Kristol: ‘We Could Be In A Military Confrontation With Iran Much Sooner Than People Expect’
“America will attack Iran, Syria in October” According to former head of Pakistan’s Military Intelligence

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 23 2006 19:26 utc | 3

Is your cell phone spying on you? Are the whistleblowers being killed?
Note: A version of this piece appears today on BradBlog. This version has additional information.

Is someone murdering people who know too much about NSA wiretapping?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 23 2006 19:35 utc | 5

I’m going to have to steel myself to read Uncle’s link to Kristol – Could be war in Oct….(I Have Really Had More than Enough of this War Garbage…Males should not be allowed anywhere near decision making of any sort. They’re too easily manipulated by their hormones…totally incapable of long term thinking, thinking & feeling about anyone but their own pathetic selves & their puny litte place on the pecking order)… but the title of his link is suggestive. Repugs could scrap the war altogether, and simply use the threat of war to manipulate people effectively through the electoral season. Certainly effectively enough to keep anything else off the agenda.

Posted by: jj | Aug 23 2006 20:04 utc | 7

If the Republicans try playing the “war card” this Fall, they will be sorely disappointed in the results. Voters will race to the polls to vote Dem, including a significant amount of die-hard Republicans.
2006 has nothing in common with 2004 and 2002, unless I missed something.

Posted by: Jason Bergman | Aug 23 2006 21:56 utc | 9

Uncle I suppose there must be some people who believe that telephone calls (landline or mobile) are safe, but I would like to think that elected officials in governments outside the US aren’t members of that subset of naivity. Last century the english royal family were that naive/stupid. Right at the time when mobiles were the new big thing and Vodaphone was establishing it’s market leadership in Britain.
After their rather tacky but extremely frank conversations to their lovers ended up on the front page of murdoch’s seamiest rags they smartened up.
The whole ‘unfortunate affair’ was blamed on some retired bank manager who was an amateur radio enthusiast. The problem with that scenario is of course that the gsm standard is encrypted. When someone pointed that out after a couple of mutterings about MI5 being staunchly loyal to the monarch and not her heir’s rather mad former wife nothing more was said. Doubtless there are links to this out there but it’s too early in the day to be wading through the LaRouche garbage that comes up when googling the chinless wonders who the english defer to.
The tight assed monetarists in the NZ govt balked at the cost of developing the means to independently decrypt gsm, relying instead upon the community mindedness of Vodaphone to do it for them. LOL!
I have always enjoyed playing with the fools at the bottom end of the food chain in the security services and on the occasions where I have to buy a new phone/sim card from a shop always pay cash and don’t fill out the rebate claim forms by which one discloses their identity for a $10 ‘rebate’.
Since thousands of people do the same, nothing usually happens unless one’s phone calls attract attention. Nothing wrong or illegal you understand, just by making calls to ‘telephones of interest’.
Suddenly one starts receiving all sorts of calls from Vodaphone ‘salesmen’ who are offering all sorts of special deals and discounts: “Now where-abouts would you like us to send your $50 credit Mr….(pregnant pause)?”
“Oh just put it on my phone.”
“Sorry sir, it doesn’t work that way. We would hate for our valued customers such as yourself to be compelled to use this right away on a specific phone, so we prefer to send the $50 credit out for you to use at the time and on the handset you prefer.”
I suppose mamy people either don’t see through it or think what the heck I’ll take the money. That is fair enough because if the phone company or the authorities really want to know who is using a phone, simple analysis of the incoming and outgoing calls eventually steers them in the right direction. The only reason I got alla the offers would have been because I hardly used the damn phone, not for ‘security’ reasons but just because all local calls are free here so why waste money if you don’t need to.
I did stay in contact with an old school chum via it though because our children were friends and he wouldn’t have a landline going into his house for other “security related” reasons.
I was going to segue into a discussion on the parlous state of the warez scene especially regarding the new cpu’s which lock functions away from their owners, but I think that had better be a seperate post.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 23 2006 22:22 utc | 11

