Thursday, July 31, 2008

THE HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE: VOLUME 22, ISSUE 41
SHOOTING BACK
by The Real News Network






















Under an initiative promoted by an Israeli human rights group, Palestinians were armed with 100 cameras to film real-life interactions and confrontations with Israeli settlers and troops.

The Guardian: Shooting back: Israeli occupation filmed by 100 Palestinian cameras In a graphic and hard-hitting film, Peter Beaumont speaks to Palestinians filming abuse from settlers and Israeli armed forces as part of a remarkable project called Shooting Back


Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Airing-the-Dirty Laundry Issue: VOLUME 21, ISSUE 40
THE STAGNANT HUSTLE
by Jennifer Rosario, A Matrix Correspondent



















Amongst the beauty, busyness, and chaos of New York City there is a constant strive amongst New Yorkers to make an extra dollar. Nearly every street corner is a Turkish bazaar with legitimate vendors who sell fruits and vegetables, dirty-water dogs, chips, bagels and coffee, along side other “vendors” hawking bootlegged colognes, purses, belts and movies, and must-go items that have “fallen off a UPS truck.”

I am promoter of social change and advocacy for the liberation of black people. By black liberation, I mean the ability to be culturally, spiritually, financially, and ultimately self-dependent.

As black people are we assisting or further paralyzing brothers and sisters by supporting their stagnant hustles? Should we give the black homeless man money? Would he stand on the same corner each day if he receives a certain amount of money every morning? What about the men and boys roaming the streets and highway exits selling bottled water out of a cooler on those hot summer days? What about the teens on the train selling candy bars “to help raise money for their school basketball uniforms/team”? Or bootleggers selling $5 bags, $10 colognes, $5 pirated dvd movies…they crowd the streets of trendy neighborhoods like SOHO, TriBeca, Greenwich Village running from police officers who request vendor licenses. Would it be wrong to suggest that black people, not support blacks in any of the above stated stagnant hustles?

One of the few times I’ve listened to the radio I heard a host state a message that has refrained my mentality around these hustles. He said something in the lines of:

“I would give money to a white homeless man before I give money to a black homeless man.”

The radio host’s theory was by giving money to the homeless you create a level of comfort and generate stagnation. However, by not supporting a black transient, you create discomfort and generate mobility within that person.

The act of supporting bootleggers, the teens selling candy bars on the train, and water bottles on the streets paralyze our youth and create a level of comfort that will generate a lack of social mobility and a creativity, consciousness.

Stagnant hustlers consider themselves entrepreneurs, giving them a false sense of earning a livable wage from these side-hustle, but these activities are not of an inspired entrepreneurial mind.

It can be argued that these brothers and sisters are making ends meet through the use of a legal/positive/harmless hustle as they themselves, e.g. the teens selling candy on the train would verbalize. Yes harmless, at times legal, but I must argue not positive. The argument that it’s legal is an excuse to attract supporters, however the more support, the more the stagnation.

As long as we continue to support these stagnate hustles we will further hurt our youth. In particular, youth of color tend to be under the impression that we’ve made it that things are all right. It has been a generation and a half since we were exposed to the lynching of black people, segregation, or accepted maltreatment. Black youths’ lack of knowledge and interest of the struggle has developed into laziness of the mind. For that reason, we can not support the uncreative, temporary, stagnant hustle and instead demand from youth to think beyond the quick dollar and exercise their energies into long-term solutions to start a business not a STAGNANT HUSTLE.

Sunday, July 27, 2008

THE REAL POLITIK ISSUE: VOLUME 20, ISSUE 39
THE HANDMAIDEN
by Malik Isasis

















Just as every modern politician before him, Barack Obama has went over to Israel and kissed the golden ring of the Israeli neocons. Obama predictably ignored the Palestinian apartheid, and overly sympathized with the Israeli government’s propaganda of victimhood, over its frequent aggressive bombings, assassinations and kidnappings. Obama’s platform of change rang hollow, as he visited the Holocaust memorial to lay a wreath. And just like every other politician before him, he arrogantly showed his cowardice to confront Israel on its dichotomy of morals by coughing up canned bullshit of blind servitude and unquestionable support.

Israeli neocons and corporate media have done something very clever. They have managed to take the genocide of six million Jewish people during World War II, trademark it, turn into a religion of worship and use it as a blunt instrument to colonize Arabs in the Middle East, and to control U.S. politicians to further, said colonization. No other genocide since, has had any relevance to the world.

Isn’t that right, Africa?

The Shakespearean Tragedy

Like Iago whispering twisted lies into Othello’s ear, the neoconservatives and The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC /Israel Lobby) have convinced George W. Bush, that democratization in the Middle East would result in a domino effect of democracy. The neoconservative cabal postulated that if Iraq were used as a model, Syria and Iran would surely follow with their own democratic revolutions, thus significantly or completely reducing the amount of terrorism. This was one of many rationales told to the American public after the Weapons of Mass Destruction claim fell apart upon further investigation, but the die for war had already been cast.

The Bush Administration, was filled to the brim with neocons such as Donald Rumsfield (former Secretary of Defense), Dick Cheney (current Vice President), Richard Perle (former member of Defense Policy Board under Bush Administration), Scooter Libby (former Chief of Staff), James Woosely (former CIA Director), John Bolton (former UN Ambassador), Paul Wolfowitz (former Under Secretary of Defense) and the late Jeane Kirkpatrick (former United Nations Human Rights Commission) all, signatories to a preemption manifesto called “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” The manisfesto was originally submitted to President Clinton in the late 90s.

