Archives: Articles

 

 

11 March, 2011

Countercurrents.org

Ralph Nader calls Washington corporate-occupied territory – “every department agency controlled by the overwhelming presence of corporate lobbyists, corporate executives in high government positions, turning the government against its own people.”

Nader also said corporations don’t just control government, they are the government. “The corporation IS the government!” They bought and own it at the federal, state and local levels, running it like their private fiefdom at the expense of working Americans, systematically stripping them of hard-won rights.

They have 10,000 Political Action Committees and 35,000 full-time lobbyists. “Just imagine,” says Nader, “even the Labor Department is not controlled by trade unions – it’s (owned and) controlled by corporations.”

In 1938, Franklin Roosevelt defined the problem, saying:

“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism – ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power.”

Today it’s more virulent and pervasive than anything Roosevelt could have imagined, using corrupted politicians to smash worker rights.

It’s more evidence of America’s fake democracy and the criminal class running it. Politicians are bought like toothpaste. Mock elections pretend to be real. Behind the scenes power players control everything, supported by brazen media misreporting, whether about war and peace, the rule of law, or other vital issues, including worker rights.

Overnight on March 9, fascist Republicans erased them in five minutes, in violation of Wisconsin’s open meetings law, requiring “24 hours prior to the commencement of (special sessions) unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical.”

The measure had nothing to do with budget-balancing. It’s corporate ordered union busting. Wisconsin is a microcosm of America, ground zero, now breached as well as Ohio. Expect other states to follow. Public and private sector workers nationwide are losing out – betrayed by brazen politicians and corrupted union bosses, selling out rank and file members for self-enrichment and privilege.

On March 9, New York Times writer Monica Davey headlined, “Wisconsin Senate Limits Bargaining by Public Workers,” saying:

The 23-day “bitter political standoff in Wisconsin over Gov. Walker’s bid to sharply curtail (public worker) collective bargaining (rights) ended abruptly Wednesday night as” on-the-take Senate Republicans rammed through an illegitimate bill, voting 18 – 1 – with no debate or Democrat members present.

On March 10, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (JS) writers Patrick Marley and Lee Bergquist headlined, “Maneuver ignites furious protests,” saying:

Republicans secretly “devised a plan to get around the impasse and hurriedly approved the bill late in the day.” Some financial issues were removed to be voted on separately. Included were provisions raising worker healthcare and pension contributions. Democrat Senator Bob Jauch called it ‘political thuggery,’ saying ‘it’s akin to political hara-kiri. I think it’s political suicide.’ “

The measure gives Walker dictatorial power over BadgerCare health coverage for low-paid Wisconsinites earning too much for Medicaid. It also makes 37 civil service jobs political appointments.

Moreover, state and local public employees must pay half their annual pensions cost contributions, and minimally 12.6% of healthcare premiums. In addition, future pay raises are pegged to annual CPI increases, a rigged index not reflecting true inflation. Greater ones may only be approved by statewide referendum, a cumbersome process taking time.

Further, unions must hold annual votes to let workers decide whether or not to be members, and state authorities no longer will collect union dues from paychecks.

On March 10, Wisconsin’s Republican controlled State Assembly easily passed the measure 53 – 42. Walker will sign it into law – by diktat, not democracy.

On March 10, JS writers Lee Bergquist, Jason Stein and Bill Glauber headlined, “Demonstrators crowd Capitol in wild scene after Senate vote,” saying:

“Protesters took back control of the Capitol on Wednesday night after Senate Republicans” stripped their collective bargaining rights. “Surging past security, (they) reclaimed the Capitol rotunda….”

Others outside chanted, “Let us in.” Inside, they yelled, “You lied to Wisconsin” and “Kill the Bill.” In a shocking act of betrayal, the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), representing 98,000 public education employees, instructed teachers to return to classrooms, instead of calling for a general strike to shut down the entire state until the bill is reversed. Growing numbers of teachers and other workers demand one.

Ahead of the Senate vote, email exchanges between Walker and Democrats suggested a deal, involving union certification votes triannually instead of as approved as well as other compromises. All along Democrats, like union bosses, planned capitulation, but needed enough cover to fool constituents.

On March 10, Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal gave Walker op-ed space to headline, “Why I’m Fighting in Wisconsin,” claiming:

He’s doing it “to avoid mass teacher layoffs and reward our best performers,” when, in fact, he and other Democrat and Republican governors and lawmakers are destroying public education in their states, and making public university tuitions unaffordable for millions of aspiring students with inadequate family and personal resources to afford them.

Nonetheless, Walker claimed the bill’s passage is “good for the Badger State’s hard-working taxpayers. It will also be good for state and local government employees who overwhelmingly want to do their jobs well….Our (union busting) bill is a commitment to the future so our children won’t face even more dire consequences than we face today, and teachers (won’t have to be) laid off (so) government (can) work for” everyone in Wisconsin.

It’s instructive to remember journalist IF Stone’s admonition to young journalists, telling them:

“All governments lie,” or at other times, saying, “All governments are run by liars and nothing they say should be believed.” Who better than Walker and Obama prove it. Like other corrupted politicians, the president is no friend of labor.

