The Emperial Times editorial is agreeing to send U.S. troops into Pakistan, but only if there first is more “democracy” like a deal between Bhutto and Sharif. Both are of course crooks. (Sharif is no back in Pakistan from Saudi Arabia as Musharraf plans to play Bhutto against Sharif)

Before the Pentagon goes any further, President Bush must work a lot harder to restore democracy — the best hope for holding off the chaos that would make Pakistan an even more hospitable host for extremists. That means that he must make clear once and for all that Washington is firmly on the side of democracy, not more deal-making designed to keep the general in power.

“Not more deal-making” they say. And the next paragraph:

Instead of urging Benazir Bhutto to expend her credibility on implausible power-sharing deals, Washington should be encouraging her to work with her longtime political rival, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, and build a broad civilian democratic front.

Okay – so no deal-making with Mush but deal-making under DC “encouragement” anyway. That’s “democracy” in Pakistan and “America’s strategic interests.”

Before plunging American forces more deeply into Pakistan’s remote borderlands, Washington needs to deal with the critical political crisis threatening that country’s very core and America’s strategic interests.

And they talk about “to drive Al Qaeda and the Taliban from its Pakistani sanctuaries”. That Talibs, as we know, are the Pashtun people living there. To “drive them out” means ethnical cleansing.

Posted by: b | Nov 23 2007 8:25 utc | 3

The recent meme of “Iraq is now more peaceful” is quickly revealed as illusory. The stream of people coming back to Baghdad (1,000 per day which means it will take 7 or so years ’til all refugees are back) is due to Syria and Jordan closing their borders and evicting people without visa.
Pet market bomb kills 13 in Baghdad

The device, which exploded just before 9am (6am GMT) in the al-Ghazl market, also injured about 60 people, including four policemen.

10 U.S.-Backed Fighters Killed in Iraq

Al-Qaeda in Iraq gunmen disguised as official security forces killed at least 10 U.S.-backed Sunni fighters on Thursday, the latest attack on the American effort to form neighborhood-based armed patrols, Iraqi officials said.
The fighting began in the early morning in Hawr Rajab when about 15 members of the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq attacked an Iraqi army checkpoint, the U.S. military said. The military said the insurgents used small-arms fire throughout the morning against the Iraqi soldiers and the U.S.-backed Sunni fighters, known in military jargon as “concerned local citizens.”
The insurgents had dressed up in police uniforms and commandeered vehicles before the attack, which killed at least 10 of the U.S.-backed fighters and wounded five Iraqi soldiers, according to an Interior Ministry official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to reporters.
The U.S. military said it called in helicopter gunships to attack a van transporting insurgents involved in the clashes, killing two members of al-Qaeda in Iraq and wounding two others. An Air Force F-16 fighter jet later destroyed the van by dropping a 500-pound bomb on it, the military said.

Let’s see: people dressed up in police uniform with “commandeered vehicles”. Looks like police, walks like police, smells like police – must be “Al-Qaida”.
Better explanation: Shia policemen fighting with a local Sunni gang of “concerned citizens” with the U.S. taking sides with the Sunni.

Meanwhile, the bloodshed continued unabated elsewhere in Iraq. More than 24 people were killed or found dead in attacks across the country, the Interior Ministry official said. A series of rockets or mortar shells slammed into the Green Zone, though the number of casualties was unclear.

Just yesterday I read somewhere that attacks on the Green Zone have stopped …

Posted by: b | Nov 23 2007 10:26 utc | 5

High drama in Lebanon. At midnight tonight the mandate of the current president, Emile Lahoud, expires. No compromise has been achieved and elections will not take place before then. So, what will happen? Here is a selection of readings for those who are interested:
Yesterday: Make-it-or-break it talks

The foreign ministers of France, Italy and Spain were shuttling between the bitterly divided parties in an ultimate bid to wrench an agreement on a compromise candidate before midnight Friday, when the term of president Emile Lahoud expires.
All indicators on Thursday, Lebanon’s independence day, were that the ruling majority and the opposition remained as divided as ever ahead of a scheduled vote in parliament to replace Lahoud.
“They have no more cards to play and I don’t think there will be a breakthrough by tomorrow,” an official said on condition of anonymity. “We are at an impasse.”….
According to Article 62 of the Lebanese constitution, if no candidate is chosen by parliament to replace Lahoud, the outgoing head of state hands over power to the government, which can then pursue talks on a compromise candidate.
But there are fears that the opposition might go ahead with its threat to set up a parallel government, a grim reminder of the end of the 1975-1990 civil war when two administrations battled for control….
The standoff, the country’s worst political crisis since the end of the war, is widely seen as an extension of the regional confrontation pitting the United States against Iran and Syria.
Hezbollah, leading the opposition, has said it would not settle for a president under US tutelage while the majority has balked at any candidate close to Syria and Iran.
The standoff has left the country on edge, with many schools to shut on Friday and the army deploying heavily in the capital to prevent any outbreak of violence.
Prime Minister Fuad Siniora’s government has been paralysed since the opposition withdrew its six ministers from the cabinet in November 2006 in a bid to gain more representation in government.

Today: The Clock Ticks Relentlessly to Midnight: Deadline Looms in Lebanon Vote as Factions Deadlocked [Interesting headline that has the word “dead” in it twice…]

Parliament is scheduled to convene at 1:00 pm (1100 GMT) to pick a successor to pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud, whose term ends at midnight.
But the ruling coalition and the opposition have been unable to agree on a compromise candidate, prompting fears of a power vacuum or the formation of two rival governments, as was the case at the end of the 1975-1990 civil war.
The army was deployed heavily in the capital, with tanks and troops at all major intersections, and the downtown area where the parliament building is located was declared off-limits.
Beirut’s usually bustling streets were relatively quiet with schools shut down and many people remaining home for fear of unrest.