@jj#7 that’s quotable 🙂

Posted by: DeAnander | Aug 24 2006 0:01 utc | 13

@jj:
You’re really attached to your sexism, aren’t you?
I’m sure we would all be a lot better with Hillary Clinton, Condi Rice, Madeline Albright, Dianne Feinstein, and Nancy Pelosi, running things. They could hire Maggie Thatcher as an advisor. They could bring in Carly Fiorina as Secretary of Commerce Corporations, bring back Gail Norton as Secretary of Privatising Public Lands, bring back Ann Venneman as Secretary of Agribusinees and GMO, and keep Elaine Chao as Secretary of Impovershment.
Then the whole world would run like a top: End of growth and militarism, a sustainable world, equal rights for all, child care for all, women in complete control of their own bodies, universal single payer health insurance, the whole nine yards.
Yep, just get some women in there and everything would be hunky-dory in no time.
Well, I got news for you. It ain’t so. Women can be just as mean, deceitful, conscienceless, corrupt, violent, abuse, dishonest, etc. as men. And they probably could do a better job of selling an elitist program to the public.
Not a single one of those women I named supports a woman’s complete control over her own body and full reproductive rights. And that’s so basic. But not for elite power and control of the populace.
It ain’t the sex of the person running things — its the level of violence and deceit they can stand that allows anyone to rise to the top, and its this propensity for lying and deceit that is the problem. Plus our screwed up system which would assassinate anyone trying to implement substantial change.
I really like your point of view and your comments, jj, but this sexism trip that women would run things better is b.s. (It’s the second time you brought it up in two days.) Better people,regardless of sex or race, would stand a chance of running things better.

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 24 2006 1:24 utc | 15

Males should not be allowed anywhere near decision making of any sort. They’re too easily manipulated by their hormones…totally incapable of long term thinking, thinking & feeling about anyone but their own pathetic selves & their puny litte place on the pecking order)…
The language seems pretty clear to me. I don’t mean to be the PC police. She has a right to say whatever she believes. But I have the right to disagree. And what she says is simply not true of me and my life.

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 24 2006 1:59 utc | 17

Re: Sexism.
I got over the whole “Girls are smarter than boys!”, “Well, girls have cooties!”, “Yeah, well, you’re a poopiehead!” thing when I was about six. I saw jj’s comment and had every thought that Malooga expressed about them, but assumed that she was just joking and that we could simply chuckle quietly or shake our heads sadly as our individual temperaments dictated and then pass on the whole thing without comment.
The ironic thing here is that I think both Malooga and jj are two of our most insightful commentators here whose energies could be better spent dealing with issues that aren’t already being covered on playgrounds all over the world during elementary school recess.

Posted by: Monolycus | Aug 24 2006 2:22 utc | 19

Your poster boy for testosterone run amuck is Bill Kristol? You’ve got to be kidding. Who would you bet on in a back alley knife fight: Bill Kristol or Anne Coulter? If he were a Dem, the right wing would be hollering “girly man” at his every appearance. Jeanne Kirkpatrick and maybe even Madeline Albright – certainly Maggie Thatcher and Golda Meir – were/are tougher than that dweeb ever was in his wildest dreams.
You can add Perle (future generations will sing songs about us – spoken from his Lazy Boy), Cheney (I had other priorities), Wolfowitz (real men lick their combs), Brooks, Rove, Krauthammer and others to this group of (male) abstract, global dominion “thinkers.” (For that matter, you can add Falwell, Robertson, Franklin Graham and other Christian dominionist idealogues.) The closest any of them got to actual combat were the control-the-world board games they played as children. They are sly, manipulative and intellectually dishonest, their worlds existing in their pointy heads far removed from physical and emotional realities where others live and struggle. Effete, intellectual snobs, Agnew might have called them. Hardly the picture of the masculine, testosterone oozing, action hero stereotype played by Willis, Arnold (2 Repugs), Cage, Washington, Jackson and others in so many Hollywood movies. One significant – possibly the last significant – source of resistance to their designs comes from the testosterone laden military who know they will do the bleeding in all the wars advocated by the abstract think tankers funded by plutocrats.
This male/female thing is another false dichotomy, a distraction. Both men and women are capable of acts generally associated with characteristics of one or the other gender – good and bad. I’m with Malooga. Give me a combination of intelligence and compassion and the courage to act on it. I don’t care if it comes wrapped in a testosterone or estrogen package.

Posted by: lonesomeG | Aug 24 2006 3:00 utc | 21

Thanks for the link, Guthman. I had heard of DeMeo’s research before, that the catastrophic drying up of fertile lands created “Saharasia.”
“A massive climate change shook the ancient world, when approximately 6000 years ago vast areas of lush grassland and forest in the Old World began to quickly dry out and convert into harsh desert.
DeMeo’s maps show spreading centers for the origins of patriarchal authoritarian cultures within this same Saharasian global region – male-dominated, child-abusive, sex-repressive cultures with a great emphasis upon war-making and empire-building.”
Another interesting quote from your link to matriarchy.info:
“To test Reich’s ideas, DeMeo reviewed social variables on child-rearing, sexuality, the status of women, and violence, for over 1000 aboriginal cultures from around the world. “The cross-cultural evidence is very clear about this: the most violent human societies are those which treat their children in a neglectful and punitive manner, and which also demand sexual abstinence from their young unmarried people. Such cultures also emphasize highly compulsive forms of marriage, with a reduced status for women, and a lot of strong-man political or religious bosses who order everyone around at the point of a spear.”
Sound like any culture you know? Actually the article says American culture is not the most violent …

