May 2007

War Is a Government Program
Posted: Thursday, May 31, 2007

¤ Rice's #2 at the State Department
To what degree do neoconservatives and militarists control U.S. foreign policy? And how much influence do the less ideological figures like former National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice have over President Bush?
Those were questions continually debated by foreign policy observers during last three years of the first Bush administration. And at the onset of Bushs second term, assessing the new ideological/realist balance in the foreign policy team is the main topic of Washingtons foreign policy community.

¤ The Sixty Year Wound
¤ The Political Censorship of Hip Hop
¤ Lebanon and the Planned US Airbase at Kleiaat
¤ Iraq's Militias Under the US Surge

¤ Mr. Hardball Goes to the World Bank
Nine days after the September 11 terrorist attacks, I opened up The Washington Post and stared right into the flinty mind of one Robert B. Zoellick, the Bush administration's pick for new World Bank president.
While the rest of the country was still in a haze of horror and confusion, Zoellick had seized the moment to advance his agenda as U.S. trade representative. In a commentary titled "Fighting Terror with Trade," he argued that Congress needed to pass fast track trade negotiating authority as part of their support for the "War on Terror."
Having failed to sell the legislation on its merits, Zoellick had moved with breathtaking speed to take advantage of public fears and pressure on lawmakers to stand with the president during a national crisis.

¤ Goldman Sachs Marches on with Bush's Candidate for World Bank
¤ Pentagon concedes a 'tough' month in Iraq
¤ Report: In Meeting, 'Wild-Eyed' Bush Thumped Chest While Repeating 'I Am The President!'
¤ Tribunals, Trials and Tribulations in Lebanon?
¤ Miss Universe: Everyone Hates Miss USA
¤ Baghdad embassy plans turn up online

¤ Dems Wimp Out on Bush & Prewar Intelligence
As part of its much belated inquiry into the prewar intelligence, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a 229-page report on Friday on the intelligence produced by US intelligence agencies on what could be expected to occur in Iraq following a US invasion. No surprise: the intelligence community foresaw the likelihood of chaos and trouble inside and outside Iraq.

¤ Bloody month for US troops in Iraq
¤ War Is a Government Program
¤ The Appropriate Disillusionment of Andrew Bacevich and Cindy Sheehan
¤ Afghans dispute U.S. version of raid casualties
¤ U.S. ranks low, just above Iran on new peace index

¤ Ideas cannot be killed
A few days ago, while analysing the expenses involved in the construction of three submarines of the Astute series, I said that with this money "75,000 doctors could be trained to look after 150 million people, assuming that the cost of training a doctor would be one-third of what it costs in the United States." Now, along the lines of the same calculations, I wonder: how many doctors could be graduated with the one hundred billion dollars that Bush gets his hands on in just one year to keep on sowing grief in Iraqi and American homes. Answer: 999,990 doctors who could look after 2 billion people who today do not receive any medical care.

Getting Away with Murder
Posted: Tuesday, May 29, 2007

¤ Getting Away with Murder
This war will wind down when the oil distribution law, or whatever they call it, is signed. It was all about the oil, from day one (really from before day one). Once it is passed by the Iraqi Government that we set up for just this very reason, we will start winding down and leave just enough troops in Iraq to make sure that they don't renege on the law, and to keep Iran in line. If this turns out to be the case, than Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and everyone else in government and the oil companies should be put on trial for murdering almost a million human beings for profit. Big Oil has gotten its hands on all that light crude and can pump for another twenty years.

¤ Africa's 'cyber' currency

¤ Business Is Booming!
One thing that really gets my goat is all these Iraqi insurgents and militia running around with AK-47 Kalashnikovs! AK-47s aren’t stamped "Made in the USA!" As every Tom, Dick and Harry knows, AK-47s are manufactured in Russia, China and a whole host of interesting places. And, they are pieces of junk! Go ahead, drop the damn thing in the sand, kick it under your bed for a year and forget it. While it will spray out 700 rounds a minute and kill and maim a lot of people, the AK-47 is not a precision firearm.

¤ Should U.S. intervention in Sudan be supported? A Closer Look

¤ China and USA in New Cold War over Africa’s Oil Riches
To paraphrase the famous quip during the 1992 US Presidential debates, when an unknown William Jefferson Clinton told then-President George Herbert Walker Bush, "It's the economy, stupid," the present concern of the current Washington Administration over Darfur in southern Sudan is not, if we were to look closely, genuine concern over genocide against the peoples in that poorest of poor part of a forsaken section of Africa.
No. "It's the oil, stupid."

¤ Poisoning the Troops, Again
¤ Good Riddance Attention Whore
¤ How We Got Here
¤ Bush's New Middle East
¤ What Qualifies Bush to Lead Iraq War?
¤ We Are Your Bad Conscience
¤ The Bush take on Iraq opinion
¤ Human rights in Iraq: a case to answer
¤ Sheehan quits as face of US anti-war fight
¤ Hope dries up for Nicaragua's Miskito
¤ Texas Mother Hangs Herself, 3 Children

¤ Venezuela to sue CNN
Venezuela says it will file charges against US cable network CNN for linking President Hugo Chavez to Al Qaeda. It says it will also sue a Venezuelan TV network for encouraging Mr Chavez's assassination. The move comes a day after popular Venezuelan TV network RCTV went off the air after the Chavez Government cancelled its broadcast licence. Information Minister William Lara has presented what he says is CNN footage displaying pictures of Mr Chavez juxtaposed with those of an Al Qaeda leader.

¤ Mexicans boo Miss USA, showing discord
¤ Iraq: it's worse than you can possibly imagine, and worse than we can possibly know.
That was the message when the brilliant Middle East reporter, Patrick Cockburn, spoke on stage today at Hay, publicising his book about the British and American occupation of Iraq.
Iraq, he said, is a country that's been "hollowed out". Two million people have left. At least 3,000 civilians are murdered every month. The rest live in terror. He told of details that give a real sense of what's going on. Because there are no more open-air markets, since so many have been bombed, people have set up stalls in side streets or their back gardens instead. Before the war, there were 32,000 doctors in Iraq; now 2,000 are dead, 12,000 have left, and the remainder, who are seen as having money and are thus targets for kidnappers, must work from armed-guarded clinics.

¤ Israel Gets OK to Expand Gaza Operations
¤ Oil companies salivating over U.S. reserves
¤ Dead in Afghanistan: May 2007
¤ U.S. warplanes pound residential area in Mosul
¤ Top General underestimates Iraq War fatalities in Memorial Day media appearance
¤ Why the Iraq War was worth it

Venezuela to sue CNN
Posted: Tuesday, May 29, 2007

"Venezuela says it will file charges against US cable network CNN for linking President Hugo Chavez to Al Qaeda."

"Information Minister William Lara has presented what he says is CNN footage displaying pictures of Mr Chavez juxtaposed with those of an Al Qaeda leader.

Mr Lara says CNN also aired a story about the Venezuelan protests but used images taken in Mexico of an unrelated story.

'CNN broadcast a lie which linked President Chavez to violence and murder,' he said."

Denial

CNN has issued a statement strongly denying being "engaged in a campaign to discredit or attack Venezuela".

The news network has acknowledged a video mix-up and "aired a detailed correction and expressed regret for the involuntary error".

Regarding the Al Qaeda leader, the network says "unrelated news stories can be juxtaposed in a given program segment just as a newspaper page or a news website may have unconnected stories adjacent to each other".
Full Article : abc.net.au

Cartoon Coup D'Etat
Posted: Tuesday, May 29, 2007

by Paul Haste / May 28th, 2007

The Presidential Palace is in our hands; why don't you show that?' Chávez's supporters shouted to the journalists… instead, RCTV was broadcasting Looney Tunes cartoons.

Venezuela takes an important step towards democratizing its media on 28 May when a billion dollar media corporation loses its television broadcast license to 'those who almost never have a voice,' in President Hugo Chávez's words.

Radio Caracas Television — RCTV — and its multi-millionaire owner, Marcel Granier, who are about to lose their unceasing political war against Chávez and Venezuela's Bolívarian revolution, are claiming that 'independent media are being closed down,' that Chávez is a dictator intent on 'restricting freedom of expression and democratic rights.'

Reporters without Borders declares that RCTV losing its license is 'a serious attack on editorial pluralism', while editorials in US newspapers have predictably misrepresented the controversy, claiming Chávez is retaliating against his critics in the opposition media who 'disagree' with the Bolívarian revolution.

The reality is rather different. As Reporters without Borders doesn't mention, perhaps understandably so, given its financing by the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy — which also finances rightist opposition political parties in Venezuela — RCTV was an active participant in the violent coup d'etat that deposed President Chávez for almost 48 hours in 2002.
Full Article : dissidentvoice.org

Venezuela, RCTV, And Media Freedom
Posted: Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Venezuela, RCTV, And Media Freedom: Just The Facts, Please

There are a number of ways to curtail press freedom. You can charge a journalist with murder and put him on death row-Mumia Abu-Jamal, for instance. You can grant special favors, privileges, and access to corporate media giants while raiding and shutting down low-power, independent radio stations, which the FCC does with some regularity. You could arrest independent journalists at anti-war demonstrations-again, a regular occurrence. For instance, I recall my friend and Indy journalist, Jeff Imig, who has been repeatedly threatened with arrest, while recording anti-war demonstrations in Tucson, Arizona, for violating the statute against filming federal buildings. Jeff finally got arrested-for jaywalking! Corporate press, on the other hand, seems to have free reign to jaywalk and film federal buildings at these same events-behavior I and countless others have witnessed!
Full Article : venezuelanalysis.com

Google Deal Said to Bring U.S. Scrutiny
Posted: Tuesday, May 29, 2007

By STEVE LOHR

The Federal Trade Commission has opened a preliminary antitrust investigation into Google’s planned $3.1 billion purchase of the online advertising company DoubleClick, an industry executive briefed on the agency’s plans said yesterday.

The inquiry began at the end of last week, after it was decided that the Federal Trade Commission instead of the Justice Department would conduct the review, said the executive, who asked not to be identified because he had not been authorized to speak. The two agencies split the duties of antitrust enforcement.

An F.T.C. spokesman said yesterday that the agency did not comment on pending inquiries.

The deal, involving powerful forces in their respective niches of the online advertising business, prompted privacy advocates and competitors to raise concerns after it was announced last month. Those concerns and the deal’s size made a preliminary investigation all but certain, according to antitrust experts.

