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:07:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [R-G] Youth protest against the tar sands in Fort Chipewyan Message-ID: <61655.64.85.36.244.1231639671.squirrel@mail.resist.ca> http://www.dominionpaper.ca/weblogs/dawn/2423 Youth protest against the tar sands in Fort Chipewyan Youth from Fort Chipewyan marched through the streets to protest against the tar sands in -32 degree temperatures this afternoon. The march was organized by 10 year old Robyn Courtoreille, who got other youth involved in the protest. "Syncrude and Suncor have been poisioning our water, air, so we protested to let them know we want a future not cancer," said Dailen Powder, 12, after the protest. "I was protesting because I dont want anymore deformed two jawed fish in our lake," said Cherish Kaskamin, 11. There is another protest in Fort Chipewyan planned for January 12th. From critical.montages at gmail.com Sat Jan 10 21:56:42 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 23:56:42 -0500 Subject: [R-G] U.S. Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site (But Authorized New Covert Action against Iran) Message-ID: January 11, 2009 U.S. Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site By DAVID E. SANGER WASHINGTON ? President Bush deflected a secret request by Israel last year for specialized bunker-busting bombs it wanted for an attack on Iran's main nuclear complex and told the Israelis that he had authorized new covert action intended to sabotage Iran's suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, according to senior American and foreign officials. White House officials never conclusively determined whether Israel had decided to go ahead with the strike before the United States protested, or whether Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel was trying to goad the White House into more decisive action before Mr. Bush left office. But the Bush administration was particularly alarmed by an Israeli request to fly over Iraq to reach Iran's major nuclear complex at Natanz, where the country's only known uranium enrichment plant is located. The White House denied that request outright, American officials said, and the Israelis backed off their plans, at least temporarily. But the tense exchanges also prompted the White House to step up intelligence-sharing with Israel and brief Israeli officials on new American efforts to subtly sabotage Iran's nuclear infrastructure, a major covert program that Mr. Bush is about to hand off to President-elect Barack Obama. This account of the expanded American covert program and the Bush administration's efforts to dissuade Israel from an aerial attack on Iran emerged in interviews over the past 15 months with current and former American officials, outside experts, international nuclear inspectors and European and Israeli officials. None would speak on the record because of the great secrecy surrounding the intelligence developed on Iran. Several details of the covert effort have been omitted from this account, at the request of senior United States intelligence and administration officials, to avoid harming continuing operations. The interviews also suggest that while Mr. Bush was extensively briefed on options for an overt American attack on Iran's facilities, he never instructed the Pentagon to move beyond contingency planning, even during the final year of his presidency, contrary to what some critics have suggested. The interviews also indicate that Mr. Bush was convinced by top administration officials, led by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, that any overt attack on Iran would probably prove ineffective, lead to the expulsion of international inspectors and drive Iran's nuclear effort further out of view. Mr. Bush and his aides also discussed the possibility that an airstrike could ignite a broad Middle East war in which America's 140,000 troops in Iraq would inevitably become involved. Instead, Mr. Bush embraced more intensive covert operations actions aimed at Iran, the interviews show, having concluded that the sanctions imposed by the United States and its allies were failing to slow the uranium enrichment efforts. Those covert operations, and the question of whether Israel will settle for something less than a conventional attack on Iran, pose immediate and wrenching decisions for Mr. Obama. The covert American program, started in early 2008, includes renewed American efforts to penetrate Iran's nuclear supply chain abroad, along with new efforts, some of them experimental, to undermine electrical systems, computer systems and other networks on which Iran relies. It is aimed at delaying the day that Iran can produce the weapons-grade fuel and designs it needs to produce a workable nuclear weapon. Knowledge of the program has been closely held, yet inside the Bush administration some officials are skeptical about its chances of success, arguing that past efforts to undermine Iran's nuclear program have been detected by the Iranians and have only delayed, not derailed, their drive to unlock the secrets of uranium enrichment. Late last year, international inspectors estimated that Iran had 3,800 centrifuges spinning, but American intelligence officials now estimate that the figure is 4,000 to 5,000, enough to produce about one weapon's worth of uranium every eight months or so. While declining to be specific, one American official dismissed the latest covert operations against Iran as "science experiments." One senior intelligence official argued that as Mr. Bush prepared to