Thursday, May 31, 2007

Climate Change Reparations?


Oxfam believes the world's industrial giants should begin paying tens of billions of dollars a year in reparations for climate change damage being sustained in the Third World. From Financial Times:


"The US should pay $22bn a year to developing countries to help them to adapt to the effects of climate change, according to a calculation published on Monday by the charity Oxfam.

"Japan should pay about $6.5bn, Germany about $3.5bn a year and the UK at least $2.5bn a year in order to give developing countries the aid they need. Other countries, such as European Union member states and Australia, should pay between $1.5bn and $2.5bn in climate change reparations, or “compensatory finance”, said Kate Raworth, senior researcher at Oxfam and author of the report.

"Oxfam said it would cost about $50bn a year for developing countries to build sea and other defences needed to handle problems caused by climate change.

"Ms Raworth said: 'This is not about aid, it is about the world’s biggest and richest polluters covering the costs forced upon those who are most vulnerable – an entirely separate and added responsibility [to conventional overseas development aid or disaster relief].'”


Wednesday, May 30, 2007

A Breath of Fresh Air - Sue Riley


It's a little depressing to endure the global warming agitprop spewed out by the Canwest/Global crowd (which holds a near monopoly position here in B.C.). That's why it was refreshing to read Susan Riley take a shovel to the Harpo/Baird crap in today's Ottawa Citizen:

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=2800de0f-f13b-4717-b455-5cd673de5bbb

Tories' Environmental Strategy Revealed

It's right there in today's NatPo. John Ivison reveals that the Harpies' priority is to change public opinion, not combat global warming.

"Environment Minister John Baird would unveil the government's own detailed emissions reduction targets, province by province, based on what he yesterday called "the architecture of a regulatory regime" that he rolled out earlier this spring.

"This calls for greenhouse gas emissions for existing industrial emitters to be 16% below 2006 levels by 2010, with annual 2% reductions to follow thereafter.

"The hope appears to be that once the debate comes down to Earth from its current level somewhere in the stratosphere, and people at ground level become aware of how onerous the Conservative cuts will be on industrial plants in their immediate area, they will have no stomach for the even deeper cuts that would be required to meet Kyoto."

So, according to Ivison, the ploy is to drive the debate "down to Earth" by making GHG emission cuts the public will find unpalatable. From a global warming denier's point of view, which is the viewpoint of Ivison, this all makes sense.

The Tories haven't got the slightest intention of dealing with this critical issue. This is a threat of such scope and complexity that it requires powerful moral and political leadership. Too many people in this country still do not understand global warming and its ramifications while many others flock to the false comfort doled out by the climate change denial community with the collusion of some of Canada's major media.

By not employing that scale of moral and political leadership, Baird and Harpo are counting on the recoil effect of slapping some carefully chosen restrictions that will be painfully felt by an unprepared population. If the only thing you understood about idodine was the sting, you would never use it to treat a wound would you? These vermin don't want to treat the wound, they want you to recoil from the treatment. Mission accomplished, Harpo style.

Canada's New Holocaust Deniers

Forget Keegstra, forget Zundel, there's a brand new breed of holocaust deniers infesting Canada and they reach all the way to the top levels of government, industry and our media.

There's a holocaust coming that's going to make the WWII holocaust look like a bad traffic accident. The coming holocaust is forecast to result in scores of millions of dead and upwards of a billion people permanently displaced from their homelands.

What's really galling about our 21st century holocaust deniers is that they know this is coming, they know they must act now to deal with it, but they have elected to preserve their prosperity and indulgence by spreading confusion about the problem and by claiming to be acting on it while actually subverting any meaningful action.

Today's holocaust deniers are the likes of Big Oil, our federal Tories and their handmaidens in the Canadian media (and you know which papers those are). These types, and their supporters, have made a choice knowing it will be the men, women and children of the far north and the tropics, particularly sub-Saharan Africa who will pay the price for their choice.

That's the ugly side of the global warming debate, the one that the TarSanders, NatPo and the Harpies never mention. Harpo will drone on endlessly about bringing faux democracy to Afghanistan while 55-year old men sell their 12-year old daughters to other 55-year old men. Why won't he talk about bringing real peril - drought, famine and dislocation to Africa - in his quest to transform Canada into an "energy superpower"? I'd love to know how, when Stevie gets on his knees at night and says his prayers, he rationalizes this to his God. I'll bet when it comes to the devastation of climate change, God is as far from Harpo's mind as those kids in Africa.

Canada's last crop of holocaust deniers was bad enough but they merely argued that history didn't happen. Our new crop is so much worse. They deny what is already happening and about to happen on a horrific scale and work to ensure that it does. But this is Canada, a place where these people are still treated with great civility and respect. I guess that alone makes us all a bit culpable.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Trust Us, Really


BULLSHITTER




BULLSHITTER IN CHIEF

Harpies Sued Over Kyoto

Friends of the Earth Canada has launched a suit in Federal Court against the Harpo government. The suit alleges the government has breached Canadian law by rejecting the country's Kyoto commitments.

From The Guardian:

"A target announced by the Canadian government last month, which would see emissions cut by 20% on 2006 levels by 2020, would still leave the country 39% over its Kyoto target for 2008-2012, the group said.

"It added that, of the countries signed up to the Kyoto agreement, only Australia was further behind on its targets.

"The case is being brought under Canadian legislation which incorporates the international agreement to cut emissions into domestic law and says ministers have to act if the country is found responsible for an increase in greenhouse gases.

"In October, the Canadian government was presented with legal opinion which indicated it had failed to show "demonstrable progress" on meeting its target, as required by 2005.

"Although this should have triggered action by the environment minister, Friends of the Earth said nothing had happened to suggest the country would meet its targets and it was applying for a judicial review, which would force the government to act."

Broken Bootstraps


There was a time when we in the West could be comfortable in our affluence. We had this belief, unspoken usually, that the rest of the planet wasn't as well off as we were but could be anytime they wanted to pull themselves up by the bootstraps - just like we had done. If only they could be as diligent and principled and hard working and creative as we had become, they too could enjoy the good life.

That was never more than a self-serving myth designed to assuage our consciences while we rapaciously pursued the world's resources and wealth. If some upstart decided his nation's oil should belong to his nation's people - off with his head. If someone else decided his nation's banana plantations should benefit his nation's people - off with his head. If some leader's people opted for a system of government we didn't like - off with his head. What we couldn't dominate colonially, we subverted by influencing, even controlling, the selection of a compliant head of state. The underlying myth made this all possible.

That myth is pretty much gone today. We cannot afford the environmental costs of allowing developing nations to follow our path to prosperity. If China or India began generating the same level of per capita greenhouse gas emissions as, say, the United States or Canada, the most dire scenarios of global warming would become a certainty. The planet can't sustain the levels of industrial activity we have today. Two more industrial revolutions are out of the question.

So, how are we to go about telling China and India not to aspire to what we have achieved? How are we to frame the argument that we have a right to certain benefits that they do not? How do we tell them not to touch those bootstraps?

Read any major Indian newspaper and you will see that this is going to be a very tough sell. The Indian people seem positive rapturous about their country ascending to a top position - economically, militarily and politically - in the family of nations. There is a level of nationalism sweeping India that may pose a huge obstacle to any pleas for restraint. The Chinese too look toward a bright and expansive future for their nation. With economic capitalism wedded to political communism and a domestic market of 1.3-billion (far more than Europe and North America combined) their advance seems unstoppable.

It's pretty tough to ask "have not" nations to forego becoming "haves" at the very moment they've arrived at the opportunity, so how do we persuade them? We have the trade "stick", such as it is, if necessary but what do we have in the way of "carrots" to dangle in front of them? They've already said, quite justifiably, that they want to see the current, great polluters set a clear example before they'll follow suit. The thing is, in North America at least, there's no political appetite for doing that, at least not yet.

Our pathetic leader, Harpo, says he wants a global warming agreement that embraces all major emitters, including India and China, and he's going to work to bring that about. This from the same guy who has scored political points by snubbing China at every opportunity. I'm sure they'll be eager to hear from that bozo. Of course he could always remind them that, now that we're in Afghanistan, we're a major player to be reckoned with. I'm sure that'll have them laughing in the aisles in Beijing.

No, if there is any possibility of an agreement that can be forged, it will be Europe that will have to find the consensus. Harpo's not going to bridge anything. On global warming, he's a thoroughly spent force.

Shuckin' & Jivin'


Are we onside or are we not? Do we support the G8 global warming proposals or are we really just playing for time? Do you believe John Baird or do you believe Harpo? Is John Baird actually just playing green, talking the talk so to speak?

One newspaper claims the wallowing government supports the G8 policies, another says that we're holding back. Something for everybody, Harpo style.

Baird says we're 'very supportive' of the G8 call for a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. 'Very supportive' is very subjective at best, an outright lie at worst. It was telling that, when asked whether Canada would accept the G8 call for a 30% GHG reduction by 2020, Baird responded, "We're not going to conduct G-8 negotiations in the media." Huh?

Baird acts like he's just heard about the 30% reduction target. It's as though he sees himself on the other side of a horse trade. Just where the hell has this loudmouth been since he took over from Rona (remember her?)?

2020 is a problem. 2050 is half a century off so you can promise just about anything and forget about it. 2020, however, is just around the corner. That means coming up with policies - today - to sharply curb GHG emissions. That means lowering the boom on the tar sands and other major GHG emitters. Yeah, 2020 is a problem for the Harpies.

What to do? Why not try sleight of hand? Let's point some stinky fingers at those yellow folks and their brown friends. They've each got a billion people plus. We're less than 5% of that. So, let's see how each country stacks up on overall GHG emissions. Why, suddenly we look lily white.

Isn't it curious that we're not willing to consider GHG caps for our own country but we want something similar from the Chinese and Indians? What if they offered to cap their per capita GHG emissions at half our own? They're nowhere close to that, at least not yet. If they ever do get to that point, the planet is pretty much screwed anyway. But it's a hell of an argument, one that leaves us no fallback except to say that we're entitled to create vastly more GHG than them because, well just because.

What if the Chinese and Indians offered to guarantee that their per capita GHG emissions would never exceed half of our own in exchange for our guarantee to bring our per capita GHG emissions to a level no more than twice theirs, say within 10-years? That's when Harpo's grand lie would be stripped as bare as a tar sand pit.
Harpo, as usual, is a two-legged sack of hypocrisy.

Monday, May 28, 2007

US Warns Iran - Stop Arming Militants


Don't laugh, not yet. According to the BBC, "The US has called on Iran to stop arming militants in Iraq." Don't those Iranians know that America and its stooge, Maliki, are already doing a fine job at arming the militants, especially the Shiite militias.

Today's New York Times reports on how members of the elite, 82nd Airborne, are coming to have a change of heart about the Iraq war:

"Staff Sgt. David Safstrom does not regret his previous tours in Iraq, not even a difficult second stint when two comrades were killed while trying to capture insurgents.

"But now on his third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb. When they searched the bomber’s body, they found identification showing him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army.

“'I thought: ‘What are we doing here? Why are we still here?’ said Sergeant Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the First Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. 'We’re helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day. They turn around at night and try to kill us.'

"His views are echoed by most of his fellow soldiers in Delta Company, renowned for its aggressiveness.

"With few reliable surveys of soldiers’ attitudes, it is impossible to simply extrapolate from the small number of soldiers in the company. But in interviews with more than a dozen soldiers in this 83-man unit over a one-week period, most said they were disillusioned by repeated deployments, by what they saw as the abysmal performance of Iraqi security forces and by a conflict that they considered a civil war, one they had no ability to stop.

"They had seen shadowy militia commanders installed as Iraqi Army officers, they said, had come under increasing attack from roadside bombs — planted within sight of Iraqi Army checkpoints — and had fought against Iraqi soldiers whom they thought were their allies.
"On April 29, a Delta Company patrol was responding to a tip at Al Sadr mosque, a short distance from its base. The soldiers saw men in the distance erecting barricades that they set ablaze, and the streets emptied out quickly. Then a militia, believed to be the Mahdi Army, began firing at them from rooftops and windows.

"Sgt. Kevin O’Flarity, a squad leader, jumped into his Humvee to join his fellow soldiers, racing through abandoned Iraqi Army and police checkpoints to the battle site.

"When the battle was over, Delta Company learned that among the enemy dead were at least two Iraqi Army soldiers that American forces had helped train and arm.

"Captain Rogers admits, 'The 29th was a watershed moment in a negative sense, because the Iraqi Army would not fight with us,' adding, 'Some actually picked up weapons and fought against us.'

"The battle changed the attitude among his soldiers toward the war, he said. 'Before that fight, there were a few true believers.' Captain Rogers said. 'After the 29th, I don’t think you’ll find a true believer in this unit. They’re paratroopers. There’s no question they’ll fulfill their mission. But they’re fighting now for pride in their unit, professionalism, loyalty to their fellow soldier and chain of command.'

"To Sergeant O’Flarity, the Iraqi security forces are militias beholden to local leaders, not the Iraqi government. 'Half of the Iraqi security forces are insurgents,' he said."

Iraq - Worse Than Vietnam, Hands Down

As a psychological failure, Iraq probably isn't as bad for the US as Vietnam was. It's easy to forget just how troubled the 60's and 70's were in the United States. Iraq, for all of its frustrations and disasters, hasn't left the same scar on the American people.

Where Iraq has eclipsed Vietnam, however, is in terms of its aftermath. Yes, I'm talking about aftermath. It's over. Iraq is a failure, a genuinely earned defeat for the US and Britain. You can't screw up something that badly without working at it. This fiasco was no accident. There was nothing unforeseeable in it.

There were fears that the aftermath of Vietnam would be a "domino effect" that would see communist revolution sweep across Southeast Asia and beyond. That didn't happen. There was bloodshed but nothing on the scale we'd been warned would be inevitable.

The aftermath of Iraq, however, is already taking place and the Americans haven't even bailed out yet. There's a brand new generation of terrorists being minted in today's Iraq. I suppose they could fairly be called the "Bush Brigade" because they are the direct result of George Bush's idiotic invasion of Iraq. The bad guys are doing so well at churning out these fledgling terrorists that they've saturated the Iraqi market. As The New York Times reports, Iraq is now exporting terrorists:

"The Iraq war, which for years has drawn militants from around the world, is beginning to export fighters and the tactics they have honed in the insurgency to neighboring countries and beyond, according to American, European and Middle Eastern government officials and interviews with militant leaders in Lebanon, Jordan and London.

"Some of the fighters appear to be leaving as part of the waves of Iraqi refugees crossing borders that government officials acknowledge they struggle to control. But others are dispatched from Iraq for specific missions. In the Jordanian airport plot, the authorities said they believed that the bomb maker flew from Baghdad to prepare the explosives for Mr. Darsi.

"Estimating the number of fighters leaving Iraq is at least as difficult as it has been to count foreign militants joining the insurgency. But early signs of an exodus are clear, and officials in the United States and the Middle East say the potential for veterans of the insurgency to spread far beyond Iraq is significant.

"Militant leaders warn that the situation in Lebanon is indicative of the spread of fighters. “You have 50 fighters from Iraq in Lebanon now, but with good caution I can say there are a hundred times that many, 5,000 or higher, who are just waiting for the right moment to act,” Dr. Mohammad al-Massari, a Saudi dissident in Britain who runs the jihadist Internet forum, Tajdeed.net, said in an interview on Friday. 'The flow of fighters is already going back and forth, and the fight will be everywhere until the United States is willing to cease and desist.'