Within a few weeks, perhaps within days, the F.T.C. will decide whether to escalate its investigation into the Google deal, antitrust experts say. That step, known as a “second request” for information, would suggest that the proposed acquisition raises more serious antitrust issues.

Google said it was confident that the deal would withstand scrutiny.
Full Article : nytimes.com

Zimbabwe: Diamonds - Africa must get lion's share
Posted: Tuesday, May 29, 2007

By Isdore Guvamombe
The Herald
May 29, 2007

RECENTLY, diamond producing countries, mainly in Sadc, met in Luanda, Angola, under the auspices of the newly-formed African Diamond Producers' Association (Adpa) to establish a policy that should see the countries become masters and shapers of their own economic destiny on the world diamond market.

The diamond is regarded as the world's strongest mineral used both for industrial and commercial purposes and it continues to fetch high prices on the world market.

According to De Beers, the world diamond industry is currently valued at US$10 billion, with Africa producing 60 percent of the world's diamonds.

This is why Africa must be the main factor in influencing the prices.

There is no doubt that, years after gaining political independence, Sadc countries are mindful of the need to end the foreign stranglehold on the precious stone by introducing effective strategies and policies that are aimed at devolving sovereignty and recovering lost revenue for each member state.

As many as 12 African diamond producing countries, mainly in Southern Africa, formed the association, that is headquartered in Luanda, Angola, to influence the world diamond market.

Angola, Botswana, Ghana, Guinea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Togo, Central Africa Republic and South Africa have sent a clear message that the time has come for them to influence the marketing and pricing of their mineral product.

They now need the lion's share.

The countries have also sought knowledge and co-operation of the Kimberly process.

This is a clear sign that Africa is rising from the ashes of mineral exploitation to self-determination against monopolistic Eurocentric companies like De Beers, Anglo-American and Rio Tinto.

Since colonial times, the Anglo-Saxons, through De Beers and Rio Tinto have, like moles, dug an array of tunnels through African soils for diamonds, mostly for the benefit of their kith and kin in Europe.

Ironically Africa, which produces about 60 percent of the world's diamonds, has been receiving crumbs from the periphery of the market yet the mineral was being extracted from its soil using Africans as cheap labour.

The move to control diamond trade by African countries should be taken seriously by all governments on the continent as a major step towards fair deals and fair trade, that is mutually beneficial.

African countries must insist on benefiting through local cutting and polishing of diamonds and jewellery production to generate more employment for the people.

African countries are certainly moving fast to become masters of their own economic destiny and fair play companies from Russia, China and others from the Far East should also be given a chance to clinch deals with diamond producing companies in Africa in general and Sadc in particular. This will broaden the market.

Since the Zimbabwean diamond fields are expected to produce 15,5 million tonnes of diamonds, it is worthwhile trying new partnerships with the Chinese and Russians, who also have vast experience in diamond mining and processing.

This would effectively end the Anglo-Saxon monopoly on the mineral's exploitation, as other investors would have to buy a huge stake in order to get real value and fair price.

It is true that Africa has predominantly remained as a source of raw material while countries that add value to the precious stones have significantly benefited and this has been to our detriment.

This is why there is now serious need to understand that if the local industries are transformed from being mere primary producers into full-fledged industries, there are a lot of benefits that will accrue from that.

In terms of fighting colonialism and defending political sovereignty Africans have, since the 1960s stood the test of time, in most cases cuddling together against the predatory instincts of American and British political hawks.

Of course, sell-outs have been noticed here and there but Africa will never be a colony again, politically, yet economically the journey is still too long.

Signs are clear that the time has now come for Africa to end western countries' hegemony on its important resources, especially the land and diamonds.

The host country Angola's Minister of Mines Mr Victor Kasongo summed up the intentions of the African countries.

"It is an African initiative trying to ensure that there is value addition to our resources with the support from our members in Southern Africa.

"We have to amend our laws to enable the governments to realise this. Benefaction is the key priority," he said.

Andre' Action Diakite' Jackson of DRC chairs Adpa with a secretariat headed by Edgar Diogo de Cavalho Santos, the former secretary general from Angola.

Unless Adpa is taken seriously and its principles implemented, the negative trade balance that has existed since colonial times will persist through the systematic plunder of resources for the benefit of other countries.

In Iraq, Every Day Is Memorial Day
Posted: Monday, May 28, 2007

¤ A Day on the Bush Chain Gang
¤ The Paranoid and the Dead
¤ Japanese minister commits suicide
¤ Car bomb kills at least 21 in Baghdad
¤ Inside Nahr el-Bared
¤ Inside Nahr el-Bared, exclusive images
¤ Hamas, Mickey Mouse and other horror stories

¤ Bush Pens Dictatorship Directive, Few Notice
It is hardly surprising not a single corporate newspaper reported the death of the Constitution. Go to Google News and type in "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive" and hit enter. Google returns ten paltry results, not one from the New York Times, the Washington Post, or related corporate media source. Google Trends rates the story as "mild," that is to say it warrants nary a blip on the news radar screen. Of course, another death blow to the Constitution, already long on life support, is hardly news. Few understand we now live in a dictatorship, or maybe it should be called a decidership.

¤ Passive Genocide With Collaboration of Mainstream Media

¤ The Politics of Murder, and the Democrats' War
With regard to the general contours of United States foreign policy for the last hundred years, and especially in the six decades following World War II, the catastrophe of Iraq has always belonged to both the Republicans and the Democrats. Both parties, and all leading national politicians, subscribe to the goal of American world hegemony, and America's "right" to encircle the globe with a military empire and intervene anywhere, anytime, for any reason we contend is related to "national security," a phrase purposely defined so broadly as to encompass any imaginable set of circumstances.

¤ Dissent spreads through U.S. military ranks

¤ Memorial Day
As the owners order up their Memorial Day spectacles in the USA entity, calling on the constantly cultivated reservoir of ignorant hatred and servility, exulting in the prospect of continuing to get the sucker-soldiers to die for their banker-gangster Godfathers and getting the sheeple to low in hapless assent to the Freedom whims of their Overlords, let us remember and memorialize some of those who deserve to be commemorated for their true heroism in the service of liberation and resistance to oppression.

¤ In Iraq, Every Day Is Memorial Day
The Shi'ite militias that forced Azhour Ali Mohammed from her home in Baghdad's al-Dolai district last month shot her husband Amer dead before her eyes and torched all her worldly possessions. And the fear that the killers may come back for her and her two little children prevented her from mourning her husband. "I could not hold a proper wake for him," says the young widow. "He deserved at least that."

¤ It's Time for Congress To Put Its Money Where Its Mouth Is
¤ More stop and quiz terror powers
¤ The Myth Of Al Qaeda Is Now Almost Totally Exposed

Zimbabwe: West's degrees conferred on leaders not sincere
Posted: Monday, May 28, 2007

EDITOR — Cde George Charamba's response in The Herald (April 25 2007) to calls from some quarters that want American and British universities to revoke President Mugabe's honorary degrees was spot on — the President does not suffer from a crisis of academic achievement.

I would like to add my voice as well.

Africans in general and Zimbabweans in particular must know that the honours, degrees, medals, and so forth conferred on African leaders, past or present, by the West, were never sincere.

They are meant to flatter our leaders so that they can work to further Western interests at the expense of the majority of Africans.

Just look at how they praise past and present African leaders who have done virtually nothing to empower indigenous black people but whose "success" is rated by how well they maintain the status quo of minority white privileges.

I am glad that we Zimbabweans have opted to die on our feet than live on our knees. We must never fear sanctions!

We must stand firm in our fight for self-reliance. Just look at how the Chinese and Koreans have done it.

All that we need are sacrifices across the board.

Godwin Hatitye

Harare

Who's Behind the Fighting in North Lebanon?
Posted: Saturday, May 26, 2007

Inside Narh al-Bared and Bedawi Refugee Camps

By Franklin Lamb, counterpunch.org
Tripoli, Lebanon.
May 24, 2007

Wearing a beat-up ratty UNCHR tee-shirt left over from Bint Jbeil and the Israeli-Hezbollah July probably helped. As did, I suspect, the Red Cross jersey, my black and white checkered kaffieyh and the Palestinian flag taped to my lapel as I joined a group of Palestinian aid workers and slipped into Nahr el-Bared trying not to look conspicuous.

Our mission was to facilitate the delivery of food, blankets and mattresses, but I was also curious about the political situation. Who was behind the events that erupted so quickly and violently following a claimed 'bank robbery'? A heist that depending on who you talked to, netted the masked bandits $ 150,000, $ 1,500 or $ 150!

It seems that every Beirut media outlet has a different source of 'inside information' based on which Confession owns it and 'knows' the real culprits pulling the strings. But then, even we who are particularly obtuse have realized, as the late Rafic Hariri often counseled: "In Lebanon, believe nothing of what you are told and only half of what you see!"

My friends made we swear out loud that I would claim to be Canadian instead of American if Al Qaeda types stopped us inside the Camp. My impression was that they were not so worried about my safety but for their own if they got caught with me. It would not be the first time that I relied on my northern neighbors to get me out of a potential US nationality jam in the Middle East, so I ditched my American ID.

We were advised as we approached the Fatah al Islam stronghold that we would be in the cross-hairs of Lebanese army snipers from outside of Nahr el-Bared Camp as well as Fatah al-Islam snipers from the inside, and that any false move or bad luck could prove fatal.

After three days of shelling and more than 100 dead and with no electricity or water, Nahr el-Baled reeks of burned and rotting flesh, charred houses with smoldering contents, raw sewage and the acrid smell of exploded mortars and tank rounds.

Press figures of 30,000-32,000 are not accurate. 45,000 live in Bared! Contrary to some reports food and water still not being allowed in.

15 to 70 percent of some areas destroyed. Some light shooting this morning and afternoon. Army shelling at rate of 10-18 shells per minute from 4:30 am to 10 am on Tuesday. Army will not allow Palestinian Red Crescent to move out civilians because they don't trust them. Only the Lebanese Red Cross is allowed. It is possible to enter Bared from the back (east side). The Army taking cameras of journalists they catch. The Lebanese government is controlling the information and don't want extent of damage known yet. Still unrecovered bodies. 40 per cent of the camp population have been evacuated. The rest don't want to leave out of fear of being shot or that they are losing their homes for the 5th time or more for some.

No electricity and cell phone batteries are dying. Relatives who fled are telling families to stay because there are not enough mattresses at Bedawi Camp. Bared evacuees are living up to 25 in one room in Badawi schools etc. 3,000 evacuees in one school in Bedawi. UN aid is starting to arrive at Badawi but workers not able so far to deliver it to Bared due to attack on relief convoy on Tuesday.