leave office, the Iranians were already so close to achieving a weapons capacity that they were unlikely to be stopped. Others disagreed, making the point that the Israelis would not have been dissuaded from conducting an attack if they believed that the American effort was unlikely to prove effective. Since his election on Nov. 4, Mr. Obama has been extensively briefed on the American actions in Iran, though his transition aides have refused to comment on the issue. Early in his presidency, Mr. Obama must decide whether the covert actions begun by Mr. Bush are worth the risks of disrupting what he has pledged will be a more active diplomatic effort to engage with Iran. Either course could carry risks for Mr. Obama. An inherited intelligence or military mission that went wrong could backfire, as happened to President Kennedy with the Bay of Pigs operation in Cuba. But a decision to pull back on operations aimed at Iran could leave Mr. Obama vulnerable to charges that he is allowing Iran to speed ahead toward a nuclear capacity, one that could change the contours of power in the Middle East. An Intelligence Conflict Israel's effort to obtain the weapons, refueling capacity and permission to fly over Iraq for an attack on Iran grew out of its disbelief and anger at an American intelligence assessment completed in late 2007 that concluded that Iran had effectively suspended its development of nuclear weapons four years earlier. That conclusion also stunned Mr. Bush's national security team ? and Mr. Bush himself, who was deeply suspicious of the conclusion, according to officials who discussed it with him. The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate, was based on a trove of Iranian reports obtained by penetrating Iran's computer networks. Those reports indicated that Iranian engineers had been ordered to halt development of a nuclear warhead in 2003, even while they continued to speed ahead in enriching uranium, the most difficult obstacle to building a weapon. The "key judgments" of the National Intelligence Estimate, which were publicly released, emphasized the suspension of the weapons work. The public version made only glancing reference to evidence described at great length in the 140-page classified version of the assessment: the suspicion that Iran had 10 or 15 other nuclear-related facilities, never opened to international inspectors, where enrichment activity, weapons work or the manufacturing of centrifuges might be taking place. The Israelis responded angrily and rebutted the American report, providing American intelligence officials and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with evidence that they said indicated that the Iranians were still working on a weapon. While the Americans were not convinced that the Iranian weapons development was continuing, the Israelis were not the only ones highly critical of the United States report. Secretary Gates, a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, said the report had presented the evidence poorly, underemphasizing the importance of Iran's enrichment activity and overemphasizing the suspension of a weapons-design effort that could easily be turned back on. In an interview, Mr. Gates said that in his whole career he had never seen "an N.I.E. that had such an impact on U.S. diplomacy," because "people figured, well, the military option is now off the table." Prime Minister Olmert came to the same conclusion. He had previously expected, according to several Americans and Israeli officials, that Mr. Bush would deal with Iran's nuclear program before he left office. "Now," said one American official who bore the brunt of Israel's reaction, "they didn't believe he would." Attack Planning Early in 2008, the Israeli government signaled that it might be preparing to take matters into its own hands. In a series of meetings, Israeli officials asked Washington for a new generation of powerful bunker-busters, far more capable of blowing up a deep underground plant than anything in Israel's arsenal of conventional weapons. They asked for refueling equipment that would allow their aircraft to reach Iran and return to Israel. And they asked for the right to fly over Iraq. Mr. Bush deflected the first two requests, pushing the issue off, but "we said 'hell no' to the overflights," one of his top aides said. At the White House and the Pentagon, there was widespread concern that a political uproar in Iraq about the use of its American-controlled airspace could result in the expulsion of American forces from the country. The Israeli ambassador to the United States, Sallai Meridor, declined several requests over the past four weeks to be interviewed about Israel's efforts to obtain the weapons from Washington, saying through aides that he was too busy. Last June, the Israelis conducted an exercise over the Mediterranean Sea that appeared to be a dry run for an attack on the enrichment plant at Natanz. When the exercise was analyzed at the Pentagon, officials concluded that the distances flown almost exactly equaled the distance between Israel and the Iranian nuclear site. "This really spooked a lot of people," one White House official said. White House officials discussed the possibility that the Israelis would fly over Iraq without American permission. In that case, would the American military be ordered to shoot them down? If the United States did not interfere to stop an Israeli attack, would the Bush administration be accused of being complicit in it? Admiral Mullen, traveling to Israel in early July on a previously scheduled trip, questioned