"There are signs of that traffic in and out of Iraq in other places.

"In Saudi Arabia last month, government officials said they had arrested 172 men who had plans to attack oil installations, public officials and military posts, and some of the men appeared to have trained in Iraq.

"Officials in Europe have said in interviews that they are trying to monitor small numbers of Muslim men who have returned home after traveling for short periods to Iraq, where they were likely to have fought alongside insurgents."

George Bush is fond of claiming that America is fighting terrorists in Iraq so that Americans won't have to fight them at home. This moron suggests that his military has these bad guys pinned down in Iraq. Sorry George but that's nonsense. Your adventure is now actually creating terrorists for the export market.

How are we going to stop these guys? I don't know. What I do know is that it's going to take a crop of leaders vastly better than the Bush, Blair, Howard and Harper gang that have created the current mess with their ideologically-bound incompetence.

Blame Me? No, Blame the Media!


Paul Wolfowitz is a genuine Bushie to the end. Having been run out of the World Bank in disgrace, Wolfie says the whole thing was the media's fault:

People were reacting to a whole string of inaccurate statements and by the time we got to anything approximating accuracy the passions were around the bend.

Sorry, Paul, were you talking about your World Bank screwup or the Iraq war fiasco? And please, stop licking my comb!

Memorial Day


Tony Clement's Straw Man


Canada's health minister Tony Clement is blatantly more focused on politics than health care when it comes to Vancouver's safe injection site.

According to NatPo, last year Clement ordered an aide to prepare a report debunking the "five myths" surrounding the facility before he announced his refusal to extend the site's permit.

Here are the five myths that Clement's aide conjured up:

1. safe injection sites are commonly used in other countries,
2. they operate "all across Canada",
3. they are legal,
4. they present "a complete solution" to drug-use harms, and,
5. the Vancouver site "has the complete support of the community."

Guess what, those are indeed myths. It's too bad Clement thought it necessary to make them up. Hey Tony, have you stopped beating your wife yet?

Safe injection sites are used in some other countries such as Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Spain, Norway, Luxembourg, and Australia. They're legal enough that these countries, states we're proud to be allied with, are running their own sites.

No one, save perhaps for this bozo, Clement, has suggested these sites are "a complete solution" to drug-use harms. To reach that far shows how desperate Clement is for any sort of justification to shut down this facility. Similarly no one has claimed that the Vancouver site has the complete support of the community. What project ever does get complete support? Try building a new arena or, better yet, a transit line and you'll find plenty of people ready to bitch about it. That doesn't mean they're not worthwhile or that you shelve them.

These myths exist only in Tony Clement's tortured mind. Too bad we have to settle for a man of his calibre and vision as our health minister.

Sunday, May 27, 2007

A Few Things You Need to Remember about Global Warming

It's all so confusing, especially given the sums being shoveled out the back door by Big Oil outfits like Exxon to keep you confused. It's not just confusing, it's frightening. We all find it frightening, me too. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be alarming, it should if only because it is.

Tackling global warming will be a scalding test of your - and my - beliefs. Principles are delightful to righteously espouse when they don't really cost anything. When they come with a price, however, they're not nearly as popular.

In coming years, we're going to face a steadily mounting list of demanded sacrifices, that is if we're going to confront the problem. Critics will denounce it as a socialist plot, an unprecedented transfer of wealth. It's nothing of the sort. Global warming transcends political belief, at least of the sort that Edmund Burke might recognize. It is also anything but some felonious transfer of wealth. Wealth has little to do with it except as it may represent unconscionable privilege to continue damaging mankind.

Global warming is a global challenge and we don't even begin on the same page of the prayer book. If you're reading this you probably haven't felt much in the way of the repercussions of global warming. You're not one of those who is already displaced or dying from it. Displaced, dying? Yes, now go ahead and fill up that Hummer, eh?

You see, those who are dying as you read this are those who don't have Hummers or Esplanades, yachts or holidays abroad. However, those who are killing those who don't have Hummers or Esplanades, yachts and holidays abroad, do. Let that sink in for a minute unless there's something irresistible on the Home Shopping Channel.

First question, my fellow Christians, are we going to stop killing these people? Second question, are we going to let things slide while they die in ever greater numbers? Yes, you're right, I am looking at you Born Agains - you self-proclaimed, truly devout Christians. Hey, what's the deal? Is it going to be the teaching of Christ or is it time to scurry away into the dark reaches of the Old Testament again? Don't look to Falwell to bail you out, he's all tied up with his real maker at the moment.

So there's the first issue you need to keep in mind as you express your opinion - or vote - on this enormous issue: do we in the indulged West have a right to cause the deaths of the less fortunate? TO BE CONTINUED

Climate, Class and Claptrap


Some observations on global warming by Garret Keizer, excerpted from this month's Harper's Magazine:


...We're told that the "science is all in on global warming" and that it's just about unanimous. I believe it. We owe a debt to Al Gore that most people now believe it. But the science has also been in, and in for a while, and is every bit as unanimous in concluding that we are members of a single species, descendants of common ancestors - 'family' in every conceivable sense of the word. How can we imagine that we will address one overwhelming consensus of scientific opinion without having acted fully on the other? The question is not sentimental. If one can be forgiven of applying base political considerations to such a sublimely moral issue" you do not repair the climate of an entire planet without staggering sacrifices, and people will not elect to make staggering sacrifices unless the burden is shared with something like parity.


To put that as succinctly as possible, the days of paradise for a few are drawing to a close. The game of finding someone else in some convenient misery to fight our wars, pull our rickshaws, and serve as the offset for our every filthy indulgence is just about up. It is either Earth for all of us or hell for most of us. Those are the terms, those have always been the terms, and any approach to climate change that begins on those terms can count me as a loyal partisan. Otherwise, don't expect me to get overly excited as to which side of a golf-course heart attack shows the affluent, the educated, the suburban, and the wired a world much hotter than the one they were banking on.

More Baird Drivel

Canada's Enviromin, Furious John Baird, says Canada has to clean up its own climate change problems before lecturing other nations. Look, Johnny boy, talk is cheap so where are your policies?

In a letter to Stephane Dion, Baird says the United States has done more to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than Canada did under the previous Liberal government. Of course, if it wasn't for America's new, bottomless gas tank - the Athabasca Tar Sands - our performance would have been decidedly better. Thanks to Alberta, the Tar Sands and the Tories, Canada is becoming a greenhouse gas factory and the Americans are eager for us to ramp up bitumen production and processing five fold.

Baird says that it's not Canada's place to lecture the US until we clean up our own act. How about we do both, kill two birds with one stone? How about we declare the Tar Sands an environmental disaster and shut the whole thing down until either Big Oil or the Alberta government or both come up with the long promised technology to make this black goldmine GHG neutral? How about it, Big John?

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Who Am I?

I've been the leader of the most militarily powerful nation on earth.

I sparked a war and was enormously successful, at first.

Instead of consolidating my victory, I put my first war on hold and went out to topple a vile dictator.

I didn't listen to the many warnings of potential disaster before launching my invasion. I even rejected the advice of my top generals. Instead I surrounded myself with sycophants as incompetent as myself.

I contrived justification for pre-emptive attack.

I skilfully used deceit and half-truths to blind my own people.

I believed that governmental power should be mine, not some legislature's.

I endorsed arrest without charge, detention without trial and I approved of torture.

I brought suffering and death to tens of thousands of innocents.

I waged war according to ideology and what I wanted to believe instead of military principles.

I squandered my nation's treasury on a futile military quest that I could neither win nor leave.

After six years of slowly deteriorating war, I gambled everything on one last, grand operation even though it was almost certain to fail.

As my failures became inescapable I began blaming everyone else, even my own people, for my incompetence.

I made my nation a pariah to all other nations.

I stand as the worst leader in my country's history.

Who am I?

Friday, May 25, 2007

Surge II - Even Better than Surge I


I'll bet George Bush wishes he'd never learned to say "eye-rack." Four years ago he kicked the top off an anthill and has been plagued with the nippy little creatures ever since.

After fumbling and stumbling and bumbling year after year, George decided to change course, to fight another Iraq War. What, you say, there has been more than one Iraq War? Why yes, grasshopper. There was the war to protect America against an imminent attack by weapons of mass destruction, although that one's best forgotten. Then there was the war to topple Saddam. Then there was the war to defeat the "dead enders", disgruntled Saddamites. Of course we can't forget the war to defeat al-Qaeda. Then there was the war to defeat the sectarian militias. Then, when everything else had been thoroughly botched, there was the war to reclaim Baghdad, the "Surge."

Now, even Republicans in congress realize the Surge is just another flop atop all the earlier flops. It hasn't quelled sectarian violence, it hasn't stopped the killing of American troops, it hasn't brought the insurgents to heel.

So what's a complete incompetent right-wingnut president to do? Why not try something that's worked so well before - spin? Let's call the Surge, Surge II. Rebrand the hell out of it. Then, when no one's looking, let's move the goal posts closer and lower them - a lot.

According to the McClatchy news service this process is already underway:

"Less than five months after President Bush announced that 'we need to change our strategy in Iraq,' his administration is preparing to change course there once again, this time emphasizing political rather than military progress.

"'...the search for a new direction,' as one of the officials described the effort, was prompted by a recognition that the increase of American and Iraqi troops in Baghdad hasn't produced the improvements in security or the political progress that proponents of the buildup had expected and that domestic support for the administration's Iraq policy, even among Republicans, is ebbing quickly.

"The administration's new Iraq war "czar," Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, remains skeptical that the surge can succeed, and instead has favored the kinds of political steps that Petraeus and Crocker have advocated, one of the officials said.

"There's little optimism in Baghdad or Washington, however, that a new effort to strengthen the Iraqi army, bolster the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and weaken Sunni Muslim insurgents and Shiite Muslim militias is likely to succeed.

"Publicly, the president and his advisers express confidence that the decision to send more troops to Iraq is making a difference. Privately, some administration officials are far more pessimistic.

"One of the major problems, one official said, is the Badr Corps, which is the military arm of the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, which controls several government ministries, holds a key position in parliament and controls much of southern Iraq, which lies across the U.S. supply routes from Kuwait.

"Another official said he was skeptical that the Bush administration can find any credible Iraqi nationalists and persuade them to step forward, especially since doing so would invite assassination from Sunni and Shiite extremists. "The nationalists were mostly members of the (Sunni) Baath Party or a few secular Shiites," the official said. "And forget about finding a Kurd who's an Iraqi nationalist."

"A former senior U.S. defense official who still advises the Pentagon said he thought the troop buildup was doomed because there were insufficient numbers of American troops and the insurgents were gaining strength."

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

What's Next - Back Alley Abortions?


According to NatPo, the Harpies are taking the first, tentative steps back into the Dark Ages. Their opening salvo will be to cancel funding for safe injection sites where addicts can obtain clean needles to shoot up.

The idea behind the clinics holds that it's better, for a number of reasons, to provide a facility for intravenous drug users.

One goal is to cut down on the rate of HIV/AIDS from contaminated needles shared by junkies on the street. Another is to draw them into a place where they can get information and counselling if they want to quit. Another nice little benefit is not having to worry about stepping on those used needles on our sidewalks and in our parks. It strikes me that measures that reduce the incidence of the spread of HIV/AIDS are probably worthwhile but that's just my opinion. Not so say the Harpies. They claim the safe injection sites are tantamount to the government facilitating illegal drug use.

A peer-reviewed (i.e. "legitimate" for you Harpies) study in the London medical journal, Addiction, "...concludes that Insite's opening in Vancouver's grim Downtown Eastside has led to a 30 per cent increase by facility users in entering detoxification programs.The study, provided to The Vancouver Sun Thursday, by the journal Addiction also concluded that Insite users who began detox programs are more likely to enroll in long-term addiction treatment and reduce injecting." (Vancouver Sun).

Message to Harpo. If you have any evidence that safe injection centres actually encourage drug use, let's see it. If, on the other hand, this is just another one of your reactionary, jackboot bents then be honest about it.

Gee, Steve, why do you hate measures to reduce the spread of AIDS? Is this part of that Rapture bullshit you guys buy into? There ain't no Rapture, Steve, and, even if there was, they wouldn't be reserving a spot for your sorry backside.

Hey, here's an idea. Why not promote trade with China instead of promoting AIDS within Canada?

Harper Warns Karzai

Hamid, If I Catch You Negotiating With
the Taliban One More Time,
You'll Be Wearing This!

Diversified Agriculture Booming in Iraq


Farmers in southern Iraq's historic rice-growing region have diversified. Now they're moving into poppy cultivation. From The Independent:

"Rice farmers along the Euphrates, to the west of the city of Diwaniya, south of Baghdad, have stopped cultivating rice, for which the area is famous, and are instead planting poppies, Iraqi sources familiar with the area have told The Independent.

"The shift to opium cultivation is still in its early stages but there is little the Iraqi government can do about it because rival Shia militias and their surrogates in the security forces control Diwaniya and its neighbourhood. There have been bloody clashes between militiamen, police, Iraqi army and US forces in the city over the past two months.

"There has been an upsurge in violence not only in Diwaniya but in Basra, Nassariyah, Kut and other Shia cities of southern Iraq over the past 10 days. It receives limited attention outside Iraq because it has nothing to do with the fighting between the Sunni insurgents and US forces further north or the civil war between Shia and Sunni in Baghdad and central Iraq. The violence is also taking place in provinces that are too dangerous for journalists to visit. Aside from Basra, few foreign soldiers are killed.

"The fighting is between rival Shia parties and militias, notably the Mehdi Army, who support the anti-US cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, and the Badr Organisation - the military wing of the recently renamed Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC). In many, though not all, areas of southern Iraq, the latter group controls the police.

"The intra-militia violence in southern Iraq is essentially over control of profitable resources and the establishment of power bases. According to one report the violence in Diwaniya has been escalating for two months and was initially motivated by rivalry over control of opium production but soon widened into a general turf war."

Don't Ask, Don't Tell - Canadian Style


It came from the mouth of the man himself. We're not done, no way near done. That's how Stephen Harper described "the mission" to a gaggle of garrison troops in Kandahar. He made it plain that, if he has anything to say about it, Canadian troops can expect to be in Afghanistan for years to come.

Harper told the troops their work isn't done. I doubt he'd get many arguments on that point, in Afghanistan or Canada. What he didn't let us in on, however, is just exactly what their "work" is and how much of that work remains undone. That's the beauty of Bush's Global War Without End on Terror, it's endless. You can claim victory simply by refusing to admit failure but, then again, that cuts both ways.

Just what is "victory" in Afghanistan supposed to look like? I don't know, do you? Is it a matter of bringing an end to the current insurgency (and I'm only talking here about the one involving the Taliban)? Is it the establishment of a Western-style, secular democracy? Is it Pashtun, Baloch, Uzbek, Tajik and Hazara living peacefully, arm in arm? Is it the establishment of genuine civil liberties for women and children? Is it the creation of a viable economy to end Afghanistan's narco-economy? Is it all of these things? What is "victory" in Afghanistan?

Once we get a handle on the main question we can begin to devise metrics. How much of the job have we accomplished over the past six years? Are we 20% of the way there? How much progress are we making at the moment? What is an appropriate amount of time to achieve victory in Afghanistan?