I met Abdul Rahman Hallab famous for Lebanese candy factory in Tripoli. Helped him unload 5,000 meals to evacuees from Bared staying in Badawi. He is Lebanese not Palestinian.

The camp population all say that Fatah Al-Islam came in September-October 2006 and have no relatives in the camp. They are from Saudi, Pakistan, Algeria, Iraq, and Tunisia and elsewhere. No Palestinians among them except some hanger ons. Most say they are paid by the Hariri group.

Reports that Fateh al-Islam helps people in Bared are denied. " All they do is pray, one woman told me..and do military training.. They are much more religious than the Shia" she said.

Population of Badawi camp was 15,000 and as of this morning it is 28,000. Four bodies arrived this morning at Safad, the only Palestinian Red Crescent Hospitals in north Lebanon.

I was told the army will have to destroy every house in Bared to remove Fateh al Islam.

I expect to stay in Bared tonight with aid workers. Some say FAI with die fighting others than a settlement could be negotiated. I may try the latter with NGO from Norway here. Not sure if anyone in government is interested. One minute ago a member of Fateh at_Islam walked into the medical office I am using at Safed Hospital and said they want a permanent ceasefire and do not want more people killed or injured.

They claim to have no problem with the army

Now some background about Nahr el-Bared. Like the other Palestinian camps in Lebanon, it is inhabited by Palestinians who were forced from their homes, land, and personal property in 1947-48, in order to make room for Jews from Europe and elsewhere prior to the May 15, 1948 founding of Israel.

Of the original 16 Refugee camps, set up to settle the more than 100,000 refugees crossing the border into Lebanon from Palestine during the Nakba, 12 official ones remain. The camp at Tal El-Za`tar was ethnically cleansed by Christian Phalange forces at the beginning of the 1975-1990, Lebanese Civil War and the Nabatieh, Dikwaneh and Jisr el-Basha camps were destroyed by Israeli attacks and Lebanese militia and not rebuilt. Those remaining include the following which currently house more than half of Lebanon's 433,276 Palestinian refugees:

Al-Badawi, Burj El-Barajna, Jal El-Bahr, Sabra and Shatilla, Ain El-Helwa, Nahr El-Bared, Rashidieh, Burj El Shemali, El-Buss, Wavel, Mieh Mieh and Mar Elias.

Nahr el-Bared is 7 miles north of Tripoli near the stunning Mediterranean coast and is home to more than 32,000 refuges many of whom were expelled from the Lake Huleh area of Palestine, including Safed. Like all the official Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, plus several 'unofficial' ones, Nahr el-Bared suffers from serious problems including no proper infrastructure, overcrowding, poverty and unemployment.

Tabulated at more than 25%, Nahr el-Bared has the highest percentage of Palestinian refugees anywhere who are living in abject poverty and who are officially registered with the UN as "special hardship" cases.

Its residents, like all Palestinians in Lebanon are blatantly discriminated against and not even officially counted. They are denied citizenship and banned from working in the top 70 trades and professions (that includes McDonald's and KFC in downtown Beirut) and cannot own real estate. Palestinians in Lebanon have essentially no social or civil rights and only limited access to government educational facilities. They have no access to public social services. Consequently most rely entirely on the UNRWA as the sole provider for their families needs.

It is not surprising that al-Qaeda sympathies, if not formal affiliations, are found in the 12 official camps as well as 7 unofficial ones. Groups with names such as Fateh al-Islam, Jund al-Shams (Soldier of Damascus) , Ibns al-Shaheed" (sons of the martyrs) Issbat al-Anssar which morphed into Issbat al-Noor - "The Community of Illumination" and many others.

Given Bush administration debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan and its encouragement for Israel to continue its destruction of Lebanon this past summer, the situation in Lebanon mirrors, in some respects, the early 1980's when groups sprung up to resist the US green lighted Israeli invasion and occupation. But rather than being Shia and pro-Hezbollah, today's groups are largely Sunni and anti-Hezbollah. Hence they qualify for US aid, funneled by Sunni financial backers in league with the Bush administration which is committed to funding Islamist Sunni groups to weaken Hezbollah.

This project has become the White House obsession following Israel's July 2006 defeat.

To understand what is going on with Fatah al-Islam at Nahr el-Bared one would want a brief introduction to Lebanon's amazing, but shadowy 'Welch Club'.

The Club is named for its godfather, David Welch, assistant to Secretary of State Rice who is the point man for the Bush administration and is guided by Eliot Abrams.
Key Lebanese members of the Welch Club (aka: the 'Club') include:

The Lebanese civil war veteran, warlord, feudalist and mercurial Walid Jumblatt of the Druze party( the Progressive Socialist Party or PSP)

Another civil war veteran, warlord, terrorist (Served 11 years in prison for massacres committed against fellow Christians among others) Samir Geagea. Leader of the extremist Phalange party and its Lebanese Forces (LF) the group that conducted the Israel organized massacre at Sabra-Shatilla (although led by Elie Hobeika, once Geagea's mentor, Geagea did not take part in the Sept. 1982 slaughter of 1,700 Palestinian and Lebanese).

The billionaire, Saudi Sheikh and Club president Saad Hariri leader of the Sunni Future Movement (FM).

Over a year ago Hariri's Future Movement started setting up Sunni Islamist terrorist cells (the PSP and LF already had their own militia since the civil war and despite the Taif Accords requiring militia to disarm they are now rearmed and itching for action and trying hard to provoke Hezbollah).

The FM created Sunni Islamist 'terrorist' cells were to serve as a cover for (anti-Hezbollah) Welch Club projects. The plan was that actions of these cells, of which Fatah el-Islam is one, could be blamed on al Qaeda or Syria or anyone but the Club.

To staff the new militias, FM rounded up remnants of previous extremists in the Palestinian Refugee camps that had been subdued, marginalized and diminished during the Syrian occupation of Lebanon. Each fighter got $700 per month, not bad in today's Lebanon.

The first Welch Club funded militia, set up by FM, is known locally as Jund-al-Sham (Soldiers of Sham, where "Sham" in Arabic denotes Syria, Lebanon, Palestine & Jordan) created in Ain-el-Hilwa Palestinian refugee camp near Sidon. This group is also referred to in the Camps as Jund-el-Sitt (Soldiers of the Sitt, where "Sitt" in Sidon, Ain-el-Hilwa and the outskirts pertain to Bahia Hariri, the sister of Rafiq Hariri, aunt of Saad, and Member of Parliament).

The second was Fateh-al-Islam (The name cleverly put together, joining Fateh as in Palestinian and the word Islam as in Qaeda). FM set this Club cell up in Nahr-al-Bared refugee camp north of Tripoli for geographical balance.

Fatah el-Islam had about 400 well paid fighters until three days ago. Today they may have more or fewer plus volunteers. The leaders were provided with ocean view luxury apartments in Tripoli where they stored arms and chilled when not in Nahr-al-Bared. Guess who owns the apartments?

According to members of both Fatah el-Islam and Jund-al-Sham their groups acted on the directive of the Club president, Saad Hariri.
So what went wrong? "Why the bank robbery" and the slaughter at Nahr el-Baled?

According to operatives of Fatah el-Islam, the Bush administration got cold feet with people like Seymour Hirsh snooping around and with the White House post-Iraq discipline in free fall. Moreover, Hezbollah intelligence knew all about the Clubs activities and was in a position to flip the two groups who were supposed to ignite a Sunni Shia civil war which Hezbollah vows to prevent.

Things started to go very wrong quickly for the Club last week.
FM "stopped" the payroll of Fateh el-Islam's account at the Hariri family owned back.

Fateh-al-Islam, tried to negotiate at least 'severance pay' with no luck and they felt betrayed. (Remember many of their fighters are easily frustrated teenagers and their pay supports their families). Militia members knocked off the bank which issued their worthless checks. They were doubly angry when they learned FM is claiming in the media a loss much greater than they actually snatched and that the Club is going to stiff the insurance company and actually make a huge profit.

Lebanon's Internal Security Forces (newly recruited to serve the bidding of the Club and the Future Movement) assaulted the apartments of Fatah-al-Islam Tripoli. They didn't have much luck and were forced to call in the Lebanese army.

Within the hour, Fatah-al-Islam retaliated against Lebanese Army posts, checkpoints and unarmed, off-duty Lebanese soldiers in civilian clothing and committed outrageous killings including severing at four heads.

Up to this point Fatah-al-Islam did not retaliate against the Internal Security forces in Tripoli because the ISF is pro-Hariri and some are friends and Fatah al-Islam still hoped to get paid by Hariri. Instead Fatah al Islam went after the Army.

The Seniora cabinet convenes and asks the Lebanese Army to enter the refugee camp and silence (in more ways than one) Fatah-al-Islam. Since entrance into the Camps is forbidden by the 1969 Arab league agreement, the Army refuses after realizing the extent of the conspiracy against it by the Welch Club. The army knows that entering a refugee camp in force will open a front against the Army in all twelve Palestinian refugee camps and tear the army apart along sectarian cracks.

The army feels set up by the Club's Internal Security Forces which did not coordinate with the Lebanese Army, as required by Lebanese law and did not even make them aware of the "inter family operation" the ISF carried out against Fatah-al-Islam safe houses in Tripoli.

Today, tensions are high between the Lebanese army and the Welch Club. Some mention the phrase 'army coup'.

The Club is trying to run Parliament and is prepared to go all the way not to 'lose' Lebanon. It still holds 70 seats in the house of parliament while the Hezbollah led opposition holds 58 seats. It has a dutiful PM in Fouad Siniora.

The club tried to seize control of the presidency and when it failed it marginalized it. Last year it tried to control of the Parliamentary Constitutional Committee, which audits the government's policies, laws and watch dogs their actions. When the Club failed to control it they simply abolished the Constitutional Committee. This key committee no longer exists in Lebanon's government.

The Welch Club's major error was when it attempted to influence the Lebanese Army into disarming the Lebanese Resistance led by Hezbollah. When the Army wisely refused, the Club coordinated with the Bush Administration to pressure Israel to dramatically intensify its retaliation to the capture of the two soldiers by Hezbollah and 'break the rules' regarding the historically more limited response and try to destroy Hezbollah during the July 2006 war.