Israeli officials about their intentions. His Israeli counterpart, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, argued that an aerial attack could set Iran's program back by two or three years, according to officials familiar with the exchange. The American estimates at the time were far more conservative. Yet by the time Admiral Mullen made his visit, Israeli officials appear to have concluded that without American help, they were not yet capable of hitting the site effectively enough to strike a decisive blow against the Iranian program. The United States did give Israel one item on its shopping list: high-powered radar, called the X-Band, to detect any Iranian missile launchings. It was the only element in the Israeli request that could be used solely for defense, not offense. Mr. Gates's spokesman, Geoff Morrell, said last week that Mr. Gates ? whom Mr. Obama is retaining as defense secretary ? believed that "a potential strike on the Iranian facilities is not something that we or anyone else should be pursuing at this time." A New Covert Push Throughout 2008, the Bush administration insisted that it had a plan to deal with the Iranians: applying overwhelming financial pressure that would persuade Tehran to abandon its nuclear program, as foreign enterprises like the French company Total pulled out of Iranian oil projects, European banks cut financing, and trade credits were squeezed. But the Iranians were making uranium faster than the sanctions were making progress. As Mr. Bush realized that the sanctions he had pressed for were inadequate and his military options untenable, he turned to the C.I.A. His hope, several people involved in the program said, was to create some leverage against the Iranians, by setting back their nuclear program while sanctions continued and, more recently, oil prices dropped precipitously. There were two specific objectives: to slow progress at Natanz and other known and suspected nuclear facilities, and keep the pressure on a little-known Iranian professor named Mohsen Fakrizadeh, a scientist described in classified portions of American intelligence reports as deeply involved in an effort to design a nuclear warhead for Iran. Past American-led efforts aimed at Natanz had yielded little result. Several years ago, foreign intelligence services tinkered with individual power units that Iran bought in Turkey to drive its centrifuges, the floor-to-ceiling silvery tubes that spin at the speed of sound, enriching uranium for use in power stations or, with additional enrichment, nuclear weapons. A number of centrifuges blew up, prompting public declarations of sabotage by Iranian officials. An engineer in Switzerland, who worked with the Pakistani nuclear black-marketeer Abdul Qadeer Khan, had been "turned" by American intelligence officials and helped them slip faulty technology into parts bought by the Iranians. What Mr. Bush authorized, and informed a narrow group of Congressional leaders about, was a far broader effort, aimed at the entire industrial infrastructure that supports the Iranian nuclear program. Some of the efforts focused on ways to destabilize the centrifuges. The details are closely held, for obvious reasons, by American officials. One official, however, said, "It was not until the last year that they got really imaginative about what one could do to screw up the system." Then, he cautioned, "none of these are game-changers," meaning that the efforts would not necessarily cripple the Iranian program. Others in the administration strongly disagree. In the end, success or failure may come down to how much pressure can be brought to bear on Mr. Fakrizadeh, whom the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate identifies, in its classified sections, as the manager of Project 110 and Project 111. According to a presentation by the chief inspector of the International Atomic Energy Agency, those were the names for two Iranian efforts that appeared to be dedicated to designing a warhead and making it work with an Iranian missile. Iranian officials say the projects are a fiction, made up by the United States. While the international agency readily concedes that the evidence about the two projects remains murky, one of the documents it briefly displayed at a meeting of the agency's member countries in Vienna last year, from Mr. Fakrizadeh's projects, showed the chronology of a missile launching, ending with a warhead exploding about 650 yards above ground ? approximately the altitude from which the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was detonated. The exact status of Mr. Fakrizadeh's projects today is unclear. While the National Intelligence Estimate reported that activity on Projects 110 and 111 had been halted, the fear among intelligence agencies is that if the weapons design projects are turned back on, will they know? David E. Sanger is the chief Washington correspondent for The New York Times. Reporting for this article was developed in the course of research for "The Inheritance: The World Obama Confronts and the Challenges to American Power," to be published Tuesday by Harmony Books. From menecraj at shaw.ca Sat Jan 10 22:35:19 2009 From: menecraj at shaw.ca (Richard Menec) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 23:35:19 -0600 Subject: [R-G] A Teacher of French in Gaza Witnesses the Bombardment Message-ID: <418472DD29F64DC18D43D27D7F503848@agingCHS072729> http://humaniteinenglish.com/spip.php?article1110 l'Humanit? in English ORIGINAL FRENCH ARTICLE : Prof de fran?ais ? Gaza, il t?moigne By Ziad Medouk, Palestinian