Sunday, January 30, 2005

ICP election musings

I guess election results will be a time coming but I'm interested in how the Iraqi Communist Party fared in this election. They are one of the few parties that are for full woman's rights and call for unity among all Iraqis regardless of ethnicity or religion. And better yet to me they have fewer links with the Americans. Interestingly they happen to be antiwar when it came to the American invasion unlike the well funded and organized expatriate groups.

Obviously the Americans would not let a Communist Iraq come into being and I doubt they will get widespread support among more religious Iraqis however high their support runs among the more secular portion of society. But if they manage to gain any significant number of seats lets say above 20 then their presence can only be positive. Certainly as a voice of anti-occupation, anti-terror, pro-worker (unemployment is still huge and is main destabilizer), pro democracy and pro women the ICP as a role to fill.
UPDATE: If anything I may have underestimated the Communist showing in the election. This article suggests the ICP could have won over 25% of the vote in some Shiite areas. Of course the Communist would be allied with the Kurds who most likley won 25% of the seats. The article did ignore the ICP's anti-occupation voice but it did bring up a good point about the party having no ties to Iran. Some nationalist Iraqis are probably not too happy about SCIRI (Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq) and other Shia exile parties strong ties to Iran. Siminarly the nationalist are not too pleased with experiates such as Allawi leading many secular parties with their strong American and CIA ties.

Thursday, January 27, 2005

Remembrance

Today is the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. This has personal significance to me as my Great Uncle Henryk was executed at Auschwitz in 1941. When I say this people think that I am Jewish such is the perception of the Holocaust. I have read textbooks that claim 12 million Jews died in the Holocaust and some which say 6 million Jews died but ignore the fact that 5 million 'others' die. The 'others' are rarely mentioned. These others included: Homosexuals, Jehovah Witness’s, Gypsies, Political prisoners from every country in Europe, Russian POWs, Partisans from every country in Europe (Henryk would have fallen into this category), dissenting Catholic, Mentally Disabled, and probably the least talked about- blacks. 6 million Poles were killed in the Holocaust; half were Jewish while the rest were Catholic.

So for this day it is important to remember all victims of the Holocaust and victims of genocide in China by the Japanese which is never ever talked about.
Here is the website Forgotten Holocaust
And one for China and the Rape of Nanking

Wednesday, January 26, 2005

Arab/Muslim Voting Shift

Now is much talk in the mass media pumping up how 'moral values' voters increased and that Bush improved his stature among most demographic. But absent from CNN's bar graphs is a comprehensive look at the Muslim and Arab American vote. Traditionally speaking Arabs and Muslims lean Republican as most of them are social conservatives and the Arabs in particular are in business or at least very concerned with the economy. Moreover Bush in 2000 was a break from Clinton's unpopular Middle Eastern policies. He had been bombing Iraq for eight years and the sanctions were very rough on hundreds of thousands Iraqi children, also he was weak on Israel and let Barak slip out of a peace deal. Bush was seen as person who could restart and finish the peace process. Accordingly Bush won a convincing victory over Gore among Muslim voters.

A Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) poll stated in 2000 Bush won 72%, Nader got 19% while Gore could only manage 8%. That's pretty pathetic performance among the estimated 6-8 million Muslim Americans for Gore. This isn't too surprising as Gore did chose a Jewish running mate with didn't help him out. Although impressive for Nader who is the most famous Arab-American on record.

According to the Arab-American Institute (AAI) the 2000 election was a little closer as Bush won 46%, Gore 38% and I could not find figures for Nader but I guessing he got at least 12% and possibly up 15% of the vote. The American Arab vote doesn't overlap too much with the Muslim vote as only 25% of the estimated 3 million Arab-American voters are actually Muslim as most of their community is from Lebanon, Palestine, and Egypt.

Needless to say the Bush's Arab and Muslim supporters did not bargain for his first term actions. Ashcroft unconstitutional detention of thousands of Muslims, -which was mostly ignored by mainstream media- the Patriot Act, one of the worst fiscal policies on record and of course the topper- Bush's exploits in the Middle East. Beside being the most ardent and unthinking supporter of Israel among his predecessors in the Oval Office and his steadily worsening adventure in Iraq destroyed whatever goodwill he got in form of translators and huge support he received in the wake of 9/11.
And dismissing 6 Arabic speaking translators simply because of their homosexual identity is probably not the best thing for national security.

The result: an amazing voting shift among the American Arab and Muslim communities.
CAIR estimated over 80% and possibly up to 90% of Muslims voted for Kerry. While in the four battleground states of Michigan, Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania the AAI reported Kerry won 63% of the vote while Bush only managed 28.5% this time around.

