<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>tresy's blog</title>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/blog/tresy"/>
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.correntewire.com/blog/8/atom/feed"/>
  <id>http://www.correntewire.com/blog/8/atom/feed</id>
  <updated>2006-01-12T20:06:04-05:00</updated>
  <entry>
    <title>That Was Then, This Is Now</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/that_was_then_this_is_now" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/that_was_then_this_is_now</id>
    <published>2006-08-01T15:13:43-04:00</published>
    <updated>2006-08-01T19:34:56-04:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Middle East Clusterfuck" />
    <category term="Department of Eerie Historical Parallels" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p><IMG src="http://www.ups.edu/Images/luz1.jpg" align="LEFT" hspace="6px"><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/31/mideast.main/index.html">CNN</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>President Bush said Monday there could be no cease-fire until Hezbollah was reined in and international borders respected, reiterating the U.S. stance on the conflict.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;m confused. I remember a time not too long ago when a well-armed militia disrespecting the border of a sovereign country was a good thing&#8212;so good, in fact, that US politicians from both parties lined up to vote this militia upwards of $100M to keep it equipped and in the field.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p><IMG src="http://www.ups.edu/Images/luz1.jpg" align="LEFT" hspace="6px"><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/31/mideast.main/index.html">CNN</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>President Bush said Monday there could be no cease-fire until Hezbollah was reined in and international borders respected, reiterating the U.S. stance on the conflict.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;m confused. I remember a time not too long ago when a well-armed militia disrespecting the border of a sovereign country was a good thing&#8212;so good, in fact, that US politicians from both parties lined up to vote this militia upwards of $100M to keep it equipped and in the field. <a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Middle_East/Israel_Nicaragua_Contras.html">Israel even did its bit to help out</a>, and the <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a4/Elliott_Abrams.jpg">people</a> <a href="http://schema-root.org/region/americas/north_america/usa/government/officials/john_negroponte/vert.un.negroponte.ap.jpg">most committed</a> to them are now helping make US Middle East policy. This militia was known as the Contras, and were certainly the most well-financed and -equipped militia the world has ever known. Oddly, despite this lavish funding, the contras never managed to hold a square inch of Nicaraguan soil, and they rarely if ever confronted their adversary directly, unlike Hezbollah, because they always got creamed. Instead, the contras&#8217; strategy was to use their base camps on the Honduran border to launch attacks Nicaraguan citizens, killing, maiming and raping them before retreating to their sanctuaries. (Similar militias were also being funded by the US in Angola and Mozambique.)</p>
<p>These atrocities, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0896083128/104-5387413-9643144?v=glance&amp;n=283155">amply documented by human rights groups at the time</a>, were denied by the US government and minimized by the press. Instead, Ronald Reagan lionized the contras as &#8220;the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers,&#8221; and all responsible opinion in the US agreed that, whatever the contras&#8217; failings, the real problem was the elected government of Nicaragua, which had to be brought down by whatever means possible.</p>
<p>Even more confusing to me, back then Nicaragua had no right whatsoever to cross the Honduran border to attack these contra camps. Indeed, the camps&#8217; very existence was <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0DE7DE1E3AF93BA25757C0A960948260">denied</a> by the people supplying them with weaponry. Eventually this fiction collapsed, but a new one replaced it, which was that any hot pursuit by the Nicaraguan army of contra units across the Honduran border constituted a gross violation of international law, meriting stern condemnation from the political class and dutiful water carrying by responsible opinion in the press.</p>
<p>Indeed, I can vividly recall sitting in a Tegucigalpa hotel restaurant in 1987 and overhearing a gaggle of Newsweek journalists at the table next to me. The Nicaraguan army had briefly chased the contras into Honduran territory, and the reporters, reading the published account of it in their magazine, were chuckling at how their editors had exaggerated the size of the incursion on the map accompanying their article, to show the commies encroaching on the Honduran capital&#8212;indeed, on the very restaurant we were sitting in! Oh, that liberal media and its puckish sense of humor.</p>
<p>How things change. Now, of course, Israel has every right, not just to repel Hezbollah, but to raze all of Lebanon if necessary to secure its own territory. Many urge that Israel and the US go to the &#8220;<a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1151AP_US_Mideast.html">root cause</a>&#8221; of its troubles and attack Syria and Iran. I lately wonder what the reaction would have been if the Sandinistas had attacked the &#8220;root cause&#8221; of its problems, or at least its principal offshoot, and had shelled the US embassy in Honduras. Something tells me we wouldn&#8217;t be hearing platitudes from Condi Rice about &#8220;birth pangs of a new Central America.&#8221;</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>With Apologies to Edwin Starr</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/with_apologies_to_edwin_starr" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/with_apologies_to_edwin_starr</id>
    <published>2006-06-29T14:25:44-04:00</published>
    <updated>2006-06-29T14:27:25-04:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Republicans vs. the Constitution" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>On the occasion of his <a href="http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/06/significance-of-hamdan-v-rumsfeld.html">5-3 defeat</a> at the hands of the Supreme Court, I patriotically submit the following anthem for the Era of the Unitary Executive. Perhaps Bush can get the Nuge to play it this Independence Day:</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>On the occasion of his <a href="http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/06/significance-of-hamdan-v-rumsfeld.html">5-3 defeat</a> at the hands of the Supreme Court, I patriotically submit the following anthem for the Era of the Unitary Executive. Perhaps Bush can get the Nuge to play it this Independence Day:</p>
<p><b>Law</b></p>
<p><i>Law (huh!)<br />
What is it good for?<br />
Absolutely nothing! (say it again!)</p>
<p>Law is something that I ignore<br />
For it gets in the way of my pet war<br />
Law means nothing in my A.G.&#8217;s eyes<br />
As I send other people&#8217;s sons off to lose their lives</p>
<p>(chorus)</p>
<p>Law! It ain&#8217;t nothing but a ballbreaker<br />
Law! Friend only to the legislator<br />
Law is the enemy of all my kind<br />
The thought of law, it blows my mind<br />
Handed down from generation to generation<br />
Legislation, litigation<br />
Who wants to follow these&#8212;</p>
<p>Laws! (chorus)</p>
<p>Law has shattered many a Republican&#8217;s dream<br />
Drove him out of office, bitter and mean<br />
Power is much too precious to spend fighting laws these days<br />
Laws won&#8217;t rule my life, I can just <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/">sign them away</a>!</p>
<p>(chorus)<br />
Peace Love and Understanding;<br />
Find some other place for them to play.<br />
They say we must fight to keep our freedom<br />
But not if it gets in my way</p>
<p>(chorus)</p>
<p>Law! Huh Good God y&#8217;all<br />
What is it good for?<br />
Stand up and shout it.<br />
Nothing!</I></p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>NAFTA, R.I.P.</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/nafta_r_i_p" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/nafta_r_i_p</id>
    <published>2006-04-29T13:39:56-04:00</published>
    <updated>2006-04-29T14:20:39-04:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>Never having been much of a supporter in the first place, I can&#8217;t say I mind this week&#8217;s demolition of NAFTA, aka the US/Canada <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060428.wsoft0428/BNStory/National/home">softwood lumber &#8220;compromise.&#8221;</a> But if I were a <a href="http://www.correntewire.com/a_small_step">&#8220;sober realist&#8221;</a> about free trade, I might be composing a mea culpa of my own to those hippie NAFTA skeptics right about now:</p>
<blockquote><p>The federal government defended its softwood deal with the United States Friday, dismissing suggestions the pact favours American interests and arguing that it took action where past efforts had failed.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>Never having been much of a supporter in the first place, I can&#8217;t say I mind this week&#8217;s demolition of NAFTA, aka the US/Canada <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060428.wsoft0428/BNStory/National/home">softwood lumber &#8220;compromise.&#8221;</a> But if I were a <a href="http://www.correntewire.com/a_small_step">&#8220;sober realist&#8221;</a> about free trade, I might be composing a mea culpa of my own to those hippie NAFTA skeptics right about now:</p>