teacher, as communicated to Hassane Zerrouky A Teacher of French in Gaza Witnesses the Bombardment Translated dimanche 4 janvier 2009, par Henry Crapo Ziad Medouk tells of the blind Israeli bombardment of all sorts of targets and the climate of terror it is creating for a population taking refuge in whatever shelter they can find. Ziad Medouk is teacher of French in Gaza. Having received a grant from the French government and a visa delivered by the French consul in Jerusalem, he was unable to travel to France last October because the Israeli authorities prevented him from leaving Gaza. He managed to reach us, yesterday morning, in an email that is a veritable distress call. We reproduce it in its entirety below. Then we reached him by telephone. He testifies. "Israel claims that their target is Hamas. Then why is it that on Sunday they bombarded the Faraya prison in Gaza, where they know - and moreover everyone knows - that the Fatah militants of Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian militants opposed to Hamas are detained. Of course this building did shelter a Hamas building, but I ask myself whether Israel didn't try to profit from the situation to rid itself also of prisoners opposed to Hamas. In any case, the population didn't take kindly to the fact that Hamas did not decide to free these prisoners, once the air strikes began." Yesterday, the whole night, the bombardment continued. They were more and more intense. The Israeli army is in the process of destroying Gaza, they bomb everything : houses, stores, and warehouses are destroyed. We don't sleep any more. Especially the children (Ziad has four children) . This morning (Tuesday) sixteen missiles fell on the city in less than an hour. The complex housing the Ministries of Labor, of Finance, of Public Works, and Interior are largely destroyed. The day before, it was the Islamic University that was hit by several missiles. Five of the fifteen buildings were completely destroyed. Al-Aqsa University, where I work, situated nearby, was also damaged. Happily there were no students there, but some guardians and employees. Here, also, why target an educational complex ? In what sense is it a menace to Israel ? The streets are empty. No one goes out, and if one does, it's to go to the cemetery to bury one's neighbors and friends, or to find provisions. Because of the week-long strike that everyone observed, but mainly because of the bombardment, nobody goes to work. Only the medical and nursing professions, the ambulance drivers and civil protection personnel are active. They are overwhelmed by the situation, and, despite being aided by the population, they don't manage to do what would be necessary. The hospitals and health centers, open day and night, are overwhelmed. Ambulances and personal vehicles are continually coming and going. Adults, children, bloody bodies, are dropped off. There are more than 400 dead and 2,000 hospitalized wounded (those who have minor wounds are not counted, and return to their homes after first aid). Businesses and stores are closed. Only the bakeries are open. Early in the morning, despite the bombs, long waiting lines form. Bread is rationed, and is becoming scarce. Everything is lacking, especially medicine and milk products for the children, and milk itself is becoming scarce. Don't believe the images projected by Israeli propaganda affirming that trucks carrying merchandise are permitted to enter Gaza. From yesterday to today, the Israeli army permitted four semi-trailers to pass ! There were 300 per day prior to June 2007 when the Israeli blockade of Gaza began. Do you think that four trucks are enough to feed one and a half million inhabitants ? It's atrocious, it's horrible how we are living. And all that the international community finds to say is that Israel has the right to defend itself ! Against whom ? The blockade, which was more a military siege, and these bombardments, are nothing other than a war against the Palestinian people. That's what we believe here. And it's the population that is paying the price. And if this continues, we will go headlong into a humanitarian catastrophe. ============== Fresh Ink is an alternative news service and sister project of Booksinternationale.com. Join us! https://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink ============== From critical.montages at gmail.com Sat Jan 10 23:04:08 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 01:04:08 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Bailout Pact of GM, U.S. Would Block a UAW Strike Message-ID: JANUARY 8, 2009, 8:23 P.M. ET Bailout Pact Of GM, U.S. Would Block A UAW Strike By JOHN D. STOLL and SHARON TERLEP DETROIT -- The bailout agreement between General Motors Corp. and the federal government includes terms aimed at blocking the United Auto Workers from going on strike while the union negotiates wage and benefit cuts with the auto maker over the next few weeks. The terms are part of the agreement GM and the U.S. Treasury Department hammered out in December. They surfaced late Wednesday in a regulatory filing by GM and surprised union leaders, including President Ron Gettelfinger, people familiar with the matter said. Treasury spokeswoman Brookly McLaughlin said that the no-strike provision was "included as a taxpayer protection" and that it could be waived if the government determines that was appropriate. The chances of a UAW strike are small because both sides are under orders from the government to work quickly to cut costs to help GM get on the path to recovery. Any delay could push