http://www.uruknet.de:80/?s1=1&p=54692&s2=30
In a country where government corruption and payoffs are pervasive, only pennies from each aid dollar being sent to Afghanistan are actually reaching the people who need help, an international aid expert said Thursday.
Marco Vicenzino, the founder of the Global Strategy Project, a non-partisan, non-profit foreign policy think-tank based in Washington, D.C., said he is "appalled" by the inefficiency of humanitarian aid efforts in the war-torn country.
"You've got 15,000 foreigners, primarily westerners, based in Kabul - a lot of overlapping, poor co-ordination - and it seems a battle between the NGOs (non-government organizations) in terms of territoriality and a battle of egos," Vicenzino said at a gathering hosted by the United States Consulate in Calgary.
"I was very depressed and discouraged by the disorganization of the international aid efforts."
Vicenzino, who is a strategic adviser for the Afghanistan World Foundation and a former official with the World Bank, said about 80 cents of every dollar goes back to donor countries, largely through the contractors doing the work.
"You have 20 cents left for Afghanistan and those 20 cents have to go through their layers of corruption. By the time any money reaches the ordinary citizen, you're lucky if you even have five cents ...."
Sunday, 31 May 2009
George W. Bush torture terror suspects
The former U.S. president broke his silence over the controversial issue to insist that interrogation methods such as waterboarding and sleep deprivation helped save lives by gaining valuable intelligence.
But he shied away from directly criticising his successor Barack Obama, who has banned the CIA from using the techniques.
'It was a rollercoaster of emotions, it really was.
I vowed to take whatever steps that were necessary to protect you,' he said in a speech to a largely sympathetic crowd of about 2,500 people in Benton, Michigan.
'The first thing you ask is, what's legal?
'What do the lawyers say is possible?'
Although careful to avoid using the words 'torture' and 'abuse', Mr Bush added: 'You have to make tough decisions.
'They've captured a guy who murdered 3,000 citizens and that affected me.
'They come in and they say he may have more information.
'We had an anthrax attack. What do you do?'
The remarks come after Mr Bush's vice president Dick Cheney claimed the harsh methods were justified to protect the U.S. from further attacks.
But he shied away from directly criticising his successor Barack Obama, who has banned the CIA from using the techniques.
'It was a rollercoaster of emotions, it really was.
I vowed to take whatever steps that were necessary to protect you,' he said in a speech to a largely sympathetic crowd of about 2,500 people in Benton, Michigan.
'The first thing you ask is, what's legal?
'What do the lawyers say is possible?'
Although careful to avoid using the words 'torture' and 'abuse', Mr Bush added: 'You have to make tough decisions.
'They've captured a guy who murdered 3,000 citizens and that affected me.
'They come in and they say he may have more information.
'We had an anthrax attack. What do you do?'
The remarks come after Mr Bush's vice president Dick Cheney claimed the harsh methods were justified to protect the U.S. from further attacks.
Saturday, 30 May 2009
Karadzic
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/may2009/kara-m30.shtml
Defence lawyers for Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic this week demanded the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) drop all charges against him because of an alleged immunity deal with US diplomat Richard Holbrooke. Karadzic claims he was offered immunity from prosecution at the end of Bosnia-Herzegovina’s 1992-1995 war in return for stepping down from his position as leader of the Serbian Democratic Party and disappearing from public life.
Defence lawyers for Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic this week demanded the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) drop all charges against him because of an alleged immunity deal with US diplomat Richard Holbrooke. Karadzic claims he was offered immunity from prosecution at the end of Bosnia-Herzegovina’s 1992-1995 war in return for stepping down from his position as leader of the Serbian Democratic Party and disappearing from public life.
Politics US Future
This week, a new report released by the Campaign for America's Future and the media watchdog group MediaMatters attempts to finally bury the idea that the U.S. leans rightward. It takes a comprehensive look at the political landscape in which we live and a look forward at America's shifting demographic profile -- all of which reveal a citizenry that is anything but center-right and will only continue to trend in a more progressive direction, leaving modern conservatism increasingly isolated in its ideas.
The study gathered public-opinion data from a number of respected, nonpartisan polling outfits, findings from the (huge) National Election Study series and official statistics on ethnicity and gender to make the case. Among the findings:
The study gathered public-opinion data from a number of respected, nonpartisan polling outfits, findings from the (huge) National Election Study series and official statistics on ethnicity and gender to make the case. Among the findings:
On what may be the key difference between liberals and conservatives today --
the role of government -- more than twice as many people agree with the
statement, "there are more things government should be doing" than believe the
Reaganite adage, "the less government, the better."
In 1994, more than half of Americans said, "government regulation of business
usually does more harm than good" and fewer than 4 out of 10 thought "government
regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest." That's been
flipped on its head during the 15 years since -- today, fewer than 4 in 10
believe regulation causes more harm than good.
A majority (55-70 percent, depending on how the question is worded) believes
it's the government's responsibility to provide health care to all Americans;
fewer than a third of those responding to a CBS/New York Times poll thought
health insurance should be "left only to private enterprise."
Almost 2 out of 3 Americans believe the taxes they pay are fair, and that the
very wealthy pay too little in taxes; almost 7 in 10 believe corporations don't
pay their fair share of taxes.
Taichi
I am not sure what this subject is or how to spell it. Its an ancient art of......
1.) Taiji (in pinyin format) or T'ai-chi (Wade-Giles transliteration), a concept in Chinese philosophy
2.) Tai chi chuan, a Chinese martial art often shortened to "Tai Chi" or "Taiji" in everyday use
This is not for me as it says this. I hate discrimination.
The study of tai chi chuan primarily involves three aspects[citation needed]:
Now I bin thinking about this for a while. And I got a course from the internet, just the introductory free course. I bin trying it out and started to think like this:
If you stand upright and start raising your arms up along your body to your shouldors, very slowly. Do you feel a pressure agaist it. Say for instance you stop half way to your shouldors and stop. Wait a bit and you will feel that the opposing pressure is gone? Now curl your arm forword as if you are holding a ball.
Now relax in that position, until there is no pressure on your muscles. Now think about shrinking that ball with both your hands. And while shrinking this imaginary ball you should feel the muscles in all your body. The day you go through all the muscle right down to your skin; that day you will have such a tingle in your whole skin that; some have died. Beware of this practice to the extremes.
1.) Taiji (in pinyin format) or T'ai-chi (Wade-Giles transliteration), a concept in Chinese philosophy
Taiji 太極 (literally "great ridgepole") is a Chinese cosmological term for the "Supreme Ultimate" state of undifferentiated absolute and infinite potentiality, contrasted with the Wuji 無極 "Without Ultimate". Taiji is best known in the West from the name Taijiquan (or T'ai chi ch'uan) 太極拳 "Supreme Ultimate Shadowboxing".
2.) Tai chi chuan, a Chinese martial art often shortened to "Tai Chi" or "Taiji" in everyday use
Focusing the mind solely on the movements of the form purportedly helps to bring about a state of mental calm and clarity.
This is not for me as it says this. I hate discrimination.
The study of tai chi chuan primarily involves three aspects[citation needed]:
Health: An unhealthy or otherwise uncomfortable person may find it difficult to meditate to a state of calmness or to use tai chi as a martial art. Tai chi's health training therefore concentrates on relieving the physical effects of stress on the body and mind. For those focused on tai chi's martial application, good physical fitness is an important step towards effective self-defense.
3.)Tai chi chih, a westernized, standardized version of Tai Chi
Nothing much there?
Now I bin thinking about this for a while. And I got a course from the internet, just the introductory free course. I bin trying it out and started to think like this:
If you stand upright and start raising your arms up along your body to your shouldors, very slowly. Do you feel a pressure agaist it. Say for instance you stop half way to your shouldors and stop. Wait a bit and you will feel that the opposing pressure is gone? Now curl your arm forword as if you are holding a ball.
Now relax in that position, until there is no pressure on your muscles. Now think about shrinking that ball with both your hands. And while shrinking this imaginary ball you should feel the muscles in all your body. The day you go through all the muscle right down to your skin; that day you will have such a tingle in your whole skin that; some have died. Beware of this practice to the extremes.
Friday, 29 May 2009
Sotomayor's Jewish ties
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1243346494831&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
Ron Kampeas / jta , THE JERUSALEM POST
Jewish groups don't endorse US Supreme Court nominees, at least in writing.
The tears and choked sobs when Sonia Sotomayor accepted President Obama's nomination on Tuesday told another story.
Packed into the room along with Sotomayor's family, friends and colleagues were representatives of Jewish groups that have consulted with the White House about prospective replacements for David Souter.
The story of her life - the daughter of a Puerto Rican single mother from the Bronx, NY, whose ambitions knew no bounds - resounded with a community that has made the story of immigrant triumph over struggle a template of Jewish American success.
"It was impossible not to moved by her personal story," said Mark Pelavin, the associate director of the Reform movement's Religious Action Center. "To see her mother sitting there and think about what this says about her and her country - the combination of someone who grew up in a housing project, who has been on the bench for a long time, but who has been a prosecutor as well, that combination is very powerful."
"It was thrilling," said Sammie Moshenberg, the Washington director of the National Council of Jewish Women.
It doesn't hurt that Sotomayor, 54, is a poster child for strong Jewish-Hispanic relations. In 1986, when she was in private legal practice, she joined one of the first young leadership tours of Israel sponsored by Project Interchange, which is affiliated with the American Jewish Committee.
Sotomayor so enjoyed the country - its immigrant culture, its popular music influenced heavily by Jewish immigrants from Argentina and Brazil - that she made a return visit in 1996 when she was a federal judge, and recently joined a Project Interchange US-Israel forum on immigration. In the process, she formed a lifelong friendship with Project Interchange founder Debbie Berger and her husband, Paul, who attended her swearing-in as a Manhattan appeals court judge in 1998.
"She enjoyed Israel not just from an intellectual perspective, she liked the music and the people," Paul Berger told JTA.
Richard Foltin, the legislative director for the AJC, said her background naturally played a role in how the Jewish community would welcome her.
"We must recognize the significance of the third woman and first Hispanic on the court," he said. "And there's no question of her impressive qualifications."
Sotomayor would come to the Supreme Court with one of the longest bench careers in its history, having handed down or joined 3,000 decisions in 18 years as a federal and appeals court judge. That's a lot to read through and accounted for a degree of hesitancy from Jewish groups that were enthused about her life story but just getting to know her judicial record.
"I've got a bunch of opinions in my briefcase and it's time to start reading," Pelavin said.
The National Council of Jewish Women -- one of the few Jewish groups that expresses an opinion on judicial candidates -- has yet to announce where it stands. Whatever the case, said Nancy Ratzan, the NCJW's president, the organization would dedicate itself to ensuring that Sotomayor receives a fair hearing.
"Our 90,000 followers will be focused on making sure it's a fair and prompt process that focuses on her record," she said.
NCJW and the Religious Action Center will canvass members for appropriate questions for Sotomayor during the confirmation process; the questions will be relayed to the US Senate Judicary Committee.
Leaders of the Anti-Defamation League issued a statement calling for a process that is conducted "professionally, and with civility and respect," and praised the pick while stopping short of an official endorsement.
"We applaud President Obama for having selected this noted jurist to be the Court's first Hispanic and third woman Justice," the ADL leaders stated. "If confirmed, she will undoubtedly bring an important new perspective to the work of the Court."
Even the Orthodox Union, which tends to stake our more conservative ground than other Jewish organizations on church-state issues, spoke positively about Sotomayor, citing several religious freedom-related cases.
In a 1993 case, she upheld the constitutional right of a rabbi in White Plains, NY, to display a menorah in a city park. In two other cases, in 1994 and 2003, Sotomayor upheld prisoners' religious rights even though the practices in question did not conform with mainstream beliefs. And in 2006, she ruled that allowing federal age discrimination statutes to apply to a 70-year-old minister dismissed by the Methodist church would constitute unwarranted government interference in church affairs.
Those decisions, OU said, were "very encouranging."
Marc Stern, the legal counsel for the American Jewish Congress, predicted that Sotomayor's long bench experience ultimately will be a plus. More time on the bench shaping reasoned opinions made her less of a target than other nominees - like Lani Gunier, Robert Bork and Samuel Alito - whose years pushing intellectual boundaries in the halls of academe handed fodder to opponents seeking controversial statements.
Additionally, the 2nd Circuit of Appeals - based in Manhattan and covering New York, Connecticut and Vermont - deals with cases emerging from courts and legislatures that already trend liberal. That means it is less likely to address issues such as abortion and discrimination that often exercise Jewish groups.
"There's no track record that anyone can point to," Stern said, referring to such hot-button issues. "There's not likely going to be a whole lot there as a smoking gun."
==================================================================================
http://www.alternet.org/rights/140348/right-wing_hate_machine_launches_vicious_campaign_of_racist_and_sexist_attacks_on_sotomayor/?page=entire
Right-Wing Hate Machine Launches Vicious Campaign of Racist and Sexist Attacks on Sotomayor
By Faiz Shakir, The Progress Report. Posted May 30, 2009.
In Gmail
=================================================================================
Ron Kampeas / jta , THE JERUSALEM POST
Jewish groups don't endorse US Supreme Court nominees, at least in writing.
The tears and choked sobs when Sonia Sotomayor accepted President Obama's nomination on Tuesday told another story.
Packed into the room along with Sotomayor's family, friends and colleagues were representatives of Jewish groups that have consulted with the White House about prospective replacements for David Souter.
The story of her life - the daughter of a Puerto Rican single mother from the Bronx, NY, whose ambitions knew no bounds - resounded with a community that has made the story of immigrant triumph over struggle a template of Jewish American success.
"It was impossible not to moved by her personal story," said Mark Pelavin, the associate director of the Reform movement's Religious Action Center. "To see her mother sitting there and think about what this says about her and her country - the combination of someone who grew up in a housing project, who has been on the bench for a long time, but who has been a prosecutor as well, that combination is very powerful."
"It was thrilling," said Sammie Moshenberg, the Washington director of the National Council of Jewish Women.
It doesn't hurt that Sotomayor, 54, is a poster child for strong Jewish-Hispanic relations. In 1986, when she was in private legal practice, she joined one of the first young leadership tours of Israel sponsored by Project Interchange, which is affiliated with the American Jewish Committee.
Sotomayor so enjoyed the country - its immigrant culture, its popular music influenced heavily by Jewish immigrants from Argentina and Brazil - that she made a return visit in 1996 when she was a federal judge, and recently joined a Project Interchange US-Israel forum on immigration. In the process, she formed a lifelong friendship with Project Interchange founder Debbie Berger and her husband, Paul, who attended her swearing-in as a Manhattan appeals court judge in 1998.
"She enjoyed Israel not just from an intellectual perspective, she liked the music and the people," Paul Berger told JTA.
Richard Foltin, the legislative director for the AJC, said her background naturally played a role in how the Jewish community would welcome her.
"We must recognize the significance of the third woman and first Hispanic on the court," he said. "And there's no question of her impressive qualifications."
Sotomayor would come to the Supreme Court with one of the longest bench careers in its history, having handed down or joined 3,000 decisions in 18 years as a federal and appeals court judge. That's a lot to read through and accounted for a degree of hesitancy from Jewish groups that were enthused about her life story but just getting to know her judicial record.
"I've got a bunch of opinions in my briefcase and it's time to start reading," Pelavin said.
The National Council of Jewish Women -- one of the few Jewish groups that expresses an opinion on judicial candidates -- has yet to announce where it stands. Whatever the case, said Nancy Ratzan, the NCJW's president, the organization would dedicate itself to ensuring that Sotomayor receives a fair hearing.
"Our 90,000 followers will be focused on making sure it's a fair and prompt process that focuses on her record," she said.
NCJW and the Religious Action Center will canvass members for appropriate questions for Sotomayor during the confirmation process; the questions will be relayed to the US Senate Judicary Committee.
Leaders of the Anti-Defamation League issued a statement calling for a process that is conducted "professionally, and with civility and respect," and praised the pick while stopping short of an official endorsement.
"We applaud President Obama for having selected this noted jurist to be the Court's first Hispanic and third woman Justice," the ADL leaders stated. "If confirmed, she will undoubtedly bring an important new perspective to the work of the Court."
Even the Orthodox Union, which tends to stake our more conservative ground than other Jewish organizations on church-state issues, spoke positively about Sotomayor, citing several religious freedom-related cases.
In a 1993 case, she upheld the constitutional right of a rabbi in White Plains, NY, to display a menorah in a city park. In two other cases, in 1994 and 2003, Sotomayor upheld prisoners' religious rights even though the practices in question did not conform with mainstream beliefs. And in 2006, she ruled that allowing federal age discrimination statutes to apply to a 70-year-old minister dismissed by the Methodist church would constitute unwarranted government interference in church affairs.
Those decisions, OU said, were "very encouranging."
Marc Stern, the legal counsel for the American Jewish Congress, predicted that Sotomayor's long bench experience ultimately will be a plus. More time on the bench shaping reasoned opinions made her less of a target than other nominees - like Lani Gunier, Robert Bork and Samuel Alito - whose years pushing intellectual boundaries in the halls of academe handed fodder to opponents seeking controversial statements.
Additionally, the 2nd Circuit of Appeals - based in Manhattan and covering New York, Connecticut and Vermont - deals with cases emerging from courts and legislatures that already trend liberal. That means it is less likely to address issues such as abortion and discrimination that often exercise Jewish groups.
"There's no track record that anyone can point to," Stern said, referring to such hot-button issues. "There's not likely going to be a whole lot there as a smoking gun."
==================================================================================
http://www.alternet.org/rights/140348/right-wing_hate_machine_launches_vicious_campaign_of_racist_and_sexist_attacks_on_sotomayor/?page=entire
Right-Wing Hate Machine Launches Vicious Campaign of Racist and Sexist Attacks on Sotomayor
By Faiz Shakir, The Progress Report. Posted May 30, 2009.