Once we've defined the task and a target timeframe we need to assess whether we have deployed the forces we need to meet it. Is 2,500 enough? C'mon, get real. Do we need 10,000 or 15,000 or perhaps more? Without a large enough force, is everything else just optics, window dressing?

Are we in Afghanistan for a decade or two or three? Can we turn our back on the rest of the world where we're needed for that long? How do we justify that?

What will the insurgency in Afghanistan look like if the Americans leave Iraq? Will Canadian troops find themselves in the crosshairs of a fresh batch of Islamists hatched out of the Iraq fiasco?

Notice how few of these questions ever get asked, much less answered? To ask them is to reveal that we have no answers.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell - Harper Style.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Global Warming - Who Says?

Now if you think you know all you need to know about global warming from Exxon or Lennie Asper and the NatPo, then move along, nothing to see here.

If, however, you really want to learn about the problem or even just expand or update your knowledge, here's a site that has links where you'll find everything (or almost everything):

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=448

Has NATO'S Time Run Out?


What happened to NATO? For half a century there was a clear purpose to the military alliance. It was intended to safeguard Europe from being overrun by masses of Soviet tanks. Oh sure, the mutual defence of North America was in there too, sort of, wink, wink.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was, as the name suggests, an alliance of Western nations on both sides of the Atlantic. The members' land and air forces kept Western Europe viable while their naval forces maintained the North Atlantic sea lanes.

The US was always the senior partner in NATO. It had most of the guns and most of the planes and most of the ships but, then again, it also had the most to gain or lose.

Despite de Gaulle and lesser irritants, NATO more or less sailed smoothly through the close of the 20th Century until those pesky Soviets folded up and closed shop. The music stopped, the dance ended and no one was quite sure what to do next. The North Atlantic suddenly seemed very quiet, even dull.

Along comes 11 September, 2001 and the al-Qaeda attacks on New York and Washington. Get the horses harnessed up, boys, we're going to a fire! Everyone threw on his best pants and raced toward the sound of the guns, except there was no gunfire.

Even though the United States had suffered an attack that was much more a criminal act than an act of war, no one wanted to bother with petty details. Instead we all invoked Article 5 and raced off in mutual defence of a member under attack. That was almost six years ago. Where have we come in the meantime? The answer isn't encouraging.

NATO started fraying from the outset. Some members were eager to come to America's aid, others were hesitant. Still, everything probably would have worked out well enough except that Bush decided to parlay his strength into an illegal, ill-conceived and incompetently executed war in Iraq that was doomed to wind up where it stands today - a mess.

Instead of going to aid America by taking the battle to al-Qaeda, NATO is now backed into something much more grandiose and futile. We're part and parcel of a frat boy's fun scheme to reshape the Middle East. The illusion that (a) we're only in Afghanistan and (b) our presence there isn't an essential part of Bush's greater Middle East fiasco is sheer fantasy.
Bush erased all doubts when he told the NATO Secretary General this weekend that the alliance should play a much bigger role in the "war on terror." Now, let's see. That would be George Walker Bush's war on terror, his Global War Without End on Terror, Amen. That would be the very same war that this cretin has incompetently waged for six years now without accomplishing anything except to leave global security in tatters and the world a much more dangerous place.
This is like the falling-down drunk behind the wheel of the schoolbus asking you to put your kids aboard.
No, it's better for NATO to have no defined role even if it means an end to the alliance than to transform it into some multi-national foreign legion to be commanded by that dimwit in Washington. The American people wouldn't follow this clown into another adventure, why should we send our young people to sacrifice their lives in his ill-conceived causes?

Just Guessing


















We've already found Harpo. Is Hamid the long lost Groucho? That must mean Chico's running around the Oval Office.



Democracy - Afghanistan Style


You'll know when conditions in Afghanistan (and Iraq for that matter) have really turned around. It'll be the day when politicians like Harpo no longer have to skulk in on "surprise" visits. Let's face it, the people Stevie is trying to take by surprise are those he figures have a good enough chance to blow his smug ass out of the air before he can set foot in Kandahar if word leaks out. They're the bad guys and we can't give Steve enough protection against them that he can fly in announced.

So, anyway, just how are things going in Afghanistan? Well, if you read today's National Post, we've all but won. The Taliban are a "spent force" in Kandahar, all but finished. Uh, sure, okay.

How 'bout that pinnacle of Afghanistan's liberation, its parliament or Loya Jirga? Some snags there, one of them being outspoken female MP, Malalai Joya. Isn't that typical. Give a woman a seat in parliament and she still won't do as she's told! This uppity female has been a real pain to the men in parliament. They've pelted her with water bottles, even lustilly joined together to call for her to be raped. They tried to off her a couple of times (okay, so it was four times). Did she get the message? NO she di'int!

But now Malalai has really torn it. She had the nerve to call the parliament "worse than a zoo." The gall! Well it didn't take long for the menfolk to sort out this nonsense. They voted (overwhelmingly I might add) to suspend her from parliament for the balance of her 5-year term.

"Most of Ms Joya's campaigning has been about women's rights, which have been severely eroded after initial gains made with the fall of the Taliban in 2001. Women activists, including the highest-ranking official dealing with female empowerment, Safia Amajan, have been murdered.

"Ms Joya said: 'Talking about women's rights in Afghanistan is a joke. There really have not been any fundamental changes, the Taliban were driven off by the Americans and the British but then they were allowed to be replaced by warlords who also simply cannot see women as equals.'

"She added: 'Those of us who speak up are targets. My friends and colleagues have been assassinated. They have tried to kill me four times, the last attack was in Kabul which is the capital of this country which is supposed to be secure and democratic. And then if you try to speak up in parliament their first reaction is to try to gag you.'"

Hey, Harpo's over there. Karzai even turned out to greet him. Why doesn't Little Stevie sort this out. After all, he's a champion of democracy and women's rights, right?


Global Warming - You Guessed It, More Rotten News


This is nap time for the Flat Earth Society. Just go play quietly in the corner.

For those, however, who don't feel like drinking the Exxon Kool Aid, there's word that we're actually emitting more CO2 faster today than just a few years back - a lot more. Now, it's not me. I'm cutting my emissions a lot. That means it has to be you. So, I'll say it right now, shame on you.

It seems our mankind is actually slipping backwards on GHG emissions. A report in the journal, Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences, indicates that greenhouse gas emissions rose substantially during the 2000-2004, much faster than what was assumed by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in coming to the findings in their recent reports.

How much? According to the report in The Guardian, GHGs went up 1.1% annually during the 1990's. During the first four years of this decade, the annual rate of GHG increase shot up to 3.1%.

"The research noted a reversal of the trend towards greater energy efficiency and lower carbon working seen in the 1990s.

"'The trends relating energy to economic growth are definitely headed in the wrong direction,' said Chris Field, one of the authors of the report and director of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology.

"'Despite the scientific consensus that carbon emissions are affecting the world's climate, we are not seeing evidence of progress in managing those emissions in either the developed or developing countries. In many parts of the world, we are going backwards.'

"The American, British, Australian and French scientists behind the study found that the acceleration of carbon dioxide emissions was greatest in the rapidly expanding economies of developing countries, particularly China.

"In 2004, 73% of the growth in global emissions came from developing economies, which comprise 80% of the world's population. However, when the scientists looked at total emissions for the year, they found developed countries, including the former Soviet Union, contributed about 60%."

Iran Joining Al-Qaeda Against US?


Now consider the source. Ask yourself: a) whether any party has an obvious benefit to be had from this account, and; b) whether that party and the source are one and the same.

The source: the United States. The story: Iran is planning on allying with al-Qaeda and Sunni Iraqis to help force America out of Iraq.

A "senior US official in Baghdad" tells The Guardian that "...US commanders were bracing for a nationwide, Iranian-orchestrated summer offensive, linking al-Qaida and Sunni insurgents to Tehran's Shia militia allies, that Iran hoped would trigger a political mutiny in Washington and a US retreat. 'We expect that al-Qaida and Iran will both attempt to increase the propaganda and increase the violence prior to Petraeus's report in September [when the US commander General David Petraeus will report to Congress on President George Bush's controversial, six-month security "surge" of 30,000 troop reinforcements].'"

"US officials now say they have firm evidence that Tehran has switched tack as it senses a chance of victory in Iraq. In a parallel development, they say they also have proof that Iran has reversed its previous policy in Afghanistan and is now supporting and supplying the Taliban's campaign against US, British and other Nato forces.

"Tehran's strategy to discredit the US surge and foment a decisive congressional revolt against Mr Bush is national in scope and not confined to the Shia south, its traditional sphere of influence, the senior official in Baghdad said. It included stepped-up coordination with Shia militias such as Moqtada al-Sadr's Jaish al-Mahdi as well as Syrian-backed Sunni Arab groups and al-Qaida in Mesopotamia, he added. Iran was also expanding contacts across the board with paramilitary forces and political groups, including Kurdish parties such as the PUK, a US ally."

So, there you have it. The already failed "Surge" now can be passed off as something other than a failure. Just point a finger at Iran. Come to think of it, with a good bit of spin, the "Surge" might even work as a shoehorn to expand this glorious war to Iran itself. Think of the possibilities! Hell, how is America supposed to win in Iraq with one hand tied behind its back? This drama is straight out of Saigon 30-years ago. Hey, isn't that plagiarism?

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Republicans, Rednecks and Racism


The Republican Party has mutated into a party of America's Deep South. That's where the core of its support is to be found and that accounts for why slime like Tom Delay, Trent Lott and George W. Bush ascend to become its leaders.

The Republican Party isn't an overtly white supremacist organization but, these days, that sort of thing really isn't necessary. There are plenty of ways to reach the same objectives and smile at the cameras at the same time.

Now the Deep South and racism are about as well linked as fried chicken and hot oil. If you don't understand the connection you might as well get straight back to whatever planet you just came from. The Deep South has evolved similar bonds to Christian fundamentalism and to the Republican Party.

The history of Christian fundamentalism and racism (at least if you think slavery is a form of racism) goes way back. In his book, American Fascists, author Chris Hedges records how the anti-slavery fundamentalist movement utterly reversed itself when it saw an opportunity to flourish in the pre-Civil War era south. In his early years even the late Uber-Kristian, Jerry Falwell, refused to perform mixed marriages and until only recently Bob Jones University forbad mixed race dating. We're talking real Kristian Krackers here folks.

The Republicans knew a good thing when they saw it - and they saw it when Democratic President Lyndon Johnson enacted civil rights legislation that cut off southern discrimination loopholes. Republicans, Rednecks, Racists and Radical Christians - how far off can the Rapture really be?

Now Bob Jones University got caught red-handed and ran for cover but, c'mon folks, does anyone really believe this Southern Redneck/Fundamentalist/Republican racism problem has gone away? And no, don't go asking a bunch of Southern redneck fundamentalist Republicans, no fair.

If you really have any doubts, try to swing by the courthouse in Jena, Louisiana this week. If you yearn for the "good old days", tomorrow marks the start of a race trial that, as reported in The Guardian, really fits the bill:

"Jena is gaining national notoriety as an example of the new 'stealth' racism, showing how lightly sleep the demons of racial prejudice in America's Deep South, even in the year that a black man, Barak Obama, is a serious candidate for the White House.

"It began in Jena's high school last August when Kenneth Purvis asked the headteacher if black students could break with a long-held tradition and join the whites who sit under the tree in the school courtyard during breaks. The boy was told that he and his friends could sit where they liked.

"The following morning white students had hung three nooses there. 'Bad taste, silly, but just a prank,' was the response of most of Jena's whites.

"'To us those nooses meant the KKK [Ku Klux Klan], they meant, "Niggers, we're going to kill you, we're going to hang you till you die,"' says Caseptla Bailey, a black community leader and mother of one of the accused. The three white perpetrators of what was seen as a race hate crime were given 'in-school' suspensions (sent to another school for a few days before returning).
"Jena's major industry is growing and marketing junk pine. Walk down the usually deserted main street and you will not find many black employees. Bailey, 56, is a former air force officer and holder of a business management degree. 'I couldn't even get a job in Jena as a bank teller,' she said. 'Look at the banks and the best white-collar jobs and you'll see only white and red necks in those collars.'

"Billy Doughty, the local barber, has never cut black men's hair. 'They just don't come here,' he mumbled. 'Anyway, their hair is different and difficult to cut.'

"The majority of blacks live in an area known as Ward 10. Many homes are trailers, or wooden shacks. Rubbish lies in the streets. On 'Snob Hill', where the whites live, the spacious gardens and lawns are trimmed, the gravelled drives boast SUVs and nice new saloons. Only two black families live there. A teacher from Jena High had enough money to buy his way in. But when he arrived local estate agents refused to show him a 'white' property even though several were advertised in the local paper ('they're all under contract,' the agents lied). The teacher eventually went to see one white owner and offered him cash. 'The guy preferred green [dollars] to black, so I got the property,' laughed the teacher, 'but since we moved in three years ago we haven't been invited by a single neighbour.'

"On 30 November, someone tried to burn Jena High to the ground. The crime remains unsolved. That same weekend race fights between teenagers broke out downtown, and on 4 December racial tension boiled over once more in the school. A white student, Justin Barker, was attacked, allegedly by six black students.

"The expected charges of assault and battery were not laid, and the six were charged with attempted second-degree murder and conspiracy to commit second-degree murder. They now face a lifetime in jail.

"Barker spent the evening of the assault at the local Baptist church, where he was seen by friends to be 'his usual smiling self'.

"Nine days later, with the case technically sub judice, the District Attorney made the following public statement to the local paper: 'I will not tolerate this type of behaviour. To those who act in this manner I tell you that you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and with the harshest crimes that the facts justify. When you are convicted I will seek the maximum penalty allowed by law. I will see to it that you never again menace the students at any school in this parish.'

"Bail for the impoverished students was set absurdly high, and most have been held in custody. The town's mind seems to be made up."

Hurricane Katrina tore the roof off the illusion of Southern equality and the trial of the Jena Six proclaims that the vilest forms of Southern racism are alive and well. Their hatred and intolerance are the powerful fuel of the emerging political right.

Saturday, May 19, 2007

True to Form

General Rick Hillier has been responsible for setting the new tone of Canada's armed forces - tough, macho, trained killers - and he's starting to reap the rewards of his juvenile claptrap.

The proof of this particular pudding is in the type of young person now trying to enlist in Canada's military. A study of the recent recruits has found an increasing number "...are prone to displaying traits of social disobedience, intolerance toward ethnic groups and being fatalistic."

The Toronto Star reports, "A profile drawn up in the study shows that today's average potential military recruit is 'proud and intense,' a 'crude hedonist' and drawn to transgressive behaviour – or breaking the rules. Potential recruits are also driven by the need for social status and 'to belong,' and feel a lack of confidence in the future."

"The potential recruits tend to show an affinity for social Darwinism, characterized by the view that only the strongest members of society will survive. Violence and sex are also prominent interests associated with potential soldiers, according to the study, by Montreal-based polling firm CROP Inc.

"This contrasts, the study says, with those already enrolled in the army, who have upstanding qualities, including a commitment to duty and ethical concerns. They also seek enriching experiences and have a capacity to deal with uncertainty.