the auto maker to the brink of bankruptcy again, a fate that was put off for now after the government provided the first $4 billion portion of a $13.4 billion emergency loan. The company and the union have until Feb. 17 to negotiate cuts. If they do, GM could be in line for additional loans. Still, the strike ban is likely to give GM some additional leverage as it negotiates with its largest U.S. union. In the loan agreement, the Treasury stipulated that there can be no labor strikes against GM pending or threatened between the period from Dec. 31 to Feb. 17. GM outlined details of the loan in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission Wednesday evening. Chrysler LLC has a similar no-strike provision in its loan contract. A Chrysler spokeswoman declined to comment. GM and the UAW are set to start negotiating Monday on issues ranging from job security to compensation. When the White House gave GM and Chrysler a $17.4 billion bailout last month, it insisted that the UAW make concessions that would allow the auto makers to become more competitive with foreign rivals like Toyota Motor Corp. During a joint interview on NBC Thursday morning, GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner and the UAW's Mr. Gettelfinger expressed optimism about their ability to come to an agreement that puts the auto maker on a stronger footing and meets the government's demands. "I am confident that we'll come together and get the kind of changes that we need," Mr. Wagoner said. He added that GM won't have to cut retiree benefits further. Mr. Wagoner, under intensifying pressure to restructure the 100-year-old auto maker, also needs to reach a deal with public debt holders by Feb. 17 that will lead to GM cutting its $60 billion debt load by about two-thirds. In order to succeed, he will have to get the UAW to restructure a recent health-care agreement. "We will be in immediate default of the loan if they were to strike," GM spokesman Tony Sapienza said on Thursday. "It would not be in [our] best interest." If GM can't prove it can be viable going forward by March 31, it may be forced to pay back the loans from the government immediately. A UAW spokeswoman declined to comment. Barring the UAW from a strike has taken a critical bargaining chip away from the union. In years past, when negotiating with the Big Three and key automotive suppliers, the UAW has often encouraged workers to walk off the job, leading to major cost penalties and a lack of vehicle supply for the auto makers. On Monday, as bargainers from GM and the UAW begin hashing out concessions, some UAW members -- under the banner of a group called autoworkercaravan.org -- are planning to protest the proposed cuts by rallying at the Detroit auto show. "Cutting wages will not help the industry at this point," said Tiffany Ten Eyck, a spokeswoman for the group. "We are in favor of a longer-term solution," including deeper executive pay cuts and more energy-efficient production. Workers represented by the UAW have walked off GM assembly lines several times over the past 15 months as part of labor disputes. The union also staged a costly strike against one of GM's top suppliers, American Axle & Manufacturing, in 2008. That action, combined with smaller strikes at GM assembly plants in Michigan and Kansas, cost the auto maker billions of dollars in cash at a time when it was already struggling to stay afloat. At this point, however, with U.S. light-vehicle demand tracking at its lowest point in decades and GM perilously close to collapse, the UAW might well have been reluctant to strike in any case. "You're literally signing your own death warrant," KeyBanc auto analyst Brett Hoselton said, referring to the likelihood that a prolonged UAW strike could further dent GM's prospects. He also said the UAW is not just negotiating with GM but also with the White House, so its relative bargaining power has diminished compared with past labor talks. "In that sense, with that third party player involved, a strike is effectively a threat against the U.S. government," he said. -- Kris Maher and Alex P. Kellogg contributed to this article. Write to John D. Stoll at john.stoll at wsj.com and Sharon Terlep at sharon.terlep at dowjones.com From critical.montages at gmail.com Sun Jan 11 01:48:32 2009 From: critical.montages at gmail.com (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 03:48:32 -0500 Subject: [R-G] Egypt, Jordan Resist Calls to Recall Envoys over Israeli Gaza Incursion + Israel Says Egypt Should Have Gaza Border Role Message-ID: Last update - 09:18 11/01/2009 Egypt, Jordan resist calls to recall envoys over Israeli Gaza incursion By Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondent Tags: Egypt, Israel News, Jordan Egypt and Jordan resisted calls over the weekend to follow Venezuela and Mauritania, which have recalled their ambassadors to Israel to protest its operation in the Gaza Strip. "Our stand is firm and well known," an Egyptian official said Saturday. Since the start of the fighting, Cairo has gained importance as a mediator between Israel and the Palestinians. "We'll expel the ambassador and then what? We have to hold talks with everyone," Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was recorded as telling officials in the past, regarding the ambassador to Israel. Israel's ambassador to Venezuela left the country Friday, expelled by President Hugo Chavez in rejection of Israel's attacks on Gaza. Chavez had given Ambassador Shlomo Cohen and some embassy personnel until Friday to leave the country. "We are harboring the hope t