The Welch Club now considers the Lebanese Army a serious problem. The Bush administration is trying to undermine and marginalize it to eliminate one of the last two obstacles to implementing Israel's agenda in Lebanon.
If the army is weakened, it can not protect _over 70% of the Christians in Lebanon who support General Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement. The F.P.M. is mainly constituted of well educated, middle class and unarmed Lebanese civilians. The only protection they have is the Lebanese Army which aids in maintaining their presence in the political scene. The other type of Christians in Lebanon is the minority, about 15% of Christians associated with Geagea's Lebanese Forces who are purely militia. If the Club can weaken the Army even more than it is, then this Phalange minority will be the only relatively strong force on the Christian scene and become the "army" of the Club.

Another reason the Club wants to weaken the Lebanese Army is that the Army is nationalistic and is a safety valve for Lebanon to ensure the Palestinian right of return to Palestine, Lebanese nationhood and the resistance culture led by Hezbollah, with which is has excellent relations.

For their part, the Welch Club wants to keep some Palestinians in Lebanon for cheap labor, ship others to countries willing to take them (and be paid handsomely to do so by American taxpayers) and allow at most a few thousand to return to Palestine to settle the 'right of return' issue while at the same time signing a May 17th 1983 type treaty with Israel with enriches the Club members and gives Israel Lebanon's water and much of Lebanon's sovereignty.

Long story short, Fatah el-Islam must be silenced at all costs. Their tale, if told, is poison for the Club and its sponsors. We will likely see their attempted destruction in the coming days.

Hezbollah is watching and supporting the Lebanese army.

Franklin Lamb's recent book, The Price We Pay: A Quarter Century of Israel's use of American Weapon's against Lebanon (1978-2006) is available at Amazon.com.uk. Hezbollah: A Brief Guide for Beginners is expected in early summer.

Dr. Lamb can be reached at fplamb @ gmail.com.

Reprinted from:
www.counterpunch.org/lamb05242007.html

US master of blame-shifting
Posted: Saturday, May 26, 2007

¤ US master of blame-shifting
The fighting that began in northern Lebanon last Sunday may drag the country back into a civil war, or it may not. It may be the result of a Syrian plot, or it may not. As a rule, if you claim to understand what is going on in Lebanon, you simply reveal the depths of your ignorance. And yet people do claim to understand it.

White House spokesperson Tony Snow does. "We believe those behind the attack have two clear goals: to disrupt Lebanon's security and to distract international attention from the efforts to establish a special tribunal for Lebanon. We will not tolerate attempts by Syria, terrorist groups or any others to delay or derail Lebanon's efforts to solidify its sovereignty or to seek justice in the Hariri case."

¤ Cheney, Israel and Iran
"There is a race currently underway between different flanks of the administration to determine the future course of US-Iran policy," writes Washington insider Steven C. Clemens on his Washington Note blog. "On one flank are the diplomats, and on the other is Vice President Cheney's team and acolytes -- who populate quite a wide swath throughout the American national security bureaucracy." This is "worrisome" because the "person in the Bush administration who most wants a hot conflict with Iran is Vice President Cheney."

¤ Imperial Rot

¤ Memorial and Veterans Day Hypocrisy
Because both days are related, they’re discussed together. The first, Memorial Day, is commemorated on the last Monday in May and was first observed in 1866 and called Decoration Day beginning in 1868. Usage of Memorial Day wasn’t common until after WW II and wasn’t the holiday’s official name until federal law called it that in 1967. The day is an occasion to honor the nation’s men and women who died in military service to the country. More on that shortly.

Veterans Day was formerly known as Armistice Day, or Remembrance Day in Europe, that originally commemorated the end of WW I on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of the year in 1918 when the guns went silent, or were supposed to. It was first observed in the US in 1919 and made a legal holiday here in 1938. In June, 1954, Congress enacted legislation changing the holiday’s name to Veterans Day.

¤ Strange Bedfellows
¤ Behind the eyes of the warmongering US hawks

¤ How Can Bush Free Iraq When He Brings Tyranny to America?
The Washington, DC, think-tank, The American Enterprise Institute, camouflages its purpose with its name. There is nothing American about AEI, and the organization’s enterprise is fomenting war in the Middle East against Israel’s enemies. Its real name should be The Likud Center for Middle East War. AEI has the largest collection of warmongers in America. AEI "scholars" have agitated for war in the Middle East for years. A moronic president and 9/11 gave them their opportunity. Now that the US invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan have failed, the AEI warmongers are conspiring with Vice President Cheney to foment war with Iran.

¤ Britons Blast Blair, Bush for Iraq War
Adults in Britain are particularly critical of their prime minister and the American president over their Iraq policies, according to a poll by Ipsos-MORI. Only 17 per cent of respondents approve of the way Tony Blair is handling the current situation with Iraq, and just nine per cent feel the same way about George W. Bush. Britain committed troops to both the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and the U.S.-led coalition effort in Iraq. The conflict against Saddam Hussein’s regime was launched in March 2003. At least 3,711 soldiers have died during the military operation in Iraq, including 149 Britons. Only 11 per cent of respondents say they still support the war in Iraq.

¤ U.S. funding Mexico's wiretaps
¤ Infants Have 'Amazing Capabilities' That Adults Lack
¤ Democratic Blood Money

¤ 8 killed in market explosion in India
A bomb exploded in a busy market in India's restive northeast Saturday, killing eight people and injuring 19, and authorities said they discovered and defused a large bomb hidden on a crowded passenger train headed for the area.

¤ Israel attacks Hamas facilities
¤ Pounding Gaza
¤ US military says five Iraqi militants killed in Sadr City raid
¤ Curse of Oil and Iraq’s Disintegration

¤ Why Congress caved to Bush
The anti-war Democrats are crying betrayal – and justifiably so.
For a Democratic Congress is now voting to fully fund the war in Iraq, as demanded by President Bush, and without any timetable for a U.S. troop withdrawal. Bush got his $100 billion, then magnanimously agreed to let Democrats keep the $20 billion in pork they stuffed into the bill – to soothe the pain of their sellout of the party base.
Remarkable. If the Republican rout of 2006 said anything, it was that America had lost faith in the Bush-Rumsfeld conduct of the war and wanted Democrats to lead the country out.

¤ "Privatizing Iraq's Oil is Theft!"

¤ Israel attacks Hamas facilities

Coup Co-Conspirators as Free-Speech Martyrs
Posted: Friday, May 25, 2007

By FAIR, fair.org
May 25, 2007

The story is framed in U.S. news media as a simple matter of censorship: Prominent Venezuelan TV station RCTV is being silenced by the authoritarian government of President Hugo Chávez, who is punishing the station for its political criticism of his government.

According to CNN reporter T.J. Holmes (5/21/07), the issues are easy to understand: RCTV "is going to be shut down, is going to get off the air, because of President Hugo Chávez, not a big fan of it." Dubbing RCTV "a voice of free speech," Holmes explained, "Chavez, in a move that's angered a lot of free-speech groups, is refusing now to renew the license of this television station that has been critical of his government."

Though straighter, a news story by the Associated Press (5/20/07) still maintained the theme that the license denial was based simply on political differences, with reporter Elizabeth Munoz describing RCTV as "a network that has been critical of Chávez."

In a May 14 column, Washington Post deputy editorial page editor Jackson Diehl called the action an attempt to silence opponents and more "proof" that Chávez is a "dictator." Wrote Diehl, "Chávez has made clear that his problem with [RCTV owner Marcel] Granier and RCTV is political."

In keeping with the media script that has bad guy Chávez brutishly silencing good guys in the democratic opposition, all these articles skimmed lightly over RCTV's history, the Venezuelan government's explanation for the license denial and the process that led to it.

RCTV and other commercial TV stations were key players in the April 2002 coup that briefly ousted Chávez's democratically elected government. During the short-lived insurrection, coup leaders took to commercial TV airwaves to thank the networks. "I must thank Venevisión and RCTV," one grateful leader remarked in an appearance captured in the Irish film The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. The film documents the networks' participation in the short-lived coup, in which stations put themselves to service as bulletin boards for the coup—hosting coup leaders, silencing government voices and rallying the opposition to a march on the Presidential Palace that was part of the coup plotters strategy.

On April 11, 2002, the day of the coup, when military and civilian opposition leaders held press conferences calling for Chávez's ouster, RCTV hosted top coup plotter Carlos Ortega, who rallied demonstrators to the march on the presidential palace. On the same day, after the anti-democratic overthrow appeared to have succeeded, another coup leader, Vice-Admiral Victor Ramírez Pérez, told a Venevisión reporter (4/11/02): "We had a deadly weapon: the media. And now that I have the opportunity, let me congratulate you."

That commercial TV outlets including RCTV participated in the coup is not at question; even mainstream outlets have acknowledged as much. As reporter Juan Forero, Jackson Diehl's colleague at the Washington Post, explained (1/18/07), "RCTV, like three other major private television stations, encouraged the protests," resulting in the coup, "and, once Chávez was ousted, cheered his removal." The conservative British newspaper the Financial Times reported (5/21/07), "[Venezuelan] officials argue with some justification that RCTV actively supported the 2002 coup attempt against Mr. Chávez."

As FAIR's magazine Extra! argued last November, "Were a similar event to happen in the U.S., and TV journalists and executives were caught conspiring with coup plotters, it's doubtful they would stay out of jail, let alone be allowed to continue to run television stations, as they have in Venezuela."

When Chávez returned to power the commercial stations refused to cover the news, airing instead entertainment programs—in RCTV's case, the American film Pretty Woman. By refusing to cover such a newsworthy story, the stations abandoned the public interest and violated the public trust that is seen in Venezuela (and in the U.S.) as a requirement for operating on the public airwaves. Regarding RCTV's refusal to cover the return of Chavez to power, Columbia University professor and former NPR editor John Dinges told Marketplace (5/8/07):

What RCTV did simply can't be justified under any stretch of journalistic principles…. When a television channel simply fails to report, simply goes off the air during a period of national crisis, not because they're forced to, but simply because they don't agree with what's happening, you've lost your ability to defend what you do on journalistic principles.

The Venezuelan government is basing its denial of license on RCTV's involvement in the 2002 coup, not on the station's criticisms of or political opposition to the government. Many American pundits and some human rights spokespersons have confused the issue by claiming the action is based merely on political differences, failing to note that Venezuela's media, including its commercial broadcasters, are still among the most vigorously dissident on the planet.

When Patrick McElwee of the U.S.-based group Just Foreign Policy interviewed representatives of Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists—all groups that have condemned Venezuela's action in denying RCTV's license renewal—he found that none of the spokespersons thought broadcasters were automatically entitled to license renewals, though none of them thought RCTV's actions in support of the coup should have resulted in the station having its license renewal denied. This led McElwee to wonder, based on the rights groups' arguments, "Could it be that governments like Venezuela have the theoretical right to not to renew a broadcast license, but that no responsible government would ever do it?"