"The new report says the standing of the Canadian Forces has clearly risen since the Somalia scandal, thanks to a general alignment between military values and Canadian values.

"It found that Canadians are becoming more deferential to authority and more receptive to the need for strong homeland security, law and order and national pride."

Bush and Blair's Baghdad Fantasy

The lead editorial in today's Guardian contends that Tony Blair and George Bush's perception of Iraq is utterly delusional and repudiated by the facts on the ground.

"...after four years of occupation then Mr Bush and Mr Blair's collective account of Iraq amounts to virtual reality. In their vision there are 152,000 Iraqi soldiers (10 divisions) and 135,000 policemen, 26,000 national servicemen and 33,000 other forces personnel - all trained. There is a navy, 1,000-strong, and an air force. There is a government that functions, and whose writ runs outside the heavily fortified green zone in central Baghdad. There is a constitution, and a political process in place. The surge of US reinforcements is showing signs of working. As trained, professional, non-sectarian Iraqi troops stand up, coalition forces will stand down. The situation is difficult. It may get worse before it gets better. But the American and British people need to hold their nerve. Give the plan we have got time to work, they plead.

"But examine the plan and it begins to unravel, as all the other security plans have. Sunni insurgents are showing a remarkable ability to regroup. Forced out of Baghdad temporarily, 50 of them attacked a US base in Baquba yesterday. There is a major manhunt going on for three US soldiers seized in an ambush a week ago. Anyone who argues that the surge is quelling the insurgency, rather than merely displacing it, will have difficulty sustaining the thesis. Power has become so dispersed that it makes little sense talking about one insurgency, or indeed one civil war. As Gareth Stansfield argues in a Chatham House paper this week, there are Shias fighting against Sunnis for control of Baghdad; there are Kurds struggling against Arabs in Kirkuk and possibly also Mosul; there are Sunnis fighting US soldiers in the centre and the north; there are Sadrist Shias fighting the US and British in the south; Sunni tribal forces are fighting Sunni Islamists of al-Qaida; Shia militia groups are fighting each other in the south, as we report today; and there is also rampant criminality everywhere.

"There is no shortage of deeply gloomy scenarios for a country that is in the process of disintegrating. If serious fighting breaks out this year between the Kurds and Arabs in Kirkuk, the world will see just how much further Iraq can fall. Few doubt that there will be a pull-out of coalition forces. The only debate is how quickly and under what conditions. Some insiders argue that it is better to get the pain over with now, and hand over to the Iraqi army and police force immediately, others that a central government with an army and police force is a myth on which it is dangerous to rely, and that local forces should be put in charge of local law enforcement. Whoever is right, it is surely time that our leaders started recognising the reality of life in Iraq and stopped indulging in daydreams."

Just Who is George W. Bush?


It's often claimed by today's Republican leadership candidates that their unpopular president isn't really a conservative and not much of a Republican either. At the same time, however, polls of core Republican supporters show solid approval for Mr. Bush and his policies. A lot of his committed supporters present him as a good guy who just got bad advice and was let down by his key aides. These myths were shredded in today's New York Times.

The lead editorial refutes the notion that Bush's problems have resulted from bad advice from the likes of Alberto Gonzales, George Tenet or Donald Rumsfeld and the president's renowned loyalty to his aides. It contends that Bush's tenacity in supporting these types, despite their demonstration of chronic incompetence, bad judgment or malfeasance is really grounded in the fact that they've actually been doing precisely what he's told them to do. In other words, the incompetence, bad judgment and malfeasance originates with and lies squarely at the feet of George Walker Bush himself.

One by one these aides and supposed advisors have turned into sycophantic minions delivering up exactly what their boss ordered.

Columnist Paul Krugman takes this argument one step further and claims that while Bush may have, "...degraded our government and undermined the rule of law; ...led us into strategic disaster and moral squalor," he's not been untrue to his party's values and wishes.

Krugman revisited the last Republican leadership debate at which every candidate save for John McCain endorsed the use of torture and mirrored Bush's state of denial about the utter failure in Iraq.

The columnist argues that Bush's bubble, his "no-reality zone" extends to the Republican party's core supporters who, "...believe that patriotic torturers are keeping us safe, that there’s a vast Islamic axis of evil, that victory in Iraq is just around the corner, that Bush appointees are doing a heckuva job — and that news reports contradicting these beliefs reflect liberal media bias."

George W. Bush is indeed the face of today's movement conservative, southern Republican party.

Friday, May 18, 2007

Blair Defends Iraq Policy



That seems to be the story line coming out of Tony Blair's final visit to the White House. The media, as always, are treating this as news.


This charade has been going on for years and no one seems to ask "what other choice does he have?" Just imagine.


Imagine if Tony Blair decided to redeem his integrity at his final White House press conference. It might have gone something like this:


1. The whole Iraq business was a fiasco even before the first tank rolled across the Iraqi border and I knew it.

2. The war was illegal. We knew that. It was because we knew Resolution 1441 did not authorize war that my government tabled another resolution before the Security Council, one that would make the war legal. I got caught in my own scheme when it was apparent we couldn't get anything remotely like a majority to approve the resolution. That's when we skulked about, blamed the French threat to veto it, withdrew the whole resolution and invented the notion that 1441 authorized war. We had to, we were already committed to the invasion. It was too late for anything else.

3. Yes, I'm probably a war criminal. So's George and Dick and Rummy. I guess Condi would get lumped in with us too and, of course, Jack Straw.

4. A lot of the blame lies with me. I failed to stand up to my fellow born again. Didn't have the spine. Instead I seconded his adventure, gave it legitimacy.

5. I knew that the intelligence was heavily gamed.

6. My own people warned me that the Yanks had no idea of what they would do after Saddam was driven out.

7. It was obvious from the beginning that there were plenty of ways this whole thing could go bad. We knew there was no bottom to the potential downside of this harebrained scheme.

8. George and Dick and I - and Rummy as well - were utterly and completely incompetent in running this war and tens of thousands of innocents have paid for that with their lives.

9. My friends and I will all soon be out of office but we're not leaving without giving the world a few gifts such as a Middle East in flames; Islamic terrorism born again (neat pun, eh?); global security and co-operation set back decades, two wars, Iraq and Afghanistan, lost.

10. Getting rid of Saddam was never worth it.


Tony Blair has left the White House for the last time but he didn't take his integrity with him on the way out.

Poor Old Harpo


Canada's New Government is looking very old - old and tired, worn out and wobbly, running on empty if running at all.

Now this is a site for Progressives so, be fair. Let's face it, Harpo didn't have much to begin with so it's a bit of a cheap shot to measure his performance against a real prime minister.

For starters, the Harpster didn't have a vision. He was driven by an ideology, one that was already crumbling under its own weight elsewhere just as he got his imperfect shot at power.

Harpo was never much more than an Amway type. He found a calling and it was the Reagan Revolution and he was a True Believer and figured he could bring Canadians to heel if only he could get the reins of government. It was always about making the Canadian people fit his ideology, not meeting their own values and interests. In front of his Uber-Right Amerikan friends he mocked and belittled the Canadian people, revealing his goal wasn't to serve Canadians but to serve them up to his skewed and alien dogma.

Stevie has faced a lot of hurdles since he toppled the Martin government and he hasn't cleared a lot of them. It's tough replacing one minority government with another, particularly when the outfit you bumped was actually running the country very well. Oh at first it's easy because you've been left with a full treasury to dole out. That always makes friends. After that, though, things get a lot trickier.

The Harperites were an unruly herd of cats, largely inexperienced and, as these things go, relatively unaccomplished. Definitely not the sort that give any leader too much confidence when it comes to delegation and power-sharing and the calibre that give a control freak like Harpo utter fits. He did the only thing that a person of his character could do - he instituted strongman rule. So long as power was exercised behind the velvet curtain in the Emerald City all would be right, eh?

Harpo tied a set of strings to each of his cabinet ministers and ran about furiously behind the stage making them dance. It was the puppet master, his ideology and his marionettes. A telling example was Rona Ambrose, the Boss's first EnviroMin. Taking his cue from his American Idol, Harpo saw global warming as a load of nonsense about "so-called greenhouse gases" and left Ms. Ambrose swinging idly backstage. When that blew up in his face all he had was a hollow shell of big hair and lipstick. Feeling the flames licking his feet, Little Stevie called in his fireman, Baird, to douse the fire but keep the smoke. And hasn't that knuckle-dragger done a wonderful job?

Now Canada's New Government sits stymied, all dressed up (albeit poorly) and going nowhere in the polls. Without a majority Stevie can't drop the Harper Manifesto on the Canadian people but he can't hope to get a majority without looking assuringly moderate and, on that score, he comes across a poor impersonation of the Liberal government he so despised. One by one he's forced to reinstate Liberal policies and programmes that he furiously scrapped on taking office. The longer he has to stay in that spot the worse it gets for him - and he knows it.

So don't be too harsh in judging Harpo. He just arrived on the scene two decades too late. The world is changing - rapidly - and it's heading in the wrong direction for the only thing Stevie knows, his Reagan ideology.




Thursday, May 17, 2007

Weapons of Mass Destruction? Look No Further.


How does this sound for weapons of mass destruction - 132 million unexploded cluster bomblets? Handicap International estimates there are between 22-132 million of these nasty devices waiting to catch the unwary in some 20-countries. From The Guardian:

"The vast majority of cluster bomb casualties occur while victims are carrying on their daily lives, says the report, Circle of Impact: The Fatal Footprint of Cluster Munitions on People and Communities.

"The huge numbers turn "homes and crucial social areas of the people living in affected countries into de facto minefields", says the Brussels-based charity. "As men and boys are the traditional earners and the majority of casualties, the economic loss for both the short term and the distant future cannot be underestimated."

"In Afghanistan, boys between five and 14 who are tending animals are most likely to be casualties. In Laos, more than 1,000 people were killed by submunitions while weeding or sowing crops."

Environmental Degradation Hits Spanish Beaches


Spain is moving to protect its precious tourist beaches from an onslaught of jellyfish. Spain plans to scour coastal waters to scoop up the creatures before they can reach the beaches and vacationing swimmers.

Why all the jellyfish? One cause is the exhaustion of red tuna stocks, a key jellyfish predator, due to overfishing. Another is a lack of rainfall preventing the usual flow of fresh water into coastal regions that once kept jellyfish well offshore.

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Iraq Facing Collapse - Chatham House

As think tanks go, Britain's Royal Institute for International Affairs, commonly known as "Chatham House", is about as authoritative as they come. That's one reason to heed its latest report warning that Iraq is poised on the brink of collapse and fragmentation.

The BBC reports this latest paper, written by Gareth Stansfield, a Middle East expert, is unremittingly bleak. Mr Stansfield, of Exeter University and Chatham House, argues that the break-up of Iraq is becoming increasingly likely.

"In large parts of the country, the Iraqi government is powerless, he says, as rival factions struggle for local supremacy.

"The briefing paper, entitled Accepting Realities in Iraq, says: "There is not 'a' civil war in Iraq, but many civil wars and insurgencies involving a number of communities and organisations struggling for power."

"The paper accuses each of Iraq's major neighbouring states - Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey - of having reasons 'for seeing the instability there continue, and each uses different methods to influence developments'.

"The paper says: 'These current harsh realities need to be accepted if new strategies are to have any chance of preventing the failure and collapse of Iraq.'

Mr Stansfield contends that the American security surge is moving violence to different areas, but is not overcoming it.

Wolfie Fights to Save What He's Already Lost


Mission Accomplished, Wolfie Boy
It's a spectacle befitting a Greek tragedy. Paul Wolfowitz negotiating his resignation from the World Bank in a vain attempt to salvage his reputation. He doesn't understand that the World Bank was his hidey-hole, the place he was to go to lay low while memories of his instigation of the Iraq war fiasco dimmed. It wasn't a bad job, all he had to do was keep very quiet.

He blew it. Now he's Paul Wolfowitz, architect of America's greatest foreign policy blunder of all time and chump who couldn't even hang onto a job bestowed on him by his own government.

Paul, you might as well just resign and go away quietly. You don't have any reputation left to salvage. You're a two-time loser in a stratus where damned few even get second chances. Go away, preferably well into the night. You're embarrassing senior management.

Wolfowitz Not Welcome

A German cabinet minister has issued a rebuke to World Bank President, Paul Wolfowitz.

Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul told reporters that Wolfie and all the controversy that surrounds him are not welcome at an African forum the bank is staging next week in Berlin.

"I would not advise him to (take part) if he's still in office," she said, referring to Wolfowitz.

Ethics and Climate Change

Global warming can be seen as primarily a scientific issue but its very enormity brings into play powerful political, economic, social and ethical dimensions.

Ethics and climate change was the topic of a two-day seminar held earlier this month at the University of Washington. Some of the ideas discussed were:

Basic, universal human rights. The argument was made that there is a duty, on the part of all nations and peoples, to protect core human interests including the right to decent health, economic necessities and physical security. These rights must be safeguarded by all for the benefit of those living and for generations to come. In other words, our policies today, our governments and societies must accommodate these rights for future generations. There are those who strongly contend that future people should not have any rights in today's policy making.

What is truly wrong with climate change. This presentation focused on the five fundamentals: 1. that it imposes unacceptable risks (Schneider and others); 2. that it will cause significant economic losses (Nordhause and others); 3. that it is unjust (Shue and others); 4. that it will have irreversible effects. For those who are most concerned about climate change there is a further, fundamental moral intuition that is at work that raises the salience of this issue. The intuition is roughly that it is simply wrong for humans to causally affect natural systems in such a profound way.

The role and duty of scientists to confront those who abuse or politicize global warming science. How far do scientists’ responsibilities go in ensuring that relevant science is appropriately transmitted and understood by the public and policy makers? Even if scientists are not interested in the political ramifications of their work, do they still have a responsibility to try and ensure that it is not misused? What recourses are available to extract work from the fake ‘scientized’ political debate? Do all scientists have this responsibility, or can the field rely on a few public spokespeople? To what extent are ‘public’ scientists responsible for explaining/defending the field as a whole rather than just their own work?

The four dimensions of failing to deal with global warming:

1 . Failing to deal with climate change constitutes, not failing to help future generations, but inflicting harm on them;
2. Failing to deal with climate change constitutes inflicting harm on generations who could have been spared all such harm;
3. Failing to deal with climate change constitutes not simply continuing to make it worse, but unnecessarily creating opportunities for it to become significantly worse by feeding upon itself through positive feedbacks that
would otherwise not have occurred; and
4. Failing to deal with climate change constitutes not only unnecessarily creating opportunities for the planetary environment to become significantly worse, but also unnecessarily creating opportunities for it to become catastrophically worse.

Like it or not, if we want answers that best suit our societal needs, we're going to have to delve seriously into the philosophical, moral and ethical dimensions of global warming.

Change of Heart - Prince Harry Stays Home


Prince Harry will not be with his regiment when it ships out for Iraq. According to the Associated Press:

"Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt, the army chief of staff who recently traveled to Iraq, said the changing situation on the ground exposed the prince to too much danger. Media scrutiny of Harry's potential deployment exacerbated the situation, he said.

"'There have been a number of specific threats, some reported and some not reported, that relate directly to Prince Harry as an individual,' Dannatt said. 'These threats exposed him and those around him to a degree of risk I considered unacceptable.'"