<blockquote><p>The federal government defended its softwood deal with the United States Friday, dismissing suggestions the pact favours American interests and arguing that it took action where past efforts had failed.</p>
<p>&#8230;On Thursday, Mr. Harper announced the Conservative<a href="/glossary/term/3876" title="Conservative: N. Authoritarian greedhead on the winger billionaire tit."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a><a href="/glossary/term/3876" title=" N. Authoritarian greedhead on the winger billionaire tit."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a> government had brokered a truce in the long-running softwood lumber dispute.</p>
<p>&#8230;A key element of the agreement will see about $4-billion (U.S.) in U.S. collected duties returned to Canadian firms. <i>However, about a $1-billion in U.S. collected duties remains south of the border</i> despite Ottawa&#8217;s victory in legal battles under the North American free-trade agreement that would have refunded all levies.</p>
<p>That aspect of the agreement drew fire in the House of Commons on Friday, with opposition critics accusing the government of bowing to the United States.</p>
<p>â€œWith yesterday&#8217;s deal, Canada lost both ways,â€ Liberal<a href="/glossary/term/83" title="Liberal: Noun. 1. Reality-based. 2. In Republican usage, a hate trigger. Usage example: A liberal isn&#039;t afraid to experiment, and change their thinking if the experiment doesn&#039;t pan out. Usage example: Liberal programs like Social Security."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a><a href="/glossary/term/83" title=" Liberal programs like Social Security."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a> House Leader Ralph Goodale said.</p>
<p>â€œIt was a political deal, a deal at any price, and the Americans got a signing bonus of up to $1.5-billion, swiped directly from Canadians.</p>
<p>â€œWhy did this government give in on bended knee to Uncle Sam?â€</p>
<p>&#8230;.<br />
The complex agreement also allows Canada to ship as much lumber as it wants to the United States. <i>But if the price falls below $355 per thousand board feet, the different regions of Canada can make a choice.</I></p>
<p>They can pay a sliding export tax that rises as high as 15 per cent as lumber prices fall, or pay a smaller charge and face a regional quota. Canada would collect the export tax.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Now I&#8217;m no hippie, but from where I sit, the US keeping 20% of 5 billion unjustly levied tariff dollars does not sound like a victory for free trade, especially against a backdrop of consistent legal rebuffs to the US position by the NAFTA court. A hippie might even quote Bobby Dylan: Steal a little and they throw you in jail/Steal a lot and they make you king. </p>
<p>The real coffin marker, however, is the quid pro quo.  Capping Canada&#8217;s market share at 34 percent (unmentioned in the Globe article, but alluded to <a href="http://finance.channels.netscape.ca/finance/article.adp?id=20060427125909990015">here</a>) while guaranteeing US timber interests their own slice of the action in a down market, is less reminiscent of Adam Smith and David Ricardo than it is of Tony Soprano and Johnny Sack, carving up the waste management business. From the market&#8217;s reaction to the deal, too, it looks like  <a href="http://finance.channels.netscape.ca/finance/article.adp?id=20060427125909990015">Fat Tony took Johnny to the cleaners</a>.</p>
<p>Canadians should look on the bright side, however. With the US&#8217;s actual stance towards free trade now abundantly clear, Canucks should feel perfectly fine disregarding NAFTA requirements in other areas, like the requirement that Americans get Canada&#8217;s oil on the same terms as their own citizens.  Gas prices in the US are starting to approach those that Canadians have been paying for years, I hear. Be a shame if their <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000082&amp;refer=canada&amp;sid=asxAzV.tqzR0">largest source of imported oil</a> decided that it should go to its own people first, instead of a bunch of gas-guzzling whiners with no interest in open bilateral trade. Nowad&#8217;msayin&#8217;?</p>
<p>Capice?</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>A Small Step</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/a_small_step" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/a_small_step</id>
    <published>2006-04-29T12:24:36-04:00</published>
    <updated>2006-04-29T13:09:19-04:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Good Deeds" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p><a href="http://examinedlife.typepad.com/johnbelle/2006/04/a_trip_down_mem.html">This</a> (and the earlier post linked to) has to be one of the classiest mea culpas I have ever read. Belle has my admiration and respect. Now if only she had been a conservative supporter of the war instead of a liberal, because, you know, conservatives believe in taking responsibility and shit. Oh, well: one down, about 30 million to go.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p><a href="http://examinedlife.typepad.com/johnbelle/2006/04/a_trip_down_mem.html">This</a> (and the earlier post linked to) has to be one of the classiest mea culpas I have ever read. Belle has my admiration and respect. Now if only she had been a conservative supporter of the war instead of a liberal, because, you know, conservatives believe in taking responsibility and shit. Oh, well: one down, about 30 million to go.</p>
<p>The unacknowledged irony in Belle&#8217;s otherwise spot-on description of the American political climate (even today) is that the so-called &#8220;sober realists,&#8221; who were so much more &#8220;serious&#8221; than the hippies, were the ones who engaged in the lion&#8217;s share of the invective and vituperation. Not to put too fine a point on it, the realists acted like immature children, while the hippies tried to keep them from running the car of a cliff. Yes, the antiwar people said unkind and cynical things about the people planning the war, and those unkind and cynical things turned out to be, if anything, too kind and trusting. </p>
<p>But I don&#8217;t think anyone who opposed the war ever impugned the patriotism of pro-war Americans. What we didn&#8217;t appreciate was being told (largely by people who had no intention of ever putting their own jingo ass in combat) we were stupid and knee-jerk and terrorist sympathizers and didn&#8217;t deserve a place in a debate about the single gravest decision a democracy can make: declaring unprovoked war on another country. What kind of mature democracy thinks that way?</p>
<p>The reason I say &#8220;even today&#8221; about the political climate is that former war supporters still can&#8217;t wean themselves from these habits of thought. In the comments to Belle&#8217;s post someone confesses to agreeing with Hitchens about &#8220;anti-Americans&#8221; like Noam Chomsky. Why this desperate need to find someone on the antiwar side to demonize? Noam Chomsky, for all his manifest and perfectly human faults, has spent a life writing and giving lectures to thousands about US foreign policy, at little or no profit to himself, and that&#8217;s not even his day job. Do you think he does this to turn his native country over to its enemies? Do you think he needs moralistic lectures from a drunken Trotskyite British ex-pat like Christopher Hitchens?  Please. Chomsky probably receives more personal vituperation and orchestrated slander than any nonpolitician in American political life, which is a pretty odd effort to go to for someone whose views are supposed so self-evidently crackpot. </p>
<p>Maybe that&#8217;s because he (and other &#8220;anti-Americans&#8221; like him) were actually proven right a good deal of the time? Recall shortly after the invasion of Afghanistan (the &#8220;good&#8221; war, which all decent patriots must prostrate themselves in support of) when Chomsky was derided by the smart people at <a href="http://slate.msn.com/?id=2059057&amp;device=">Slate</a> and elsewhere for predicting that the US would commit human rights abuses that would be covered up and if that failed, rationalized by the US media. How <a href="http://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/afghanistan0304/">crackpot</a> does that sound <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8231">now</a>?</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s an idea for the &#8220;sober realists&#8221;: next time try acting sober and dealing with reality, not some cartoon version you carry around in your head. If people disagree with you, and you think they are wrong, say so. But the crap about &#8220;anti-Americanism&#8221;? Take it and stick it up your ass. Then go look in a mirror. </p>
<p>(cross-posted with slight revisions from comments)</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>A Few Good Men</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/a_few_good_men" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/a_few_good_men</id>
    <published>2006-03-21T11:03:12-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-03-21T12:08:58-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Iraq Clusterfuck" />
    <category term="Department of Eerie Historical Parallels" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>Proving that you don&#8217;t have to waterboard people to get them to renounce everything they know, arrested Vietnam-era deserter Allen Abney now says refusing to fight was a <a href="http://www.salon.com/wire/ap/archive.html?wire=D8GG16AO0.html">&#8220;mistake.&#8221;</a> And all it took was a couple of nights in a brig and the prospect of 5 more years in prison:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;When I was 18, I wasn&#8217;t aware that duty and honor would mean as much to me as they do now,&#8221; Allen Abney, 56, said Monday&#8230;.</p>