A Final Comment

Wisconsin Republicans’ Wednesday night putch was preceded a week earlier by Walker demanding at least $1.5 billion in budget cuts, besides earlier ones enacted, including:

— $1.25 billion from schools and local governments, including $900 million in education funding (or $500 per student), exposing his real education agenda;

— $500 million from Medicaid at the expense of a million needy Wisconsinites dependent on it; and

— $250 million from the University of Wisconsin, besides sharp tuition hikes, wage and benefit reductions, separating the main Madison campus from others, and possibly privatizing the system, ruining it by selling it off to profiteers.

Now, with collective bargaining gone, all other rights are threatened, except one – a mass action general strike, shutting down the state, staying out until Walker’s coup is reversed. Protests aren’t enough. Inflicting pain on politicians and corporate interests is crucial. Nothing less can work with firm non-negotiable demands for:

— restoring collective bargaining rights;

— social spending increases, not cuts, especially for healthcare, education, and aid to Wisconsin’s most needy;

— recalling all Democrat and Republican politicians, eligible under state law, requiring one year in office before possible; and

— replacing corrupted union bosses who sold out their rank and file members for self-enrichment and privilege.

Negotiations failed. Mobilized, committed, unified mass action is essential as quickly as possible. On Wisconsin! Then take the campaign nationwide, especially to ground zero in Washington, the heart of corrupted power.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

 

 

 

President Obama can choose war with Moammar Gadhafi, or he can choose to keep the U.S. military out of Libya. But, contrary to claims of Sen. John Kerry and a platoon of pundits, Obama cannot walk a middle line by imposing a “no-fly zone” or staging an antiseptic air campaign.

Imposing a no-fly zone is not a step short of war – it is war. And how many Americans are willing to go to war for Libya?

Many commentators, hoping a no-fly zone would end Gadhafi’s air attacks on protesters and rebels, point to the decade-long no-fly rules the United States enforced in Iraq. But Michael Knights, a leading expert on no-fly zones, says that the Iraq model is neither apt nor desirable. Knights, a Lafer fellow in the Washington Institute’s Military and Security Studies Program, wrote his doctoral dissertation on no-fly zones. He says enforcing a no-fly zone “is basically an act of war.”

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates seems to agree. “A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses.” This would include – as Kerry put it on CBS on Sunday – “cratering their runways” to ground their jets. “An attack on Libya,” as Gates puts it, which would mean dropping bombs or shooting rockets, is pretty hard to distinguish from war.

On Iraq, it’s crucial to remember our no-fly zone there followed Operation Desert Storm – an invasion of Iraq. Knights told me that “no-fly zones are best utilized in countries that you already have quasi-war relations with,” either following a war like Desert Storm or as “preparatory actions” for a war.

And there’s no logic behind simply stopping Gadhafi’s jets. AP quoted reports Wednesday that Libyan tanks are firing “randomly” on homes in Zawiyah. Gadhafi also has artillery – plenty of it. There’s no coherent justification for the U.S. military shutting down Gadhafi’s jets but not his howitzers and tanks. If we do no-fly, we also have to do no-tank and no-cannons. You see how things start to get sticky.

Americans could take out Libyan tanks and cannons from the air, but can pilots really tell the difference between a tank driven by a soldier still loyal to Gadhafi and one driven by a rebel soldier? U.S. pilots could easily confuse farmers’ tractors for mortars.

And does anyone doubt that Gadhafi is evil enough to put anti-aircraft weapons on the back of a school bus or the roof of a mosque. So do American pilots bomb a mosque or risk getting their jets shot down? War often involves terrible choices like that – which is one reason it’s good to stay out of war when you can.

Many of the hawks today calling for a no-fly zone admit they want war with Libya. D.B. Grady, a former paratrooper now a writer at the Atlantic, put bluntly the advantage of a no-fly zone: First the United States would have to clear the zone with attacks on air defenses. “Once the first U.S. missile strikes the first Libyan target, the shock is gone and the stage is set for continued operations. It’s far easier to launch the second missile.”

But others draw an imaginary line between no-fly and war. Kerry, after advocating the “cratering” of Libyan runways, said on CBS, “The last thing we want to think about is any kind of military intervention. And I don’t consider the no-fly zone stepping over that line,”

Some of this talk is just political spin – politicians and laptop generals hoping Americans won’t balk at a war if it’s not called a war. Iraq hawks pulled the same bait-and-switch tactic in 2002 and early 2003: promising the nation a cakewalk and then scolding President Bush and the American people for lacking the “resolve” for a bloody, protracted occupation.

But the word games also matter because of the so-called “Pottery Store Rule”: You break it, you buy it.

What constitutes “breaking” Gadhafi? At what point does the United States “own” the rebuilding of Libya in the way it has responsibility for nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan. Can America “crater” a country’s runways, bomb its tanks, blow up its howitzers, and shoot down its jets – and then walk away from the rubble?

Gates apparently doesn’t harbor the same illusion Kerry does – that we can flex military muscle in Libya but keep our hands clean. It’s like the old saying that you can’t be a little bit pregnant. Gates knows a third war in the Muslim world would be tough for our military, tough for our budget and tough for the American people to bear.

Timothy P.Carney, The Examiner’s senior political columnist, can be contacted at tcarney@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Monday and Thursday, and his stories and blog posts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.

 

 

11 March, 2011

The Guardian

Bradley Manning, the US soldier being held in solitary confinement on suspicion of having released state secrets to WikiLeaks, has spoken out for the first time about what he claims is his punitive and unlawful treatment in military prison.