Many in the anti-war movement accused the Bush Administration of going to war over oil—this writer included, however, according to the working research paper titled, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” by Professors John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt of Harvard University, wrote “Some Americans believe that this was a ‘war for oil,’ but there is hardly any direct evidence to support this claim. Instead, the war was motivated in good part by a desire to make Israel more secure” (54).

Mearsheimer’s and Walt’s point about Bush's intention to make Israel safe is buying into the false argument that Israel is in danger. It is not. Israel is the most powerful country in the Middle East. The invasion was all about the oil, make no mistake about it.

Here is why: During the recent Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with Iraq, Bush and his cronies asked for 58 permanent military bases, immunity for U.S. troops and mercenaries, and control of Iraqi air space up to 30,000 feet. During the first months of the occupation, under Coalition Provisional Authority chief L. Paul Bremer, the Bush Administration revised Iraqi legal codes and added 97 legal orders that read like a menu of how he and his cronies would rape the Iraqis.


Order #39: Privatize the country's 200 state-owned enterprises, permit 100 percent foreign ownership of Iraqi businesses, allow for complete repatriation of profits without tax. No requirements for reinvestment, hiring local labor, or provisioning public services. Labor rights non-existent.

Order #40: Foreign banks can enter the Iraqi market and take a 50 percent interest in formerly state-owned banks.

Order #49: Drop the corporate tax rate from 40 percent to a flat 15 percent. The income tax is capped at 15 percent.

Order #12: Suspension of "all tariffs, customs duties, import taxes, licensing fees and similar surcharges for goods entering or leaving Iraq, and all other trade restrictions that may apply to such goods." Result: A tidal wave of cheap imports wipes out locally made goods.

Order #17: Security firms get full immunity from Iraq's laws.


Mearsheimer’s and Walt’s paper, predictably came under scathing criticism by many in the media. The critics asserted that the paper was “marred by numerous errors.” However, the professors argument that AIPAC’s success in “convincing Americans that US and Israeli interests are essentially identical”(30) can not be overlooked, or easily dismissed.

“The combination of unwavering U.S. support for Israel and the related effort to spread democracy throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security. This situation has no equal in American political history. Why has the United States adopted policies that jeopardized its own security in order to advance the
interests of another state?” (30).

Mearsheimer and Walt states that the blind allegiance with Israel is a strategic liability and argues thusly:

“A final reason to question Israel's strategic value is that it does not act like a loyal ally. Israeli officials frequently ignore U.S. requests and renege on promises made to top U.S. leaders (including past pledges to halt settlement construction and to refrain from "targeted assassinations" of Palestinian leaders). Moreover, Israel has provided sensitive U.S. military technology to potential U.S. rivals like China, in what the U.S. State Department inspector general called "a systematic and growing pattern of unauthorized transfers."

According to the U.S. General Accounting Office, Israel also "conducts the most aggressive espionage operations against the U.S. of any ally”(34).

On December 20, 2006 President Bush gave his final press conference of the year. In it, he stated, “I’m not going to make predictions about what 2007 will look like in Iraq, except that it’s going to require difficult choices and additional sacrifices, because the enemy is merciless and violent.”

Investigative journalist, Robert Parry reported on December 21, 2006 that, “The first two or three months of 2007 represent a dangerous opening for an escalation of war in the Middle East, as George W. Bush will be tempted to “double-down” his gamble in Iraq by joining with Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and outgoing British Prime Minister Tony Blair to strike at Syria and Iran, intelligence sources say.”

The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy paper shed light on Bush’s motivation, which to me masked as a diagnosable psychotic break with reality, when historians look back on Bush’s reign, they may very well find that he suffered from a psychiatric mental illness, but for now it appears that he is only a meat puppet with a hand up his ass, moving his mouth. This is why Bush keeps moving forward, even when he doesn’t know what the hell he is doing or when the American people are telling him to stop.

Although Bush appears more and more isolated by his distorted worldview, he appears to have a lot of support from the neocons, AIPAC, Christian Zionists and the government officials in Israel, all whispering in his ear again about Iran and Syria. Although the neocons and AIPAC were wrong, dead wrong about the Iraq Invasion and subsequent Iraq Occupation, they still appear to keep his confidence.

Shakespeare’s Tragedy of Othello, is a tale of ill-placed trust. Blind trust between Othello and his friend Iago, who betrays him. Mearsheimer’s and Walt’s research paper is a wake up call.

Who stands to benefit from the destruction of Iran and Syria?

Who will pay the cost in blood and treasure?

The American people, of course, but I think Iago said it best when referring to Othello, which the AIPAC and the neocons will apply to the American populace.

“The Moor is of a free and open nature, that thinks men honest that but seem to be so, and will as tenderly be led by the nose as asses are.”

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Nth DEGREE: THE STRAIGHT DOPE
RAINY DAYS AND SUNDAYS ALWAYS GET ME DOWN
by N






















Sunday to me has always been a day of rest, relaxation, and maybe some self reflection and fun. It has also been the day of the week to put the breaks on and get back to reality. But since moving to the big city, Sundays have been a whirlwind of obsessively cleaning, catching up on sleep, accepting being alone, sulking, and excessive eating. I mean I wake up, usually in my own bed, and wonder what I am going to do today. The answer always rears its ugly head, nothing.

Am I being suffocated by Sunday?