In Gmail
=================================================================================
Thursday, 28 May 2009
SriLanka Gov Death Toll
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/may2009/slwa-m28.shtml
Speaking on the state-owned ITN television channel, Rajapakse acknowledged that 6,261 members of the security forces had died and another 29,551 had been injured since the government resumed the communal war in July 2006. Of the injured, 2,556 had been permanently disabled.
Speaking on the state-owned ITN television channel, Rajapakse acknowledged that 6,261 members of the security forces had died and another 29,551 had been injured since the government resumed the communal war in July 2006. Of the injured, 2,556 had been permanently disabled.
Monday, 25 May 2009
BBC Holocaust Denial
http://www.countercurrents.org:80/polya240509.htm
The UK British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has produced a book and a lavish, 6-part TV series called “The Story of India”. However the 6th episode that deals with India under the British manages to completely ignore horrendous, repeated British-imposed atrocities on a scale of death greater than that of the World War 2 (WW2) Jewish Holocaust (5-6 million dead, 1 in 6 dying from deprivation), most notably the 1769-1770 Bengal Famine (10 million dead), the WW2 Bengal Famine (6-7 million dead) and the British India Holocaust in general that was associated with 1.8 billion excess Indian deaths in the period 1757-1947. [1, 2].
Does the BBC secretly subscribe to the views of a succession of racist Englishmen who regarded Indians in much the same way as the German Nazis regarded Jews i.e. as untermenschen [sub-humans]? Here, with documentation, is a sample of 7 of those views – but before reading them see the following image of starving Indians in British India circa 1900: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/26713/42/ (of course there are no such images in the BBC’s sanitized “The Story of India”). [3].
1. Lord Hastings (Lord Moira, Marquess of Hastings and Governor-General of India, 1813-1823) (1813): “The Hindoo appears a being nearly limited to mere animal functions and even in them indifferent. Their proficiency and skill in the several lines of occupation to which they are restricted, are little more than the dexterity of which any animal with a similar conformation but with no higher intellect than a dog, an elephant, or a monkey, might be supposed to be capable of attaining. It is enough to see this in order to have full conviction that such a people can at no period have been more advanced in civil policy.” [4].
2. Charles Dickens (circa 1857): “I wish I were Commander in Chief over there [India]! I would address that Oriental character which must be powerfully spoken to, in something like the following placard, which should be vigorously translated into all native dialects, “I, The Inimitable, holding this office of mine, and firmly believing that I hold it by the permission of Heaven and not by the appointment of Satan, have the honor to inform you Hindoo gentry that it is my intention, with all possible avoidance of unnecessary cruelty and with all merciful swiftness of execution, to exterminate the Race from the face of the earth, which disfigured the earth with the late abominable atrocities [2,000 British killed in the 1857 Indian War of Independence aka the 1857 Indian Mutiny]”. [5].
3. Report of the Indian Famine Commission 1880 (arguing against generous famine relief): “the great object of saving life and giving protection from extreme suffering may not only be as well secured, but in fact will be far better secured, if proper care be taken to prevent the abuse and demoralisation which all experience shows to be the consequence of ill-directed and excessive distribution of charitable relief.” [6].
4. Lord Curzon, Viceroy of India on the 1900 Indian Famine, January 1900 (arguing against generous famine relief): “In my judgement any government which imperilled the financial position of India in the interests of a prodigal philanthropy would be open to serious criticism. But any government which, by indiscriminate alms-giving, weakened the fibre and demoralised the self-reliance of the population would be guilty of a public crime.” [7].
5. Winston Churchill, speech to the House of Commons (1935): “In the standard of life they have nothing to spare. The slightest fall from the present standard of life in India means slow starvation, and the actual squeezing out of life, not only of millions but of scores of millions of people, who have come into the world at your invitation and under the shield and protection of British power.” [8].
6. Winston Churchill to Leo Amery, Secretary of State for India (1942): “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.” [9].
7. Winston Churchill (1953) (in an egregious act of Nobel Prize-winning Holocaust Denial in which he totally wipes out any mention of the 6-7 million Indians he deliberately starved to death in 1943-1945): “No great portion of the world population was so effectively protected from the horrors and perils of the World War as were the peoples of Hindustan. They were carried through the struggle on the shoulders of our small Island.” [10].
Here is a list of immense British atrocities in its over 2 centuries of genocidal mis-rule in India (substantially from 1757-1947) that were simply not noticed by the BBC’s TV series “The Story of India” (for detailed histories of India, details of British atrocities in India and detailed documentation see my books “Body Count” and “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History”). [1, 2].
1. 1769-1770 Bengal Famine (10 million dead).
2. Other pre-20th Century famines in British India, in particular those in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa (1769-1770), Rajasthan, Oudh and elsewhere in northern India (1782-84), Rajasthan, Bombay, Gujarat and north-western provinces (1812-1815), north-western provinces, Punjab and Rajasthan (1837-1838), Madras, Deccan, Bihar, Bengal and particularly Orissa (1866; 3 million dead), Rajasthan and northern India (1868-1870), and throughout much of India from Hyderabad to Rajasthan and the Punjab (1899-1900; millions dying).
3. 25 million Indian cholera deaths in 19 th century India due to British transmission of the disease from Bengal by rail and sea (and by sea around the world).
4. 1.5 billion Indian excess deaths in the period 1757-1947 (1.8 billion excess deaths in the British-dominated Native States are included).
5. 17 million Indians died in the Spanish influenza pandemic (1918-1923) out of a world total of about 50 million, this being exacerbated by the return of hundreds of thousands Indian soldiers from WW1 and British Empire commerce.
6. 1943-1945 Bengal Famine (first WW2 atrocity to be described as a “Holocaust” – by Jog in 1944; 6-7 million Indians deliberately starved to death by the British under Churchill; see the 2008 BBC “confessional” broadcast involving myself, 1998 Economics Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen of Harvard University, medical historian Dr Sanjoy Bhattacharya, Wellcome Institute, University College London, and other scholars: http://www.open2.net/thingsweforgot/
bengalfamine_programme.html ). [11].
The UK British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has produced a book and a lavish, 6-part TV series called “The Story of India”. However the 6th episode that deals with India under the British manages to completely ignore horrendous, repeated British-imposed atrocities on a scale of death greater than that of the World War 2 (WW2) Jewish Holocaust (5-6 million dead, 1 in 6 dying from deprivation), most notably the 1769-1770 Bengal Famine (10 million dead), the WW2 Bengal Famine (6-7 million dead) and the British India Holocaust in general that was associated with 1.8 billion excess Indian deaths in the period 1757-1947. [1, 2].
Does the BBC secretly subscribe to the views of a succession of racist Englishmen who regarded Indians in much the same way as the German Nazis regarded Jews i.e. as untermenschen [sub-humans]? Here, with documentation, is a sample of 7 of those views – but before reading them see the following image of starving Indians in British India circa 1900: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/26713/42/ (of course there are no such images in the BBC’s sanitized “The Story of India”). [3].
1. Lord Hastings (Lord Moira, Marquess of Hastings and Governor-General of India, 1813-1823) (1813): “The Hindoo appears a being nearly limited to mere animal functions and even in them indifferent. Their proficiency and skill in the several lines of occupation to which they are restricted, are little more than the dexterity of which any animal with a similar conformation but with no higher intellect than a dog, an elephant, or a monkey, might be supposed to be capable of attaining. It is enough to see this in order to have full conviction that such a people can at no period have been more advanced in civil policy.” [4].
2. Charles Dickens (circa 1857): “I wish I were Commander in Chief over there [India]! I would address that Oriental character which must be powerfully spoken to, in something like the following placard, which should be vigorously translated into all native dialects, “I, The Inimitable, holding this office of mine, and firmly believing that I hold it by the permission of Heaven and not by the appointment of Satan, have the honor to inform you Hindoo gentry that it is my intention, with all possible avoidance of unnecessary cruelty and with all merciful swiftness of execution, to exterminate the Race from the face of the earth, which disfigured the earth with the late abominable atrocities [2,000 British killed in the 1857 Indian War of Independence aka the 1857 Indian Mutiny]”. [5].
3. Report of the Indian Famine Commission 1880 (arguing against generous famine relief): “the great object of saving life and giving protection from extreme suffering may not only be as well secured, but in fact will be far better secured, if proper care be taken to prevent the abuse and demoralisation which all experience shows to be the consequence of ill-directed and excessive distribution of charitable relief.” [6].
4. Lord Curzon, Viceroy of India on the 1900 Indian Famine, January 1900 (arguing against generous famine relief): “In my judgement any government which imperilled the financial position of India in the interests of a prodigal philanthropy would be open to serious criticism. But any government which, by indiscriminate alms-giving, weakened the fibre and demoralised the self-reliance of the population would be guilty of a public crime.” [7].
5. Winston Churchill, speech to the House of Commons (1935): “In the standard of life they have nothing to spare. The slightest fall from the present standard of life in India means slow starvation, and the actual squeezing out of life, not only of millions but of scores of millions of people, who have come into the world at your invitation and under the shield and protection of British power.” [8].
6. Winston Churchill to Leo Amery, Secretary of State for India (1942): “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.” [9].
7. Winston Churchill (1953) (in an egregious act of Nobel Prize-winning Holocaust Denial in which he totally wipes out any mention of the 6-7 million Indians he deliberately starved to death in 1943-1945): “No great portion of the world population was so effectively protected from the horrors and perils of the World War as were the peoples of Hindustan. They were carried through the struggle on the shoulders of our small Island.” [10].
Here is a list of immense British atrocities in its over 2 centuries of genocidal mis-rule in India (substantially from 1757-1947) that were simply not noticed by the BBC’s TV series “The Story of India” (for detailed histories of India, details of British atrocities in India and detailed documentation see my books “Body Count” and “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History”). [1, 2].
1. 1769-1770 Bengal Famine (10 million dead).
2. Other pre-20th Century famines in British India, in particular those in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa (1769-1770), Rajasthan, Oudh and elsewhere in northern India (1782-84), Rajasthan, Bombay, Gujarat and north-western provinces (1812-1815), north-western provinces, Punjab and Rajasthan (1837-1838), Madras, Deccan, Bihar, Bengal and particularly Orissa (1866; 3 million dead), Rajasthan and northern India (1868-1870), and throughout much of India from Hyderabad to Rajasthan and the Punjab (1899-1900; millions dying).
3. 25 million Indian cholera deaths in 19 th century India due to British transmission of the disease from Bengal by rail and sea (and by sea around the world).
4. 1.5 billion Indian excess deaths in the period 1757-1947 (1.8 billion excess deaths in the British-dominated Native States are included).
5. 17 million Indians died in the Spanish influenza pandemic (1918-1923) out of a world total of about 50 million, this being exacerbated by the return of hundreds of thousands Indian soldiers from WW1 and British Empire commerce.
6. 1943-1945 Bengal Famine (first WW2 atrocity to be described as a “Holocaust” – by Jog in 1944; 6-7 million Indians deliberately starved to death by the British under Churchill; see the 2008 BBC “confessional” broadcast involving myself, 1998 Economics Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen of Harvard University, medical historian Dr Sanjoy Bhattacharya, Wellcome Institute, University College London, and other scholars: http://www.open2.net/thingsweforgot/
bengalfamine_programme.html ). [11].
Winston Churchill
1. Involvement as a soldier in British imperial war crimes in India [1896-1899; compelled on advice to join his regiment in India after charges of homosexual abuse; avoidable deaths in British India 1757-1947 1.5 billion; avoidable deaths in the 1895-1897 famine about 1 million; 1899-1900 Indian Famine, 6-9 million deaths]; a stint in Sudan at the Battle of Obdurman [1989; horrendous British atrocities]; a stint in South Africa as a war correspondent and thence as a soldier [1899; Boer (Afrikaaner) Genocide (1899-1902): 28,000 Afrikaaner women and children died in British concentration camps; see: "Australia's secret genocide history" on MWC News: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/22128/42/ ].
2. Churchill was one of the more bellicose members of the British Cabinet prior to the outbreak of World War 1 [World War I Allied military and civilian dead totalled 5.7 million and 3.7 million, respectively, and the German-allied (Central Powers) military and civilian deaths totalled 4.0 million and 5.2 million, respectively; the troop movement-exacerbated Spanish Flu Epidemic killed 20-100 million people world wide: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/26587/42/ ].
3. Churchill was responsible for the disastrous 1915 WW1 Dardanelles Campaign in Turkey [that killed 0.2 million Allied and Turkish soldiers and helped to precipitate the 1915-1923 Turkish Armenian Genocide that killed up to 1.5 million Armenians – a genocide that the holocaust-denying Turks, racist Zionists of Apartheid Israel and US Congressmen refuse to acknowledge as such ].
4. Churchill vigorously promoted the unsuccessful UK and US invasion of Russia in response to the Russian Revolution [1917-1919; millions died in the Russian Civil War and the subsequent the Russian Famine; 7 million died in the circa 1930 Ukrainian Famine; and perhaps up to 20 million died overall in Stalinist atrocities i.e. a death toll comparable to that in World War 2].
5. Churchill was involved in the suppression of the Arab revolt in Iraq (invaded by Britain in 1914) and bombing of Kurdish villages [violent British occupation of Iraq involving everything from poison gas (1920s) to mass murder of children (today) occurred on and off in the period 1914 to the present; 1990-2008 Iraqi excess deaths 4 million; under-5 infant deaths 1.8 million; refugees currently 6 million].
6. Churchill was actively involved in the genocidal suppression of India and vehemently opposed Indian self-determination [1757-1947 excess deaths, 1.5 billion; Victorian era excess deaths, 1837-1901 0.5 billion; 1901-1947 excess deaths 0.4 billion; avoidable deaths in the 1895-1897 famine about 1 million; 1899-1900 Indian Famine, 6-9 million deaths; 1943-1945 Bengali Holocaust deaths 6-7 million].
7. Churchill was again one of the more bellicose members of the British Parliament in the 1930s but is generally positively credited with warning the world about the rise of German Nazism [ World War 2 military deaths 25 million and civilian deaths about 67 million].
8. Churchill actively sought the entry of Japan into World War 2 in order to involve the US and hence ensure victory [35 million Chinese avoidable deaths, 1937-1945; 6-7 million Indians perished in Churchill's deliberate scorched earth policy in Bengal 1943-1945; millions more died in the WW2 Eastern Theatre; see Rusbridger, J. and Nave, E. (1991), Betrayal at Pearl Harbor. How Churchill Lured Roosevelt into World War II (Summit, New York)].
9. Churchill knew well in advance that Singapore was indefensible [8,000-15,000 killed, 130,000 captured in the 1941 Malaya campaign; 14,000 Australian, 16,000 British and 32,000 Indian troops surrendered in Singapore; see Rusbridger, J. and Nave, E. (1991), Betrayal at Pearl Harbor. How Churchill Lured Roosevelt into World War II (Summit, New York)].
10. Churchill did not warn the Americans about the impending Pearl Harbor attack [the US authorities knew too but still did not warn their military personnel in Hawaii; see Rusbridger, J. and Nave, E. (1991), Betrayal at Pearl Harbor. How Churchill Lured Roosevelt into World War II (Summit, New York)].
11. Churchill hated Muslims, Arabs and Indians and remorselessly refused food to 6-7 million starving Indians, rejected Viceroy Wavell's pleas and blocked Canadian attempts at relief [6-7 million Indian deaths – the British Bengali Holocaust death toll being numerically greater than the 5-6 million dead in the Nazi German Jewish Holocaust; see Moon, P. (1973) (editor), Wavell. The Viceroy's Journal (Oxford University Press, London) ].
12. Churchill rejected top scientific advice and supported bombing of German cities instead of protecting Atlantic convoys [0.16 million allied airmen killed; 0.6 million German civilians killed; Battle of the Atlantic almost lost; huge impact on famine in the Indian Ocean region due to halving of Allied shipping in 1943; see Snow, C.P. (1961), Science and Government (The New English Library, London); Behrens, C.B.A. (1955), Merchant Shipping and the Demands of War (Longman's, Green, London, 1955); Taylor, A.J.P. (1975), The Second World War. An Illustrated History (Hamish Hamilton, London) ].
13. Churchill acknowledged the crucial importance of maintaining Hindu-Muslim antipathy to preserve British rule [1 million dead and 18 million Muslim and Hindu refugees associated with India-Pakistan Partition in 1947].
14. Churchill over-rode strong British military objections in 1944 to decide on Partition of Palestine [in 1948 Jews were 1/3 of the population; there are now over 7 million Palestinian refugees; post-1967 Occupied Palestinian excess deaths 0.3 million, post-1967 under-5 infant deaths 0.2 million; excess deaths in countries partially or completely occupied by Apartheid Israel now total about 24 million; 4 million Occupied Palestinians still illegally and abusively imprisoned by racist Zionist goons in their own country].
15. British, American, Zionist and Australian adoption of Churchill's holocaust denying legacy, specifically his famous "history is written by the victors", has ensured continuance of Anglo-American and Zionist atrocities involving invasion, occupation, devastation and genocide [in relation to Occupiers (in parenthesis) 1950-2005 excess deaths in post-1945 occupied countries total 36 million (Belgium) 142 million (France), 24 million (Apartheid Israel), 0.7 million (Apartheid South Africa), 23 million (Portugal), 37 million (Russia), 9 million (Spain), 727 million (the UK) and 82 million (the US); 25 million Indigenous excess deaths in post-1950 US Asian Wars; 9-11 million excess deaths associated with 1990-2008 Bush Wars; post-invasion excess deaths in Occupied Iraq 2 million, refugees 6 million; post-invasion excess deaths in Occupied Afghanistan 4-6 million, refugees 4 million).
Perhaps, to be fair, we should leave the penultimate words to Winston Churchill himself. Here is a succession of Winston Churchill quotes that say it all.
"In the standard of life they have nothing to spare. The slightest fall from the present standard of life in India means slow starvation, and the actual squeezing out of life, not only of millions but of scores of millions of people, who have come into the world at your invitation and under the shield and protection of British power."