Lessons: This shift may be a one time deal as Bush has been a particularly bad Republican president from a economic, civil liberties, and foreign policy point of view so the Democrats have to reach to the Arab and Muslim much better then Kerry did. If they can make this shift permanent then they will have added a voting demographic of growing importance. Greater voter turnout will allow the now weak Arab lobby to wield more power. Although they are growing and the Jewish American population is shrinking the Arab and Islamic lobbies can not hope to reach their power for a long time.

Jews in the 109th congress- 29 in the House of Representatives and 11 in the Senate. -An 11% Jewish Senate is impressive as they comprise 2% of the population. And I could go on forever about the power Jewish neoconservatives hold in the current administration.

Compare the above with the number of Arabs in the House. It comes to four. And even more distressing for the Muslim community- there is not a single Muslim congressman. This is hilarious if you look at Iran and see how there is a Jew and 3 Christians in their parliament. And you think of Bush preaching the need for more democracy in Iran.

But that aside both parties must do more to court the ever growing Arab and Muslim especially the Democrats who stand to lose all the Arab and Muslim votes that Bush's policies gave them.

Sources:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/74242197-1DF2-4544-A556-0B9C6A51E9CF.htm
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/26E638CA-34FA-4BE2-B9EA-D7F71EFC5769.htm
http://www.arabamericanbusiness.com/
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/8/13/211908.shtml

Sunday, January 23, 2005

Mark Twain's War Prayer

Samuel Clemens was quite the character and his Mark Twain persona he used for writing was even more of a character. This great American writer did not happen to be a great fan of war. Quite a bit different then the traditional requirement of an American patriot i.e. you gots to love fighting although maybe not you in particular but other Americans fighting you should be stoked on that. Mark Twain was a deserter from a Confederate militia unit known as Marion's Rangers and became an outspoken critic of America's imperial ambitions in the turn of the century Philippines. He wrote the War Prayer as a result of the Philippines but it wasn't published until after his death. Basically he is saying everyone is too riled up with patriotism. When they pray to God to their sons in battle they are wishing evil things upon their neighbor.
Here is the actual prayer part:


You have heard your servant's prayer -- the uttered part of it. I am commissioned of God to put into words the other part of it -- that part which the pastor -- and also you in your hearts -- fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard these words: 'Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient. the *whole* of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory--*must* follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle -- be Thou near them! With them -- in spirit -- we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it -- for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.
(*After a pause.*) "Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits!"

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.

This short story is certianly still valid today in a world where being a patriot is synomous with being a cheerleader. Fox News, CNN, and virtually every Republican blog I have found bring this to a whole new mass media/information age level. Iraqi civilian casualties are dismissed even when five times the numbers of civillians have been killed by the American invasion of Iraq then were killed on 9/11. And thats at the absolute minimum and not taking into account the Lancet projection of 100,000 Iraqi deaths. The mass media creates telegenic heros such as Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman while often ignoring the cotinuing toll of the wounded.
More and more people have forgotten the words of Thomas Jefferson: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." Here I will finish off with Mark Twain's words- "Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it."

Saturday, January 22, 2005

Arnie vs. Dubya


Damn I missed the inaugurapalooza television coverage. It reminds me how little distance we have come. There is little difference between a coronation of olde and this present one. Both are parties for the elites while people on the streets of DC or London starve. Of course I'm positive Kerry' inaugurapalooza would have had the same obscene waste of money but maybe slightly less security to keep the protesters away.

Anyway it seems some Austrians are upset at Arnie's very first execution. He's going to have to work a lot harder to beat the record of 152. Who set that record? Well before he was setting the deficits and job loss records George W. Bush manage to kill more people in his six years as governor of Texas than any other governor in American history. This is in sharp contrast to the Republican governor George Ryan of Illinois who commuted the death sentences of every person on the death row. Interestingly the Democrats tried to show how they could kill people just as well as Republicans and resisted this action. Anyway Ryan's enlightenment is in direct contrast to Bush's imitation of a death row inmate begging for her life. Wow I never did figure out how the Democrats managed to let that guy in office. But Bush is not as popular a Reagan and Clinton when they took their respective oaths. I guess.People often make a fuss about Saudi Arabia's love of public executions. Now I have been to these sites where they behead prisoners and certainly are gruesome but why would you complain about them if you’re okay with an execution behind closed doors. You’re saying its fine to kill people if we don’t see them die.

So in conclusion you can make a fuss over Arnie but I think Bush's record is much more disturbing.

Wednesday, January 19, 2005

Caged Saddam To Be Highlight Of Inaugural Ball

WASHINGTON, DC—Attendees at the Independence Ball, one of nine officially sanctioned galas celebrating President George W. Bush's second inauguration Thursday, will be treated to a viewing of a caged Saddam Hussein, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said Monday. "What better way to honor the president than with a physical symbol of his many first-term triumphs?" McClellan said as Hussein rattled the bars of a cage already suspended above the ballroom where the event will be held. "And I must compliment the planning committee. Outfitting Gitmo detainees with iron collars and forcing them to serve appetizers was an inspired stroke." Ball attendees will also be awarded door prizes, including a basket of nuts, 20 yards of cloth, and a barrel of crude oil.