Breaking: Lebanon Fails to Elect President; Vote Again Delayed to Nov. 30

BEIRUT, Lebanon — Lebanon’s parliament failed to elect a successor to President Emile Lahoud just hours before he was set to leave office after it was unable to convene due to an opposition boycott Friday.
The failure puts the country in a potentially explosive political vacuum.
Lebanon’s parliament was expected to make a last attempt to meet Friday to elect a president hours before President Emile Lahoud leaves office, but a quorum was unlikely amid widely expected opposition boycott.
Speaker Nabih Berri said in a statement that the session was postponed for a week until Nov. 30 to give more time “for additional consultations to reach a consensus on electing a president.”
The opposition-aligned Berri made the decision 30 minutes after the legislature failed to muster the necessary two-thirds quorum to begin voting. It followed talks with leaders of the parliamentary majority.
Scheduling another session in a week as talks between the two sides continue could defuse for now any potential street confrontations.
While both sides said efforts were underway to prevent a further deterioration, each camp was waiting for the other to make the first move. The failure to elect a new president could throw the country deeper into political chaos and violence.
In the absence of a president, the anti-Syrian [US-sponsored] government of PM Fuad Saniora takes executive power under the constitution. But the pro-Syrian Lahoud has vowed not to hand his authorities over to Saniora’s administration, considering it unconstitutional after all five ministers of the Shiite Muslim community quit a year ago.
“Any step taken by Fuad Saniora to take over the presidency’s duties … within hours the opposition will be on the streets to bring him down by force,” warned opposition politician Wiam Wahhab on Hezbollah’s al-Manar TV late Thursday.
The most dangerous scenario is that Lahoud could create an alternative government and hand it his power. Saniora’s Western-backed government would likely refuse to step aside, leaving Lebanon with two rival governments, much like during the last two years of the 1975-90 civil war.
A compromise possibility is that Lahoud will entrust his security powers to the heads of the military, a move that the government would likely not oppose–effectively putting the situation on hold to allow further talks on a candidate.
“We are giving wide space to the continuation of dialogue and consultations,” said Akram Chehayeb of a hard-line faction in the parliament backing Saniora. “We want to preserve civil peace.”
Others in the majority said they would not take any drastic measures such as electing one of their own in a simple majority ignoring the opposition boycott.

Posted by: Bea | Nov 23 2007 15:02 utc | 7

b, I knew you would say that, but I am still interested in your 25 technical reasons…
LOL about the “true reason” offered by the commentator…

Posted by: Bea | Nov 23 2007 16:16 utc | 9

Insightful and very accurate comment about the symbiosis between Palestine and Lebanon from Josh Landis @Syria Commment:

Progress in Lebanon is intimately related to progress in Palestine. It is a large ball of wax. Most actors are making calculations in one place based on their position in the other. This is certainly true of Syria, which views Lebanon as a card that can only be played when the Golan is on the table. So long as the peace process is going no where for Syria, Damascus will not council flexibility among its allies in Lebanon. Likewise, the US cannot expect to force its will on Lebanon while stiffing Syria in the peace process. Israel will not get relief from Hizbullah so long as it refuses to relinquish the Golan. The Palestinians have no leverage at all.

He links to and highly recommends this article by Anthony Shadid about Lebanon’s failure to elect a president.

Posted by: Bea | Nov 23 2007 16:22 utc | 11

@daar – thanks – downloading now – please comment more often 🙂

Posted by: b | Nov 23 2007 17:47 utc | 13

Excellent sleuthing by Cernig on the shia Iraqi tribes’ petition against Iranian interference in Iraq story:
That Disappearing Petition And The Media

Posted by: Alamet | Nov 23 2007 18:47 utc | 15

UN refugee agency cautious about returns to Iraq

(snip)
“We welcome improvements to the security conditions and stand ready to assist people who have decided or will decide to return voluntarily. However, UNHCR does not believe that the time has come to promote, organize or encourage returns,” agency spokesperson Jennifer Pagonis told a press briefing in Geneva.
“That would be possible only when proper return conditions are in place – including material and legal support and physical safety,” she said, pointing out that there is currently “no sign of any large-scale return to Iraq as the security situation in many parts of the country remains volatile and unpredictable.”
UNHCR staff in Syria who surveyed over 100 Iraqi families said most of the refugees report that they are returning because they are running out of money and/or resources, face difficult living conditions, or because their visas have expired.
(snip)

Posted by: Alamet | Nov 23 2007 18:53 utc | 17

The future of the corporation

“Dynastic wealth, the enemy of a meritocracy, is on the rise,” Buffett told the senators. “Equality of opportunity has been on the decline. A progressive and meaningful estate tax is needed to curb the movement of a democracy toward a plutocracy.”

Posted by: b | Nov 23 2007 20:49 utc | 19

b
thank for the new york review of books link
unfortunately, found myself reading le monde – with an article by that peruvian prick varghas lhosa who imagines himself nabakov – & his hatred of chavez, morales, ortega etc . in fact any leader or people moving towards the light
he accuses them all of lacking culture, of being barbarian – & he really can’t wait for the butchers to return – the pinochets, the somozas, the fujimoris, the videla, the stoessners – these are men of high christian culture in defence of western civilisation
really sometimes – high culture is so base, so rotten in its construction – that it stinks to high heaven

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 23 2007 22:24 utc | 21

Keep an eye on Australia this weekend.
We’re voting to, hopefully, oust another member of the coalition of the killing, Mr. John Howard.
After 11 years of conservative, and divisive, rule, the Australian people are wanting a leader who will look to the future with optimism as opposed to fear.
Let’s hope, for our children’s sake, that we succeed.
Cheers.

Posted by: Marek Bage | Nov 24 2007 5:38 utc | 23

t’was me

Posted by: annie | Nov 24 2007 7:02 utc | 25

@Marek – 23 congratulations – Labor has won down under.
Now what took the Aussies so long to get to this point?

Posted by: b | Nov 24 2007 11:47 utc | 27

The other day I was listening to a round table with good experts on Georgia, at present it has a one party state, United National Movement Party, there is no opposition with voice except the street, after all the Rose Revolution Hoopla, which I believe was somewhat genuine, heartfelt. It is said that the US formented and supported the Rose Revolution but that that is quite iffy (see Soros, etc.)
The Pres. Saakashvili turned out to have no clue about the economy and/or to be a first class predator – say, fire sales of state enterprises to bring cash in and high level state corruption (while cracking down on policemen), and recently distributing monies, even to old enemies, to ensure votes, running the whole country as if he was a criminal entrepreneur who got a mind-boggling inheritance. The US contributed to the failure by going from clueless meddling (?) to support the Pres (well that might be discussed, they didn’t really, stability was all) to then giving up and supporting individuals instead…no institutional support for the famed ‘democracy’. That is what I got from my reading and the round table.
The sameness world-wide is really depressing.
Nationalization vs. privatization – does it make a difference? Putin basically has nationalized the energy sector, and one can have some understanding and sympathy for that (..reversing Yeltsin) but what does it mean for the Russian ppl? Russia is a very wasteful or inefficient energy user – the return in GDP terms is possibly the lowest in the world. China is not communist, it is simply a one-party-state, and the vicious free market economy with all its lack of controls practised there is killing peasants, small entrepreneurs, and various other classes of ppl. The United Arab Emirates are not a ‘state’ according to ‘western criteria’ – it is a feudal arrangement of overlords who have transmuted into corporate types. Kosovo (that exercise in bombs for democracy, THE great Nato success) is on the point of exploding again. To quote only some varied examples.
What is the root cause?
Freedom leading to gangsterism? The rise of corporate power? The general adoption of a free market ideology? Peak oil and the powerful saving their fat or skinny dieted asses? Globalization and its cut throat competition? New colonialism? The death of the nation state (see corporate power)? A rush to annihilation and the end times? Domination to ensure survival? Just an inevitable chapter in mankind’s history, plagues and wars will see us through? What?

