Sunday, October 31, 2010

Aboriginal Responsibility


Aunty Bess Price has very eloquently spoken words that have given me a greater understanding of the root problem between the black and white fellas. (The later of which I am almost ashamed to be part of.
I will watch and look for ways in which I can assist.
"We have to take our share of the blame" By Aunty Bess Price
(A speach given in Alice Spings on 22 October by this senior Warlpiri woman from Yuendumu.)
My mother and father were born in the desert. They lived their childhood out of contact with whitefellas. They were terrified when they first saw a whitefella.
They taught me the Old Law that our people lived by. That Law worked when we were living in tiny family groups taking everything that we needed from the desert.
It is Sacred Law. There was strong Law for sacred business. If the sacred Law was broken both men and women could be killed.
There was strong Law for who we could marry. Men had the power of life and death over their wives.
Young girls were forced into marriage. Men too had no choice in who they married.
There was no law for property except that everything must be shared. There was no law for money because we didn’t have any.
There was no law for houses, cars, grog, petrol or drugs – we didn’t have any except for bush tobacco which was shared like everything else we had.
The only way to punish was physically, by beating or killing the law breaker. They couldn’t be fined, we had no money or wealth to take. They couldn’t be locked up, we had no jails.
Everybody knew what they had to do to make sure that everybody survived. We all knew how to make a living from our country. We lived from day to day.
Everybody was taught to fight. We only had our family to defend us. We had no army, no police, no courts.
Everybody needed to know how to use a weapon, women and men both learned to fight and knew they would have to do that sometime.
We also believe that our Law Man can make magic, they can heal the sick but they can also make people sick and die by magic. That is what all my people believe. We kept the peace by fear of violence and magic.
Now we live in a world ruled by a new law that is not sacred, that doesn’t accept that magic exists.
Now we are all equal citizens with human rights. Now we have property, houses, cars, grog, drugs, pornography.
Now we live off welfare, other people’s money or we need to get a whitefella education and get a job.
We still share everything and this keeps us poor. We can’t say ‘no’ to our family even when we know they are drinkers and gamblers and will waste our money or destroy themselves with it.
Now too many of our men still think they have the power of life and death over their wives.
My people think all property should be shared and we think whitefellas are just greedy and stingy.
We don’t plan for the future, we don’t budget or invest – we share and consume. All this has happened too quickly.
The Bath report on the failure of child protection in the NT tells us that our kids live in a chaotic world where they are at terrible risk.
My community of Yuendumu has been torn apart by feuding. These problems show us that government has failed but is also shows us that Aboriginal Law has failed too.
Aboriginal organisations have failed as well. Aboriginal politics that focused on the ‘Stolen Generation’ and ‘Deaths in Custody’ also failed.
Aboriginal politicians forgot about our women and kids, forgot about the violence on the remote communities, forgot about the problems we are causing for ourselves.
We can’t just keep blaming the government without taking our share of the blame. That is the only way we can find our own way out of these problems.
Our old Law worked really well in the old days but it was not about human rights. It was about unconditional loyalty to kin, to family and following the sacred Law.
It was about capital and physical punishment. There were wise old people who tried to make sure that there was justice. But they are all dying now.
Those like my own parents who were born and grew up in the bush, are all getting very old and passing away.
But even they could not stop the grog and the violence that came from the new world we were living in. There is nothing in our old Law that helps us deal with grog and drugs.
All these new things that whitefellas brought in we have no law for. But we still respect our ancestors and we still want to keep our culture.
The Two Laws, whitefella and blackfella, are based on opposing principles. My people are confused.
If they go the blackfella way they break whitefella law, if they go whitefella way they break blackfella law.
Our young men are caught in the middle, they are still initiated into the old Law but they live in a world run by the new law, that’s why they fill up the jails.
Con Vaskalis is right when he says that we don’t have effective leadership. We have wonderful old people who know the old Law but are confused and worried by the new.
They are truly wise when they have real authority, when they are in small, family based communities away from towns.
They are ignored by the drinkers and the young people who are rushing to take the benefits of the whitefella way without learning whitefella law.
Too many don’t know either law now. We have Aboriginal people who speak out all the time but don’t live in the communities and don’t speak an Aboriginal language – who don’t have any idea what life is like for my people.
We have Aboriginal people who others call leaders who we know are only looking after their own families, their own interests and not those of the whole community.
We have very good people who want to do the right thing but are too worried and confused and who are continually grieving over the deaths of their loved ones.
We have white radicals and NGO’s with their own agendas who want to use us like political footballs.
When we women talk out about our problems they either ignore us or tell the world that we are liars and trouble makers.
Some of my people who carry on about human rights and attack governments every time they try to do anything new run away from their own kin and communities when there is trouble.
They never find it hard to find a gullible human rights lawyer to back them up in public but they don’t do anything in their own communities to make things better for their own people.
Too many lawyers are only interested in the rights of the perpetrators. Because they are worried about racism and they don’t like a particular government they will do what ever they can to make sure that murderers and rapists and child abusers are protected from the new law.
they will only advocate acknowledging traditional law when they think it will work better for their clients, the perpetrators. But they don’t know how the old Law worked.
They never worry about the victims who are also Aboriginal and victims of racism, who have had their basic human rights ignored and trampled on by members of their own communities, their own families.
It seems to us that human rights lawyers only worry about the black victims when the perpetrators are white. It is not somehow more acceptable to be raped, abused and murdered when the one doing it to you has the same colour skin.
Our problem is that we want to keep our culture. We want to respect our ancestors and their Law but we also want to be equal citizens and we want human rights. We can’t do that without changing our Law.
But we need to change it ourselves, others can’t do that for us. Only we can solve our own problems and we will do it in our own way. But we really need the support of governments and our fellow citizens.
You need to listen to the voices that are usually drowned out by the strong, the noisy and the powerful. You need to find a way to listen to those who don’t speak English, who are the most marginalised and victimised in our own communities.
You need to listen to our own women and young people, the ones who don’t have a voice under the old Law. If you really want us to have human rights then you have to find ways to protect the victims of black crime as well as white crime.
  • indymedia.org.au