This must be true it is reported by America's Finest News Source.

The Good Ol' Po-Po

Normally I'm all over police brutality and after seeing the BBC undercover reporter's documentary on racism I would have to conclude most police forces are racist in nature. But I agree with this lawsuit victory for a dimissed po-lice officer. Like come on I'm going to give the guy benefit of the doubt here cause the teen most likely grabbed the guy's balls. That's low, no matter how professial a po-po is if he gets his jewels assaulted he will rip shit up out of the insinct to protect his manhood.

Run of the Mill

mmmm not too exciting today although I did watch Drawn Together. Talk about political incorrectness- "those Muslims are so kooky, I mean have you read the Koran it's mostly knock-knock jokes and.... " Wow thats awesome and even better they dish it out on every conceviable group.

I did find this NDP blog it seems for the upcoming British Columbia elections called Strategic Thoughts. It appears fairly well done by a David Schreck. On Febuary 6th we will see who has secured the NDP nomination for my old riding of Malahat-Juan de Fuca either John Horgan or Juile Thomas. Horgan did email me though so I guess I'll endorse him. Hahahahah he'll win fo shore with this blogging empire behind him- man I got to gets some links up.

The babblers seem to think my riding will be a Fiberal one. I'm not sure about that prediction because it is on the island, there is no incumbent, there is a decent amount of union workers- teachers, ferryworkers, millworkers- and in the past Federal election held 6 months ago NDP's Jean Crowder won by over 6000 votes. And that larger federal riding includes the huge Cowichan reserve (Natives mostly vote fiberal I hear), a ton of old people (high turnout and are largely Conservatives I believe), and Saltspring Island (all loyal members of either the Green or Marijuana parties). Plus there will be less angry greenies around so the left wing vote wont be as fractured as last time. Also the Unity and Conservative Parties are apparently merging so that might help split the right wing vote. Although I think it would be tricky to be more right wing then the Campbell Liberals and not have the Parliament burnt down. Ah well those damn greenies if they just joined the NDP already British Columbia will not be touched by a right of centre party for a least a century. Here's my prediction: NDP slightly more then the Fiberals and the Green Party a fattie Zero.

Here's a Spectator article on Blair's Gitmo record- quite a damning I think. I believe the Spectator is a conservative rag but I am not positive. After sucking up to Blair throughout the Iraq great game, British Conservatives have finally seemed to realized that they are supposed to a opposition party not a rubber stamp organization like the American Donkey Party.

Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Martin and the Tamils

Martin has been taking some flack for his Sri Lanka visit. This is good example of a Martin style compromise which everyone leaves a little disgruntled. First he met with leaders of the Tamil National Alliance which happens to be closely allied with the notorious LTTE or the Tigers. This doesn't please:
a) Sri Lankan government officials
b) CPC (although its hard to please them)
c) U.S.A. (the Tigers are not a designated terrorist group under Canadian law)
d) Some of the few Sri Lankan Canadians who don’t like the Tigers

Now Martin might of flown in helicopter on a tsunami diaster sightseeing tour over Tamil controlled areas but he did not venture into the Tiger controlled areas. He also did not meet with any of the Tigers leadership. He did go to the Ampara region which does have a number of Tamils to visit our DART team. This doesn't please:
a) over 90% estimated 250,000 to 300,000 Tamils living in the GTA (And they all vote Liberal including Defense Minister Bill Graham who was the guy in the spotlight after the tsunami)
b) maybe the NDP although I couldn't find a statement on Martin's visit

So basically Martin skored another unexciting compromise that wont please anyone but won't cause any long term consequences. Congrats Paul on showing just how exciting being a Liberal is. And while I'm at it congrats to the eager young CPC members who stood up us all by relentlessly questioning Judy Sgro on her taste in strippers, congrats to the glorious NDP who fought for the common man by introducing a motion which will allow for a vote on banning transfats to happen at some unspecfied point in time and good job to the Bloc for being good Frenchmen (or Frenchwomen or in Bernard Cleary's case a good First Nations/Native/Aboriginal/Indian Frenchman). There, if Canadian politics gets anymore gripping I wont be able to let go of my desk.

Monday, January 17, 2005

A bit of Iraqi History

Most backers of GWII and indeed many antiwar types are unaware of the history of Iraq and the Middle East. Past GWI it is pretty much a haze. I found this article by former Attorney General Ramsey Clark who to be fair has some sketchy views especially on the defense of Milosevic but in this case he is just listing American involvement in Iraq since 1958.