I realized in the past, Sundays would be used to fastidiously finish up college papers, clean out my garage with my ex-husband, frolic over to a local wine tasting, or eat a large meal and catch up with my family. These days none of that happens because by my own choice and of course because I no longer have an ex-husband and a garage, my Sundays have morphed into this mental day of reckoning. I tend to ask myself “What should I do next? When should I do it? Who should I do it with? And why haven’t I done this sooner?”

Well those answers are blatantly clear. My family is states away. My friends are always busy, too tired from Saturday night, or spending time with their significant others and/or families. And of course there is the small fact that I find it hard to wake up at a decent time and find motivation. I end up being so exhausted by the What’s, When’s, and Who’s that I take a much needed nap and forget all about it until I wake up at 8pm from a “nap” and feel guilty.

So after much struggle with my Sundays and reflection, I have decided to impart some words of wisdom. It’s okay to take a day and do nothing or something by yourself. That’s right I am giving you unsolicited permission to mope around, sleep in, eat ice cream for breakfast, and update your Facebook page for three hours all without feeling guilty or thinking you’re headed for Depression 101.

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

THE REAL POLITIK ISSUE: VOLUME 20, ISSUE 38
IS YOU IS, OR IS YOU AIN’T MY BABY?
by Malik Isasis






















Presidential candidate John McCain once referred to the corporate media as “my base.” His remarks were correct. The media fell in love with McCain during his presidential bid in 2000 branding him as The Maverick® in spite the reality of his political record.

McCain has voted with Bush 95% of the time, which makes him a clone rather than a maverick, yet he is still fawned over by the media as The Maverick® here is a sample from Think Progress:

MSNBC’s Mike Barnicle: “McCain’s stance on the war. They view it because of who he is and the eye contact during these town meetings. He’s the Babe Ruth of town meetings.”

Fox News’ Greta van Susteren: “I can’t think of anyone happier tonight than Sen. John McCain.”

Politico’s Mike Allen: “Tonight is a fantastic night for John McCain. … He’s one of the biggest winners of the night.”

Newsweek’s Jon Meacham: “To me, the great story about Sen. McCain is, when in doubt, give principle a try.”

Fox News’ Carl Cameron: “Inside Washington, he’s been a real maverick outsider.”


Barack Obama is receiving a fair amount of press for his overseas trip, as he should—he is after all, the first black presidential candidate to be nominated in the history any Western nation. McCain, however appears to have caught a case of the vapors, acting like a lover scorned, lashing out at the media for excessive coverage of Obama.

The Maverick® Mythology: Attack of the Clone II

The corporate media has a thing for all Republicans, despite their obvious incompetence when they rise to power; they are still considered the party of national security. When it comes to John McCain the reality the corporate media hides from the public is that he is a weak, and flawed candidate (just as Bush was), a man who is in the twilight of his life with ambition to show the world just how big a dick he really has by warring with natives, just as his father, an admiral in the navy, and his grandfather, also an admiral in the navy before him. McCain comes from a long line of militarists; there hasn’t been a war John McCain has not supported. The fact that he is considered a war hero for dropping bombs from thousands of feet above on Vietnamese civilians, in a senseless war and being shot down for it makes no sense.

The corporate media intertwines his capture as a Prisoner of War with national security credentials as if they are one in the same. So when he says stupid shit like, “I know how to when wars,” the corporate media doesn’t question the logic. McCain reminds me of a boxer coming out of retirement for one more fight, only to get humiliated by being knocked on his ass. He is a caricature, physically feeble but tries to hide behind tough talk because he knows other people’s children, wives, and husbands will be the ones dying for his delusional indulgence. Like Bush, here is another man with a daddy complex.

John McCain shouldn’t question why his paramour, the corporate media is off flirting with Obama, if they turn on him and start to cover all of his recent gaffes on world events, and that he is a clone, rather a Maverick®, the public just may come to realize how incredibly horrible a president he would be.

Monday, July 21, 2008

THE REAL POLITIK ISSUE: VOLUME 20, ISSUE 37
COLONY COLLAPSE DISORDER
By Malik Isasis


















Colony Collapse Disorder is when a Western power such as a European country or the United States is unable to maintain its military and/or economic colonization of a developing nation usually located on the continent of Africa, in the Middle East or in the Latin Americas.

Okay, so CCD actually refers to honey bee colonies disappearing but I wanted to use the analogy to write about Bush, and the despotic Republicans and the incorrigible Democrats and why they continue to try and colonize the Iraqi people in a bloody occupation.

The decadence of the nearly 12 years of absolute power by the Banana Republicans and the sheer cowardice of the Democrats to do anything about it has resulted in the United States circling the drain, displaying all the symptomologies of a dying superpower. The value of the dollar as compared to the Euro is exactly forty cents. There are airplane specials that book two and three-day trips from Ireland just to shop here in New York City. Hostile takeovers like the recent purchase of Budweiser by InBev a European beer company, are becoming regular. The New York City landmark, Chrysler building has been bought by the Abu Dhabi Group. The Bank of China holds $20 billion of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debt.

With my tin foil hat on, I can’t help but wonder if there is a conspiracy to collapse the U.S. economy by conglomerates and their meat-puppet George Bush. I watch and read the corporate media and the economy and Bush are mentioned as if one has nothing to do with the other. It is Bush’s policies that have wrought the economic pain Americans are feeling. The corporate mind is so narrowly focused on short-term gain that everything else is secondary, including the survival of the middle-class, but then again, without a middle class, we have an oligarchy: the very rich and the very poor. Advantage: the investment class.