In an 11-page legal letter released by his lawyer, David Coombs, Manning sets out in his own words how he has been “left to languish under the unduly harsh conditions of max [security] custody” ever since he was brought from Kuwait to the military brig of Quantico marine base in Virginia in July last year. He describes how he was put on suicide watch in January, how he is currently being stripped naked every night, and how he is in general terms being subjected to what he calls “unlawful pre-trial punishment”.

It is the first time Manning has spoken publicly about his treatment, having previously only been heard through the intermediaries of his lawyer and a friend. Details that have emerged up to now have inspired the UN to launch an inquiry into whether the conditions amount to torture, and have led to protests to the US government from Amnesty International.

The most graphic passage of the letter is Manning’s description of how he was placed on suicide watch for three days from 18 January. “I was stripped of all clothing with the exception of my underwear. My prescription eyeglasses were taken away from me and I was forced to sit in essential blindness.”

Manning writes that he believes the suicide watch was imposed not because he was a danger to himself but as retribution for a protest about his treatment held outside Quantico the day before. Immediately before the suicide watch started, he said guards verbally harassed him, taunting him with conflicting orders.

When he was told he was being put on suicide watch, he writes, “I became upset. Out of frustration, I clenched my hair with my fingers and yelled: ‘Why are you doing this to me? Why am I being punished? I have done nothing wrong.'”

He also describes the experience of being stripped naked at night and made to stand for parade in the nude, a condition that continues to this day. “The guard told me to stand at parade rest, with my hands behind my back and my legs spaced shoulder-width apart. I stood at parade rest for about three minutes … The [brig supervisor] and the other guards walked past my cell. He looked at me, paused for a moment, then continued to the next cell. I was incredibly embarrassed at having all these people stare at me naked.”

Manning has been charged with multiple counts relating to the leaking of hundreds of thousands of secret US government cables, videos and warlogs from Iraq and Afghanistan to WikiLeaks. The charges include “aiding the enemy”, which can carry the death penalty.

The legal letter was addressed to the US military authorities and was drawn up in response to their recent decision to keep Manning on a restriction order called Prevention of Injury (PoI). It means he is kept in his cell alone for 23 hours a day and checked every five minutes by guards including, if necessary, through the night.

The letter contains excerpts from the observation records kept in the brig which consistently report that Manning is “respectful, courteous and well spoken” and “does not have any suicidal feelings at this time”.

Sixteen separate entries made from 27 August until the records stop on 28 January show that Manning was evaluated by prison psychiatrists who found he was not a danger to himself and should be removed from the PoI order.

      6 March, 2011

A FORMER Israeli ambassador to South Africa has pointedly resigned from the foreign service, citing the collapse of apartheid South Africa as an important lesson for modern-day Israel.

“For 46 years the apartheid government strove by force of arms to achieve regional hegemony,” wrote Ilan Baruch wrote to his colleagues in the Israeli foreign ministry in a parting letter. “Apartheid was supported by almost everyone in the white community, not necessarily as a racist theory but as a policy of self-defence. There was denial of the moral price.”

Mr Baruch stressed that “those who accuse Israel of South Africa-style apartheid are plain wrong. That is a vengeful and vicious calumny against Zionism… However, I do believe that the South African experience needs to be studied.” He explained in his letter that he found himself no longer able to represent Israel because the government of Binyamin Netanyahu had no interest in a peace process based on land for peace and designed to end the conflict with the Palestinians.

Government spokesmen, he wrote, had repeatedly rejected the international demand that Israel withdraw from the occupied Palestinian territories. “They spurn the Annapolis process, they ignore the Road Map [two American peace initiatives from the Bush years which Israel accepted at the time]. The upshot is a malignant diplomatic dynamic which threatens Israel’s international standing and undermines the legitimacy not only of its occupation but of its very membership in the family of nations.”

He was, therefore, taking early retirement, Mr Baruch announced. He is the first and thus far the only member of the foreign service to quit since Mr Netanyahu became prime minister two years ago and installed Avigdor Lieberman, leader of the hard-right Yisrael Beitenu party, as foreign minister. He says he received dozens of e-mails and text messages from colleagues thanking him for expressing what many in the ministry think. No-one wrote condemning his action. Most of his colleagues wrote nothing at all. Perhaps, he surmises, people were not anxious to put their thoughts in traceable writing.

The foreign ministry itself issued a statement saying that Mr Baruch had applied last year to be ambassador to Egypt, had failed to get the appointment—and that was why he was leaving.

Mr Baruch dismisses that as petty and spiteful. He admits, though, that if he were younger or poorer he probably would not have left, “but rather have sought a low-profile posting where one can keep one’s head down and wait. A sort of unarticulated, internal resignation; that’s what many people do.”

In his letter, Mr Baruch cautioned that “the paternalistic depiction of Israel as a front-line fortress in a global inter-cultural and inter-religious conflict is dangerous. The depiction of the opposition within the international community to Israel’s occupation policy as anti-Semitism is simplistic, provincial and superficial.”

Mr Baruch took a stinging swipe at the foreign ministry’s efforts to change Israel’s branding as a way of improving its international standing. “The concept that the answer to the various threats to our national security lies in expanding our public advocacy and in promoting Israel’s image as a leader in world technology—that concept is an illusion.”

Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister in the previous government and now leader of the opposition, supported Mr Baruch’s critique. “Public relations without policy is no solution,” she said. “Perhaps [Mr Netanyahu] really believes that speaking in fluent English on foreign television stations creates change. But it doesn’t.”