Posted by: jonku | Aug 24 2006 3:31 utc | 23

Hey Gertie, I hear you’ve been busy trying to draw two new lines through your old map. Give us a heads up before it goes public.
@lonesomeG: I forgot cruise missile Jean. real men lick their combs I don’t think I have ever used this acronym on the web before, but you just earned it: ROTFLMAO!
@Guthman Bey: I’m glad someone read that and understood it. I thought it was one of the most profound, simple, and poetic, things I have ever written.
@Monolycus:
You’re probably right. I’m one of jj’s biggest fans here. She is one of my top three favorite posters, along with r’giap, and…I think I’ll keep one small secret to myself. I wouldn’t have said anything if I hadn’t caught her several times before, and if I didn’t respect her so much. Idiots, I suffer through; but those I respect, I try to be honest with, so the relationship can be honest and grow stronger.
___________
Anyway, to take the conversation to a higher level, what jj was refering to was Gynarchy, or rule by women, which most feminists feel would be of little difference, as long as they were functioning within a patriarchal system. Indeed, as lonesomeG noted, for women to succeed in such a hostile system, they have to be even more masculine then the men (Hillary/Bill), a projected caricature of masculinity.
The alternative to what we have now, Patriarchy, is of course, Matriarchal Society.

Matriarchy is distinct from matrilineality, where children are identified in terms of their mother rather than their father, and extended families and tribal alliances form along female blood-lines. For instance, in Jewish Halakhic tradition only a person born of a Jewish mother is automatically considered Jewish. Hence Jewish descent is passed on from the mother to the child (see: Who is a Jew).
Matriarchy is also distinct from matrilocality, which some anthropologists use to describe societies where maternal authority is prominent in domestic relations, owing to the husband joining the wife’s family, rather than the wife moving to the husband’s village or tribe, such that she is supported by her extended family, and husbands tend to be more socially isolated.
Matriarchy is a combination of these factors; it includes matrilineality and matrilocality. But what is most important is the fact that women are in charge for the distribution of goods for the clan and, especially, the sources of nourishment, fields and food. This characteristic feature sees every clan member dependent beyond matrilineality and matrilocality and grants women such a strong position that these societies are now considered matriarchal.

Back when I was studying Anthropology (Because I hated what I really was majoring in), some thirty years ago (Aaagh), it was generally doubted whether matriarchal societies might have ever existed at some time in the distant past. As GB’s link above demonstrates,scholarship has come a long way.
Of particular interest are the proceedings of the 1st and 2nd World Congress’ on Matriarchal Studies, the links to which may be found at the International Academy for Modern Matriarchal Studies and Matriarchal Spirituality website. There is much work going on in the field.
A definition and theory of matriarchal society can be found here.
Here is a brief summary of the criteria of the matriarchal society:

Economic criteria: societies with self-supporting gardening or agriculture; land and house are property of the clan, no private property; women have the power of disposition over the source of nourishment; constant adjustment of the level of wealth by the circulation of the vital goods in form of gifts at festivals – societies of reciprocity.
Social criteria: matriarchal clans, which are held together by matrilinearity and matrilocality; mutual marriage between two clans; visiting marriage with additional sexual freedom for both sexes; social fatherhood – non-hierarchical, horizontal societies of kinship.
Political criteria : principle of consensus in the clan-house, on the level of the village, and on the regional level; delegates as bearers of communication, not as decision-takers; absence of classes and structures of domination – egalitarian societies of consensus.
Cultural criteria : concrete belief in rebirth into the same clan; cult of ancestresses and ancestors; worship of Mother Earth and the Goddess of Cosmos; divinity of the entire world; absence of dualistic world view and morality; everything in life is part of the symbolic system – sacral societies as cultures of the Goddess.

It is worth emphasizing, that according to theory, matriarchal societies generally originated in, and function within, agricultural society. As detailed in the theory, the structure of agricultural society is far more conducive to being arranged around women.
If you take the time to read the full definition, even more than the summary quoted here, you will inevitably note, as I did, the Utopian nature of the definition: it is all good. Of course, this is a huge potential problem, especially in an area where ethnohistories, ethnologies and field studies of ancient societies, and even extant pre-industrial societies, are sparse to almost non-existent. It is simply too tempting for an Anthropologist to fall prey to deeply held beliefs and prejudices (and anthropological history is replete with many examples of this). In this case, as one examines the papers presented at the conferences, one can’t help but note the absence of critical studies and viewpoints. Indeed, the very definition of matriarchal societies practically precludes against this possibility. The result is a certain moral reduction where all matriarchal societies are seen as inherently good, and patriarchal societies, defined as dominator/oppressor societies, as evil incarnate. In other words, it is often hard to tell whether you are reading anthropology or hagiography as you study the literature.
That caveat noted, there are some very fascinating studies presented. Here is a peak at a few:

Beyond Patriarchy and Violence: the Khoisan and Partnership
Violence and inequity are inextricably tied to patriarchy, and the dominator system. Cultural systems of patriarchy and domination are very prevalent at this time, but are not inevitable. Pre-patriarchal societies, such as the Khoisan of Southern Africa, are examples of harmonious, gender-continuous, nonviolent lifestyles, which can be used to construct alternative models to violence and inequity. This research will harness lessons from partnership societies like the Khoisan, and show how we can move forward from our present conditions to a more equitable and less violent society.
My presentation will draw on the many lessons embedded in Khoisan culture which can be adapted to reduce current violence and improve present society. Historical records, and modern texts, reflect numerous examples of the Khoisan’s originally peaceful, non-violent and egalitarian ways of life. A deeper understanding of Khoisan culture can lead directly to models and methods for change in present Southern African society, and how going back to some of the best aspects of our roots can, in fact, lead us forward into a future that is both economically and culturally healthy.

I would feel better if the qualifier “more” was added before the adjective “harmonious.” Perhaps it is a sign of my own fallen condition, but I find it hard to conceive of any society without some stressors and conflict.

The Utopia of a Motherless World – Patriarchy as ‘War-System’
At the “1st World Congress on Matriarchal Studies” in Luxemburg in 2003, I presented a paper on “Patriarchy as Negation of Matriarchy. The Perspective of a Delusion”. Starting from there I want to concentrate on the fact that patriarchy did not appear in the world as such, but did develop in time and is still developing today. The typical mechanisms that have been and are used for the development of patriarchal society are defined as such that seem to overcome and “replace” matriarchal societies by something supposedly “better”, “more developed”, and spiritually “higher”. This way we can define patriarchy as the utopia of a motherless world that wants to become “concrete” and is indeed becoming concrete in modernity and with capitalism, especially. The analysis leads to the idea of patriarchy as a social “system” in contrast to matri- archal societies that did not develop into “systems”. Furthermore, patriarchy finally has to be defined even as “war- system”, in which war has always more become the main principle of social organization, economy, policies, technology, science and the relationship with nature, gender and the future. The dynamics of especially western society’s development into a closed war-system is felt today more than ever before, as globalization, the last phase of patriarchy, turns always more into globalized war on all levels of life. This fact is confronting us with the necessity to break with patriarchal thinking, feeling and acting immediately, if we want to continue life on earth.

It would be interesting to have heard this presentation, and to have applied it to the discussion centered on Bookchin. We certainly talk enough about “war- systems,” and their possible causes.

Notes on the Origin of Patriarchy
This presentation developed out of my research on matriarchy. My studies have firmly convinced me that it is impossible to hypothesize about the historical origin of patriarchy without first having researched the structure of matriarchy, which was prior to patriarchy. Otherwise false assumptions will be made about the constituent causes that brought patriarchal structures into existence; if the structures of matriarchy remain unknown or unclear, unconscious patriarchal assumptions are likely to creep into the explanation. To clarify how this happens, I will challenge some of the popular – but wrong – hypotheses about the rise of patriarchy.
Then I will address the question of why the matriarchal form of society gave way to the patriarchal form. An answer is only possible if the many different constituent causes leading to such a complex and enduring transformation are taken into account. The change took place in different ways all over the world, and is still going on today. At different times during this process, new and different constituent causes have produced multiple changes. I will briefly outline the most important steps in this transformational process.

I would have loved to have heard this — it would apply directly to Bookchin’s theories of human nature, “this re-working must come from human society – the only repository of reflective ethics – and involve the active imposition of human values onto the natural world”. Perhaps I can find the paper online.
And finally:

“They Are the Soul of the Councils.”
The Iroquoian Model of Woman-Power
Woman-power may be a new cultural idea among Europeans and their descendants, but it is an old and mature idea among the Native Americans, especially those east of the Mississippi River. All eastern Nations recognized the political, economic, spiritual, and social roles of Clan Mothers as the power brokers of their people, but, in the twelfth century, the Iroquois wrote those roles directly into their Constitution. In fact, by law, the men’s councils may not consider a matter that has not been discussed by the women and forwarded to them by the women’s consensus. Given the boggling implications of this power structure, the Iroquoian Constitution is careful to clarify that men have the same rights as women. When the early American feminists learned of this legal set-up – and they picked up on it in colonial times – they held up the Iroquoian Gantowisas, of Official Woman, as their model of the possible. She remains the model of the possible, to this day, as my talk will show.