<p>&#8220;The (Marine Corps) is one of the finest military organizations in the world,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Good or bad, they take care of their own and I feel privileged to have shared some time with those fine young warriors.&#8221;</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Well, Allen, I have good news. You may have missed out on My Lai, napalming villages, fragging your commander, whoring with Third World women, and defoliating jungles 38 years ago, but there are <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060320.wmarines0320/BNStory/International/">ground-floor opportunities in &#8220;duty and honor&#8221; opening up in a desert theater of war not so near you</a>:</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>Proving that you don&#8217;t have to waterboard people to get them to renounce everything they know, arrested Vietnam-era deserter Allen Abney now says refusing to fight was a <a href="http://www.salon.com/wire/ap/archive.html?wire=D8GG16AO0.html">&#8220;mistake.&#8221;</a> And all it took was a couple of nights in a brig and the prospect of 5 more years in prison:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;When I was 18, I wasn&#8217;t aware that duty and honor would mean as much to me as they do now,&#8221; Allen Abney, 56, said Monday&#8230;.</p>
<p>&#8220;The (Marine Corps) is one of the finest military organizations in the world,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Good or bad, they take care of their own and I feel privileged to have shared some time with those fine young warriors.&#8221;</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Well, Allen, I have good news. You may have missed out on My Lai, napalming villages, fragging your commander, whoring with Third World women, and defoliating jungles 38 years ago, but there are <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060320.wmarines0320/BNStory/International/">ground-floor opportunities in &#8220;duty and honor&#8221; opening up in a desert theater of war not so near you</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>After a roadside bomb killed a U.S. marine in western Iraq, American troops went into nearby houses and shot dead 15 members of two families, including a three-year-old-girl, residents told The Associated Press on Monday&#8230;.</p>
<p>The allegations against the marines were first brought forward by Time magazine, which reported this week that it obtained a videotape two months ago taken by a Haditha journalism student that shows the dead still in their nightclothes.</p>
<p>The magazine report mirrored what was told independently to The AP by residents who described what happened as a massacre.</p>
<p>A military spokeswoman said Monday the allegations were being taken &#8220;very seriously.&#8221;</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>And by &#8220;very seriously&#8221; the Marines mean seriously in need of coverup:</p>
<blockquote><p>
A U.S. military statement in November described it as an ambush on a joint U.S.-Iraqi patrol that left 15 civilians, eight insurgents and a U.S. marine dead in the bombing and a subsequent firefight. The statement said the 15 civilians were killed by the blast, a claim residents denied.</p>
<p>They said the only shooting done after the bombing was by U.S. forces.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>You see? Marines do &#8220;take care of their own.&#8221; Semper fi! Hooah!</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;American troops immediately cordoned off the area and raided two nearby houses, shooting at everyone inside,&#8221; said Mr. Rsayef, who didn&#8217;t witness the events but whose 15-year-old niece says she did. &#8220;It was a massacre in every sense of the word.&#8221;</p>
<p>Mr. Rsayef and another resident, former city councilman Imad Jawad Hamza, who spoke with hospital officials and residents, said the first house to be stormed was that of Abdul-Hamid Hassan Ali, which was near the scene of the bombing.</p>
<p>Mr. Ali, 76, whose left leg was amputated years ago because of diabetes, died after being shot in the stomach and chest. His wife, Khamisa, 66, was shot in the back. Ali&#8217;s son, Jahid, 43, was hit in the head and chest. Son Walid, 37, was burned to death after a grenade was thrown into his room, and a third son, 28-year-old Rashid, died after he was shot in the head and chest, Mr. Rsayef and Mr. Hamza said.</p>
<p>Also among the dead were son Mr. Walid&#8217;s wife, Asma, 32, who was shot in the head, and their son Abdullah, 4, who was shot in the chest, Mr. Rsayef and Mr. Hamza said.</p>
<p>Mr. Walid&#8217;s eight-year-old daughter, Iman, and his six-year-old son, Abdul-Rahman, were wounded and U.S. troops took them to Baghdad for treatment. The only person who escaped unharmed was Mr. Walid&#8217;s five-month-old daughter, Asia. The three children now live with their maternal grandparents, Mr. Rsayef and Mr. Hamza said.</p>
<p>Mr. Rsayef said those killed in the second house were his brother Younis, 43, who was shot in the stomach and chest, the brother&#8217;s wife Aida, 40, who was shot in the neck and chest while still in bed where she was recuperating from bladder surgery. Their eight-year-old son Mohammed bled to death after being shot in the right arm, Mr. Rsayef said.</p>
<p>Also killed were Mr. Younis&#8217;s daughters, Nour, 14, who was shot in the head; Seba, 10, who was hit in the chest; Zeinab, 5, shot in the chest and stomach; and Aisha, 3, who was shot in the chest. Hoda Yassin, a visiting relative, was also killed, Mr. Rsayef and Mr. Hamza said.</p>
<p>The only survivor from Mr. Younis&#8217;s family was his 15-year-old daughter Safa, who pretended she was dead. She is living with her grandparents, Mr. Rsayef said.</p>
<p>The troops then shot and killed four brothers who were walking in the street, Mr. Rsayef and Mr. Hamza said, identifying them as the sons of Ayed Ahmed â€” Marwan, Qahtan, Jamal and Chaseb&#8230;.</p>
<p>Dr. Walid al-Hadithi, chief physician at Haditha General Hospital, said that about midnight the day of the attack, two U.S. Humvees arrived at the hospital â€” one carrying the bodies of men and the other those of women and children.</p>
<p>&#8220;They (the marines) told me the women and children were shot in their homes, and they added that the men were saboteurs,&#8221; Dr. al-Hadithi said. He said he was given a total of 24 bodies. &#8220;All had bullet wounds.&#8221;</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>It&#8217;s true. It&#8217;s the one-legged amputee saboteurs who are the deadliest, you know, what with their sympathy-inducing limp and all. It gives them extra time to waddle away from their IEDs.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Time said the available evidence did not prove the marines deliberately killed civilians. The magazine, however, said its investigation showed that walls and ceilings in both houses were pockmarked with shrapnel and bullet holes as well as sprays of blood. The video did not show any bullet holes on the outside of the houses â€” holes that might support the military report of a gunbattle.</p>
<p>The military, after being shown the videotape in January, concluded civilians were killed by marines, Time said, victims of &#8220;collateral damage.&#8221;</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, they had the misfortune of living in a country chosen as the site of &#8220;Vietnam II: The Re-freedoming&#8221;. But what can you do? They put their country over all that oil, and now they won&#8217;t let us at it. It&#8217;s our duty and honor to liberate it for them.</p>
<p>Luckily for you, Allen, <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/02/20/struggling_for_recruits_army_relaxes_its_rules/">joining today&#8217;s Marines</a> is almost as easy as it was in the glory years of Vietnam. Hell, pretty soon they&#8217;ll take anybody: toothless old men, moral idiots, drug users, gang bangers, you name it. (Just no fairies.) So don&#8217;t let that whole deserter thing make you think you&#8217;re disqualified. Now that you&#8217;ve renounced whatever principles you may have had, you are prime raw material, ready to learn about the duty and honor of fighting to liberate natural resources from the women and children that oppress them. Carpe diem.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>How They Hate Our Freedom</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/how_they_hate_our_freedom" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/how_they_hate_our_freedom</id>
    <published>2006-03-16T14:40:41-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-03-16T17:28:14-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Political Axioms" />
    <category term="Department of Changing the Subject" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>I have little doubt <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060316.wxhostage16/BNStory/International/">this</a> partially explains why <a href="http://www.correntewire.com/tom_fox_1951_2006">Tom Fox</a>&#8217;s fellow Christian Peacekeepers, all Canadian, are still alive:</p>
<blockquote><p>
<b>Passport saved Canadian hostage</b></p>
