Wednesday, July 30, 2008

The Jvl Bi-Weekly for 073108

I can be most easily reached through the following email address for suggesting new additions to the subscription list or to cancel your subscription to the Bi-Weekly:

channujames@yahoo.com

The Blog Address for the Bi-Weekly is: http://jvlbiweekly.blogspot.com

Please forward the Blog address for the Bi-Weekly to any who might be interested

Thursday, July 31st, 2008

Volume 7, No. 13

4 Articles, 16 Pages

1. Thar She Blows

2. Record-High Ratio of Americans in Prison

3. Wall Comes Tumbling Down

4. Iraq War 'Caused Slowdown In US'

(Editors note: July 26th message from the Cuban Five

July 26, 2008.

Dear Friends and Supporters:

By next September the 12th it will be 10 years since our arrests.
Back then, by putting us in jail, the U.S. government materialized a
conscious political decision: The full weight of their law
enforcement agencies and their corrupt system of justice would be
thrown in support of the terrorists and criminals we were monitoring
in Miami .

No wonder our trial has been kept a well guarded secret from the
American people. Moving away from every tradition of the mainstream
media, nobody seems interested on entertaining the public with a
lengthy espionage trial, or willing to take the opportunity to play
the usual scare script, or to take this unique opening to warn about
a threat to American national security, or to take advantage of the
chance to practice the always profitable sport of slandering
Communist Cuba.

As five dangerous Communist spies are given the combined sentences of
four life terms plus seventy five years, nobody seems interested in
learning what peril was the United States into, such as to warrant
such punishment. The free press runs away from the courtrooms and the
fourth power, as compliant as the other three, cancels interviews and
suppresses the case from the news.

All of this shows the uphill battle we must face to convey the truth
to the people of this country. It also shows the extraordinary human
quality of those who have gotten themselves involved, and the depth
of their commitment to justice.

We all still have a hard struggle ahead to bring awareness to the
American people; it is a struggle that demands determination,
initiative and lots of imagination.

From our five prison cells we want to express to all or you our
gratitude for what have been already achieved, and our full trust on
what remains to be done.

A big hug to all.

Gerardo, Ramon, Antonio, Fernando and Rene)

(Editor's second note:

$16bn
The amount the US spends on the monthly running costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - on top of regular defence spending

$138
The amount paid by every US household every month towards the current operating costs of the war

$19.3bn
The amount Halliburton has received in single-source contracts for work in Iraq

$25bn
The annual cost to the US of the rising price of oil, itself a consequence of the war

$3 trillion
A conservative estimate of the true cost - to America alone - of Bush's Iraq adventure. The rest of the world, including Britain, will shoulder about the same amount again

$5bn
Cost of 10 days' fighting in Iraq

$1 trillion
The interest America will have paid by 2017 on the money borrowed to finance the war

3%
The average drop in income of 13 African countries - a direct result of the rise in oil prices. This drop has more than offset the recent increase in foreign aid to Africa)

Back to Top

1. THAR SHE BLOWS
(
The Last Hurrah for the Banking System)

BY

MIKE WHITNEY


The Bush administration will be mailing out another batch of "stimulus" checks in the very near future. There's no way around it. The Fed is in a pickle and can't lower interest rates for fear that food and energy prices will shoot to stratosphere. At the same time, the economy is shrinking faster than anyone thought possible with no sign of a rebound. That leaves stimulus checks as the only way to "prime the pump" and keep consumer spending chugging along. Otherwise business activity will slow to a crawl and the economy will tank. There's no other choice.

The daily barrage of bad news is really starting to get on people's nerves. Most of the TV chatterboxes have already cut-out the cheery stock market predictions and no one is praising the "impressive powers of the free market" anymore. They know things are bad, real bad. A pervasive sense of gloom has crept into the television studios just like it has into the stock exchanges and the luxury penthouses on Manhattan's West End. That same sense of foreboding is creeping like a noxious cloud to every town and city across the country. Everyone is cutting back on non-essentials and trimming the fat from the family budget. The days of extravagant impulse-spending at the mall are over. So are the "big ticket" purchases and the "go-for-broke" trips to Europe. Consumer confidence is at historic lows, disposal income is a thing of the past, and all the credit cards are at their limit. The country is drowning in red ink.

Something has gone terribly wrong with the economy, but no one knows what it is? In the last three months bank credit has shrunk faster than any time since 1948. The banks aren't lending and people aren't borrowing; that's a lethal combo. When credit-creation slows, the economy falters, unemployment rises and the misery index soars. That's why Bush will have to mail out more stimulus checks whether he wants to or not; his back is against the wall. He'll try to make it look like the economy is still breathing on its own and just needs a spell on the respirator before resuming its normal activities. But Bush is wrong; we've reached Peak credit and the blood-transfusions won't work anymore. The vital signs have shut down and rigamortis is already setting in. Our goose is cooked.

MORE BANK RUNS

On Friday, after the market had closed, the FDIC shut down two more banks, First Heritage Bank and First National Bank. Two weeks earlier, regulators seized Indymac Bancorp following a run by depositors. The FDIC now operates like a stealth paramilitary unit, deploying its shock troops on the weekends to do their dirty work out of the public eye and at times when it will least effect the stock market. The reasons for this are obvious; there's only one thing the government hates more than seeing flag-draped coffins on the evening news, and that's seeing long lines of frantic soccer moms and blue-collar working guys waiting impatiently to get what's left of their savings out of their now-deceased bank. After all, flag-draped coffins merely indicate that we're losing a war, but lines at the bank prove that the system is broken. And the system is broken, that's why people are depressed and confidence is waning.

Banks-runs are a shock to the collective psyche; they demonstrate that the stewards of the system are incompetent and have made a mess of things. When depositors see a bank run they realize that their hard-earned money is not safe. That's why they get edgy and cut back on their spending. When their confidence wanes, it extends to the whole system. Suddenly they start questioning everything they once took for granted. They become skeptical of the institutions which, just days earlier, seemed rock-solid. That's why bankers surround themselves with marble columns, vaulted ceilings and lofty-sounding titles; to maintain the illusion of security while masking the truth, that fractional banking is the biggest scam in history. It relies on the "greater fools" theory which assumes that bankers can be trusted to only create credit when it is backed by sufficient capital. But it is not true. The banks have put us all at risk.

Bank runs are a direct hit on the foundation of the free market system. Unchecked, the tremors can ripple through the entire society and trigger violent political upheaval, even revolution. The public may not grasp their significance, but everyone in Washington is paying attention. They take it seriously, very seriously. It is a sign that the system is disintegrating and it may be irreversible.

SABER-RATTLING AT THE FDIC

An article in the San Francisco Business Times said that the FDIC is worried about the reporting on Internet blogs. They'd rather keep banking system's troubles out of the news. The publicity just further undermines the publics confidence and spreads fear. Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., summed it up like this after the run on Indymac:

"The blogs were a bit out of control. We're very mindful of the media coverage and blogs in controlling misinformation. All I can say is were going to continue to stay on top of it. The misinformation that came out over the weekend fed a lot of depositors' fears."

Is that a threat? The cure for a failed banking system is adequate capital and prudent oversight not threats to critics of the system. That's balderdash. Commissar Blair apparently believes that bloggers should be treated the same way as journalists in Iraq, who, if they veer ever so slightly from the Pentagon's "the surge is a great triumph" script, find themselves on the smoky end of an M-16 at some unmarked checkpoint outside Baquba.

If Blair wants people to take her seriously, she should stop the paramilitary-type mothballing operations to shut down banks and tell the American people the truth about what is going on. The banking system is busted; Blair knows that as well as anyone. Now its time for someone to accept the mantle of leadership, step up to the microphone and tell the public what they really need to know:

"My fellow citizens, we are embroiled in the greatest financial crisis our nation has ever faced and we will have to take emergency action to keep the entire system from melting down."

How hard is that? But it won't happen, because everyone in the administration has an aversion to telling the truth; it's like the Devil and Holy Water. Besides, its easier to blame the bloggers, that harmless subspecies that spend long hours pecking away at their keyboards in their windowless 5' by 7' hovels.