(Winston Churchill, speech to the House of Commons about Indians (1935); 1. Hansard of the House of Commons, Winston Churchill speech, Hansard Vol. 302, cols. 1920-21, 1935; quoted by Jog (1944), p195 in Jog, N.G. (1944), Churchill's Blind-Spot: India (New Book Company, Bombay).).
"I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion." (Winston Churchill to Leo Amery, Secretary of State for India (1942); 4. Diary of Amery (Secretary for India), September 9, 1942; quoted by Ziegler (1988), pp 351-352 in Ziegler, P. (1988), Mountbatten. The Official Biography (Collins, London); see also
Moon, P. (1973) (editor), Wavell. The Viceroy's Journal (Oxford University Press, London).).
"No great portion of the world population was so effectively protected from the horrors and perils of the World War as were the peoples of Hindustan. They were carried through the struggle on the shoulders of our small Island." (Churchill (1954), vol. 4, p181 in Churchill, W.S. (1954), The Second World War. Volumes I-VI (Cassell, London) – a book in which he makes NO mention of the 6-7 million Indians he murdered in 1943-1945; his statement is a gross falsehood in view of 2.4 million Indians serving in the Allied forces in WW2 and 6-7 million Indian deaths in the 1943-1935 Bengali Holocaust).
"{Churchill} cynically telling the Cabinet in February 1940 that he "regarded the Hindu-Muslim feud as the bulwark of British rule in India"" (p381, Irving, D. (1987), Churchill's War, Volume I, The Struggle for Power (Veritas, Bullsbrook, WA) ) – from which we glean (p538) "Getting America into the war remained Churchill's highest priority throughout 1941", a position consonant with the position of the 1941 UK Ambassador to Japan: "I had, moreover, given it as my considered opinion in October 1941 that Japan's former desire to avoid war with the United States at almost any cost could no longer be counted upon as a factor in the situation should Japan feel herself to be finally driven into a corner ... there can be no doubt that the absence of any British moderating influence, whether at Washington or Tokyo, increased the chances of that breakdown which eventually occurred" (Sir R. Craigie, British Ambassador to Japan in 1941, in his final report to Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden (1943); Report of Sir R. Craigie (former British Ambassador to Japan) to Mr. Eden (British Foreign Secretary) in 1943, reproduced in Rusbridger & Nave (1991), Appendix I; Rusbridger, J. and Nave, E. (1991), Betrayal at Pearl Harbor. How Churchill Lured Roosevelt into World War II (Summit, New York)).
"History is written by the victor", an aphorism often attributed to Winston Churchill.
In pages 96-98 of this "Street Fighting" book Tariq Ali describes an Oxford Union debate on a Condolence Motion occasioned by the death of Winston Churchill in 1966 and the response by a brilliant anti-Establishment, anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist socialist Richard Kirkwood who listed the following of Churchill's crimes in opposing the Motion [my added dates in square brackets]: "It was Churchill who had been the most vociferous proponent of the armed intervention against the Russian Revolution of 1917; it was he who had justified the use of troops against the Welsh miners of Tonypandy [1910]; led the siege of Sidney Street in East London against a couple of anarchists [1911]; played the provocateur during the General Strike of 1926; backed the Greek far-right against the resistance in 1944; and opposed the Independence of India. It was for his consistent and long record of vindictiveness and hostility towards workers throughout the world that he was being mourned. For these reasons alone, shouted Kirkwood above the growing din, he, for one, would not stand and observe even a second's silence … He sat down to a chorus of boos, with some of his opponents literally frothing at the mouth. Kirkwood, however, was unmoved. As over 400 people stood up to observe the formalities, about twenty-five of us remained seated and were counted. Kirkwood was delighted. After all, he had separated the Bolsheviks from the Mensheviks"
Winston Churchill's crimes, of which arguably the most serious was the deliberate, sustained, remorseless starving to death of 6-7 million Indians in the 1943-1945 Bengali Holocaust – an atrocity larger in magnitude than the World War 2 Jewish Holocaust (5-6 million dead, 1 in 6 dying from deprivation).
2. Churchill was one of the more bellicose members of the British Cabinet prior to the outbreak of World War 1 [World War I Allied military and civilian dead totalled 5.7 million and 3.7 million, respectively, and the German-allied (Central Powers) military and civilian deaths totalled 4.0 million and 5.2 million, respectively; the troop movement-exacerbated Spanish Flu Epidemic killed 20-100 million people world wide: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/26587/42/ ].
3. Churchill was responsible for the disastrous 1915 WW1 Dardanelles Campaign in Turkey [that killed 0.2 million Allied and Turkish soldiers and helped to precipitate the 1915-1923 Turkish Armenian Genocide that killed up to 1.5 million Armenians – a genocide that the holocaust-denying Turks, racist Zionists of Apartheid Israel and US Congressmen refuse to acknowledge as such ].
4. Churchill vigorously promoted the unsuccessful UK and US invasion of Russia in response to the Russian Revolution [1917-1919; millions died in the Russian Civil War and the subsequent the Russian Famine; 7 million died in the circa 1930 Ukrainian Famine; and perhaps up to 20 million died overall in Stalinist atrocities i.e. a death toll comparable to that in World War 2].
5. Churchill was involved in the suppression of the Arab revolt in Iraq (invaded by Britain in 1914) and bombing of Kurdish villages [violent British occupation of Iraq involving everything from poison gas (1920s) to mass murder of children (today) occurred on and off in the period 1914 to the present; 1990-2008 Iraqi excess deaths 4 million; under-5 infant deaths 1.8 million; refugees currently 6 million].
6. Churchill was actively involved in the genocidal suppression of India and vehemently opposed Indian self-determination [1757-1947 excess deaths, 1.5 billion; Victorian era excess deaths, 1837-1901 0.5 billion; 1901-1947 excess deaths 0.4 billion; avoidable deaths in the 1895-1897 famine about 1 million; 1899-1900 Indian Famine, 6-9 million deaths; 1943-1945 Bengali Holocaust deaths 6-7 million].
7. Churchill was again one of the more bellicose members of the British Parliament in the 1930s but is generally positively credited with warning the world about the rise of German Nazism [ World War 2 military deaths 25 million and civilian deaths about 67 million].
8. Churchill actively sought the entry of Japan into World War 2 in order to involve the US and hence ensure victory [35 million Chinese avoidable deaths, 1937-1945; 6-7 million Indians perished in Churchill's deliberate scorched earth policy in Bengal 1943-1945; millions more died in the WW2 Eastern Theatre; see Rusbridger, J. and Nave, E. (1991), Betrayal at Pearl Harbor. How Churchill Lured Roosevelt into World War II (Summit, New York)].
9. Churchill knew well in advance that Singapore was indefensible [8,000-15,000 killed, 130,000 captured in the 1941 Malaya campaign; 14,000 Australian, 16,000 British and 32,000 Indian troops surrendered in Singapore; see Rusbridger, J. and Nave, E. (1991), Betrayal at Pearl Harbor. How Churchill Lured Roosevelt into World War II (Summit, New York)].
10. Churchill did not warn the Americans about the impending Pearl Harbor attack [the US authorities knew too but still did not warn their military personnel in Hawaii; see Rusbridger, J. and Nave, E. (1991), Betrayal at Pearl Harbor. How Churchill Lured Roosevelt into World War II (Summit, New York)].
11. Churchill hated Muslims, Arabs and Indians and remorselessly refused food to 6-7 million starving Indians, rejected Viceroy Wavell's pleas and blocked Canadian attempts at relief [6-7 million Indian deaths – the British Bengali Holocaust death toll being numerically greater than the 5-6 million dead in the Nazi German Jewish Holocaust; see Moon, P. (1973) (editor), Wavell. The Viceroy's Journal (Oxford University Press, London) ].
12. Churchill rejected top scientific advice and supported bombing of German cities instead of protecting Atlantic convoys [0.16 million allied airmen killed; 0.6 million German civilians killed; Battle of the Atlantic almost lost; huge impact on famine in the Indian Ocean region due to halving of Allied shipping in 1943; see Snow, C.P. (1961), Science and Government (The New English Library, London); Behrens, C.B.A. (1955), Merchant Shipping and the Demands of War (Longman's, Green, London, 1955); Taylor, A.J.P. (1975), The Second World War. An Illustrated History (Hamish Hamilton, London) ].
13. Churchill acknowledged the crucial importance of maintaining Hindu-Muslim antipathy to preserve British rule [1 million dead and 18 million Muslim and Hindu refugees associated with India-Pakistan Partition in 1947].
14. Churchill over-rode strong British military objections in 1944 to decide on Partition of Palestine [in 1948 Jews were 1/3 of the population; there are now over 7 million Palestinian refugees; post-1967 Occupied Palestinian excess deaths 0.3 million, post-1967 under-5 infant deaths 0.2 million; excess deaths in countries partially or completely occupied by Apartheid Israel now total about 24 million; 4 million Occupied Palestinians still illegally and abusively imprisoned by racist Zionist goons in their own country].
15. British, American, Zionist and Australian adoption of Churchill's holocaust denying legacy, specifically his famous "history is written by the victors", has ensured continuance of Anglo-American and Zionist atrocities involving invasion, occupation, devastation and genocide [in relation to Occupiers (in parenthesis) 1950-2005 excess deaths in post-1945 occupied countries total 36 million (Belgium) 142 million (France), 24 million (Apartheid Israel), 0.7 million (Apartheid South Africa), 23 million (Portugal), 37 million (Russia), 9 million (Spain), 727 million (the UK) and 82 million (the US); 25 million Indigenous excess deaths in post-1950 US Asian Wars; 9-11 million excess deaths associated with 1990-2008 Bush Wars; post-invasion excess deaths in Occupied Iraq 2 million, refugees 6 million; post-invasion excess deaths in Occupied Afghanistan 4-6 million, refugees 4 million).
Perhaps, to be fair, we should leave the penultimate words to Winston Churchill himself. Here is a succession of Winston Churchill quotes that say it all.
"In the standard of life they have nothing to spare. The slightest fall from the present standard of life in India means slow starvation, and the actual squeezing out of life, not only of millions but of scores of millions of people, who have come into the world at your invitation and under the shield and protection of British power."
(Winston Churchill, speech to the House of Commons about Indians (1935); 1. Hansard of the House of Commons, Winston Churchill speech, Hansard Vol. 302, cols. 1920-21, 1935; quoted by Jog (1944), p195 in Jog, N.G. (1944), Churchill's Blind-Spot: India (New Book Company, Bombay).).
"I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion." (Winston Churchill to Leo Amery, Secretary of State for India (1942); 4. Diary of Amery (Secretary for India), September 9, 1942; quoted by Ziegler (1988), pp 351-352 in Ziegler, P. (1988), Mountbatten. The Official Biography (Collins, London); see also
Moon, P. (1973) (editor), Wavell. The Viceroy's Journal (Oxford University Press, London).).
"No great portion of the world population was so effectively protected from the horrors and perils of the World War as were the peoples of Hindustan. They were carried through the struggle on the shoulders of our small Island." (Churchill (1954), vol. 4, p181 in Churchill, W.S. (1954), The Second World War. Volumes I-VI (Cassell, London) – a book in which he makes NO mention of the 6-7 million Indians he murdered in 1943-1945; his statement is a gross falsehood in view of 2.4 million Indians serving in the Allied forces in WW2 and 6-7 million Indian deaths in the 1943-1935 Bengali Holocaust).
"{Churchill} cynically telling the Cabinet in February 1940 that he "regarded the Hindu-Muslim feud as the bulwark of British rule in India"" (p381, Irving, D. (1987), Churchill's War, Volume I, The Struggle for Power (Veritas, Bullsbrook, WA) ) – from which we glean (p538) "Getting America into the war remained Churchill's highest priority throughout 1941", a position consonant with the position of the 1941 UK Ambassador to Japan: "I had, moreover, given it as my considered opinion in October 1941 that Japan's former desire to avoid war with the United States at almost any cost could no longer be counted upon as a factor in the situation should Japan feel herself to be finally driven into a corner ... there can be no doubt that the absence of any British moderating influence, whether at Washington or Tokyo, increased the chances of that breakdown which eventually occurred" (Sir R. Craigie, British Ambassador to Japan in 1941, in his final report to Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden (1943); Report of Sir R. Craigie (former British Ambassador to Japan) to Mr. Eden (British Foreign Secretary) in 1943, reproduced in Rusbridger & Nave (1991), Appendix I; Rusbridger, J. and Nave, E. (1991), Betrayal at Pearl Harbor. How Churchill Lured Roosevelt into World War II (Summit, New York)).
"History is written by the victor", an aphorism often attributed to Winston Churchill.
In pages 96-98 of this "Street Fighting" book Tariq Ali describes an Oxford Union debate on a Condolence Motion occasioned by the death of Winston Churchill in 1966 and the response by a brilliant anti-Establishment, anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist socialist Richard Kirkwood who listed the following of Churchill's crimes in opposing the Motion [my added dates in square brackets]: "It was Churchill who had been the most vociferous proponent of the armed intervention against the Russian Revolution of 1917; it was he who had justified the use of troops against the Welsh miners of Tonypandy [1910]; led the siege of Sidney Street in East London against a couple of anarchists [1911]; played the provocateur during the General Strike of 1926; backed the Greek far-right against the resistance in 1944; and opposed the Independence of India. It was for his consistent and long record of vindictiveness and hostility towards workers throughout the world that he was being mourned. For these reasons alone, shouted Kirkwood above the growing din, he, for one, would not stand and observe even a second's silence … He sat down to a chorus of boos, with some of his opponents literally frothing at the mouth. Kirkwood, however, was unmoved. As over 400 people stood up to observe the formalities, about twenty-five of us remained seated and were counted. Kirkwood was delighted. After all, he had separated the Bolsheviks from the Mensheviks"
Winston Churchill's crimes, of which arguably the most serious was the deliberate, sustained, remorseless starving to death of 6-7 million Indians in the 1943-1945 Bengali Holocaust – an atrocity larger in magnitude than the World War 2 Jewish Holocaust (5-6 million dead, 1 in 6 dying from deprivation).
London 7/7 bombing
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/may2009/ukte-m25.shtml
The ISC report confirms that, in reality, there was a wealth of information about the bombers, particularly Khan. “As we have delved deeper,” it declares, “we have uncovered new information that even the organisations involved had not connected together.” In relation to Khan the report reveals:
* He was cautioned by West Yorkshire Police for assault in 1993, a police record created and his photograph taken.
* In 2001, several months before the September 11 bombings in New York, Khan was one of 40 men filmed by West Yorkshire Police surveillance officers at a suspected terrorist training camp in Yorkshire, although he remained unidentified.
* In late March 2003, MI5 received intelligence that Mohammed Quayam Khan, from Luton, was the leader of an “Al-Qaida facilitation network”, which provided financial and logistical support to the organisation. MI5 launched an investigation called Operation Crevice, about which it informed the ISC.
* In April 2003, Siddique Khan was seen driving a car carrying an extremist suspect connected to another investigation.
* In July 2003, Quayam Khan’s mobile phone was found to contain the number of Siddique Khan’s phone, which was registered to an Islamist bookshop in Leeds.
* In January 2004, MI5 received intelligence that another individual in the network, Omar Khyam, was involved in an active bomb plot. Khyam became MI5’s “top priority” and Operation Crevice developed into “the largest operation they had ever run”. Khyam was under “consistent” surveillance and everyone he met and spoke to was “assessed”.
* On February 2, 2004, Khan met Khyam near Crawley and was followed and photographed on his way back to Leeds.
* On February 20, 2004, the same day that 600 kilograms of fertiliser was discovered in a warehouse, electronics expert Mohammed Momin Khawaja arrived from Canada to give advice to the Crevice group on remote detonation devices. The following day Khan attended a “farewell” meal with the group and Khawaja.
* On three occasions between February 28 and March 23, 2004 Khan drove to Crawley to meet Khyam and was heard talking about financial fraud, the “success of the Madrid bombings” and returning to “jihad” in Pakistan. Despite being followed home again on one occasion to Leeds, Khan still remained unidentified and classified as a “desirable” target for MI5 investigation (Khyam was classified as “essential”). MI5 told the ISC that they could easily have identified Khan, but did not because he was considered a “small-time fraudster” who had “minor contact” with the Crevice plotters.
* At the end of March 2004, Khyam and seven others in the Crevice group were arrested on suspicion of involvement in the fertiliser plot, tried and found guilty in April 2007.
* In May 2004, a detainee revealed that a man named “Ibrahim” had travelled to Pakistan in 2003 and met the future Crevice group members there.
* In June-July 2004, ten “extremely sensitive” emails are exchanged between West Yorkshire Police and MI5 about Khan and other Crevice contacts in the Leeds area. One of the emails was nine pages long and contained Khan’s 1993 photograph.
* On July 14, 2004, a check on the Police National Computer showed that there had been 21 enquiries about Khan’s car since August 2003.
* On February 9, 2005, Khan’s car was put on the Automatic Number Plate Recognition system so that CCTV cameras around the country could track it.
* On April 12, 2005, following confirmation from another source that “Ibrahim” had been in Pakistan, MI5 launched Operation DO*** (the full name is redacted in the ISC report) to identify him. It was not until after the 7/7 bombings that Ibrahim was discovered to be Khan. Recent evidence suggests a fifth man was involved and remains at large.
The ISC report confirms that, in reality, there was a wealth of information about the bombers, particularly Khan. “As we have delved deeper,” it declares, “we have uncovered new information that even the organisations involved had not connected together.” In relation to Khan the report reveals:
* He was cautioned by West Yorkshire Police for assault in 1993, a police record created and his photograph taken.
* In 2001, several months before the September 11 bombings in New York, Khan was one of 40 men filmed by West Yorkshire Police surveillance officers at a suspected terrorist training camp in Yorkshire, although he remained unidentified.