<p>Mark Budzanowski could almost feel his captors&#8217; mood sag when they rifled through his pockets and found his passport. The word &#8217;Canada&#8217; on the cover was a blow to the dozens of masked men who surrounded him in the nondescript basement somewhere in the Gaza Strip. They thought they had kidnapped an American.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>I have little doubt <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060316.wxhostage16/BNStory/International/">this</a> partially explains why <a href="http://www.correntewire.com/tom_fox_1951_2006">Tom Fox</a>&#8217;s fellow Christian Peacekeepers, all Canadian, are still alive:</p>
<blockquote><p>
<b>Passport saved Canadian hostage</b></p>
<p>Mark Budzanowski could almost feel his captors&#8217; mood sag when they rifled through his pockets and found his passport. The word &#8217;Canada&#8217; on the cover was a blow to the dozens of masked men who surrounded him in the nondescript basement somewhere in the Gaza Strip. They thought they had kidnapped an American.</p>
<p>At first, the men in the masks didn&#8217;t believe their eyes, and questioned the 57-year-old aid worker about Canada and about specific shops near Mr. Budzanowski&#8217;s residence on Carlton Street in Toronto.</p>
<p>When they were finally convinced that Mr. Budzanowski was not an American in disguise, he said, they started treating him more politely, and handling him less roughly.</p>
<p>&#8220;When they were certain I was Canadian, they were very disappointed. Then, they told me, &#8217;We love Canada.&#8217; That&#8217;s wonderful to hear when you have guns pointed at you,&#8221; an exhausted Mr. Budzanowski said yesterday in a telephone interview shortly after he was released after almost 30 hours as a hostage.</p>
<p>&#8220;It&#8217;s wonderful to have a Canadian passport because it changes people&#8217;s minds. One of the guards kept asking me to say hello to Canada, so it does stand for something.&#8221;</p>
<p>His former captors had taken a liking to him toward the end of the hostage-taking and one â€” the one who kept asking him to say hello to Canada â€” even gave him a phone number to call if he ever needed the help of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Paul William Roberts described similar experiences as a Canadian journalist covering the US attack on Irag in his indispensable <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1551928191/qid=1142539173/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-9123820-1828954?s=books&amp;v=glance&amp;n=283155">A War Against Truth</a>. Unfortunately, as a few of the comments to the Globe and Mail article demonstrate, some assumptions retain a theological grip on the the Western public mind, and one (thanks, Bernard Lewis) is that the Muslim world hates the West and modernity in general, and our freedoms in particular. While their methods are often hideously immoral, the Arab world&#8217;s confrontation is not with the West, but with the West&#8217;s policies, in particular those of the United States. And in many cases, those policies are just as immoral. </p>
<p>Sometimes I try to imagine a foreign power setting up military bases in the United States, helping displace many of its inhabitants and dictating how and where its natural resources will be disposed of (I&#8217;m sure it would be less of a stretch if I were Native American). Then I try imagining the reaction of Americans to being told their resentment is really towards their conquerors&#8217; superior cultural values. At this point, I usually find myself looking for a rocket launcher.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Tom Fox (1951-2006)</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/tom_fox_1951_2006" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/tom_fox_1951_2006</id>
    <published>2006-03-11T10:14:37-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-03-12T11:42:24-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Middle East Clusterfuck" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>By now readers are probably aware that Christian activist Tom Fox&#8217;s body was found, shot and showing signs of torture, in a Baghdad suburb. Tom&#8217;s group, <a href="http://www.cpt.org/">Christian Peacemaker Teams</a>, was abducted several months ago by an insurgent group and held hostage in exchange for the release of Iraqi prisoners held by coalition forces. Tom was the only American in the group. He leaves behind two children. A video aired recently on al-Jezeera showed the other hostages still alive.</p>
<p>In a world where &#8220;moral clarity&#8221; amounts to giving rein to the animal instincts of predation and revenge, it may not count for much that a few people were willing to fight hate with love and violence with peace. To be honest, I can imagine situations where I&#8217;d pick up a gun. In any case I don&#8217;t want to cheapen their their actions by wrapping myself in their bravery. But Tom and his comrades only put their own lives on the line, not those of others, and did so for a radical faith that most of us pay only lip service to. And for that attention must be paid.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>By now readers are probably aware that Christian activist Tom Fox&#8217;s body was found, shot and showing signs of torture, in a Baghdad suburb. Tom&#8217;s group, <a href="http://www.cpt.org/">Christian Peacemaker Teams</a>, was abducted several months ago by an insurgent group and held hostage in exchange for the release of Iraqi prisoners held by coalition forces. Tom was the only American in the group. He leaves behind two children. A video aired recently on al-Jezeera showed the other hostages still alive.</p>
<p>In a world where &#8220;moral clarity&#8221; amounts to giving rein to the animal instincts of predation and revenge, it may not count for much that a few people were willing to fight hate with love and violence with peace. To be honest, I can imagine situations where I&#8217;d pick up a gun. In any case I don&#8217;t want to cheapen their their actions by wrapping myself in their bravery. But Tom and his comrades only put their own lives on the line, not those of others, and did so for a radical faith that most of us pay only lip service to. And for that attention must be paid.</p>
<p>From Tom&#8217;s <a href="http://www.cpt.org/archives/2005/dec05/0007.html">last message</a> before he was abducted:</p>
<blockquote><p>
It seems as if the first step down the road to violence is taken when I dehumanize a person. That violence might stay within my thoughts or find its way into the outer world and become expressed verbally, psychologically, structurally or physically. As soon as I rob a fellow human being of his or her humanity by sticking a dehumanizing label on them, I begin the process that can have, as an end result, torture, injury and death. </p>
<p>&#8220;Why are we here?&#8221; We are here to root out all aspects of dehumanization that exist within us. We are here to stand with those being dehumanized by oppressors and stand firm against that dehumanization. We are here to stop people, including ourselves, from dehumanizing any of God&#8217;s children, no matter how much they dehumanize their own souls.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.cpt.org/iraq/response/iraq_team_statement_of_conviction.htm">More here</a> and <a href="http://www.cpt.org/iraq/response/06-10-03statement.htm">here.</a></p>
<p>I cannot possibly imagine, in that Dostoevskyan ordeal, what Tom Fox&#8217;s last thoughts were, but I&#8217;d like to think he held fast to what his Savior <a href="http://kingjbible.com/matthew/10.htm">told his disciples</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>
And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.</p>
<p>And when ye come into an house, salute it.</p>
<p>And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.</p>
<p>And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.</p>
<p>Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.</p>
<p>Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.</p>
<p>But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;</p>
<p>And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.</p>
<p>But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.</p>
<p>For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>May Tom Fox&#8217;s martyrdom not be in vain.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Invisible Women&#039;s Day</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/invisible_womens_day" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/invisible_womens_day</id>
    <published>2006-03-08T17:35:51-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-03-08T19:12:13-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Heroines and Heroes" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>What do the Washington Post, the New York Times, the LA Times, the Seattle Times, the Miami Herald, the Chicago Sun-Times, and for all I know every other paper in the US all have in common today? Today is <a href="http://www.internationalwomensday.com/">International Women&#8217;s Day</a>, and not one of the papers covers it&#8212;unless you count as &#8220;coverage&#8221; a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701570.html">story on page A17</a> of the Washington Post about Bush &#8220;celebrating&#8221; IWD, with Afghan and Iraqi women as props. From W we learn that democracies flourish when women can vote, preferably under US tutelage, and vice versa. We need look no further than the great state of <a href="http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionlaw/a/sdabortionban_2.htm">South Dakota</a> to see this deep truth at work. So, I suppose, there really isn&#8217;t a &#8220;local angle&#8221; for the US press on this, and I shouldn&#8217;t be too critical.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>What do the Washington Post, the New York Times, the LA Times, the Seattle Times, the Miami Herald, the Chicago Sun-Times, and for all I know every other paper in the US all have in common today? Today is <a href="http://www.internationalwomensday.com/">International Women&#8217;s Day</a>, and not one of the papers covers it&#8212;unless you count as &#8220;coverage&#8221; a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701570.html">story on page A17</a> of the Washington Post about Bush &#8220;celebrating&#8221; IWD, with Afghan and Iraqi women as props. From W we learn that democracies flourish when women can vote, preferably under US tutelage, and vice versa. We need look no further than the great state of <a href="http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionlaw/a/sdabortionban_2.htm">South Dakota</a> to see this deep truth at work. So, I suppose, there really isn&#8217;t a &#8220;local angle&#8221; for the US press on this, and I shouldn&#8217;t be too critical.</p>