Bloggers aren't the problem; the problem is a system that's collapsing from decades of abusive credit expansion creation and insufficient capital. Now everyone is going to pay for the excesses of the few.

As the bank-runs increase, the FDIC will be forced to admit the truth, that they don't have the resources to deal with a problem this big. Currently, the FDIC has only $53 billion in reserves to guarantee $4 trillion in total bank deposits. The entire system has a mere $267 billion cash in the vaults. What a shabby way to run a banking system. Where's the money going to come from when depositors start withdrawing their savings? How will the FDIC deal with the ongoing deleveraging in the market which is forcing more and more investors move into cash?

No one knows. All we get is more prevaricating; more smoke and mirrors, Bush assures us that "Our capital markets are functioning efficiently and effectively." Nonsense. The markets are cratering and the banks are toast. A blind man can see it. The FDIC is listing and Blair knows it. Bush needs to cut the gibberish and tell the American people the truth so they can prepare for the hard times ahead.

P.T. PAULSON: "The the banking system is sound... This is a very manageable situation."

Last Sunday, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson tried to reassure the public that the banking system is sound, while bracing people for more trouble ahead:

"I think it's going to be months that we're working our way through this period
clearly months. But again, it's a safe banking system, a sound banking system. Our regulators are on top of it. This is a very manageable situation."

Paulson is like a broken record. Everything is always hunky-dory. He is the consummate Wall Street investment sharpie; a bright guy who could charm a hungry dog off a meat-wagon. But when it comes to telling the truth; forget about it. You'd be better off listening to Bush, which isn't saying much. The banking system is not sound nor is it well capitalized. It is a corpse that's been propped up in the office hallway next to the water-cooler so that everyone who passes bye gets a stifling whiff of the decaying flesh. Still, the charade goes on. Still the lies persist.

If the rate of bank closures continues at the present pace, by the middle of 2009 there will be restrictions on withdrawals. Even now, if you go to your bank and try to withdraw $9,000 or $10,000, it sends waves of panic through the entire building like a 5-alarm fire that quickly engulfs the main exits. It's crazy. Tellers go scampering around helter-skelter, and bank managers suddenly appear at the window grimacing in pain and wringing the sweat from their brows.

"Did you say $10,000, sir?" which is usually followed by low moaning sounds and heavy wheezing.

Journalist Bill Sardi summed it up nicely in an article last week on lewrockwell.com titled "Could Your Bail Fail?":

"The banking industry is walking on pins and needles, hoping the bad news doesn
t become a self-fulfilling prophecy that drives bank depositors to demand withdrawal of funds en masse........ There is a high likelihood the American banking system will fail, and you will likely be the last to know. The more panicked you get, and withdraw funds, the worse the implosion. In an effort to avert runs on the banks, will the news media delay informing the public of the current dire situation, which appears to be an inevitable system-wide banking collapse?

What to do?

So, while your bank still has money and can process your checks, it may be time to pay down debts, pay quarterly taxes and mortgage payments in advance, and think of having money outside of banks (gold, foreign currencies), etc., before your money is inaccessible or even evaporates! Don
t think all your investments outside of banks are immune from all this turmoil. For example, money market mutual funds, where Americans have invested $3 trillion, are not covered by FDIC insurance (however, money market accounts offered by banks are covered). Recent losses in some of these money market mutual funds have caused some companies to rush to plug the losses. For example, Legg Mason Inc. and SunTrust Banks Inc., recently pumped $1.4 billion each into its money market funds. Bank of America Corp. has injected $600 million.

As for your checking and savings accounts, recognize you may have five different accounts in the same bank, but the FDIC only insures individuals, not each account, up to $100,000. Putting your money in different accounts in the same bank does not necessarily provide better insurance for your deposits. (Bill Sardi, "Could Your Bail Fail?", lewrockwell.com)

Good advice, but if the whole system blows; we're all in trouble. It's probably wise to have a back-up plan; like plenty of ammo and a couple hundred pounds of seed potatoes. It could get hairy.


FANNIE BAILOUT: "If they dumped these securities on the market today, their value would go straight to 0."


Most people are unaware of the fact that the new Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout package that was passed into law on Saturday, provides Paulson with $300 billion of taxpayer dollars to shore up the faltering mortgage behemoths. In order to accomplish this, the congress increased the national debt by a whopping $800 billion sending it over the $10 trillion mark for the first time in history. Naturally the congress buried this little tidbit of information deep in the 600 pages of legislation. It's clear that the administration is lying about Fannie and Freddie. They'll need much more than the $25 billion infusion that Paulson is predicting. That's why the national debt is ballooning. This is the biggest boondoggle of all time and it's spearheaded by the "dueling windbags", Chris Dodd and Barney Frank; both Democrats. Dodd's lengthly oratory on the floor of the House on Friday nearly earned him a citation from the EPA for releasing massive levels of toxic gas into the jet-stream and accelerating the rate of global warming.

So it's not just the Fed and the Treasury that are ruining the system; the politicos are busy bankrupting the country, too. In fact, the Fannie bailout could quite possibly be the last straw.

It now looks like Obama has been anointed by Wall Street (who are his biggest contributors) to revive the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC)--a morgue for dead banks---so that the investment giants can off-load hundreds of billions in bad paper in one fell swoop and purge the system. That will be the big "post election" surprise; another bone for investment giants.

The path ahead has never looked so uncertain. Still, neither Paulson nor Bernanke seem at all upset by the riskiness of their strategy or by the fact that the nation's economic future has been reduced to a crap-shoot. The Fed has already spent more than $300 billion to prop up the teetering banking system in the last year alone, plus another $29 (that was never approved by congress) to buy the toxic bonds from Bear Stearns in the JP Morgan acquisition. Now, the Treasury has been authorized by congress to buy an "unlimited amount" of Fannie and Freddie shares at their own discretion. They are presently exchanging Fannie and Freddie securities for US Treasury notes, which means that the dollar is now backed by dodgy mortgage-backed sludge for which there is no market. According to Rep Ron Paul, "This is the asset (MBS) which now backs up our currency. An asset that no one else wants. If they were to dump these securities on the market today, the value of these stocks would go straight to 0. But that is literally the asset that is behind our currency. It is a very serious situation."

None of congress's back-room maneuvering has anything to do with "providing a lifeline for the struggling homeowner", as Senator Dodd claims. That's all bunkum. The homeowner won't get a lick of help from this bill. Its just another handout for the brokerage fraternity. The country is putting its AAA credit rating on the line for same clatter of carpetbaggers who created the mammoth equity bubble in the first place. Now they are being rewarded for their criminal conduct. Also, Bloomberg News notes that, "Sensible people are starting to question whether the U.S. can hang on to its AAA credit rating. The prospect of an extra $5 trillion or thereabouts leaking onto the U.S. government's tab from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has spooked investors."

America's AAA rating will vanish in a year. It should be zero anyway. No one really believes the US will repay its debts. The US bond market is just a glitzy imitation of casino roulette only the odds are considerably worse.

Our political leaders have engineered this whole farce and are now speeding up the process by savaging the dollar. How long before foreign creditors see through this ruse and dump their dollar-backed assets on the open market? The hoax can't go on forever.

Of course, some market analysts think the banking system will make it through this rough patch, even though it is likely to take a real pasting. Economics guru, Gary North, for example, expects a slightly different outcome which he details in his latest article on Lew Rockwell's web site "Ben Bernanke's Hush Money":

"There is an enormous difference
a literally life-and-death difference between individual bank failures and a systemic banking failure. I do NOT believe we are facing a systemic banking failure. But we are facing more individual bank failures...