Posted by: Tangerine | Nov 24 2007 14:51 utc | 29

Ensley, that report is probably understated. See this Energy Bulletin article by Sohbet Karbuz last year:

According to the US Defense Energy Support Center Fact Book 2004, in Fiscal Year 2004, the US military fuel consumption increased to 144 million barrels. This is about 40 million barrels more than the average peacetime military usage.
By the way, 144 million barrels makes 395 000 barrels per day, almost as much as daily energy consumption of Greece.
The US military is the biggest purchaser of oil in the world.
(snip)
In May 2005 issue of The Atlantic Monthly, Robert Bryce gives another example; “The Third Army (of General Patton) had about 400,000 men and used about 400,000 gallons of gasoline a day. Today the Pentagon has about a third that number of troops in Iraq yet they use more than four times as much fuel.”

Lots more in the article, all referenced. Moreover, if you will check Karbuz’s blog, he believes a good deal of the oil purchases in US bases overseas is listed under host country consumption in world statistics, and so the real total is likely much higher.

Posted by: Alamet | Nov 24 2007 15:53 utc | 31

Robert Dreyfuss – The withering away of several enemies in Iraq
I think the picture of Iraq he paints is nonsense. But what matters is he is making a good case for withdrawal.

Posted by: Alamet | Nov 24 2007 16:12 utc | 33

US Military fuel consumption – in today’s news: US Navy steps up fuel deliveries to Gulf forces

LONDON: The US military has stepped up chartering of tankers and requests for extra fuel in the US Central Command area, which includes the Gulf, shipping and oil industry sources say.
A Gulf oil industry source said the charters suggested there would be high naval activity, possibly including a demonstration to Iran that the US Navy will protect the Strait of Hormuz oil shipping route during tensions over Tehran’s nuclear programme.
The US Navy’s Military Sealift Command (MSC) has tendered for four tankers in November to move at least one million barrels of jet and ship fuel between Gulf ports, from Asia to the Gulf and to the Diego Garcia base, tenders seen by Reuters show.
It usually tenders for one or two tankers a month to supply Gulf operations, which include missions in Iraq.
…
Fuels specified to be moved between Gulf ports include JP5, high flashpoint jet fuel, used to power F18 fighters aboard aircraft carriers.
They have been very active, said a ship industry source, familiar with the MSC tender process, who asked not to be named.
Out of the multiple charter requirements they issue, they usually do maybe one or two (tankers) a month in the Gulf. They were quiet over the summer months, he said.

That points to about March 2008 for some “operation”.

Posted by: b | Nov 24 2007 16:16 utc | 35

the karbuz blog is excellent, i have linked to it twice here.
But let’s keep a sense of proportion, the first sentence of the Energy Bull article is:
The US Department of Defense (DoD) is the largest oil consuming government body in the US and in the world.
Government body. And the US is very big. Not the single largest purchaser, in what terms morevoer?, 38th country wise, even that is possibly an exaggeration.
That said, the accounting is not ‘proper’ – as pointed out.
That they are using a tremendous amount of oil or energy as a whole can’t be a surprise to anyone. War with no or few casualties on the side of the invaders is run on superior punch power, which rests on massive use of fossil fuels, expensive technology (created with fossil fuels, usually not counted), as well as forbidden and sophisticated radioactive punch (Depleted Uranium.) 


Posted by: Tagerine | Nov 24 2007 16:26 utc | 37

alamet 34, she was found dead of a gunshot wound in Baghdad.
hmm

The Department of Defense has labeled Davis’ death Dec. 12 a “non-combat related incident” and has said her death is under investigation.
Thomas, of Lorton, Va., said her family has been given few details.
Davis phoned her daughter, Candace Thomas, from Baghdad nearly every other day to see how she was doing in school and to assure her granddaughter, Kennedy, that she was fine….
When Thomas last spoke with her mother, “she was just as happy as she could be,” she said. “She loved the Army.”

Westhusing suicided w/ a gunshot to the head also.

Government officials say the suicide occurred a day after she admitted to an Army investigator that she had accepted at least $225,000 in bribes from the company. The United States has begun proceedings to seize Major Davis’s assets, a move her heirs are contesting.
…..
Court documents, say Major Davis also served as a contracting officer at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, from in 2003 and 2004 and awarded millions of dollars in contracts to American Logistics and its affiliate companies, raising the question of whether the cases are related.
……
In May 2005, the document said, Mr. Lee and his son, Justin W. Lee, shifted assets and contracts to Lee Dynamics, and its contract to maintain the warehouses was renewed in July 2005 even though its performance had been abysmal, said two American officials who were in the country at the time.
That month, after Major Davis moved to the Pentagon, Lee Dynamics was awarded a $12 million warehousing contract.

Booming trade in U.S. weapons on Iraqi black market
the reason this case is so interesting is not just the 12 million contract for storage facilities. it’s what was stored in them. davis was transfered from her job at Camp Arifjan to the pentagon. hmm. she calls her family every other day, they say she sounds fine, she is alledged to have confessed the day before she ends up dead. it is not initially reported as suicide.

Activities at that armory and other warehouses help explain how the U.S. military lost track of some 190,000 pistols and automatic rifles supplied by the United States to Iraq’s security forces in 2004 and 2005, as auditors discovered in the past year.
..
The company’s armory was a logistics hub for the new Iraqi police. Crates of AK-47s and Glock pistols purchased by the Pentagon were trucked to the armory by armed convoys.
….
Ted Nordgaarden, an Alaska state trooper who worked as the police academy’s supply chief, said most of the weapons he saw leaving the armory went with a military escort.
….
In July, the company, American Logistics Services, which later became Lee Dynamics International, was suspended by the Army from doing future business with the government amid accusations that the company paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes to military contracting officers. The company had won $11 million in contracts to manage five warehouses with arms and other equipment in Iraq.

nty

Two people with direct knowledge of the investigation or the contracting office in Iraq at the time said “Person B” was Lt. Col. Kevin A. Davis, who worked with an officer who has emerged as a focus of the investigation in the weapons case in Iraq.
That officer, Lt. Col. Levonda Joey Selph, was at the heart of the effort to strengthen the fledgling Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005. She worked closely with Gen. David H. Petraeus, who commanded the effort at the time.

from alamet’s link..

Poor record-keeping, overwork and inadequate supervision contributed to the problem, as a relative handful of personnel scurried to support complex operations – set up quickly in the run-up to the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq – which have lasted far longer than foreseen.
A handful of soldiers and civilians and military officers working out of a small office in the bleak Kuwaiti desert found themselves doling out contracts totaling hundreds of millions of dollars, often with little contracting experience.
Several former civilian contractors who worked in Iraq spoke of a climate where costs didn’t seem to matter, where equipment disappeared without accountability and where inept managers were simply shifted from job to job rather than fired.

contrast

Deceiving the checks and balances in the federal procurement system takes careful planning, Frank Anderson, president of the Defense Acquisition University at Fort Belvoir, said in a separate interview.
“You had some smart bad apples,” said Anderson, who leads the organization that trains the military’s acquisition officials. “It had to be someone who understood the business well enough to figure out how to get around the system.”

this isn’t just about making lots of money illegally it’s about instigating a civil war directed out of the pentagon.