McElwee acknowledged the critics' point that some form of due process should have been involved in the decisions, but explained that laws preexisting Chávez's presidency placed licensing decision with the executive branch, with no real provisions for a hearings process: "Unfortunately, this is what the law, first enacted in 1987, long before Chávez entered the political scene, allows. It charges the executive branch with decisions about license renewal, but does not seem to require any administrative hearing. The law should be changed, but at the current moment when broadcast licenses are up for renewal, it is the prevailing law and thus lays out the framework in which decisions are made."

Government actions weighing on journalism and broadcast licensing deserve strong scrutiny. However, on the central question of whether a government is bound to renew the license of a broadcaster when that broadcaster had been involved in a coup against the democratically elected government, the answer should be clear, as McElwee concludes:

The RCTV case is not about censorship of political opinion. It is about the government, through a flawed process, declining to renew a broadcast license to a company that would not get a license in other democracies, including the United States. In fact, it is frankly amazing that this company has been allowed to broadcast for 5 years after the coup, and that the Chávez government waited until its license expired to end its use of the public airwaves.

Reprinted from:
www.fair.org/index.php?page=3107

So You Thought They'd End the War
Posted: Friday, May 25, 2007

¤ Coup Co-Conspirators as Free-Speech Martyrs
RCTV and other commercial TV stations were key players in the April 2002 coup that briefly ousted Chávez's democratically elected government. During the short-lived insurrection, coup leaders took to commercial TV airwaves to thank the networks. "I must thank Venevisión and RCTV," one grateful leader remarked in an appearance captured in the Irish film The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. The film documents the networks' participation in the short-lived coup, in which stations put themselves to service as bulletin boards for the coup—hosting coup leaders, silencing government voices and rallying the opposition to a march on the Presidential Palace that was part of the coup plotters strategy.

¤ We Should Back Chávez
Neoconservative forces, via compliant media outlets and Christian right groupings within the European parliament, are preparing their latest attack on Hugo Chávez and the government of Venezuela. The latest focus of the campaign is the decision of Venezuela’s broadcasting authorities not to renew the licence of the private television channel RCTV. The anti-Chávez apparatus once again presents a test for Foreign Office ministers.

¤ Venezuela and RCTV: Is Free Speech Really at Stake?
President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela has been the subject of many controversies. His critics often accuse him of laying the groundwork for dictatorship, despite the democratic credentials of his government. Chávez was democratically elected in 1998 and again in 2000 under a new constitution. He then won a recall election in 2004, which was certified by observers from the Carter Center and the Organization of American States. Chávez was re-elected last December by 63 percent of voters, a result again certified by international observers including the OAS and the European Uni0n. Chávez has pledged to accelerate policies that have given poor Venezuelans vastly increased access to health care, education, and subsidized food, and in the last three and a half years of political stability, a remarkable 40 percent increase in the economy.

¤ Why is Cuba Exporting Its Health Care Miracle To The World’s Poor?
Cubans say they offer health care to the world’s poor because they have big hearts. But what do they get in return?

They live longer than almost anyone in Latin America. Far fewer babies die. Almost everyone has been vaccinated, and such scourges of the poor as parasites, TB, malaria, even HIV/AIDS are rare or non-existent. Anyone can see a doctor, at low cost, right in the neighborhood.

¤ Secret memo shows Israel knew Six Day War was illegal
¤ Venezuela and RCTV
¤ Congress Gives War Profiteers Another $100 Billion

¤ So You Thought They'd End the War
Welcome to the Show, kid.
The Democrats have "surrendered" on Iraq. Liberals are "shocked." And all the innocents who didn't know any better, didn't see it coming, feel "betrayed."
Poor Duncan Black, better known as "Atrios," is nearly at a loss for words: "People hate Bush, hate Republicans, and hate this war," he protests, and yet the Democrats caved!
"I don't understand these people," he wails.
Precisely.

¤ Bush's Pick for Surgeon General Makes Us Sick
¤ Anger at Aborigine school plan
¤ Unsuitable, unsustainable
¤ Bush signs $100 billion Iraq war funding bill
¤ Will Most Certainly Be Fooled Again
¤ Rampage & Massacres on Gaza Strip
¤ Israel Leading 'War Criminals Championship' in Amnesty Report

Venezuela and RCTV: Is Free Speech Really at Stake?
Posted: Friday, May 25, 2007

By Patrick Mcelwee, counterpunch.org
May 25, 2007

President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela has been the subject of many controversies. His critics often accuse him of laying the groundwork for dictatorship, despite the democratic credentials of his government. Chávez was democratically elected in 1998 and again in 2000 under a new constitution. He then won a recall election in 2004, which was certified by observers from the Carter Center and the Organization of American States. Chávez was re-elected last December by 63 percent of voters, a result again certified by international observers including the OAS and the European Union. Chávez has pledged to accelerate policies that have given poor Venezuelans vastly increased access to health care, education, and subsidized food, and in the last three and a half years of political stability, a remarkable 40 percent increase in the economy.

Throughout this process of increasing voter and citizen participation and electoral democracy, the Venezuelan opposition and their allies in the U.S. press have told us that authoritarianism was just around the corner. They now say it has arrived. The immediate focus of their concern is the president's decision not to renew the broadcast license of a major television network that is openly opposed to the Chávez government. Their free speech concerns have been echoed by Human Rights Watch, Reporters without Borders, and the Committee to Protect Journalists. On the other hand, the vice-chair of the European Parliament's Freedom Commission, ruling out a resolution on the issue, has said the non-renewal has nothing to do with human rights.

Here are the basic facts. Rádio Caracas Televisión (RCTV) is one of the biggest television networks in Venezuela. It airs news and entertainment programs. It is also openly opposed to the government, including by supporting a military coup that briefly ousted Chávez in 2002. During the oil strike of 2002-2003, the station repeatedly called upon its viewers to come out into the street and help topple the government. As part of its continuing political campaign against the government, the station has also used false allegations, sometimes with gruesome and violent imagery, to convince its viewers that the government was responsible for such crimes as murders where there was no evidence of government involvement.

According to a law enacted in 1987, the licenses given to RCTV and other stations to use the public airwaves expire on May 27. President Chávez has publicly declared that RCTV's license will not be renewed, citing its involvement in the coup. Although it will not be able to continue to use the public broadcast frequencies, the station will still be able to send its signal out over cable, satellite, and the Internet.

The U.S. media, much of which has been unsuccessfully predicting dictatorship under Chávez for years, has used this case to make accusations of censorship and the end of press freedom in Venezuela.

To understand the issue better, I decided to talk to the human rights and press freedom groups who have criticized the action.

José Miguel Vivanco of Human Rights Watch clarified for me that "broadcasting companies in any country in the world, especially in democratic countries, are not entitled to renewal of their licenses. The lack of renewal of the contract, per se, is not a free speech issue. Just per se." A free speech issue arises if the non-renewal is to punish a certain editorial line.

Still, Benoît Hervieu of Reporters Without Borders in Paris said that, while he could not be certain, he thought US and European governments would stop short of non-renewal despite RCTV's "support for the coup."

"I think that there would be pressure to make a replacement at the head of the channel. But I don't think that they would not renew the concession. There is a risk in that story. There are 3000 employees at RCTV. So I don't think that even in a country like [the United States or France], a government would risk putting 3000 people in the streets," he said.

Could it be that governments like Venezuela have the theoretical right not to renew a broadcast license, but that no responsible government would ever do it? In the United States, this may seem plausible, since broadcast licenses here seem to be forever. (Who could imagine life without ABC, CBS, or NBC?) Still, the government sometimes takes actions in other parts of the economy that result in a company going out of business.

Actually, in other democratic countries, broadcast companies sometimes do not get their licenses renewed. For example, in Britain in 1992, in a process based in part on a subjective assessment of "quality of service," Thames Television lost its license after 24 years of service. Several British commentators speculated that the Thatcher government had influenced the result.

So democracies do occasionally find reasons not to renew a license. So what about this case in particular: Would RCTV have had its license renewed in the United States or Europe?

While the two US-based human rights advocates I spoke with declined to answer that question directly, they acknowledged that non-renewal would not be out of the question here.

Vivanco said, "I don't know. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) could decide that they're not going to renew, for instance, Fox News or MSNBC because they're in violation of the contract, according to the conditions of the contract. Normally you settle those things in court."

Carlos Lauría of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) spoke similarly: "I don't think you can translate what's going on there [in Venezuela] to the United States. That's a very difficult question. I mean, if RCTV had violated the law, I assume they wouldn't get the concession renewed."

For Lauría, non-renewal itself is not the problem. His concern is the process by which the decision was reached. "I assume in the US there would be a process. The FCC would follow protocol. This is what hasn't happened in Venezuela. We're not arguing that the concession should be renewed, should be given to RCTV. We're just saying that there's no process to evaluate if it should be."

Vivanco also complained about the process, saying that if the government argues there is a violation of the contract, "that would be settled normally in court. Second, if there's some crimes committed, the individuals who were involved in those crimes should be prosecuted in a court of law."

On process, they have a legitimate point. The government seems to have made the decision without any administrative or judicial hearings. Unfortunately, this is what the law, first enacted in 1987, long before Chávez entered the political scene, allows. It charges the executive branch with decisions about license renewal, but does not seem to require any administrative hearing. The law should be changed, but at the current moment when broadcast licenses are up for renewal, it is the prevailing law and thus lays out the framework in which decisions are made.

However, Vivanco's critique goes beyond process to the government's justification for non-renewal. "You have the president saying, forget it, the license is not going to be renewed, it's a bunch of golpistas [coup-mongers] or fascists or whatever which is clearly some sort of censorship. That sounds like an arbitrary decision made by the president on political grounds. And that is not acceptable."

Lauría also told me that RCTV was "selectively chosen because of opposition views."

But is support for the violent overthrow of an elected government really protected political speech? Vivanco acknowledges that RCTV "obviously probably sympathized with the coup." But, he says, "it is a matter of free speech."

Vivanco understates RCTV's connection to the coup. RCTV encouraged viewers to attend a rally that was part of the coup strategy, invited coup leaders to address the country on their channel, and reported the false information that the president had resigned. After Pedro Carmona declared himself president and dissolved the National Assembly, Supreme Court, and other democratic institutions, the head of RCTV Marcel Granier met with him in the Presidential Palace. The following day, when mass protests and loyal army units brought back President Chávez, RCTV and other stations blacked out the news, showing movies and cartoons instead.

