informant38
.

-
...But of these sophisms and elenchs of merchandise I skill not...
Milton, Areopagitica

Except he had found the
standing sea-rock that even this last
Temptation breaks on; quieter than death but lovelier; peace
that quiets the desire even of praising it.

Jeffers, Meditation On Saviors


-

11.12.06

a sign that says $70 billion:

Truthdig: What was the upshot of {Tuesday's} Democratic caucus meeting?

Kucinich: At this point the Democratic leadership - the speaker and the majority leader and Rahm Emanuel - are all recommending that the Democrats support the appropriation that is going to be brought forward in the spring, for the purposes of {continuing to fund} the war in Iraq.

Truthdig: Why do you think that is?

Kucinich: The leadership feels that they can bring about greater transparency {in spending}, that they can bring special committees to look at what's gone wrong with the war, and that there's going to be improved oversight.
[...]
If we support the troops, why in the world would we not use the money to bring them home, instead of spending more money to keep them in? Why would we, when we have money to bring them home right now, appropriate another $160 billion which would keep them there, possibly through the end of George Bush's term?

The Iraq Study Group recognized the perilous nature of this war, and there is no indication that the administration is going to bring the troops home. Every statement that the president has made has been very clear with respect to his intent to continue the U.S. presence. He has basically said, "No timetables," and he hasn't set any call for troop reductions. Now, we have men and women who are dying there, and for what? That's why it's more than disappointing that the Democratic Party is not standing up.
Kucinich/Truthdig 06.Dec.06
-
Listening to Roberts and Burnham and Kucinich, and Juan Cole, on C-SPAN2 today was one of the more inspiring moments of this long dark year.

...In a bipartisan Congressional briefing hosted by Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH) and Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) the authors of the Lancet Study, which found that as many as 650,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed during the war, will present their full findings to Congress.


Les Roberts, co-author of the Lancet Report, at the Congressional briefing chaired by Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul, today, in rotation broadcast on C-SPAN, said that what's missing, what should be there but isn't, is contrition.
Specifically contrition, in the attitude of those who seek withdrawal from Iraq, toward the Iraqi people.
He didn't say this specifically but it's clear there's something psychopathic in just leaving, even in just talking about leaving, as though that's all it will take.
What do you say to them as you're leaving?
All this noise about the Iraqis "stepping up to the plate" is a diversion, a way of sounding in charge, a way of pretending there's something more important, some aspect of governance or control that's primary, when there isn't.
The only way forward now that doesn't demand sincere articulated contrition is outright aggression, a stripping away of the hypocrisy of "democracy" and "liberation" as motive and getting right down to the real blood and guts of total domination - intentionally destroying Iraq doesn't call for remorse. Every other possibility does.

How the electricity from the lightning
entered the sealed area
is still under investigation:

Family members of miners killed by an explosion at the Sago Mine in January say a state report on the tragedy leaves too many questions unanswered...
The report also says the miners' emergency air packs "did not perform in the manner expected,"
CNN 11.Dec.06
-
Various ways of expressing the same thing:
Lightning is official reason for Sago Mine explosion

Sago Mine explosion caused by lightning

State to blame lightning in Sago

Sago Mine Explosion Caused by Lightning

Investigators say lightning caused fatal Sago Mine blast

Sago Operator Cited for Flawed Breathing Gear
-
Sago previously here here, and here

10.12.06

"I see nothing in the photos..."
This is another step closer to defeating al-Qaeda in Iraq and helping establish a safe and peaceful Iraq.

Rejectionism:

"The United States cannot achieve its goals in the Middle East unless it deals directly with the Arab-Israeli conflict and regional instability. There must be a renewed and sustained commitment by the United States to a comprehensive Arab- Israeli peace on all fronts."

Paragraph #19
ISG
-
rejectionism then:
Noam Chomsky September 8 1991-

The lack of policy was evident from James Baker's briefing after the coup had collapsed ("Baker's Remarks: Policy on Soviets," NYT, Sept. 5, 1991). The Secretary of State presented a "four-part agenda."
Three parts were the kind of pieties that speech writers produce while dozing: we want democracy, the rule of law, economic reform, settlement of security problems, etc. One part of the agenda did, however, have a modicum of substance, the third item, on "Soviet foreign policy." Here, Baker focused on his "efforts to convene a peace conference to launch direct negotiations and thereby to facilitate a viable peacemaking process in the Middle East."
As Times diplomatic correspondent Thomas Friedman explains in an accompanying gloss, the Soviet Union should "work together with the United States on foreign policy initiatives like Middle East peace."
What is of interest here is what was missing. "Soviet foreign policy" does indeed have a role in the Bush-Baker Middle East endeavor. The Soviet role is to provide a (very thin) cover for a unilateral U.S. initiative that may at last realize the U.S. demand, stressed by Kissinger years ago, that Europe and Japan be kept out of the diplomacy of the region. Baker's phrase "direct negotiations" is the conventional Orwellian term for the leading principle of U.S.-Israeli rejectionism: the framework of the "peace process" must be restricted to state-to-state negotiations, effectively excluding the indigenous population and any consideration of their national rights and concerns. They offer no services to the U.S. and, accordingly, have no meaningful rights.
That is the core principle of the rigid rejectionism that the U.S. has upheld for 20 years in virtual international isolation (apart from both major political groupings in Israel), and now feels that it may be in a position to impose.
-