Posted by: annie | Nov 24 2007 17:54 utc | 39

via Main and Central a McClatchy piece on Americans and waterboarding. At the end it points to an evangelical Christian site post: Our Tortured Silence:
The Shameful Response of Christians to Waterboarding.
The comments there are quite hmmm – well, shameful.

Posted by: b | Nov 24 2007 19:08 utc | 41

tap. tap.
*cough*
Iran: We have nuke fuel pellets
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-11-24-iran_N.htm

Posted by: wa sabi | Nov 24 2007 19:42 utc | 43

this isn’t just about making lots of money illegally it’s about instigating a civil war directed out of the pentagon.
Bravo annie, very, very astute observation. One that should be elaborated upon. Excellent example of yet another, criminal negligent ‘law of unintended consequences’, a direct result of the cupidity of sheer market place greed. And though it may not seem like it at first, this is the same kind of thing that comes from the parable of the broken window mentality. Justifying jobs, contracts, ultimately resulting in corruption both at home and abroad.
And the solution? Give out even more contracts!

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said this month that the Pentagon will act on recommendations that the Army needs 2,000 more military and civilian workers to better manage contracts – to ensure the years of waste, fraud and abuse don’t happen again.

I highly recommend the discussion comments from Alamet’s link. If for nothing more that an understanding of where some of those cats are at.
For instance one says the following with regards to Gates platitude,
“So, 2000 MORE civilian workers will help our forces overcome the disaster that over 125,000 civilian contractors have helped cause?
That’s some seriously flawed thinking… a common thing these days.”
That’s some serious fission going on.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 24 2007 20:46 utc | 45

the sad truth of australia is that it is a subsidiary of the u s state department & is wholly owned by rupert murdoch & newscorp
it will be a blairite ‘social democracy’ – that is to say it is neither social nor democratic. it will as always follow the sinister cosmologies of margaret thatcher

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Nov 24 2007 21:40 utc | 47

Israel backed by army of cyber-soldiers in propaganda war on

Israel backed by army of cyber-soldiers
Israel’s Government has thrown its weight behind efforts by supporters to counter what it believes to be negative bias and a tide of pro-Arab propaganda. The Foreign Ministry has ordered trainee diplomats to track websites and chatrooms so that networks of US and European groups with hundreds of thousands of Jewish activists can place supportive messages.

Israel ups the stakes in the propaganda war

Amir Gissin runs what he calls ‘”Israel’s Explanation Department”. Which is why it is surprising to hear him admit that many Israelis think “the whole problem is that we don’t explain ourselves correctly”.

No wonder gatekeeper kos is so well entrenched in mediocrity. Oh, and it has just come to my attention why the Sibel Edmonds/Val Plame Wilson case will never go anywhere, Waxman is AIPAC member. Blackmail’s a bitch …
Sibel Edmonds Case: the untellable story of AIPAC

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 25 2007 0:41 utc | 49

Speaking of Real Threats, as opposed to Elite Manufactured boogy boys, here on the homefront we might as well have one of our last Merry Christmases while we can –
Forecast: U.S. dollar could plunge 90 pct
RHINEBECK, N.Y., Nov. 19 (UPI) — A financial crisis will likely send the U.S. dollar into a free fall of as much as 90 percent and gold soaring to $2,000 an ounce, a trends researcher said.
“We are going to see economic times the likes of which no living person has seen,” Trends Research Institute Director Gerald Celente said, forecasting a “Panic of 2008.”
“The bigger they are, the harder they’ll fall,” he said in an interview with New York’s Hudson Valley Business Journal.
Celente — who forecast the subprime mortgage financial crisis and the dollar’s decline a year ago and gold’s current rise in May — told the newspaper the subprime mortgage meltdown was just the first “small, high-risk segment of the market” to collapse.
Derivative dealers, hedge funds, buyout firms and other market players will also unravel, he said.
Massive corporate losses, such as those recently posted by Citigroup Inc. and General Motors Corp., will also be fairly common “for some time to come,” he said.
He said he would not “be surprised if giants tumble to their deaths,” Celente said.
The Panic of 2008 will lead to a lower U.S. standard of living, he said.
A result will be a drop in holiday spending a year from now, followed by a permanent end of the “retail holiday frenzy” that has driven the U.S. economy since the 1940s, he said.
© United Press International. All Rights Reserved.link

Posted by: jj | Nov 25 2007 0:53 utc | 51

Hello (hello hello), is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 25 2007 3:14 utc | 53

The drought in Australia is bad the last drought this bad was in the early 80’s and it that had a lot to do with Labor winning power then. That drought broke not long after Hawke was elected PM. If that happens again the libs are in for a hard road. They no longer have power in any state or federal parliament that has never happened before. The last ALP govt always had one or two holdouts like the N.T. or the A.C.T. , WA or Qld.
This time it has the global warming edge to it. That is Australia has a history of droughts which have driven thousands of families off the land but people were more sanguine about it because they believed it would eventually come right, now they aren’t so sure. This was a bigger factor in getting rid of Howard, remember he refused to sign up to Kyoto, than Iraq was. Australia will sign Kyoto now, but like Iraq too late the damage has been done. The long term effect of BushCo intransigence was to make everyone including most signatories go very soft on targets. Our great granchildren will hate us all for that.
The China/amerika thing is already a battleground but you can bet that Rudd will be in the USuk club. He speaks mandarin fluently as a foreign affairs policy wonk and diplomat China was his subject but the opposition to his election would have been more fervent if the USuk corporatists didn’t think he was ‘on their side’.
I think they have miscalculated. In the end history tells Australians that the only way they can safely navigate the contest is to stay neutral favouring both sides equally. That has been the primary motivator behind ALP policy for the last few decades and one man won’t change that.
As for the anglo australians, well most of the ones that still worry about such stuff never vote ALP anyway, so no one will listen.
The media will as I said upthread, beat up the yella peril thing from time to time, but the fight is unlikely to boil down to a physical occupation so playing on that fear will be strictly for the white racists, who are declining in most places. Western Australia is the exception because that is where the anglo white south africans scurried off to when they got ther asses kicked outta africa. Western Australia swung against the ALP, apparently the vote for Howard actually increased there.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Nov 25 2007 3:59 utc | 55

Speaking of Israel…
Israel won’t be included in new genocide probes
So the USIP is being monopolized by Israel while unpeace is happening in Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places, and funded by…? that’s unsane.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 25 2007 4:18 utc | 57

There are ways to resist without being jailed.
Really? You may want to rethink that one:
“Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.”
The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act was passed in an overwhelming 400 to six House vote last month. This week it goes to the Senate.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 25 2007 12:35 utc | 59

Ensley at 38, I see what you mean, but it all depends what one means by “single purchaser”. Not a country then. So you would want to compare with Greyhound, an airline conglomerate or, better, counting ‘total energy’ – Wallmart (coal to electricity, heat with fuel, refrigeration, shipping, trucking, not to mention wrapping, etc.) or the Indian rail system. The end use, killing ppl or selling pickles or shunting them from A to B, raises its head. In any case, the DOD accounting is incomplete for certain. Karbuz points that out in various posts. See also Anton’s post at 54. It isn’t really arguable without a lot of boring definitions.
The US will bleed itself to death trying to get what it cannot.