<p>But the US wasn&#8217;t always such a model of progressivity. In fact, IWD was born out of protests in New York City 149 years ago today, over the brutal working conditions of women in the clothing and textile industries. For this impertinence, the protesters were attacked by police. Later, IWD came to commemorate the 140 women working under sweatshop conditions who perished in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire because management had locked the fire doors to keep them from taking breaks. But reforms were later implemented, and as Jon Stewart said, &#8220;&#8230;<a href="http://www.heartsandminds.org/articles/sweat.htm">those problems were never heard from again.&#8221;</a></p>
<p>Meanwhile, up here in Canada, <a href="http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ac8231fe-f50c-4275-bf94-2439e98c15b2&amp;k=67929">every</a> <a href="http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=26be67ff-7f72-44b1-9309-213ae6536018&amp;k=83579">major</a> <a href="http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/index.html">newspaper</a> gives IWD <a href="http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=26be67ff-7f72-44b1-9309-213ae6536018&amp;k=83579">front-page</a> play; the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/">Globe and Mail</a> also gives IWD its own <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060308.wwomengal/PhotoGallery01?slot=1">photo section</a>. I wonder if that attention has something to do with things like the existence of a federal day care program, taxpayer-funded abortions under the Canada Health Act, and a year off for maternity leave? Then again, the gender gap still exists here, with <a href="http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=ba6aa9e6-94ff-4062-9d0e-4e9d999ef857&amp;k=10596">women earning 71% of men</a>, unchanged over 10 years. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure W. would tell us, standing in front of a backdrop of Afghan women, that the answer is lower taxes.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Feel Like I&#039;m Fixing to Die Rag</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/feel_like_im_fixing_to_die_rag" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/feel_like_im_fixing_to_die_rag</id>
    <published>2006-02-26T13:03:06-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-02-26T13:43:04-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Iraq Clusterfuck" />
    <category term="Department of How Stupid Do They Think We Are?" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>Here&#8217;s a nice big stinkbomb for Stephen Harper from the voters who recently gave him a minority government:</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060224.POLL24/TPStory/?query="><b>Majority opposed to Afghan mission</b></a></p>
<p>A robust majority of Canadians say they would opt against sending troops to Afghanistan and would like to see parliamentarians have the opportunity to vote on the issue.</p>
<p>&#8230;The poll found that 62 per cent of Canadians are against sending troops to Afghanistan, while only 27 per cent are in favour. Furthermore, 73 per cent of those surveyed said parliamentarians should have the chance to vote on deployment.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Canada being an advanced capitalist nation, like the US it also has its claque of propagandists to tell the people what their opinions mean:</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>Here&#8217;s a nice big stinkbomb for Stephen Harper from the voters who recently gave him a minority government:</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060224.POLL24/TPStory/?query="><b>Majority opposed to Afghan mission</b></a></p>
<p>A robust majority of Canadians say they would opt against sending troops to Afghanistan and would like to see parliamentarians have the opportunity to vote on the issue.</p>
<p>&#8230;The poll found that 62 per cent of Canadians are against sending troops to Afghanistan, while only 27 per cent are in favour. Furthermore, 73 per cent of those surveyed said parliamentarians should have the chance to vote on deployment.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Canada being an advanced capitalist nation, like the US it also has its claque of propagandists to tell the people what their opinions mean: </p>
<blockquote><p>
&#8220;I&#8217;m very, very surprised at the degree of opposition to something that is not well known by the population,&#8221; said Allan Gregg, chairman of the Strategic Counsel, which conducted the poll.</p>
<p>&#8220;I think you&#8217;ve got a knee-jerk against doing anything with the Americans, especially on the military front, but also part of this distinctiveness and difference with the United States is our unwarlike nature.&#8221;</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Ah, yes, the People Are Stupid and Uninformed and Knee-Jerk Pacifist, because they differ from their betters on sending other people&#8217;s kids to kill and die. (Even in Alberta&#8212;the most dependably pro-US province&#8212;a majority opposes supporting the Aghan mission.) That&#8217;s intersting, because four years ago the same stupid Canadians favored combat roles for their troops&#8212;not just peacekeeping one&#8212;<a href="http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/pressrelease.cfm?id=1397">by almost exactly the same margin</a>.</p>
<p>Hmmm, I wonder what might have caused this dramatic change in opinion? Here&#8217;s a clue:</p>
<blockquote><p>But Canadians are still skeptical about taking part in international conflicts that aren&#8217;t seen as peacekeeping ventures <i>or that are part of a U.S.-led effort</I>.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Let me amend that last phrase a bit: &#8220;&#8230;because everything that George Bush touches turns to shit.&#8221; Much better.</p>
<p>And now Bush&#8217;s Canuck golden boy gets to choose between kicking sand in his biggest trading partner&#8217;s face and torpedoing his own fragile government. Pass the popcorn.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Our Way Home</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/our_way_home" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/our_way_home</id>
    <published>2006-02-16T13:20:35-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-02-16T14:37:38-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Good Deeds" />
    <category term="Department of War" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>I know it&#8217;s hard to keep track of all the things wingnuts are outraged about, so most corrente readers may have forgotten about this one if it ever crossed their radars in the first place. But back in 2004, this was briefly a very big deal: a bunch of peaceniks in Nelson, BC actually had the unmitigated gall to announce plans for a &#8220;draft resister memorial&#8221; honoring the Americans who took refuge in Canada rather than kill for LBJ and Nixon in Vietnam. O&#8217;Reilly called for a boycott of this sleepy (some would say stoned) little ski town of 10,000 inhabitants, and the 101st Fighting Keyboarders did their patriotic duty by carpet bombing the town&#8217;s website with angry emails pledging never to visit this place they&#8217;d never heard of before. More seriously, some veterans groups took offense and pledged to protest the gathering if it ever survived the Keyboarders&#8217; fearsome firepower. I blogged about it at the time <a href="http://corrente.blogspot.com/2004/09/dodging-draft-dodging-ourselves.html">here</a>.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>I know it&#8217;s hard to keep track of all the things wingnuts are outraged about, so most corrente readers may have forgotten about this one if it ever crossed their radars in the first place. But back in 2004, this was briefly a very big deal: a bunch of peaceniks in Nelson, BC actually had the unmitigated gall to announce plans for a &#8220;draft resister memorial&#8221; honoring the Americans who took refuge in Canada rather than kill for LBJ and Nixon in Vietnam. O&#8217;Reilly called for a boycott of this sleepy (some would say stoned) little ski town of 10,000 inhabitants, and the 101st Fighting Keyboarders did their patriotic duty by carpet bombing the town&#8217;s website with angry emails pledging never to visit this place they&#8217;d never heard of before. More seriously, some veterans groups took offense and pledged to protest the gathering if it ever survived the Keyboarders&#8217; fearsome firepower. I blogged about it at the time <a href="http://corrente.blogspot.com/2004/09/dodging-draft-dodging-ourselves.html">here</a>. </p>
<p>Shortly thereafter we moved here. </p>