 

12 March, 2011

Men who recently crossed into Tunisia from Libya walk through a United Nations displacement camp on March 10, 2011 in Ras Jdir, Tunisia

After a week of heavy fighting in the strategically oil-important town of Zawiyah rebels have finally been overthrown by Gaddafi’s forces.

At the same time, according to the local TV station reports, the port city of Ras Lanuf has been cleaned of Al-Qaeda supporters. For several days now Gaddafi’s forces have remained in control there too.

On the ground in Libya, while it certainly does seem as if Gaddafi’s men are pushing back and winning the battle there, on the international stage it is the rebels who are really coming in the front. The EU ministers in Brussels met on Friday for the second round of negotiations over the international response. Leaders of major powers discussed whether or not to go ahead with some kind of no-fly zone or foreign intervention.

The International Red Cross describes Libya as now being in the midst of a civil war. Ministers from the Gulf Co-operation Council – which represents six Arab states – have called the Libyan regime illegitimate.

However, Libyans themselves do not consider the situation being that serious. Many locals make the point that the global media’s tendency to put drama above reality is encouraging foreign intervention.

There is good deal more negotiating happening on the international stage over the merits of intervention and a no-fly zone than the bargaining taking place in the downtown Tripoli market. Shops here close early nowadays.

People are afraid and many of the Africans who used to work here have fled the country. And the argument that Libya is on the brink of civil war, so foreign intervention is needed, still seems to ring a little hollow.

“There have been several hundred people killed, but it is not a huge level of violence. It certainly is not a global level of violence that would normally merit intervention,” John Laughland from the Institute of Democracy and Co-operation.

Gaddafi has offered access to foreign media, but only if the camera lenses stay well away from any of the opposition. But it is a similar picture in the opposition strongholds.

Dr. Ramadan Breki, the director of the Quryna newspaper was forced to close the Benghazi office of his newspaper because of pressure from rebels. You have to print their version of events, he says, or nothing at all.

“The media is going to the hotspots and all these cities are controlled by the rebels and the independent people, they are afraid and they cannot tell the news what they think and what they believe,” explains Breki.

And many of Gaddafi’s supporters fear that while he may be winning the war with the rebels, he is losing the information war.

Schoolgirl Mona Jama Mohammed from Janzur, a town some 13km away from the capital Tripoli, says she is puzzled and angered by reports that mercenaries were shooting people in her town.

“It is normal: teachers come and we get the lessons, and we write the homework. Normal life,” she says.

And life certainly seems calm on the streets. As for conflicts elsewhere where the death count is climbing. There is little media coverage and even less foreign interest to intervene.

“There are events unfolding now in [Cote d’Ivoire], where there is also an armed conflict between rebels and the government, but nobody seems to be thinking of that. It is only because fashionable attention is focused on Libya,” says John Laughland from the Institute of Democracy and Co-operation.

“The only reason they are interested in Libya is about the oil. Think we will be in Iraq if the major export there was broccoli?” questions Gerald Celente, the director of the Trenda Research Institute

So as leaders met in Brussels to discuss the fate of a country hundreds of miles away, many Libyans are saying that it is their mess, and they will clean it up.

 

 

 

 

 

Indian air force’s Sukhoi jets India accounts for 9% of global arms imports

Continue reading the main story

US defence deals have become big business

India has overtaken China to become the world’s largest importer of arms, a Sweden-based think tank says.

A report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri) says India accounted for 9% of all weapons imports between 2006 and 2010.

India will continue to be to the leading arms importer in the coming future, the report adds.

With a $32.5bn (£20.2bn) defence budget, India imports more than 70% of its arms.

It is looking to spend more than $50bn over the next five years to modernise its armed forces, including a $10bn deal to buy 126 new fighter jets.

India’s increased spending on arms also comes amid rising concerns about China’s growing power, and its traditional rivalry with neighbouring Pakistan, with which is has fought three wars.

‘Big boy’

“India has ambitions to become first a continental and [then] a regional power,” South Asian defence analyst Rahul Bedi told the Associated Press news agency.

“To become a big boy, you need to project your power.”

A senior fellow at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said India would continue to be a top importer for the years to come.

“Just from what they have already ordered, we know that in the coming few years India will be the top importer,” said Siemon Wezeman.

He said China had dropped to second place with 6% of the global weapons as it develops its domestic arms industry.

The US remained the world’s largest weapons exporter, followed by Russia and Germany, the report says.

Last October, India announced that it would buy 250 to 300 advanced fifth-generation stealth fighter jets from Russia over the next 10 years.

The deal, which could be worth up to $30bn, is believed to be the largest in India’s military history.

 

 

14 March, 2011

Countercurrents.org

The people’s revolution is on its track; calling for the removal of the regime and performing various activities on the road to victory. In the past week several remarakable activities were undertaken with resounding success. First came the picketing of the financial harbour owned by the regime’s prime minister, Khalifa bin Salman Al Khalifa. It was conducted at night when hundreds of protesters moved from their base at the Pearl Square and took position near the main financial centre. Then came the massive demonstration and picketing of the main torture headquarters at Bahrain’s Fort where a human wave flooded to highlight the role that place had been playing in torturing Bahrainis over the years. It stands as a reminder of the most brutal periods of the Al Khalifa reign of terror. The revolutionaries then organised another qualitative demonstration outside the main TV station which is the mouthpiece of the repressive Al Khalifa regime. In addition to these there have been massive demonstrations nearer to the Pearl Square where hundreds of thousands took part chanting anti regime slogans and calling form a regime change. Today, one of the demonstrations was held outside the government offices in Qudhaibiya where participants called for the downfall of the regime.