  • Saturday, October 30, 2010

    Rupert Murdoch-a land of opportunity

    I am realising what a silly old bugger murdoch has become. He chose to leave his citizenship of the great southern land for more money pastures in other lands. I say how dare he speak as if he is an australian. If education is his current hobby horse donate some of the lots of $'s he has to prove his worth. Put your money where your mouth is murdoch. Or RETIRE from the world stage.
    This is a land of opportunity, says Rupert Murdoch
    Tom Dusevic - From: The Australian
    AUSTRALIA is a wonderful land of opportunity as long as it harnesses strong leadership and educates its people, says Rupert Murdoch.
    He also urged voters ignore the Greens.
    Speaking last night at an event in Sydney as part of the The Australian's Smart Business series, the chairman and chief executive of News Corporation, publisher of this newspaper, urged governments to invest in nuclear power, teacher quality, research and the education of all Australians.
    "Being poor is no excuse for being badly educated," he said. "Having bad teachers is the only excuse for being badly educated."
    Mr Murdoch said Australia's economy was in much better shape than the languishing US, and that Western governments had used the excuse of the global financial crisis to "waste tens of billions of dollars".
    "This country is sailing forth. It is a wonderful land of opportunity, with the right leadership, the right government, the right bureaucrats and so on."
    He warned that the Greens were a threat to prosperity and scarce resources. "Whatever you do, don't let the bloody Greens mess it up," he said, urging Australians to be patient about energy.
    "I can assure you that in a very few years it will be possible to have all the energy we want from economic and cheap and small nuclear plants -- which is anathema to a lot of people. But it would be safe. There would not be an energy waste problem. We don't have to rush into a lot of mad schemes, fouling up the country with windmills and other crackpot ideas which are very, very expensive."
    The Australian's editor-in-chief, Chris Mitchell, announced a new Australian Leadership Alliance next year to bring together great minds to solve the nation's problems.
    Mr Murdoch admitted education in English-speaking countries was his current hobby horse.
    "We can congratulate Julia Gillard for what she's done, and is doing, to improve teacher quality," he said. "Universities need money. We're throwing billions around on all sorts of crackpot things when we could actually be spending it on getting some of our universities to be really world-class centers of excellence."
    Australia should try to emulate the investment in education incentives of countries such as Singapore, which was attracting the best brains in the world.
    "If we are going to use this boom we're getting from mineral resources and make something for the long term . . . it's important that everybody be educated and that innovation is going on and that new industries are being started," Mr Murdoch said.
    Glen Boreham, managing director of IBM Australia, which partners The Australian in the Smart Business program, urged Australians not to become complacent "and think we are sitting pretty".
    "Technology isn't and never will be a substitution for leadership," he said.
  • Source
  • Friday, October 29, 2010