Not an Exception to the Rule

Superpowers are delusional by nature because they truly believe that they can hold onto power and keep others from obtaining it. It is in this delusion that all empires rise and fall. They believe that what happened to their predecessors will not happen to them. For example, the ethos of American exceptionalism--that the United States is benign and benevolent, keep Americans from accepting the systemic failure in governance and the certainty of economic and military collapse due to non-sensical foreign policies.

Occupying and trying to colonize Iraq is not exceptional, yet our politicians want us to believe that our occupation of Iraq is not like that of Europe’s occupation and colonization of African, Latin, and Asian nations, which was brutal, and uncivilized—not to mention, leaving behind tragic consequences that has bloomed into genocides and decades of civil unrest.

Johan Galtung, a Professor of Peace Studies wrote a research paper titled, “THE DECLINE AND FALL OF EMPIRES: A THEORY OF DE-DEVELOPMENT” for the United Nations Research Institute on Development in which he states:

Looking at the list of the ten empires, their creators certainly did not think of their project as existing on a limited lease of time only. The presumed viability was forever; the project was irreversible. They thought they had created an End of History through a new reality. Reality, however, put an end to their project. Why? How?

One answer: "because of dialectics". Action creates reaction. Push long enough and counter-forces arise. Empire-building without "pushing" is difficult, to put it mildly. To grow economically some "pushing" is also needed. A single counter-force may not tear down what has been built, being too weak. But in the margin of the system these forces will accumulate and their synergies may ultimately lead to decline and fall as the system exhausts itself fighting or in general trying to control the disruptive forces.”

As the Roman Empire became model for other empires, at least in the West, its decline also became archetype for other declines, defining the discourse. One more example of how the Roman Empire has survived its own demise, dominating our thinking even about the death of empires.

Illusions of Grandeur

The United States has a long history of colonization in its short existence from the Philippines, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, Samoa, Virgin Islands to Hawaii. Since the rise of the Military Industrial Complex at the end of World War II, the United States has been in a state of perpetual war--starting with Korea 1950-53, Indonesia, 1950-53, Guatemala 1950-53, Congo 1964, Cuba 1959-61 Vietnam 1961-73, Peru 1965, Laos 1964-73, Cambodia 1969-70, Lebanon 1982-83, Grenada 1983, El Salvador 1980, Libya 1986, Nicaragua, Bosnia, Iraq 1990-currently.

The United States’ hubris stems from its historical roots of white supremacy, which it inherited from its ancestor Great Britain. It is hard for politicians in this country to grasp that people do not want to be occupied—but that doesn’t matter does it? The United States knows what is best for the natives, and will give the Iraqis democracy whether they want it or not.

As America trips and falls into the pile of bodies of former empires, the baton will be caught by China. Will China prove any different from the any number of empires throughout history? Probably not, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.

Maybe imperialism is nature’s way of recycling human beings.

Thursday, July 17, 2008

THE REAL POLITIK ISSUE: VOLUME 20, ISSUE 36
OCCUPIER'S NEGLECT ALLOWS NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE USED AS A DUMP
by B'Tselem, Electronic Intifada



















The Jerusalem Municipality's gross, prolonged neglect of East Jerusalem has led to the Dahiyeh al-Salam neighborhood becoming a pirate garbage dump. The Municipality has not yet kept its promise to renovate the refuse site.

Dahiyeh al-Salam is one of East Jerusalem's most neglected areas. The streets in the neighborhood, which lies in the northern part of East Jerusalem, are in complete disrepair and are strewn with piles of refuse, and the Municipality provides almost no services to its residents. This has enabled criminals to turn the neighborhood into a pirate garbage dump.

For years, in 2007 in particular, dozens of privately-owned garbage trucks have come from West Jerusalem and dumped large amounts of construction, medical, and industrial debris in areas adjacent to residents' homes. The unsupervised and disorderly dumping is done for free, while fees of dozens of shekels a ton are charged at the regulated dumping sites located relatively far from the city.

According to residents of the neighborhood, the garbage dump is run by criminals, who react violently when residents oppose the dumping. The dump is a sanitation hazard: strong odors, dust, flies, and smoke from frequent fires. Also, children playing in the junk are exposed to dangerous refuse and some have complained of shortness of breath.

Last year, residents complained to city officials repeatedly, without success, about the problem. Only after B'Tselem invited officials from the city's Environmental Quality Department to a meeting at the site, in March 2008, did they promise to renovate it. Shortly after, dumping ceased when residents managed to deny the truck drivers access to the site.

The city has not yet begun to remove the mountains of refuse or renovate the site. However, the Municipality informed B'Tselem that it had recently obtained a budget allocation from the Environmental Protection Ministry to deal with refuse nuisances in East Jerusalem, and that the site in Dahiyeh al-Salam would be handled this year. The budget is also intended to ensure the presence of inspectors to prevent unauthorized dumping in East Jerusalem. According to Municipality figures, East Jerusalem has 16 other pirate refuse sites, with the Dahiyeh al-Salam site being the largest and greatest nuisance.

Neglect of the neighborhood illustrates the Municipality's grave, ongoing neglect of neighborhoods in East Jerusalem. The neglect appears in every area of Municipality responsibility: education, refuse collection, water supply, development, and building permits.

In neglecting East Jerusalem, the Municipality is breaching its obligations to the residents there. East Jerusalem, like other parts of the West Bank, is considered occupied territory and is therefore subject to international humanitarian law. According to this body of law, Israel is required to ensure order and public safety, which includes sanitation services.

The annexation of East Jerusalem following the 1967 war violated international law, which prohibits unilateral annexation of land. As a result, the international community has not recognized Israel's annexation.