Meanwhile, the mothers of the martyrs have appealed to political parties not to engage in dialogue with the regime. The mother of Ali Abdul Hadi Mushaime, the first of the martyrs of the revolution has vowed to spend her life to oppose the Al Khalifa until their downfall. Today, the mother of the martyr Mahmood Abu Taki confirmed that the family had received calls from the Al Khalifa who had killed their son offering to buy off their silence with money but they refused and insisted that we only accept the demands of the 14th February revolutionaries. Also, Nidhal the son of Karzakkan martyr Isa Abdul Hassan confirmed a similar move by the killers. He told them he has nothing to add to what the people want; the downfall of the regime and that the blood of the martyrs cannot be bought with money or promises. Similar statements have been attributed to the son of martyr Ali Khudhair who said that there is only one demand; the downfall of the regime. In light of these development s, it is now expected that the coming activities will be more serious and the regimes could use violence to suppress the people, in which case, that will be the needed fuel for the final push to oust this hereditary dictatorship.

While the revolutionary activities continue unabated, the Americans have entered the political arena forcefully. In the past week, Jeffrey Feltman , the Assistant Secretary of State for the Near East, has been lobbying the political societies to lure them to engage in what he calls “dialogue” in line with what the Al Khalifa crown prince had suggested. When these societies presented some conditions, he said that dialogue must be without conditions. There has been negative reaction to the American proposals which clearly aim at safeguarding the ruling family in the face of the collective popular decision calling for its downfall. The US is better advised not to stand again on the wrong side of history by supporting this dictatorial regime. The Al Khalifa system of government is unsustainable as has been proven by the events of the recent history. Bahrain has not been stable, and the apparent stability was only achieved with the use of violence against Bahrainis, torture , intimidation and dictatorship. If they are granted more time, the Al Khalifa will resort to the same style of dictatorship, repression and human rights violations. The US needs to fundamentally revise their strategy that has only led to regime changes at their expense.

Bahrain Freedom Movement

6th March 2011

 

 

14 March, 2011

AL MANAR

Half a century ago, during the late Senator Joseph McCarthy fueled “great red’ scare” that terrorized many in America, my kindergarten teacher at Milwaukie Grammar School in Oregon, Miss Kidd, used to instruct our class of five and six year olds how to prepare for the coming Atomic bomb attack from the communists in the Soviet Union, who she explained, “did not like our freedom and wanted to kill all Americans.”

As I recall, the twice weekly A-bomb practice sessions were actually sort of fun. Complete with squealing and sometimes trembling, pants wetting or crying classmates dropping to the floor as Miss Kidd, right in the middle of reading us a nice story like “Life on the Prairie”, from her chair in front of the class, would pause, remove her glasses, look toward the windows, slap shut the storybook on her lap, and shout “down!”

We approximately 25 or so tykes would scramble to take out the white sheet from our desks (it had to be a white Miss Kidd told us in order to reflect the ‘uranium radiation’ off of us-some of us told our Moms not to give us colored sheets or we might die). We would quickly lie down on the floor under the protection of the desk and facing away from the windows from which Miss Kidd told us glass would fly when the blast occurred and the mushroom cloud arrived over our nearby playground. We were to lay quiet, without even saying goodbye to our friends, until Miss Kidd would motherly intone: “All is clear!” as she resumed the story after we folded up our sheets and came to order with hands folded together on our desk tops.

When I asked my, Franklin Roosevelt devoted new dealer dad (hence my prenom) why we did not practice for the coming Atomic bomb at home he would say not to worry son, it’s just a Republican trick to scare us. After my dad’s comforting words, I never did worry much about the ‘Red menace’ or the soon to follow ‘Yellow menace’ of the Vietnam era, the Black Power menace, the Illegal Immigrant menace or the current menace du jour, the great “Islamic Terrorist menace.”

I have no idea what Republican Congressman Peter King’s dad told him but it was apparently something I was never told.

What is wrong with King’s Muslim scare hearings on “The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and That Community’s Response” (he plans more every couple of months), is what was wrong with McCarthy’s House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) hearings in the 1950’s and that they constitute an irresponsible overgeneralization under which patriotic Americans were irrationally targeted as state enemies.

Peter King, as with Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee among others, habitually grovels to Israel as he seeks higher office and his witch hunting “Muslim Terrorism” hearings suit the Israeli lobby just fine. Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), the highest-ranking Jewish member of Congress, is squarely behind King as he receives strong criticism from civil libertarians and religious groups over his decision to target one group in his ” fact finding investigation.”

Frankly, King is widely believed to have reached his conclusions long before he decided on holding a Congressional hearing. From a House committee room near King’s, Cantor is urging these days a near cut off of all American foreign aid except to Israel, for whom he has pledged to preserve the $8 million dollar per day-every day of the year- of borrowed US taxpayer money that most Americans do not realize is gifted to the occupiers of Palestine.

King comes across as a prejudiced lawmaker determined to demonize American Muslims as violent radicals. At a time when the U.S. needs the goodwill of domestic Muslim communities to safeguard homeland security, King is reinforcing fear and lack of trust and while potentially weakening mutual respect among Americans.