    Obama Losing Votes

    Obama Coalition Is Fraying, Poll Finds By JIM RUTENBERG and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN
    Critical parts of the coalition that delivered President Obama to the White House in 2008 and gave Democrats control of Congress in 2006 are switching their allegiance to the Republicans in the final phase of the midterm Congressional elections, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
    Republicans have wiped out the advantage held by Democrats in recent election cycles among women, Roman Catholics, less affluent Americans and independents. All of those groups broke for Mr. Obama in 2008 and for Congressional Democrats when they grabbed both chambers from the Republicans four years ago, according to exit polls.
    If women choose Republicans over Democrats in House races on Tuesday, it will be the first time they have done so since exit polls began tracking the breakdown in 1982.
    The poll provides a pre-Election Day glimpse of a nation so politically disquieted and disappointed in its current trajectory that 57 percent of the registered voters surveyed said they were more willing to take a chance this year on a candidate with little previous political experience. More than a quarter of them said they were even willing to back a candidate who holds some views that “seem extreme.”
    On the issue most driving the campaign, the economy, Republicans have erased the traditional advantage held by Democrats as the party seen as better able to create jobs; the parties are now even on that measure. By a wide margin, Republicans continue to be seen as the party better able to reduce the federal budget deficit.
    The public wants compromise from both sides, though it thinks Mr. Obama will try to do so more than Republicans will. Yet for all of its general unhappiness, the electorate does not seem to be offering any clear guidance for Mr. Obama and the incoming Congress — whoever controls it — on the big issues.
    While almost 9 in 10 respondents said they considered government spending to be an important issue, and more than half said they favored smaller government offering fewer services, there was no consensus on what programs should be cut. There was clear opposition to addressing one of the government’s biggest long-term challenges — the growing costs of paying Social Security benefits — by raising the retirement age or reducing benefits for future retirees. Support for one of Mr. Obama’s main economic proposals — raising taxes on income above $250,000 a year — has declined substantially over the course of this year.
    Though Republicans have managed to keep Democrats on the defensive over the health care plan they enacted this year, the poll also shows Americans remain divided over Republican promises to repeal it. Forty-five percent said the law should stand, and 41 percent said it should go.
    The poll does not measure the strength of individual candidates in specific districts, where indeterminate factors like voter turnout and even weather can affect results. And the poll, taken nationally Thursday through Tuesday with interviews of 1,173 adults, did not ask about United States Senate contests, as 14 states do not have Senate races this year. (The poll had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.)
    But it does offer a clear indication of party strength at the end of what has been a particularly intense and hard-fought midterm campaign with more bad news than good for Mr. Obama and his party.
    Over all, 46 percent of likely voters said they would vote for Republicans and 40 percent said they would support Democrats.
    A higher percentage of Americans continues to have a more favorable opinion of the Democratic Party than of the Republican Party, with 46 percent favoring Democrats and 41 favoring Republicans. But the Republicans’ favorability rating in the New York Times/CBS poll is at its highest level since September 2006.
    Disapproval of Congress, however, remains near its highest level in the history of the Times/CBS poll: 76 percent of respondents disapproved, 14 percent approved, and 10 percent expressed no opinion.
    Mr. Obama’s approval rating remains below 50 percent. It is 43 percent among registered voters, which is about where President Bill Clinton’s approval rating was in the 1994 midterm elections when Republicans swept control of the House and the Senate.
    Yet nearly 60 percent of Americans were optimistic about Mr. Obama’s next two years in office and nearly 70 percent said the economic slump is temporary. Half said the economy was where they expected it would be at this point, and less than 10 percent blamed the current administration for the state of the economy, leaving the onus on former President George W. Bush and Wall Street.
    Still, Mr. Obama and the Democrats in Congress have their work cut out for them if they intend to rebuild the voting coalition that gave them their current positions at the levers of power, whatever the outcome on Election Day.
    In the case of women — a traditionally Democratic-leaning group that the White House has been courting actively in recent weeks — the shift toward the Republicans was marked in the latest poll, especially when compared with their stated preferences in the last Times/CBS poll, in mid-September.
    In the earlier poll, women favored Democrats over Republicans by seven percentage points. In the latest poll, women said they were likely to support a Republican over a Democrat by four percentage points, suggesting Republican gains among women who were undecided as of last month.
    But the shift extended geographically, as well. Among poll respondents from the Western United States, more said they expected to vote for Republicans this year than said they expected to vote for Democrats; majorities of voters from that region voted for Mr. Obama in 2008 and for Congressional Democrats in 2006, according to the exit polls taken in those elections.
    The Democratic House speaker, Representative Nancy Pelosi, clearly emerged as a political liability for her party in the latest Times/CBS poll. Over all, 43 percent of respondents had an unfavorable opinion of Ms. Pelosi; 15 percent had a favorable opinion, and 40 percent said they had no opinion. The minority leader in the House who would probably become the speaker if Republicans win the majority, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, remains largely unknown. Three quarters of respondents said they had no opinion of him.
    In a follow-up interview, one poll respondent, Judy Berg, an independent from Morton Grove, Ill., said she voted for Mr. Obama in 2008 because she was “looking for a change,” adding, “the change that ensued was not the change I was looking for but something totally out of left field.”
    This year, Ms. Berg, a registered nurse, expressed a preference for Republicans because “I’m pro-life and I’m also looking at the immigration issues and the tax issues.” She added, “I like the Republican agenda on these issues better than the Democratic agenda.”
    Like several other national polls, the latest Times/CBS poll shows a considerable “enthusiasm gap” between Republicans and Democrats. Six in 10 Republicans said they were more enthusiastic about voting this year than usual. Four in 10 Democrats said the same.
    The poll includes indications that Republicans will have their own challenges should they gain control of one or both chambers of Congress with a new crop of lawmakers who identify with the Tea Party.
    About 6 in 10 Republicans who are likely to vote think the views of most Republicans are consistent with those of the Tea Party movement, which, though diffuse, has had success this year in arguing that Republicans have been too eager to choose compromise over principle.
    Yet 78 percent of respondents said they believed Republicans in Congress should compromise some of their positions to get things done and 15 percent said they should stick to their positions even if it means getting less done. Similar percentages said they wanted Democrats to choose compromise over principle.
    Marjorie Connelly, Dalia Sussman and Marina Stefan contributed reporting.
  • nytimes.com
  • Global Warming Data Secrets