Beginning in December 2007, the Federal Reserve System has sold Treasury debt whenever it has increased its purchase of questionable assets that it has bought from banks and large financial institutions. It has unloaded about 40% of its holdings of liquid Treasury debt. This has kept it from inflating the money supply at a dramatic rate. At some point, it will run out of Treasury debt to sell to the general public in order to offset the increase of its purchase of questionable assets held by the financial system. At that point, the great inflation will begin. This could be a year away. This could be a month away. All we know is this: when the Federal Reserve system runs out of Treasury debt to sell, its purchase of all assets will be inflationary. The banking system as a whole is protected. What is not protected is the purchasing power of the dollar." ("Ben Bernanke's Hush Money", Gary North, lewrockwell.com)

North makes a good point; when the Fed runs out of US Treasuries, they'll have to rev-up the printing presses and monetize the debt. That'll be doomsday for the dollar. When foreign central banks see the greenbacks a-gushing like the blood from a harpooned whale; they'll have to sell off their dollar stockpiles and take the loss. That will trigger a period of hyper-inflation in the US. Everyone will pay for the excesses of the few.

The whole system has been rejiggered to serve the needs of a few greedy bankers on top of the food chain. They could care less whether the whole country blows up or not as long as they get their slice of the pie. That's all that matters. Congress is just as bad. They abdicated their most important responsibility by giving Paulson the authority to take whatever money he needs to do whatever he wants. If that's their attitude, then what do we need congress for? Let's just board up the House of Representatives and send them all home. It would be a lot cheaper.

The truth is, the big money guys have taken a wrecking-ball to the financial system and have now moved on to the real economy. By the time their done, we'll all be picking through the wreckage just to feed our families.

Back to Top

2. RECORD-HIGH RATIO OF AMERICANS IN PRISON

(For First Time in US History, More Than 1 in Every 100 Americans Is Behind Bars)

BY

DAVID CRARY

For the first time in U.S. history, more than one of every 100 adults is in jail or prison, according to a new report documenting America's rank as the world's No. 1 incarcerator. It urges states to curtail corrections spending by placing fewer low-risk offenders behind bars.

Using state-by-state data, the report says 2,319,258 Americans were in jail or prison at the start of 2008 one out of every 99.1 adults. Whether per capita or in raw numbers, it's more than any other nation.

The report, released Thursday by the Pew Center on the States, said the 50 states spent more than $49 billion on corrections last year, up from less than $11 billion 20 years earlier. The rate of increase for prison costs was six times greater than for higher education spending, the report said.

The steadily growing inmate population "is saddling cash-strapped states with soaring costs they can ill afford and failing to have a clear impact either on recidivism or overall crime," the report said.

Susan Urahn, managing director of the Pew Center on the States, said budget woes are pressuring many states to consider new, cost-saving corrections policies that might have been shunned in the recent past for fear of appearing soft on crime.

"We're seeing more and more states being creative because of tight budgets," she said in an interview. "They want to be tough on crime. They want to be a law-and-order state. But they also want to save money, and they want to be effective."

The report cited Kansas and Texas as states that have acted decisively to slow the growth of their inmate population. They are making greater use of community supervision for low-risk offenders and employing sanctions other than reimprisonment for offenders who commit technical violations of parole and probation rules.

"The new approach, born of bipartisan leadership, is allowing the two states to ensure they have enough prison beds for violent offenders while helping less dangerous lawbreakers become productive, taxpaying citizens," the report said.

While many state governments have shown bipartisan interest in curbing prison growth, there also are persistent calls to proceed cautiously.

"We need to be smarter," said David Muhlhausen, a criminal justice expert with the conservative Heritage Foundation. "We're not incarcerating all the people who commit serious crimes. But we're also probably incarcerating people who don't need to be."

According to the report, the inmate population increased last year in 36 states and the federal prison system.

The largest percentage increase 12 percent was in Kentucky, where Gov. Steve Beshear highlighted the cost of corrections in his budget speech last month. He noted that the state's crime rate had increased only about 3 percent in the past 30 years, while the state's inmate population has increased by 600 percent.

The report was compiled by the Pew Center's Public Safety Performance Project, which is working with 13 states on developing programs to divert offenders from prison without jeopardizing public safety.

"Getting tough on criminals has gotten tough on taxpayers," said the project's director, Adam Gelb.

According to the report, the average annual cost per prisoner was $23,876, with Rhode Island spending the most ($44,860) and Louisiana the least ($13,009). It said California which faces a $16 billion budget shortfall spent $8.8 billion on corrections last year, while Texas, which has slightly more inmates, was a distant second with spending of $3.3 billion.

On average, states spend 6.8 percent of their general fund dollars on corrections, the report said. Oregon had the highest spending rate, at 10.9 percent; Alabama the lowest at 2.6 percent.

Four states Vermont, Michigan, Oregon and Connecticut now spend more on corrections than they do on higher education, the report said.

"These sad facts reflect a very distorted set of national priorities," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, referring to the full report. "Perhaps, if we adequately invested in our children and in education, kids who now grow up to be criminals could become productive workers and taxpayers."

The report said prison growth and higher incarceration rates do not reflect an increase in the nation's overall population. Instead, it said, more people are behind bars mainly because of tough sentencing measures, such as "three-strikes" laws, that result in longer prison stays.

"For some groups, the incarceration numbers are especially startling," the report said. "While one in 30 men between the ages of 20 and 34 is behind bars, for black males in that age group the figure is one in nine."

The racial disparity for women also is stark. One of every 355 white women aged 35 to 39 is behind bars, compared with one of every 100 black women in that age group.

The nationwide figures, as of Jan. 1, include 1,596,127 people in state and federal prisons and 723,131 in local jails. That's out of almost 230 million American adults.

The report said the United States incarcerates more people than any other nation, far ahead of more populous China with 1.5 million people behind bars. It said the U.S. also is the leader in inmates per capita (750 per 100,000 people), ahead of Russia (628 per 100,000) and other former Soviet bloc nations which round out the Top 10.

The U.S. also is among the world leaders in capital punishment. According to Amnesty International, its 53 executions in 2006 were exceeded only by China, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq and Sudan.

Back to Top

3. WALL COMES TUMBLING DOWN

(The inspiring breakout of Palestinians from their imprisonment in Gaza is a timely reminder that this is a people who cannot be caged or wished away)
BY

SEUMAS MILNE

Anyone with a sense of human solidarity must surely celebrate the demolition of the wall on the Gaza-Egyptian border on Wednesday and the mass exodus of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians starved of basic supplies of food, fuel and medicine by Israel's flagrantly illegal act of collective punishment. There was a further breakout today, when a bulldozer pulled down a new section of the barrier.

It has been first and foremost a human triumph. An occupied and imprisoned people has taken its fate into its own hands and broken a shameful blockade, enforced jointly by Israel and Egypt with the support of the Bush administration and the connivance of the US and Israeli-backed rump Palestinian authority in Ramallah.

But it is also a political defeat for the cruelly-enforced attempt to isolate and crush the elected Hamas leadership in Gaza. By tearing down the walls that held 1.5 million people in the world's largest open air prison, Gazans have broken the siege that had become the main weapon to bring the Palestinians to heel and impose a pliant leadership and an occupier's settlement.

Egyptian forces have been struggling to reseal the Rafah border crossing. It was closed last summer in agreement with Israel when Hamas took control of the Gaza strip (see the piece by Yaakov Katz, Khaled Abu Toameh and Herb Keinon in the Jerusalem Post of January 3 2008 on Israel's reaction to the recent more modest breach for Hajj pilgrims). Israel had meanwhile been sharply intensifying the squeeze on supplies through its own closed border crossings since it declared Gaza a "hostile territory" in September, with predictably grim consequences, as UN official Karen Koning AbuZayd spelled out in the Guardian on Wednesday.

But the point has now been clearly demonstrated that it can be re-opened at will. Hamas has been strengthened and the US-Israeli strategy of isolating the Palestinians' most recently elected leaders is in ruins. And the spectacle of Gazans holding candles in Israeli-enforced darkness this week - echoing Yasser Arafat's siege in Ramallah in 2002 - has returned the Palestinian cause to the centre stage of Arab politics.