Posted by: Tangerine | Nov 25 2007 14:30 utc | 61

The ‘homegrown terrorism’ act is not much of a step forward, it just tightens what existed before (imho, but then I haven’t studied the fine print) into one package.
At first the legislation was vague, and included US violence in the last paragraph, or a side bar, or one clause, often focussing on small groups (animal research terrorists, etc.) The US authorities have been preparing for massive social unrest or revolt for a long time. The general drift is perfectly conventional, and a sort of half hearted copy of Stalin-to-Hitler-to the Stasi-etc.
a) bureaucracy and rules, power of the state, thru identification of individuals, which is necessary for scape-goating and ethnic or other hate and the targeting and subsequent mistreatment of some set of ppl
b) putting limitations on travel
c) massive surveillance of communications
d) creating rules or conventions for employment and position that run on ‘loyalty’ lines
e) rewarding adherents, nominating cronies
f) suppressing information of all kinds, free speech, free assembly
g) controlling science and finance
h) rigged elections (since Bush I)
i) encouraging personality cults (of any kind)
One might add:
j) using ideology, religion, or values to promote submission to authority, and big families, a moral straight and narrow path
Missing seems to be:
– infiltration of dissident groups
– consistent and reliable information gathering
– avowed torture at home as a repressive tool

Posted by: Tangerine | Nov 25 2007 15:00 utc | 63

Any suggestions as to where these lists are being discussed?
To but in here, I can’t necessarily where these lists are being discussed, but I may be able to shed light on how they are compiled:
Air Marshal Exposes Quota Policy for Intelligence Reports
Federal Air Marshal in Las Vegas Exposes Rogue Quota Policy for Submitting Surveillance Intelligence Reports

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 25 2007 15:43 utc | 65

you can now watch the Route Irish Documentary I mentioned upthread somewhere online here: http://stage6.divx.com/IT-IS-ON/video/1888068/

Posted by: drunk as a rule | Nov 25 2007 19:16 utc | 67

One of the most successful aspects of BushCo policy as revealed in the changes to domestic law such as the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 is the way that terrorism and political violence, two seperate types of action with quite different goals have been melded into one heinous crime in the minds of the masses.
Terrorism is the deliberate act of inflicting copious random violence on a community in order to make the populace so scared they become putty in the hands of the terrorist organisation. It is rarely effective, most often it creates solidarity against the aims of the action.
Madrid is claimed as an instance where terrorism worked; but really that was due to the way it was mishandled by the conservative ex-fascist government. If they hadn’t tried to pin the bombing on ETA and had included Islamic militants as possible causes right from the start, it is likely the population would have united in outrage just as they do everywhere else.
The air force bombing blitzes conducted upon populations of errant states from time to time by western powers, are the most organised and deliberate acts of terror, yet even they rarely serve to do more than kill and destroy humans and buildings – morale remains intact.
However be that at is it may, acts of random violence upon a community in order to bring the community to it’s knees, have been deemed ‘special’ therefore in need of special treatment, primarily because of their claimed propensity to destroy a community’s sense of well being.
This is vastly removed from acts of political violence such as assassination, where the aim is to remove the elites in control of a society while keeping the bulk society, especially the population, intact.
Political violence is rather more common, and has a proud history in many nations once ruled by despots. Yet now the whole lot have been rolled together.
In a vain effort to protect the status quo some of the most tyrannical and human unfriendly regimes in history; from Bushco’s amerika to Vlad the retailer’s Russia, nations around the world were forced into adopting legislation to crack down on anyone who belongs to a group deemed by Russia or China or amerika, or england, or France, to be ‘dangerous’.
We have just seen the results in NZ where the spectrum of political activists were rounded up using all the terror tactics perfected by the thieves of Baghdad. There was no real evidence against these people apart from their talking the sort of stuff caring humans talk, over telephones which had bugs put on them, thanks to the anti-terror template legislation which the UN has forced upon the world. No real evidence other than a declaration by the state security organ that they are suspicious, is required, before phones are tapped from asshole to breakfast. Fuck. I have said worse in here than what these people were alleged to have said.
The legislation is crazy. The reason for the round-up was in part, that the UN, or amerika or both had expressed a concern that NZ’s anti-terror rules didn’t go far enough. Therefore they demanded another Act of Parliament to tighten it up. The round-up was a charade in an attempt to scare NZers into not objecting to the even more draconian legislation. It failed in that aim too.
99% of the stuff that security intelligence organisations get up to is directly related to themselves. Read up on the cold war spy yarns and you’ll find that the opposing agencies were doubling and trebling each other like fuck, all totally meaningless and proving that without security agencies, there is no need for a security agency. This terra-ist stuff is the same.
The security agencies create terra-ists to justify their existence and the need for the draconian legislation which sets them up.
As one Green MP here said the laws make no sense. According to the anti terror acts, if a couple of blokes get greedy and don’t want to work anymore, so they rob a bank ,they will get 5 years the usual under the Crimes Act, however if they are committed to some ideal and rob a bank to raise funds for that ideal they get life with a 20 year non-parole period under the anti-terror laws. Does that make sense?
Yet this madness has been enacted around the world. Unravelling it will take a huge amount of work. The UN has a process for endorsing these crazy treaties but there is no process for un-endorsing them which is why amerika has abused them so heavily, ever since some prick in the Raygun admistration thought the strategy up.
I larf whenever some bright spark somewhere talks about legalising drugs in their state or nation. It can’t be done. War on drugs treaties dating back to the 80’s which have pretty much been ratified everywhere have made this impossible. Hence the talk of de-criminalization which is doubtful too, but it does save pols from having to tell their populations that their stupidity has made democratic decisions around drug usage an impossible task.
Eventually humans will have to form cross border groupings to defeat these anti-people, anti-democratic (in the original sense of democracy – not today’s perversion), UN treaties.
It is likely to be the trade treaties which are defeated first not drugs or political activist oppressing laws.
The work goes on.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Nov 25 2007 20:00 utc | 69

edward herman & david peterson: The U.S. Aggression Process and Its Collaborators: From Guatemala (1950-1954) to Iran (2002-)