Tough call, especially for Harry who was pretty determined to serve with his squadron in the war zone.

The Nail in Gonzales' Coffin?


Monkey See, Monkey Do

How low can he go? George Bush's overreaching Attorney-General, Alberto Gonzales keeps showing himself to be ever more dishonest and unethical.
The latest episode in the Gonzales drama plays like something out of The Godfather. Then Attorney-General John Ashcroft lies in a bed in intensive care, recovering from surgery. His aide, James B. Comey, then the acting U.S. attorney general, gets a late night call on his way home. It's from Ashcroft's aide. Mrs. Ashcroft has received word that two Bush aides are en route to the hospital.
Comey orders his security detail to head for the George Washington Medical Centre. He also calls FBI Director Robert Mueller to get to the hospital and protect Ashcroft from any coercion.
Comey speeds to the hospital and arrives just in time to head off the intruders, one of whom was the man who would ultimately succeed Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales. The purpose of their visit, or raid, was to get an incapacitated Ashcroft to approve a secret national security directive authorizing warrantless wiretaps. Comey beat them to the punch and they were sent packing.
Comey, testifying before a senate committee, revealed details of that raid and the aftermath that sound like something straight out of Hollywood. The drama aside, his evidence leaves no doubt that Alberto Gonzales is utterly morally unfit to hold the post of Attorney General of the US.




Not Leaving Anytime Soon


Here it is, what will become the biggest embassy in the world. It's American. It's in Baghdad. It's about the same size as the Vatican, 104 acres containing a 27-building complex. It comes complete with 600-blast proof apartments.

The main concern at the moment is that the development simply isn't big enough. Not enough meeting space for congressional delegations, insufficient housing. According to the McClatchey news service, one tenant is even demanding bullet-resistant, kevlar blankets for those long nights when the mortar rounds have you tossing and turning endlessly.

Now, c'mon folks. Does this sound like Washington expects security to return to Baghdad anytime soon? Does it sound like the White House is yearning for the day that the US can clear out of Iraq?

More Tokyo Chicanery


The International Whaling Commission has a new member! Everyone give a big "hello" to - well, to Laos.

Laos has a real interest in whales and don't let the fact that it's landlocked fool you. Whales are big, after all, and Laos isn't big so the connection is obvious. That Laos has now jumped aboard the Tokyo gravy train, perhaps might even use its position to vote against whaling moratoria, really has nothing to do with it.

Maybe it's time we told our Japanese friends that buying votes on the International Whaling Commission is corrupt and wholly unacceptable. Now you may not have any Japanese friends you swap e-mails with but here are some people you might want to contact, folks with names like Sony, Mitsubishi, Toyota, Honda, Yamaha, Subaru and Suzuki. Let those people know what you think of it. They'll get the message.

Let's Train'em, Declare Victory and Leave


Great progress being made in Afghanistan. Six years down the road and we're almost at the halfway point in the goal of building a 70,000-soldier strong Afghan army. Once we hit that magic number, so we're told anyway, it's all "Mission Accomplished" and we can move on. Just a few more years now - or maybe ten or twenty or...

The Afghanistan National Army is a bit of a novelty. The country has never really fielded a national army in recent history. Force has been structured by militias controlled by ethnic warlords - Pashtun, Baloch, Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara. The national army essentially takes that military control out of the hands of the warlords and there's the rub.

Where are those warlords today? Why, many of them are in key positions of power in the Karzai government. Some of those are also in the narcotics industry. Some have ties to the Taliban.

What then is holding the Afghan national army together as its rate of enlistment slowly comes to outpace its rate of desertions? Well the glue would be the US and NATO forces in that country. They provide the structure and, after this many years, they're actually getting fairly good at herding the cats.

The question is whether the western troops have become the indispensible spine of the Afghan National Army. What is there to replace them if we leave that country? What would be left save for a thoroughly corrupt and dysfunctional central government?

If the national government is too weak and corrupt to sustain the national army, what then? That may depend as much on the army's officer corps as the number and quality of soldiers we train for them. It is not inconceivable that it may take a military coup to prevent a post-NATO Afghanistan from sliding back into the abyss of warring fuedalism fueled by the spoils of a failed, narco-state.

Maybe the best we can do for Afghanistan is to help train an effective army with heavy emphasis on its officer corps so that we can leave the country in safe hands. Perhaps this is our only legitimate exit strategy. The quest to bring Western democracy to Afghanistan may be more than the US, NATO and Afghanistan can bear.

The True Conservative President


George Bush gets roundly attacked from within his party for abandoning true conservative principles. Some even argue that he's no Replublican at all. An interesting article in today's New York Times by Rutgers history professor David Greenberg claims that Bush is, if anything, the ultimate Republican conservative and that's what truly has his fellow party leaders worried:

"...Before Reagan, the so-called conservative movement had been an insurgent force within the Republican party. But starting in the 1980s, most of the liberals in the party left it, and for the last 10 or 20 years, the party and the movement have been more or less congruent. From 2002 to 2007, moreover, the G.O.P. controlled not just the White House but both houses of Congress, the federal judiciary and a majority of state governments, as well as more media outlets than ever before. They were thus able to impose a conservative agenda with little resistance.

"Indeed, so few were the obstacles that conservatism was able to run amok. The result — in the assessment of not just liberals but also other observers — has been disaster: a mess of a war, the failure to plan for Hurricane Katrina, the erosion of the church-state wall, widening inequality, the loss of civil liberties including habeas corpus, and scores of other ills that readers of this column can list as easily as I. This was the fruit of modern American conservatism.

"But now Republicans are deserting Bush. Businessmen and evangelicals, libertarians and social moderates are all astir. The reason isn’t that Bush failed to espouse their causes any more than Reagan did. From the Iraq War on down, after all, his policies have also been their policies — backed by their legislators, upheld by their judges, championed by their journalists.

"No, the reason so many are complaining about Bush or today’s G.O.P. is that their policies haven’t worked out very well. Since the 2004 election, majorities of Americans have turned against them. What conservatives like Chuck Hagel and Bush’s other right-wing detractors fear in their bones — and not without reason — is that majorities of Americans will soon also turn against the creed of conservatism itself."

It may be time for Harpo to take another look at those bones and entrails.

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

The Ploys of Christian Fundamentalism


With the passing of uber-evangelist Jerry Falwell this seemed a good time to let Chris Hedges be heard on the issue of fundamentalists and their compulsive belief in biblical inerrancy - that is to say that the notion that every word in the Bible is absolutely and completely true:

The four Gospels, we understood, were filled with factual contradictions, two Gospels saying Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, while Luke asserted that John was already in prison. Mark and John gave little importance to the birth of Jesus, while Matthew and Luke give differing accounts. There are three separate and different versions of the 10 Commandments (Exodus 20, Exodus 34, and Deuteronomy 5). As for the question of God's true nature, there are many substantive contradictions. Is God a loving or a vengeful God? In some sections of the Bible, vicious acts of vengeance, including the genocidal extermination of opposing tribes and nations, appear to be blessed by God. God turns on the Egyptians and transforms the Nile into blood so the Egyptians will suffer from thirst - and then sends swarms of locusts and flies to torture them, along with hail, fire and thunder from the heavens to destroy all plants and trees. To liberate the children of Israel, God orders the firstborn in every Egyptian household killed so all will know "that the Lord makes a distinction between the Egyptians and Israel " (Exodus 11.7). The killing does not cease until "there was not a house where one was not dead" (Exodus 12:30). Amid the carnage God orders Moses to loot all the clothing, jewelry, gold and silver from the Egyptian homes (Exodus 12:35-36). God looks at the devastation and says "I have made sport of the Egyptians" (Exodus 10:2). While the Exodus story fueled the hopes and dreams of oppressed Jews, and later African Americans in the bondage of slavery, it has also been used to foster religious chauvinism.

A literal reading of the Bible means re institution of slavery coupled with the understanding that the slavemaster has the right to beat his slave without mercy since "the slave is his money" (Exodus 21:21). Children who strike or curse a parent are to be executed (Exodus 21:15, 17). Those who pay homage to another god "shall be utterly destroyed" (Exodus 22:20). Menstruating women are to be considered unclean, and all they touch while menstruating becomes unclean (Leviticus 15:19-32). The blind, the lame, those with mutilated faces, those who are hunchbacks or dwarfs and those with itching diseases or scabs or crushed testicles cannot become priests (Leviticus 24:16). And "if the spirit of jealousy" comes upon a man, the high priest can order the jealous man's wife to drink "the water of bitterness." If she dies, it is proof of her guilt; if she survives, of her innocence (Numbers 5:11-31). Women, throughout the Bible, are subservient to men, often without legal rights, and men are free to sell their daughters into sexual bondage (Exodus 21:7-11).

Hatred of Jews and other non-Christians pervades the Gospel of John (3:18-20). Jews, he wrote, are children of the devil, the father of lies (John 8:39-44). Jesus calls on his followers to love their enemies and to pray for their persecutors (Matthew 5:44), a radical concept in the day of the Roman Empire. He says we must never demean or insult our enemies. But then we read of Jesus calling his enemies "a brood of vipers" (Matthew 12:34).

The Book of Revelation, a crucial text for the radical Christian Right, appears to show Christ returning to earth at the head of an avenging army. It is one of the few places in the Bible where Christ is associated with violence. This bizarre book, omitted from some of the early canons and relegated to the back of the Bible by Martin Luther, may have been a way, as scholars contend, for the early Christians to cope with Roman persecution and their dreams of final triumph and glory. The book, however, paints a picture of a bloody battle between the forces of good and evil, Christ and the Antichrist, God and Satan, and the torment and utter destruction of those who do not follow the faith. In this vision, only the faithful will be allowed to enter the gates of the New Jerusalem. All others will disappear, cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14-15).

...There is enough hatred, bigotry and lust for violence in the pages of the Bible to satisfy anyone bent on justifying cruelty and violence. Religion, as H. Richard Niebuhr said, is a good thing for good people and a bad thing for bad people. And the Bible has long been used in the wrong hands - such as the antebellum slave owners in the American South who quoted from it to defend slavery - not to Christianize the culture, as those wielding it often claim, but to acculturate the Christian faith.

...These evangelicals and fundamentalists are, as the Reverend William Sloane Coffin wrote, not biblical literalists, as they claim, but "selective literalists," choosing the bits and pieces of the Bible that conform to their ideology and ignoring, distorting or inventing the rest. And the selective literalists cannot have it both ways. Either the Bible is literally true and all of its edicts must be obeyed, or it must be read in another way.

...Church leaders must denounce the biblical passages that champion apocalyptic violence and hateful political creeds. They must do so in the light of other biblical passages that teach a compassion and tolerance, often exemplified in the life of Christ, which stands opposed to bigotry and violence. Until this happens, until the Christian churches wade into the debate, these biblical passages will be used by bigots and despots to give sacred authority to their calls to subjugate or eradicate the enemies of god.

Chris Hedges, American Fascists

Fall Guy Found for Iraq War Debacle


President Bush has chosen Lt. General Douglas Lute, currently the Pentagon's director of operations, to oversee the fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq as the President's "War Czar."

The position, created after those ordinarily responsible for such things took to the hills to distance themselves from the Iraq fiasco, is Lute's opportunity to end his career in total ignominy. General Lute, known for his skills in stenography and copy filing, has been promised he will be able to retain his parking spot at the Pentagon.

It is understood that the general will immediately begin preparing for the handover by practising falling on his sword.

Father and Son


In 1992, George H.W. Bush was President of the United States. In that year he signed into law

the Energy Policy Act of 1992, which was developed in response to energy dependence issues raised by the first Persian Gulf War. The law prescribed the replacement of 10 percent of petroleum motor-fuel consumption with alternative fuels by the year 2000 and 30 percent by 2010.

On Monday, GHW Bush's idiot son announced his green initiative, the "20-in-10" proposal to replace 20% of US gasoline consumption with alternative fuels by 2017.

The Bush 43 administration dragged its heels so badly on Bush 41's Energy Policy Act of 1992 that it had to be sued, successfully, three times and even now remains in violation of those requirements.

Bush 43 (Shrub to you) is happy to parrot his blatant retreat from his own father's standards as a great environmental breakthrough.

Saving Forests Begins at Home


Canada is being urged to protect our boreal forests. A meeting of 1,500 scientists gathered in Ottawa identified the global significance of Canada's forest lands. From Reuters:

"Canada's Boreal Forest, stretching from the Alaskan border and running north of the plains all the way to Newfoundland on the Atlantic, is one of largest intact forest-and-wetland ecosystems remaining on earth.

"The mainly coniferous forest is the single largest terrestrial carbon storehouse in the world, which helps stem the greenhouse effect. It supports 3 billion migratory songbirds, the world's largest caribou herds and large populations of bears, wolves, lynx and fish.

"University of Alberta ecologist David Schindler warned, 'Canada's Boreal Forest offers what may be our last, best chance to do things right, but only if our leaders act decisively and act now.'

"The scientists called for half of Canada's Boreal Forest to be protected, up from 10 percent now, and for development in the rest to be carefully managed, particularly in the face of pressure from logging, mining and oil and gas operations.

"For example, they said an area the size of Florida is slated to be used for the development of Canada's vast tar sands reserves."


Time Flies


Bennett, The Christian Science Monitor

Fallwell Fell Unwell - Now Dead




I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for an American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say, "you helped this happen."

The Reverend Jerry Falwell exposing the real villains responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

He's dead. Good riddance.

The Decency Deficit of George W. Harper


He's studied the Republican play book, memorized every paragraph in the section on slime and imported it directly into Canadian politics. Stephen Harper has shown that he can be just as morally bereft as his American Idol, the now thoroughly discredited George Bush.

One of the lessons Harpo has mastered is that war is good. Not for the troops, perhaps, and certainly not for civilians who happen to live within several hundred feet of the arrival of a 2,000 pound aerial bomb, but, damn, it can be real goooooood for a good old boy politician. Get yourself in trouble, botch everything up, to the point where there is no handy excuse or explanation - why then use the war, use the troops, use their sacrifice, exploit the hell out of all of that to smear your critics, turning your failures into an attack on their patriotism. This is pure Bush/Cheney 101. It has no place in decent society.

Bill Graham took this to the Tories yesterday in the House of Commons, "The consistent approach" of Harper and the government is "to stifle legitimate debate about this mission (and) impugn the motives of members of this House who are every bit as patriotic as the Prime Minister and every person sitting over there."

Which prompted Tory house leader Peter van Loan to roll himself in a fresh coat of swill and reply, ""When it comes to consistency, the people of Canada know where this government stands. We stand firmly, clearly behind our troops and behind their mission."
At the end of the day this is all about decency and a basic respect for all Canadians. Harper and his gaggle of sycophants just keep showing us they have no sense of either.

Monday, May 14, 2007

More Bush Fallout - Russian Paranoia



George W. Bush is undoubtedly the worst, stupidest and most inept president in the history of the United States. The man defines incompetence and arrogance. His visions are fueled by the heady elixer of hubris. He styles himself the instrument of God's will but surely the hand directing him is Loki's.

He came to the White House with the swagger of omnipotence. Here was the POTUS for the red meat crowd, personified by the neo-conservatives and their Project for the New American Century. Bush was to be the man to remake the world in America's image, to complete the legacy of Ronald Reagan.