The Iroquois nations’ political union and democratic government was of some influence on the drafting of the United States Constitution, as well as the architecting of other democracies. The Iroquois are also the originators of the Seventh Generation precept of the Great Law of the Haudenosaunee (Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy), which requires that chiefs consider the impact of their decisions on the seventh generation. Unfortunately, rather than guiding the progress of our society, the Seventh Generation precept has been appropriated and commodified, and since devolved into a meaningless corporate marketing slogan.
Finally, while on the topic of sex and gender and warfare, and their interactions with society, Stan Goff has been blogging a series of thoughtful and highly perceptive pieces on his website over the past year, recently compiled into the book, “Sex & War.” His work is always worth a gander, but this book is particularly brave, and ruthlessly honest — not an easy book for anyone to produce, but even more laudable considering his military background and history.

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 24 2006 5:12 utc | 25

A question for the 9/11 experts/theorists out there:
One of the key pieces of evidence cited for the government being in on 9/11 was that it allowed them to do what they wanted to do well before, and take over Iraq. Yet, if it were an inside job, or the evidence were manufactured by the government, then why were none of the hijackers, or “hijackers”, Iraqi? Or Iranian?

Posted by: Rowan | Aug 24 2006 6:15 utc | 27

What We Know And Don’t Know About 9/11 by Paul Craig Roberts

We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to “pancake” at free fall speed. Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse of the WTC buildings is false.

@ Rowan:

According to reports, the BBC has found 6 of the alleged suicide hijackers alive and well in their home countries. I do not know if the report is true, but I do know that the report has been ignored and there has been no investigation. Both the US government and the US media have turned a blind eye. We have no way of knowing if Atta and his named accomplices hijacked the planes, or, if they did, whether they were dupes of intelligent services that pretended to be a terrorist cell and organized the cover for the engineered demolition.

Posted by: beq | Aug 24 2006 11:37 utc | 29

Gertrude,
If you want to hook up with the (apparently German) girl blogger from Beirut, you need to hang out at Cafe Younes in Hamra.
Now what’s with the green bananas?

Posted by: Guthman Bey | Aug 24 2006 12:55 utc | 31

From Dan Froomkin’s daily briefing at the WaPo:

Here’s Bush on Monday: “In order for the U.N. to be effective, there must be consequences if people thumb their nose at the United Nations Security Council.”

Totally agree.
So when do we start carpet bombing Israel?

Posted by: ran | Aug 24 2006 16:18 utc | 33

@alabama
Kicking off operation Steal Iran’s Resources in mid-October leaves enough time for thousands of GIs in Iraq to get killed when the Shiites erupt and Iran rockets our Iraq bases and also for gas prices at the pump to surge to north of $10/gallon before the November elections.
This is supposed to make anyone sane vote for Rethugs?

Posted by: ran | Aug 24 2006 18:09 utc | 35

But ran, who ever staged an October Suprise in November? And anyway, it’s not the sane votes that they’re looking for…..I must say that it would be interesting to see how 130,000 troops could be sheltered in the safety of the Green Zone….As for the gas prices: don’t Cheney’s guys keep a lot of gas in the federal reserves, with which to flood the market on the day they launch Operation Christian Victory, or whatever they decide to call it?
There’s often a Black Monday on the markets in October, and they wouldn’t want to trigger one of those things. So maybe they’d launch it on a Wednesday….I’ll push my guess back to October 13…. There’s also probably an arcane algorithm involving the dates of Labor Day and Election Day. I ought to check the calendar…..

Posted by: alabama | Aug 24 2006 18:53 utc | 37

@beq, Uncle,
I’m certainly aware of quite a few discrepancies. Just saying, if you’re planning to invade Iraq and connect it to 9/11, then why not have a hijacker from Iraq?