King has a long history of Islamophobic diatribes and he recently told the newly formed Manhattan Government Relations Committee of UJA-Federation of New York, about the need for constant vigilance to guard against the threat of Islamic terrorism worldwide.

The threat is real,” he said. “We can’t protect everyone everywhere, so we should go where the greatest threat is”, as he explained that his priority would be to make sure that security grants are allocated to those chosen and with the greatest need, including his state of New York and Jewish groups.

King consistently misrepresents the facts. As Middle Eas t specialist Mohamed Khodr instructs us, between 1980 and 2005, according to FBI statistics less than six percent of terrorist incidents during this fifteen year period were committed by Muslims, while 94% were committed by non-Muslims. Moreover, 23 of the 24 recorded terrorist incidents (2002-2005) were carried out by domestic terrorists The FBI claims that of the 83 terrorist attacks in the United States between 9/11 and the end of 2009, only three were clearly connected with the jihadist cause. (3.6% of total)

The picture is similar in Europe. Of a total of 1,571 terrorist attacks in the E.U. from 2006-2008 only 6 were committed by Islamist terrorists which translates to less than 0.4% of all attacks, which means 99.6% of all attacks were committed by Non-Muslims.

According to the FBI, with the exception of a white supremacist’s firebombing of a synagogue in Oklahoma City, all of the domestic terrorist incidents were committed by special interest extremists active in the animal rights and environmental movements

In the face of this research, King still insists that 85 percent of American mosques have “extremist leadership” are “the enemy within” and that ordinary American Muslims are not opposed to terrorism. Yet a 2004 survey of mosque congregations in greater Detroit conducted by the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding found that the vast majority of mosque participants shun extremist views (92 percent) and are virtually unanimous (93 percent) in supporting community service and political involvement. Terrorists tend to hatch their plots via the Internet not in Mosques.

Kings, ‘Muslim Terrorism” hearings are the first and hopefully the last of its kind to focus on a single religious group. His false assumptions are being roundly rejected across America and Europe. Counterterrorism experts, veteran’s organizations, interfaith leaders, local leaders and editorial boards, and most importantly the American public are rejecting King’s racist calumny.

The reason is that his team’s hateful and reprehensible project represents the wrong approach to homeland security, arguably violates the First Amendment to the US Constitution which enjoins singling out a particular religion and the growing realization that his crusade is actually harmful to America’s anti-terrorism efforts both at home and abroad.

Franklin Lamb is reachable c/o fplamb@gmail.com

 

U.S. Representative Peter King (R-NY), who once said 85% of American Muslim community leaders are “an enemy living amongst us,” is set to hold hearings today to investigate “the extent of radicalization of American Muslims.” The idea of hearings that single out one ethnic or religious group in the United States is profoundly offensive to me as a Jew, a Rabbi, an American, and a human being.   These hearings come on the heels of a string of shockingly racist attacks and campaigns against Muslims in the United States including:

Villa Park Councilwoman Deborah Pauly in Orange County, who called a fundraiser for womens’ shelters sponsored by the Islamic Circle of North America Relief USA(ICNA) “pure unadulterated evil” and said, “I know quite a few Marines who will be very happy to help these terrorists to an early meeting in paradise.”

Efforts to stop the building of mosques and Muslim community centers around the country.

The District Attorney’s unprecedented criminalization of Muslim students in Orange County for engaging in a garden-variety student protest.

It is painful to see some Jewish groups promoting this hatred and fear because they mistakenly believe it will help Israel. It is also deeply distressing to see this disturbing trend of scapegoating Muslim-Americans being echoed at the highest levels of our government.

Every fiber of our being, as Jews and people of good will, should vibrate with astonishment at these incidents. But if we view this spectacle with “old eyes,” as Rabbi Leo Baeck observed upon witnessing the events in 1930s Germany, we must acknowledge that we know this place and time in history from our own experience.

For Jews, viewing the creation of a national narrative about Muslims as “the harmful other” reminds us of our past in Europe in ancient Egypt, and even in early 20th Century America. By trying to assign Muslim-Americans and Islam to the role of the source of evil, they inflame

passions and add enmity not only to the American discourse but also to the Israeli-Palestinian

conflict.

In this season of change in the Middle East, as people call for freedom, democracy and equality– largely inspired by the promise of our own democracy– we should be seeking to build bridges of understanding, not separation.

Examples of work we continue to do to fight anti-Muslim bigotry:

• JewsonFirst.org produced a rebuttal of the “documentary” Obsession that sought to brand all Islam a continuation of Nazism.
• JewsOnFirst.org responded to the protests against mosques with its essay: A Muslim Community Center? Why Not?: Why Should Jews Care?” asking “What kind of society will the United States become if Muslims are denied their rights?”
• Jewish Voice for Peace stood up for the rights of Muslims to build the Park 51 community center while opposing a Museum of Tolerance built on a Muslim cemetery.
• Jewish Voice for Peace brought rabbis together in support of this Islamic community center in New Jersey
• Jewish Voice for Peace delivered signatures in support of the Irvine 11, the Muslim students facing prison time for protesting human rights violations at the speech of Israeli ambassador Michael Oren.

 

Member, Jewish Voice for Peace Rabbinic Council

Founder, Jews On First

 

 

15 March, 2011

Countercurrents.org

 

Officially, Japan’s nuclear emergency is under control and contained. In fact, lies substitute for truths, denial for reality, and managed news for honest reporting.