…
Among the aggression process’s many modalities, which combine the suppression of critical facts with the repetition of falsehoods, we note here the following:
1. That only rarely is mention made of the striking and ominous parallels between the utterly discredited U.S. and U.K. mobilization campaign in 2002-2003 to rid Iraq of its nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, and the ongoing U.S. and Israeli mobilization campaign from 2002 onward alleging that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.
2. That no mention is made that the U.S. and Israeli threats to attack Iran are themselves violations of the UN Charter’s prohibition on the threat or use of force, and that even the UN and the international community are guilty of turning a blind-eye to the illegality of these threats.
3. That no mention is made that the U.S.-led aggressions-occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq mean that Iran is now surrounded on its eastern and western borders by massive and hostile military forces that can launch devastating strikes on Iran at any time. So that to focus at this juncture on any kind of threat—real or counterfactual—to peace and security posed by Iran is simply incongruous with reality.
4. That no mention is made of Iran’s inherent right of self-defense against the very real threats posed by the United States and Israel, both the closest of allies and nuclear weapons powers. As the Israeli military analyst Martin Van Creveld noted, “The world has witnessed how the United States attacked Iraq for, as it turned out, no reason at all. Had the Iranians not tried to build nuclear weapons, they would be crazy.” (“Is Israel planning to attack Iran?” International Herald Tribune, August 24, 2004.) This sentiment appears virtually nowhere in the establishment U.S. media, which also give little credence to the Iranian leadership’s repeated protest that they do not intend to produce nuclear weapons.
5. That no mention is made that Israel was the first state outside the Permanent Five to develop nuclear weapons, a capability that it possesses to this day; and that Israel remains the only state in the Middle East never to have acceded to the NPT and international inspections.
6. That no mention is made that Security Council Resolution 687 (April 3, 1991), which imposed disarmament requirements on Iraq, also recalled the longstanding “objective of the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East;” and that this objective, which enjoys very broad support throughout the region, has been ignored by Israel, the United States, and Security Council.
7. That no mention is made that Iran also has long advocated a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, as well as extending IAEA safeguards to all states in the region; and that every year the UN General Assembly votes by overwhelming margins to adopt resolutions to this effect, but that at the same time they are rejected by the United States and Israel.
8. That no mention is made that under the NPT, Iran—like every other non-nuclear-weapons-possessing party to the treaty—enjoys the “inalienable right…to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination” (Art. IV.1), and that the IAEA has produced no evidence that Iran is working on nuclear weapons.
9. That no mention is made that under the NPT, the United States—like every other nuclear-weapons-possessing party to the treaty—agrees to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race…and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control” (Art. VI). By continuing to improve its nuclear weapons, and to make their design more practicable, it is the United States that stands in serious violation of the NPT.
10. That no mention is made that at the last NPT Review Conference, held in New York City in May 2005, recognition of the urgency to implement this disarmament article figured prominently among the vast majority of participants—but not with the United States. Instead, the conference ended in “the most acute failure in the history of the NPT” (former U.S. weapons negotiator Thomas Graham), unable to produce even a final statement on substantive issues. Led by the U.S. refusal, the conference was unable to admit any topic related to disarmament, “[turning] the world of nuclear proliferation into the Wild West, with complete disrespect for the rule of law” (Abolition 2000 founder Alice Slater).
11. That no challenge is raised in the UN or international community contesting the fact that the United States has taken it upon itself to decide which states may develop nuclear programs, and which may not. Iran could build nuclear power plants under the Shah, Pakistan can develop and keep nuclear weapons under Pervez Musharraf (or a likely successor-client of the U.S.), Egypt can develop nuclear power under Hosni Mubarak, Israel and India can develop and keep nuclear weapons over four decades—but neither the Islamic Republic of Iran, Libya, nor North Korea can. Not only is this unilateralism and politicization of the right of access to nuclear energy not challenged by the UN or the establishment media, it isn’t even noticed.
12. One basis for these politicized choices is the usual demonization process, so that a target like Iran cannot be allowed to come close to developing nuclear energy for any purpose because its leaders are portrayed as religious fanatics who might use a single nuclear device to bring about some mad end even though this would entail national suicide. These fears are not based on an examination of the performance of Iran’s leaders, who in their diplomatic relations with other states and UN representatives clearly behave as realistic geopoliticians. Nor is any comparison ever made with the religious beliefs of “End Times” evangelicals in the United States and their influence on U.S. leaders and policy.
13. That the Iranian target can be accused of other crimes, with minimal evidence and context, like interference in Iraq’s internal affairs by sending aid to the resistance. This allegation is very convenient, as it is impossible for Iran to refute beyond simple denial, the establishment media don’t require hard evidence to report it, and it scapegoats Iran for the failures of the aggression-occupation—so attacking Iran will be part of the effort to “liberate” the Iraqis! Note also that when the United States aids insurgents opposing an occupation, as in the case of the Afghan resistance to the Soviet occupation, no question is raised about the legitimacy of such interference; but then, only the United States has aggression rights. Thus, only the United States can legitimately aid factions in the conflict over Iraq. It aids all of the factions, according to momentary strategic convenience. And it attacks anybody inside Iraq that it wants to attack.
14. That very little attention is given to the fact that the U.S. supports the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) and related groups such as the National Council of Resistance of Iran, whose members appear to move freely among the Western capitals, despite the U.S. Department of State’s formal designation of these groups as Foreign Terrorist Organizations at least since 1997. With U.S. aid and approval since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the MEK has continued its longstanding campaign of cross-border bombings and assassinations against Iran—causing much bloodshed among Iranians.
15. That by highlighting the abuses of dissidents inside Iran, a prospective U.S. attack on Iran is made all-the-more palatable. When the lie about going to war to disarm Iraq no longer could be sustained, the selling-point shifted to the “liberation” of Iraqis from the dictatorship in Baghdad. Similarly, Western intellectuals and human rights organizations have featured the detentions and trials of different Iranian figures, combining cost-free denunciations of Iran’s leadership with public displays of solidarity towards the dissidents. This has been an important mechanism by which a segment of the intellectual community, including the humanitarian interventionists and devotees of “democracy promotion,” serve the imperial state while convincing themselves that they are simply aiding in the global liberation process. It has been noted, however, that this segment seems reluctant to push hard for democracy in states allied with and supported by the empire (e.g., Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Indonesia, Israel, etc., or in the United States itself). They also spend much more effort in expressing concern over the condition of the dissidents in target countries than they do over the supreme international crimes to which they may be contributing.

