As noted in an earlier piece this week, the U.S. officially defines freedom as derived from ‘free-trade’, i.e. in a pure economic, neo-liberal sense .

Any slight attempt by a country to implement policies that are somewhat socialist makes them thereby less ‘free’ and in need of U.S. intervention.

Russia and Venezuela are such countries. In renegate democracies as these revolutions are the proscribed remedy. Color Revolutions like they took place in Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan:

Each time massive street protests followed disputed elections and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered by their opponents to be authoritarian.

Elections are coming up in Russia and in Venezuela a referendum to change the constitution will take place this weekend. There are signs that in both cases, but especially in Venezuela, attempts for color revolutions will follow.

Back in 2004 the Guardian explained:

The Democratic party’s National Democratic Institute, the Republican party’s International Republican Institute, the US state department and USAid are the main agencies involved in these grassroots campaigns as well as the Freedom House NGO and billionaire George Soros’s open society institute.

There are ten steps in these revolutions to be taken under the guidance and with funding from ‘western’ pseudo Non Governmental Organisation (NGOs):

Cont. reading: Media Prepare New Color Revolutions

Part of the backroom deals to the Annapolis conference now seems to have been about giving Lebanon to Syria.

Let’s recap:

In Lebanon a coalition of the Shia Hizbullah and Christian groups under former General Aoun are supported by Syria and Iran. The March 14 movement, consisting of the Sunni leader and Saudi business mogul Hariri plus various Christian fractions, is supported by the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.

The official government of Lebanon is somewhat in limbo. Voting for a new president by the split parliament was blocked and the date to vote moved several times. There is still the threat of a new bloody civil war. Another vote on the president is supposed to take place tomorrow but will likely be postponed.

This, in geopolitical terms, small conflict was constapiated in the run up to the recent Annapolis conference.

There was a long discussion if and under what circumstances Syria would be part of that conference. The Syrians taking part was something the Bush administration really desired.

Cont. reading: Syria’s Annapolis Deal

Foes Use Obama’s Jewish Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him

By Perry Bacon Jr.^*
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 29, 2007; Page A01

In his speeches and often on the Internet, the part of Sen. Barack Obama’s biography that gets the most attention is not his race but his connections to the Jewish world.

Since declaring his candidacy for president in February, Obama, a member of a congregation of the United Church of Christ in Chicago, has had to address assertions that he is a Jew or that he had received bar mitzvah training in Indonesia, where he lived from ages 6 to 10. While his father was an atheist and his mother did not practice religion, Obama’s stepfather did occasionally attend services at a Synagogue there.

Despite his denials, rumors and e-mails circulating on the Internet continue to allege that Obama (D-Ill.) is a Jew, a "Jewish plant" in a conspiracy against America, and that, if elected president, he would take the oath of office using a Talmud, rather than a Bible.

[…]

Cont. reading: Obama’s Jewish Ties

The elder is filled so here is new open thread.

Please comment. This blog subsists on comments …

There is still a lot of musing about the reasons for the War on Iraq. I have struggled with the question for quite some time, but finally feel to get a grip on an answer. Let’s review the ongoing discussion:

In the London Review of Books Jim Holt argues: It’s the Oil, and that the war is a success:

The costs – a few billion dollars a month plus a few dozen American fatalities (a figure which will probably diminish, and which is in any case comparable to the number of US motorcyclists killed because of repealed helmet laws) – are negligible compared to $30 trillion in oil wealth, assured American geopolitical supremacy and cheap gas for voters. In terms of realpolitik, the invasion of Iraq is not a fiasco; it is a resounding success.

In the libertarian Taki Patrick Foy does neither agree with the oil argument, nor does he see assured success:

Cont. reading: On Motives for War on Iranq

After weeks of talks Abbas and Olmert have agreed to continue to talk.