B'Tselem calls on the Jerusalem Municipality to act immediately to improve municipal services to East Jerusalem's residents.

Monday, July 14, 2008

THE POWER ISSUE: VOLUME 19, ISSUE 35
QUESTION REALITY
ZEITGEIST, a film by PETER JOSEPH






















(Instruction: Slide the slider down to minute 4:00 to start the opening sequence)

PRESS PLAY

Zeitgeist, the Movie is a 2007 documentary film, produced by Peter Joseph about the Jesus myth hypothesis, the attacks of 9/11, and the Federal Reserve Bank as well as a number of conspiracy theories related to those three main topics. It was released free online via Google Video in June of 2007. A remastered version was presented as a global premiere on November 10, 2007 at the 4th Annual Artivist Film Festival & Artivist Awards. The film has attracted significant public interest.

Sunday, July 13, 2008

THE REAL POLITIK ISSUE: VOLUME 18, ISSUE 34
BUSH & CHENEY ALWAYS SAW IRAQ AS A SWEETHEART OIL DEAL
by Noam Chomsky, Khaleej Times Online



















U.S. war planners want an obedient client state that will house major U.S. military bases, right at the heart of the world's major energy reserves.

The deal just taking shape between Iraq's Oil Ministry and four Western oil companies raises critical questions about the nature of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq -- questions that should certainly be addressed by presidential candidates and seriously discussed in the United States, and of course in occupied Iraq, where it appears that the population has little if any role in determining the future of its country.

Negotiations are under way for Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP -- the original partners decades ago in the Iraq Petroleum Company, now joined by Chevron and other smaller oil companies -- to renew the oil concession they lost to nationalization during the years when the oil producers took over their own resources. The no-bid contracts, apparently written by the oil corporations with the help of U.S. officials, prevailed over offers from more than 40 other companies, including companies in China, India and Russia.

"There was suspicion among many in the Arab world and among parts of the American public that the United States had gone to war in Iraq precisely to secure the oil wealth these contracts seek to extract," Andrew E. Kramer wrote in the New York Times.

Kramer's reference to "suspicion" is an understatement. Furthermore, it is highly likely that the military occupation has taken the initiative in restoring the hated Iraq Petroleum Company, which, as Seamus Milne writes in the U.K. Guardian, was imposed under British rule to "dine off Iraq's wealth in a famously exploitative deal."

Later reports speak of delays in the bidding. Much is happening in secrecy, and it would be no surprise if new scandals emerge.

The demand could hardly be more intense. Iraq contains perhaps the second-largest oil reserves in the world, which are, furthermore, very cheap to extract: no permafrost or tar sands or deep-sea drilling. For U.S. planners, it is imperative that Iraq remain under U.S. control, to the extent possible, as an obedient client state that will also house major U.S. military bases, right at the heart of the world's major energy reserves.

That these were the primary goals of the invasion was always clear enough through the haze of successive pretexts: weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein's links with al Qaeda, democracy promotion and the war against terrorism, which, as predicted, sharply increased as a result of the invasion.

Last November, the guiding concerns were made explicit when President Bush and Iraq's prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, signed a "Declaration of Principles," ignoring the U.S. Congress, the Iraqi parliament and the populations of the two countries.

The declaration left open the possibility of an indefinite long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq that would presumably include the huge air bases now being built around the country, and the "embassy" in Baghdad, a city within a city, unlike any embassy in the world. These are not being constructed to be abandoned.

The declaration also had a remarkably brazen statement about exploiting the resources of Iraq. It said that the economy of Iraq -- which means its oil resources -- must be open to foreign investment, "especially American investments." That comes close to a pronouncement that we invaded you so that we can control your country and have privileged access to your resources.

The seriousness of this commitment was underscored in January, when Bush issued a "signing statement" declaring that he would reject any congressional legislation that restricted funding "to establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq" or "to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq."

Extensive resort to "signing statements" to expand executive power is yet another Bush innovation, condemned by the American Bar Association as "contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers." To no avail.

Not surprisingly, the declaration aroused immediate objections in Iraq, among others from Iraqi unions, which survive even under the harsh anti-labor laws that Hussein instituted and the occupation preserves.

In Washington propaganda, the spoiler to U.S. domination in Iraq is Iran. U.S. problems in Iraq are blamed on Iran. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sees a simple solution: "Foreign forces" and "foreign arms" should be withdrawn from Iraq -- Iran's, not ours.

The confrontation over Iran's nuclear program heightens the tensions. The Bush administration's "regime change" policy toward Iran comes with ominous threats of force (there Bush is joined by both U.S. presidential candidates). The policy also is reported to include terrorism within Iran -- again legitimate, for the world rulers. A majority of the American people favor diplomacy and oppose the use of force. But public opinion is largely irrelevant to policy formation, not just in this case.

An irony is that Iraq is turning into a U.S.-Iranian condominium. The Maliki government is the sector of Iraqi society most supported by Iran. The so-called Iraqi army -- just another militia -- is largely based on the Badr brigade, which was trained in Iran and fought on the Iranian side during the Iran-Iraq War.

Nir Rosen, one of the most astute and knowledgeable correspondents in the region, observes that the main target of the U.S.-Maliki military operations, Moktada al-Sadr, is disliked by Iran as well: He's independent and has popular support, and is therefore dangerous.

Iran "clearly supported Prime Minister Maliki and the Iraqi government against what they described as 'illegal armed groups' (of Moktada's Mahdi army) in the recent conflict in Basra," Rosen writes, "which is not surprising given that their main proxy in Iraq, the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, dominates the Iraqi state and is Maliki's main backer."