<p>What a difference a quagmire makes. Back then we were still turning corners (capturing Saddam&#8217;s third cousin once removed) and seeing lights at the end of nonexistent tunnels (Iraqis will vote for Ahmed Chalabi, AEI will broker peace with Israel, and Iran will beg for mercy). Democrats to a man were not to be trusted with weaponry of any kind. Now, <a href="http://neilshakespeare.blogspot.com/">not so much</a>&#8230;. Even so, the speading violence grinds on, chaos being the one thing this Administration is good at.</p>
<p>So it&#8217;s with a feeling akin to watching a crocus pop up through thawing ground that I am pleased to note that the <a href="http://www.ourwayhomereunion.com/index.php">Our Way Home Reunion</a> has survived the slings and arrows of O&#8217;Reilly &amp; Co., and will go on as planned this June, with a slight change of venue. Featured speakers will include George McGovern, Tom Hayden, Michael Lerner, Arun Gandhi, and Kim Phuc, whose naked, napalm-scarred body remains the iconic image of that earlier evil enterprise, one that we apparently didn&#8217;t learn enough from. And since no peacenik gathering would be complete without music, there will be  that, too. </p>
<p>Oh, and in a distasteful display of reality-based diplomacy, the veterans who once planned to protest the event have now agreed to participate in it instead. I&#8217;m sure this is the rankest form of appeasement. If this kind of thing were to spread, next thing you know, everyone will be doing it. As a famous person once said, war is over if you want it.</p>
<p>So if non-troll readers are looking for a good way to spend part of their summer vaction, you could do a lot worse than spend 4 days in one of the most beautiful places on earth, surrounded by other people who were right about opposing this war before our liberal-hawk betters made it legal (but not retroactively). I was going to add that you can count on no one asking you to defend Harry Belafonte, but then I realized that Britt Hume and the rest of the Convent of the Perpetually Wrong are almost guaranteed to be there, tallying up birkentstocks and sniffing for hackey sacks. Every picnic attracts ants. </p>
<p>But one thing you can be sure of: O&#8217;Reilly won&#8217;t be able to cut our mike.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Support the Troops</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/support_the_troops" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/support_the_troops</id>
    <published>2006-02-08T13:57:47-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-02-08T14:33:12-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Heroines and Heroes" />
    <category term="Department of Fat Chance!" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>I&#8217;m not naive enough to believe that Canada&#8217;s courts are going to hand Stephen Harper a political IED by <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060208.wrefuge0208/BNStory/National/home">granting American soldiers asylum here</a>, but any publicity about soldiers who are refusing to fight in Iraq helps bring this depraved war closer to an end. It should be abundantly clear by now that everything that&#8217;s happening in Iraq right now is about protecting Bush and the Republicans politically&#8212;<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/02/AR2006010200370.html">it cetainly isn&#8217;t about saving Iraq</a>&#8212;so even if once upon a time it was possible to imagine one was fighting for a freedom and democracy, that fairy tale is now standing crucified on a box in Abu Ghraib, and the soldiers fighting and dying aren&#8217;t doing so for a mistake, they are doing so for a squalid band of thieves and liars. The only question is whether they admit it to themselves. If they do, their course of action is pretty clear.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>I&#8217;m not naive enough to believe that Canada&#8217;s courts are going to hand Stephen Harper a political IED by <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060208.wrefuge0208/BNStory/National/home">granting American soldiers asylum here</a>, but any publicity about soldiers who are refusing to fight in Iraq helps bring this depraved war closer to an end. It should be abundantly clear by now that everything that&#8217;s happening in Iraq right now is about protecting Bush and the Republicans politically&#8212;<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/02/AR2006010200370.html">it cetainly isn&#8217;t about saving Iraq</a>&#8212;so even if once upon a time it was possible to imagine one was fighting for a freedom and democracy, that fairy tale is now standing crucified on a box in Abu Ghraib, and the soldiers fighting and dying aren&#8217;t doing so for a mistake, they are doing so for a squalid band of thieves and liars. The only question is whether they admit it to themselves. If they do, their course of action is pretty clear.</p>
<p>Citizens writing polite letters have failed, citizens marching in the streets have failed, scandal after scandal has failed, and &#8220;opposition&#8221; politicians have failed to make a dent in this Adminsistration&#8217;s demented military adventurism. (Next up: Iran.) The only actors with the ability to bring this criminal administration to heel are the ones now paying the price, and they can do so simply by saying &#8220;no&#8221;. As I&#8217;ve said before, the sooner we stop &#8220;honoring&#8221; them for facilitating a criminal war, and instead encourage them to honor their higher loyalty to the human race, the sooner Americans can again stand unashamed before the community of law-abiding nations. That would be real heroism.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Through the Looking Glass</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/through_the_looking_glass" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/through_the_looking_glass</id>
    <published>2006-01-27T13:45:54-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-01-27T14:07:29-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Department of Changing the Subject" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>In a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/27/lauer-russert-abramoff/">parallel universe, far, far away</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>RUSSERT: No, they will say it is a primarily a Democratic scandal because the Madison Guaranty money was siphoned off by Jim McDougal to cover his losses in Whitewater. But Matt, the issue is broad and wide. Republicans also understand that their policies created the Savings and Loan debacle, the Bush family&#8212;Jeb, Neil, the former President&#8212;is up to its eyeballs in failed S&amp;Ls and so forth, and thatâ€™s why in order to reform all this, it has to be a bipartisan approach. But Republicans get raging mad when you suggest Whitewater is a bipartisan scandal.</p>
</p></blockquote>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>In a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/27/lauer-russert-abramoff/">parallel universe, far, far away</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>RUSSERT: No, they will say it is a primarily a Democratic scandal because the Madison Guaranty money was siphoned off by Jim McDougal to cover his losses in Whitewater. But Matt, the issue is broad and wide. Republicans also understand that their policies created the Savings and Loan debacle, the Bush family&#8212;Jeb, Neil, the former President&#8212;is up to its eyeballs in failed S&amp;Ls and so forth, and thatâ€™s why in order to reform all this, it has to be a bipartisan approach. But Republicans get raging mad when you suggest Whitewater is a bipartisan scandal.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Not exactly parallel, of course, since the Clintons committed no crime whatsoever in Whitewater. Is there a third universe somewhere where Democrats aren&#8217;t always guilty?</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Sowing Dragon&#039;s Teeth</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/sowing_dragons_teeth" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/sowing_dragons_teeth</id>
    <published>2006-01-26T19:40:30-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-01-26T20:13:57-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Department of Eerie Historical Parallels" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>In the wake of the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060126.wpales0126/BNStory/International/">Hamas victory in the Occupied Territories</a>, Israel loudly announced that it would have nothing to do with the resulting government. That&#8217;s interesting, because Hamas owes its very survival in large part to Israel. As Richard Sale accurately reported for <a href="http://www.upi.com/inc/view.php?StoryID=18062002-051845-8272r">UPI</a> (no doubt when the usual media filters were unaccountably offline):</p>
<blockquote><p>
[A]ccording to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>In the wake of the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060126.wpales0126/BNStory/International/">Hamas victory in the Occupied Territories</a>, Israel loudly announced that it would have nothing to do with the resulting government. That&#8217;s interesting, because Hamas owes its very survival in large part to Israel. As Richard Sale accurately reported for <a href="http://www.upi.com/inc/view.php?StoryID=18062002-051845-8272r">UPI</a> (no doubt when the usual media filters were unaccountably offline):</p>
<blockquote><p>
[A]ccording to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years. </p>
<p>Israel &#8220;aided Hamas directly &#8212; the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization),&#8221; said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies. </p>
<p>Israel&#8217;s support for Hamas &#8220;was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative,&#8221; said a former senior CIA official. </p>