This, and lots of photos, is the result of the Annapolis conference:

"We agree to immediately launch good-faith bilateral negotiations in order to conclude a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues, including all core issues without exception, as specified in previous agreements," it continued. "We agree to engage in vigorous, ongoing and continuous negotiations and shall make every effort to conclude an agreement before the end of 2008."

Why one needs to agree to "immediately launch" talks when one is continuously talking was not explained:

Cont. reading: The Annapolis Production

by Debs is dead
lifted from a comment

As the shape and efforts of the amerikan empire and it’s army come
to resemble that of the Roman Empire each day; one wonders where they
will move to now that the continental US is becoming less salubrious,
less inviting for them.

A very good argument can be put up to support the contention that
this empire has moved once already – from england when the ‘messiness’
of WW2 caused the imperialists to lose control of england’s body
politic. We may consider the likes of Harold Wilson‘s
blood to be a very pale red indeed but there is no doubt it was
sufficiently magenta to prevent england from being the administrative
and oppression HQ for the world’s largest empire. Which is when
responsibility for that empire was quietly handballed across to
amerika. . .

Cont. reading: Moving the Empire?

Hmm – what is up with these?

Earthquake shakes Manila, 11/27/2007

Workers evacuated office buildings in Manila Tuesday afternoon after a magnitude 4.2 earthquake rattled an undersea area off Pangasinan.

Indonesia rocked by major earthquake, three people killed, 11/27/07

A 6.7-magnitude earthquake struck off Indonesia’s Sumbawa island yesterday, killing three, injuring 55 and damaging hundreds of homes as repeated aftershocks rattled nerves, officials said.

Earthquake rocks Delhi, adjoining areas, 11/27/07

Cont. reading: Earthquake Cluster

One of the biggest socialist organization in today’s world is the U.S. military: free healthcare, free education, equal opportunities, guaranteed pensions. It is what you wish for but what the civil society is prohibited to get. But for the top guys in that organization that isn’t enough. In the civil land, a few folks make millions and billions – the Generals want to do so too.

An interesting piece by the LA Times today says the Military wants more views on Iraq reports:

Concerned about the war’s effect on public trust in the military, the leading officials said they hoped the next major assessment early next year would not place as much emphasis on the views of Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq, who in September spent dozens of hours in testimony before Congress and in televised interviews.

One wonders what that is about. Why would the brass not like Congress to again pay obeisance to the ‘lord of counterinsurgency’, i.e. the master of paying off tribal mafias?

The first issue the military establishment has is about picking up the publicity tab for a war they consider lost:

Cont. reading: The Concern About Petraeus Role

Well, everybody makes mistakes …

American Majority Sees Iraq War as a Mistake

Most adults in the United States question their federal government’s decision to launch the coalition effort, according to a poll by Knowledge Networks released by the Associated Press and Yahoo. 62 per cent of respondents think the U.S. made a made a mistake in going to war in Iraq.

The War on Iraq was not a mistake, but a willful, carefully planed and marketed supreme crime. A war of aggression for various nefarious reasons.

But let’s not blame the people who answered the poll for their answer. They were asked the wrong (loaded) question and given only two alternatives for answers:

All in all, thinking about how things have gone in Iraq since the United States went to war there in March 2003, do you think the United States made …

1. .. the right decision in going to war in Iraq? (37%)
2. .. a mistake in going to war in Iraq? (62%)

(Refused / Not Answered 1%)

It is obvious that this was a push poll:

A push poll is a political campaign technique in which an individual or organization attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll.

In a classic political campaign push poll, many more people are called than the sample needed to get statistical relevant answers. The idea is to spread a meme, a chunk of cultural information, as far as possible. That is not the case here, the sample size is 2230.

But with AP and Yahoo paying for the poll and publishing its result through their media power the meme distributing effect is even bigger than in the classic campaign case. Similar question were included in earlier polls too and the results also presented under a "mistake" headline.