* In late March 2003, MI5 received intelligence that Mohammed Quayam Khan, from Luton, was the leader of an “Al-Qaida facilitation network”, which provided financial and logistical support to the organisation. MI5 launched an investigation called Operation Crevice, about which it informed the ISC.
* In April 2003, Siddique Khan was seen driving a car carrying an extremist suspect connected to another investigation.
* In July 2003, Quayam Khan’s mobile phone was found to contain the number of Siddique Khan’s phone, which was registered to an Islamist bookshop in Leeds.
* In January 2004, MI5 received intelligence that another individual in the network, Omar Khyam, was involved in an active bomb plot. Khyam became MI5’s “top priority” and Operation Crevice developed into “the largest operation they had ever run”. Khyam was under “consistent” surveillance and everyone he met and spoke to was “assessed”.
* On February 2, 2004, Khan met Khyam near Crawley and was followed and photographed on his way back to Leeds.
* On February 20, 2004, the same day that 600 kilograms of fertiliser was discovered in a warehouse, electronics expert Mohammed Momin Khawaja arrived from Canada to give advice to the Crevice group on remote detonation devices. The following day Khan attended a “farewell” meal with the group and Khawaja.
* On three occasions between February 28 and March 23, 2004 Khan drove to Crawley to meet Khyam and was heard talking about financial fraud, the “success of the Madrid bombings” and returning to “jihad” in Pakistan. Despite being followed home again on one occasion to Leeds, Khan still remained unidentified and classified as a “desirable” target for MI5 investigation (Khyam was classified as “essential”). MI5 told the ISC that they could easily have identified Khan, but did not because he was considered a “small-time fraudster” who had “minor contact” with the Crevice plotters.
* At the end of March 2004, Khyam and seven others in the Crevice group were arrested on suspicion of involvement in the fertiliser plot, tried and found guilty in April 2007.
* In May 2004, a detainee revealed that a man named “Ibrahim” had travelled to Pakistan in 2003 and met the future Crevice group members there.
* In June-July 2004, ten “extremely sensitive” emails are exchanged between West Yorkshire Police and MI5 about Khan and other Crevice contacts in the Leeds area. One of the emails was nine pages long and contained Khan’s 1993 photograph.
* On July 14, 2004, a check on the Police National Computer showed that there had been 21 enquiries about Khan’s car since August 2003.
* On February 9, 2005, Khan’s car was put on the Automatic Number Plate Recognition system so that CCTV cameras around the country could track it.
* On April 12, 2005, following confirmation from another source that “Ibrahim” had been in Pakistan, MI5 launched Operation DO*** (the full name is redacted in the ISC report) to identify him. It was not until after the 7/7 bombings that Ibrahim was discovered to be Khan. Recent evidence suggests a fifth man was involved and remains at large.
bisphenol A (BPA)
In GMail: http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/140203/drinking_from_plastic_bottles_%27increases_exposure_to_gender-bending_chemical%27/
Friday, 22 May 2009
Horrific UN And US Death Statistics
http://www.countercurrents.org:80/polya220509.htm
Horrific UN And US Death Statistics Expose Obama’s Fake War On Terror
By Dr Gideon Polya
22 May, 2009Countercurrents.org
The Bush (now Obama) War on Terror has been described by sensible and humane observers of the carnage as a "fake anti-terror war". The following statistics derived from authoritative UN, US and medical literature sources bear out the racism, dishonesty and criminality of the genocidal US Alliance (the US, UK, NATO and racist White Australia).
Thus we are told that about 3,000 people were killed in the 9-11 atrocity and it can be estimated from conservative sources that about 7,000 Western civilians have been killed by Muslim-origin non-state terrorists in the last 40 years (this figure including about 2,000 racist Zionists colonizing Arab lands and ignoring mounting scientific evidence for US involvement in the 9-11 atrocity) (see “Is US responsible for 9-11 atrocity? Scientists find [unignited] nano-thermite [high explosive] in WTC dust “: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29921/42/ " ) .
However the number of people actively or passively murdered in the Bush (now Obama) War on Terror (1990-2009) now totals 9-11 million (this figure including the 0.6 million opiate drug-related deaths, 50,000 of them American, due to the Bush - and now Obama - complicity in the US Alliance restoration of the Taliban-destroyed Afghan opium industry) (see “9-11 excuse for US global genocide. The real 9-11 atrocity – millions dead [9-11 million] in Bush Wars [1990-2009] “: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29921/42/ ).
Thus post-invasion non-violent excess deaths in Occupied Afghanistan now total 3.2 million; post-invasion violent deaths may total up to about 4 million; post-invasion violent and non-violent excess deaths accordingly total 3-7 million; and post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 2.3 million (90% avoidable due to Occupier violation of the Geneva Convention i.e. 2.1 million); in addition, refugees (including the 1.5 million Pashtuns driven from NW Pakistan under Obama's robot bombing attacks) total 4-5 million – Genocide as defined by Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention (see “US Afghan Holocaust (3-7Mdead) and Jewish Holocaust (5-6M dead)”: http://gpolya.newsvine.com/_news/2009/05/18/2833663-us-afghan-holocaust-3-7m-dead-jewish-holocaust-5-6m-dead-
As of April 2009, in the Occupied Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan Territories post-invasion non-violent excess deaths total 0.3 million, 1.0 million and 3.2 million, respectively; post-invasion violent deaths total about 10,000, 1.3 million and 2-4 million, respectively; post-invasion violent and non-violent excess deaths total 0.3 million, 2.3 million and 3-7 million, respectively; post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 0.2 million, 0.6 million and 2.3 million, respectively; and refugees total 7 million, 6 million and 4-5 million, respectively – a Palestinian Holocaust, an Iraqi Holocaust and an Afghan Holocaust; a Palestinian Genocide, Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide as defined by Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention. These are egregious war crimes due in part to Occupier war criminal non-supply of life-sustaining food and medical requisites demanded unequivocally by Articles 55 and 56 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War – thus the Gaza Concentration Camp has been under US-backed Israeli blockade for 2 years and according to WHO the “total annual per capita medical expenditure” permitted by the Occupiers in Occupied Iraq and Occupied Afghanistan is US$124 and US$29, respectively, as compared to US$6,714 for the US (see “Pro-Zionist Western holocaust denial”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29844/26/).
A good example of the monstrous disparity between asserted “terror deaths” and horrendous US-backed response is provided by the most recent Apartheid Israeli Gaza Massacre in which about 1,400 Occupied Palestinians were murdered in retaliation for zero (0) Israeli deaths from Gaza rockets in the preceding year.
The ostensible excuse for US-backed Apartheid Israel’s latest Gaza Massacre in what the Catholic Church describes as “Israel’s Gaza Concentration Camp” was “Gaza rocket terror”. However “terror” is directly proportional to the “proportion of people killed” and the ACTUAL number of Israelis killed by Gaza rockets and mortars since the start of the Second Intifada 8.25 years ago is TWENTY EIGHT (28), this corresponding to a 21st century “annual homicide rate” in units of persons killed per million per year of 0.5 (Israelis killed by Gaza missiles) – as compared to 0.5 (rapist husbands murdered by raped wives), 1.0 (violent husbands murdered by battered wives), 15 (Israelis by Israelis), 56 (Americans), 100 (Americans by guns), 164 (Palestinians killed violently by Israelis), 200 (African-Americans), 473 (citizens of Detroit, Michigan, USA) and 902 per million per year (annual Palestinian non-violent deaths through war criminal, Geneva Convention-violating Israeli-imposed deprivation) (see ”Palestinian-Israeli Death Ratios. Nazi-style Israeli Gaza War Crimes”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/27795/42/ ).
We can usefully zero in on a further incisive example from the above statistics, specifically the homicide rate in Detroit Michigan of 473 homicides per million of population per year (for other related statistics see ”Palestinian-Israeli Death Ratios. Nazi-style Israeli Gaza War Crimes”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/27795/42/ ).
Detroit has a population of about 1 million and this means that on average 473 people are murdered there every year. Accordingly it takes 3,000/473 = 6.3 years for as many people to be murdered in Detroit as were killed on 9-11 (very likely by the US with Israeli complicity – see “Is US responsible for 9-11 atrocity? . Scientists find nano-thermite in WTC dust “: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29921/42/ " ) .
This statistic also means that it takes 7,000/473 = 14.8 years - less than a double term each for pro-war Bush and for pro-war Obama i.e. 16 years - for as many people to be murdered in Detroit as the number of Western civilians allegedly killed by "Muslim origin non-state terrorists" in the last 40 years (this figure including Israelis colonizing Arab lands and ignoring scientific evidence pointing to US and Israeli complicity in the 9-11 atrocity that killed 3,000 people).
While the perpetrators (as opposed to "alleged perpetrators") of most of the "terror" atrocities against Western civilians are actually unknown in the legal sense of not having been brought to trial and convicted, the perpetrators of most of the Detroit murders are African-Americans (the murder rate in the African-American community being about 4 times the US average) .
On the basis of the Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide examples, should Obama (with the help of the UK, NATO, Apartheid Israel and racist White Australia) be bombing the African-American suburbs of Detroit with the US Air Force and unmanned drones, shelling, rocketing, shooting, driving hundreds of thousands of African -American Detroiters from their homes to "make America safe from African-American terrorism"?
Obviously not - Obama should be spending money not on guns and killing women and children (not to mention the men) but on "green jobs", housing, health, education etc to make life for all Detroiters happier and more relaxed and by getting rid of the Guns that kill about 29,000 Americans every year – and indeed getting rid of other factors that avoidably kill about 0.9 million Americans every year (see “Devaluation of American lives. 7 million Americans & $49 trillion lost under Bush”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/23939/42/ ).
But Zionist-, Bush-ite-, neo-Bush-ite- and military industrial complex-beholden war criminal Obama won't even try to stop the circa 29,000 American lives lost annually from the "terror" of Gun Deaths while spending hundreds of billions of dollars actively and passively murdering about 650,000 people annually (mostly Women and Children) in the American Empire from Occupied Haiti eastward to robot-bombed Pakistan (Occupied Haiti, Occupied Somalia, Occupied Palestine, Occupied Lebanon, Occupied Syria, Occupied Iraq, Occupied Diego Garcia, Occupied Afghanistan, robot-bombed NW Pakistan) (for details see “Hey, hey, USA, how many kids did you kill today? Answer: 1,000 “: http://bellaciao.org/en/spip.php?article18750 ).
Zionist- and neo-con-beholden, pro-war Obama (more a murderous slave-owner Simon Legree than a quietly acquiescent slave Uncle Tom) presides over the ongoing mass murder of 650,000 Indigenous inhabitants of the American Empire each year – and ignores the preventable death of 0.9 million Americans each year from avoidable causes ranging from Guns to smoking.
The Bush (now Obama ) War on Terror is a "fake terror war" indeed – in horrible reality it is a cowardly and racist War on Women and Children, and specifically a cowardly and racist War on Arab, Muslim, Asian and non-European Women and Children.
Dr Gideon Polya published some 130 works in a 4 decade scientific career, most recently a huge pharmacological reference text "Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds" (CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New York & London, 2003). He has recently published “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007: http://mwcnews.net/Gideon-Polya and http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com/ ) and an updated 2008 version of his 1998 book “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History, Colonial rapacity, holocaust denial and the crisis in biological sustainability” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2008: http://janeaustenand.blogspot.com/ ). He is currently teaching Biochemistry theory and practical courses to second year university agricultural science students at a very good Australian university.
Horrific UN And US Death Statistics Expose Obama’s Fake War On Terror
By Dr Gideon Polya
22 May, 2009Countercurrents.org
The Bush (now Obama) War on Terror has been described by sensible and humane observers of the carnage as a "fake anti-terror war". The following statistics derived from authoritative UN, US and medical literature sources bear out the racism, dishonesty and criminality of the genocidal US Alliance (the US, UK, NATO and racist White Australia).
Thus we are told that about 3,000 people were killed in the 9-11 atrocity and it can be estimated from conservative sources that about 7,000 Western civilians have been killed by Muslim-origin non-state terrorists in the last 40 years (this figure including about 2,000 racist Zionists colonizing Arab lands and ignoring mounting scientific evidence for US involvement in the 9-11 atrocity) (see “Is US responsible for 9-11 atrocity? Scientists find [unignited] nano-thermite [high explosive] in WTC dust “: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29921/42/ " ) .
However the number of people actively or passively murdered in the Bush (now Obama) War on Terror (1990-2009) now totals 9-11 million (this figure including the 0.6 million opiate drug-related deaths, 50,000 of them American, due to the Bush - and now Obama - complicity in the US Alliance restoration of the Taliban-destroyed Afghan opium industry) (see “9-11 excuse for US global genocide. The real 9-11 atrocity – millions dead [9-11 million] in Bush Wars [1990-2009] “: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29921/42/ ).
Thus post-invasion non-violent excess deaths in Occupied Afghanistan now total 3.2 million; post-invasion violent deaths may total up to about 4 million; post-invasion violent and non-violent excess deaths accordingly total 3-7 million; and post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 2.3 million (90% avoidable due to Occupier violation of the Geneva Convention i.e. 2.1 million); in addition, refugees (including the 1.5 million Pashtuns driven from NW Pakistan under Obama's robot bombing attacks) total 4-5 million – Genocide as defined by Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention (see “US Afghan Holocaust (3-7Mdead) and Jewish Holocaust (5-6M dead)”: http://gpolya.newsvine.com/_news/2009/05/18/2833663-us-afghan-holocaust-3-7m-dead-jewish-holocaust-5-6m-dead-
As of April 2009, in the Occupied Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan Territories post-invasion non-violent excess deaths total 0.3 million, 1.0 million and 3.2 million, respectively; post-invasion violent deaths total about 10,000, 1.3 million and 2-4 million, respectively; post-invasion violent and non-violent excess deaths total 0.3 million, 2.3 million and 3-7 million, respectively; post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 0.2 million, 0.6 million and 2.3 million, respectively; and refugees total 7 million, 6 million and 4-5 million, respectively – a Palestinian Holocaust, an Iraqi Holocaust and an Afghan Holocaust; a Palestinian Genocide, Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide as defined by Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention. These are egregious war crimes due in part to Occupier war criminal non-supply of life-sustaining food and medical requisites demanded unequivocally by Articles 55 and 56 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War – thus the Gaza Concentration Camp has been under US-backed Israeli blockade for 2 years and according to WHO the “total annual per capita medical expenditure” permitted by the Occupiers in Occupied Iraq and Occupied Afghanistan is US$124 and US$29, respectively, as compared to US$6,714 for the US (see “Pro-Zionist Western holocaust denial”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29844/26/).
A good example of the monstrous disparity between asserted “terror deaths” and horrendous US-backed response is provided by the most recent Apartheid Israeli Gaza Massacre in which about 1,400 Occupied Palestinians were murdered in retaliation for zero (0) Israeli deaths from Gaza rockets in the preceding year.
The ostensible excuse for US-backed Apartheid Israel’s latest Gaza Massacre in what the Catholic Church describes as “Israel’s Gaza Concentration Camp” was “Gaza rocket terror”. However “terror” is directly proportional to the “proportion of people killed” and the ACTUAL number of Israelis killed by Gaza rockets and mortars since the start of the Second Intifada 8.25 years ago is TWENTY EIGHT (28), this corresponding to a 21st century “annual homicide rate” in units of persons killed per million per year of 0.5 (Israelis killed by Gaza missiles) – as compared to 0.5 (rapist husbands murdered by raped wives), 1.0 (violent husbands murdered by battered wives), 15 (Israelis by Israelis), 56 (Americans), 100 (Americans by guns), 164 (Palestinians killed violently by Israelis), 200 (African-Americans), 473 (citizens of Detroit, Michigan, USA) and 902 per million per year (annual Palestinian non-violent deaths through war criminal, Geneva Convention-violating Israeli-imposed deprivation) (see ”Palestinian-Israeli Death Ratios. Nazi-style Israeli Gaza War Crimes”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/27795/42/ ).
We can usefully zero in on a further incisive example from the above statistics, specifically the homicide rate in Detroit Michigan of 473 homicides per million of population per year (for other related statistics see ”Palestinian-Israeli Death Ratios. Nazi-style Israeli Gaza War Crimes”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/27795/42/ ).
Detroit has a population of about 1 million and this means that on average 473 people are murdered there every year. Accordingly it takes 3,000/473 = 6.3 years for as many people to be murdered in Detroit as were killed on 9-11 (very likely by the US with Israeli complicity – see “Is US responsible for 9-11 atrocity? . Scientists find nano-thermite in WTC dust “: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29921/42/ " ) .
This statistic also means that it takes 7,000/473 = 14.8 years - less than a double term each for pro-war Bush and for pro-war Obama i.e. 16 years - for as many people to be murdered in Detroit as the number of Western civilians allegedly killed by "Muslim origin non-state terrorists" in the last 40 years (this figure including Israelis colonizing Arab lands and ignoring scientific evidence pointing to US and Israeli complicity in the 9-11 atrocity that killed 3,000 people).
While the perpetrators (as opposed to "alleged perpetrators") of most of the "terror" atrocities against Western civilians are actually unknown in the legal sense of not having been brought to trial and convicted, the perpetrators of most of the Detroit murders are African-Americans (the murder rate in the African-American community being about 4 times the US average) .
On the basis of the Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide examples, should Obama (with the help of the UK, NATO, Apartheid Israel and racist White Australia) be bombing the African-American suburbs of Detroit with the US Air Force and unmanned drones, shelling, rocketing, shooting, driving hundreds of thousands of African -American Detroiters from their homes to "make America safe from African-American terrorism"?
Obviously not - Obama should be spending money not on guns and killing women and children (not to mention the men) but on "green jobs", housing, health, education etc to make life for all Detroiters happier and more relaxed and by getting rid of the Guns that kill about 29,000 Americans every year – and indeed getting rid of other factors that avoidably kill about 0.9 million Americans every year (see “Devaluation of American lives. 7 million Americans & $49 trillion lost under Bush”: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/23939/42/ ).