    Companies fight to keep global warming data secrets Author: DINA CAPPIELLO
    Date: Oct 28, 2010 AP News
    Some of the country's largest emitters of heat-trapping gases, including businesses that publicly support efforts to curb global warming, don't want the public knowing exactly how much they pollute.
    Oil producers and refiners, along with manufacturers of steel, aluminum and even home appliances, are fighting a proposal by the Environmental Protection Agency that would make the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that companies release — and the underlying data businesses use to calculate the amounts — available online.
    While gross estimates exist for such emissions from transportation and electricity production and manufacturing as a whole, the EPA is requiring companies for the first time to submit information for each individual facility.
    The companies say that disclosing details beyond a facility's total emissions to the public would reveal company secrets by letting competitors know what happens inside their factories. More importantly, they argue, when it comes to understanding global warming, the public doesn't need to know anything more than what goes into the air.
    "There is no need for the public to have information beyond what is entering the atmosphere," Steven H. Bernhardt, global director for regulatory affairs for Honeywell International Inc., said in comments filed with the agency earlier this year. The Morristown, N.J.-based company is a leading manufacturer of hydrofluorocarbons, a potent greenhouse gas used in a variety of consumer products. Honeywell wants the EPA to reconsider its proposal, which the company said would damage its business.
    Other companies are pressing the agency to require a third party to verify the data, so they don't have to submit it at all, or to allow them to argue on a case-by-case basis to keep some of it confidential, a suggestion the EPA warned would delay public release.
    The EPA says it's necessary to make the data public in order for the companies' calculations to be checked.
    "It is important for outside groups and the public to have access to this information so they can essentially see and check EPA's and the company's math — giving the public greater confidence in the quality of data," the agency said in a statement.
    As the EPA prepares to regulate greenhouse gases, the data companies are being required to submit will help determine what limits eventually are put in place and whether they are working.
    The EPA required companies responsible for large amounts of heat-trapping pollution to begin this year collecting 1,500 pieces of information. The data, which is due to be reported by March, will be used in the first-ever inventory of greenhouse gases, a massive database that will reveal most sources of greenhouse gases in the United States.
    Suppliers of fossil fuels, which when burned release greenhouse gases, plus manufacturers of engines and vehicles, and facilities that release 25,000 tons or more of any of six heat-trapping gases, all must comply with the regulation, the first by the government on pollution blamed for global warming.
    Most companies don't have a problem telling the government or the public how much they pollute; they already do it for other types of pollution, such as toxic chemicals and sulfur dioxide, the gas that forms acid rain.
    What they oppose — almost unanimously — is the public disclosure of the underlying data necessary to calculate the annual amount of greenhouse gases.
    The EPA wouldn't need that information if companies actually measured greenhouse gas pollution at its source. But that equipment is expensive and for many companies would cost millions of dollars.
    Even the Federal Trade Commission has weighed in, and asked the EPA to treat data used in emissions equations as confidential since it could lead to collusion among companies and raise prices for consumers.
    Aluminum smelters want 11 of the 15 data fields the EPA intends to make public kept confidential, according to comments filed by the Aluminum Association.
    Koch Nitrogen Co. LLC, a fertilizer producer, questions the EPA's desire to make unit-specific or facility-specific emissions available, calling it "misguided" since a change in pollution from a single factory is unlikely to influence policy on a global problem.
    For DuPont, a founder of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership — a group of businesses that support controls on global warming pollution — the proposal has caused heartburn, according to Michael Parr, senior manager of government affairs. Many of the company's plants, including a titanium dioxide factory in New Johnsonville, Tenn., release greenhouse gases when generating power.
    "We actually lobbied for this reporting bill because we think it is a very good idea," Parr said in an interview. "What we are trying to get across is that if you take that information about how the plant runs and you make that available to the public it does not make the public any better informed about what is coming out of my plant. It exposes the fruits of all my innovation."
    If there is one polluting sector that is supportive of EPA's plans for full disclosure, it's electricity producers, which make public much of the data already.
    Companies that sell information to investors and businesses want even more disclosure. They argue it is necessary to know how efficient a facility is, which is the amount of greenhouse gases released per unit of production. Bloomberg LP, which has provided greenhouse gas data to the financial community since 2005, is asking the EPA to make public production volume data even if it is not used to calculate emissions.
    In the company's comments it says, "Greenhouse gas emissions are not meaningful in isolation."
    Copyright 2010 AP News / Copyright (c) Mochila, Inc.
  • thefreelibrary.com
  • Harrison Ford act decisively to save our world