There is apparently a campaign to redefine the crime of War on Iraq into a "mistake". A "mistake" of course does not justify any punishment of its perpetrators, not even their impeachment. Everybody makes mistakes …

Who orders and pays Associated Press and Yahoo to run this campaign?

If no one does, why is it their and other media companies self-interest to run this campaign?

In a Washington Post op-ed Michelle D. Gavin, for the Council of Imperial Relations, is Looking Towards Zimbabwe’s Future:

[T]he U.S., working with others, can help to alter the calculus of the Zimbabwean players who can affect change.
[…]
[T]his requires marshalling real resources in an international trust fund for Zimbabwe’s recovery — resources that can serve as powerful incentives for potential successors to Mugabe to embrace vital reforms.

Deimperialized translation:

The U.S., with other people paying, can use carrots and sticks to instigate some Zimbabwean crooks into launching a coup.
[…]
This requires luring international payers into handing over some cash –, money we can use to give huge bribes to potential dictatorial successors so that they will do whatever we will demand.

Simple – isn’t it?

Adding via Angry Arab: Zimbabwe Under Siege

News, views and leftovers …

Please contribute to this open thread.

A small NGO, Senlis Council, which also claims to also be a ‘thinktank’ and is financed by a Swiss billionaire, came up with a report that grabbed headlines today: Afghanistan ‘falling into hands of Taliban’. The NGO’s not so peaceful solution is to call for NATO to double its troop levels.

Either Karzai got an earful from Washington or he was just pissed off about this. He banned Senlis Council from Afghanistan.

The Swiss government is wiser than the NGO. It has voluntarily recalled its military from Afghanistan after four years of hard engagement. The two officers, who were sharing the beer with the Germans in Kunduz, will leave because the situation is getting too dangerous. The South Korean’s are on their way out too and Japan ended its support mission.

Smart folks.

There will certainly be NO doubling of NATO troops.

The Germans and Austrians just got some nasty video message threatening a bit of terror at home if they don’t recall their troops (Germany has 3000 there and Austria 50% more than Switzerland had). Any real terror event in Germany could now be the end of Merkel as chancellor. The Canadians find the war is quite expensive and the politicians not truthful about it.

The public opinion in Germany, like in Canada and the Netherlands, is overwhelmingly against any  troops in Afghanistan anyway, but politicians like in Berlin ain’t listening – yet.

The people are asking: What is the supposed benefit of fighting the Pashtuns in their homeland? An increase in terror threats? What else?

The Afghans are shutting down all private security firms which will make any project and business much more difficult. A Chinese(!) company wins the bid for Afghan copper mining (12 million tons!), Karzai is negotiating for peace with the Talibs and, in the UN, votes against Canada. Most of the financial aid to Afghanistan gets wasted while it exports (pdf) plenty of opium and heroin. Meanwhile the dictator in Pakistan is held in place by the U.S. to keep the supply lines to its troops in Afghanistan open.

So what’s the reason for NATO troops being there? And to double them? Why?

NATO wasn’t build to occupy and fight nasty counterinsurgency wars in some landlocked Asian backyard. There is no consensus for such fights and in the long run such public consensus is decisive. NATO was build to hold off the Sowjet Union. Now it embarresses itself by renting Russian helicopters and crews to do fight in Afghanistan.

The people in the Kremlin must be laughing their asses off.

People smell that somethings very wrong here. The foreign policy ‘elite’ on both sides of the Atlantic wants to keep NATO alive. If that is their aim, they will have to give up on Afghanistan and do so very soon. Otherwise NATO will fall apart.

It is likely though that they will wait too long and lose both, NATO and the war against the Pashtuns.

That’s the only positive aspect I can find in this mess.

story

The State Department and White House outlined the following schedule
for next week’s Annapolis Mideast peace conference. [All times Eastern:]

Monday, Nov. 26, Washington
10:55 a.m.: Photo opportunity with President Bush, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Oval Office.
1:15 p.m.: Photo opportunity with Bush, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Oval Office.
7 p.m.: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s dinner with conference participants at the State Department. Bush delivers photo opportunities.