There was some speculation today - for example, by the commentator Talal 'Awkal in the Palestinian daily al-Ayyam - that Israel appeared to be hoping for a reversion to Gaza's pre-67 status when it was controlled by Egypt, perhaps as a precursor to bringing the West Bank back into the Jordanian orbit. That followed the remarks by Israel's deputy defence minister Matan Vilnai on Thursday that the opening of the Rafah border could pave the way for Israel permanently to hand over all responsibility for supplying Gaza to Egypt.

Neither is a serious option. The Palestinian national genie cannot be put back in the bottle, despite current divisions. And Israel remains the fully responsible occupying power in Gaza, controlling its land access, sea and air space and conducting regular military operations in the territory at will.

Those "incursions" are supposedly carried out to end rocket attacks from Gaza into southern Israel. If so, they are hopelessly ineffective. Benjamin Pogrund asked this week: what can Israel do to stop the rockets, which spread fear and demoralisation in towns like Sderot, even if - unlike Israeli attacks on Gaza - they rarely kill? The obvious answer is to end its illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories and negotiate a just settlement for the refugees, ethnically cleansed nearly 60 years ago, (who, with their families, make up a majority of the Gaza Strip's population).

All the Palestinian factions, including Hamas, accept that as the basis for a permanent settlement or indefinite end of armed conflict. In the meantime, the Palestinians have the right to resist occupation, whether they choose to exercise it or not. The dominant Palestinian view - though not that of PA president Mahmoud Abbas - has long been that negotiation without some element of armed pressure is, as was once said in a rather different British context, to go naked into the conference chamber.

Even significant figures on the Israeli right - including Sharon's former security adviser Giora Eiland, former Mossad boss Efraim Halevi and ex-defence minister Shaul Mofaz are coming to recognise that the refusal to talk or deal with Hamas is going nowhere. And the argument (made, for example, by senior British ministers) that talks with Hamas will have to wait until the organisation has been politically weakened looks increasingly threadbare.

The same goes for the PA leadership. Waiting for Hamas to go away won't work. Only negotiations without preconditions for Palestinian political reconciliation can both restore national dignity and allow the Palestinians out of the dead end they have been forced into by relentless Israeli and US pressure. The magnificent display of popular power this week has shown that there are other ways ahead.

Back to Top

4. IRAQ WAR 'CAUSED SLOWDOWN IN THE US'

BY

PETERWILSON

The Iraq war has cost the US 50-60 times more than the Bush administration predicted and was a central cause of the sub-prime banking crisis threatening the world economy, according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz.

The former World Bank vice-president yesterday said the war had, so far, cost the US something like $US3trillion ($3.3 trillion) compared with the $US50-$US60-billion predicted in 2003.

Australia also faced a real bill much greater than the $2.2billion in military spending reported last week by Australian Defence Force chief Angus Houston, Professor Stiglitz said, pointing to higher oil prices and other indirect costs of the wars.

Professor Stiglitz told the Chatham House think tank in London that the Bush White House was currently estimating the cost of the war at about $US500 billion, but that figure massively understated things such as the medical and welfare costs of US military servicemen.

The war was now the second-most expensive in US history after World War II and the second-longest after Vietnam, he said.

The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit.

"The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system," he said.

That led to a housing bubble and a consumption boom, and the fallout was plunging the US economy into recession and saddling the next US president with the biggest budget deficit in history, he said.

Professor Stiglitz, an academic at the Columbia Business School and a former economic adviser to president Bill Clinton, said a further $US500 billion was going to be spent on the fighting in the next two years and that could have been used more effectively to improve the security and quality of life of Americans and the rest of the world.

The money being spent on the war each week would be enough to wipe out illiteracy around the world, he said.

Just a few days' funding would be enough to provide health insurance for US children who were not covered, he said.

The public had been encouraged by the White House to ignore the costs of the war because of the belief that the war would somehow pay for itself or be paid for by Iraqi oil or US allies.

"When the Bush administration went to war in Iraq it obviously didn't focus very much on the cost. Larry Lindsey, the chief economic adviser, said the cost was going to be between $US100billion and $US200 billion - and for that slight moment of quasi-honesty he was fired.

"(Then defence secretary Donald) Rumsfeld responded and said 'baloney', and the number the administration came up with was $US50 to $US60 billion. We have calculated that the cost was more like $US3 trillion.

"Three trillion is a very conservative number, the true costs are likely to be much larger than that."

Five years after the war, the US was still spending about $US50billion every three months on direct military costs, he said.

Professor Stiglitz and another Clinton administration economist, Linda Bilmes, have produced a book, The Three Trillion Dollar War, pulling together their research on the true cost of the war, which does not include the cost to Iraq.

One of the greatest discrepancies is that the official figures do not include the long-term healthcare and social benefits for injured servicemen, who are surviving previously fatal attacks because of improved body armour.

"The ratio of injuries to fatalities in a normal war is 2:1. In this war they admitted to 7:1 but a true number is (something) like 15:1."

Some 100,000 servicemen have been diagnosed with serious psychological problems and the soldiers doing the most tours of duty have not yet returned.

Professor Stiglitz attributed to the Iraq war $US5-$US10 of the almost $US80-a-barrel increase in oil prices since the start of the war, adding that it would have been reasonable to attribute more than $US35 of that rise to the war.

He said the British bill for its role in the war was about 20 times the pound stg. 1billion ($2.1 billion) that former prime minister Tony Blair estimated before the war.

The British Government was yesterday ordered to release details of its planning for the war, when the country's Information Commissioner backed a Freedom of Information request for the minutes of two cabinet meetings in the days before the war.

Commissioner Richard Thomas said that because of the importance of the decision to go to war, the public interest in disclosing the minutes outweighed the public interest in withholding the information.

Back to Top

Monday, July 14, 2008

The Jvl Bi-Weekly for 071508

I can be most easily reached through the following email address for suggesting new additions to the subscription list or to cancel your subscription to the Bi-Weekly:

channujames@yahoo.com

The Blog Address for the Bi-Weekly is: http://jvlbiweekly.blogspot.com

Please forward the Blog address for the Bi-Weekly to any who might be interested

Tuesday, July 15th, 2008

Volume 7, No. 12

6 Articles, 18 Pages

(Editor's Note: “Who is the real patriot, or rather what is the kind of patriotism that
we represent? The kind of patriotism we represent is the kind of
patriotism which loves America with open eyes. Our relation towards
America is the same as the relation of a man who loves a woman, who is
enchanted by her beauty and yet who cannot be blind to her defects. And
so I wish to state here, in my own behalf and in behalf of hundreds of
thousands whom you decry and state to be antipatriotic, that we love
America, we love her beauty, we love her riches, we love her mountains
and her forests, and above all we love the people who have produced her
wealth and riches, who have created all her beauty, we love the
dreamers and the philosophers and the thinkers who are giving America
liberty. But that must not make us blind to the social faults of
America. That cannot compel us to be inarticulate to the terrible
wrongs committed in the name of the country.

“We simply insist, regardless of all protests to the contrary, that
this war is not a war for democracy. If it were a war for the purpose
of making democracy safe for the world, we would say that democracy
must first be safe for America before it can be safe for the world.” Emma Goldman)

1. Dutch Health System Rated Best, US Worst - Polls

2. A Climate Threat From Flat TVs, Microchips

3. Fidel Castro And The FARC

4. From Triumph to Torture

5. Japanese Lawmaker Takes 9/11 Doubts Global

6. US Scientist Calls For Prosecution of Energy Company CEOs for Global Warming Disinformation

1. DUTCH HEALTH SYSTEM RATED BEST, US WORST- POLLS

BY

UNKNOWN AUTHORS OF THE HARRIS INTERACTIVE

Americans are the least satisfied with their health care system, while the Dutch system is rated the best, according to new research.

Polls about health care in 10 developed countries by Harris Interactive revealed a range of opinions about what works and what doesn't.

In the United States a third of Americans believe their system needs to be completely overhauled, while a further 50 percent feel that fundamental changes need to be made.

"Given that all countries other than the U.S. have universal health care systems in place, this may invite questions on why the U.S. remains the only wealthy, industrialized country without such a system," Harris president George Terhanian told Reuters.