    We must act decisively to save our world By Harrison Ford, Special to CNN
    STORY HIGHLIGHTS
    * Harrison Ford calls on ministers to set "bold, ambitious targets" to protect nature
    * Says the earth's ecological foundation "is already severely stressed"
    * Urges leaders to back policies to protect at least 25 percent of Earth's land mass by 2020
    * Calls on the U.S. to ratify the Convention on Biodiversity
    Nagoya, Japan (CNN) -- This week, I have had the opportunity to meet with ministers and country delegates from around the world who have gathered in Nagoya, Japan, to set a global conservation action plan for the next ten years.
    This is a critical moment in time for environmental ministers gathered here to work together to set bold, ambitious targets to protect nature and the services it provides. Decisions made here will not only impact our planet's environmental health, but every person, family, and nation that depend on nature to survive and thrive.
    Biodiversity is the foundation of all life on Earth. Human societies cannot provide for themselves the essential services provided by nature and healthy ecosystems. Among them: A stable climate, clean air, fresh water, insect populations that pollinate our food crops, healthy soils, and sources of pharmaceuticals for human health.
    However, biodiversity loss and ecosystem destruction pose a global challenge of unprecedented proportions. The current rate of species extinction is 1,000 times the expected natural rate.
    While the concept of biodiversity can be complicated, think of it as is the very fabric of life on earth and each species a thread. How many threads can we lose before the fabric is in tatters?
    No matter how powerful our drive for improving the human condition we will not succeed over the long haul if Nature is not healthy.
    Evidence is everywhere around the globe.
    For example, more than one billion people currently lack reliable access to clean drinking water, and 2.6 billion lack adequate access to sanitation. Global fish stocks -- food security for one billion people -- have fallen by 90 percent.
    NATURE doesn't need people. PEOPLE need nature.
    Over the next 30 years, three billion people are expected to join us. Within this short space we will need to double our food output and fresh water availability. And all of this must be achieved on a planet whose ecological foundation is already severely stressed.
    If we honestly assessed the economic value of the services that nature proves humanity, we would understand that we have undervalued our healthy ecosystems.
    These are daunting problems, but a solution to these challenges is available.
    Protected areas -- both on land and in our oceans -- constitute a pivotal cornerstone in halting biodiversity loss.
    In fact, in a world facing tremendous pressure to convert intact ecosystems into other forms of land use -- from agriculture to urbanization -- protected areas are likely to be the ONLY intact natural environments that will remain in many regions impacted by human activity.
    To this end, I urge our global leaders to strongly support policies to protect at least 25 percent of Earth's land mass and 15 percent of Earth's oceans by 2020.
    As important as the number is the fact that these areas are chosen carefully. They must include those areas of our planet that are particularly important to global biodiversity AND ALSO provide critical ecosystem services. Simply put -- those areas that nature and humanity most need to survive.
    It is clear that the costs of protecting intact ecosystems, with their multitude of services, are far outweighed by the benefits.
    Protecting biodiversity is in our self-interest. As the father of five children, I can think of no greater responsibility.
    While important decisions are being made here in Nagoya about the future health of our planet, one country is missing: The United States.
    Seventeen years ago, President Clinton committed the United States to ratifying the Convention on Biodiversity. It has still not happened. We are essentially alone in refusing to join this agreement that we, as a nation, were instrumental in drafting.
    What this means is that our country does not have a seat at the table in shaping global environmental policies that support the protection of nature and long-term sustainable economic development. Our national interests in the agricultural, research, pharmaceutical and biotech sectors will be affected, but we will have no vote. That makes no sense.
    As an American citizen I urge my government to ratify this convention's treaty. I hope you join me in encouraging your political leaders to do the same.
    The future of each of our nations, of the entire community of nations, will be impacted by the choices made this week. Our world is at a tipping point, and we can choose to save it -- and ourselves -- but we must act decisively, and we must act now.
    There has been news that gives us cause for hope with the announcement of the "Life in Harmony" Initiative by the Government of Japan. This $2 billion investment provides critical assistance to countries that are focused on the conservation and sustainable use of their natural ecosystems.
    This is exactly the type of leadership that is needed by our governments to ensure the protection of our global biodiversity, and the future of humanity.
    The opinions in this commentary are solely those of Harrison Ford.
  • cnn.com