But Zionist-, Bush-ite-, neo-Bush-ite- and military industrial complex-beholden war criminal Obama won't even try to stop the circa 29,000 American lives lost annually from the "terror" of Gun Deaths while spending hundreds of billions of dollars actively and passively murdering about 650,000 people annually (mostly Women and Children) in the American Empire from Occupied Haiti eastward to robot-bombed Pakistan (Occupied Haiti, Occupied Somalia, Occupied Palestine, Occupied Lebanon, Occupied Syria, Occupied Iraq, Occupied Diego Garcia, Occupied Afghanistan, robot-bombed NW Pakistan) (for details see “Hey, hey, USA, how many kids did you kill today? Answer: 1,000 “: http://bellaciao.org/en/spip.php?article18750 ).
Zionist- and neo-con-beholden, pro-war Obama (more a murderous slave-owner Simon Legree than a quietly acquiescent slave Uncle Tom) presides over the ongoing mass murder of 650,000 Indigenous inhabitants of the American Empire each year – and ignores the preventable death of 0.9 million Americans each year from avoidable causes ranging from Guns to smoking.
The Bush (now Obama ) War on Terror is a "fake terror war" indeed – in horrible reality it is a cowardly and racist War on Women and Children, and specifically a cowardly and racist War on Arab, Muslim, Asian and non-European Women and Children.
Dr Gideon Polya published some 130 works in a 4 decade scientific career, most recently a huge pharmacological reference text "Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds" (CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New York & London, 2003). He has recently published “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007: http://mwcnews.net/Gideon-Polya and http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com/ ) and an updated 2008 version of his 1998 book “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History, Colonial rapacity, holocaust denial and the crisis in biological sustainability” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2008: http://janeaustenand.blogspot.com/ ). He is currently teaching Biochemistry theory and practical courses to second year university agricultural science students at a very good Australian university.
The 13 Bush Officials Who Made Torture Possible
By Marcy Wheeler, Salon
Posted on May 22, 2009, Printed on May 22, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/140192/
Originally published on Monday, May 18, 2009 by Salon.com
On April 16, the Obama administration released four memos that were used to authorize torture in interrogations during the Bush administration. When President Obama released the memos, he said, "It is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution."
Yet 13 key people in the Bush administration cannot claim they relied on the memos from the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel. Some of the 13 manipulated the federal bureaucracy and the legal process to "preauthorize" torture in the days after 9/11. Others helped implement torture, and still others helped write the memos that provided the Bush administration with a legal fig leaf after torture had already begun.
The Torture 13 exploited the federal bureaucracy to establish a torture regime in two ways. First, they based the enhanced interrogation techniques on techniques used in the U.S. military's Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE) program. The program -- which subjects volunteers from the armed services to simulated hostile capture situations -- trains servicemen and -women to withstand coercion well enough to avoid making false confessions if captured. Two retired SERE psychologists contracted with the government to "reverse-engineer" these techniques to use in detainee interrogations.
The Torture 13 also abused the legal review process in the Department of Justice in order to provide permission for torture. The DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) played a crucial role. OLC provides interpretations on how laws apply to the executive branch. On issues where the law is unclear, like national security, OLC opinions can set the boundary for "legal" activity for executive branch employees. As Jack Goldsmith, OLC head from 2003 to 2004, explains it, "One consequence of [OLC's] power to interpret the law is the power to bestow on government officials what is effectively an advance pardon for actions taken at the edges of vague criminal statutes." OLC has the power, Goldsmith continues, to dispense "get-out-of-jail-free cards." The Torture 13 exploited this power by collaborating on a series of OLC opinions that repeatedly gave U.S. officials such a "get-out-of-jail-free card" for torturing.
Between 9/11 and the end of 2002, the Torture 13 decided to torture, then reverse-engineered the techniques, and then crafted the legal cover. Here's who they are and what they did:
1. Dick Cheney, vice president (2001-2009)
On the morning of 9/11, after the evacuation of the White House, Dick Cheney summoned his legal counsel, David Addington, to return to work. The two had worked together for years. In the 1980s, when Cheney was a congressman from Wyoming and Addington a staff attorney to another congressman, Cheney and Addington argued that in Iran-Contra, the president could ignore congressional guidance on foreign policy matters. Between 1989 and 1992, when Dick Cheney was the elder George Bush's secretary of defense, Addington served as his counsel. He and Cheney saved the only known copies of abusive interrogation technique manuals taught at the School of the Americas. Now, on the morning of 9/11, they worked together to plot an expansive grab of executive power that they claimed was the correct response to the terrorist threat. Within two weeks, they had gotten a memo asserting almost unlimited power for the president as "the sole organ of the Nation in its foreign relations," to respond to the terrorist attacks. As part of that expansive view of executive power, Cheney and Addington would argue that domestic and international laws prohibiting torture and abuse could not prevent the president from authorizing harsh treatment of detainees in the war against terror.
But Cheney and Addington also fought bureaucratically to construct this torture program. Cheney led the way by controlling who got access to President Bush -- and making sure his own views preempted others'. Each time the torture program got into trouble as it spread around the globe, Cheney intervened to ward off legal threats and limits, by badgering the CIA's inspector general when he reported many problems with the interrogation program, and by lobbying Congress to legally protect those who had tortured.
Most shockingly, Cheney is reported to have ordered torture himself, even after interrogators believed detainees were cooperative. Since the 2002 OLC memo known as "Bybee Two" that authorizes torture premises its authorization for torture on the assertion that "the interrogation team is certain that" the detainee "has additional information he refuses to divulge," Cheney appears to have ordered torture that was illegal even under the spurious guidelines of the memo.
2. David Addington, counsel to the vice president (2001-2005), chief of staff to the vice president (2005-2009)
David Addington championed the fight to argue that the president -- in his role as commander in chief -- could not be bound by any law, including those prohibiting torture. He did so in two ways. He advised the lawyers drawing up the legal opinions that justified torture. In particular, he ran a "War Council" with Jim Haynes, John Yoo, John Rizzo and Alberto Gonzales (see all four below) and other trusted lawyers, which crafted and executed many of the legal approaches to the war on terror together.
In addition, Addington and Cheney wielded bureaucratic carrots and sticks -- notably by giving or withholding promotions for lawyers who supported these illegal policies. When Jack Goldsmith withdrew a number of OLC memos because of the legal problems in them, Addington was the sole administration lawyer who defended them. Addington's close bureaucratic control over the legal analysis process shows he was unwilling to let the lawyers give the administration a "good faith" assessment of the laws prohibiting torture.
3. Alberto Gonzales, White House counsel (2001-2005), and attorney general (2005-2008)
As White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales was nominally in charge of representing the president's views on legal issues, including national security issues. In that role, Gonzales wrote and reviewed a number of the legal opinions that attempted to immunize torture. Most important, in a Jan. 25, 2002, opinion reportedly written with David Addington, Gonzales paved the way for exempting al-Qaida detainees from the Geneva Conventions. His memo claimed the "new kind of war" represented by the war against al-Qaida "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners." In a signal that Gonzales and Addington adopted that position to immunize torture, Gonzales argued that one advantage of not applying the Geneva Convention to al-Qaida would "substantially reduce the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act." The memo even specifically foresaw the possibility of independent counsels' prosecuting acts against detainees.
4. James Mitchell, consultant
Even while Addington, Gonzales and the lawyers were beginning to build the legal framework for torture, a couple of military psychologists were laying out the techniques the military would use. James Mitchell, a retired military psychologist, had been a leading expert in the military's SERE program. In December 2001, with his partner, Bruce Jessen, Mitchell reverse-engineered SERE techniques to be used to interrogate detainees. Then, in the spring of 2002, before OLC gave official legal approval to torture, Mitchell oversaw Abu Zubaydah's interrogation. An FBI agent on the scene describes Mitchell overseeing the use of "borderline torture." And after OLC approved waterboarding, Mitchell oversaw its use in ways that exceeded the guidelines in the OLC memo. Under Mitchell's guidance, interrogators used the waterboard with "far greater frequency than initially indicated" -- a total of 183 times in a month for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and 83 times in a month for Abu Zubaydah.
5. George Tenet, director of Central Intelligence (1997-2004)
As director of the CIA during the early years of the war against al-Qaida, Tenet had ultimate management responsibility for the CIA's program of capturing, detaining and interrogating suspected al-Qaida members and briefed top Cabinet members on those techniques. Published reports say Tenet approved every detail of the interrogation plans: "Any change in the plan -- even if an extra day of a certain treatment was added -- was signed off on by the Director." It was under Tenet's leadership that Mitchell and Jessen's SERE techniques were applied to the administration's first allegedly high-value al-Qaida prisoner, Abu Zubaydah. After approval of the harsh techniques, CIA headquarters ordered Abu Zubaydah to be waterboarded even though onsite interrogators believed Zubaydah was "compliant." Since the Bybee Two memo authorizing torture required that interrogators believe the detainee had further information that could only be gained by using torture, this additional use of the waterboard was clearly illegal according to the memo.
6. Condoleezza Rice, national security advisor (2001-2005), secretary of state (2005-2008)
As national security advisor to President Bush, Rice coordinated much of the administration's internal debate over interrogation policies. She approved (she now says she "conveyed the authorization") for the first known officially sanctioned use of torture -- the CIA's interrogation of Abu Zubaydah -- on July 17, 2002. This approval was given after the torture of Zubaydah had begun, and before receiving a legal OK from the OLC. The approval from the OLC was given orally in late July and in written form on Aug. 1, 2002. Rice's approval or "convey[ance] of authorization" led directly to the intensified torture of Zubaydah.
7. John Yoo, deputy assistant attorney general, Office of Legal Counsel (2001-2003)
As deputy assistant attorney general of OLC focusing on national security for the first year and a half after 9/11, Yoo drafted many of the memos that would establish the torture regime, starting with the opinion claiming virtually unlimited power for the president in times of war. In the early months of 2002, he started working with Addington and others to draft two key memos authorizing torture: Bybee One (providing legal cover for torture) and Bybee Two (describing the techniques that could be used), both dated Aug. 1, 2002. He also helped draft a similar memo approving harsh techniques for the military completed on March 14, 2003, and even a memo eviscerating Fourth Amendment protections in the United States. The Bybee One and DOD memos argue that "necessity" or "self-defense" might be used as defenses against prosecution, even though the United Nations Convention Against Torture explicitly states that "no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war … may be invoked as a justification of torture." Bybee Two, listing the techniques the CIA could use in interrogation, was premised on hotly debated assumptions. For example, the memo presumed that Abu Zubaydah was uncooperative, and had actionable intelligence that could only be gotten through harsh techniques. Yet Zubaydah had already cooperated with the FBI. The memo claimed Zubaydah was mentally and physically fit to be waterboarded, even though Zubaydah had had head and recent gunshot injuries. As Jack Goldsmith described Yoo's opinions, they "could be interpreted as if they were designed to confer immunity for bad acts." In all of his torture memos, Yoo ignored key precedents relating both specifically to waterboarding and to separation of powers.
8. Jay Bybee, assistant attorney general, Office of Legal Counsel (2001-2003)
As head of the OLC when the first torture memos were approved, Bybee signed the memos named after him that John Yoo drafted. At the time, the White House knew that Bybee wanted an appointment as a Circuit Court judge; after signing his name to memos supporting torture, he received such an appointment. Of particular concern is the timing of Bybee's approval of the torture techniques. He first approved some techniques on July 24, 2002. The next day, Jim Haynes, the Defense Department's general counsel, ordered the SERE unit of DOD to collect information including details on waterboarding. While the record is contradictory on whether Haynes or CIA General Counsel John Rizzo gave that information to OLC, on the day they did so, OLC approved waterboarding. One of the documents in that packet identified these actions as torture, and stated that torture often produced unreliable results.
9. William "Jim" Haynes, Defense Department general counsel (2001-2008)
As general counsel of the Defense Department, Jim Haynes oversaw the legal analysis of interrogation techniques to be used with military detainees. Very early on, he worked as a broker between SERE professionals and the CIA. His office first asked for information on "exploiting" detainees in December 2001, which is when James Mitchell is first known to have worked on interrogation plans. And later, in July 2002, when CIA was already using torture with Abu Zubaydah but needed scientific cover before OLC would approve waterboarding, Haynes ordered the SERE team to produce such information immediately.
Later Haynes played a key role in making sure some of the techniques were adopted, with little review, by the military. He was thus crucial to the migration of torture to Guantánamo and then Iraq. In September 2002, Haynes participated in a key visit to Guantánamo (along with Addington and other lawyers) that coincided with requests from DOD interrogators there for some of the same techniques used by the CIA.
Haynes ignored repeated warnings from within the armed services about the techniques, including statements that the techniques "may violate torture statute" and "cross the line of 'humane' treatment." In October 2002, when the legal counsel for the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff attempted to conduct a thorough legal review of the techniques, Haynes ordered her to stop, because "people were going to see" the objections that some in the military had raised. On Nov. 27, 2002, Haynes recommended that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld authorize many of the requested techniques, including stress positions, hooding, the removal of clothing, and the use of dogs -- the same techniques that showed up later in the abuse at Abu Ghraib.
10. Donald Rumsfeld, secretary of defense (2001-2006)
As secretary of defense, Rumsfeld signed off on interrogation methods used in the military, notably for Abu Ghraib, Bagram Air Force Base and Guantánamo Bay. With this approval, the use of torture would move from the CIA to the military. A recent bipartisan Senate report concluded that "Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's authorization of interrogation techniques at Guantánamo Bay was a direct cause of detainee abuse there." Rumsfeld personally approved techniques including the use of phobias (dogs), forced nudity and stress positions on Dec. 2, 2002, signing a one-page memo prepared for him by Haynes. These techniques were among those deemed torture in the Charles Graner case and the case of "20th hijacker" Mohammed al-Qahtani. Rumsfeld also personally authorized an interrogation plan for Moahmedou Ould Slahi on Aug. 13, 2003; the plan used many of the same techniques as had been used with al-Qahtani, including sensory deprivation and "sleep adjustment." And through it all, Rumsfeld maintained a disdainful view on these techniques, at one point quipping on a memo approving harsh techniques, "I stand for eight to 10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to four hours?"
11. John Rizzo, CIA deputy general counsel (2002-2004), acting general counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency (2001-2002, 2004-present)
As deputy general counsel and then acting general counsel for the CIA, John Rizzo's name appears on all of the known OLC opinions on torture for the CIA. For the Bybee Two memo, Rizzo provided a number of factually contested pieces of information to OLC -- notably, that Abu Zubaydah was uncooperative and physically and mentally fit enough to withstand waterboarding and other enhanced techniques. In addition, Rizzo provided a description of waterboarding using one standard, while the OLC opinion described a more moderate standard. Significantly, the description of waterboarding submitted to OLC came from the Defense Department, even though NSC had excluded DOD from discussions on the memo. Along with the description of waterboarding and other techniques, Rizzo also provided a document that called enhanced methods "torture" and deemed them unreliable -- yet even with this warning, Rizzo still advocated for the CIA to get permission to use those techniques.
12. Steven Bradbury, principal deputy assistant attorney general, OLC (2004), acting assistant attorney general, OLC (2005-2009)
In 2004, the CIA's inspector general wrote a report concluding that the CIA's interrogation program might violate the Convention Against Torture. It fell to Acting Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury to write three memos in May 2005 that would dismiss the concerns the IG Report raised -- in effect, to affirm the OLC's 2002 memos legitimizing torture. Bradbury's memos noted the ways in which prior torture had exceeded the Bybee Two memo: the 183 uses of the waterboard for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in one month, the gallon and a half used in waterboarding, the 20 to 30 times a detainee is thrown agains the wall, the 11 days a detainee had been made to stay awake, the extra sessions of waterboarding ordered from CIA headquarters even after local interrogators deemed Abu Zubaydah to be fully compliant. Yet Bradbury does not consider it torture. He notes the CIA's doctors' cautions about the combination of using the waterboard with a physically fatigued detainee, yet in a separate memo approves the use of sleep deprivation and waterboading in tandem. He repeatedly concedes that the CIA's interrogation techniques as actually implemented exceeded the SERE techniques, yet repeatedly points to the connection to SERE to argue the methods must be legal. And as with the Bybee One memo, Bradbury resorts to precisely the kind of appeal to exceptional circumstances -- "used only as necessary to protect against grave threats" -- to distinguish U.S. interrogation techniques from the torture it so closely resembles around the world.
13. George W. Bush, president (2001-2009)
While President Bush maintained some distance from the torture for years -- Cheney describes him "basically" authorizing it -- he served as the chief propagandist about its efficacy and necessity. Most notably, on Sept. 6, 2006, when Bush first confessed to the program, Bush repeated the claims made to support the Bybee Two memo: that Abu Zubaydah wouldn't talk except by using torture. And in 2006, after the CIA's own inspector general had raised problems with the program, after Steven Bradbury had admitted all the ways that the torture program exceeded guidelines, Bush still claimed it was legal.
"[They] were designed to be safe, to comply with our laws, our Constitution and our treaty obligations. The Department of Justice reviewed the authorized methods extensively, and determined them to be lawful."
With this statement, the deceptions and bureaucratic games all came full circle. After all, it was Bush who, on Feb. 7, 2002, had declared the Geneva Conventions wouldn't apply (a view the Supreme Court ultimately rejected).
Bush's inaction in torture is as important as his actions. Bush failed to fulfill legal obligations to notify Congress of the torture program. A Senate Intelligence timeline on the torture program makes clear that Congress was not briefed on the techniques used in the torture program until after Abu Zubaydah had already been waterboarded. And in a 2003 letter, then House Intelligence ranking member Jane Harman shows that she had not yet seen evidence that Bush had signed off on this policy. This suggests President Bush did not provide the legally required notice to Congress, violating National Security Decisions Directive-286. What Bush did not say is as legally important as what he did say.