In 1980, the U.S. provided Iraq with intelligence reports that Iran would quickly collapse in the face of an Iraqi advance. At the urging of U.S.-backed Arab rulers in Kuwait, Egypt and elsewhere, Saddam Hussein unleashed a war with Iran in which hundreds of thousands died.8

The attack served U.S. interests by weakening Iran, where U.S. embassy personnel were still kept hostage. The U.S. did not want either side to win. "We wanted to avoid victory by both sides," a Reagan official told the New York Times.9 Kissinger was more blunt: "I hope they kill each other" and "too bad they both can't
lose."10

Iraq could not have sustained the eight year war without massive assistance, direct and indirect, from the U.S.S.R., Eastern bloc countries, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, the U.S., U.K., France, and West Germany. The Pentagon and CIA provided Iraq with satellite and AWACS intelligence on Iranian forces.11 The U.S. sent CIA and Special Forces to train Iraqi commandos and the U.S. helped funnel billions of dollars worth of arms to Iraq.12

Egypt, a major recipient of U.S.military aid, sent troops, tanks and heavy artillery to Iraq.13 In 1980, the military dictatorship in Turkey - a major recipient of U.S. military aid -sent troops to fight rebels in Iraqi Kurdistan, freeing Iraq's army toconcentrate on fighting Iran.

The U.S.-supported regimes in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia also supported Iraq's war
effort. Kuwait's contributed over $30 billion. The U.S. sold over $20 billion worth of arms to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states during this period and allowed Saudi Arabia to transfer large quantities of U.S. arms to Iraq during the war.

In 1984, the U.S. became Iraq's principal trading partner by increasing its purchases of Iraqi oil while encouraging Europe and Japan to do likewise.14 The Reagan administration increased intelligence-sharing with Iraq. Vice President Bush, the State Department and the CIA lobbied for large-scale financing of U.S.
exports to Iraq.15 In 1986, the U.S. sent a CIA team to advise the Iraqi military.16

But the U.S. was supporting both sides. In 1983, U.S. and Turkish generals were preparing to re-implement the 1958 "Cannonbone" plan.17 Until 1986, the U.S. funnelled arms to Iran through Oliver North, Israel and Pakistan.18 In 1985, Oliver North told Iranian officials that the U.S. would try to engineer the overthrow of
Hussein.19

In 1987, the U.S. became directly involved in the war on Iraq's side by protecting the passage of Kuwaiti tankers with a major military presence in the Persian Gulf. Some U.S.-escorted, Kuwait tankers carried Iraqi oil while Iraqi planes attacked Iranian tankers. The U.S. sank Iranian patrol ships and destroyed their oil platforms.

In 1987, Army General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. became commander of the U.S. Central Command. He had a unique background for the assignment.20 In the 1953, his father assisted in the CIA's coup in Iran.

When the Iran-Iraq War ended in 1988, U.S. war contingency plans made Iraq the enemy.21 In January 1990, CIA Director William Webster testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee on growing Western dependency on Middle East oil.22 In February,
Schwarzkopf told the committee that the U.S. should increase its military presence in the region and described new intervention plans.23 In 1990, the U.S. conducted at least four war games directed at Iraq, some premised on an Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

The U.S. wanted a new war in the Middle East: the Pentagon, to maintain its tremendous budget; arms industries, to feed their Middle East and U.S. military contracts; oil companies, for increased profits; and the Bush administration, which saw the USSR's disintegration as a chance to establish a permanent military presence in the Middle East to control of its oil resources.

The challenge was to force Iraq, a country more interested in rebuilding than expansion, to take action that would justify U.S. military intervention. To create this crisis, the U.S. invoked its special relationship with the Kuwait. In his book Hidden Agenda Behind the Gulf War, Pierre Salinger observed that Kuwait drastically increase oil production one day after the Iran-Iraq ceasefire.

During the Iran-Iraq war, Kuwait seized 900 square miles of Iraq's Rumaila oil field. Using U.S. drilling technology, Kuwait was also stealing oil that was
indisputably inside Iraq. When Iraqi troops amassed on the border, Hussein summoned U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie to his office to clarify the U.S. position. Glaspie assured him: "We have no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait. [Secretary of State] James Baker has directed our official spokesmen to emphasize this instruction."24
That was the 1980-1990 part of the article there are 24 footnotes that are documented on the website. Certainly puts the current action on Iraq in perspectives. Because business and strategic considerations will always be put before the human rights that right wingers cling to now as their justification for Iraq. Most likely because of no WMDs or links to Al Qaida. I did like Coulter's brilliant point saying there obviously were terrorists in Iraq because we invaded and people attacked us. That’s like saying everyone in Iowa is a commie so we gots to invade and solve this problem. Then for some reason Iowan farm boys shoot you up- must be commies good thing we invaded. Here’s a closer quote about why the Americans didn't finish up the job in GWI. You'll find it is from a fairly well placed source.
Tying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream,
engaging in "mission creep", and would have incurred incalculable human and
political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, there was no viable ˜exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different—and perhaps barren--outcome."
From the Book "A World Transformed", Alfred A. Knopf, 1998. George H. W. Bush , the current President’s father, was Director of the CIA from 1976-1977 and the 41st president from 1989-1993. Brent Scowcroft was the National Security advisor to the first President Bush.
Seems like a decent source for me. Although Junior didn't have to worry about the Arabs dropping out of the coalition as there weren't any to begin with.