"There is no proxy war in Iraq," Rosen concludes, "because the U.S. and Iran share the same proxy."

Tehran is presumably pleased to see the United States institute and sustain a government in Iraq that's receptive to its influence. For the Iraqi people, however, that government continues to be a disaster, very likely with worse to come.

In Foreign Affairs, Steven Simon points out that current U.S. counterinsurgency strategy is "stoking the three forces that have traditionally threatened the stability of Middle Eastern states: tribalism, warlordism and sectarianism." The outcome might be "a strong, centralized state ruled by a military junta that would resemble" Saddam Hussein's regime.

If Washington achieves its goals, then its actions are justified. Reactions are quite different when Vladimir Putin succeeds in pacifying Chechnya, to an extent well beyond what Gen. David Petraeus has achieved in Iraq. But that is them, and this is the United States. Criteria are therefore entirely different.

In the United States, the Democrats are silenced now because of the supposed success of the U.S. military surge in Iraq. Their silence reflects the fact that there are no principled criticisms of the war. In this way of regarding the world, if you're achieving your goals, the war and occupation are justified. The sweetheart oil deals come with the territory.

In fact, the whole invasion is a war crime -- indeed the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes in that it encompasses all the evil that follows, in the terms of the Nuremberg judgment. This is among the topics that can't be discussed, in the presidential campaign or elsewhere. Why are we in Iraq? What do we owe Iraqis for destroying their country? The majority of the American people favor U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. Do their voices matter?

Tuesday, July 08, 2008

THE MEDIA ISSUE: VOLUME 17, ISSUE 33
FUNTIONALLY, DYSFUNTIONAL
by Malik Isasis















The news over the past Fourth of July (America’s Independence Day) weekend was wall-to-wall coverage of the recently freed American hostages. It was beyond surreal to watch the news coverage of hostages Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes in what was a live press conference. The live press conference was 90% propaganda, 10% stage craft, and 100% bullshit

All the news channels like CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, so-called Fox News, and ABC love spreading flowery folklore of bravery, heroism, and American innocence. This press conference again, revealed an immature jingoism and destructive self-indulgence. The military clearly orchestrated this national circle-jerk, revealing deft skills that kept the conference focused on family members and on the freed-hostages’ teary thank yous to their rescuers. The blighted television press cooed like a baby getting his shitty diaper changed. Nothing of substance was gathered from why these gentlemen were kidnapped. Nor did the press ask why? Many outlets referred to them as American contractors, a euphemism I’m sure ushered onto the media by savvy military handlers. Some were as bold to name the defense contractors these men worked for Northrop Grumman one of the largest and most profitable defense contractors in the world. Northup Grumman was also penalized for bid rigging, fraud, delivery of faulty military parts and environmental damage. Northup Grumman was also awarded a $48 million dollar contract to train the Iraqi Army in 2003 Since the army has fallen apart, I’m wondering if we can have a refund for a half-assed services rendered? Corp Watch has done a fantastic job at tracking this conglomerate and its relationship with the Bush administration. (read more on Northup Grumman)

The American Hostages

Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes were mercenaries hired to fight the drug trafficking industry in Columbia. New York Times in a story written by Juan Forero on February 14th, 2004 reported this:

Bogota, Colombia - After their tiny plane crashed deep in the jungles of southern Colombia, three American civilians on a mission to search for cocaine labs, drug planes and, occasionally, guerrilla units were taken hostage by Marxist rebels.

A year later, the men's families say the captives have been all but forgotten. Some say that is the way American officials and the men's employers want it to be.

The three Americans -- Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes -- worked cloaked in secrecy for two subsidiaries of Northrop Grumman , the huge military contractor, in an arrangement used increasingly by the United States government in conflict zones from Colombia to Afghanistan.

The men's families and critics of American policy here say the case sheds light on a shadowy world of secret operations that employ private contractors in deals that make it easy to skirt public scrutiny and for all to wash their hands if something goes wrong.

"My complaint about use of private contractors is their ability to fly under the radar and avoid any accountability," Representative Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat, said. "Now we're finding out that because of their low profile, and so little scrutiny, they are able to avoid liability or responsibility for these individuals."

In Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 70 American companies and private individuals have won up to $8 billion in contracts in the last two years, according to the Center for Public Integrity in Washington. Much of their work is shielded from the public, critics say, noting that their deaths are not even added to the American body count.

American officials, here and elsewhere, say using contractors saves money, provides essential services and specialists and frees military forces that are already stretched thin. They also say the three men taken captive were working within the legal limits set by the Congress.

But critics say that for American policy makers, the political risks surrounding Washington's deepening involvement in Colombia's conflict made using contractors preferable to placing American forces or intelligence officers in similar jeopardy.

The mission of the three men whose plane went down last Feb. 13 was to fly their single-engine Cessna, its underbelly loaded with sophisticated photographic equipment, over vast jungle tracts to search for illegal drug activities and, sometimes, guerrilla movements.

The intelligence was then shared with the Colombian armed forces in Washington's two-pronged fight against drug trafficking and a 40-year Marxist insurgency.

After the crash, in Caqueta Province, the rebels killed two other survivors: an American pilot, Tom Janis, and a Colombian intelligence officer. Weeks later, on March 25, a plane on a mission to track the captives hit a tree. Three more Americans were killed: Tommy Schmidt, Ralph Ponticelli and James Oliver.