Point of fact: Besides its catastrophic quake, tsunami, destructive aftershocks, and resulting humanitarian crisis, Japan is experiencing a developing nuclear catastrophe, the full extent not known until independent sources reveal it.

On March 12, a huge explosion rocked Fukushima’s Unit 1 reactor. Reports said its containment chamber was intact. Independent experts are skeptical, believing at least some damage occurred, perhaps a major breach now covered up. Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) blamed a core meltdown for the explosion, releasing hazardous atmospheric radioactive cesium-137 and iodine-131.

Greenpeace said:

“This proves once and for all that nuclear power cannot ever be safe. Japan’s nuclear plants were built….to withstand natural disasters, yet we still face potential meltdown” disaster.

Nuclear expert Helen Caldicott said atmospheric cesium-137 and iodine 131 releases pose grave human health risks. “All of these substances can cause cancer and genetic diseases either in the near or long term.” Why are “we mad enough to introduce this disastrous form of energy into our lives,” knowing major catastrophes are inevitable, especially in earthquake prone areas like Japan, California, and other vulnerable locations, many throughout the world.

Caldicott added in an email to this writer that the situation is “beyond terrifying!!!” Moreover, downplaying the potential severity is outrageous, irresponsible and criminal. Literally, millions of lives potentially are at risk. Further, nothing short of shutting down and dismantling all nuclear facilities is crucial. They’re all ticking time bombs waiting to explode, especially ones in seismically active areas.

On March 12, nuclear expert Karl Grossman’s CounterPunch article headlined, “Don’t Worry, It’s Just a Little Radiation,” saying:

Lies always follow major events like Fukushima. Saying modest atmospheric radiation levels won’t have long-term environmental and human health effects is deceitfully false. Grossman quoted the US Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI – the industry trade group) stating:

“The Japanese prime minister and the industry safety agency say all plants in the country are safe and that there has been no radiation release from any reactors,” when, in fact, NISA confirmed it with few details.

On March 13, NEI said there’s no danger of a Chernobyl-like event, when, in fact, the threat potential far exceeds it. “Japanese nuclear facilities are designed to withstand powerful seismic events,” it said. In fact, substantial damage occurred, its full extent not revealed.

Like Japan’s prime minister and other government officials, NEI is paid to lie to protect powerful member interests like General Electric. Its Nuclear Energy division is a major producer of “advanced reactor technologies” and related services.

Moreover, claiming failsafe systems prevent nuclear disasters is patently false, Grossman saying:

“In fact, like any machinery, nuclear plants can – and regularly do – undergo accidents. The big difference with atomic energy: the malfunctions can end up killing large numbers of people and impact other life as well.”

At worst, however, entire countries, regions or planet earth may be catastrophically harmed. Potentially, Japan’s meltdown triggered that type event. Full scale damage control is concealing it, or at least the possibility that it’s happening.

Chernobyl’s disaster, in fact, affected the entire Northern Hemisphere, killing almost a million people. Multiple Japanese reactor meltdowns may far exceed it, Grossman saying:

“Nuclear power plants are, in fact, life-threatening wherever they are – they represent the most dangerous way to boil water ever devised.” Readily available “(w)ind, solar and geothermal energy and other forms of safe, clean power would” prevent the deadly fallout from Japan’s catastrophe, threatening the entire Pacific rim and beyond, but using them would be bad for business. Companies like GE have plenty of clout to prevent it, placing bottom line priorities above humanity’s survival.

Second Nuclear Explosion Rocks Japan

On March 14, Reuters headlined, “Japan grapples with nuclear crisis,” saying:

A second explosion blew off a containment facility’s roof. A third reactor’s cooling system failed. Officials claimed no reactor’s been harmed. As explained above, independent experts are skeptical, believing powerful explosions damage or destroy everything nearby, what official reports won’t reveal.

As a result, “Japan scrambled to avert (multiple) meltdown(s) at a stricken nuclear reactor on Monday.”

Live NHK video showed the reactor facility’s skeletal remains, thick smoke rising and spreading. Multiple injuries were reported. Workers inside were exposed to extremely high radiation levels endangering their lives.

Thousands of quake/tsunami-related deaths are confirmed. Tens of thousands are missing and unaccounted for. In Otsuchi, ICRC’s Patrick Fuller described “a scene from hell, absolutely nightmarish.” As many as 10,000 people, half the town’s population, may have perished, besides many others in Northern Japan.

Spreading Atmospheric Radiation

Massive atmospheric radiation is feared, frantic Fukushima engineers trying to contain it. Multiple reactors are affected. Full scale official and media damage control efforts are suppressing bad news. The IAEA said Japan added a third troubled plant, Onagawa, to others under a state of emergency because of failed cooling systems and radiation releases. Later reports suggested Onagawa experienced no leaks, whether or not true. Be skeptical.

On March 13, New York Times writers David Sanger and Matthew Wald headlined, “Radioactive Releases in Japan Could Last Months, Experts Say,” stating:

Flooding two stricken reactors with corrosive seawater (rendering them henceforth inoperable) is “a desperate step to avoid a much bigger problem: a full meltdown,” perhaps ongoing but concealed. Japanese officials and media reports call it “partial.” Radioactive steam is being released to relieve pressure, spreading atmospheric poison.