Sunday, January 16, 2005

Bush and the Arab World

I posted the following on the Conservative Life Fourm -talk about extremists. It was in response to this article posted on the Fourm. The article basically talked about how some people in Damascus would be happy to vote for Bush and this really surprised the conservatives.
My Response:
For me this isn't too much of a surprise as I lived in Saudi Arabia during the 2000 elections. My school had no Saudis in it but it was about 30% muslim and about half of them were arabs from Eygpt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and some Palestinians. It would have be hard to find a Gore supporter among the Muslims. Muslims in general and Arabs in particular are very conservative and certainly on the Republican side when it comes to abortion, gay marriage, death penalty, drug and gun issues. Also they were impressed by Bush's stated foriegn policy where he gave a traditional conservative stance in saying America does not do nation building. They saw Clinton as being soft on Israel by letting Barak slip out of a peace accord. They saw the fact that Gore had a Jewish vice president as
disturbing. Bush was seen in Arab eyes as being more pro Palestinian then his
Democratic foes. I told them it wouldn't matter as any American president would follow the much same in policy in that area but I was wrong. Bush turned out to be more pro-Israel then his father or Reagan. So it is in foriegn policy where muslims differ in their beliefs. Most of the Arabs in Congress are Republicans notably former Sen. Spencer Abraham. But in these elections a huge majority of Muslim and Arabs voted for Kerry. Where in 2000 only a scant 8% of Arabs voted for Gore and 20% going to perhaps the most famous Arab American Ralph Nader and the other 72% going to Bush. If Bush had maintained the containment policy to Iraq and adopted a neutral or even continued Clinton's position towards Israel the Middle East would be solidly Bush to this day. About ferrathouse's remark with Iran being the first arab nation to tranform itself: first Iran is certainly not Arab which most likly explains why it is already the first country in the Middle East to transform itself. In 1979 the Irani people overthrew the brutal American backed dictatorship of the Shah. For better or for worse the Islamic fundamentalists beat the Communists in the struggle for power. So they got sidetracked into a Islamic pseudo-democracy which comes close to the Shah's brutality but it is only a matter of time before the reformers prevail. The only other violent attempted revolution that I can think of of the top of my head was when Islamic fundamentalists took over the third largest city in Syria but of course it was sealed off and overwheming air power and artillery destroyed the city while hardened baathist army soldiers retook the city street by street. Quite an interesting parallel to Fallujah. In conclusion most in the Islamic world greatly admires American freedom and conservative nature of the current adminstration but are opposed to American Middle Eastern policy and the large amount of American money that goes into the dictatorships that are oppressing them.
My polling might be a little sketchy but if anything the high students will proboly be more liberal then their parents. So I think Bush defintly 'shat the bed' on Middle Eastern policy. But hell this election even the Iranians still endorsed him.

Friday, January 14, 2005

Iranian Parliament

Iran has quite an interesting system. It has a democratically elected parliament with oversight by an unelected Council of Guardians. This pseudo-democracy is quite an improvement compared to all other Middle Eastern countries with the obvious exceptions of Israel and Turkey. This fact alone illustrates the cultural differences in the Middle East. As the only three non-Arab countries in the Middle East are all far more democratic than their Arab neighbors. The Iran revolution of 1979 attempted to fuse democracy with an Islamic theocracy. How well this has been done is open for debate and obviously the Iranian system has huge problems not least being the hardliner control over all important aspects of the state including the army, judiciary, and the Council of Guardians.

But what a lot of Americans and Canadians do not know is that there are women in the Iranian Parliament. Eleven out of 290 seats were held by women in the last session of parliament. That is about 4% the seats are held by women which is tiny of course by still better then Saudi Arabia where the man can't even vote. Around 13% of the members in the American Congress are woman. And 21% of the seats in the Canadian parliament are held by women. So we still have a ways to go to establish gender equality in our political system. Hell women can not even vote in the few elections that are held in the Gulf Arab states. I would argue states like Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iran who all have less then 4% woman representation in parliament are at a similar stage that Western countries were at a century. At the turn of the century it looked unlikely that women would ever gain the right to vote but with the aid of WWI woman proved they were as capable as any man. More details on female participation in the Iranian parliament and local councils can be found here .