James A. Baker III September 1994-

The Arabs no longer present as much of a unified front as they used to, for three reasons: the collapse of communism and the end of the East-West conflict; the defeat of Arab rejectionism and radical Palestinian elements in the Gulf War; and the fact that Israel has now reached an agreement with the Palestine Liberation Organization.
And you've got Gaza-Jericho first there and - and that deal was made without consultation with - with some of the Arab states. So, the states have less of a reason to condition their positions on whatever will result in the permanent status talks. As a result, they're less committed to the idea of a Palestinian state.
I suppose they will still give lip service to the idea of a Palestinian state, but the Syrians particularly feel free to reach an agreement with Israel on peace without regard to what happens on the Palestinian track.
At least with respect to the countries around Israel, you're not going to get real economic development until there's peace. And when you do get peace, boy, there's going to be tremendous development and economic activity in so many different ways in those countries - in Israel herself and in the countries bordering Israel. And I'm optimistic that you can get peace.
-

Noam Chomsky April 12 1991:-

A Security Council resolution in similar terms had been offered by Syria, Jordan, and Egypt as far back as January 1976 with the support of the PLO and indeed initiated by it according to Israel. It was vetoed by the US. Europe, the USSR, the Arab states, and the world generally have been united for years on such a political settlement, but the US will not permit it.
The facts are unacceptable, thus eliminated from history.

For twenty years, the US has backed Israeli rejectionism. For that clear but inexpressible reason, the peace process remains a "hypothetical creature." There is one simple reason why an international conference is "unwieldy": participants will support "the right to self-determination" for the indigenous population.
-
rejectionism now:
MR. BAKER: Well, here's what we thought at the time. We said to ourselves, "Look, we have great credibility now with both sides, as a consequence of having defeated Arab rejectionism in the Gulf." The Gulf War was a defeat of Arab rejectionism that gave us even more credibility than we normally had with Israel, which is a lot, because we had defeated the number one threat to Israel's security. And we had great credibility with the Arab nations, because for many of them we had saved their bacon. So we could go to them and say, "Now, look, now is the time to get serious about peace and to really work at it."
-
The problem is not that the Israelis will not concede to the Palestinians a state. It has been very clear at least since Camp David in 2000 that the Palestinians can have a state in the West Bank and Gaza any time that they are able and willing to offer peace in return.
Current Israeli PM Olmert was elected on a platform of essentially trying to give them that state even in the absence of such a commitment.
Disagreements over scraps of land are not what is holding peace back.
What is holding it back is primarily the perpetuation of Arab rejectionism of Israel in any borders.
Rejectionism is at the moment being strongly promoted - with money, weapons and aggressive propaganda and diplomacy - by the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah-Hamas axis, which is escalating its bid for regional hegemony while the US is distracted in Iraq. By essentially agreeing with their rhetoric that all the region's problems are connected to Israel, well-intentioned outsiders are making them stronger, which is the last thing anyone who hopes for peace should want to do.
-
US President George W. Bush rejected the main recommendations of the Iraq Study Group after holding talks Thursday in Washington with British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
-
Olmert rejects linking Iraqi and Israeli conflicts:
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert today said he had no intention of opening peace talks with Syria, despite the recommendations of a US advisory group.
-
...irrespective of the ISG's rejection of a timetable, the report's willingness to put the issue forward merits attention: "The question of the future US force presence must be on the table for discussion." This, and another of the report's recommendations, for a more overt US overture toward Iraq's Shi'ite leaders and the appointment of a "high-level American Shi'ite Muslim to serve as an emissary" to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, should be welcomed by Tehran.
-
Israel has rejected claims by a team of elder US statesmen that the Iraq crisis cannot be resolved unless the US also tackles the Arab-Israeli conflict.
-
The paper highlights comments on the report from Rush Limbaugh ("stupid"), the Wall Street Journal editorial page ("strategic muddle"), and Richard Perle ("absurd"). And, oh yeah, the New York Post, which calls James Baker and Lee Hamilton "surrender monkeys."
On the other end of the debate are Republicans like Sen. Olympia J. Snowe, who says: "The American people are essentially unified in their intense dissatisfaction with the way things have progressed in Iraq." Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol comments that the choice for party members will come down to Baker or John McCain, and the choice will have to be made soon. McCain, of course, has argued for more troops and rejects the ISG report's main recommendations.
-
Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani, a longtime Washington ally, has angrily rejected the Iraq Study Group's recommendations, warning that any delay in deciding the fate of an oil-rich region claimed by the Kurds would have "grave consequences."
-
Phyllis Bennis and Erik Leaver at Foreign Policy in Focus have some clear and sensible things to say about the ISG report
-
As does, as always, Helena Cobban:
"From that point of view, it is barely "about" Iraq at all. It is much more "about" this group of senior statespeople trying to grab hold of the wheel of the ship of (the American) state and slowly drag this lumbering great vessel away from a course that has been-- and still is, to this day-- most evidently headed towards a disaster."