George Bush was none of the things his movement expected. From global warming to global security he has failed his nation miserably. He ripped the veil off America's weaknesses and vulnerabilities while simultanousley emboldening her enemies and alienating her former friends. He brought war to Afghanistan and Iraq and lost both (at least by the objectives he announced when he began his adventures). He smothered the incomparable American military with wars it can neither win nor escape.

Not content with focusing on the challenges he was already incapable of tackling, Bush had to throw the rest of the world into turmoil with his pathetic Bush Doctrine, as bellicose and fascist a pronouncement as the western world has seen in almost 80-years. This president put every other nation and group of nations on notice that his America would use military force, if required, to pre-empt any other nation or group of nations from ever ascending to a point where it might rival the U.S. economically or militarily. The laws of war would no longer govern the United States which would act pre-emptively on the strength of its own perceptions.

The Bush Doctrine ought to have been met with angry protest and denouncement within the United States and among America's allies but that didn't happen. The Democrats, the American people and the rest of the west exemplified by NATO remained mute and complacent.

The Bush message was heard with alarm in some corners, notably Russia and China. The boom in world oil and gas prices has reinvigorated Russia's economic clout while that country is led by a shrewd, brutal and calculating president, himself an old Cold Warrior from the KGB.

Vladimir Putin has seen one provocation after another issue out of Washington. The United States has driven the expansion of NATO to Russia's very borders and has tried to supplant Russian influence with its southerly neighbours such as Kazhakstan and Turkmenistan. The US has shown Moscow that it is entirely willing to launch pre-emptive war on false pretences, something the Russians have experienced before in the 1940's. Now the Americans want to put anti-missile batteries right on Russia's doorstep. At the same time America has sparked arms races in China, India and Russia itself. This too is the Bush legacy.

Against this backdrop, Bush's Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, goes to Moscow today for meetings with President Putin. This is the woman who, just a few years ago, dismissed Russia as a "weak and incoherent country."

According to a report in this week's issue of The Economist, Rice will be met by a Russian leader heavy on suspicion and very light on goodwill toward her country's regime.

"RUSSIA is a strong, sovereign and prosperous country, surrounded by enemies and traitors who are bent on undermining its geopolitical power. Upstarts such as Estonia and Poland are trying to spoil Russia’s far more important relationships with proper European countries, such as Germany or France. The freshly-baked European Union (EU) members act on the instructions of America, a hypocritical and arrogant dictator of the world order, which pretends to be a democracy but in fact is closer to the Third Reich.

"This, in short and perhaps a bit exaggerated, is the view of Europe from behind the Kremlin wall, intensified by the state media, and shared by many Russians.

"Russia’s sense of power has been enhanced over the weekend by Mr Putin’s brinkmanship in central Asia. To the irritation of the White House, Russia has apparently persuaded Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to build a pipeline for the export of gas through, rather than around, Russia. If it actually goes ahead this would spoil American plans for a trans-Caspian pipeline which is seen as crucial for diversifying sources of energy to Europe.

"Russia’s rhetorical hostility towards America is reaching levels unseen since the cold war ended. Indeed, even in the late Soviet period anti-American propaganda was less emotional and certainly less sincere than it is today. The question now is whether the noisy words will be translated into action. That may become a bit clearer at the end of Ms Rice’s two-day long visit to Moscow."

It's unlikely that the Bush regime will try to defuse the tensions between Washington and Moscow. This is one president who has shown himself utterly incapable of correcting his mistakes. That means these problems will be left to simmer while the world awaits the next leaders who will take over from Bush and Putin. We can only live in hope.

Sunday, May 13, 2007


Imagine the carbon footprint of 8-million people flying from London to New York.

According to a report in The Independent, that is the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atomsphere each and every day due to deforestation.

"The accelerating destruction of the rainforests that form a precious cooling band around the Earth's equator, is now being recognised as one of the main causes of climate change. Carbon emissions from deforestation far outstrip damage caused by planes and automobiles and factories.

"The rampant slashing and burning of tropical forests is second only to the energy sector as a source of greenhouses gases according to report published today by the Oxford-based Global Canopy Programme, an alliance of leading rainforest scientists.

"Most people think of forests only in terms of the CO2 they absorb. The rainforests of the Amazon, the Congo basin and Indonesia are thought of as the lungs of the planet. But the destruction of those forests will in the next four years alone, in the words of Sir Nicholas Stern, pump more CO2 into the atmosphere than every flight in the history of aviation to at least 2025.

"Indonesia became the third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world last week. Following close behind is Brazil. Neither nation has heavy industry on a comparable scale with the EU, India or Russia and yet they comfortably outstrip all other countries, except the United States and China.

"What both countries do have in common is tropical forest that is being cut and burned with staggering swiftness. Smoke stacks visible from space climb into the sky above both countries, while satellite images capture similar destruction from the Congo basin, across the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and the Republic of Congo.

"The remaining standing forest is calculated to contain 1,000 billion tons of carbon, or double what is already in the atmosphere.

As the GCP's report concludes: "If we lose forests, we lose the fight against climate change."

Are Canadians Finally Fed Up with This Joker?

A Billion Homeless?

A report by Christian Aid, a group representing churches in Britain and Ireland, forecasts that up to a billion people could be forced to leave their homes by 2050 due to global warming and other developments.

The Christian Aid study is based on latest UN population and climate change figures. It says conflict, large-scale development projects and widespread environmental deterioration will combine to make life unsupportable for hundreds of millions of people, mostly in the Sahara belt, south Asia and the Middle East.

Western governments are increasingly aware of climate change as a security issue. Britain's foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, has highlighted the threat of climate change to the UN security council and last week said it was an underlying factor in the Darfur crisis with the potential to escalate many other existing conflicts. "In climate change we have a new and potentially disastrous dynamic," she said.

Over staunch Republican opposition, the US National Intelligence director has been given the go ahead to commence his own study of the looming environmental threats to US security.

Meanwhile, the C40, which represents leaders of the world's largest cities, begin their Large Cities Climate Summit in New York today. They contend that cities have a big role in combatting climate change as they contribute up to 80% of greenhouse gas emissions.

Saturday, May 12, 2007

Outsourcing Journalism - Maybe They'll Get It Now



Western reporters have been remarkably complacent about outsourcing in the era of globalization but that may be about to change. Now it's their jobs that could be next on the line.

A report in The Guardian tells of two reporters recently hired by PasadenaNow.com to cover city council meetings. The brace of scribes will probably never step foot inside the Pasadena city council chamber because they're based about 8,000 miles away in Mumbai and Bangalore, India.

The two reporters will watch council meetings on the internet and they'll work for spare change - one getting $12,000, the other a more modest $7,200.

The website's editor, James MacPherson, is a veteran at outsourcing from his experience in the clothing industry when he outsourced production to India and Vietnam.




Hooked on Firepower


In Afghanistan, US and NATO forces enjoy total air superiority and it may just cost them the war against the Taliban.

The New York Times reports that our dependence on air strikes has brought "the mission" to the brink of failure:

"Afghan, American and other foreign officials say they worry about the political toll the civilian deaths are exacting on President Hamid Karzai, who last week issued another harsh condemnation of the American and NATO tactics, and even of the entire international effort here.

"What angers Afghans are not just the bombings, but also the raids of homes, the shootings of civilians in the streets and at checkpoints, and the failure to address those issues over the five years of war. Afghan patience is wearing dangerously thin, officials warn.

"The civilian deaths are also exposing tensions between American commanders and commanders from other NATO countries, who have never fully agreed on the strategy to fight the war here, in a country where there are no clear battle lines between civilians and Taliban insurgents.

"But American officials say that they have been forced to use air power more intensively as they have spread their reach throughout Afghanistan, raiding Taliban strongholds that had gone untouched for six years. One senior NATO official said that “without air, we'd need hundreds of thousands of troops" in the country. They also contend that the key to reducing casualties is training more Afghan Army soldiers and police officers.

"The anger is visible here in this farming village in the largely peaceful western province of Herat, where American airstrikes left 57 villagers dead, nearly half of them women and children, on April 27 and 29. Even the accounts of villagers bore little resemblance to those of NATO and American officials — and suggested just how badly things could go astray in an unfamiliar land where cultural misunderstandings quickly turn violent.

"The United States military says it came under heavy fire from insurgents as it searched for a local tribal commander and weapons caches and called in airstrikes, killing 136 Taliban fighters.

"But the villagers denied that any Taliban were in the area. Instead, they said, they rose up and fought the Americans themselves, after the soldiers raided several houses, arrested two men and shot dead two old men on a village road.

"After burying the dead, the tribe’s elders met with their chief, Hajji Arbab Daulat Khan, and resolved to fight American forces if they returned. 'If they come again, we will stand against them, and we will raise the whole area against them,' he warned. Or in the words of one foreign official in Afghanistan, the Americans went after one guerrilla commander and created a hundred more."

A World in Flux


If you think it's becoming much harder to find stability in the world today, you're right.

For better - and for worse - the nation's of the world are in a state of turbulent transition. China, India and the Middle East come to mind but the west isn't spared either.

The undisputed leader of the western world, some would say of the world itself, the United States of America teeters precipitously on the brink of decline. This engine that drove the prosperity of the west for more than half a century is beginning to break down and weaken just as it needs even more strength to hold its position against emerging economies.

The looming decline of the American empire is examined carefully in American Theocracy, The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century, Ken Phillips, Viking, 2005.

Phillips is a fierce critic of the Reagan/Bush syndrome that is undermining his country. He's also a former Republican strategist. He's not running any Democratic agenda in this book.

Phillips analyzes how the United States is pursuing policies that closely mirror the practices that led to the demise of the previous empires, Dutch, Spanish and British, by turns. Here are some excerpts from the preface of American Theocracy:

...Reckless dependency on shrinking oil supplies, a milieu of radicalized (and much too influential) religion, and a reliance on borrowed money - debt, in its ballooning size and multiple domestic and international deficits - now constitute the three major perils to the United States of the twenty-first century.

[War and terror] both derive much of their current impetus from the incendiary backdrop of oil politics and religious fundamentalism, in Islam as well as the West. Despite pretensions to motivations such as liberty and freedom, petroleum and its geopolitics have dominated Anglo-American activity in the Middle East for a full century. On this, history could not be more clear.

The excesses of fundamentalism, in turn, are American and Israeli, as well as the all-too-obvious depredations of radical Islam. The rapture, end times, and Armageddon hucksters in the United States rank with any Shiite ayatollahs, and the last two presidential elections mark the transformation of the GOP into the first religious party in U.S. history.

The financialization of the United States economy over the last three decades - in the 1990s the finance, real estate and insurance sector overtook and then strongly passed manufacturing as a share of the U.S. gross domestic product - is an ill omen in its own right. ...Excessive debt in twenty fist century United States is on its way to becoming the global Fifth Horseman, riding close behind war, pestilence, famine and fire.

...A leading world power such as the United States, with almost three hundred million people and huge international responsibilities, goes about as far in a theocratic direction as it can when it satisfies the unfortunate criteria on display in Washington circa 2005: an elected leader who believes himself in some way to speak for God, a ruling party that represents religious true believers and seeks to mobilize the churches, the conviction of many voters in that Republican party that government should be guided by religion, and on top of it all, White House implementation of domestic and international political agendas that seems to be driven by religious motivations and biblical worldviews.

Over three decades of Bush presidencies, vice presidencies and CIA directorships, the Republican party has slowly become the vehicle of all three interests - a fusion of petroleum-defined national security; a crusading, simplistic Christianity; and a reckless credit-feeding financial complex.

Because the United States is beginning to run out of its own oil sources, a military solution to an energy crisis is hardly lunacy. Neither Caesar nor Napoleon would have flinched, and the temptation, at least, is understandable. What Caesar and Napoleon did not face, but less able American presidents do, is that bungled overseas military embroilment, unfortunate in its own right, could boomerang economically. The United States, some $4-trillion in hock internationally, has become the world's leading debtor, increasingly nagged by worry that some nations will sell dollars in their reserves and switch their holdings to rival currencies. Washington prints bonds and dollar-green IOUs, which European and Asian bankers accumulate until for some reason they lose patience. This is the debt Achilles' heel, which stands alongside the oil Achilles' heel.

Unfortunately, as much or more dynamite hides in the responsiveness of the new GOP coalition to Christian evangelicals, fundamentalists, and Pentecostals, who muster some 40 per cent of the party electorate. Many, many millions believe that the Armageddon described in the Bible is coming soon. Chaos in the explosive Middle East, far from being a threat, actually heralds the awaited second coming of Jesus Christ. Oil-price spikes, murderous hurricanes, deadly tsunamis, and melting polar ice caps lend further credence.

The potential interaction between the end-times electorate, inept pursuit of Persian Gulf oil, Washington's multiple deceptions, and the credit and financial crisis that could follow a substantial liquidation by foreign holders of U.S. bonds is the stuff of nightmares. To watch U.S. voting patterns enable such policies - the GOP coalition is unlikely to turn back - is depressing... .

...These developments have warped the Republican party and its electoral coalition, muted Democratic voices, and become a gathering threat to America's future. No leading world power in modern memory has become a captive, even a partial captive, of the sort of biblical inerrancy - backwater, not mainstream - that dismisses modern knowledge and science.

...Conservative true believers will scoff: the United States is sui generis, they say, a unique and chosen nation. What did or did not happen to Rome, Imperial Spain, the Dutch Republic and Britain is irrelevant. The catch here, alas, is that these nations also thought they were unique and that God was on their side. The revelation that He was apparently not added a further debilitating note to the later stages of each national decline.

...The concentration of wealth that developed in the United States in the long bull market of 1982-2000 was also a characteristic of the zeniths of the previous leading world economic powers as their elites pursued surfeit in Mediterranean villas or in the country-house splendor of Edwardian England.

...wealth and debt have often overextended together in the modern trajectories of leading world economic powers. In a nation's early years, debt is a vital and creative collaborator in economic expansion; in late stages, it becomes what Mr. Hyde was to Dr. Jekyll: an increasingly dominant mood and facial distortion.

..three of the preeminent weaknesses displayed in these past declines have been religious excess, an outdated or declining energy and industrial base, and financialization and debt (from foreign and military overstretch). ....The extent to which politics in the United States - and especially the governing Republican coalition - deserves much of the blame for this fatal convergence is not only the book's subject matter but its raison d'etre.

American Theocracy is a compelling read. It offers skilfully researched analyses of what may lie ahead for the US - and the rest of us - in the very near future. If nothing else it will greatly help you understand how the world has gotten where it is today and the perils that confront us.


Timetables - They're All the Rage


Here's a little fact that the buffoons who lead our western countries can't understand - Infidels have a very limited shelf life in the Middle East. We begin to go off after a few years and then the locals really don't like us any more.

The moral is that you only go there when it's absolutely necessary and, when you do, you go in with enough resources to get the job done right and then get out as quickly as possible.

We've ignored that fundamental rule in Afghanistan and in Iraq. We're still in both countries and we're still trying to figure out what to try next. Here's what we should try next - we should try to work out how to leave.

How do we leave? One way, maybe the only way, would be to find Arab forces to replace us. Locals, if at all possible, supplemented by Saudis, Jordanians, even Syrians - whatever it takes.

Why do we think that predominantly white, Christian, western, non-Arabic speaking troops are suitable for the long haul in Afghanistan or Iraq? Why do we think that neighbouring Arab states can't do our job much better?