Posted by: Rowan | Aug 24 2006 19:57 utc | 39

I haven’t written about this before because one of the kidnap victims is a good friend of my brother who doesn’t share my view that he got what was coming to him by working for Fox News.
I am referring to the two Fox News employees Steve Centanni, a journalist and Olaf Wiig his cameraman who were kidnapped in Gaza just over a week ago. This hasn’t really featured in the media outside Mr Centanni’s hometown and NZ where Mr Wiig comes from. Everyone else ignored it, probably because traditionally Palestinian abductions are short-lived affairs where the hostages are well treated and money is paid and everyone goes home happy. Although this was unusual right from the start in that journalists were kidnapped which is generally a no-no since Palestinians know that their journalists seeing exactly what a hell hole Israel has turned Palestine into is one of their best levers. However since that couldn’t really be said about Fox News journalists maybe an exception had been made.
However after the release of this video a couple of days ago it has become apparent that that this is far from a normal Palestinian kidnapping. It is either the first signs of an Al-quaeda style group in Palestine or an Israeli ‘false-flag’ operation for one reason or another.
Given that despite the zionist propaganda to the contrary, Palestinians loathe the restrictive and spartan Saudi style philosophy of Al Quaeda more than most westerners do, if AQ has established a foothold in Gaza it will be a direct consequence of the destruction of Palestinian institutions by Israel since the Hamas victory. The internal security services which have always dealt harshly with any attempt to take the focus of the resistance away from the struggle of the Palestinian people would have to be in a terrible state for an AQ style group to be able to get into Palestine and carry out a plan as well executed as this one was. Both Hamas and Fatah have been united on their opposition to AQ getting a foothold and in addition they have been working together to try and get to the bottom of this abduction which both groups see as disadvantageous to the long term struggle.
But the argument against this act having been carried out by the traditional actors is rather more substantial than that.
When the video is studied in full the first thing that becomes apparent is that there are no Palestinian flags on the wall no balaclava clad ak-47 toting dummies in the back-ground. The video logo is that of the news agency which first received it.
The demands that abductors make in the past have always been about Palestinian issues never about the ‘world wide jihad’ or any of that AQ bulldust but this time the abductors are asking that; “All Muslims be released from US prisons” Yeah right they will get that no worries.
Now there has been a bit of schism between those working for the two journalists from early on. Olaf’s wife is Anita McNaught who BBC World viewers may recognise as a reporter and newsreader on that channel until the post Hutton inquiry clean-out of anti-zionists when she was ‘let go’. NZers will also recognise her as one of the TVNZ talking heads on their news and current affairs programs for many years until she returned to Britain. Anita has been frantically mobilising her contacts in Fatah and Hamas and the Palestinian Authority but to no avail.
The two were abducted as they left the Palestinian Authority headquarters in Gaza following an interview.
Initially it appeared that the Israeli abduction of Nasser Shaer was an attempt to gain a bargaining chip as Fox News executives had in typical fashion, been spending more time in negotiation with Israeli officials than they were with the Palestinian authority. However if this is an Israeli false flag operation Nasser Shaer’s kidnapping was just a piece of misdirection.
Otherwise it means that the neo-cons have been so desperate to tie the ferment in Gaza and the West Bank to “arab terrorism” that they are doing so without their best friends Israel, who dropped the ball so badly in Lebanon. In other words if they can’t ‘protect’ Israel when the shit hits the fan in Iran, they are edging them out of the way into the zone of patronised deceit and indulgence that Tony Bliar has allowed the English to be taken to.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 24 2006 21:33 utc | 41

Good to see you about the virtual world M.r’giap although I must admit you were probably better off staying unconnected, if only that unconnection could be part of some blissful ignorance deal, still your man Dylan will keep you in a better place than the machinations and manipulations of the political class.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 25 2006 0:37 utc | 43

@Malooga, re our discussion last night of Water, population, immigration etc. I wondered what Ernest Callenbach, author of Ecotopia, thought about the current situation. In his bk. he had the borders closed, allowing only for people leaving, but that was written a few decades ago. Poked about last night & found that someone else was similarly curious & had recent correspondence w/him on the subject. Happily for him, he’s now 77 & won’t have to live w/the consequences of this nightmare.
He’s no longer writing & has no major help to offer, but agrees w/me that it’s part of the elite hollowing out of America.
(In case you’re not aware of it, other Major Environmentalists fought for immigration curbs arguing that you can’t protect the environment if you over-populate it. I’m referring specifically here to Edward Abbey, and even more importantly, David Brower, who quit the Sierra Club over it at the end of his life. The Sierra Club has had major battles over it, but the no curbs guys win ‘cuz some Major Donor stepped forward -giving something approaching 9 figures, ONLY if they stayed clear of supporting essential curbs. His grand daddy immigrated goddamnit, and what was good enough 100 yrs. ago, is good enough policy now!!!)