7.12.06

Ad Astra:

What's particularly cool about Cordyceps is that it is not alone. Other parasites drive their hosts to bizarre heights. Another fungus, called Entomophthora muscae, drives houseflies and other insects upwards, climbing screen doors in some cases, before springing out of its host's body.
Carl Zimmer/Loom
-
NASA announced this week that it plans to establish a permanent moon base by 2024, a mere generation from now. Intriguingly, the plan, which is still short on details, calls for an open-standard, modular design that would allow private enterprises to plug into the permanent station by building their own extensions to the base.
As good as this sounds ...
WSJ

dealing from strength:

"And we market the hospital to the community. We meet with the managed-care people. They know that we are reliable. We give quality care. We haven't had problems like some others. If you follow the industry, you know of which I speak. The managed-care people rely on us, we have a good relationship with them, but we are dealing from strength.
"...we don't have any particular magic. What we do is attack sort of every area of the hospital. When we buy it or when we build it, it's the same thing."
Alan B. Miller/Universal Health Services interview with Forbes 29.Nov.05
-
Maybe it's my currently possibly excessive state of cynical despair but it would seem pretty generally obvious that virtually every end-user of Universal Health Services' services would not be "dealing from strength", and would thus be at a pretty serious disadvantage in whatever negotiations were taking place.
People don't negotiate for the health of their loved ones, or themselves, not in the clinch.
Health care as a business is a disease.
-
link Marsh/Huffington

5.12.06

Contractual obligations:

"If you're trying to win hearts and minds and the contractor is driving 90 miles per hour through the streets and running over kids, that's not helping the image of the American army...."

There are about 100,000 government contractors operating in Iraq, not counting subcontractors, a total that is approaching the size of the U.S. military force there, according to the military's first census of the growing population of civilians operating in the battlefield.

The survey finding, which includes Americans, Iraqis and third-party nationals hired by companies operating under U.S. government contracts, is significantly higher and wider in scope than the Pentagon's only previous estimate
Renae Merle/WaPo/demoundergrnd 05.Dec.06

If it was about American control of Iraq's oil
stability would have been more important than democracy.

4.12.06

"...would they be here if I had not asked them to go?"

Roy Sesana, Bushman leader, with Gunhild Buljo of the SAAMI Council 2004
-
Two Kenyan hunter-gatherers who traveled 2,800 km to investigate the plight of the Kalahari Bushmen have called on Botswana's government:

'Kenya fought its hunter-gatherers, mountain and forest people for decades, but the government realised its mistakes and gave indigenous hunter-gatherer people like ours title deeds for land. They helped the people to own and manage the wildlife resources in their areas, and draw the benefits of exploitation. I am sure Botswana can learn from our experience.'

3.12.06

In 1988 she was sentenced to one year in prison for planting corn on nuclear missile silo sites.

"We're in the hands of God and the doctors"

Juan Cole on the memo by Donald Rumsfeld :