Another fact that would most likely amaze Westerners would be that there is a Jew and three Christians in the Iranian parliament. A Jew! Under the constitution of Iran five seats are reserved for minorities. Let's look at how many Muslims are in the American Congress eh? Hmmmmm there is not a single Muslim to be found in this Christian Congress although there is a sizable Jewish minority. Here is a BBC article on the situation of the Jews in Iran including a picture of Morris Mottamed the Jewish MP.

This helps put some of the American propaganda in perspective. I think despite the current name calling i.e. 'Great Satan' and 'Axis of Evil' Iran and the United States can work together in order to promote each others security because the USA doesn't really have any other option then diplomacy in this case. More on that later.

Submarine Crashes into Mountain

Yah I know its a dramatic title. Looks like the USN got lucky on this one.
The crash happened on Saturday but the full extent of the damage to the
submarine and its crew only emerged yesterday. Sailing for Australia, the San Francisco was travelling at 30 knots — some 35mph — at a depth of 400ft when it hit rock. The impact produced a “nearly instantaneous deceleration” to about four knots, according to a leaked e-mail from a top admiral. [source]
Pravda has an interesting prespective on this accident. But I must say the men (and women in the Canadian Navy) of submarines have the toughest jobs in any navy and preform extremely well. Rest In Peace Machinist Mate 2nd Class Joseph Ashley and Lieut. Chris Saunders of Canadian Navy who became the first Canadian submariner since 1955 to die while on duty.

Republican Moral Values

Mainstream conservatives currently have to bend over backwards in attempts to rationalize Iraqi torture scandals. And I will use the word torture because any objective view of these non-consensual activities will find what happens at Gitmo or Abu Ghraib is clearly torture. American mainstream media never had any qualms about calling Soviet actions on detainees as torture. Actions that included use of military dogs and urination on their prisoners. On a side note this Tom Engelhardt article analyses the difference of media coverage on the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan and American occupation in Iraq.

Back to American torture Yoram Gat compiled this list of used torture from American official documents. This list is particularly damning after one has heard the particularly bizarre cheerleading defense of Sgt. Garner's lawyer. To paraphrase his statement- 'cheerleaders all over America are forming human pyramids' -alright but they are clothed and it is consensual. And cheerleaders are not forced to do the things that happened to the detainees. Such as being raped by a rifle muzzle, stunned gunned, mock executions, punched in the face, strangled and the topper being dragged by the neck until dead. I simply don’t see how a person can hold torture is an expectable moral value while use of an morning after pill is not or even better gay marriage.

These tortures are also fairly pervasive in Iraq and Afghanistan. One can see how a group of badly led, badly trained reservists might abuse their responsibilities as jailers and torture members of a religion and race with are so different from their own. But this does not explain the allegations against the Navy Seals and the USMC. These are elite organizations the pinnacle of the American military profession rather then low ranking reservist military policemen. This shows how the 'softening up' of prisoners is an accepted tactic that the Bush administration has pushed in its 'war on terror'.

Torture proponents are technically correct when they state that the detainees are not covered under the Geneva Convention but this is a dangerous slope. My great aunt who passed away quite recently was captured by the Gestapo in WW2 as she was a courier for the Polish Home Army. As it happened she didn't take her suicide pill correctly so did not manage to escape their tortures but she did survive the war. Now she wasn't under uniform and thus not covered by the Geneva conventions but this doesn't make her torture any more morally right. And most of the partisans in the forest such as my grandfather and his brother did wear uniforms but the Germans never recognized them as an army. Also with this argument you are indirectly saying that mercenaries who don’t wear a uniform are subject to torture. Man like Thomas Hamill who was a first fairly well treated by his captors but after the Abu Ghraib prison pictures were shown he treatment took a turn for the worst. Also large scale denial of Geneva Conventions to prisoners held by the American Armed Forces has no real precedent. Hell PJ wearing Viet Cong soldiers were afforded the Geneva Conventions along with NVA regulars. And this was at a time where the treatment of American soldiers by their Vietnamese captors could best be described as horrible.

Torture proponents always try to shift the focus to Saddam's tortures but this only show how futile their argument is. They are saying Saddam did horrible tortures and that’s bad. But they are okay with American troops administering tortures that might not always be as physically brutal as Saddam's albeit certainly more sexual humiliating. What’s more they are doing it in the same friggin prison- wow that looks great in Arab world. If you hate Saddam's torture of his enemies so much then why would you yourself allow torture on your enemies.