Posted by: b real | Nov 25 2007 23:11 utc | 71

Just nod if you can hear me…
nodding uncle 😉
i am having trouble getting irish route to work. i downloaded divx. still, nada

Posted by: annie | Nov 26 2007 2:28 utc | 73

from pr watch’s spin of the day blog
The U.S. Propaganda Blitz in Post-War Japan

Source: USIS role revealed in Japan’s tilt toward West, The Japan Times, November 21, 2007
A report written in 1959 by Mark May, a Yale University professor and expert on psychological warfare, detailed the extensive operations by the United States Information Service (USIS) in Japan after the end of World War II. The report was recently uncovered in the National Archives in Washington by Kenneth Osgood, an assistant professor of history at Florida Atlantic University. The report reveals that 23 of 50 USIS-sponsored programs were not publicly identified as U.S. funded projects. USIS sponsored radio news and commentary programs “which are tape-recorded and utilized by commercial stations, yet the listening public is unaware of the source of these programs,” May wrote. Other programs funded movies and conservative academics. One of the aims of USIS was to reduce anti-nuclear sentiment in Japan in the aftermath of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. May reported that the promotion of civilian “Atoms for Peace” nuclear power program resulted in the number of people equating the word “atom” with “harmful” falling from 70 percent in 1956 to 30 percent in 1958.

from the japan times article,

The United States waged a secret propaganda campaign in Japan through films, radio programs and intellectuals during the 1950s in an effort to keep the nation from leaving the Western bloc, a recently found report shows.
The “Report on USIS-Japan,” written by Mark May, then chairman of a U.S. advisory group on information, said the objective was “to achieve Japanese identification with U.S. policies.”
The United States Information Service was an overseas operational institution meant to influence foreign citizens in promoting U.S. national interests. May, a Yale University professor and expert on psychological warfare, visited Japan for five weeks from June to July 1959 and wrote the report after interviewing various USIS and U.S. Embassy officials.
In the confidential report, he revealed that about half of the USIS programs in Japan were not attributed to U.S. sources. Out of 50 USIS programs “to keep Japan aligned with the Free World and cooperating closely with the U.S.,” 23 were not attributed.
…
“The USIS didn’t want to be attributed because it might provoke anti-U.S. sentiment in Japan,” said Fumiko Fujita, a professor at Tsuda College in Tokyo and an expert on USIS activities in Japan.
One area that was not attributed was financial aid to the production of movies, TV and radio programs. Five unattributed USIS-assisted commercial movies were produced. The scripts were USIS-approved, and the Japanese contractors were guaranteed a strong box office return.

Posted by: b real | Nov 26 2007 5:08 utc | 75

Re #75 & US propaganda blitz in post-war Japan – don’t forget that any Hollywood film that uses war toys is also propaganda – Pentagon don’t lend no toys unless it approves the script, etc.

Posted by: jj | Nov 26 2007 8:35 utc | 77

Stiglitz: Financial hypocrisy

It is no accident that these countries that had not fully liberalised their capital markets have done so well. Subsequent research by the IMF has confirmed what every serious study had shown: capital market liberalisation brings instability, but not necessarily growth. (India and China have, by the same token, been the fastest-growing economies.)
Of course, Wall Street (whose interests the US Treasury represents) profits from capital market liberalisation: they make money as capital flows in, as it flows out, and in the restructuring that occurs in the resulting havoc. In South Korea, the IMF urged the sale of the country’s banks to American investors, even though Koreans had managed their own economy impressively for four decades, with higher growth, more stability, and without the systemic scandals that have marked US financial markets with such frequency.
…
The contrast between the IMF/US Treasury advice to East Asia and what has happened in the current sub-prime debacle is glaring. East Asian countries were told to raise their interest rates, in some cases to 25%, 40%, or higher, causing a rash of defaults. In the current crisis, the US Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank cut interest rates.
Similarly, the countries caught up in the East Asia crisis were lectured on the need for greater transparency and better regulation. But lack of transparency played a central role in this past summer’s credit crunch; toxic mortgages were sliced and diced, spread around the world, packaged with better products, and hidden away as collateral, so no one could be sure who was holding what. And there is now a chorus of caution about new regulations, which supposedly might hamper financial markets (including their exploitation of uninformed borrowers, which lay at the root of the problem.) Finally, despite all the warnings about moral hazard, western banks have been partly bailed out of their bad investments.

Posted by: b | Nov 26 2007 9:07 utc | 79

Military training program for teens expands in US

CHICAGO (AFP) – Dozens of teens dressed in uniforms provided by the US Marines stand at attention in the gym of a Chicago public high school as a drill sergeant goes through a list of the day’s do’s and don’ts.
snip:
One in 10 public high school students in Chicago wears a military uniform to school and takes classes — including how to shoot a gun properly — from retired veterans.
That number is expected to rise as junior military reserve programs expand across the country now that a congressional cap of 3,500 units has been lifted from the nearly century-old scheme.
snip:
Proponents of the junior reserve programs say they provide stability and a sense of purpose for troubled youth and help to instill values such as leadership and responsibility.
But opponents say the programs divert critical resources from crumbling public schools and lead to a militarization of US society.

Ahh, yes, join the military and at least eat…
We can’t offer you sustainable food while your under 5, but if you make it to your teens you can join our military!

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 26 2007 10:59 utc | 81

Madrid is claimed as an instance where terrorism worked; but really that was due to the way it was mishandled by the conservative ex-fascist government. If they hadn’t tried to pin the bombing on ETA and had included Islamic militants as possible causes right from the start, it is likely the population would have united in outrage just as they do everywhere else.
Debs, I usually agree with the gist and content of your posts, plus enjoy them. But this isn’t right, and the correction imho sheds light. I have never heard that the Madrid ‘terror’ worked, that must be Anglo chatter – not in Europe. 2) Islamic militants (provided one accepts that they are the culprits for x or y terror attack) have never shown any interest in or intent to influence elections or any other political process in any way, nor have they ever made any demands – the story is they are motivated by hate, as any other motive appears to be lacking. 3) Even if the Madrid case was an exception, bombing to get Zapatero elected seems a very peculiar long shot; not associated with a ‘muslim’ cause; etc. 4) Had that been the aim, it is most likely Aznar would have understood it and exploited it that way. 5) The Spanish did not vote for Zapatero because Aznar lied but because they perceived that supporting the US is disgusting or detrimental and the terror stuff is linked to that association.
The ‘terror’ attack in Madrid was not (imho) linked to the elections at all but simply an effort to push ‘terrorism’ in Europe. As usual, the masterminds have not been convicted. Some of the perps were blown up, or killed themselves, versions vary. The alleged mastermind has been cleared by the courts, in Nov. 2007. Only the dopey minions or executors get sentenced.
The mastermind of the Bali bombings (a big AlQ figure according to the Western Press) walked free in 2006. Bin Laden is not officially wanted for 9/11.

Posted by: Tangerine | Nov 26 2007 15:29 utc | 83

Iraq to seek long-term US presence ????

AP – Iraq’s government, seeking protection against foreign threats and internal coups, will offer the U.S. a long-term troop presence in Iraq in return for U.S. security guarantees as part of a strategic partnership, two Iraqi officials said Monday.