1. Rumsfeld doesn't understand the magnitude of the crisis...
2. Rumsfeld spends more time plotting out how to manipulate the American public than how to win the war. Everything is about spin, about giving the image of progress even in the face of a rapid downward spiral into the abyss.
3. Rumsfeld openly admits that he wants to run Iraq just like Saddam did...
Informed Comment 03.Dec.06
-
1. Crisis for who? Not for the Israelis, our staunch ally in the Middle East, who in spite of that alliance have lost no soldiers in Iraq. A crisis for Iraq which means a powerless, crashing state, is not a crisis for everyone, anymore than the fall of the Soviet Union was, for all the misery it brought its citizens.
2. Possibly because "winning the war" was never a goal. Once you stop believing the liars who are setting the goal, defining what "winning" is, then what do you have?
Why did this happen? Whose interests are being served by this?
3. A proxy army controlling Iraq with an iron fist, as opposed to "liberating, democratizing, etc.", would fit with a plan to remove Iraq as a military presence in the Middle East. A liberated Iraq with a functioning economy and a viable independent Iraqi military wouldn't.
Once you admit the possibility that present conditions in Iraq were the reason for the invasion and occupation, it makes a lot more sense, and the seeming absurdities and outright insanities of these men, themselves disposable, who have proven themselves over and over to be skillful and conscienceless liars, look a lot more like cunning and craft than idiocy and failure.

My father joined the army in the 1930's, I think around 1936 or so. He said. He was a fabulist, a deeply wounded one, and a lot of the things he told me when I was very young turned out not to be strictly real. The woundedness was real, but the stories, a lot of them, weren't. He told me he'd been in Hawaii then, in the 30's when he was in the peacetime Army, and land was for sale on Oahu for $100 an acre. A lot of money in the Depression for land you had to take a long boat ride to get to, he said.
As near as I can tell, or remember from the little bit of family history I retain from what little I was given, when the Second World War started he was still in the Army, stationed on the West Coast, and that's when he met my mom. There's some vagueness in the narrative about the years just before the war began.
He was in it for the duration. He told me a story about being blown up by a land mine on the Burma Road, seeing his friend die. Later, as the stories lost their credible substance as fact, as the things I knew and found out refuted what he'd said too many times for trust, I had to put the rest of them into a kind of "wait and see" file, because some of them were true, or had truth in them, some of them were attempts at saying something that needed saying.
He was on the Burma Road toward the end of the war, that much is true, it was in his records. The Burma Road is generally regarded as one of the most arduous campaigns of the war. Also in his records is that he was Section 8'ed out of the Army - that his discharge was medical, for psychiatric reasons. That can cover a lot of territory when it's applied to combat veterans.
Later, when I was 14 and applying to enter a Catholic pre-seminarian boarding school, I had to sit for a personal interview that was conducted by the arch-bishop. He only asked me one question - whether or not there was any insanity in my family.
As far as I knew there wasn't, so I told him that; though no more than a few years later I would become convinced that virtually everyone I knew was more or less insane, and not in a lighthearted or silly way.
What makes that question interesting to me, the asking of it, and what makes my father's discharge interesting to me - and what makes some memories I have of events that took place around the time we were living in Ione, where Preston was, interesting to me - is that my father had been molested by a Catholic priest when he was an altar boy.
My uncle told me this a few years after my father had already died. My uncle was younger than my father by enough years that he wasn't there when it happened. What he said he'd been told, in one of the rare times anyone in the family would talk about it, was that my grandfather had charged the parish house, gone down there in person, made as big a stink as he could with what little power he had - he was a blue-collar Irishman, he worked for the railroad. My uncle said the end result was the family had moved across the city, had had to move out of the parish and across the city; this was in I believe Syracuse, New York.
The precise interplay of forces that caused that move are unavailable to me. But it happened. And, years later, the bishop asked me if there was any insanity in my family. It was the only thing he asked me in our private interview to see whether, at 14, I was sufficiently pious enough to enter the pre-seminary.
Once, earlier, on a trip to Mexico with my mother and father, we stopped south of LA in Oceanside to see his Army buddy Dave. We went body-surfing at night. The water wasn't cold, and it was dark out; swimming in the ocean with the two of them, grown men half-lit on beer and bourbon. It was a big event for me. And seeing my father with someone he knew, who knew him from that time, whatever shared nightmares they had, that was big, something like the ocean was, dark and huge and right there in front of me.
He left my mom and I when I was 5, moved to Santa Rosa to a different job to live with a different woman. My mother and I stayed where we were living, in Ione - where he'd been working at Preston, the California Youth Authority, a penal institution, essentially a prison for under-18 year-old boys.
I remember clearly an afternoon from those days, in the turmoil of grief and emotional panic my mother's life had become, and mine with it, when a man came to the house, and talked with me a little while, and gave me a book. He said his name was Joe Crossman, he wanted me to remember that, and I did; I have ever since, and I've forgotten an awful lot of very important things along the way.
My impression was he was a friend of my father's, from the Army, not from Preston; though later, when I was in my thirties I asked my father about it, and he said he'd never had a friend with that name, and he had no idea who it might have been.
I had that book all through my childhood, from before I could read until I could read the Random House Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language cover to cover. Neither my mother nor my father ever remembered that man coming to the house, or anyone with that name in their lives, but he was there, he'd been there, in my life. I had the book to prove it - C.S. Lewis's The Silver Chair.
Lewis' religion and his religious activism make it hard for me to get back to the visions of Narnia I had as a boy, reading and rereading that book. I'm not a Catholic in any sense of the word. Not a Christian in most people's sense of that word. Like a leper on the streets of Calcutta I've been grateful for mercy and kindness that have come my way from that long ragged line of compassionate believers. The best teachers I had - few as they were, when they were good they were brilliantly good - up until my junior year in high school, were perforce Catholic nuns and priests.
But there's the corpulent bishop with his ring and his question, and that priest that hurt my father; a series of educationally-credentialed madwomen whose cruelty and gibberish poisoned my early education with nonsensical lies and torment; and a vicious Jesuit priest, the Dean at the seminary, whose jealousy and rage scarred me for life. There's the buzzing swarm of the mindless faithful, waiting like locusts for the signal of their Redeemer. And Ratzinger and Lustiger in the Vatican - imps of Mordor with a burnished gloss of sanctimony.
And yet there's that book. And all along, at the edge of things too horrible to recount, with none of the smug confidence and institutional courage that makes cheap angels out of moralistic thugs, some kind of light above the layer-on-layer of spiritual politics and gang war.
It's how I imagine the American military now, the struggle behind the facade of unity; there are, there have to be, good men and women still in positions of power in the American military, who can see the darkness they're being driven toward, and who are trying like the rest of us to find a place to stand.
That book. I think about it sometimes, it sparks a kind of dread and hope simultaneously; it's a reminder, for when the veils of conspiracy darken what seems like everything, that there were, that there still are, others - the presence of good intrigue in an evil world, in spite of what seem impossible odds.