The best document I have seen which displays flawless rationale concerning torture and Alberto Gonzales appointment was written by twelve retired officers from all four branches of service.
These are not bleeding heart hippies but men and woman who have served their nation for over 25 years at the minimum. So if the Republicans really like the military then they should actually listen to the Generals when they are thinking of changing longstanding military policy. And if the Democrats want to prove they are not spineless whipping boys of the Republicans they should filibuster the appointment of Alberto Gonzales to the post of Attorney General. And they won’t filibuster because they seem to think they can get votes just for being Bush Lite.

Wednesday, January 12, 2005

History Fun Fact

Apparently according to the excerpt I am reading for my first year history course 28.7% of all Canadian troops in 1915 Europe had syphilis. This is impressive compared to the 4.83% of the British Army which was actually below the pre-war rates.
Proud to be Canadian.

War, Pacifism, and Ideology

In the 20th century and even before that there were three major ideologies-
-Communism
-Liberal Democracy
-Conservatism

These still exist today to a greater or lesser extent depending on the country. In Europe they all exist within a democratic and largely capitalist system. Although both Communism and Conservatism have the possibility off falling into a dictatorship as witnessed by the USSR and Nazi era Germany where nearly all conservatives backed Hitler. Now on to my point none of these ideologies are openly pro-war. This is very interesting and I think it shows how the architects of these systems realized for a broad appeal they could not endorse war. Fascism certainly does endorse war but it happened to be a synthesis of all three political systems. Lets look at all three of these ideologies reasons for being anti-war because they are all different.

First Communism: The main rationale is that all war is essentially class war. The workers of Germany and England are no different and it is the elites that are pushing for war which will further their strategic standing and ultimately their own benefit. Perhaps the best expression of this is found in four time presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs who speaking at a June 16, 1918 socialist rally said the following:

Years ago I declared that there was only one war in which I would enlist and that was the war of the workers of the world against the exploiters of the world. I declared moreover that the working class had no interest in the wars declared and waged by the ruling classes of the various countries upon one another for conquest and spoils.
Second Liberal Democracy: The main rationale is that war in the long term is bad for business. Sending money into warfare will eventually bankrupt a nation as all European governments found out after the first year of WWI. And having hostile governments on your trade routes is not the best for free trade which neo-liberalism economics is all about. The best expression of this can be found in American President Woodrow Wilson's Fourthteen Points that he intended to be the blueprint for peace in Europe. His 2nd, 3rd and 12th points deal directly with the need for free trade:


II. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in
part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.

III. The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the
establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.

XII. The Turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles shouldbe permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.

To guarantee free trade Wilson envisioned that there must be no more secret pacts i.e. Triple Entente, Triple Alliance, arms reduction and self determination (only in Europe though not Africa, Asia, Middle East etc..) This can be seen in points 1 and 4 while specific cases of self-determination can be seen points 6-11 and 13. While the last point urges the creation of an international body ( League of Nations predecessor of the UN).

I. Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.

IV. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with
domestic safety.

XIV. A general association of nations must be formed under
specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

And of course Wilson did not want Germany saddled with a reparations bill because would not be good for trade.

We have no jealousy of German greatness, and there is nothing in this program that impairs it. We grudge her no achievement or distinction of learning or of pacific enterprise such as have made her record very bright and very enviable. We do not wish to injure her or to block in any way her legitimate influence or power. We do not wish to fight her either with arms or with hostile arrangements of trade if she is willing to associate herself with us and the other peace-loving nations of the world in covenants of justice and law and fair dealing. We wish her only to accept a place of equality among the peoples of the world, --the new world in which we now live, -- instead of a place of mastery.
Clearly Woodrow Wilson did not get his wish and in hindsight he certainly had the best plan for a lasting European peace as his documents sounds very similar as to what happened after WW2 i.e. Marshall Plan and infusion of aid to simulate economic growth. Perhaps the most successful piece of American foreign policy ever as it certainly peacefully contained Communism behind the Iron Curtain. Ultimately America's involvement in WWI made the world safe for British and French imperialism and not democracy as Wilson would claim. American involvement prevented any hope of a just end to the war as the British and French saw this entry as decisive and were eager for vengeance. Prolonging the war also allowed Russia to fall to Communism although this most likely would have happened anyway.

Third Conservatism: Interestingly the above critique is draw largely from arch-conservative Pat Buchanan's writings on the subject. His can be seen as a typical America Firster/ isolationist viewpoint. Basically who gives a crap about what happens overseas as long as they don’t mess with us it will be fine. Now not all isolationists abhor war many see it as necessary in cases of Cold War as a matter of defense against perceived Soviet aggression and in the most recent invasion of Afghanistan. But not in GWI or GWII. These antiwar types are perhaps the most honest- they often don’t give a toot about democracy or idealism- they are simply unwilling to put the nation's treasure and blood into a overseas war in which their opponent does not directly threaten America. A more extreme isolationist view point can be seen in the 1930s era speeches and writings of Maj. Gen. Semdley Butler USMC:


Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the
benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses. I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

This can be seen as almost similar to Debs' reasoning against war where he condemned war as it was the elite's quest for spoils. Butler went further and compared his deployments as a marine to being a gangster for capitalism:

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy
enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super Nationalistic-Capitalism.It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism....During thoseyears, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Lookingback on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

This does come from a man who knew what he was talking about as since he has a very impressive record. He is one of only two marines in history who received two Medals of Honor for two separate acts of outstanding heroism. Another one of my favorite general turned pacifist was President Dwight David Eisenhower who remarked:

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
He later warned against the "military industrial complex" in his Farewell speech.