Here is some of the corporate coverage:





Responsibility

Every time Americans get caught with their hands down their pants they scream terrorist, consistently blaming others for the chaos that they’ve created. I don’t know much about the guerilla group known as FARC, and I surely don’t support violence against people; The story is always more complicated than what we are getting. America has been interfering in Latin America politics for decades, flipping governments like pancakes, assassinating political leaders, supporting corrupt governments that oppress the population. So when American mercenaries and military personnel are kidnapped, the corporate media wants to give no context as to why, rather they focus on the emotional. How Hollywood.

Todd Cretien wrote this on July 4, 2008:

Recently, the FARC has come under intense pressure to negotiate an end to the civil war and is listed as a "terrorist" organization by the U.S. government--a label most American media sources, not to mention mainstream Democrats like presidential candidate Barack Obama, repeat without comment.

However, the FARC's reluctance to disarm is certainly understandable. In the mid-1980s, many of the group's members agreed to lay down their weapons and take part in elections in a leftist coalition called the Patriot Union. In exchange for their participation in the "democratic process," up to 5,000 of them were systematically exterminated by the military and its death squads, including 1990 presidential candidate, Bernardo Jaramillo Ossa.

Despite this bloody history, President Bill Clinton initiated "Plan Colombia" during his second term in office. Between 1996 and 2000, Clinton increased aid to the Colombian military by nearly 14 times, from $54 million to $765 million. George Bush has sent between $400 million and $650 million in military aid to Colombia every year of his presidency.

This avalanche of arms has made the Colombian military one of the mightiest in the region, far more powerful than the Venezuelan military, for instance. And it has also turned the tide in the civil war, driving FARC guerrillas deeper and deeper into the mountains and reducing their fighting force from more than 15,000 10 years ago to an estimated 6,000 to 8,000 today.

Whether or not Uribe pre-empted the French-brokered release of Betancourt, it is clear that the FARC is in trouble, and the Colombian government believes that, if it cannot military win the war in the next few years, it can certainly continue to press its advantage.

Furthermore, the Colombian military's incursion into Ecuador earlier this spring "in pursuit" of FARC rebels sets a dangerous precedent.

As Latin America turns left, U.S. imperialism is searching for the means to regain the strategic advantage in "its backyard." Boosting Colombia's military capacity is not just about defeating the FARC or fighting the "war on drugs." It is also about sending a bipartisan message to Colombia's unruly neighbors that the U.S. aims to play an increasingly intrusive role in the region's future.


For Every Action, There is a Reaction

The corporate media will never tell us that American policy creates blowback, terrorists groups, terrorist acts but that by no means make people who fight American imperialism, terrorists. The term is overused, and over simplified. Those in the media need to grow up, or go back to journalism school. The misinformation put out by the media is far more damaging to us than terrorists.

Monday, July 07, 2008

A FILM REVIEW
THE WACKNESS
a film review by Malik Isasis






















The 90s are the new 80s. Now that pop culture has scavenged the bones of the 70s and 80s, the trendsetters have now begun mining the not-so-distant decade of the 90s. I see young hipsters walking about with 1994 graphic tee shirts on as if it were a long forgotten era. I think it reveals a lot about American culture, which is to say, we have absolutely no sense of history.

This mysterious 1994 is the year in which The Wackness world is set. Director/writer Jonathan Levine’s title The Wackness could have been a big ol’ softball for critics to turn into a snide remark like “The Wackness lived up to its title” but Levine is much too talented of a writer/director to have let that happened.

Ben Kingsley who appears to be in the next 50 movies coming out this summer, plays Dr. Squires, a psychiatrist who is bartering his services for a dime bag (per session). The client with whom he is bartering with is a freshly minted high school graduate name Luke Shapiro (Josh Peck), a lonely slacker. Luke has a huge crush on Dr. Squires’ step-daughter, Stephanie (Olivia Thirlby) and at a graduation party Luke wasn’t invited to, (he's just stopping by to sell some weed) he happens upon Stephanie in the bathroom.

“Whad’ya up to this summer?” She asks.
“Chillin’, making money, why? You wanna go study?” He jokes.
“Yah. Sure.” She says, catching him off guard.

And thus begins young Luke’s hero’s journey into heartbreak, self-discovery, and disillusionment in the summer of 1994, a summer that he will probably never forget. Seriously.

Levine is heavy-handed with the production design, constantly reminding us in case we forgot that by gone era of the 90s. Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Guiliani’s name was used as a blunt instrument. He was mentioned no less than four times throughout the film to remind us of his wackness (right on, brother). Then there’s the reference to Kurt Cobain, and Notorious B.I.G.

There is some serious self-medication going on in this film; characters are blowing trees, smoking cigarettes, drinking beer and alcohol, and dropping acid and when they are not blowing trees, smoking cigarettes, drinking beer or alcohol, or dropping acid, they are abusing prescription medications. If Levine would’ve examined his characters a little more closely, this would not have been a comedy. There is plenty of emotional dysfunction with characters swinging like monkeys from one vice to another just to get away from dealing with their troubled lives. Not only does Dr. Squires smoke pot with his step-daughter, it seems as if he is sexually attracted to her.

All the adults in the film, including Dr. Squires seem under developed compared to Luke and Stephanie. The beautiful Famke Janssen was wasted. Her character Mrs. Squires is miserable and has found herself in a cold-comfort situation, but we never really care because she was under written. There is nothing more tragic in film than watching a character you spend a lot of time with that you have no feelings for.

Dr. Squires and Luke become more than therapist and client—I suppose they had crossed that line on the onset of thier relationship. At times Dr. Squires is a mentor, but mostly he is Luke’s emotional peer. Because they both have no friends, they become each other’s best friend and confidant. This relationship works even though it is completely dysfunctional and unethical.