Such actions clearly go beyond protected free speech, at least in the United States. Imagine the consequences if NBC took such actions during a coup against Bush.

In fact, RCTV's participation in the oil strike of 2002-2003, and even their joining in legal political campaigns would be grounds for revoking their broadcast license in the United States.

Consider this episode in the US. Two weeks before the 2004 presidential election, it was reported that the Sinclair Broadcast Group, which operates the largest number of local TV stations in the United States, planned to order its affiliates to replace prime-time programming with a documentary critical of John Kerry.

Democrats were outraged. The Democratic National Committee filed a case with the FCC arguing that such "partisan propaganda" was inappropriate. And, yes, at least one powerful Democratic politician swore that if the documentary was aired, there would be no Sinclair Broadcast Group by the 2008 election. A Kerry spokesman said, "You don't expect your local TV station to be pushing a political agenda two weeks before an election. It's un-American." Couldn't it be un-Venezuelan too? (The political pressures above led Sinclair to cancel the anti-Kerry broadcast).

If RCTV were the only major source of opposition to the government, the loss of its voice would be troubling. It would also be disturbing if the RCTV case forced others to tone down legitimate opposition. But Greg Wilpert, a sociologist living in Venezuela, declares, "It is the height of absurdity to say that there's a lack of freedom of press in Venezuela."

Of the top four private TV stations, three air mostly entertainment and one, Globovisión, is a 24-hours news channel. On Globovisión, Wilpert says, "the opposition is very present. They pretty much dominate it. And in the others, they certainly are very present in the news segments."

Regarding the print media, Wilpert told me, "There are three main newspapers. Of those three, two are definitely very opposition. The other one is pretty neutral. I would say, [the opposition] certainly dominates the print media by far. There's no doubt about that."

"I think some of the TV stations have slightly moderated [their opposition to the government] not because of intimidation, but because they were losing audience share. Over half of the population is supportive of Chávez . They've reduced the number of anti-Chávez programs that they used to have. But those that continue to exist are just as anti-Chávez as they were before."

The RCTV case is not about censorship of political opinion. It is about the government, through a flawed process, declining to renew a broadcast license to a company that would not get a license in other democracies, including the United States. In fact, it is frankly amazing that this company has been allowed to broadcast for 5 years after the coup, and that the Chávez government waited until its license expired to end its use of the public airwaves.

Once again, it seems, the warnings of a move from democracy to dictatorship in Venezuela have been loud but lacking in evidence.

Patrick McElwee is a policy analyst with Just Foreign Policy. He can be reached at patrick@justforeignpolicy.org

Reprinted from:
www.counterpunch.org/mcelwee05252007.html

Also Read:

Hugo Chávez and RCTV: Censorship or a legitimate decision?
Wednesday, Feb 07, 2007

Zimbabwe: When the bully cries foul...
Posted: Friday, May 25, 2007

By Peter Mavunga
The Herald
May 25, 2007

I HAVE just been reading Rian Malan's article in the Spectator (May 19 2007) titled "Shame on the white liberals and black Africans who cheer on Mugabe."

It is another instalment of the anti-Mugabe brigade that deliberately chooses to misrepresent the facts about the problems in Zimbabwe.

To them, Zimbabwe's problems are a consequence of President Mugabe's "misrule" fullstop.

It is about "dictatorship and human rights abuses". Above all, it is about an African leader who has no support in his country but who is trying to hang on to power by crushing his opponents.

So says Malan, writing from Johannesburg.

What bugs him is that African diplomats at the UN in New York should support Zimbabwe. Malan is "appalled" that Zimbabwe is put in charge of Sustainable Development by the UN and says this is symptomatic of the way in which President Mugabe is indulged by foolish do-gooders from New York to South Africa.

He may accuse others of indulging the President but he seems to be guilty of the same thing himself.

Malan says he had gone to Johannesburg to participate in the inaugural Franschhoek Literary Festival but his thoughts were with Ian Pearson, UK Environment Minister (poor thing) who "was attempting to explain to African diplomats that one could not appoint a malignant regime like Zimbabwe to the chairmanship of anything, let alone a committee on development."

He seemed so sorry for the UK Minister to have the task of explaining this to these "unthinking" people. Malan concedes the African bloc did not like this at all. And when Cde Boniface Chidyausiku, Zimbabwe's UN ambassador, said he thought the Minister's lecture was: "an insult to our intelligence," he seemed surprised that others agreed, "with Pearson going down in flames", as he put it.

Malan gets too big for his boots very quickly. He says he stood shoulder to shoulder with the UK Minister in this "righteous" fight. Yes, his is a righteous fight against evil, the evil of a regime that dares to challenge its former colonial master.

Malan's "righteous fight" was at a posh dinner in Johannesburg attended, he says, by such "grandees as Bevil Rudd, grandson of Rhodes's right-hand man" and others. There, for standing shoulder to shoulder with the UK Minister in New York in this "righteous fight", he says he was shouted down as "pathetic" by an eminent white liberal.

Such white liberals and black Africans he says should be ashamed of themselves for cheering on President Mugabe. I don't know about white liberals but I write as a black African who knows the effect of white racism in Rhodesia where I grew up. It is a bit rich for Malan to be lecturing us on who to cheer and who not to cheer.

Malan says he first saw President Mugabe in the flesh in Johannesburg in 2002 at the UN Earth Summit. While both Colin Powell, US Defence Secretary and Tony Blair, UK Prime Minister were booed and jeered, Cde Mugabe was greeted with a tumultuous standing ovation.

"I wrote it off as a passing fad," says Malan and hoped that black power fantasies would soon wear off once the folly of Mugabe's 'ethnic cleansing of white farmers' began to take effect".

This is what righteous Malan thinks of an ovation acknowledging the man who led the war to restore dignity to an oppressed people. Passing fad, he calls it.

He was nevertheless surprised that although by 2004 the Zimbabwean economy was in "free-fall", the President was more popular than ever but then he qualifies this by saying this popularity was not in Zimbabwe but in many African capitals and at President Mbeki's swearing-in ceremony.

He says it was clear by then the fast-track land reform programme had not reversed President Mugabe's unpopularity at home and he had "already taken to bludgeoning black opponents and rigging elections in order to stay in power.

He goes on: "His black supporters didn't care. Mugabe was giving the whites hell. Mugabe was therefore a hero. 'Mugabe is speaking for black people worldwide,'" he quotes Harry Mashabela as saying.

Malan of course, does not even attempt to explore why President Mugabe, while giving whites hell, was receiving standing ovations.

Might it be true that self-respecting Africans, because of their experience at the hands of colonials have a different mindset that the likes of Malan cannot begin to understand even if they tried?

Malan does not understand why when Western members of the Commonwealth moved to expel Zimbabwe, South Africa helped to block them.

He says South Africa also thwarted attempts to place his "atrocities on the agenda at the UN Security Council and the UN Human Rights Committee," but he does not attempt to understand why. Neither does he want to know why President Mugabe's popularity appears to increase to rock star proportions world wide, as he puts it.

He makes a passing comment on "the wounds of history" though, but then goes on to brush it aside by expressing he hoped a time would soon come when "Mugabe's militant fans realised their behaviour was restoring the reputation of Ian Smith, "who prophesised that Rhodesia would be 'buggered' if the blacks took over."

Of course, there are different kinds of reputation and it depends on the point of view of who is speaking.

No doubt Malan has nostalgic fond memories of Rhodesia under Smith. What I have are memories of Smith the human rights abuser. Memories of a man whose Rhodesia project was about protecting the privileges of the few white settlers on the burning backs of black Africans.

For was it not only on November 24 1977 that Smith, faced with an increasingly bitter guerrilla war, for the very first time announced publicly that he was abandoning his opposition to universal suffrage?

Until then his stance, which he sincerely believed in, was that Africans were second class citizens. This is what the restoration of Smith's reputation means to a self-respecting African.

Rhodesia was a regime of violence and racial injustice as observed by David Caute in his fascinating book: "Under the Skin".

He reported the case of Wilfred and Darryl Collett, father and son, who had taken their black foreman, Mac Maduma from Mphoengs police station after the African had admitted stealing their money but had promised to pay it back.

"Arriving back at Ingwesi Ranch, Plumtree," wrote Coate, "the Colletts stripped him naked, secured him to a block and tackle by handcuffs, had him hoisted from the ground and given twelve strokes."

He goes on: "When the case came to court in February 1978, the magistrate told the two whites that they were guilty of a form of terrorism and fined the 70-year-old father R$500 with a three-month prison sentence conditionally suspended; the son got ten months in gaol, of which six months were conditionally suspended.

"But Chief Justice Hector Macdonald didn't like to see a white man gaoled for beating a black one; in April the Appeal Court set aside Darryl Collett's prison sentence and reduced the verdict from 'assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm' to 'common assault.'"

Caute also cites another case widely reported in the Press in March 1977. Basil Rowlands, was a white farmer, "who kicked a 65 year-old labourer to death, and later pleaded that the man was not correctly planting maize pips along a furrow."

According to Caute, an erudite historian and journalist, V. J. Kock, the Magistrate at Salisbury Regional Court commented that "although the consequences had been unfortunate he did not consider the assault a serious one". Rowlands was sentenced to a fine of R$300 or two months in jail. (This episode is reported by Denis Hills in his book, Rebel People.)"

This was Smith's Rhodesia and this was the kind of "justice" that he meted out to black people.

So when Malan says President Mugabe's militant supporters in New York and Africa had better realise that "their behaviour was restoring the reputation of Ian Smith" it is clear he is talking gibberish.

But Malan would probably say he was comparing Smith and Mugabe in their economic management. He says by January this year, Smith was utterly vindicated. "Eight out of 10 Zimbabweans were jobless and those who had work were screwed anyway, because inflation was 2 200 percent and they couldn't afford anything."

Malan would also say he was talking about President Mugabe's repression against his political opponents.

For he indeed expresses "righteous indignation at the violence in Zimbabwe".

These are issues David Gazi explores carefully in his book: Racism and the Land Question — A Colonial Legacy. He finds inter party violence in Zimbabwe between Zanu-PF and ZUM youths.

He observes that on March 24 1990, for instance, "there were running battles between Zanu and ZUM youths after a car belonging to Vice-President Muzenda had been set alight."

He goes on: "Kombayi's shops were ransacked and looted by Zanu youths and several ZUM youths were injured in the factional fighting. One of Kombayi's trucks was commandeered to take the injured ZUM youths to hospital," he says.