In the Netherlands, where health care is financed by mandatory health insurance, 42 percent of people think their system works well and needs only minor changes.

And only nine percent of the Dutch think a complete overhaul is necessary, compared to 12 percent in Canada and Spain, 15 percent Britain and France, 17 percent in Germany and New Zealand, 18 percent in Australia and 20 percent in Italy, according to the polls of more than 1,000 people in each country.

The U.S. model, widely criticized on its combination of private insurance and publicly-funded programs, spends more on health care than any other nation worldwide but ranks low on overall quality of care, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

France's health system, based on compulsory national insurance, was ranked best in the world by the WHO in 2000, while Britain's National Health Service, the world's largest publicly funded system, was in 18th place.

The Harris comparison of the national surveys showed that 70 percent of the French and 59 percent of Britons think their health services are "the envy of the world."

Nearly 70 percent of Germans, a majority of whom receive coverage from state-funded insurance plans, feel that access to healthcare depends on a patient's ability to pay for it.

But at least 47 percent of those surveyed in all countries think there are some good things in their systems but they need to be improved.

"It is by no means clear through these surveys that universal health care systems represent the so-called magic pill," said Terhanian.

Back to Top

2. A CLIMATE THREAT FROM FLAT TVs, MICROCHIPS

BY

MARGOT ROOSEVELT

A synthetic chemical widely used in the manufacture of computers and flat-screen televisions is a potent greenhouse gas, with 17,000 times the global warming effect of carbon dioxide, but its measure in the atmosphere has never been taken, nor is it regulated by international treaty.

The chemical, nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), could be considered the missing greenhouse gas, atmospheric chemists Michael J. Prather and Juno Hsu of UC Irvine wrote in a paper released June 26 in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. With the surge in flat-panel displays, the market for NF3 has exploded.

The rapid growth in production alarms some climate scientists. In the atmosphere it has a life of 550 years, according to calculations by Prather and Hsu.

When the Kyoto Protocol, the 1997 international global warming treaty, was negotiated to control the rapid rise of planet-warming gases, NF3 was a niche product used in modest amounts in the semiconductor industry.

At the time, computer chip manufacturers used perfluorocarbons to clean the vacuum chambers where integrated circuits were made. But about two-thirds of the PFCs escaped into the atmosphere, contributing to the greenhouse effect, a warming of the Earths surface.

Reacting to environmental concerns, the industry sought a substitute and estimated that NF3, though it had greater potential for global warming, was less likely to escape into the air. We moved into manufacturing NF3 for environmental reasons, said Corning F. Painter, vice president of global electronics for Air Products in Allentown, Pa., the worlds leading producer. The company received a 2002 Climate Protection Award from the Environmental Protection Agency for its transition.

Last year, it announced a major production expansion at its U.S. and Korean plants. About three-quarters of the chemical is now used to manufacture computer microchips; the rest is used to make liquid crystal display panels on flat-screen televisions, Painter said.

Overall, world production of NF3 is likely to reach 8,000 tons a year by 2010, Painter said. That is the equivalent of more than 130 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. By comparison, according to the UC Irvine paper, a major coal-fired power plant producing 3,600 megawatts of electricity emits as much as 25 million metric tons of carbon dioxide a year.

Air Products officials say that about 2% of NF3 is emitted during manufacturing and that much of that is burned off before reaching the atmosphere.

But Prather, a leading author of the influential reports of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, cited a study showing that even under ideal conditions, more than 3% may be emitted. And, he added, a slippery gas such as NF3 could easily leak out undetected during manufacture, transport, application or disposal.

We dont know if 1% is getting out or 20% is getting out. . . . But once you let the genie out of the bottle, you cant get it back in.

Prather said UC Irvine researchers were working on a method to measure concentrations of the gas in the atmosphere so that industry emissions estimates would not be the only source of information.

Atmospheric scientists not connected with the paper said the authors had raised a significant issue for future climate negotiations.

NF3 lives a very long time in the atmosphere, said Charles E. Kolb Jr., an IPCC scientist with Massachusetts-based Aerodyne Research Inc.

We are having a hard enough time controlling carbon dioxide and methane we shouldnt be creating a new problem.

Another climate scientist, V. (Ram) Ramanathan of UC San Diego, noted the potency and long life of NF3, adding: This paper raises new awareness of this molecule. We need to know how much of these super-greenhouse gases are up there.

The Kyoto Protocol covered six greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, PFCs and sulfur hexafluoride.

California, citing the danger of water shortages, wildfires and other effects of climate change, last month adopted a draft plan to control global warming emissions statewide, including several synthetic greenhouse gases but not NF3. The larger issue is the chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons, said state air resources board spokesman Stanley Young.

Enough material [is] stored in old refrigerators, air conditioners and insulating foams to equal over 600 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in California alone.

Back to Top

3. FIDEL CASTRO AND THE FARC

(Eight Mistaken Thesis of Fidel Castro)

BY

JAMES PETRAS

I have been a supporter of the Cuban Revolution for exactly fifty years and recognize Fidel Castro as one of the great revolutionary leaders of our time. But I have never been an uncritical apologist: On several crucial occasions I have expressed my disagreements in print, in public and in discussions with Cuban leaders, writers and militants. Fidel Castros articles and commentaries on the recent events in Colombia, namely his discussion of the Colombian regimes freeing of several FARC prisoners (including three CIA operatives and Ingrid Betancourt) and his critical comments on the politics, structure, practices, tactics and strategy of the FARC and its world-renowned leader, Manuel Marulanda, merit serious consideration.

Castros remarks demand analysis and refutation, not only because his opinions are widely read and influence millions of militants and admirers in the world, especially in Cuba and Latin America, but because he purports to provide a moral basis for opposition to imperialism today. Equally important Castros unfortunate diatribe and critique against the FARC, Marulanda and the entire peasant-based guerrilla movement, has been welcomed, published and broadcast by the entire pro-imperialist mass media on five continents. Fidel Castro, with few caveats, has uncritically joined the chorus condemning the FARC and, as I will demonstrate, without reason or logic.

Eight Erroneous Theses of Fidel Castro

1. Castro claims that the liberation of the FARC political prisoners opens a chapter for peace in Colombia, a process which Cuba has been supporting for 20 years as the most appropriate for the unity and liberation of the peoples of our America, utilizing new approaches in the complex and special present day circumstances after the collapse of the USSR…” (Reflections of Fidel Castro, July 4, 2008).

What is astonishing about this thesis (and the entire essay) is Castros total omission of any discussion of the mass terror unleashed by Colombias President Uribe against trade unionists, political critics, peasant communities and documented by every human rights group in and out of Colombia in both of his recent essays. In fact, Castro exculpates the current Uribe regime, the most murderous regime, and puts the entire blame on US Imperialism. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and under the US-led military offensive, a multitude of armed revolutionary movements have emerged in Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Nepal, and other pre-existing armed groups in Colombia and the Philippines, have continued to engage in struggle. In Latin America, the new approaches to revolution were anything but peaceful massive popular uprisings overthrowing corrupt electoral politicians in Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuelacosting many hundreds of lives.

The liberation of Betancourt has strengthened the iron fist of the Uribe regime, increased the militarization of the countryside, and covered up the on-going death squad murders of trade unionists and peasants. Contrary to Fidel Castro, the US and Colombias death squad president have used their success to buttress their arguments in favor of joint US-Colombian military action. Fidels celebration of the Colombian regimes action as an opening for peace serves to deflect attention from the Colombian Supreme Court decision claiming that the re-election of Uribe was illegal because of the tyrants bribing Congress people to amend the constitutional provision allowing the president a second term.

2. Fidel Castro denigrates the recently deceased leader of the FARC, Manuel Marulanda, as a peasant, communist militant, principle leader of the guerrilla (Reflections). In his text of July 5, 2008 (Reflections II), Castro condescendingly refers to Marulanda of notable natural intelligence and leadership qualities, on the other hand never had opportunities to study when he was an adolescent. It is said he only finished the fifth grade. He conceived (of the revolution) as a long and prolonged struggle, a point of view which I never shared. Castro was the son of a plantation owner and educated in private Jesuit colleges and trained as a lawyer. He implies that education credentials and higher status prepares the revolutionary leadership to lead the peasants lacking formal education, but with natural leadership qualities apparently sufficient to allow them to follow the intellectuals and professionals better suited to lead the revolution.