Posted by: jj | Aug 25 2006 1:21 utc | 45

@jj “His grand daddy immigrated goddamnit, and what was good enough 100 yrs. ago, is good enough policy now!!!” is probably a fair enough statement. I have no doubt that NZ’s isolation from the rest of the world has helped it keep the rest of the world’s worse problems at bay but I could never argue to stop migration especially not refugee be it economic or political when my family has only been here for just over 150 years.
Apart from the hypocrisy thing, which is no small thing, and which IMHO could only be solved by the First People making all the immigration decisions in a ‘new world’ nation, it is also pointless and incendiary to try and ‘shut the door now that we’re in’.
Without getting into a long spiel about lawful ownership of colonised countries it is wise to remember that the law is only what people will accept to be the law and given that the vast majority of people on this planet would vigorously oppose any move to lock them out of former colonies now sovereign nations owned by the colonisers, it would seem that there is a far more logical and self sustaining way to skin this cat.
That is to help the parts of the world where migrants are emanating from become much more attractive places to live. Most people would much rather stay ‘at home’ if they could so.
For example if the assholes in control of the globalisation process had to use the ability of people all around the world to interact with each other in a positive way, rather than using it to make ‘money’, the immigration pressure would subside.
Once the failure of the Doha round of trade talks hits the third world properly, so-called developed nations can expect to see immigrants forcing their way in using whatever means necessary, as starvation tends to rid one of polite social convention.
Also under the present economic model any developed nation which doesn’t have a net migration surplus, that is have more people migrate into their nation than leave it is going to go broke real fast. I know it seems stupid, hell it is stupid, but this is the hamster wheel we have placed ourselves on.
In the last two decades following the repudiation of the Keynsian economic model and it’s replacement by a demand driven, market economy success can only be assured while demand is assured. Demand is the ‘invisible force’ holding the ax blade off the back of our necks. The easiest way to keep up demand in an economy is to have an increasing population of consumers. This is why so many of the older western nations which used to have a net migration loss, are now running intensive immigration campaigns. I mean who ever thought of migrating to Ireland? Well maybe a lot of us thought about it, since there are far more of us of Irish descent out in other countries than there are Irish in Ireland, but apart from a few writers who had sufficient royalty income to guarantee survival no one actually ‘went home’.
But now Ireland has an immigration strategy which harvests the successes of the developing nations education systems in exactly the same way as every other ‘developed’ country.
I suppose one could say ‘fair enough’ given that Ireland has been on the wrong end of that sort of people harvesting for centuries.
Here’s the thing, the ‘skilled’ migration programs eg the mythical ‘Polish Plumbers’ of western europe are only a cover for the much larger numbers of unskilled migrants needed to keep an economy expanding.
Blind Freddy can see that this is madness and something will have to ‘give’ soon. Blocking migration won’t ameliorate shit though, all it will do is increase the pressure at the closed gate until it implodes.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 25 2006 2:43 utc | 47

Without getting into a long spiel about lawful ownership of colonised countries it is wise to remember that the law is only what people will accept to be the law and given that the vast majority of people on this planet would vigorously oppose any move to lock them out of former colonies now sovereign nations owned by the colonisers, it would seem that there is a far more logical and self sustaining way to skin this cat.
That is to help the parts of the world where migrants are emanating from become much more attractive places(for the down-trodden former imperialists) to live in.
Had to edit and emphasize a bit.
Whatever you are smoking or drinking tonight DEBS, I’d like to have some.

Posted by: Ms. Gertrude Bell | Aug 25 2006 3:13 utc | 49

@jj:
Yes. I’m pretty aware of all that. I used to own a copy of ectopia long ago, but I lent it to someone and never got it back. I agree.
@b real:
Thanks for the links, particularly the Asia Times one. This is a direct consequence of the Bush administrations aggresively martial bent. In future years, it will be looked at as the single greatest strategic failure in US history. Give a guy a uni-polar world, and he doesn’t know what to do with it but crash it.

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 25 2006 4:12 utc | 51

@Rick:
The whole thing is beyond puke sickening.

Posted by: Whoever | Aug 25 2006 4:34 utc | 53

— And so everything is supposed to be better if the Democrats win either or both houses in Nov? (Not that anyone here says that but it is rife 0ver at Kos and other partisan Democratic sites)
There is no opposition to what is fundamentally the same ethos in the White House as in either party. We are completely without leaders and will have to recreate our political infrastructure if any change that is meaningful is to take place. Till then, we are going through the motions and literally putting lipstick on the pig labeled “Democrat”

Posted by: Elie | Aug 25 2006 5:12 utc | 55

@bey, save yr. words for someone anyone who thinks they’re worth the time spent typing.

Posted by: jj | Aug 25 2006 5:57 utc | 57

The 205’s are drinking and coming over all 205’ish I see. Being 205’s they imagine that changing a nym changes them in the way they wish changing a frock could.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 25 2006 8:02 utc | 59

See the latest Bliar BuschCo scare in the air has created a whole new class of crime in the eyes of the gullible.
It’s called “unwhite while possessing technology in public”.
The Gruaniad explains:
All 12 suspects released after terror alert on flight

Dutch prosecutors are releasing all 12 passengers held for interrogation after a Northwest Airlines flight to Mumbai turned back to Amsterdam under escort by fighter jets.
The men, all Indian nationals, aroused suspicions on Flight NW0042 because they had numerous mobile phones, laptops and hard drives, and refused to obey the crew, prosecutors said.
US air marshals stepped in during the drama. Dutch prosecution spokesman Ed Hartjes said no evidence of a terrorist threat was found but the pilot was right to turn back as the equipment could have been used to set off a bomb.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 25 2006 9:23 utc | 61

Grrr… #62 was mine.
Also, while I’m here..
Myths of a 9/11 hero, debunked
After the terrorist attacks, Mayor Giuliani was the man. Now his leadership comes under fire in “Grand Illusion.”
I also predicted in an earlier comment/post, that we will see a Newt Gingrich/Giuliani repub ticket, In 09, I stand by that.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 25 2006 11:14 utc | 63

shining a spotlight on neo-clown elliott abrams
Hunting Monsters with Elliott Abrams

If one U.S. official were to be blamed—aside from the president, vice president, and secretary of state—for the U.S. government’s disastrous stance with Israel in the recent war, it would be Elliot Abrams. Perhaps more than any other member of Bush’s foreign policy team, Abrams embodies the administration’s zealous, ideological, and dangerously delusional vision of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

Posted by: b real | Aug 25 2006 14:46 utc | 65

Fidelity III….would that be the boat BushDaddy bought after his 3rd Affair?