Yet, ultimately, Bush and whatever approval he gave the program is at the center of the administration's embrace of torture. Condoleezza Rice recently said, "By definition, if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations in the Convention Against Torture." While Rice has tried to reframe her statement, it uses the same logic used by John Yoo and David Addington to justify the program, the shocking claim that international and domestic laws cannot bind the president in times of war. Bush's close allies still insist if he authorized it, it couldn't be torture.
© 2009 Salon All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/140192/
Posted on May 22, 2009, Printed on May 22, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/140192/
Originally published on Monday, May 18, 2009 by Salon.com
On April 16, the Obama administration released four memos that were used to authorize torture in interrogations during the Bush administration. When President Obama released the memos, he said, "It is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution."
Yet 13 key people in the Bush administration cannot claim they relied on the memos from the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel. Some of the 13 manipulated the federal bureaucracy and the legal process to "preauthorize" torture in the days after 9/11. Others helped implement torture, and still others helped write the memos that provided the Bush administration with a legal fig leaf after torture had already begun.
The Torture 13 exploited the federal bureaucracy to establish a torture regime in two ways. First, they based the enhanced interrogation techniques on techniques used in the U.S. military's Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE) program. The program -- which subjects volunteers from the armed services to simulated hostile capture situations -- trains servicemen and -women to withstand coercion well enough to avoid making false confessions if captured. Two retired SERE psychologists contracted with the government to "reverse-engineer" these techniques to use in detainee interrogations.
The Torture 13 also abused the legal review process in the Department of Justice in order to provide permission for torture. The DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) played a crucial role. OLC provides interpretations on how laws apply to the executive branch. On issues where the law is unclear, like national security, OLC opinions can set the boundary for "legal" activity for executive branch employees. As Jack Goldsmith, OLC head from 2003 to 2004, explains it, "One consequence of [OLC's] power to interpret the law is the power to bestow on government officials what is effectively an advance pardon for actions taken at the edges of vague criminal statutes." OLC has the power, Goldsmith continues, to dispense "get-out-of-jail-free cards." The Torture 13 exploited this power by collaborating on a series of OLC opinions that repeatedly gave U.S. officials such a "get-out-of-jail-free card" for torturing.
Between 9/11 and the end of 2002, the Torture 13 decided to torture, then reverse-engineered the techniques, and then crafted the legal cover. Here's who they are and what they did:
1. Dick Cheney, vice president (2001-2009)
On the morning of 9/11, after the evacuation of the White House, Dick Cheney summoned his legal counsel, David Addington, to return to work. The two had worked together for years. In the 1980s, when Cheney was a congressman from Wyoming and Addington a staff attorney to another congressman, Cheney and Addington argued that in Iran-Contra, the president could ignore congressional guidance on foreign policy matters. Between 1989 and 1992, when Dick Cheney was the elder George Bush's secretary of defense, Addington served as his counsel. He and Cheney saved the only known copies of abusive interrogation technique manuals taught at the School of the Americas. Now, on the morning of 9/11, they worked together to plot an expansive grab of executive power that they claimed was the correct response to the terrorist threat. Within two weeks, they had gotten a memo asserting almost unlimited power for the president as "the sole organ of the Nation in its foreign relations," to respond to the terrorist attacks. As part of that expansive view of executive power, Cheney and Addington would argue that domestic and international laws prohibiting torture and abuse could not prevent the president from authorizing harsh treatment of detainees in the war against terror.
But Cheney and Addington also fought bureaucratically to construct this torture program. Cheney led the way by controlling who got access to President Bush -- and making sure his own views preempted others'. Each time the torture program got into trouble as it spread around the globe, Cheney intervened to ward off legal threats and limits, by badgering the CIA's inspector general when he reported many problems with the interrogation program, and by lobbying Congress to legally protect those who had tortured.
Most shockingly, Cheney is reported to have ordered torture himself, even after interrogators believed detainees were cooperative. Since the 2002 OLC memo known as "Bybee Two" that authorizes torture premises its authorization for torture on the assertion that "the interrogation team is certain that" the detainee "has additional information he refuses to divulge," Cheney appears to have ordered torture that was illegal even under the spurious guidelines of the memo.
2. David Addington, counsel to the vice president (2001-2005), chief of staff to the vice president (2005-2009)
David Addington championed the fight to argue that the president -- in his role as commander in chief -- could not be bound by any law, including those prohibiting torture. He did so in two ways. He advised the lawyers drawing up the legal opinions that justified torture. In particular, he ran a "War Council" with Jim Haynes, John Yoo, John Rizzo and Alberto Gonzales (see all four below) and other trusted lawyers, which crafted and executed many of the legal approaches to the war on terror together.
In addition, Addington and Cheney wielded bureaucratic carrots and sticks -- notably by giving or withholding promotions for lawyers who supported these illegal policies. When Jack Goldsmith withdrew a number of OLC memos because of the legal problems in them, Addington was the sole administration lawyer who defended them. Addington's close bureaucratic control over the legal analysis process shows he was unwilling to let the lawyers give the administration a "good faith" assessment of the laws prohibiting torture.
3. Alberto Gonzales, White House counsel (2001-2005), and attorney general (2005-2008)
As White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales was nominally in charge of representing the president's views on legal issues, including national security issues. In that role, Gonzales wrote and reviewed a number of the legal opinions that attempted to immunize torture. Most important, in a Jan. 25, 2002, opinion reportedly written with David Addington, Gonzales paved the way for exempting al-Qaida detainees from the Geneva Conventions. His memo claimed the "new kind of war" represented by the war against al-Qaida "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners." In a signal that Gonzales and Addington adopted that position to immunize torture, Gonzales argued that one advantage of not applying the Geneva Convention to al-Qaida would "substantially reduce the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act." The memo even specifically foresaw the possibility of independent counsels' prosecuting acts against detainees.
4. James Mitchell, consultant
Even while Addington, Gonzales and the lawyers were beginning to build the legal framework for torture, a couple of military psychologists were laying out the techniques the military would use. James Mitchell, a retired military psychologist, had been a leading expert in the military's SERE program. In December 2001, with his partner, Bruce Jessen, Mitchell reverse-engineered SERE techniques to be used to interrogate detainees. Then, in the spring of 2002, before OLC gave official legal approval to torture, Mitchell oversaw Abu Zubaydah's interrogation. An FBI agent on the scene describes Mitchell overseeing the use of "borderline torture." And after OLC approved waterboarding, Mitchell oversaw its use in ways that exceeded the guidelines in the OLC memo. Under Mitchell's guidance, interrogators used the waterboard with "far greater frequency than initially indicated" -- a total of 183 times in a month for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and 83 times in a month for Abu Zubaydah.
5. George Tenet, director of Central Intelligence (1997-2004)
As director of the CIA during the early years of the war against al-Qaida, Tenet had ultimate management responsibility for the CIA's program of capturing, detaining and interrogating suspected al-Qaida members and briefed top Cabinet members on those techniques. Published reports say Tenet approved every detail of the interrogation plans: "Any change in the plan -- even if an extra day of a certain treatment was added -- was signed off on by the Director." It was under Tenet's leadership that Mitchell and Jessen's SERE techniques were applied to the administration's first allegedly high-value al-Qaida prisoner, Abu Zubaydah. After approval of the harsh techniques, CIA headquarters ordered Abu Zubaydah to be waterboarded even though onsite interrogators believed Zubaydah was "compliant." Since the Bybee Two memo authorizing torture required that interrogators believe the detainee had further information that could only be gained by using torture, this additional use of the waterboard was clearly illegal according to the memo.
6. Condoleezza Rice, national security advisor (2001-2005), secretary of state (2005-2008)
As national security advisor to President Bush, Rice coordinated much of the administration's internal debate over interrogation policies. She approved (she now says she "conveyed the authorization") for the first known officially sanctioned use of torture -- the CIA's interrogation of Abu Zubaydah -- on July 17, 2002. This approval was given after the torture of Zubaydah had begun, and before receiving a legal OK from the OLC. The approval from the OLC was given orally in late July and in written form on Aug. 1, 2002. Rice's approval or "convey[ance] of authorization" led directly to the intensified torture of Zubaydah.
7. John Yoo, deputy assistant attorney general, Office of Legal Counsel (2001-2003)
As deputy assistant attorney general of OLC focusing on national security for the first year and a half after 9/11, Yoo drafted many of the memos that would establish the torture regime, starting with the opinion claiming virtually unlimited power for the president in times of war. In the early months of 2002, he started working with Addington and others to draft two key memos authorizing torture: Bybee One (providing legal cover for torture) and Bybee Two (describing the techniques that could be used), both dated Aug. 1, 2002. He also helped draft a similar memo approving harsh techniques for the military completed on March 14, 2003, and even a memo eviscerating Fourth Amendment protections in the United States. The Bybee One and DOD memos argue that "necessity" or "self-defense" might be used as defenses against prosecution, even though the United Nations Convention Against Torture explicitly states that "no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war … may be invoked as a justification of torture." Bybee Two, listing the techniques the CIA could use in interrogation, was premised on hotly debated assumptions. For example, the memo presumed that Abu Zubaydah was uncooperative, and had actionable intelligence that could only be gotten through harsh techniques. Yet Zubaydah had already cooperated with the FBI. The memo claimed Zubaydah was mentally and physically fit to be waterboarded, even though Zubaydah had had head and recent gunshot injuries. As Jack Goldsmith described Yoo's opinions, they "could be interpreted as if they were designed to confer immunity for bad acts." In all of his torture memos, Yoo ignored key precedents relating both specifically to waterboarding and to separation of powers.
8. Jay Bybee, assistant attorney general, Office of Legal Counsel (2001-2003)
As head of the OLC when the first torture memos were approved, Bybee signed the memos named after him that John Yoo drafted. At the time, the White House knew that Bybee wanted an appointment as a Circuit Court judge; after signing his name to memos supporting torture, he received such an appointment. Of particular concern is the timing of Bybee's approval of the torture techniques. He first approved some techniques on July 24, 2002. The next day, Jim Haynes, the Defense Department's general counsel, ordered the SERE unit of DOD to collect information including details on waterboarding. While the record is contradictory on whether Haynes or CIA General Counsel John Rizzo gave that information to OLC, on the day they did so, OLC approved waterboarding. One of the documents in that packet identified these actions as torture, and stated that torture often produced unreliable results.
9. William "Jim" Haynes, Defense Department general counsel (2001-2008)
As general counsel of the Defense Department, Jim Haynes oversaw the legal analysis of interrogation techniques to be used with military detainees. Very early on, he worked as a broker between SERE professionals and the CIA. His office first asked for information on "exploiting" detainees in December 2001, which is when James Mitchell is first known to have worked on interrogation plans. And later, in July 2002, when CIA was already using torture with Abu Zubaydah but needed scientific cover before OLC would approve waterboarding, Haynes ordered the SERE team to produce such information immediately.
Later Haynes played a key role in making sure some of the techniques were adopted, with little review, by the military. He was thus crucial to the migration of torture to Guantánamo and then Iraq. In September 2002, Haynes participated in a key visit to Guantánamo (along with Addington and other lawyers) that coincided with requests from DOD interrogators there for some of the same techniques used by the CIA.
Haynes ignored repeated warnings from within the armed services about the techniques, including statements that the techniques "may violate torture statute" and "cross the line of 'humane' treatment." In October 2002, when the legal counsel for the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff attempted to conduct a thorough legal review of the techniques, Haynes ordered her to stop, because "people were going to see" the objections that some in the military had raised. On Nov. 27, 2002, Haynes recommended that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld authorize many of the requested techniques, including stress positions, hooding, the removal of clothing, and the use of dogs -- the same techniques that showed up later in the abuse at Abu Ghraib.
10. Donald Rumsfeld, secretary of defense (2001-2006)
As secretary of defense, Rumsfeld signed off on interrogation methods used in the military, notably for Abu Ghraib, Bagram Air Force Base and Guantánamo Bay. With this approval, the use of torture would move from the CIA to the military. A recent bipartisan Senate report concluded that "Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's authorization of interrogation techniques at Guantánamo Bay was a direct cause of detainee abuse there." Rumsfeld personally approved techniques including the use of phobias (dogs), forced nudity and stress positions on Dec. 2, 2002, signing a one-page memo prepared for him by Haynes. These techniques were among those deemed torture in the Charles Graner case and the case of "20th hijacker" Mohammed al-Qahtani. Rumsfeld also personally authorized an interrogation plan for Moahmedou Ould Slahi on Aug. 13, 2003; the plan used many of the same techniques as had been used with al-Qahtani, including sensory deprivation and "sleep adjustment." And through it all, Rumsfeld maintained a disdainful view on these techniques, at one point quipping on a memo approving harsh techniques, "I stand for eight to 10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to four hours?"
11. John Rizzo, CIA deputy general counsel (2002-2004), acting general counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency (2001-2002, 2004-present)
As deputy general counsel and then acting general counsel for the CIA, John Rizzo's name appears on all of the known OLC opinions on torture for the CIA. For the Bybee Two memo, Rizzo provided a number of factually contested pieces of information to OLC -- notably, that Abu Zubaydah was uncooperative and physically and mentally fit enough to withstand waterboarding and other enhanced techniques. In addition, Rizzo provided a description of waterboarding using one standard, while the OLC opinion described a more moderate standard. Significantly, the description of waterboarding submitted to OLC came from the Defense Department, even though NSC had excluded DOD from discussions on the memo. Along with the description of waterboarding and other techniques, Rizzo also provided a document that called enhanced methods "torture" and deemed them unreliable -- yet even with this warning, Rizzo still advocated for the CIA to get permission to use those techniques.
12. Steven Bradbury, principal deputy assistant attorney general, OLC (2004), acting assistant attorney general, OLC (2005-2009)
In 2004, the CIA's inspector general wrote a report concluding that the CIA's interrogation program might violate the Convention Against Torture. It fell to Acting Assistant Attorney General Steven Bradbury to write three memos in May 2005 that would dismiss the concerns the IG Report raised -- in effect, to affirm the OLC's 2002 memos legitimizing torture. Bradbury's memos noted the ways in which prior torture had exceeded the Bybee Two memo: the 183 uses of the waterboard for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in one month, the gallon and a half used in waterboarding, the 20 to 30 times a detainee is thrown agains the wall, the 11 days a detainee had been made to stay awake, the extra sessions of waterboarding ordered from CIA headquarters even after local interrogators deemed Abu Zubaydah to be fully compliant. Yet Bradbury does not consider it torture. He notes the CIA's doctors' cautions about the combination of using the waterboard with a physically fatigued detainee, yet in a separate memo approves the use of sleep deprivation and waterboading in tandem. He repeatedly concedes that the CIA's interrogation techniques as actually implemented exceeded the SERE techniques, yet repeatedly points to the connection to SERE to argue the methods must be legal. And as with the Bybee One memo, Bradbury resorts to precisely the kind of appeal to exceptional circumstances -- "used only as necessary to protect against grave threats" -- to distinguish U.S. interrogation techniques from the torture it so closely resembles around the world.
13. George W. Bush, president (2001-2009)
While President Bush maintained some distance from the torture for years -- Cheney describes him "basically" authorizing it -- he served as the chief propagandist about its efficacy and necessity. Most notably, on Sept. 6, 2006, when Bush first confessed to the program, Bush repeated the claims made to support the Bybee Two memo: that Abu Zubaydah wouldn't talk except by using torture. And in 2006, after the CIA's own inspector general had raised problems with the program, after Steven Bradbury had admitted all the ways that the torture program exceeded guidelines, Bush still claimed it was legal.
"[They] were designed to be safe, to comply with our laws, our Constitution and our treaty obligations. The Department of Justice reviewed the authorized methods extensively, and determined them to be lawful."
With this statement, the deceptions and bureaucratic games all came full circle. After all, it was Bush who, on Feb. 7, 2002, had declared the Geneva Conventions wouldn't apply (a view the Supreme Court ultimately rejected).
Bush's inaction in torture is as important as his actions. Bush failed to fulfill legal obligations to notify Congress of the torture program. A Senate Intelligence timeline on the torture program makes clear that Congress was not briefed on the techniques used in the torture program until after Abu Zubaydah had already been waterboarded. And in a 2003 letter, then House Intelligence ranking member Jane Harman shows that she had not yet seen evidence that Bush had signed off on this policy. This suggests President Bush did not provide the legally required notice to Congress, violating National Security Decisions Directive-286. What Bush did not say is as legally important as what he did say.
Yet, ultimately, Bush and whatever approval he gave the program is at the center of the administration's embrace of torture. Condoleezza Rice recently said, "By definition, if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations in the Convention Against Torture." While Rice has tried to reframe her statement, it uses the same logic used by John Yoo and David Addington to justify the program, the shocking claim that international and domestic laws cannot bind the president in times of war. Bush's close allies still insist if he authorized it, it couldn't be torture.
© 2009 Salon All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/140192/
Thursday, 21 May 2009
Phil Murphy
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,626024,00.html#ref=nlint
He collected millions of dollars for the presidential election campaigns of Clinton, Gore and Obama. Now former Goldman Sachs banker Phil Murphy is considered the favorite for the prestigious post of US Ambassador to Germany.
The poker game for the highly desired US ambassador postings in Europe has reached a decisive phase in Washington. For months, the State Department and White House have been holding secret talks with prospective candidates, and Phil Murphy has emerged as the likely pick for the US Embassy in Berlin.
He collected millions of dollars for the presidential election campaigns of Clinton, Gore and Obama. Now former Goldman Sachs banker Phil Murphy is considered the favorite for the prestigious post of US Ambassador to Germany.
The poker game for the highly desired US ambassador postings in Europe has reached a decisive phase in Washington. For months, the State Department and White House have been holding secret talks with prospective candidates, and Phil Murphy has emerged as the likely pick for the US Embassy in Berlin.