The test of history however refutes Castros claims. Marulanda built, over a period of 40 years, a bigger guerrilla army with a wider mass base than any Castro-inspired guerrilla force from the 1960s to 2000.

Castro promoted a theory of guerrilla focos between 1963-1980, in which small groups of intellectuals would organize an armed nucleus in the countryside, engage in combat and attract mass peasant support. Every Castro-ite guerrilla foco was quickly defeated wiped out in Peru, Venezuela, Brazil, Uruguay (urban focos), Bolivia and Argentina. In contrast, Marulandas prolonged guerrilla war strategy relied on mass grass roots organizing based on close peasant ties with guerrillas, based on community, family and class solidarity, building slowly and methodically a national political-military peoples army. In fact, a serious re-examination of the Cuban revolution reveals that Castros guerrillas were recruited from the mass of urban mass organizations, methodically organized prior to and during the formation of the guerrilla foco in 1956-1958.

Although reliable figures on the FARC are available, Castro underestimated by half the number of FARC guerrillas, relying on the propaganda of Uribes publicists.

3. Castro condemns the cruelty of the FACR tactics of capturing and holding prisoners in the jungle. With this logic, Castro should condemn every revolutionary movement in the 20th century beginning with the Russian, Chinese and Vietnamese revolutions. Revolutions are cruel but Fidel forgets that counter-revolutions are even crueler. Uribe established local spy networks involving local officials, as was done in Vietnam during that war. And the Vietnamese revolutionaries eliminated the collaborators because they were responsible for the execution of tens of thousands of village militants. Castro fails to comment on the fact that Ms. Betancourt, upon her celebrated liberation embraced and thanked General Mario Montoya. According to a declassified US embassy document, Montoya organized a clandestine terrorist unit (American Anti-Communist Alliance), which murdered thousands of Colombian dissidents, almost all of them ferociously tortured beforehand. The cruelty of FACR captivity did not show up in Betancourts medical exam: She was in good health!

4. Fidel claims Cuba is for peace in Colombia but not US military intervention. It is the Colombian oligarchy and Uribe regime, which has invited and collaborated with the US military intervention in Colombia. Castro implies that US military intervention is imposed from the outside, rather than seeing it as part of the class struggle within Colombia, in which Colombias rulers, landowners and narco-traffickers play a major role in financing and training the death squads. In the first 6 months of 2008, 24 trade union leaders have been murdered by the Uribe regime, over 2,562 killed over the past twenty years since what Castro describes as the new roads of complex and special circumstances. Fidel totally ignores the continuities of death squad murders of unarmed social movement activists, the lack of solidarity from Cuba toward all the Colombian movements since Havana developed diplomatic and commercial ties with the Uribe regime.

Is balancing between Cubas state interest in diplomatic and economic ties with Colombia and claiming revolutionary credentials part of the "complexities" of Cuban foreign policy?

5. Castro calls for the immediate release of all FARC-held prisoners, without the minimum consideration of the 500 guerrillas tortured and dehumanized in Uribes and Bushs horrendous high security special prisons. Castro boasts that Cuba released its prisoners captured during the anti-Batista struggle and calls for the FARC to follow Cubas example, rather than the Vietnamese and Chinese revolutionary approach. Castros attempt to impose and universalize his tactics, based on Cuban experience, on Colombia lacks the minimum effort to understand, let alone analyze, the specificities of Colombia, its military, the political context of the class struggle and the social and political context of humanitarian negotiations in Colombia.

6. Castro claims the FARC should end the guerrilla struggle but not give up their arms because in the past guerrillas who disarmed were slaughtered by the regime. Instead, he suggests they should accept Frances offer to abandon their country or accept Chavez (Uribes brother and friend) proposal to negotiate and secure a commission made up Latin American notables to oversee their integration into Colombian politics.

What are armed guerillas going to do when thousands of Uribes soldiers and death squads ravage the countryside? Flee to the mountains and shoot wild pigs? Going to France means abandoning millions of starving vulnerable peasant supporters and the class struggle.

Fidel Castro totally omits from his discussion the manner in which every political leader involved in the humanitarian mission used the celebration of Betancourts liberation to cover up and distract from their serious political difficulties. First and foremost, Uribes re-election was ruled illegal by the Colombian Supreme Court because he was accused and convicted of bribing members of Congress to vote for the constitutional amendment allowing his running for a second term. Uribes presidency is de facto illegal. Betancourts release and delirious embrace of Uribe undermines the judicial verdict and eliminates the court injunction for a new Congressional vote or national election. Sarkozys popularity in France was in a vertical free fall, his highly publicized intervention in the negotiations with the FARC were a total failure, his militarist policies in the Middle East and virulent anti-immigrant policies alienated substantial sectors of the French public (as did rising prices and economic stagnation).

The release of Betancourt and her effusive praise and embrace of Sarkozy revived his tarnished image and gave him a temporary respite from the burgeoning political and economic discontent with his domestic and foreign policies.

7. Chavez used the release of Betancourt to embrace his enemy, Uribe, and to put further distance from the FARC, in particular, and the popular movements in Colombia, as well as to build bridges with a post-Bush US President. Chavez also returned to the good graces of the entire pro-imperialist mass media and favorable comments from the right-wing US Presidential candidate, John McCain, who hoped the FARC would follow Chavez demands to disarm.

Cuba, or at least Fidel Castro, used the liberation of Betancourt to display his long-term hostility to the FARC (dating at least from 1990) for embarrassing his policy of reconciliation with the Colombian regime.

8. Striking a humanitarian and quasi-electoral posture in celebrating Betancourts release, Castro lambasted the FARC for its cruelty and armed resistance to the terrorist Uribe regime. Castro attacked the FARCs "authoritarian structure and dogmatic leadership", ignoring FARCs endorsement of electoral politics between 1984-90 (when over 5,000 disarmed activists and political candidates were slaughtered), and the free and open debate over policy alternative in the demilitarized zone (1999-2002) with all sectors of Colombian society. In contrast, Castro never permitted free and open debate and elections, even among communist candidates in any legislative process at least until he was replaced by Raul Castro.

The above mentioned political leaders were serving their own personal political interests by bashing the FARC and celebrating Betancourt at the expense of the people of Colombia.

Conclusion:

Has Castro clearly thought through the disastrous consequences for millions of impoverished Colombians or is he thinking only of Cubas possible improvement of relations with Colombia once the FARC is liquidated? The effect of Castros anti-FARC articles has been to provide ammunition for the imperial mass media to discredit the FARC and armed resistance to tyranny and to bolster the image of death squad President Uribe. When the worlds premier revolutionary leader denies the revolutionary history and practice of an ongoing popular movement and its brilliant leader who built that movement, he is denying the movements of the future a rich heritage of successful resistance and construction. History will not absolve him.

Back to Top

4. FROM TRIUMPH TO TORTURE
(Israel
s treatment of an award-winning young Palestinian journalist is part of a terrible pattern)

BY

JOHN PILGER

Two weeks ago, I presented a young Palestinian, Mohammed Omer, with the 2008 Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism. Awarded in memory of the great US war correspondent, the prize goes to journalists who expose establishment propaganda, or “official drivel”, as Gellhorn called it. Mohammed shares the prize of £5,000 with Dahr Jamail. At 24, he is the youngest winner. His citation reads: “Every day, he reports from a war zone, where he is also a prisoner. His homeland, Gaza, is surrounded, starved, attacked, forgotten. He is a profoundly humane witness to one of the great injustices of our time. He is the voice of the voiceless.” The eldest of eight, Mohammed has seen most of his siblings killed or wounded or maimed. An Israeli bulldozer crushed his home while the family were inside, seriously injuring his mother. And yet, says a former Dutch ambassador, Jan Wijenberg, “he is a moderating voice, urging Palestinian youth not to court hatred but seek peace with Israel”.