  • Note: Actor and environmentalist Harrison Ford is also the Vice Chairman of Conservation International, an organization that seeks to protect and conserve the Earth's natural resources. He's at the Convention on Biological Diversity conference in Nagoya, Japan, where delegates are working to agree new targets for biodiversity over the next 10 years.

    Thursday, October 28, 2010

    "courage is contagious"

    Thinking we were all suffering overkill from wikileaks, I was not sure if I wanted to read or gather more information? But how can we close our ears and eyes to the horrors of the wot. Well actually I do not believe there is such a war. What we have had imposed on us since (or before) 9/11 is an orchestrated plan for what final scene I dare not to try to imagine.
    There are man made abominations killing humans, the are man made abominations killing the planet to what end?
    Would we have time now to stop the decline of the human race, the destruction of the planet, can we turn things around?
    Thinking I could give up trying was wrong, I will keep fighting for truth and peace until I take my last breath and I hope and pray that the thousands of others who know the truth inside them will keep fighting also.
    What did wikileaks say : "courage is contagious" spread it around.

    Cowardly Lion: Courage! What makes a king out of a slave? Courage! What makes the flag on the mast to wave? Courage! What makes the elephant charge his tusk in the misty mist, or the dusky dusk? What makes the muskrat guard his musk? Courage! What makes the sphinx the seventh wonder? Courage! What makes the dawn come up like thunder? Courage! What makes the Hottentot so hot? What puts the "ape" in apricot? What have they got that I ain't got?
    Dorothy, Scarecrow, Tin Woodsman: Courage!
    Cowardly Lion: You can say that again! Huh?