<p>&#8230;According to ICT papers, Hamas was legally registered in Israel in 1978 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the movement&#8217;s spiritual leader, as an Islamic Association by the name Al-Mujamma al Islami, which widened its base of supporters and sympathizers by religious propaganda and social work. </p>
<p>According to U.S. administration officials, funds for the movement came from the oil-producing states and directly and indirectly from Israel. The PLO was secular and leftist and promoted Palestinian nationalism. Hamas wanted to set up a transnational state under the rule of Islam, much like Khomeini&#8217;s Iran. </p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>So the US supports the mujahedeen against the secular Soviets and we get al-Queda. Israel supports Hamas against the secular PLO and Israelis get a democratically elected terrrorist statelet on its doorstep. And with each downward spiral, our respective governments can count on its public to support them.</p>
<blockquote><p>
<i>Those who take the most from the table<br />
Teach contentment.<br />
Those for whom the taxes are destined<br />
Demand sacrifice.<br />
Those who eat their fill<br />
Speak to the hungry of wonderful Times to come.<br />
Those who lead the country into the abyss<br />
Call ruling difficult<br />
For ordinary men.</i><br />
&#8212;Bertolt Brecht</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Mission accomplished.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>&quot;Dear Paul: You&#039;re a Very Special Person...&quot;</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/dear_paul_youre_a_very_special_person" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/dear_paul_youre_a_very_special_person</id>
    <published>2006-01-16T17:47:51-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-01-16T18:42:32-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Department of Eerie Historical Parallels" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>The <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060114.wxeelection14/EmailBNStory/specialComment/">Toronto Globe and Mail</a> tells the Liberals that they&#8217;d like to try dating other people for a while:</p>
<blockquote><p><b>Three Reasons Why It&#8217;s Time for Change</b></p>
<p>Canada has been well served by 12-plus years of Liberal<a href="/glossary/term/83" title="Liberal: Noun. 1. Reality-based. 2. In Republican usage, a hate trigger. Usage example: A liberal isn&#039;t afraid to experiment, and change their thinking if the experiment doesn&#039;t pan out. Usage example: Liberal programs like Social Security."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a><a href="/glossary/term/83" title=" Liberal programs like Social Security."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a> rule. Despite what the opposition parties would have us believe, it has not been all scandal and nest-feathering.</p>
<p>Ask yourself a simple multiple of Ronald Reagan&#8217;s famous electoral question: Are you better off today than you were 12 years ago? Unemployment then stood at 11.2 per cent. Today, it is 6.5 per cent. An average mortgage rate was 8.78 per cent. Now it is 5.99 per cent, making home ownership affordable for hundreds of thousands more Canadians. The national debt has fallen from 66.5 per cent of gross domestic product to 38.7 per cent. Taxes are down; our standard of living is up.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>The <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060114.wxeelection14/EmailBNStory/specialComment/">Toronto Globe and Mail</a> tells the Liberals that they&#8217;d like to try dating other people for a while:</p>
<blockquote><p><b>Three Reasons Why It&#8217;s Time for Change</b></p>
<p>Canada has been well served by 12-plus years of Liberal<a href="/glossary/term/83" title="Liberal: Noun. 1. Reality-based. 2. In Republican usage, a hate trigger. Usage example: A liberal isn&#039;t afraid to experiment, and change their thinking if the experiment doesn&#039;t pan out. Usage example: Liberal programs like Social Security."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a><a href="/glossary/term/83" title=" Liberal programs like Social Security."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a> rule. Despite what the opposition parties would have us believe, it has not been all scandal and nest-feathering.</p>
<p>Ask yourself a simple multiple of Ronald Reagan&#8217;s famous electoral question: Are you better off today than you were 12 years ago? Unemployment then stood at 11.2 per cent. Today, it is 6.5 per cent. An average mortgage rate was 8.78 per cent. Now it is 5.99 per cent, making home ownership affordable for hundreds of thousands more Canadians. The national debt has fallen from 66.5 per cent of gross domestic product to 38.7 per cent. Taxes are down; our standard of living is up.</p>
<p>On a more qualitative level, while much of the world has struggled with intolerance, Canada has emerged as a beacon of diversity &#8212; home to newcomers from around the world and confident enough of managing differences to become one of the early adopters of same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>The Liberal years certainly have not been without their failings, from the gun registry to the sponsorship scandal to the fumbling of the income-trust issue. But there is no denying we are better off than when Jean ChrÃ©tien first came to power with Paul Martin at his side.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, we have concluded that the time has arrived for a change of government in Canada. Three reasons stand out above all. </p>
<p>1. While the past 12 years have been relatively good ones, the law of diminishing returns has been eroding Liberal effectiveness since at least the 2000 election. A change of leadership in 2003 has failed to reverse the process&#8230;.</p>
<p>Moreover, Liberal verities hinder rather than assist the finding of answers to such challenges as increasing productivity, fixing an unwieldy and politicized immigration system, steadying relations with the United States and confronting the real ills of the health-care system&#8230;.</p>
<p>2. Then there is this matter of the culture of entitlement that has taken deep root within the Liberal Party&#8230;.</p>
<p>Mr. Martin, a modest and honourable man personally, has done little to challenge this culture, despite so promising during the leadership race&#8230;.</p>
<p>3. Change is essential in a democracy. A perpetual lease on 24 Sussex Drive fuels the sense of entitlement that blurs the line between private gain and public good. Just as bad, a perpetual lease on Stornoway discourages the discipline and moderation required of an alternative government. Without a vibrant, continuing competition for power, a democracy runs the risk of degenerating into hegemony on the governing side and unreality on the opposition side. Both parties need to believe they can win elections &#8212; and lose them&#8230;</p>
<p>The argument against change essentially amounts to this: better the devil you know than the new devil. After all, the devil you know has been mediocre, not disastrous, and lies closer to that ephemeral Canadian consensus sometimes called values. Many on the centre-left of the political spectrum remain not unreasonably suspicious of Mr. Harper&#8217;s election-hour shift to the political centre. They continue to think the erstwhile neoconservative harbours a hidden agenda&#8230;.</p>
<p>There is greater reason to feel comfortable with Mr. Harper today. He has shown himself to be an intelligent man and one, in this campaign at least, who has learned to master his emotions. He has gained control of a party inclined to fly off in all directions, moved it to the centre and proposed a reasonable if imperfect governing platform. His targeted tax measures are measured, his defence policies are sound, and his approach to waiting times is worth experimenting with.</p>
<p>His pledge not to use the notwithstanding clause on same-sex marriage provides some comfort, as does his promise not to reopen the abortion debate. In both cases, he has demonstrated a deft political touch, giving something to his base but leaving himself ample political room to steer clear of unnecessarily divisive issues&#8230; </p>
<p>It is hard to endorse him and his party unreservedly. We worry about his seeming indifference to the need for a strong central government in a country so replete with runaway centrifugal forces. We worry about him teaming up with the Bloc QuÃ©bÃ©cois to weaken the federal government&#8217;s tax-raising capacity and its advocacy of national programs. We worry that he might have to strike retrograde compromises with social conservatives in the party&#8217;s midst.</p>
<p>We worry that he may prove heavy-handed in wielding the considerable powers of a prime minister.</p>
<p>But we also know that public opinion in an information-enriched society provides a natural check on immoderate policies and behaviour. Political parties are in the business of currying public favour; a governing party, even an unnatural one, will not stray too far, too frequently, from the social consensus. The dynamic of democratic change keeps competitors for power within reasonable bounds. So it will be for Mr. Harper and his Conservatives.</p>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Needless to say, any number of US papers said pretty much the same pollyannish thing in 2000 about Smirk, and we all know how that &#8220;natural check&#8221; turned out. One key difference is an &#8220;information-enriched society&#8221; vs. a propaganda-drenched one. There is nothing approaching the levels of dishonesty in Canadian discourse that yield voter illiteracy like that found in the United States; that is to say, there is no FOX News. I seriously doubt that a majority of Canadian voters think that Harper opposes Star Wars, for example, or supports Kyoto. </p>