The violence was considerable and Kombayi's injuries "necessitated his removal to the specialist Royal Orthopaedic Hospital in Stanmore, North London, England where he was hospitalised for 200 days at a cost of nearly £100 000."

Gazi cites this incident that occurred back in 1990 to make the point that such violence did not elicit the kind of hysteria that has characterised the West's support for another opposition party in Zimbabwe, the MDC.

There were no calls from Western "democracies" for punitive measures to be taken against Zimbabwe despite the heavy-handed manner in Pwhich the state agency, the CIO, by its own admission, had dealt with the national Organising Secretary of ZUM who was due to stand in elections against the Zanu candidate, Vice-President Muzenda.

This and other attacks on opposition party members took place three years after the conclusion of the Fifth Brigade forays into Matabeleland — time enough, says Gazi, for all those whose consciences were pricked by these events to have made their displeasure known.

But no, it took another decade before the West and the new opposition party in Zimbabwe voiced their concerns about political violence in Zimbabwe.

So the question is: why did all the people, who now claim outrage at violence against the opposition, not protest on ZUM's behalf when it was under attack? Why did ZUM not receive Western support?

Gazi speculates that perhaps it is because the violence was being committed on both sides and the West felt it inappropriate to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign state! If so, what has changed now?

There are many instances where the MDC has carried out acts of violence against Government supporters and it has received much support from the West — why?

For an answer, Gazi suggests we look elsewhere as to why the West never actively supported ZUM while it did support the MDC.

He says: "From the outset Edgar Tekere, the ZUM leader, had shown himself willing to ignite the powder keg of Zimbabwe's politics — the land issue."

Tekere was sympathetic to the very first land reclamations that took place more than 20 years ago in Matabeleland and Manicaland (Headlands occupations of 1981). This was at a time when the new black government's policy on the land question was one of appeasement.

Also at the time of the attacks on ZUM, President Mugabe had agreed to the introduction of ESAP, one of the cornerstones of the New World Order and forerunner to the introduction of globalisation in Africa.

In the eyes of the West, Zanu-PF was pro-West and the West did not wish to interfere in the internal affairs of a friendly, sovereign state.

Gazi says these events demonstrated that Western democracies do not usually intervene in an African country over questions of democracy or the rule of law, they do so when they sense an opportunity for regime change in favour of a more accommodating candidate.

And they moved in with a vengeance – propaganda, sanctions and all - against Zimbabwe once President Mugabe took a stance on the land question a decade later. The poor showing of Zimbabwe's economy ought to be seen in this context rather than President Mugabe's alleged misrule.

Yet the West will always claim and use its powerful influence to create this impression in a fashion similar to what goes on between a bully and his victim. The bully attacks the victim telling him to shut up and say nothing about his injuries or else more will follow.

Palestine: Forty Years of Occupation
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2007

¤ Most Palestinians killed in Israeli raids were civilians

¤ Regional currency to replace dollar in Argentina-Brazil trade
Argentina and Brazil, South America's two largest economies, will drop the U.S. dollar in favor of a regional currency in their bilateral trade starting in October 2007, Argentine Economics Minister Felisa Miceli said.
The countries' transition to a new currency, as yet unnamed, is part of a pilot project by the South American continent's major trade alliance, Mercosur, to replace the U.S. currency in internal transactions with money of its own, Miceli said.

¤ 'US would leave if Iraq asks'
Sure...

¤ Kucinich Claims War Masks the Real Objective: Iraqi Oil
It’s all about Iraq’s oil - rich, abundant, and coveted by multinational companies waiting to line their deep pockets. Or so said Rep. Dennis Kucinich Wednesday in an unusual hourlong address on the House floor. He laid out his contention that the White House and Democratic-led Congress are helping oil companies grab a stake in Iraq’s vast oil fields while claiming to be interested merely in winding down the Iraq war.

¤ Is U.S. Occupation of Iraq Legal?
What is lost in the media attention to the fight between President Bush and the Democratic-controlled Congress over funding the troops in Iraq is the fact that the military occupation of Iraq is illegal. From the early orders of Paul Bremer to the present Bush effort to push an oil law through the Iraqi Parliament, the occupation has attempted to control the political and economic life of Iraq.
According to the treaty of The Hague in 1907, which was ratified by Congress and is the “supreme Law of the Land,” an occupying power “shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.”

¤ Did The U.S. Lie About Cluster Bomb Use in Iraq?
¤ Deadly Illusions, Rest in Peace
¤ A Less "White" USA

¤ An Urgent Warning to Critics of the Iraq Wars
Consider these familiar assertions:

1. If Donald Rumsfeld had listened to the generals and invaded with more troops, Iraq would be stable today.
2. If the U.S. had provided security and basic services after the initial invasion, Iraqis would have embraced America's presence and agenda by now.
3. If Paul Bremer had neither de-Ba'athified nor disbanded the Iraqi army after the invasion, the insurgency would have been manageable or non-existent.

If you agree with any of these claims, you are an unwitting participant in American Imperialism.

¤ DEADLIEST "FRIEDMAN UNIT" YET
¤ Contractors dying in increasing numbers in Iraq
¤ They want to watch, but you can avoid them
¤ Chagos islanders win right to return
¤ Venezuela to Lower Phone Rates 20% Following Nationalization

¤ Venezuelan Authorities Warn of Destabilization Plans
In recent days, Venezuelan government officials have increasingly warned of plans to destabilize the country in the lead up to the May 27th protests in support of the private TV station RCTV. Authorities have warned of a U.S.-organized plan to infiltrate the country with Colombian paramilitaries, among other rumored plots. But President Chavez assured yesterday that the government would not allow them to achieve their goals.

¤ New files 'link Chirac to secret Japanese bank account'
¤ Choreographed Victory, Dishonorable War

¤ Innocent victims caught up in a war of endless revenge
It is a place of Palestinian fury - and almost as much Palestinian blood. The bandage-swaddled children whimpering in pain, frowning at the strange, unfatherly doctors, the middle-aged woman staring at us with one eye, a set of tubes running into her gashed-open stomach, a series of bleak-faced, angry, young men, their bodies and legs torn apart.
There was eight-year Youssef al-Radi who was cut open by shrapnel in the arm and back yesterday morning and brought to the Palestinian Safad hospital at Badawi, another refugee camp in Tripoli, his feet bleeding, a tiny figure on a huge stretcher. He hasn't been told that his mother died beside him. Nor that his father is still in the Nahr el-Bared camp.

¤
As the Israeli army attempts to imprison an entire nation, it is the youngest who suffer most. Half of all Palestinians killed in the past six years are children.
Israel is destroying any notion of a state of Palestine and is being allowed to imprison an entire nation. That is clear from the latest attacks on Gaza, whose suffering has become a metaphor for the tragedy imposed on the peoples of the Middle East and beyond. These attacks, reported on Channel 4 News, were "targeting key militants of Hamas" and the "Hamas infrastructure". The BBC described a "clash" between the same militants and Israeli F-16 aircraft.

¤ Methane gas explosion at Siberian coal mine kills 38

Venezuelan Authorities Warn of Destabilization Plans
Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2007

In recent days, Venezuelan government officials have increasingly warned of plans to destabilize the country in the lead up to the May 27th protests in support of the private TV station RCTV. Authorities have warned of a U.S.-organized plan to infiltrate the country with Colombian paramilitaries, among other rumored plots. But President Chavez assured yesterday that the government would not allow them to achieve their goals.

Speaking in Caracas yesterday, Chavez made reference to rumors of destabilization plans that have circulated in recent days. Talk of plots against the government by opposition groups has increased as the date of the May 27th opposition protest approaches.

"There are groups that keep thinking that with riots, with Colombian paramilitaries, with rumors and media campaigns against the National Armed Forces that they will destabilize the country, but they won't do it, we won't allow it," assured Chavez during his speech yesterday.
Full Article : venezuelanalysis.com

Venezuela to Lower Phone Rates 20% Following Nationalization
Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2007

With the swearing in of the new board of directors for Venezuela's main telecommunications company CANTV, which was recently nationalized, President Hugo Chavez declared that phone rates would be lowered by as much as 20%, among a number of other changes.

"We have nationalized [CANTV] after so many years [after privatization], but it will not become what it was prior to privatization, when it was a company of a capitalist state. Now we have to make a leap from a private capitalist company to a socialist state-owned company, which is not seeking profit, even when with a good management there will not be economic losses," declared Chavez during yesterday's ceremony, which was broadcast on all TV channels.

"More important than economic gain is the social gain – social service for the integral development of all inhabitants of Venezuela," added Chavez.
Full Article : venezuelanalysis.com

Chagos islanders win right to return
Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Families who were expelled from the Chagos Islands to make way for the Diego Garcia US airbase 30 years ago won their legal battle to return home today.

The families - ordered from the islands by the British government - packed the court of appeal to hear the ruling, which condemned government tactics preventing their return as unlawful and an abuse of power.

The court ruled that thousands of people who were tricked, starved and even terrorised from their homes could return immediately, with the decision likely to draw a line under what is widely seen as one of the most shameful episodes in British colonial history.
Full Article : guardian.co.uk

Bush Authorizes New Covert Action Against Iran
Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2007

The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert "black" operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell the Blotter on ABCNews.com.

The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a "nonlethal presidential finding" that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial transactions.
Full Article : commondreams.org

The West never learns
Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2007

¤ An Investigation of Zimbabwe's Different Path
Zimbabwe's different path and the penalty it has incurred: The academic and media framing of Zimbabwe's difficulties, and an investigation of external and internal causes.

¤ Zimbabwe gets top Comesa post

¤ A front-row seat for this Lebanese tragedy
There is something obscene about watching the siege of Nahr el-Bared. The old Palestinian camp - home to 30,000 lost souls who will never go "home" - basks in the Mediterranean sunlight beyond a cluster of orange orchards. Soldiers of the Lebanese army, having retaken their positions on the main road north, idle their time aboard their old personnel carriers. And we - we representatives of the world's press - sit equally idly atop a half-built apartment block, basking in the little garden or sipping cups of scalding tea beside the satellite dishes where the titans of television stride by in their blue space suits and helmets.

¤ Plague strikes Denver Zoo
¤ An Investigation of Zimbabwe's Different Path
¤ The West never learns
¤ 'Sicko' spawns Moore fever in Cannes
¤ Bush may turn to UN in search for Iraq solution
Flashback ¤ Former UN head calls Iraq war 'illegal'
¤ A UN mandate does not make war on Iraq right!