Army And Drugs
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22664.htm
According to data from a U. S. Army mental-health survey released last year, about 12 percent of soldiers in Iraq and 15 percent of those in Afghanistan reported taking antidepressants, anti-anxiety medications, or sleeping pills. Prescriptions for painkillers have also skyrocketed. Data from the Department of Defense last fall showed that as of September 2007, prescriptions for narcotics for active-duty troops had risen to almost 50,000 a month, compared with about 33,000 a month in October 2003, not long after the Iraq war began.
According to data from a U. S. Army mental-health survey released last year, about 12 percent of soldiers in Iraq and 15 percent of those in Afghanistan reported taking antidepressants, anti-anxiety medications, or sleeping pills. Prescriptions for painkillers have also skyrocketed. Data from the Department of Defense last fall showed that as of September 2007, prescriptions for narcotics for active-duty troops had risen to almost 50,000 a month, compared with about 33,000 a month in October 2003, not long after the Iraq war began.
KBR
US Army Paid Bonuses to KBR Despite Questions
by Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Army paid "tens of millions of dollars in bonuses" to KBR Inc, its biggest contractor in Iraq, even after it concluded the firm's electrical work had put U.S. soldiers at risk, according to a source close to a U.S. congressional investigation.
by Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Army paid "tens of millions of dollars in bonuses" to KBR Inc, its biggest contractor in Iraq, even after it concluded the firm's electrical work had put U.S. soldiers at risk, according to a source close to a U.S. congressional investigation.
Hamas-Fatah
We should stop this terrible mechanism where Hamas-Fatah feud, also thanks to external interferences, controls everything.
Israeli police target young people for refusing military service
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/may2009/isra-m21.shtml
By Jean Shaoul
21 May 2009
Last month, in scenes reminiscent of a coordinated sweep on dangerous organised criminals, Israeli police mounted a country-wide raid of people active in Target 21, a draft resistance group, and searched their homes citing “incitement to draft evasion”. They seized computers and documents, and detained seven people for interrogation. The police branded the refuseniks, as those who refuse to serve in Israel Defence Forces (IDF) are called, as “draft shirkers”.
By Jean Shaoul
21 May 2009
Last month, in scenes reminiscent of a coordinated sweep on dangerous organised criminals, Israeli police mounted a country-wide raid of people active in Target 21, a draft resistance group, and searched their homes citing “incitement to draft evasion”. They seized computers and documents, and detained seven people for interrogation. The police branded the refuseniks, as those who refuse to serve in Israel Defence Forces (IDF) are called, as “draft shirkers”.
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
Somali Pirates, UK
http://www.guardian.co.uk:80/world/2009/may/11/somali-pirates-london-intelligence
The Somali pirates attacking shipping in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean are directed to their targets by a "consultant" team in London, according to a European military intelligence document obtained by a Spanish radio station.
The document, obtained by Cadena SER radio, says the team and the pirates remain in contact by satellite telephone.
It says that pirate groups have "well-placed informers" in London who are in regular contact with control centres in Somalia where decisions on which vessels to attack are made. These London-based "consultants" help the pirates select targets, providing information on the ships' cargoes and courses.
In at least one case the pirates have remained in contact with their London informants from the hijacked ship, according to one targeted shipping company.
The pirates' information network extends to Yemen, Dubai and the Suez canal.
The intelligence report is understood to have been issued to European navies.
"The information that merchant ships sailing through the area volunteer to various international organisations is ending up in the pirates' hands," Cadena SER reported the report as saying.
This enables the more organised pirate groups to study their targets in advance, even spending several days training teams for specific hijacks. Senior pirates then join the vessel once it has been sailed close to Somalia.
Captains of attacked ships have found that pirates know everything from the layout of the vessel to its ports of call. Vessels targeted as a result of this kind of intelligence included the Greek cargo ship Titan, the Turkish merchant ship Karagol and the Spanish trawler Felipe Ruano.
In each case, says the document, the pirates had full knowledge of the cargo, nationality and course of the vessel.
The national flag of a ship is also taken into account when choosing a target, with British vessels being increasingly avoided, according to the report. It was not clear whether this was because pirates did not want to draw the attention of British police to their information sources in London.
European countries have set up Operation Atalanta to co-ordinate their military efforts in the area.
The Somali pirates attacking shipping in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean are directed to their targets by a "consultant" team in London, according to a European military intelligence document obtained by a Spanish radio station.
The document, obtained by Cadena SER radio, says the team and the pirates remain in contact by satellite telephone.
It says that pirate groups have "well-placed informers" in London who are in regular contact with control centres in Somalia where decisions on which vessels to attack are made. These London-based "consultants" help the pirates select targets, providing information on the ships' cargoes and courses.
In at least one case the pirates have remained in contact with their London informants from the hijacked ship, according to one targeted shipping company.
The pirates' information network extends to Yemen, Dubai and the Suez canal.
The intelligence report is understood to have been issued to European navies.
"The information that merchant ships sailing through the area volunteer to various international organisations is ending up in the pirates' hands," Cadena SER reported the report as saying.
This enables the more organised pirate groups to study their targets in advance, even spending several days training teams for specific hijacks. Senior pirates then join the vessel once it has been sailed close to Somalia.
Captains of attacked ships have found that pirates know everything from the layout of the vessel to its ports of call. Vessels targeted as a result of this kind of intelligence included the Greek cargo ship Titan, the Turkish merchant ship Karagol and the Spanish trawler Felipe Ruano.
In each case, says the document, the pirates had full knowledge of the cargo, nationality and course of the vessel.
The national flag of a ship is also taken into account when choosing a target, with British vessels being increasingly avoided, according to the report. It was not clear whether this was because pirates did not want to draw the attention of British police to their information sources in London.
European countries have set up Operation Atalanta to co-ordinate their military efforts in the area.
Sri Lanka History Tamil Tigers
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/blanktemplate/2008/11/2008111061193133.html
1948: Sri Lanka, then known as Ceylon, gains independence from British rule. Ethnic Tamils feel disenfranchised by the so-called "Citizenship Act" which denied citizenship to the Tamils and their descendants brought from India by the British to work on tea plantations
1956: Solomon Bandaranyake, then prime minister, enacts a law making Sinhala the only official language of Sri Lanka, alienating the Tamils. Peaceful protests by Tamils are broken up by a Sinhala mob and riots follow.
1957/65: Pacts are signed between the government and the Tamils giving them a measure of regional autonomy and freedoms in language and education, but the agreements remain largely on paper.
1970: New constitution enshrines earlier law making Sinhala Sri Lanka's official language and makes Buddhism the country's official religion, further alienating Tamils who are mainly Hindus and Christians.
1972: Ceylon becomes a Republic and is officially renamed the Republic of Sri Lanka. Velupillai Prabhakaran forms the Tamil New Tigers group to set up a separate homeland - the Tamil Eelam.
1975: Tamil New Tigers re-named Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
1978: LTTE proscribed as an illegal organisation.
1981: Riots in Jaffna. A state of emergency is declared.
1983: First guerrilla-style ambush by LTTE kills 13 soldiers. Rioting erupts, killing hundreds of people. About 150,000 Tamil refugees flee to India where Tamil military training camps are established.
1987: The Indian government cracks down on armed Tamil groups in India.
First suicide attack by LTTE kills 40. Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord signed and India agrees to deploy peacekeepers - the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF), which quickly gets drawn into the civil war.
1990: IPKF withdraws from Sri Lanka. LTTE becomes the prominent Tamil armed group. Over 100,000 Muslims are expelled from LTTE dominated areas, many with just two hours notice.
1991: Rajiv Gandhi, then Indian prime minister, is assassinated by a female LTTE suicide bomber.
1993: Ranasinghe Premadasa, then president of Sri Lanka, is killed in a LTTE suicide bomb attack.
1999: Chandrika Kumaratunge, a former prime minister and later the first female president of Sri Lanka, is wounded in an assassination attempt during an election rally.
2002: Norway-brokered ceasefire between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government comes into effect. It holds for five years despite many incursions from both sides. A road linking Jaffna peninsula and the rest of Sri Lanka opens after 12 years.
2004: The LTTE splits. Vinayagamoorthi Muralitharan, also known as Colonel Karuna, commander for the Batticaloa-Amparai, breaks from the LTTE forming a pro-government outfit.
2005: The government of Sri Lanka and LTTE sign Post-Tsunami Operational Management Structure (P-Toms) by which the two entities agreed to work together to offer relief to the communities devastated by the Asian Tsunami. Lakshman Kadirgamar, Sri Lankan foreign minister, is assassinated by the LTTE.
2007: After weeks of heavy fighting, the Sri Lankan army takes back the LTTE-held town of Vakarai. LTTE air force attacks various Sri Lankan targets including Colombo airport. SP Thamilselvan, leader of the LTTE's political wing, is killed in an air raid.
2008: The Sri Lankan government formally withdraws from the ceasefire with the LTTE and renewed fighting erupts. Amid attacks and counter-attacks, Sri Lankan forces seem to gradually gain the upper hand.
2009: After months of the military consistently advancing against the LTTE, the government declares victory.
=====================================================================================
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/18/tamil_tiger_leader_killed_sri_lanka
ANJALI KAMAT: Before we go into the future, can you talk a little bit about the history of the LTTE and of the chief of the Tamil Tigers, Velupillai Prabhakaran, who the Sri Lankan military is saying is now dead?
AHILAN KADIRGAMAR: Sure. When these acts of discrimination took up—came across in the 1970s, there were a number of armed groups that took up the armed struggle. The LTTE was one of them, and Velupillai Prabhakaran was the founder of the LTTE. And following the 1983 riots, so this major program where over 2,000 Tamil civilians were killed, these militant groups mushroomed, as thousands of youth joined these various militant groups.
But in the mid-’80s, in 1985, 1986, the LTTE decimated, they physically eliminated all the other militant groups, killing their leadership, massacring hundreds of fellow Tamil cadres, and claimed that they were the only sole representative. And Prabhakaran has always had a strategy of eliminating all other alternatives within the Tamil community. They also massacred the leadership—the parliamentary leadership, such as the Tamil United Liberation Front in the late ’80s. And they have consistently assassinated Tamil dissenters, dissident activists and politicians, to claim that they can be the only representative of the Tamil community. So, the construction of a traitor has been part of the politics.
And they also—you know, to match the might of the Sri Lankan state, they also developed suicide bombing. They were one of the first forces to start suicide bombing extensively in the world. They carried out assassination of political leaders in the south. And they even brought in women and children into their forces.
But they were mainly a military organization. They did not have a strong political wing, hardly a political wing at all. And their entire organization was built around the personality cult of Prabhakaran and a military structure.
So, in that sense, what we see now with the end of the war is, as reports claim, Prabhakaran has been killed, and the LTTE’s military structure has been destroyed. So, in that sense, I see it as also the end of the LTTE.
ANJALI KAMAT: Now, the LTTE has styled itself as the sole representative of the Tamil people. What’s your sense of the humanitarian crisis, tens of thousands of largely Tamil civilians who were trapped in this northern area for months, you know, withstanding shelling, fighting from both sides? Where are they now? What’s their future in the new Sri Lankan state?
AHILAN KADIRGAMAR: When the war escalated over the last couple years and as the LTTE withdrew into this small strip of territory, they also took, you know, anywhere around 250,000 Tamil civilians into that little territory and held them more or less as hostages, while the army continued to indiscriminately shell.
Now, over the last couple months, those 200,000 people, the bulk of them, have come out. They’ve been put in what the government is calling welfare camps, which human rights groups have described as internment camps, where they are boxed into barb-wired camps, and they don’t have free movement out of those camps. And then, of course, even over the last few days, with heavy fighting, civilians have been killed. Many of them have been maimed. There’s untold human suffering that has gone on over the last few months. And, of course, the LTTE also cynically used those civilians. They were shooting at civilians who were trying to flee.
Now, the question is, what’s going happen to all this particular population of the Tamil community, you know, 250,000 who are in these camps? When will they be resettled? A number of activists—you know, the human rights community is pushing for the timely resettlement of all these civilians. So, there needs to be pressure on that. There needs to be much more access by international organizations, such as the United Nations human—UNHCR, of ICRC, the International Red Cross, so that they can ensure that there are no human rights abuses of the civilian population and that there is timely resettlement.
ANJALI KAMAT: And finally, Ahilan, what’s your sense of what the future of Sri Lankan politics will look like? What’s the possibility for a democratic future in Sri Lanka? What are the ways of reining in Sinhala nationalism? And what are the ways of reining in, you know, what you have described in your article as a long trend of Tamil authoritarianism, as exemplified by the LTTE?
AHILAN KADIRGAMAR: Yeah. What the LTTE did in their claim to sole representation was to very much decimate the entire political leadership of the Tamil community. So, in that sense, it’s going to take some time for the Tamil community to rebuild a certain democratic political culture.
But it’s also important to note that, you know, the Tamil community is not the only minority in Sri Lanka. There is a sizable Muslim minority. There’s a sizable upcountry Tamil minority. This is indentured labor brought over by the British to work in the tea plantations. Now, any solution has to address the concerns of all the minorities. And there are also, of course, caste minorities. The question of women remains. There are rural people also in the Sinhala community. So, any political solution has to address their concerns.
And the debate in Sri Lanka has been around some form of a constitutional settlement that will allow for much more devolution of power to the regions, but also an interlocking mechanism where there will be power sharing at the center, such as a bicameral legislature. And then there has to be better access, in terms of education, to employment. Now the minorities have only a very small share in state employment.
1948: Sri Lanka, then known as Ceylon, gains independence from British rule. Ethnic Tamils feel disenfranchised by the so-called "Citizenship Act" which denied citizenship to the Tamils and their descendants brought from India by the British to work on tea plantations
1956: Solomon Bandaranyake, then prime minister, enacts a law making Sinhala the only official language of Sri Lanka, alienating the Tamils. Peaceful protests by Tamils are broken up by a Sinhala mob and riots follow.
1957/65: Pacts are signed between the government and the Tamils giving them a measure of regional autonomy and freedoms in language and education, but the agreements remain largely on paper.
1970: New constitution enshrines earlier law making Sinhala Sri Lanka's official language and makes Buddhism the country's official religion, further alienating Tamils who are mainly Hindus and Christians.
1972: Ceylon becomes a Republic and is officially renamed the Republic of Sri Lanka. Velupillai Prabhakaran forms the Tamil New Tigers group to set up a separate homeland - the Tamil Eelam.
1975: Tamil New Tigers re-named Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
1978: LTTE proscribed as an illegal organisation.
1981: Riots in Jaffna. A state of emergency is declared.
1983: First guerrilla-style ambush by LTTE kills 13 soldiers. Rioting erupts, killing hundreds of people. About 150,000 Tamil refugees flee to India where Tamil military training camps are established.
1987: The Indian government cracks down on armed Tamil groups in India.
First suicide attack by LTTE kills 40. Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord signed and India agrees to deploy peacekeepers - the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF), which quickly gets drawn into the civil war.
1990: IPKF withdraws from Sri Lanka. LTTE becomes the prominent Tamil armed group. Over 100,000 Muslims are expelled from LTTE dominated areas, many with just two hours notice.
1991: Rajiv Gandhi, then Indian prime minister, is assassinated by a female LTTE suicide bomber.
1993: Ranasinghe Premadasa, then president of Sri Lanka, is killed in a LTTE suicide bomb attack.
1999: Chandrika Kumaratunge, a former prime minister and later the first female president of Sri Lanka, is wounded in an assassination attempt during an election rally.
2002: Norway-brokered ceasefire between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government comes into effect. It holds for five years despite many incursions from both sides. A road linking Jaffna peninsula and the rest of Sri Lanka opens after 12 years.
2004: The LTTE splits. Vinayagamoorthi Muralitharan, also known as Colonel Karuna, commander for the Batticaloa-Amparai, breaks from the LTTE forming a pro-government outfit.
2005: The government of Sri Lanka and LTTE sign Post-Tsunami Operational Management Structure (P-Toms) by which the two entities agreed to work together to offer relief to the communities devastated by the Asian Tsunami. Lakshman Kadirgamar, Sri Lankan foreign minister, is assassinated by the LTTE.
2007: After weeks of heavy fighting, the Sri Lankan army takes back the LTTE-held town of Vakarai. LTTE air force attacks various Sri Lankan targets including Colombo airport. SP Thamilselvan, leader of the LTTE's political wing, is killed in an air raid.
2008: The Sri Lankan government formally withdraws from the ceasefire with the LTTE and renewed fighting erupts. Amid attacks and counter-attacks, Sri Lankan forces seem to gradually gain the upper hand.
2009: After months of the military consistently advancing against the LTTE, the government declares victory.
=====================================================================================
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/18/tamil_tiger_leader_killed_sri_lanka
ANJALI KAMAT: Before we go into the future, can you talk a little bit about the history of the LTTE and of the chief of the Tamil Tigers, Velupillai Prabhakaran, who the Sri Lankan military is saying is now dead?
AHILAN KADIRGAMAR: Sure. When these acts of discrimination took up—came across in the 1970s, there were a number of armed groups that took up the armed struggle. The LTTE was one of them, and Velupillai Prabhakaran was the founder of the LTTE. And following the 1983 riots, so this major program where over 2,000 Tamil civilians were killed, these militant groups mushroomed, as thousands of youth joined these various militant groups.
But in the mid-’80s, in 1985, 1986, the LTTE decimated, they physically eliminated all the other militant groups, killing their leadership, massacring hundreds of fellow Tamil cadres, and claimed that they were the only sole representative. And Prabhakaran has always had a strategy of eliminating all other alternatives within the Tamil community. They also massacred the leadership—the parliamentary leadership, such as the Tamil United Liberation Front in the late ’80s. And they have consistently assassinated Tamil dissenters, dissident activists and politicians, to claim that they can be the only representative of the Tamil community. So, the construction of a traitor has been part of the politics.
And they also—you know, to match the might of the Sri Lankan state, they also developed suicide bombing. They were one of the first forces to start suicide bombing extensively in the world. They carried out assassination of political leaders in the south. And they even brought in women and children into their forces.