Posted by: jj | Aug 25 2006 15:33 utc | 67

so what kind of fishin’ do the morons do on a speedboat?

Posted by: b real | Aug 25 2006 15:42 utc | 69

Welcome to the YOYO… (YOYO Your on your own)
Snip:

West Virginia recently approved a controversial change to its Medicaid program: a Member Agreement [NB: links to .pdf] that adds several “personal responsibilities” including attempting to avoid smoking, (illegal) drugs, heavy drinking and sloth (not sloths). It also includes clauses on compliance with doctors recommendations, keeping appointments, reading the written materials that doctors provide, and minimizing emergency department visits. Patients who don’t uphold their end of the bargain will have some benefits reduced or eliminated (that’ll learn them).

This makes my blood boil..
Also see, The United States Goes Yoyo

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 25 2006 16:26 utc | 71

Yawn.
What the insurance companies and governments give, they taketh away.
Good finds $cam.

Posted by: YoYo | Aug 25 2006 17:21 utc | 73

says host Jeff Probst, ….”I would come in and always get asked, ‘Why aren’t there more black people on the show? Where are all the Asians?’ So the idea [was] to take on something we are criticized for. We decided, let’s try to have the most ethnically diverse cast in the history of TV.”

Can someone explain to this guy the difference between diversity and divisiveness?
I barely watch TV. I don’t watch “reality” shows. This one is already in the can. I wonder how they spun it.
Don’t mix next season: Survivor: Tehran.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 25 2006 18:14 utc | 75

sleep attire for the lil’ survivalists?
armor of god PJs
Mother, Mary ‘n Jozuf, wish they’d all go away! heh heh

Posted by: b real | Aug 25 2006 18:29 utc | 77

Link dump…
Bush to anti-war widow: “There was no point in us having a philosophical discussion about the pros and cons of the war” “I said it’s time to stop the bleeding,” said Hildi Halley, whose husband, Army National Guard Capt. Patrick Damon, died June 15 in Afghanistan. “It’s time to swallow our pride and find a solution.”
She said Bush responding by saying “there was no point in us having a philosophical discussion about the pros and cons of the war.”
Government Uses New ‘CyberBug’ Aircraft Drifting in the wind, it may appear to be a harmless seagull — but the small unmanned aircraft is packed with electronics for intelligence and reconnaissance missions.
Bush and Saddam Should Both Stand Trial, Says Nuremberg Prosecutor “Nuremberg declared that aggressive war is the supreme international crime,” the 87-year-old Ferenccz told OneWorld from his home in New York. He said the United Nations charter, which was written after the carnage of World War II, contains a provision that no nation can use armed force without the permission of the UN Security Council.
Republican Guest Suggests Implementing “Universal Service” to “Put Us On a War Footing”
Ahh, it’s not all bad you know, While wearing those snazzy PJ’s you could research & surf via the PATRIOT SEARCH you could save your government money, and Snitch on yourself! And be protected in the safety of a caring loving Father. …heh heh…
I mean you know if The RCA has the blessings of the Great one, whose to blaspheme. Your either with G_D or not.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 25 2006 19:21 utc | 79

Suit yourself catlady…
As for my sanity in this ‘spiritual war’, I will be sporting the Baby Jesus Butt Plug as a precaution…hehe

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 25 2006 20:00 utc | 81

@Uncle$: now, there’s a stocking stuffer for everyone on the list. And you can choose colors: “red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight….”
I still want a scramble suit. Some years ago, I spent an entire summer reading Philip K. Dick–novels and biography. This film took me right back into the weirdest reality tunnel I’ve ever dived into. Weird and spiritual.
@ DiD: not knowing anything about how Survivor works, I can imagine really nasty outcomes of racial division (“ethnic pride”) and also some potential interesting twists. Are members of “tribes” allowed to switch teams, mix and match their skills? Seeing how it’s a network broadcast (Network 23, anyone?), I hold little hope for anything uplifting or enlightening.

Posted by: catlady | Aug 26 2006 0:01 utc | 83

@DEBS:
Your time your place.
Choose it well.
Your choice, choice of weapons.
You are a pathetic hate-filled piece of shit..
Would love to dance with you, but bandwidth prohibits.
If you don’t want to play for blood, go piss up a rope.
If you want to play FOR BLOOD, i’ll be YOUR HUCKLEBERRY.

Posted by: Ms Manners | Aug 26 2006 2:45 utc | 85