1.12.06

BBC graphics: Muslim veils

Drug addiction, human trafficking and prison:
-
a national-security threat
-
Far and Near
-
They don't know where to die, you know?

7,000 women across the world:

It is a shocking fact that despite the world having 25 years experience of dealing with an HIV epidemic that grows exponentially every year, we are far from finding the solution to the disease. One of the greatest barriers to preventing HIV is that awareness alone cannot prevent its spread. Throughout the world, those who experience poverty and poor healthcare are most at risk.

For women and girls, poverty can mean financial dependence on a partner or on sex work. This often means they cannot insist on using condoms, particularly in countries where a woman's value is measured by her fertility and a choice has to be made between motherhood and HIV. Neither can they insist on abstinence or faithfulness, as the threat of violence, abandonment or destitution is a by-product of their dependence. For millions of adolescent girls in poor countries, susceptibility to rape, forced marriage, dependence on "sugar daddies" and trafficking also put them at high risk.

Addressing poverty and gender inequality among women worldwide is no easy task, but it is one that must be pursued vigorously, as the lives of millions of women are at stake. In many countries, women are leading the way in responding to the HIV epidemic, grandmothers are taking charge of small children whose parents have died of Aids and women and girls are disproportionately involved in caring for sick and dying relatives. So it is not the case that women are powerless victims, yet by focusing on condoms or abstinence in our global response to HIV, we exclude women because these are factors often out of their control.
Bianca Jagger/Guardian UK 01.Dec.06

Ignorance and death:

Dear Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi,
We, Nobel Laureates in the sciences, are gravely concerned about the ongoing trial of five Bulgarian nurses, Valya Chervenyashka, Snezhana Dimitrova, Nasya Nenova, Valentina Siropulo, Kristiana Valcheva, and a Palestinian doctor, Ashraf Ahmad Jum'a, in Tripoli. The six face death-penalty charges of deliberately infecting 426 children with HIV at al-Fateh Children's Hospital in Benghazi in 1998. Strong scientific evidence is needed to establish the cause of this infection. However, independent science-based evidence from international experts has so far not been permitted in court.
[...]
We appreciate the agony and the sadness of the parents of these children and we sympathize with the difficult situation of the Libyan authorities in trying to deal with this matter. However, we feel that if justice is to be served it is essential that the defence should be permitted to present its case.
Among the disallowed scientific evidence is a 2003 report, which Libya requested, and which was provided by Luc Montagnier, a co-discoverer of the virus that causes AIDS, and Italian microbiologist Vittorio Colizzi. The report concluded that the infection at the hospital resulted from poor hygiene and reuse of syringes, and also that the infections began before the arrival of the nurses and doctor in 1998.
Letter to Gaddafi
Richard J. Roberts and 113 fellow Nobel Laureates
17.Nov.06

Blog Archive