¤ Opium: Iraq's deadly new export
¤ Iran accuses US academic of instigating 'soft revolution'
¤ Drop Dead, New Yorkers
¤ Looking More and More Like Vietnam
¤ Why Bush Hasn't Been Impeached
¤ 'The Darkest Moment In Palestinian History'
¤ Early Arrival of Butterflies Demonstrates Impact of Climate Change
¤ Bush Anoints Himself as the Insurer of Constitutional Government in Emergency
¤ The Powerful Odor of Mendacity
¤ 15 killed in Iraq suicide blast

¤ Israel continues to pound Gaza
Israel has launched new attacks in Gaza on buildings it said held Hamas weapons caches.
Israeli jets carried attacked four suspected arms caches and three other Hamas facilities across Gaza in the early hours of Wednesday, and an Israeli helicopter strafed a rocket launch site with machine-gun fire.

¤ IRAQ: Where Nobody Is Accountable
Killings, crime, lack of medical care, collapse of educationàthe list goes on. But with the occupation by U.S.-led forces now into a fifth year, and a supposedly democratic government in place, no one knows who to hold accountable for all that is going wrong.
It is the occupation forces, particularly the United States and Britain, that must be held accountable, many Iraqis say.

¤ Bush administration arranged support for militants attacking Lebanon
In an interview on CNN International's Your World Today, veteran journalist Seymour Hersh explains that the current violence in Lebanon is the result of an attempt by the Lebanese government to crack down on a militant Sunni group, Fatah al-Islam, that it formerly supported.
Last March, Hersh reported that American policy in the Middle East had shifted to opposing Iran, Syria, and their Shia allies at any cost, even if it meant backing hardline Sunni jihadists.

¤ The Surge - Here To Help

¤ Cheney's Iran?
¤ What is happening in Lebanon?

Zimbabwe gets top Comesa post
Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2007

From Itai Musengeyi in NAIROBI, Kenya
The Herald
May 23, 2007

ZIMBABWE was yesterday elected vice chairman of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa at the start of the trading bloc's 12th summit of heads of state and government here, in another show of confidence in Harare's leadership in regional and international fora.

Zimbabwe will host the 13th summit next year while President Mugabe will deputise host President Mwai Kibaki, who assumed the chairmanship of the Comesa Authority yesterday until the 2008 meeting.

Mr Kibaki took over from President Omar Ismail Guelleh of Djibouti, who now becomes the rapporteur, succeeding Rwandan President Paul Kagame.

The election of Zimbabwe as vice chair of Comesa – Africa's largest trading bloc – comes on the back of its selection to lead the United Nations Commission for Sustainable Economic Development and the executive board of the African Development Bank.

Environment and Tourism Minister Cde Francis Nhema will chair the UN Commission for the next year while the Secretary for Economic Development, Mr Andrew Bvumbe, will be one of the 14 executive directors of the ADB for the next three years based in Tunis, Tunisia.

Speaking to Zimbabwean journalists, Foreign Affairs Minister Cde Simbarashe Mumbengegwi said Zimbabwe was elected into the bureau after offering itself for selection and was chosen as per the rules and procedures of Comesa.

He said Zimbabwe was chosen because it was a long-standing and important member of the trading bloc.

Cde Mumbengegwi said no amount of demonisation by Western countries – which are on a relentless campaign to isolate Zimbabwe – would influence decisions in bodies like Comesa.

"This is a decision of Comesa," he said.

The two-day summit is reviewing regional integration, implementation of ongoing projects and programmes and assessing progress on decisions made at the Djibouti meeting last year.

"The annual Comesa summit is a forum through which we express our solidarity to the regional cause as well as provide political guidance to the ongoing integration process," said President Kibaki in his welcoming remarks at the opening ceremony.

Mr Kibaki said the summit should build on past achievements to propel Comesa to greater heights of integration.

He urged the grouping to intensify dialogue with other regional groups to deepen integration.

"As we collectively position ourselves towards deepening our regional integration, it is imperative that we also intensify our dialogue with other regional economic communities, notably the Southern African Development Community and the East African Community.

"This is of critical importance to all of us by virtue of the prevailing need to harmonise projects and programmes under these regional organisations and also in recognition of the ongoing negotiations with the European Union and the World Trade Organisation," said the Kenyan leader.

Mr Guelleh said Comesa had replaced the EU as the largest market for goods from member states of the trading bloc.

He said this should be strengthened and proposed the establishment of a taskforce to spearhead joint projects among member states.

The summit will address consolidation of the free trade area, progress on Economic Partnership Agreement negotiations with the European Union and the peace and security situation in the bloc, as stability is crucial to trade and investment.

It will explore possibilities of putting in place the customs unions by 2008 and promote regional trade and investment.

Comesa is moving towards transforming the free trade area into a customs union by next year, characterised by deeper integration and the merger of customs territories into a single customs territory.

Under the arrangement, countries would eliminate tariffs and other restrictive regulations on trade to create a more conducive trade environment.

The bloc was founded in 1994 when it replaced the Preferential Trade Area that had been in existence since 1981.

President Mugabe is expected to address the summit today.

He arrived here on Monday night and was met at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport by Zimbabwe's Ambassador to Kenya Mr Kelebert Nkomani, Cde Mumbengegwi, Industry and International Trade Minister Cde Obert Mpofu and Transport and Communications Minister Cde Chris Mushohwe, who were already here to attend ministerial meetings.

Mr Kibaki was last night expected to host a state banquet for the seven leaders in attendance and other dignitaries.

Robert Fisk: A front-row seat for this Lebanese tragedy
Posted: Tuesday, May 22, 2007

There is something obscene about watching the siege of Nahr el-Bared. The old Palestinian camp - home to 30,000 lost souls who will never go "home" - basks in the Mediterranean sunlight beyond a cluster of orange orchards. Soldiers of the Lebanese army, having retaken their positions on the main road north, idle their time aboard their old personnel carriers. And we - we representatives of the world's press - sit equally idly atop a half-built apartment block, basking in the little garden or sipping cups of scalding tea beside the satellite dishes where the titans of television stride by in their blue space suits and helmets.

And then comes the crackle-crackle of rifle fire and a shoal of bullets drifts out of the camp. A Lebanese army tank fires a shell in return and we feel the faint shock wave from the camp. How many are dead? We don't know. How many are wounded? The Red Cross cannot yet enter to find out. We are back at another of those tragic Lebanese stage shows: the siege of Palestinians.
Full Article : independent.co.uk

Plague strikes Denver Zoo
Posted: Tuesday, May 22, 2007

An 8-year-old hooded capuchin monkey at the Denver Zoo was a victim of the bubonic- plague outbreak moving through the City Park neighborhood near the zoo.

Twenty-three animals - mostly tree squirrels - have tested positive for the disease out of 144 examined, said John Pape, epidemiologist with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.

Twenty animals were found in the City Park area. One specimen each has come from Jefferson County, Arapahoe County and near the old Lowry Air Force Base on the border of Denver and Aurora.
Full Article : denverpost.com

An Investigation of Zimbabwe's Different Path
Posted: Tuesday, May 22, 2007

By Brendan Stone
May 22, 2007

Zimbabwe does not suffer from any single problem. Scholars and Zimbabwean dissidents, such as Kagoro, agree that the country's problems, complex and interlinked, result from multiple causes. According to Kagoro, and supported by comments from Moss and Patrick, Zimbabwe is experiencing "a state of unprecedented crisis," and "there is no doubt that the legitimacy of Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe is now seriously disputed in many quarters." Mugabe's policies - economic, political, and social - in short, the whole gamut, are "questionable," or "disastrous."

Charges leveled against the Mugabe government are numerous. Politically, scholars refer to authoritarian state practices, the militarization of politics, governmental immunity from prosecution, selective justice, and the absence of rule of law. Economically, the government is criticized for failing to manage the agrarian sector, for corruption, asset stealing, decline of the agricultural export sector, and general mismanagement leading to capital flight and "brain drain." Zimbabweans are said to suffer "war-like trauma" from state-driven political violence directed against political opponents, use of "food as a weapon," government death squads, ethnic cleansing, and even "genocide" against a rebellious region.
Full Article : raceandhistory.com

Zimbabwe: The West never learns
Posted: Monday, May 21, 2007

By Campion Mereki
May 22, 2007

THE call by Canadian opposition Liberal Member of Parliament and Foreign Affairs critic Dr Keith Martin for the expulsion of our ambassador Florence Chideya, deserves to be ignored and condemned with the contempt it deserves.

Dr Martin argues that "the envoy represents a brutal regime".

What is brutality, Dr Martin?

The term is now being used against the Government of Zimbabwe because Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of a faction of the MDC, was beaten by the police for failing to observe the very rule of law they say is deficient in Zimbabwe.

The State merely applied the rule of law on Tsvangirai. What's the hue and cry for?

What about the violence the opposition is perpetrating against the Government and innocent citizens?

Dr Martin and the West are mum on it because they are aiding and abetting it.

They want to remove the Government through force.

Dr Martin is in opposition in Canada and I wonder if the Canadian opposition is perpetrating acts of barbarism against the government.

The world over, democracy entails that one assumes power through the ballot box; anything short of that is unconstitutional.

It is clear Dr Martin's discontent with the Zimbabwean envoy is because she represents a government that will not kow-tow to Western machinations, period.

Can Dr Martin stand up in his country's parliament and demand the expulsion of the American diplomat to Ottawa because the Yankees illegally invaded Iraq and caused the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and several thousand American troops?

He can't do that because blood is thicker than water.

He can't do that because the Americans are his kith and kin.

Why is Dr Martin and the West concerned about Zimbabwe now? They think they can install their puppets and reverse the land reform programme and take us back to the pre-2000 era.

No way, that is anachronism now, Dr Martin.

That will never happen. What's done in Zimbabwe, Dr Martin, can never be undone. You can grown and howl in your capitals to no avail.

In a bid to impress his long-nosed masters and ensure continued stay in the West, one Andrew Manyewere, purportedly the MDC chairman for Toronto, delivered a petition to the Zimbabwean embassy demanding that President Mugabe and the Government leave office and allow "a return of democracy in Zimbabwe".

What is democracy, Andy?

Did you know it before President Mugabe brought it in 1980?

There is now one-person one-vote in Zimbabwe, in case you did not notice.

Does your concept of democracy merely mean the sacrilege when our erstwhile colonisers did not allow us the vote, let alone an innocent walk down First Street Mall?

Andy, for your own information, my father was arrested during the colonial era