Mary-Kate Olsen passes through the film as an acid-dropper, who fucks Dr. Squires in a telephone booth. I’m guessing that Mary-Kate had many more scenes that ended up on the cutting room floor. Her acting was god-awful. Shame on Levine for this performance. Method Man, from Wu-Tang Clan made a cameo as a Jamaican drug dealer. Even though Method Man pulled off a flawless Jamaican accent, it got in the way at times. Not sure why. And during one of his scenes, Levine had the nerve to play a Wu-Tang Clan track in the background, as Method Man delivered his lines. It took me out of the scene.

Speaking of soundtrack, the theme song by Biz Markie, “Just A Friend” is from the 80s, not 90s, go figure.

There is some really sharp writing in this film with the most memorable line coming from Stephanie, as she explained the difference between she and the brooding Luke regarding their outlook on life.

“I look at the dopeness. You look at the wackness.” Olivia Thirlby delivered that line like a weedhead who only becomes philosophical when baked. It was dead on, and deliciously funny.

Jonathan Levine like all talented filmmakers often over-indulges. There were many moments in the film where he got in his own way, but I thoroughly enjoyed The Wackness, it was well written and ably directed. Luke's and Stephanie’s love story played out, just as it should have with no fake obstacles to overcome, just like life. In spite of himself, Levine has made a really good film. It appears that I have two choices here: to look at this with Wackness or Dopeness.

I choose Dopeness. This film gets a B.

You didn’t think I would get through this review without a pun, did you?


GRADE: B

Friday, July 04, 2008

THE FOURTH OF JULY ISSUE: VOLUME 16, ISSUE 32
MANUFACTURING CONSENT ON IRAN
by The Real News.com
















Seymour Hersh writing in The New Yorker notes that a Gallup poll taken last November found that 73 percent of those surveyed thought that the United States should use economic action and diplomacy to stop Iran’s nuclear program, while only 18 percent favored direct military action.

Republicans were twice as likely as Democrats to endorse a military strike. Weariness with the war in Iraq has undoubtedly affected the public’s willingness to attack Iran.

However, this mood could change quickly. The potential for escalation became clear in early January, when five Iranian patrol boats, believed to be under the command of the Revolutionary Guard, made a series of aggressive moves toward three Navy warships sailing through the Strait of Hormuz.

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

THE CAMPAIGN ISSUE: VOLUME 16, VOLUME 32
BROTHER FROM ANOTHER PLANET
by Malik Isasis






















Barack Obama has finally sat down in front of the mirror and applied the black face makeup with fire engine-red lips stick and donned the white gloves. He has become the tap dancing negro the media has always wanted him to be. In the past several weeks Obama has shown that he is not above smiling wide and saying, “Yas’sah, I’s make you feel real comfortable boss.”

It is always people of color who have to renegotiate their being to make the white supremacist establishment media feel safe. It saddens me that Obama has already squandered the good will of the white, brown, red, and yellow progressives who’ve put him over the top because of renewed enthusiasm for change. I can’t say I didn’t see this coming. In December of 2006 in a post called Black Man Running I said this of the media and Obama:

I think Barack is nuanced and understands that the media is not his friend. He knows that the media is setting him up for a glorious fall. Howard Dean can testify to this truth. Dean, who knows what it’s like to be a media-darling, was a front-runner in the 2004 Presidential Race, but it was when he lost a primary race in Iowa to John Kerry and tried to rally his supporters by cheering, “Yaaah!” that the media took him out like a professional hit job. It was if everything was already aligned. Dean in his campaign, did threaten to break up large media conglomerates, is there a connection?

The media is not your friend Barack.

They are trying to make you precious, make you hire a grip of overbearing political consultants who will neuter your political passion (remember John Kerry?)…you’re going to become too safe to speak your mind, too safe to offend anyone, too safe to speak truth-to-power, just like your possible running mate, Hillary Clinton.


Republicans Win Even When They Lose

Because Democrats are weak, and have a genetic flaw in their political gene to want to please and be validated by the Republicans and media, they go out of their way to distance themselves from their base. Republicans proudly wear conservatism, while Democrats scatter like roaches when the lights are turned on, from liberalism. Obama is displaying such cowardice in all the key issues: FISA, gun control, expansion of Bush’s faith-based programs, status quos on Cuba, Iran and the occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What have the Democrats gained over the past eight years of giving the Republicans what they wanted? It’s obvious isn’t it? Why self-serving power that benefits them (Democrats) of course. No matter how many back flips Democrats do for the Republicans and the corporate media, the Republicans and the corporate media will still hate you. They hate you. Understand that?

There is no center in American politics. Conservatism is the new center. So, as Obama tap-dances right of center, he’s going to find himself on his ass off the stage and back in the senate with a president McCain. So no matter how far right you go Mr. Obama to gain votes, the Republicans and the corporate media will continue to portray you as the Brother from Another Planet.

You’re being played, just as other presidential nominees Al Gore and John Kerry had before you. The Republicans and corporate media will get you to move to the so-called center by convincing you to wear American flag lapel pins, praising Jesus at every opportunity, and they will still bash your fucking head in. A note to you my brother: before you even started twisting like a pretzel on your political values, you had wide support that helped put you over the top financially and politically.

So go ahead, keep dodging being seen with Muslims, run from black folk, run from progressives and liberals at your own expense. You’re going to find yourself among the pantheon of Democratic presidential losers.