Getting Mohammed to London to receive his prize was a major diplomatic operation. Israel has perfidious control over Gaza’s borders, and only with a Dutch embassy escort was he allowed out. Last Thursday, on his return journey, he was met at the Allenby Bridge crossing (to Jordan) by a Dutch official, who waited outside the Israeli building, unaware Mohammed had been seized by Shin Bet, Israel’s infamous security organisation. Mohammed was told to turn off his mobile and remove the battery. He asked if he could call his embassy escort and was told forcefully he could not. A man stood over his luggage, picking through his documents. “Where’s the money?” he demanded. Mohammed produced some US dollars. “Where is the English pound you have?”

“I realised,” said Mohammed, “he was after the award stipend for the Martha Gellhorn prize. I told him I didn’t have it with me. ‘You are lying’, he said. I was now surrounded by eight Shin Bet officers, all armed. The man called Avi ordered me to take off my clothes. I had already been through an x-ray machine. I stripped down to my underwear and was told to take off everything. When I refused, Avi put his hand on his gun. I began to cry: ‘Why are you treating me this way? I am a human being.’ He said, ‘This is nothing compared with what you will see now.’ He took his gun out, pressing it to my head and with his full body weight pinning me on my side, he forcibly removed my underwear. He then made me do a concocted sort of dance. Another man, who was laughing, said, ‘Why are you bringing perfumes?’ I replied, ‘They are gifts for the people I love’. He said, ‘Oh, do you have love in your culture?’

“As they ridiculed me, they took delight most in mocking letters I had received from readers in England. I had now been without food and water and the toilet for 12 hours, and having been made to stand, my legs buckled. I vomited and passed out. All I remember is one of them gouging, scraping and clawing with his nails at the tender flesh beneath my eyes. He scooped my head and dug his fingers in near the auditory nerves between my head and eardrum. The pain became sharper as he dug in two fingers at a time. Another man had his combat boot on my neck, pressing into the hard floor. I lay there for over an hour. The room became a menagerie of pain, sound and terror.”

An ambulance was called and told to take Mohammed to a hospital, but only after he had signed a statement indemnifying the Israelis from his suffering in their custody. The Palestinian medic refused, courageously, and said he would contact the Dutch embassy escort. Alarmed, the Israelis let the ambulance go. The Israeli response has been the familiar line that Mohammed was “suspected” of smuggling and “lost his balance” during a “fair” interrogation, Reuters reported yesterday.

Israeli human rights groups have documented the routine torture of Palestinians by Shin Bet agents with “beatings, painful binding, back bending, body stretching and prolonged sleep deprivation”. Amnesty has long reported the widespread use of torture by Israel, whose victims emerge as mere shadows of their former selves. Some never return. Israel is high in an international league table for its murder of journalists, especially Palestinian journalists, who receive barely a fraction of the kind of coverage given to the BBC’s Alan Johnston.

The Dutch government says it is shocked by Mohammed Omer’s treatment. The former ambassador Jan Wijenberg said: “This is by no means an isolated incident, but part of a long-term strategy to demolish Palestinian social, economic and cultural life … I am aware of the possibility that Mohammed Omer might be murdered by Israeli snipers or bomb attack in the near future.”

While Mohammed was receiving his prize in London, the new Israeli ambassador to Britain, Ron Proser, was publicly complaining that many Britons no longer appreciated the uniqueness of Israel’s democracy. Perhaps they do now.

Back to Top

5. JAPANESE LAWMAKER TAKES 9/11 DOUBTS GLOBAL

BY

JOHN SPIRI

In a September 2003 article for The Guardian newspaper, Michael Meacher, who served as Tony Blair's environment minister from May 1997 to June 2003, shocked the establishment by calling the global war on terrorism "bogus." Even more controversially, he implied that the U.S. government either allowed 9/11 to happen, or played some role in the destruction wrought that day. Besides Meacher, few politicians have publicly questioned America's official 9/11 narrative — until Diet member Yukihisa Fujita.

In January 2008 Fujita, a member of the Democratic Party of Japan, asked the Japanese Parliament and Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda to explain gaping holes in the official 9/11 story that various groups — including those who call themselves the "911 Truth Movement" — claim to have exposed.

Fujita, along with a growing number of individuals — including European and American politicians — are leading a charge to conduct a thorough, independent investigation of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001.

"Three or four years ago I saw some Internet videos like 'Loose Change' and '911 In Plane Site' and I began to ask questions," Fujita said in an interview, "but I still couldn't believe this was done by anyone but al-Qaida.

"Last year I watched more videos and read books written by professor David Ray Griffin (a professor emeritus of philosophy of religion and theology at Claremont Graduate University who wrote the most famous Truth Movement book, 'The New Pearl Harbor') about things such as the collapse of World Trade Center No. 7. This building, which was never hit by an airplane, collapsed straight down. Between the videos showing the way it fell, and the numerous reports of explosions, many are convinced that this building was demolished."

Fujita's presentation to the Diet and Fukuda focused a great deal on yet another aspect of 9/11 that now quite a few around the world find extremely suspicious: the Pentagon crash.

"I don't think (a) 767 could have hit the Pentagon," Fujita reckons. "There is no evidence of the plane itself. Almost nothing identifiable was left on the lawn or inside. The official story says the entire plane disintegrated, but the jet engines in particular were very strong (two 6-ton titanium steel turbine engines). And the damage to the building is much smaller than the size of the supposed airplane. The official claims just don't fit the facts."

While some label that claim "wacky" and label critics of the official 9/11 story "conspiracy theorists," Fujita has impressive company. For one, former Maj. Gen. Albert Stubblebine, who was commanding general of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security until 1984, is quoted on the "Patriots Question 911" Web site as saying, "I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, 'The plane does not fit in that hole.'

"So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?"

Fujita urges the Bush administration to put the issue to rest simply by showing videos that show the plane that hit the Pentagon. Instead, only a few grainy images have been released to the public. More disconcertingly, many videos taken by surrounding businesses were confiscated by the FBI immediately after the Pentagon explosion.

The Pennsylvania crash, like the Pentagon explosion, also yielded virtually no recognizable plane parts at the crash site. Rather, small pieces of debris were found up to 10 km away. The official story — that the plane "vaporized" when it hit the ground — is inconsistent with the evidence left by every other plane crash in the history of aviation.

Plane crashes always yield plane fragments, Fujita explained, which can be identified by the plane's serial number, but that's not the case for the four planes which crashed on 9/11. Strangely, the U.S. government managed to produce passports and DNA samples of individuals killed, but no identifiable plane parts. In an online article entitled "Physics 911," 34-year U.S. Air Force veteran Col. George Nelson notes, "It seems . . . that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view."

Fujita has largely relied on the voluminous amount of video and written material published in books and on the Internet, including the "Patriots Question 911" site, on which hundreds of allegations are leveled against the official story by senior officials from the military, intelligence services, law enforcement, and government, as well as pilots, engineers, architects, firefighters and others.

While not many other Japanese have taken an interest in this story, a few notable individuals besides Fujita have disputed the U.S. government's version, including Akira Dojimaru, a Japanese writer living in Spain. In his book, written in Japanese, "The Anatomy of the WTC Collapses: Flaws in the U.S. Government's Account," he uses photos, drawings and blueprints of the WTC buildings to back up his claim that buildings one and two could not have fallen in the manner they fell due to the plane crashes and subsequent fires. "And even if it was conceivable that they could fall due to the damage that day," Dojimaru wrote in an e-mail, "they never would have collapsed horizontally, and would have scattered steel beams and smashed concrete much farther than 100 meters."

For Fujita, it was Dojimaru's meticulous research, combined with the aforementioned Web sites, that convinced him the official story was nothing more than a house of cards.

One book that Fujita found unconvincing was the "9/11 Commission Report."

"The head of the 9/11 Commission is close with (U.S. Secretary of State) Condoleezza Rice and (Vice President Dick) Cheney. One commission member (Sen. Max Cleland) resigned, saying the White House did not disclose enough information."