<p>At any rate, it looks like we&#8217;re going to find out.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Prepared for the Worst</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.correntewire.com/prepared_for_the_worst" />
    <id>http://www.correntewire.com/prepared_for_the_worst</id>
    <published>2006-01-12T19:57:49-05:00</published>
    <updated>2006-01-12T20:06:04-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tresy</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Department of Changing the Subject" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>With the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/decision2006">likelihood of a Conservative (possibly majority) government coming to power</a> here in Canada shortly, it makes sense to get a few things out before the US press spins it in its usual braindead fashion.</p>
     ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[ <p>With the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/decision2006">likelihood of a Conservative (possibly majority) government coming to power</a> here in Canada shortly, it makes sense to get a few things out before the US press spins it in its usual braindead fashion.</p>
<p>Ever since the current Liberal<a href="/glossary/term/83" title="Liberal: Noun. 1. Reality-based. 2. In Republican usage, a hate trigger. Usage example: A liberal isn&#039;t afraid to experiment, and change their thinking if the experiment doesn&#039;t pan out. Usage example: Liberal programs like Social Security."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a><a href="/glossary/term/83" title=" Liberal programs like Social Security."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a> government fell in November, the tension has been between distaste for perceived Liberal arrogance and scandal and longstanding fear of the Conservative<a href="/glossary/term/3876" title="Conservative: N. Authoritarian greedhead on the winger billionaire tit."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a><a href="/glossary/term/3876" title=" N. Authoritarian greedhead on the winger billionaire tit."><img src="sites/all/modules/glossary/glossary.gif" /></a> Party and in particular its leader Stephen Harper, a product of the wingnut Reform Party that filled the power vacuum after the Conservatives imploded in the early 90s. Routinely described as &#8220;scary,&#8221; Harper&#8217;s persona is that a wingnut homophobe in the American mold: evangelical, blown-dry, and devoid of charisma. In 2004, this tension played out to the Liberals advantage, with voters stepping back from handing the reins to the Conservatives at the last minute. </p>
<p>This time, however, it no longer looks like deja vu all over again. After a seeming stalemate in the polls before Christmas&#8212;and the first debate&#8212;the dynamic has shifted strongly in the Conservatives&#8217; favor in January, with recent polls putting the Conservatives up by as many as 10 points over the Liberals. In some ways this mirrors the dynamic in 2004, which gives some Liberals hope of yet another near death experience. More ominously for Paul Martin this time, however, is the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060112/ELXNPOLL12/TPNational">recent plunge in his personal approval ratings</a>, which seem to worsen every time he opens his mouth. As the pollster put it today,  voter reaction to Martin&#8217;s name is remininiscent of the waning days of the Mulroney era, &#8220;when spittle would run down their chins&#8221; at the mention of his name. Harper&#8217;s profile, by contrast, as risen in voters eyes, with voters trusting Harper 32 to 25 percent over Martin. </p>
<p>Having watched both debates, I can see why. As I <a href="http://www.correntewire.com/not_in_kansas_anymore">blogged</a> after the first debate, Harper singlemindedly projected a moderate image only slightly to the right of Martin, largely dodging toxic social issues such as gay marriage while promoting family friendly policies such as a $25/week tax credit for child care and low-income subsidies for mass transit. On taxes, he promised a partial repeal of the hated Goods and Services Tax (GST), a 7% surcharge on top of provincial sales taxes that can take total sales taxes on certain goods and services over 15%. In the second debate, he refused to tout privatization as a solution for waitlists in the health care system, instead contrasting his lifelong use of the public health care system with Martin&#8217;s hypocritical employment of a private physician.</p>
<p>For his part, Martin seemed to be following a script that called for playing the nationalism card at every turn, which in Canada means calling your opponent a crypto-American. Not that there&#8217;s anything wrong with that, frankly&#8212;Canadians justifiably look at the United States the way residents of Gotham view Narrows Island in &#8220;Batman&#8221;. (Gun smuggling from the US is to Canada what illegal immigration from Mexico is to Americans, perceived spillover from a country with serious social problems.) And Harper does have skeletons in his closet, having once called Canada &#8220;a European welfare state in the worst sense of the word&#8221;, advocated sending troops to Iraq, and telling the American Enterprise Institute that they were a &#8220;shining light&#8221; to conservatives in Canada&#8212;all positions he has backpedaled from.</p>
<p>The problem is that Martin simply comes across as desperate. Of the four party leaders, only Martin gesticulates wildly while answering questions, and he even trips over his words from speaking too fast. He reminded me of Bush I in the final days of his term, or of Nixon sweating opposite a cooly composed Kennedy. An alien unfamiliar with Canadian politics would never guess that of the four parties represented on stage, Martin represented the one that brought Canada back from fiscal insolvency, kept the country together in 1995, and avoided joining the most disastrous war in a generation. In this regard, the most immediate political comparison is to 2000, and Bush v. Gore, where voters punished the incumbent for the sins of his metaphorical father (Martin was specifically exonerated of wrongdoing in the scandal that has twice brought down his government) while ignoring the dark side of a conservative challenger presenting a &#8220;compassionate&#8221; facade.</p>
<p>So is Canada getting ready to say goodbye (pace <a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28784">the Onion</a>) to its long nightmare of peace and prosperity? I frankly doubt it. Much as I&#8217;d prefer a Liberal win, the differences between Harper and Bush reassure me that Canadians are not getting ready to buy the same snake oil. For one thing, Harper&#8217;s promises are not manifestly fraudulent. He&#8217;s not promising to spend 125% of the budget surplus and still have money left over, for example. Ironically, Harper&#8217;s promised GST reduction is indeed semibogus, in that he does not actually promise to fulfill it until around 2010. but this is nothing for something, rather than something for nothing. It&#8217;s sleazy, but not fiscally reckless. (It&#8217;s also basically a repeat of the same broken promise the Liberals made when they went after Mulroney, whose passage of the tax cost Conservatives the government but set the stage for balancing Canada&#8217;s hemorrhaging budget.)</p>
<p>And Harper&#8217;s income tax proposals target only the bottom of the income ladder, which would make the effect truly progressive. To those of us accustomed to standard Republican priniciples of &#8220;White people and millionaires first,&#8221; this is hard to wrap one&#8217;s mind around. Yes, Harper&#8217;s for mandatory minimums to combat an increase in crime, but so are the Liberals and the NDP. His $25/week day care credit may be overbroad as a matter of fairness, but it still is a <i>federal day care policy</I>. As for gay marriage, I can&#8217;t think of a faster way for him to squander the voters&#8217; fragile trust than to re-open that can of worms. A recent <a href="http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/CanadaVotes/2005/12/16/1355517.html">poll shows slender support</a> for Harper&#8217;s call for a &#8220;free vote&#8221; on the issue (the Liberals had passed the earlier same-sex marriage bill under party discipline), but another recent poll shows that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Canada#Opinion_polls">66% of Canadians considered the issue of same-sex marriage &#8220;settled and it&#8217;s time to move on.&#8221;</a> Nothing like dispelling your reputation as a divisive party by promptly reopening a divisive issue, one now enshrined moreover as a Charter right. If that&#8217;s what they want to do, I say bring it on.</p>
<p>When we moved here last year we knew we weren&#8217;t moving to a one-party state (we felt, accurately, that we were moving away from one). And in any functioning democracy, no party can expect to wield power forever. If, as seems increasingly likely, the Liberals are turned out, it will be because Canadians hold their politicians to higher standards than American do, not because they have suddenly become born-again laissez-faire capitalists. As a neighbor put to me, &#8220;Canadians are skeptical, but they aren&#8217;t cynical, unlike you lot are. Big difference.&#8221; Or as an NDP policitician put it not so long ago: &#8220;Whatever their political affiliation&#8212;whether it be Tory, Liberal, or NDP&#8212;every Canadian is, at heart, a social democrat.&#8221;</p>
<p>I can live with that.</p>
     ]]></content>
  </entry>
</feed>