But they were mainly a military organization. They did not have a strong political wing, hardly a political wing at all. And their entire organization was built around the personality cult of Prabhakaran and a military structure.
So, in that sense, what we see now with the end of the war is, as reports claim, Prabhakaran has been killed, and the LTTE’s military structure has been destroyed. So, in that sense, I see it as also the end of the LTTE.
ANJALI KAMAT: Now, the LTTE has styled itself as the sole representative of the Tamil people. What’s your sense of the humanitarian crisis, tens of thousands of largely Tamil civilians who were trapped in this northern area for months, you know, withstanding shelling, fighting from both sides? Where are they now? What’s their future in the new Sri Lankan state?
AHILAN KADIRGAMAR: When the war escalated over the last couple years and as the LTTE withdrew into this small strip of territory, they also took, you know, anywhere around 250,000 Tamil civilians into that little territory and held them more or less as hostages, while the army continued to indiscriminately shell.
Now, over the last couple months, those 200,000 people, the bulk of them, have come out. They’ve been put in what the government is calling welfare camps, which human rights groups have described as internment camps, where they are boxed into barb-wired camps, and they don’t have free movement out of those camps. And then, of course, even over the last few days, with heavy fighting, civilians have been killed. Many of them have been maimed. There’s untold human suffering that has gone on over the last few months. And, of course, the LTTE also cynically used those civilians. They were shooting at civilians who were trying to flee.
Now, the question is, what’s going happen to all this particular population of the Tamil community, you know, 250,000 who are in these camps? When will they be resettled? A number of activists—you know, the human rights community is pushing for the timely resettlement of all these civilians. So, there needs to be pressure on that. There needs to be much more access by international organizations, such as the United Nations human—UNHCR, of ICRC, the International Red Cross, so that they can ensure that there are no human rights abuses of the civilian population and that there is timely resettlement.
ANJALI KAMAT: And finally, Ahilan, what’s your sense of what the future of Sri Lankan politics will look like? What’s the possibility for a democratic future in Sri Lanka? What are the ways of reining in Sinhala nationalism? And what are the ways of reining in, you know, what you have described in your article as a long trend of Tamil authoritarianism, as exemplified by the LTTE?
AHILAN KADIRGAMAR: Yeah. What the LTTE did in their claim to sole representation was to very much decimate the entire political leadership of the Tamil community. So, in that sense, it’s going to take some time for the Tamil community to rebuild a certain democratic political culture.
But it’s also important to note that, you know, the Tamil community is not the only minority in Sri Lanka. There is a sizable Muslim minority. There’s a sizable upcountry Tamil minority. This is indentured labor brought over by the British to work in the tea plantations. Now, any solution has to address the concerns of all the minorities. And there are also, of course, caste minorities. The question of women remains. There are rural people also in the Sinhala community. So, any political solution has to address their concerns.
And the debate in Sri Lanka has been around some form of a constitutional settlement that will allow for much more devolution of power to the regions, but also an interlocking mechanism where there will be power sharing at the center, such as a bicameral legislature. And then there has to be better access, in terms of education, to employment. Now the minorities have only a very small share in state employment.
Monday, 18 May 2009
Afghanistan, Civilian Deaths May2009
A copy of the government's list of the names, ages and father's names of each of the 140 dead was obtained by Reuters earlier this week. It shows that 93 of those killed were children -- the youngest eight days old -- and only 22 were adult males.
http://alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/ISL68362.htm
http://alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/ISL68362.htm
Friday, 15 May 2009
9/11
http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/30/624314.aspx
9/11 Commission controversy
Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 7:50 PM ET
By Robert Windrem and Victor Limjoco
The 9/11 Commission suspected that critical information it used in its landmark report was the product of harsh interrogations of al-Qaida operatives - interrogations that many critics have labeled torture. Yet, commission staffers never questioned the agency about the interrogation techniques and in fact ordered a second round of interrogations specifically to ask additional questions of the same operatives, NBC News has learned.
Those conclusions are the result of an extensive NBC News analysis of the 9/11 Commission’s Final Report and interviews with Commission staffers and current and former U.S. intelligence officials.
The analysis shows that much of what was reported about the planning and execution of the terror attacks on New York and Washington was derived from the interrogations of high-ranking al-Qaida operatives. Each had been subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques." Some were even subjected to waterboarding, the most controversial of the techniques, which simulates drowning.
The NBC News analysis shows that more than one quarter of all footnotes in the 9/11 Report refer to CIA interrogations of al-Qaida operatives who were subjected to the now-controversial interrogation techniques. In fact, information derived from the interrogations is central to the Report’s most critical chapters, those on the planning and execution of the attacks. The analysis also shows - and agency and commission staffers concur - there was a separate, second round of interrogations in early 2004, done specifically to answer new questions from the Commission.
9/11 Commission controversy
Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 7:50 PM ET
By Robert Windrem and Victor Limjoco
The 9/11 Commission suspected that critical information it used in its landmark report was the product of harsh interrogations of al-Qaida operatives - interrogations that many critics have labeled torture. Yet, commission staffers never questioned the agency about the interrogation techniques and in fact ordered a second round of interrogations specifically to ask additional questions of the same operatives, NBC News has learned.
Those conclusions are the result of an extensive NBC News analysis of the 9/11 Commission’s Final Report and interviews with Commission staffers and current and former U.S. intelligence officials.
The analysis shows that much of what was reported about the planning and execution of the terror attacks on New York and Washington was derived from the interrogations of high-ranking al-Qaida operatives. Each had been subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques." Some were even subjected to waterboarding, the most controversial of the techniques, which simulates drowning.
The NBC News analysis shows that more than one quarter of all footnotes in the 9/11 Report refer to CIA interrogations of al-Qaida operatives who were subjected to the now-controversial interrogation techniques. In fact, information derived from the interrogations is central to the Report’s most critical chapters, those on the planning and execution of the attacks. The analysis also shows - and agency and commission staffers concur - there was a separate, second round of interrogations in early 2004, done specifically to answer new questions from the Commission.
Citibank
So you have a situation like Citibank, which is worth, I think, the last I checked, $21 billion on the books, but yet $45 billion of taxpayer money has gone in. So, by all rights, American taxpayers should own Citibank more than twice over, which would mean they could direct Citibank to issue credit in the interests of taxpayers, in the interests of the public. But clearly, that’s not happening, or these factories wouldn’t be closing.
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/15/fire_the_boss_naomi_klein_avi
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/15/fire_the_boss_naomi_klein_avi
Puerto Rico, Vieques US
Environmental and health issues have become the most important new focus in the long-standing conflicts between the U.S. military and civilian communities. Chief evidence is the victory of popular mobilization and civil disobedience against the Navy’s 60-year-long bombing of Vieques, a 51-square-mile island municipality six miles off the southeast coast of the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico. Katherine T. McCaffrey’s expert treatment of the four-year-long movement to force an end to the bombing of Vieques is one the most important pieces in Lutz’s anthology. The bombing of a Caribbean island inhabited by 10,000 American civilians also exposed Puerto Rico’s lack of sovereignty and the second-class status of its residents within the U.S. polity. Emphasis on environmental issues overcame the Puerto Ricans’ traditional reluctance to politicize their plight and created a broad popular movement that mobilized women and caused the Catholic and Protestant churches to join hands.
On April 19, 1999, the Vieques movement was further strengthened and united when it acquired a martyr. Two U.S. Navy F-18 jet aircraft traveling at supersonic speeds accidentally dropped two 500-pound bombs on the compound that the Navy used to survey the shelling. A civilian security guard, David Sanes, who was patrolling the area, was knocked unconscious and subsequently bled to death. The result was that civilians occupied the site for more than a year, causing the Navy to move its bombing range to North Carolina. Given their access to the site, the occupiers also discovered that the Navy was using depleted uranium ammunition on Vieques. In May 2003, the Navy was finally forced off the island. McCaffrey concludes, “After decades of secrecy surrounding its activities, the military is emerging as the single largest polluter in the United States, single-handedly producing 27,000 toxic-waste sites in this country.”
On April 19, 1999, the Vieques movement was further strengthened and united when it acquired a martyr. Two U.S. Navy F-18 jet aircraft traveling at supersonic speeds accidentally dropped two 500-pound bombs on the compound that the Navy used to survey the shelling. A civilian security guard, David Sanes, who was patrolling the area, was knocked unconscious and subsequently bled to death. The result was that civilians occupied the site for more than a year, causing the Navy to move its bombing range to North Carolina. Given their access to the site, the occupiers also discovered that the Navy was using depleted uranium ammunition on Vieques. In May 2003, the Navy was finally forced off the island. McCaffrey concludes, “After decades of secrecy surrounding its activities, the military is emerging as the single largest polluter in the United States, single-handedly producing 27,000 toxic-waste sites in this country.”
Support For Muslims, Philippines, US
Simbulan is justified in calling his country’s active protests against the Americans and their domestic lackeys “the most vibrant social movement in Southeast Asia,” but he is at pains to stress that the Americans are unreconciled to their colonial defeat. They continue with unabated creativity to invent “visiting forces agreements” aimed at restoring the U.S. troops’ old extraterritorial privileges and “joint military exercises” against domestic criminal gangs such as the Abu Sayyaf bandits in Mindanao and other Islamic provinces of the southern Philippines.
Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP),
May 13, 2009
The recent threats to young girls - be it outside Park Tower in Karachi, any place where the elite class studies in Lahore, works or hangs out in the urban centres of the country - that they should cover themselves completely and shun western dress, else their faces would be defaced beyond recognition point to the glaring fact that the religious bigots who call themselves "Taliban" are not only at our door steps, but are here to stay. In the meanwhile, the number of terrorism-related incidents in the country, where the prime targets are the personnel of various security agencies besides hundreds of innocent civilians, are increasing day by day. Where does all of this take us?
To answer this question, we must first analyse the primacy of these so-called Taliban, who are known by name of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), and are lead by an ever-elusive Baitullah Mehsud. The common perception, which was recently reiterated after my discussion with an activist of a youth-based organisation that staged a protest demonstration in Lahore against the drone attacks, is that the group of Taliban led by Baitullah Mehsud is an outgrowth or a subsidiary of the Taliban fighting the American forces in Afghanistan, and is, therefore, an antithesis of America and its imperialistic policies in the region. On my suggestion that they should, after the successful demonstration against the drone attacks, stage a protest demonstration against TTP and the extremism spawn by it, the activist was of the view that since Taliban and America are each other's sworn enemies, a protest against Taliban would favour and please America and its agenda in the region, which their youth organisation wouldn't want.
This is where the whole problem lies; we haven't, as yet, been able to differentiate between what I call the "real" Taliban who solely focus on fighting the occupation forces in Afghanistan, and the "fake" Taliban, who are working on a hidden agenda of the United States and its ally, India, to disintegrate Pakistan. I call them fake, because it was during Musharraf's nine-year rule, whilst we considered ourselves an American ally, that the secret agencies of United States, India, Britain and Afghanistan established their hold throughout the length and breadth of Pakistan by setting up an extensive espionage network of their own, which recruited and subsequently released thousands of trained operatives garbed in the cloths of "Taliban" into the Pakistani territory.
This can be substantiated by the accounts of many journalists covering the war in the north western border of Pakistan, which suggest that the 25,000 strong fighters led by Baitullah Mehsud are not only highly trained but also have state-of-the-art weapons at their disposal. Now one wonders that where does the unabated supply of money and latest war gadgetry come from? These "Taliban" do not have the luxury of windfall revenues generated by the poppy cultivation, as their counterparts in Afghanistan do; neither could they be funded by the ISI, given the kind of havoc they are wreaking in Pakistan. Therefore, all the circumstantial evidence leads to the involvement of some hidden hands, which have their own axe to grind.
http://www.uruknet.de:80/?s1=1&p=54216&s2=14
The recent threats to young girls - be it outside Park Tower in Karachi, any place where the elite class studies in Lahore, works or hangs out in the urban centres of the country - that they should cover themselves completely and shun western dress, else their faces would be defaced beyond recognition point to the glaring fact that the religious bigots who call themselves "Taliban" are not only at our door steps, but are here to stay. In the meanwhile, the number of terrorism-related incidents in the country, where the prime targets are the personnel of various security agencies besides hundreds of innocent civilians, are increasing day by day. Where does all of this take us?
To answer this question, we must first analyse the primacy of these so-called Taliban, who are known by name of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), and are lead by an ever-elusive Baitullah Mehsud. The common perception, which was recently reiterated after my discussion with an activist of a youth-based organisation that staged a protest demonstration in Lahore against the drone attacks, is that the group of Taliban led by Baitullah Mehsud is an outgrowth or a subsidiary of the Taliban fighting the American forces in Afghanistan, and is, therefore, an antithesis of America and its imperialistic policies in the region. On my suggestion that they should, after the successful demonstration against the drone attacks, stage a protest demonstration against TTP and the extremism spawn by it, the activist was of the view that since Taliban and America are each other's sworn enemies, a protest against Taliban would favour and please America and its agenda in the region, which their youth organisation wouldn't want.
This is where the whole problem lies; we haven't, as yet, been able to differentiate between what I call the "real" Taliban who solely focus on fighting the occupation forces in Afghanistan, and the "fake" Taliban, who are working on a hidden agenda of the United States and its ally, India, to disintegrate Pakistan. I call them fake, because it was during Musharraf's nine-year rule, whilst we considered ourselves an American ally, that the secret agencies of United States, India, Britain and Afghanistan established their hold throughout the length and breadth of Pakistan by setting up an extensive espionage network of their own, which recruited and subsequently released thousands of trained operatives garbed in the cloths of "Taliban" into the Pakistani territory.
This can be substantiated by the accounts of many journalists covering the war in the north western border of Pakistan, which suggest that the 25,000 strong fighters led by Baitullah Mehsud are not only highly trained but also have state-of-the-art weapons at their disposal. Now one wonders that where does the unabated supply of money and latest war gadgetry come from? These "Taliban" do not have the luxury of windfall revenues generated by the poppy cultivation, as their counterparts in Afghanistan do; neither could they be funded by the ISI, given the kind of havoc they are wreaking in Pakistan. Therefore, all the circumstantial evidence leads to the involvement of some hidden hands, which have their own axe to grind.
http://www.uruknet.de:80/?s1=1&p=54216&s2=14
Thimerosal
http://www.commondreams.org:80/views05/0616-31.htm
"In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to 52 attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva, and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.
The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children."
".......But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line......"
".......In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism.
Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants -- but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines -- including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to 11-year-olds....."
".....It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation's preeminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation -- those born between 1989 and 2003 -- who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in 25 years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931......."
"In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to 52 attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva, and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.
The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children."
".......But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line......"
".......In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism.
Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants -- but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines -- including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to 11-year-olds....."
".....It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation's preeminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation -- those born between 1989 and 2003 -- who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in 25 years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931......."
Thursday, 14 May 2009
interrogation, Abu Zubaydah, Soufan, & Mitchell
But Mitchell, says the former operative, "had no experience whatsoever in Islamic extremism and ideology of al Qaeda." According to the former government official, Mitchell "never interrogated a person in his entire life and he came up with some crazy theories that anybody who's a professional in the agency or in the FBIall of us agreed at the time that this guy is a quack."
"It was imposed upon us," says the source. "And not only [at CIA] headquarters, they were getting requests specifically from the White House."
According to an intelligence officer involved in Abu Zubaydah's interrogation, Mitchell had "no idea about intelligence, no idea about interrogations, no idea about interviews."
"Who the hell authorizes these things?" Soufan reportedly asked the chief CIA officer in Thailand, as Mitchell began stripping the prisoner and blasting him with music from the Red Hot Chili Pepppers.
Tactics Bred Resistance
"We're the United States, we don't do this," Soufan is said to have told the CIA officers. According to the former operative, the CIA officer told Soufan, "It's coming from Alberto Gonzales." Gonzales was then White House counsel to President George W. Bush. Later, he would become Attorney General.
Mitchell used a program that he told those present was called "force continuum," an ascending interrogation program that began with forced nudity, followed by loud music and white noise, temperature manipulation and sleep deprivation for up to 48 hours. According to one officer on the scene, Mitchell said the program was a "strategic approach to diminish his ability to resist" the interrogators.
Soufan, will testify that Zubaydah didn't begin resisting until Mitchell began his tactics, according the source familiar with his upcoming testimony. So, Soufan blew the whistle. According to a Department of Justice inspector general report, Soufan told his superiors at FBI headquarters that Mitchell's interrogation was "borderline torture" and told FBI superiors that he wanted to arrest Mitchell for the treatment of Zubaydah.
"It was imposed upon us," says the source. "And not only [at CIA] headquarters, they were getting requests specifically from the White House."
According to an intelligence officer involved in Abu Zubaydah's interrogation, Mitchell had "no idea about intelligence, no idea about interrogations, no idea about interviews."
"Who the hell authorizes these things?" Soufan reportedly asked the chief CIA officer in Thailand, as Mitchell began stripping the prisoner and blasting him with music from the Red Hot Chili Pepppers.
Tactics Bred Resistance
"We're the United States, we don't do this," Soufan is said to have told the CIA officers. According to the former operative, the CIA officer told Soufan, "It's coming from Alberto Gonzales." Gonzales was then White House counsel to President George W. Bush. Later, he would become Attorney General.
Mitchell used a program that he told those present was called "force continuum," an ascending interrogation program that began with forced nudity, followed by loud music and white noise, temperature manipulation and sleep deprivation for up to 48 hours. According to one officer on the scene, Mitchell said the program was a "strategic approach to diminish his ability to resist" the interrogators.
Soufan, will testify that Zubaydah didn't begin resisting until Mitchell began his tactics, according the source familiar with his upcoming testimony. So, Soufan blew the whistle. According to a Department of Justice inspector general report, Soufan told his superiors at FBI headquarters that Mitchell's interrogation was "borderline torture" and told FBI superiors that he wanted to arrest Mitchell for the treatment of Zubaydah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)