On Democracy Now's radio show in March 2004, Cleland even went as far as to say, "This White House wants to cover it (the facts of 9/11) up."

More recently, a New York Times article in January quoted Thomas Kean, the chairman of the 9/11 Commission, as saying that "the CIA destroyed videotaped interrogations of Qaeda operatives," and concluded that that "obstructed our investigation."

Following the lead of Fujita, Karen Johnson, a conservative Republican senator from Arizona, has publicly voiced her doubts about 9/11 before the U.S. Senate. Inspired by Blair Gadsby — who on May 27 started a hunger strike to bring attention to the 911 Truth Movement — Johnson, like Fujita, is encouraging politicians to conduct a thorough, independent investigation.

Fujita, who worked for more than 20 years for the international conflict resolution NGO group MRA and the Japanese Association for Aid and Relief (AAR), has become something of a global cause celebre since his extraordinary questioning at the Diet. In February 2008, he participated in a conference at the European Parliament led by EMP Guilietto Chiesa calling for an independent commission of inquiry into 9/11. While in Europe, he met with NGOs from 11 European countries to discuss 9/11.

One month later Fujita spoke at the "Truth Now" conference in Sydney, Australia. One focus of these meetings was the Italian documentary "ZERO," whose release will mark the first time the 9/11 movement's message has moved from the "cyberworld" to public venues. Fujita has also spoken about his 9/11 doubts on two U.S. radio shows, one hosted by Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, and another by Alex Jones of infowars.com.

He is also making ripples in Japan. Fujita was featured in a March 2 article by well-known critic Takao Iwami on "How to deal with doubts about 9/11" in the Sunday Mainichi weekly. He was also featured in a March 26 Spa! magazine piece headlined, "European conference discusses 9/11 doubts."

However, not everyone is enthralled with Fujita's bold line of questioning.

"One person showed strong anger towards me," Fujita noted, "and another (Japanese person) threatened my life. A few others advised me to be extremely careful."

Still, Fujita says, the vast majority — around 95 percent — have been positive.

"One man said, 'You're a true samurai.' Another man came all the way from Okayama in western Japan to thank me personally. And among other Parliament members, I received only words of encouragement and support."

While in Europe, Fujita met British former MP Meacher, who dared to question the official story when it was still considered gospel. Time, the Iraq war and well-sourced online videos are emboldening many people, including politicians, to step out of the cyberworld and voice their doubts in newspapers, magazines, theaters, and — most importantly — government chambers.

"Now Blair is gone, and Bush will soon be gone," Meacher told Fujita. "Our time is coming."

See Also

9/11 Special - Dutch Television Documentary

This war on terrorism is bogus

Back to Top

6. US SCIENTIST CALLS FOR PROSCECTUION OF ENERGY COMPANY CEOs FOR GLOBAL WARMING DISINFORMATION

BY

SHANNON JONES

In testimony before the US Congress on Monday, James Hansen, a leading climatologist, called heads of major energy companies criminals who should be prosecuted for deliberately spreading false and misleading information about the threat posed by global warming.

Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), testified before the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming to mark the 20th anniversary of his initial appearance before Congress in 1988. He generated the first significant public awareness of the issue of global warming by telling the Senate at that time that manmade greenhouse gasses were raising global temperatures.

Since then climate scientists have reached a virtually unanimous consensus that the burning of oil and other fossil fuels results in additional atmospheric carbon dioxide, trapping heat. The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased greatly over the last century, and global temperatures are rising as a result.

“We have reached a point of planetary emergency,” Hansen told the Congressional panel Monday, saying the world was near a “tipping point” where climate change “would spiral dynamically out of humanity’s control.”

He compared the role of Exxon Mobil and other energy conglomerates, which have attempted to stoke doubts on scientific findings related to global warming, to the role of tobacco companies that denied the dangers of smoking. “CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of the long-term consequences of continued business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.”

Hansen warned, “Elements of a ‘perfect storm,’ a global cataclysm, are assembled.” He said that the climate could reach a point “that amplifying feedbacks spur large rapid changes.” He cited the melting of Arctic sea ice as one example. An even greater catastrophe looms with the melting of Antarctic and Greenland ice sheet, which would raise global sea levels at least two meters. “Hundreds of millions of people would become refugees,” he said.

Global warming will lead to the extinction of species, the spread of arid regions, stronger floods, droughts, forest fires and the drying up of lakes unless it is halted, he continued.

Hansen decried the extremely limited official goals set for reducing carbon emissions calling them “a recipe for global disaster.” He called for a moratorium on the construction of coal burning power plants and the development of carbon free alternatives to coal and petroleum.

Hansen indicted the energy conglomerates for blocking action on global warming. “Instead of moving heavily into renewable energies, fossil fuel companies choose to spread doubt about global warming, just as tobacco companies discredited the link between smoking and cancer. Methods are sophisticated, including funding to help shape school textbook discussions about global warming.”

He also denounced the fossil fuel industry for using “China and other developing nations as scapegoats to rationalize inaction.”

The media paid very limited attention to Hansen’s remarks, particularly his attacks on the energy companies. The New York Times in its report on his testimony managed to not even mention the NASA scientist’s criticisms of the oil industry.

House Democrats greeted Hansen’s testimony with patronizing condescension. Predictably they chose to ignore his call for the prosecution of energy company executives, who annually pour millions of dollars into the campaign coffers of both parties.

Since Hansen issued his first warning in 1988, the US, which is responsible for about one-quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas production, has done nothing to limit carbon emissions. The Bush administration, in alliance with the oil industry, has sought to play down the scientific evidence in support of global warming.

Last year Hansen testified before another congressional committee about Bush administration interference in climate research, recounting instances of government suppression of data related to global warming. In one case a staff member was told he could not issue a press release on research showing that the ocean was less efficient in removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than originally estimated.

In 2005, after Hansen presented climate data to the American Geophysical Union, the NASA public affairs office issued tighter regulations, stipulating that media interviews had to be pre-approved and that Hansen had to get prior permission before posting anything on the GISS website.

Other government scientists have reported similar attempts by the Bush administration to muzzle data on global warming. Documents support the claims of scientists that the White House made deliberate attempts to mislead the public about the dangers posed by climate change by editing official reports.

Oil company representatives have been given positions on federal environmental policy councils and climate information oversight. The White House appointed Phil Cooney, a former lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute, to head the Council of Environmental Quality. In that position he edited government climate reports in order to spread false doubt and uncertainty on the subject of global warming. After his activities were exposed, Clooney left his government post for a position with Exxon Mobil.

The attempts by Exxon Mobil to discredit the scientific understanding about climate change on the basis of pseudoscience are well documented. A conservative think tank sponsored by Exxon Mobil offered scientists $10,000 to write articles critical of official studies on climate change. The world’s largest private energy company has spent millions of dollars to spread false and misleading information about the dangers of global warming.

According to a report issued by the Union of Concerned Scientists in January 2007, Exxon Mobil gave nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to front organizations set up to provide a platform for “global warming skeptics.” In many cases these individuals are directly on the payroll of Exxon Mobil funded groups.

Despite Hansen’s compelling testimony, there are no indications that US policy will change. Since Hansen first appeared before Congress in 1988, neither the Clinton administration nor the administrations of George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush have passed any major legislation restricting greenhouse gas emissions. There have been 21 coal-fired power plants constructed and US emissions of carbon dioxide have risen by some 18 percent.

The domination of the energy sector by a handful of private monopolies and the subordination of both the Republicans and Democrats to these powerful interests blocks the adoption of any serious measures to deal with the looming catastrophe posed by global warming. These multibillion dollar corporations will not tolerate any measure, no matter how critical for human survival, that impinges on their profits.

Further, any strategy to oppose global warming requires a coordinated international effort. However, energy companies dominate US foreign policy as well, dictating a strategy that seeks to secure world hegemony, including the invasion and occupation of Iraq and other oil rich regions of the world.

Back to Top