Tuesday, Nov. 27, Annapolis, Md.

9:50 a.m.: Photo opportunity: Bush jointly with Abbas and Olmert.

11 a.m.: Conference begins with photo opportunities by Bush, Olmert, Abbas, Rice, U.N. secretary- general and others.
Plenary photo opportunity session follows.

Wednesday, Nov. 28, Washington
11 a.m.: Photo opportunity: Bush with Abbas.
1:15 p.m.: Photo opportunity: Bush with Olmert.

Sources: White House, U.S. State Dept., LA Times

In Sunday’s LA Times Professors David Cole and Jules Lobel asked Are We Safer?

We have more than six years of experience with the Bush administration’s war on terror, and there has not been another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. But can the administration take credit for that?

They present: A report card on the war on terror (pdf).

The first item on their card is the "Worldwide
Number of Terrorist Attacks" displayed in three datapoints:

• 2001  – 1,732 Terrorist Attacks
• 2005  – 4,995 Terrorist Attacks
• 2006  – 6,659 Terrorist Attacks

Yuk, now I’m scared!!!

The attributed source is the Rand-MIPT ‘Terrorism Knowledge Database‘. Using it I produced two charts:

Cont. reading: Absurd Terror Stats

by Debs is Dead
lifted from a comment

What everyone appears to be saying is quite simple to me on the
outside. Paul and Kucinich appear to have one thing going for them that
none of the other candidates do.

They seem to be honest – motivated by principle rather than a simple
lust for power. Right about now people who live in a liberal democracy,
and who normally vote left of centre would rather take a principled
far-rightist than an unprincipled ‘centre leftist’. This shouldn’t be
surprising.

It seems rational. One feels that a principled person will listen to
facts and weigh arguments before deciding. Therefore a well presented
argument for health-care or a rise in minimum wage levels could stand a
chance.

Unfortunately it doesn’t work like that. As we have seen time and
time again pols can only afford principles when they are on the outer.
Their act of being an ethical human in a jungle full of predatory
animals turns as soon as they actually catch the attention of
sufficient voters. For all the talk of that Howard Dean scream, and how
it was a deliberate ploy by the elite to derail a principled dem, it
seems that amerika didn’t really lose much. Dean has hardly covered
himself in glory as chairman of the Democratic National Committee. He
was just another pol using the ploy of being on a higher moral ground
to get attention.

There is little in either Kucinich or Paul’s past to suggest they will behave differently.

Cont. reading: Candidates Incite and Suck

On Wednesday the Lebanese parliament will elect a new president. If the (s)election fails, another civil war is a very possible outcome. All parties are heavily armed and 20,000 troops are staged within the capital.

According to the Lebanese constitution, the president has to be a Christian and elected by a two-thirds parliamentary majority. The Maronite patriarch Sfeir made a list of possible candidates and the ruling March 14 coalition is supposed to agree with the opposition on one of the listed persons.

The March 14 group consists of the Sunni followers of the Saudi business mogul Hariri and some Christian groups and is supported by the U.S., France and Saudi Arabia. It is now negotiating with the opposition which represents the Shia Hizbullah and the Christian leader Aoun and his followers. These are supported by Syria and Iran.

The elections are of course an internal Lebanese affair:

Cont. reading: (Non-)Interference in Lebanon

Heathlander at Eurotrib, Professor Farideh Farhi at Juan Cole’s blog and Jim Herring at Col. Pat Lang’s place explain the content of the recent IAEA report (pfd) on Iran’s nuclear energy program.

They conclude that the characterizing of that report in the ‘western’ mainstream media was severely distorting and did not reflect the central findings of the IAEA report.

These are:

Cont. reading: IAEA: Iran Has No Nuke Program

by b real

(full)

"The question is not what you look at but what you
see"

Henry David Thoreau

Cont. reading: Deciduous Designs