But back to timetables. A majority of Iraq's lawmakers have endorsed a petition calling for a timetable for American troop withdrawal. The petition is now in the process of being transformed into a bill.

This week Afghanistan's parliamentarians have also called for a US and NATO ceasefire and negotiations with the Taliban. I guess that, after six years of western intervention, they've figured out that we're pretty useless in defeating the Taliban reality. The Afghans have realized that they're going to have to sort out their own problems all the way up to and including the Taliban.

Maybe we need to start looking at timetables for Afghanistan too. This White Man's Burden thing is wearing very thin.

Memorial to Iraq


This is how an anti-war group in Santa Barbara, California sees the Iraq war. A municipal ordinance requires the markers to be removed weekly. The group complies and simply replaces them again, along with new markers, for another week.

This Should Be Fascinating


Despite strong Republican opposition, America's Director of National Intelligence, Michael McConnell, has endorsed the need for US spy agencies to assess the threat to America from global warming over the next three decades. The study will analyze political, social, economic and agricultural risks.

The US Congress just passed a record, $48-billion intelligence authorization which includes the global warming assessment. Republicans, true to form, shoved their heads in the sand in opposition, one dismissing the assessment as a "bugs and bunnies" issue.

Global warming is going to give rise to new and potentially very dangerous security threats. That question has already been the subject of studies by a number of agencies including the Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defence.




Billions in Iraqi Oil Missing

Well of course it's missing. Oil has been pumped into waiting tankers for years and the broken measuring gauges have been left unrepaired.

Read the item below, "A Plea from Baghdad", written by an Iraqi journalist. He laments how there's no oil to be had in the Iraqi capital yet it flows, apparently unregulated, through the pipelines to the port of Basra.

Today's New York Times cites a US government report that notes, "Between 100,000 and 300,000 barrels a day of Iraq's declared oil production over the past four years is unaccounted for and could have been siphoned off through corruption or smuggling."

"'That's a staggering amount of oil to lose every month,' said Philip K. Verleger Jr., an independent economist and oil expert. 'But given everything else that's been written about Iraq, it's not a surprise.'

"Mr. Verleger added that if the oil was being smuggled out of Iraq, there would be a ready market for it, particularly in smaller refineries not controlled by large Western companies in places like China, the Caribbean and even small European countries.

Friday, May 11, 2007

A Lowlife Leader


Harpo is about as harcore Republican as it gets when it comes to manipulating patriotism to attack those who legitimately criticize his regime. The man is pure slime.

The Prime Monster donned his best red windbreaker in Petawawa today and exploited his audience of service members and their families to deride his critics attention to the detainee issue for somehow denying our "heroes" their proper recognition.

Let's see now. Harpo and O'Conner and McKay all spin fanciful tales that repeatedly turn out to be just stories, made up crap, and then he ties his own deceit and incompetence to the issue of honouring our soldiers. As though there was any doubt, Harper again shows himself to be a very low form of life.

In a Nutshell


David Brooks is a right-wing columnist who writes for The New York Times.


Today Brooks delivered his take on Tony Blair and I think he got it right:


"Blair’s decision to support the invasion of Iraq grew out of the essence of who he is. Over the past decade, he has emerged as the world’s leading anti-Huntingtonian. He has become one pole in a big debate. On one side are those, represented by Samuel Huntington of Harvard, who believe humanity is riven by deep cultural divides and we should be careful about interfering in one another’s business. On the other are those like Blair, who believe the process of globalization compels us to be interdependent, and that the world will only flourish if the international community enforces shared, universal values."

There you have it. The key to globalization is premised on the international community (coalitions of the willing, etc.) enforcing "shared, universal values" that just happen to be our values.

A Report Card for Rick Hillier

Isn't it about time that someone came up with some meaningful way of assessing just what we're actually achieving with "the mission" to Afghanistan?

Perhaps we should break down the mission into its constituent elements: military, civilian aid and government support.

Let's face it, Afganistan is the mission with no end. It'll be over when we decide to leave, no sooner and no later. It's not like either of the Great Wars. There isn't going to be any capitulation, no surrender. Don't hold your breath waiting for any victory parades on Parliament Hill. It's not even like the Korean War - no armistice or truce, no ceasefire across some prescribed demilitarized zone.

If there's nothing for us to "win" maybe we should focus on what we have to lose. Truth be told, we're really not there fighting for the Afghans. If we were we'd be gone because they want us gone. No, we're there because we think it's in our interests to fight the Taliban and al-Qaeda there so that we don't have to fight them in the streets of Toronto, right? Sure.

So, how are we doing with the fight? We (our side) has been at these guys for six years with everything short of nuclear weapons. Six years. That's more than enough time that we should at least expect our military leaders - such as Rick Hillier - to show us just how much progress we've really made in crippling the insurgents.

How's it going, Rick? Have you finally got the Taliban on the run? Just how much of Kandahar province do the insurgents really control? How much of 'our' turf did they control last year and the two years before that?

How are we doing at undermining the locals' support for the insurgents? This is all about 'hearts and minds' after all, isn't it? So, Rick, how are we doing on that score? Are we making a lot of friends with our tanks and artillery and air strikes or are we making new friends for the Taliban?

Now Rick, is marking time a good enough approach to waging the war you talked us into fighting? Is this really all about just putting in an appearance, letting your buddies know that we're there in the flesh?

So, Ricky boy, just how does this one end? How does "the mission" play out? How do we know if you're really Canada's Warrior in Chief or just a goof who likes to use words like "scumbag" and "pissed off"?

Don't mean to be critical Rick but it seems you've set the bar pretty low for yourself. There are no benchmarks, nothing for you to win or lose. The great generals of recorded history from the pharoahs to Caesar, Napoleon and Wellington to Patton, were all about winning and losing but mainly winning. All those generals had wars to win and so they always had the real risk of losing. Best of all, everyone could see whether they were winning or losing. That's not what we see when we look at you Rick.

I wish you could give us a handle on "the mission", Rick. Just what the hell is it anymore? What are we really trying to accomplish? How are going to meet those goals and when? How long is Canada going to be held captive to Afghanistan?

If we can't even define, with real clarity, what we're doing in Afghanistan, how we're going to succeed and when we're going to have that job finished, we're not supporting our troops but merely feeding them into a gaping maw of political posturing.

Is It Any Wonder Harpo Loves These Guys?



Horsey, Seattle P.I.

Thursday, May 10, 2007

I Knew It, We All Did


Hurricane Katrina didn't just hit New Orleans. It ravaged Canadians as well, at least at the gas pump.

The Toronto Star reports on a study released by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives that found that, post-Katrina, pump prices jumped between 15 to 27 cents per litre beyond the industry's traditional cost and profit-margin pricing.

Of course you might cling to the notion that gasoline supply is a competitive industry and, therefore, any price is fair. That must explain why an increase in pump price at one station is automatically mirrored at all the others, right?

There are four principal suppliers of gasoline to the retail market and, by all appearances, they all work in lockstep. That's not quite a monopoly but the distinction is all but irrelevant.

Time for the government to intervene but then again we're talking Harpo and Big Oil. Forget I mentioned it.


Don't Look Down

Only in Japan.

That's where you'll find (obviously) the Japan Warm Water Bidet Council. The JWWBC, "... which represents nine bidet manufacturers, reported at least 105 cases of incidents involving flaming or smoking bidet toilets since 1984, the trade ministry has revealed. The council's website urged bidet users to be careful, saying units should be turned off immediately at any sign of overheating."

There you've been warned!

Lessons from the Past


In 1857, British colonial India suffered the massive, Sepoy Uprising. William Dalrwymple, writing in The Guardian, reveals there are important lessons from this insurgency the West would do well to revisit:

"...There is much about British imperial adventures in the east at this time, and the massive insurgency it provoked, which is uneasily familiar to us today. The British had been trading in India since the early 17th century. But the commercial relationship changed towards the end of the 18th, as a new group of conservatives came to power in London, determined to make Britain the sole global power. Lord Wellesley, the brother of the Duke of Wellington and governor general in India from 1798 to 1805, called his new approach the Forward Policy. But it was in effect a project for a new British century. Wellesley made it clear he would not tolerate any European rivals, especially the French, and planned to remove any hostile Muslim regimes that might presume to resist the west's growing might.

"The Forward Policy soon developed an evangelical flavour. The new conservatives wished to impose not only British laws but also western values on India. The country would be not only ruled but redeemed. Local laws which offended Christian sensibilities were abrogated - the burning of widows, for instance, was banned. One of the East India Company directors, Charles Grant, spoke for many when he wrote of how he believed providence had brought the British to India for a higher purpose: "Is it not necessary to conclude that our Asiatic territories were given to us, not merely that we draw a profit from them, but that we might diffuse among their inhabitants, long sunk in darkness, the light of Truth?"
"The British progressed from removing threatening Muslim rulers to annexing even the most pliant Islamic states. In February 1856 they marched into Avadh, also known by the British as Oudh. To support the annexation, a "dodgy dossier" was produced before parliament, so full of distortions and exaggerations that one British official who had been involved in the operation described the parliamentary blue book (or paper) on Oudh as "a fiction of official penmanship, [an] Oriental romance" that was refuted "by one simple and obstinate fact", that the conquered people of Avadh clearly "preferred the slandered regime" of the Nawab "to the grasping but rose-coloured government of the company".

"The reaction to this came with the great mutiny, or as it is called in India, the first war of independence. Though it reflected many deeply held political and economic grievances, particularly the feeling that the heathen foreigners were interfering with a part of the world to which they were alien, the uprising was consistently articulated as a defensive action against the inroads missionaries and their ideas were making in India, combined with a generalised fight for freedom from western occupation.

"Although the great majority of the sepoys were Hindus, there are many echoes of the Islamic insurgencies the US fights today in Iraq and Afghanistan. In Delhi a flag of jihad was raised in the principal mosque, and many of the resistance fighters described themselves as mujahideen or jihadis. There was even a regiment of "suicide ghazis" who vowed to fight until they met death.
Events reached a climax on September 14 1857, when British forces attacked the besieged city. They proceeded to massacre not only the rebel sepoys and jihadis, but also the ordinary citizens of the Mughal capital. In one neighbourhood alone, Kucha Chelan, 1,400 unarmed citizens were cut down. Delhi, a sophisticated city of half a million souls, was left an empty ruin.

"The emperor was put on trial and charged, quite inaccurately, with being behind a Muslim conspiracy to subvert the empire stretching from Mecca and Iran to Delhi's Red Fort. Contrary to evidence that the uprising broke out first among the overwhelmingly Hindu sepoys, the prosecutor argued that "to Musalman intrigues and Mahommedan conspiracy we may mainly attribute the dreadful calamities of 1857". Like some of the ideas propelling recent adventures in the east, this was a ridiculous and bigoted oversimplification of a more complex reality. For, as today, western politicians found it easier to blame "Muslim fanaticism" for the bloodshed they had unleashed than to examine the effects of their own foreign policies. Western politicians were apt to cast their opponents in the role of "incarnate fiends", conflating armed resistance to invasion and occupation with "pure evil".

"Yet the lessons of 1857 are very clear. No one likes people of a different faith conquering tem, or force-feeding them improving ideas at the point of a bayonet. The British in 1857 discovered what the US and Israel are learning now, that nothing so easily radicalises a people against them, or so undermines the moderate aspect of Islam, as aggressive western intrusion in the east. The histories of Islamic fundamentalism and western imperialism have, after all, long been closely and dangerously intertwined. In a curious but very concrete way, the fundamentalists of all three Abrahamic faiths have always needed each other to reinforce each other's prejudices and hatreds. The venom of one provides the lifeblood of the others."

Putin Slams American Foreign Policy

According to Prince Vlad:

“We do not have the right to forget the causes of any war, which must be sought in the mistakes and errors of peacetime.

“Moreover, in our time, these threats are not diminishing. They are only transforming, changing their appearance. In these new threats, as during the time of the Third Reich, are the same contempt for human life and the same claims of exceptionality and diktat in the world.”

Wednesday, May 09, 2007

"The Mission" in Tatters


Well we finally did it. We, meaning NATO and US forces in Afghanistan, have finally killed enough innocent civilians that the Afghan government is crying "uncle" and not to the Taliban either.

Afghan MPs are demanding that we put away our toys, go back to our garrisons and stay put unless we're invited to come out and play by the Afghan army. Their demands follow word that US air strikes took out another 21-innocents yesterday, about par for the course given that we're only in mid-week.

The good news is that we don't have to pay no mind to no uppity Afghan legislators. Why only today NATO Secretary General, Jaap "The Hoop" Scheffer, while meeting with Mushie in Pakistan, said NATO had no plans to clear out of Afghanistan because it's there under a UN mandate. I guess that's Scheffer's way of telling Kabul that we'll damn well kill who we please, when we please for as long as we please, thank you very much.

They Arrested the Wrong Guy


An unidentified employee of EnviroCan has been nabbed by the Mounties for leaking information about the Harpo Tories scheme to pretend to tackle global warming. The Men in Red bravely pounced on the guy, threw him in irons and dragged him off to the gleeful chuckles of pretend EnviroMin John Baird.


The employee was arrested for breach of trust. Odd, doesn't that charge better suit Baird himself? That bellowing knuckle-dragger's campaign to stall on effective global warming measures is surely the truly egregious breach of trust in this case.

A Plea from Baghdad

This was posted at the McClatchey Baghdad Bureau's blog site. It is from an Iraqi. The site is where journalists, American and Iraqi, post their firsthand experiences:




Temperatures are rising above 40 degrees Celsius, with electricity supply provided for one whole hour every 72 hours!
WOW! Amazing how well the reconstruction efforts are going!
How many billions has America taken out of its pouch in the name of reconstruction in Iraq??
Where did the money go??
What are the priorities??
There is no national power supply to speak of.
There is no petrol to fuel our own tiny generators.
Why is there no petrol??
Iraq has no petrol for its own consumption?!
Don’t you find that a little hard to believe?
Did you know that the pipelines in Basra, (where Iraq’s very rich southern oil wells are located) are loading oil tankers under the protection of the Coalition forces for the benefit of – God knows who?? UNGAUGED!! (They shamelessly say the gauges aren’t working. It has been four years!)
Millions of barrels daily!!
What about us??
What about US??
When did we fall out of the equation?
Or is it that we were never in it?
We are going without sleep.
It’s too hot to sleep indoors.
Too dangerous to sleep outdoors.
My daughter and son dampen their clothes and lie down on the bare tiles of the floor.
I sit up all night with a meheffa (a hand-held fan) in my hand to stir the air about them so that they can sleep – even fitfully is good enough. Me – forget me.
Is this really the situation Mr. President aspired to?
I don’t have the stomach to speak of the darkness we live in, the cold water we bathe in …etc. I’ll leave the rest to your imagination. Temperatures rise to above 55 degrees in July ….. in the shade ….

Desmond Tutu on Climate Change



The Great Debate over Global Warming is inevitably focused on how our GHG emissions will impact us and our future generations. Will we be 2 degrees warmer or 3 or perhaps 4? More sunscreen perhaps? Looser clothes? Decisions, decisions.


The enviro gargoyles like Bush and Harpo and Baird look straight ahead, rigid as stone. If they weren't they might have to look behind them and see what we've already done to the Third World and what we have lying in store for them in the future.