…”two Iraqi officials said Monday.”
Uh, which ones??
Hahahahaha…uh, hahahahahaha, er, uh hahahahaha
It’s not the hysterical laughter that bothers me, but my inability to stop.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 26 2007 16:28 utc | 85

Moving right along w/the news that sells scotch by the magnum, anyone remember deal ole Larry Summers? A more grandiose pompous ass is hard to find. He’s one of the economic architects of the wreckage of our country & the Soviet Union, grand poobah of xDem. Party & neo-feudal baron who was thrown out as Pres. of Harvard when he tried to turn it into his personal barony, hopefully free of c**ts & n*gg*rs (recall his first assault was on Black Studies, followed immediately by assault on women in sciences, followed immediately by attack on entire School of Liberal Arts – only economics & Poli. Sci. matters so screw the rest – which was finally too much for the faculty to stomach). Having done such a great job wrecking our country, he’s now a bit concerned – guess he’s stolen all he needs to thrive & is trying to save his ass…Wake up to the dangers of a deepening crisis
Three months ago it was reasonable to expect that the subprime credit crisis would be a financially significant event but not one that would threaten the overall pattern of economic growth. This is still a possible outcome but no longer the preponderant probability.
Even if necessary changes in policy are implemented, the odds now favour a US recession that slows growth significantly on a global basis. Without stronger policy responses than have been observed to date, moreover, there is the risk that the adverse impacts will be felt for the rest of this decade and beyond.
Several streams of data indicate how much more serious the situation is than was clear a few months ago. …Z
{blah de blah de blah – for non-native English speakers, that translates into etc. bullshit}
No, you dumb fuck – this was all totally predictable from the outset of the reign of you bloody thieves decades ago. Guess he’s just naming things to give himself a leg up on prescribing solutions that guarantee the elite continue to screw us.

Posted by: jj | Nov 27 2007 1:57 utc | 87

On thinking about the above, I suspect his decision to write this was an elte decision to allow the xUS propaganda system to begin breaking the news to the sheep, so policies can implemented, shall we say…
Speaking of breaking ground for the implementing of even more repressive policies, I glanced at publication of Cato Gangsters last week. They’re breaking ground for implementing the draft – which Chuck Hagel was quoted in his local press as mentioning. It’s of course highly amusing to see them do it as it exposes their so-called “libertarianism” as nothing more than Rich Boys Rule By Any Means Necessary – in it’s early days we’ll call it “freedom” since Am. guys are such hung up adolescents caught in rebelling against their Daddy – whether that be an Eng. King or whatever flows down the centuries – but now, that they’re entrenched, they can rationalize that power by any means they choose. Amusing to see that they framed it as draft vs. mercenary army. Obviously, if they took democracy seriously, they would say that since no one wants to fight the wars of the predatory metastatic military-industrial elite that’s devoured its host in all but name, they’ll have to end those wars, since it’s the job of the legislature to enact the will of the people…

Posted by: jj | Nov 27 2007 2:16 utc | 89

new rpt from focus on the global south
‘At the Door of all the East’: The Philippines in United States Military Strategy

This report seeks to document and explain why and how the United States has been attempting to re-establish its military presence in the Philippines in the period beginning in 2001. Diverging from the common explanation attributing increased US military presence in the country to the so-called “global war on terror,” this report instead locates US actions in the Philippines and in the Asia-Pacific region in the larger context of the US’ objectives and strategy.
The self-avowed aim of the US is to perpetuate its position of being the world’s sole superpower in order to re-order the world. Its strategy to perpetuate its status is to prevent the rise of any rivals. To do this, it is seeking the capacity to deter and defeat potential enemies anywhere in the world by retaining and realigning its “global posture” or its ability to operate across the globe through its worldwide network of forward-deployed troops, bases, andaccess agreements. Today, the US believes that, of all its potential rivals, China poses the greatest threat and must therefore be contained before it becomes even more powerful.
To persuade China that it is better to submit to a US-dominated world order, the US is attempting to convince it that the alternative will be worse; that defeat will be inevitable. To make this threat credible, the US is attempting to enlist countries around China to take its side and to encircle China with bases and troops. Because of its strategic location, the Philippines is among the countries in which the US wants to establish bases, secure access agreements, and station troops. But apart from the Philippines, the US also wants the same in other countries in the region. The problem is, these other countries on whom it is relying for support do not want to go against China and are not necessarily willing to give the US what it needs, thereby posing problems for US strategy. Thus, because of its favorable disposition towards the US compared to other countries, the Philippines becomes even more critical to US military strategy in the region and in the world.

Posted by: b real | Nov 27 2007 4:28 utc | 91

He actually has a heart? Cheney Treated for Irregular Heartbeat

Posted by: b | Nov 27 2007 7:55 utc | 93

What challenges do Arabs in Israel face? Here is a classic example (from Yediot Aharonot, a very mainstream Israeli newspaper) of perhaps the biggest one, overwhelming, indescribable prejudice:
An Arab on Prime Time TV

Even if ‘Arab Labor’ looks like a great show, only a miracle will turn it into a hit. Why? Because Israelis are not used to seeing Arabs on primetime
As every talkbacker knows, Arabs are divided into five types: A. Terrorists; B. Primitives; C. Construction workers; D. The guys who make great hummus; E. The stereotypical characters every comedian imitates. If that is the case – how are we expected to feel about Amjad?
Because Amjad, as portrayed by Norman Issa, doesn’t belong to any of the abovementioned groups: He is young, educated, angry, talented, frustrated, neurotic, yearning for the fragments comprising his identity to assimilate, dying for some love and freedom from the stereotypes.
Amjad is the protagonist in Sayed Kashua’s new show, “Arab Labor,” which premiered Saturday on Channel 2. He plays a journalist who is trying – unsuccessfully – to assimilate into Israeli-Jewish society.
As a journalist he is invited to many talk shows to fill in the spot of the enlightened Arab – as long as he agrees to frankly and eruditely criticize his people and refer to them as “the sector.” As a citizen, he is always targeted by police – maybe because he drives an old Subaru.
Sayed Kashua, the current pet Arab of Israeli journalism and literature (Dancing Arabs, Let it be Morning) wrote “Arab Labor” around the same stereotypes.
The problem is that the show is aired after the a comedy show filled with imitations of Arabs and accompanied by a commercial for hummus. Furthermore, it is aired on commercial TV that has few, if any, Arab journalists. After 40 years of Israeli Television – this is the first time an Arab family is the star of a show that targets Jews, many of whom believe in their superiority over the Arabs.
Yet, it is also the first time a show is aired on primetime with dual subtitles – in Hebrew and in Arabic.

Posted by: Bea | Nov 27 2007 12:14 utc | 95

When a bank has to pay 11% interest for a longterm loan, that’s not somewhat encouranging about the creditworthiness.
FT

Citigroup announced Monday night that it had raised $7.5bn in new capital at a coupon of 11 per cent from the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority in an attempt to shore up its overstretched balance sheet.

Citi is essentially bankcrupt …

Posted by: b | Nov 27 2007 15:13 utc | 97

Anyone have good links or analysis about the French riots? All I see on Google News are stories where the angle is how many policemen got injured. I’m sure there’s something slightly more deep than that going on.

Posted by: Rowan | Nov 27 2007 18:03 utc | 99