A widening area is being contaminated. Tens of thousands evacuated “may not be able to return to their homes for a considerable period,” perhaps never, depending on contamination levels. “More steam releases also mean (spreading contamination) across the Pacific….” Discount America’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission saying:

“Hawaii, Alaska, the US Territories, and the US West Coast are not expected to experience any harmful levels of radioactivity.”

False! Atmospheric winds and rain potentially may contaminate planet earth, some areas more than others. A worried unnamed official said, “under the best scenarios, this isn’t going to end anytime soon,” or perhaps well.

Another concern affects some Japanese reactors plus others in France and Germany. They use mox (mixed oxide) fuel, containing reclaimed plutonium – the most hazardous known substance. When ingested, a tiny spec can kill. Larger inhaled atmospheric amounts could devastate whole cities. Two damaged Fukushima units use it, Nos. 2 and 3.

Sanger and Wald added:

“Inside the plant….there was deep concern that spent nuclear fuel that was kept in a ‘cooling pond’ (began) letting off potentially deadly gamma radiation. Then water levels inside the reactor cores began to fall. (An estimated) top four to nine feet of nuclear fuel in the core and control rods appear to have been exposed to the air – a condition that” caused melting, potentially a “full meltdown” that may, in fact, be happening.

Using corrosive seawater may, in fact, not work. Because of high containment vessel pressure, forcing it inside is like “trying to pour water into an inflated balloon,” according to one unnamed source. It’s not clear how much water is getting in and whether cores are covered. Damaged gauges make knowing it impossible, so doing it is seat-of-the-pants, a “Hail Mary” attempt at best.

Operating 55 nuclear facilities, Japan relies heavily on them for electricity, at present 30%, a figure expected to reach 50% by 2030 if planned additions are completed.

Tokyo Electric Power’s (TEPCO) Shoddy Maintenance and Safety Record

On March 12, Los Angeles Times writers Mark Magnier and Barbara Demick headlined, “Japanese fearful as nuclear crisis builds,” saying:

“(M)any Japanese don’t trust (what) authorities (tell) them” anymore. Moreover, they “have an uncomfortable relationship with nuclear power” and TEPCO, Fukushima’s operator.

“As many people (know, it) has a history of not being forthcoming about nuclear safety issues, particularly those surrounding earthquake-related dangers.”

In 2003, its 17 nuclear plants were temporarily shut for falsifying safety inspection reports. In 2006, it was learned that its coolant-water data at two plants were falsified in the 1980s. Critics have long expressed deep concern about safety at many of Japan’s nuclear facilities,” some dating from the 1970s and 1980s.

Fukushima especially “has long been on critics’ radar, but so has the Hamaoka plant,” 100 miles southwest of Toyko on an active fault line. In fact, Kobe University Professor Emeritus Katsuhiko Ishibashi said:

“I have been warning about Japan’s possibility of a genpatsu shinsai – a nuclear disaster,” explaining that many nuclear facilities are hazardously located in seismically unsafe locations. No one listened.

On March 13, Kyodo News said another cooling system failed at Tokai’s No. 2 facility, 120 km from Tokyo. Emergency measures were taken. Unreliable reports say a backup pump and cooling system are operating. Fukushima’s No. 1 and 3 reactors experienced meltdowns. Kyodo called its No. 2 “troubled,” raising fears of the worst there, besides what’s happening at Tokai No. 2 and perhaps other quake/tsunami affected reactors.

Third Reactor Explosion Rocks Japan

On March 14, New York Times writers Hiroko Tabuchi, David Sanger and Keith Bradsher headlined, “Japan Faces Potential Nuclear Disaster as Radiation Levels Rise,” saying:

“Japan’s nuclear crisis verged toward catastrophe” after a third explosion rocked another Fukushima reactor, “damag(ing) the vessel containing the nuclear core (spewing) large amounts of radioactive material into the air, according to the statements of Japanese government and industry officials.”

Even top officials who lie admitted “a very high risk” exists. In fact, it’s well beyond “risk.” It’s reality, affecting all Japan, the Pacific rim, and beyond. Clearly, a major catastrophe is unfolding.

What more is needed to demand an immediate shutdown and replacement of all nuclear facilities worldwide. Their continued use threatens all humanity.

A Final Comment

Of any magnitude, meltdowns aren’t minor, and no structures are earthquake or tsunami-proof. When most intense, Mother Nature prevails. Images of affected Japanese areas and damaged reactor facilities offer proof, besides the potentially massive, widespread human toll.

Sunday, March 13, on the Progressive Radio News Hour, Karl Grossman explained Japan’s “nuclear emergency,” discussed in detail on his blog site, accessed through the following link:

http://karlgrossman.blogspot.com/2011/03/japan-nuclear-emergency.html

Nuclear plants use radioactive material for heat to generate electricity. Huge amounts are needed. To prevent overheating, “vast amounts of coolant are required, up to a million gallons of water a minute.” Without it, meltdowns occur, because “in less than a minute,” temperatures can reach 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit – hot enough to “burn through the cement bottom of the nuclear plant” to earth beneath.

Nuclear scientists call it the “China syndrome,” meaning “it descends to the water table underlying a plant. Then, in a violent reaction, molten core and cold water combine, creating steam explosions and releasing a plume of radioactive poisons.”

Where it spreads depends on wind velocity, direction, and rain. Nuclear reactors are vulnerable, life-threatening, and “the most dangerous way to boil water ever devised.” Deactivating them is essential, especially when safe alternatives exist, so far spurned to pad bottom lines for companies like GE, concerned about profits, not human safety.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.