Desmond Tutu wrote eloquently of this recently in The Guardian. Here are some portions of his commentary:

"What if dealing with climate change meant more than a flick of a switch? Would our friends in the industrialised world think differently if the effects of climate change were worse than extended summer months and the arrival of exotic species? Cushioned and cosseted, they have had the luxury of closing their minds to the real impact of what is happening in the fragile and precious atmosphere that surrounds the planet we live on. Where climate change has occurred in the industrialised world, the effects have so far been relatively benign. With the exception of events such as Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the inhabitants of North America and Europe have felt just a gentle caress from the winds of change.

"I wonder how much more anxious they might be if they depended on the cycle of mother nature to feed their families. How much greater would their concerns be if they lived in slums and townships, in mud houses, or shelters made of plastic bags? In large parts of sub-Saharan Africa, this is a reality. The poor, the vulnerable and the hungry are exposed to the harsh edge of climate change every day of their lives.

"The melting of the snows on the peak of Kilimanjaro is a warning of the changes taking place in Africa. Across this beautiful but vulnerable continent, people are already feeling the change in the weather. But rain or drought, the result is the same: more hunger and more misery for millions of people living on the margins of global society. Even in places such as Darfur, climate change has played a role. In the semi-arid zones of the world, there is fierce competition for access to grazing lands and watering holes. Where water is scarce and populations are growing, conflict will never be far behind.

"Every child will remember the story of the three little pigs and the big bad wolf. In the world we live in, the bad wolf of climate change has already ransacked the straw house and the house made of sticks, and the inhabitants of both are knocking on the door of the brick house where the people of the developed world live. Our friends there should think about this the next time they reach for the thermostat switch. They should realize that while the problems of the Mozambican farmer might seem far away, it may not be long before their troubles wash up on their shores."

Bennett, Christian Science Monitor

The None Too Friendly Skies


It's enough to make an environmentalist weep. In the wake of the latest IPCC report warning that we may have as little as 8-years left to get our GHG emissions under control if we're to avoid the worst impacts of Global Warming, this month is expected to set an all-time record for the commercial aviation industry. Take-offs are expected to break 2.5-million this month, a 5% rise over last year.

Two factors contributing to the problem are the growing popularity of low-cost airlines and the fast rising affluence of the Chinese.

Although aviation accounts for just 2% of GHG emissions the impact is much greater, 2.5 times in fact, because the pollution is released at high altitude. Total aircraft emissions are forecast to double by 2025.

Meanwhile, Chinese officials are warning that their nation's newfound prosperity is likely to trigger a significant rise in birth rates.

Zhang Weiqing, from the National Population and Family Planning Commission, told state media that newly rich couples can afford to pay fines to have more than one child, while rural couples are marrying earlier.

Deeply, Deeply Ashamed - Or Not


US and NATO forces in Afghanistan have to stop killing so damned many civilians.

A US Army Colonel did the latest mea culpa today, meeting with and apologizing to the families of 19-dead and 50-wounded Afghans mowed down when a force of Marines opened up on the locals in response to a suicide bomber.

These incidents are happening with such regularity that it's nearly impossible to keep track of them. There is, however, an ugly pattern to them. Word first leaks out from local Afghan officials angry at the needless deaths of innocent civilians. Our military then responds claiming the dead were Taliban but they'll investigate. Weeks or months later there's an admission that most of the dead were innocents who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time but, hey, don't worry - we gave their families $2,000 per corpse so everything's cool. We'll do better next time, for sure.

Afghan officials assert that, in an incident earlier this month, dozens of civilians were killed after a joint American and Afghan Army patrol was ambushed near Shindand and called in airstrikes. About 40 civilians, including women and children, were killed and 50 were wounded in the attacks, officials from Herat Province have told reporters.

Who's to blame? It's easy to condemn the soldiers in the field, much too easy in fact. They're not responsible for the decision to deploy them in such paltry numbers that they're constantly vulnerable to suicide bombers and ambushes. They're not responsible for being thrown into conditions where their very survival often depends on calling in artillery or air strikes on residential areas.

Lamentably, it's the soldiers who are "deeply, deeply ashamed" at this carnage, not the suits in Washington, London and Ottawa who are pulling the strings.

Let's see - we've got President Karzai pissed off, we've got the Afghan Senate pissed off, we've got the people thoroughly pissed off at us and at the government we're propping up. Guess who's not pissed off? That, of course, would be the Taliban.

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Now What?


Let's see. According to Harpo and Hillier, Canada is in Afghanistan to save the country from the Taliban. Wouldn't it be great if the Afghan government we're supposedly defending agreed with us?

They don't. Afghan President Karzai has been trying to negotiate a deal with the Taliban for years. He knows what we won't admit - we don't have a snowball's chance of genuinely defeating the Taliban. At best we're swatting flies and, even then, we're wiping out a lot of innocents when we take out the bad guys.

If the civilian casualties were worth the results we're achieving, surely the Afghan government would be onside, eh? They're not. Time and again, Karzai has been calling these collateral deaths "unacceptable." He knows we're alienating the very people whose support his government desperately needs. He knows we're driving many of these folks straight into the arms of the Taliban.

Today, Afghanistan's senate has approved a motion calling for the government to conduct direct talks with the Taliban. The senate also called for US, NATO and Afghan forces to call off the hunt for Taliban fighters and other militants.

Karzai doesn't want us fighting this war the way we're fighting it and his senate doesn't want us fighting it at all. Discontent with our forces among the Afghan people is widespread and growing. We've been at this for six years and we're still treading water.

If the President and the government and the people of Afghanistan oppose what we're doing or at least how we're doing it, what gives us the right to just keep on doing what they oppose? If they want a deal with the Taliban, why are we wasting Canadian lives in a futile effort to protect them from the Taliban?

Canada's parliament held a faux debate on the Afghanistan mission but things have changed on the ground significantly since then. There's no better time for a thorough reassessment of this mess and a proper debate on what Canada's role should be in the months and years ahead.

The Measure of the Man


Odd how what goes around comes around. During the previous government, Stephen Harper derided Paul Martin, calling him "Mr. Dithers." Now that Canada appears to be facing the greatest challenge in the history of mankind the real Mr. Dithers is emerging and it's none other than Harpo himself.

Environmental degradation is an immediate, already enormous and steadily worsening threat to our very civilization. To that overstuffed suit, however, it's little more than an election issue. That's obvious from the way that Harpo is dithering about it and dithering he is.

On the Global Warming issue, Harpo is all form over substance. He says he gets it but is careful to avoid saying just what he gets. What does GW mean to this charlatan? Like pretty much everything he says, you would be foolish to judge him by his words.

The latest IPCC report warns that we may have as little as eight years in which to implement measures that could allow us to avoid the worst impacts of global warming. Eight years. That's precious little time. There is no time to waste, no time for dithering, no time for piecemeal measures and heel-dragging.

Harpo clearly isn't troubled by this warning. If he was, his government would be taking steps to ensure that our country was prepared for what is to come. He would be building concensus at all levels on the nature and scope of these problems and the options remaining to us to respond. Without such concensus there will be no significant action. Harper seems content to ensure that there is no such concensus.

Stephen Harper thinks Canada's government needs to be reformed, restructured. Well, here's his opportunity. Of course the type of restructuring nation's need in periods of dangerous challenges isn't quite what Harpo has in mind.

Harper wants a decentralized Canada in which many federal powers are transferred to the provinces. He would be happy to Balkanize our country. Such an arrangement, however, would make it vastly more difficult, if not impossible, to effectively respond to these looming environmental threats.

If anything, federal powers need to be consolidated and strengthened to help Canada meet the challenges of global warming, at home and internationally. Harpo has no intention of doing that.

It's clear that we must move away from our carbon-based economy. Harper plainly rejects that notion, clinging to his vision of Canada as an "energy superpower" rising to global prominence thanks to the tar sands, our country's top GHG emitter.

Harper is supposed to serve Canada, not Alberta. He is supposed to serve the Canadian people, not Big Oil.

There's a void in Canada's leadership and it is Stephen Harper. At this critical moment we are led by the real Mr. Dithers, a man so wedded to his ideology that he is incapable of discharging his responsibilities to the country and to all of us. Stephen Harper's vision is from a different time and has been overtaken by events that have rendered it irrelevant. Like all ideologues he came to office with an A game and that's all.

Eight years. If that assessment is right, we haven't got a moment to lose in getting rid of this government.

Monday, May 07, 2007

If George and Tony had fought WWII


Go back to the dark days when Hitler's armies ravaged Europe and the Rising Sun blazed a path across the Pacific. Imagine, no Roosevelt, no Churchill, their places instead held by George W. Bush and Tony Blair. Imagine the fate of Western democracy in the bumbling fingers of these two "leaders."

Bush's grand adventure in Iraq, his grandiose "war on terror", has run considerably longer than the American involvement in WWII. Unlike FDR's war, GWB's war was one largely of choice ill-conceived, cloaked in lies and incompetently executed.
America, like Britain, began WWII ill-prepared and both nations sustained a series of defeats and setbacks before the tide gradually turned in favour of the Allies. Roosevelt and Churchill didn't exaggerate the threats facing their people but bolstered their courage and calmed their fears.

The War on Terror actually began with stunning victories - the rout of the Taliban and the toppling of Saddam but again the tide turned, this time not in Blair or Bush's favour. Blair and Bush, unlike FDR and WSC, preyed upon their own people - manipulating them with lies and fear and crushing those who might speak truth by impugning their patriotism.

Had we been left to rely on these two incompetents and their sycophants such as Howard and Harper, we'd have been in big trouble indeed.

The Bush/Blair syndrome demonstrates that weak, ideologically-perverted political leadership can undermine, even negate, massive advantages in superior technology and firepower. Once the initial combat is won, all that remains is a void of incompetence in which the bad guys are able to rally, regroup and retake the field in a form that is vastly more difficult to contro and from which there is neither victory nor honour to be claimed.

In war, bad political leadership can be as fatal as bad intelligence, incompetent generals, insufficient troops or defective weapons. This is nothing new. Our history books are full of examples - Hitler, Stalin, Lyndon Johnson, Kaiser Wilhelm and on and on.

It is folly bordering on dereliction for a smaller nation's leadership to cast their country's lot in with that of an incompetent such as George Bush. Canadians should thank their Supreme Being of choice that Stephen Harper wasn't in power in time to commit our soldiers to the quagmire that continues to flourish in Iraq.
Tony Blair will soon be gone and time is all too slowly running out for George Bush. However the conflicts and instability they did so much to fuel will continue and new leaders, especially in Washington, will emerge to take their turn as leaders of the free world. All we can hope for is that our nation, by then, has new leadership that can put Canada's interests first in meeting these ongoing challenges.

Bennett, Christian Science Monitor

The Greater Scheme of Things


Okay we're really beginning to get the Global Warming thing. Even Harpo can now say it without noticeably wincing too much. So, if GW has reached the political "tipping point" at which Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Right, and the looney denialists are at last defanged, neutered and put back in their cages atop a bed of fresh newspaper, the solutions should be just around the corner, right? We've come to our senses in time to save mankind, right? Well don't count on it.

Stopping the slide before the earth heats up another 2 degrees celsius is the key to avoiding the worst impacts that could be wrought by global warming. If we could achieve that, and that's still a huge "if", we won't be able to actually reverse global warming if only because "we" will be long gone and pretty much forgotten by the time any reversal can be achieved.

Human experience teaches us to think in terms of our children, grandchildren, perhaps even great-grandchildren. Beyond that third generation it really becomes hypothetical and obscure. And yet it will fall to these generations beyond our contemplation to finally undo the damage we and the handful of generations that preceded us have visited upon our planet.

The challenge isn't merely generational, it's almost millenial in scope. Now think about that for a minute. It means that mankind is going to have to achieve a common purpose that prevails across ethnic, cultural, religious, political, geographic and economic lines that is sustained on a scale of many centuries at least. This question is for the patio furniture and the Reno holiday package: When in the course of recorded history has mankind pulled off such a feat?

Full points if you guessed "never." Our planet has never witnessed this measure of co-operative cohesiveness, if only because mankind has never faced such a universal and gargantuan peril.

The good news is that we have conceived objectives that will arrest the slide, more or less. However that is the easy part. The hard part is going to be implementing these policies on a global scale.

What do we do with China and India, both of which seem determined to re-enact the coal-fueled, Industrial Revolution of two centuries past that led to the dillema we face at this moment? Both of these states must be made to understand that the window of opportunity for this type of industrialization is now closed. They missed out, too bad. Can't be helped. Sorry, so very sorry but that's life.

That's a hard line to pitch and, if we're going to attempt it, we absolutely have to show ourselves repentent for our own sins, the very ones that have created the mess that means countries like India and China simply can't follow suit. "Do as I say, not as I do," won't cut it. At the very least we'll have to be able to argue, "Do as I say, not as I did." We can't keep doing and not expect them to do also. To some extent, we have to atone.

We're going to have to devise new models - political, social and economic - that are robust enough to weather the strains and challenges they'll have to endure and that can be universally accepted. It would take a Supreme Deity to conjure up anything genuinely uniform to meet these needs. Ain't gonna happen. The best we can hope for is a basic structure of agreed, binding and enforceable, core principles to enable all nations and all peoples to co-operate while retaining as much of their individuality as possible.

Maybe we'll need to devise a new set of Commandments, this time for world leaders:

Thou shalt not foul the air
Thou shalt not corrupt the water or lay barren the earth
Thou shalt not inflict environmental degradation on others
Thou shalt not shirk responsibility for injuries caused others
Thou shalt not take so much as to deprive others of the essentials of life
In all things between and among states, all shall act equitably

This sounds fantastic and it is or would be if such a thing could be achieved. Is it unrealistic? It certainly seems so but what is the alternative?


Spies, spies - Everywhere!

A few months back there was a story about Canadian "spy" coins that were somehow slipped into the pockets of American defence contractors. Someone finally got to the bottom of this murky business. Here's a picture of the actual, secret agent:



Yes, that's right, it was the Remembrance Day commemorative quarter that sent US military contractors running for the protection of the Pentagon. According to The Guardian:

"The harmless ``poppy coin'' was so unfamiliar to suspicious U.S. Army contractors traveling in Canada that they filed confidential espionage accounts about them. The worried contractors described the coins as ``anomalous'' and ``filled with something man-made that looked like nano-technology,'' according to once-classified U.S. government reports and e-mails obtained by the AP.

"The supposed nano-technology actually was a conventional protective coating the Royal Canadian Mint applied to prevent the poppy's red color from rubbing off. The mint produced nearly 30 million such quarters in 2004 commemorating Canada's 117,000 war dead.

"'It did not appear to be electronic (analog) in nature or have a power source,'' wrote one U.S. contractor, who discovered the coin in the cup holder of a rental car. 'Under high power microscope, it appeared to be complex consisting of several layers of clear, but different material, with a wire like mesh suspended on top.'"

Okay, I give, just what is the damned frequency, Kenneth?

Me Again


The fishing was great. Actually it wasn't really great or, if it was, I didn't know that because I wasn't fishing. Truth be told, I jumped on my bike and rode Baja. Does wonders to clear the mind. I actually forgot all about Stephen Harper and all the little Harpies that scurry throughout our country.


Anyway, time to get this blog up and running again.