Conclusion: Obviously these viewpoints are dated and have been regulated to the minority voices in all of these ideologies. Why? Perhaps because of our very nature as human beings. Our aggression and continual history of warfare. War in WWI could not have happened without the overwhelming support of the common people. All these ideologies to a greater or lesser extent have used war to further the interest of the elites and particularly the business elites. Now you would certainly hear difference from the well-indoctrinated paratrooper of the Soviet Motherland who would claim he was 'liberating' the people of Afghanistan. He would point to woman being able walk the streets of Kabul without the chadors, woman becoming doctors, modern construction happening and he would shake off the consistent attacks of 'terrorist' bands as proof of them being fearful of change. Similar is the well-indoctrinated marine of the American Homeland. He would forget that woman are worst off under American occupation and that the CPA reacted an 1984 Saddam law that banned trade unions (it may be secular with women participation but I will be damned if they start demanding decent money and work that might hindered us making money off the reconstruction); the marine would point to upcoming elections as proof of democracy and that surly is worth 'liberation' from Saddam. Ah the parallels of history. Now I personally admire Debs', Butler's and Eisenhower's antiwar/pacifist stances the best however unrealistic they might be in today's political climate. I do hold out hope that the institution of War can be stopped like slavery and continuing fight for female equality. Which is to say only with great effort and trouble along the way and impossible without global cooperation. Note: Last two sentences inspired by my continuing read of Gwynne Dyer's WAR.






Tuesday, January 11, 2005

In Action (again)

Well this blog is up and running I hope. Although you could argue all day about the value of ranting on the "information highway but I guess that just makes me as crazy as the next guy eh? Right off the bat I'm going to counter a fraction of all those out of contr.ol American right wingers and perhaps some Canadian ones. Most of this will focus all foriegn policy issues.I'll start right off with the latest Ann Coulter column. I laugh my ass off every Wednesday evening after waiting breathless for a whole week. I am not going watse my time talking about every single claim she makes as racist and misleading as they often are.

My favorite one was on Hannity and Colmes where apparently the States shouldn't talk to Canada because they speak French. Wow and she likes Western Canada although she might be surprised to learn there are Social Democratic governments in two of the four Western provinces and British Columbia has had a few in recent years and most likely will have another soon. There is always Alberta but the fact there are four social democrat MLA's in the province speaks to the fact of how left wing Canada is compared to America. But here's the one the got me last week
American hero Pat Tillman won a Silver Star this year. But unlike Kerry, he did not write his own recommendation or live to throw his medals over the White
House fence in an anti-war rally.
Hmmm well Tillman is certianly an admirable character walking away from a 3.6 million football contract to join the Army but his Silver Star is another example of Army awarding a medal due to media coverage rather than valourous action. The precedant for this was Private Jessica Lynch winning a Bronze Star for Valor for being in a truck crash after trying to flee an ambush. If Tillman was in the Marines he wouldn't have gotta a Bronze Star of any type or even a Pirple Heart for being killed in a friendly fire incident which Coulter just happens to forgot to mention.

As for John Kerry he was as much as a benefactor of medal inflation as Pat Tillman. The excellant websites- David Hackworth and Soldiers for the Truth don't seem be working for me but here's a short article that illustrates how the USMC does not give out medals like candy although most Marine Divisions are on the frontlines doing the dirty work. The article does not metion the fact that the USMC has yet to hand out a Medal of Honor, Navy Cross or the Silver Star the top three adwards for valour. Although I'm sure that will change considering the November Fallujah battle with the case of Marine Sgt. Rafael Peralta in particular. The Army has handed out at least 30 Silver Stars to date but Bronze Stars are the most glaring with the Marine Corps earning a couple hundred Bronze Stars for Valour and Meritious Service while ten months ago the army was at 13000.

And I happen to think the antiwar Kerry is just as important as the Vietnam vetern Kerry. As he said before the Senate in 1972 "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake."

UPDATE: Just remembered a blatant lie on Coulter's Dec. 22 column- she claims Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is an Democrat. You would think after slandering all the Democrat Senators she would know them by heart. And for Coulter's information there is a large difference between using autopens for day to day letters and using tem to sign the letters of fallen American soldiers.