    Julian Assange - Wikileaks

    Updates:
    'You should be ashamed': WikiLeaks boss blasts astonished Larry King after he's quizzed over sex abuse claims, By David Gardner
  • Read More

  • Pack Assange off to Guantanamo, US conservatives tell Obama, By David Usborne in New York
  • Read More

  • IVAW Statement on the Iraq War Logs - A Call for Accountability
    The recent Wikileaks release--The Iraq War Logs--has shed important light on the high rate of civilian death and widespread atrocities, including torture, that are endemic to the war in Iraq. As veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are outraged that the U.S. government sought to hide this information from the U.S. public
  • Read More
  • China - Oh Dear

    I am speechless...
    China forces woman into abortion at EIGHT months for breaching one-child policy
    By Peter Simpson
    An eight-months pregnant woman was dragged from her home and forced to have an abortion because she had broken China’s one-child-per-family law.
    Twelve government officials entered Xiao Aiying’s house where they hit and kicked her in the stomach, befoe taking her kicking and screaming to hospital.
    There, the 36-year-old was restrained as doctors injected her with a drug to kill the unborn baby.
    Her husband Luo Yanquan, a construction worker, yesterday described the moment officials burst into his family home.
    ‘They held her hands behind her back and pushed her head against the wall and kicked her in the stomach,’ he said. ‘I don’t know if they were trying to give her a miscarriage.
    ‘Our ten-year-old daughter has been excited about having a little brother or sister but I don’t know how I can explain to her what has happened.’
    He recalled how a month before the child was due to be born officials told the couple they weren’t allowed to have another baby because they already have a daughter.
    His wife, who was filmed in hospital with large bruises on her arms and her dead child still inside her, said: ‘I have had this baby, feeling it moving around and around my belly. Can you imagine how I feel now.’
    Her harrowing experience in Siming, near the city of Xiamen, south-west China, on October 10, comes a month after the government in Beijing said there would be no relaxation in strict family planning laws.
    Most Chinese families are allowed only one child to reduce the 1.3 billion-plus population and cut unsustainable demand on resources.
    The policy leads to an estimated 13 million abortions every year, with many of those ordered by local authorities. Infanticide is also widespread in many rural areas.
    Those who violate the one child law can be fined up to £25,000.
    But two decades of economic boom mean many middle class parents now earn enough to pay the fine to expand their family.
    For those without cash and connections like the Luos, gruesome summary justice is meted out.
    Forced abortions are banned under Chinese law, but this doesn’t prohibit or define late-term abortions.
    An official with the Siming district family planning commission said the procedure on Mrs Luo was undertaken voluntarily and that Mr Luo had approved it - a claim he denies.
    The couple fear official retribution after making their ordeal public on a blog.
    Ordinary Chinese have expressed disgust at the Luos’ ordeal, labelling the family planning officials ‘cruel’ and ‘inhuman’.
  • Read More
  • Wednesday, October 27, 2010

    60

    On the morning of my 60th birthday (yikes) I do not know how I feel anymore.
    Oh my health is ok, my mind active BUT my heart is full of painful yearning or sorrow:
    I have an aching heart.
    What happened to our world, why have we allowed the deceit and hate to grow like a cancerous tumor.
    We have passed the tipping point I really do not think we can proceed as a human race until we expose the truth and eradicate the vermin spreading the disease.

    HOW? I am open to suggestions

    "So Much Blood has been Spilt in Iraq"

    Letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XIV: "So Much Blood has been Spilt in Iraq"
    By Felicity Arbuthnot, Global Research, October 26, 2010
    An Open Letter :
    His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, His Grace The Archbishop of Canterbury, His Grace the Archbishop of Westminster, The Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon., David Cameron, The Deputy Prime Minister, The Rt., Hon., Nick Clegg, The Foreign Secretary, The Rt. Hon., William Hague.
    Your Holiness, Your Graces, Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, Foreign Secretary,
    I apologise for this multiple sending, but time is of the essence. So much blood has been spilt in the illegal invasion of Iraq, that it is hard to comprehend, with the upper figure of deaths, since 2003 being estimated at 1.4 million. Nearly five million souls (4.7) are displaced, internally and externally, according to UNHCR, a million widows and five millions orphans have been created, according United Nations Agencies.
    Now, after the sickening lynching of the country's legitimate President, and close colleagues, a country whose: "sovereignty and territorial integrity", was guaranteed by the U.N., his Deputy, Tareq Aziz, a Chaldean Christian, is to be executed, it has been announced today. This on top of the invasions's blood letting, on a Biblical scale - and in the light of the appalling revelations of "liberation's" realities, in last days, by Wikileaks.
    Wikileaks, of course also revealed the terrorism rained on the people of Iraq by the imposed "Vichy" government's forces, "mentored" by U.S., and U.K., troops.
    The charge against Iraq's former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, is religious discrimination. Ironically, half a million Iraqi Christians, have fled, due to persecution, since the invasion. Uncounted numbers have been murdered. They had lived side by side with the majority Muslim population, since, seemingly 33 AD., when it is believed, St Thomas founded Christianity in Mesapotamia.
    The charge relates to an assassination attempt on Aziz and Saddam Hussein, in Dujail, Iraq, by affiliates of the Iranian backed Dawa party, in 1982. The same Dawa Party to which Nuri al Maliki adheres. (I have not put "Prime Minister", since he no longer is, in rudderless Iraq.) The retribution in Dujail was certainly woeful, but it was a decision made by the President. In context, it pales, however, against the massacre meted out to the population of Fallujah, in 2004 by America's forces, in retribution for the murder of four mercenaries, and reaction against U.S., troops, who had been killing men, women and children, unaccountably since the invasion.
    The blood-shed in Iraq is on the hands of all the citizens of the United States and the United Kingdom. We live with it where ever we travel, with the shame and disgrace of their governments' actions. Further, there was no Presidential immunity for Iraq's illegally overthrown government, a usual legal norm, yet the occupying forces, could have halted their murders. As the dominant, remaining occupying force, America is now responsible for every human rights violation.
    Mr Aziz was part of a government that far from religiously discriminating, gave annually, proportionately, equally, to all religions for upkeep of their places of worship and related offices. Punishments were meted out not on basis of religion, but for crimes committed. Harsh they indisputedly were, but it is shaming to reflect that they pale, in comparison to that which has occurred, and continues to occur, under the occupying powers, from the day of the invasion.
    Tareq Aziz gave himself up the United States authories, in good faith. That faith was ill founded and abused. He is an elderly man and was in poor health long before the invasion. His days are anyway, surely numbered. I beg you to take at least this chance to save just one life. Mr Aziz is a nationalist, as all his government, they could have fled. They chose to stay in Iraq, because they are Iraqis through and through - unlike the current government, with their foreign loyalties and passports, largely.
    Tareq Aziz went to the Vatican, prior to the invasion, to see the Head of the Church in which he had put his faith, all his life, to beg intervention to halt the destruction of his people and the land of Ur of the Chaldees, mentioned, of course three times in the Book of Genesis: 11:28, 11:31, 15:7. His plea fell on deaf ears.
    Your Holiness, Your Graces, Prime Minister, Foreign Secretary, please do not let him down again. Britain and America may never anyway, wash the blood from their hands. "To save one, is as if to save the whole of mankind" is a belief common to all faiths.
    Please act now. Time is running out. If it does and you have done nothing, in spite of your collective influence and contacts, his body will lie at your feet, throughout your lives. Further, any lack of action, which results in another lynching, will impose that horror on any citizen of conscience, since we are, so we are told, a democracy. I beseech you to act.
    Today we were warned of a real danger of a terrorists attack, we have already committed uncountable acts of terrorism - please do not let us be a party to another, which, with the will, is wholly preventable.
    Yours sincerely,
    Felicity Arbuthnot, journalist, human rights corresponent, Global Research
    Tony Benn, Veteran former British MP, author, CND founder
  • globalresearch.ca

  • © Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca

    Wikileaks and the Pentagon

    The Secret War Between Wikileaks and the Pentagon, By Danny Schechter
    Global Research, October 25, 2010
    Much of this commentary first appeared on the AlJazeera website. http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2010/10/2010102410827506430.html
  • aljazeera

  • It happened on a Friday, the anniversary of the first US casualties of the Vietnam War way back in l957. It was also the anniversary, in l964, of French philosopher Jean Paul Sartre’s announcement that he was turning down the Nobel Prize. He later sat as a judge on Bertrand Russell’s Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal, which indicted that conflict’s carnage and lies.
    It was the day this year that the often shadowy Wikileaks, chief nemesis of the Pentagon, maybe their worst nightmare—considered perhaps even more dangerous than the Taliban-- surfaced again with the largest public drop of secret military documents in history. Wikileaks is a public web site run by the Sunshine Press, a non-profit group.
    For understandable reasons, the Pentagon is at war with its information war against the war—literally.
    Wikileaks introduced the significance of their immense treasure trove of secrets on their website this way: “The 391,832 reports ('The Iraq War Logs'), document the war and occupation in Iraq, from 1st January 2004 to 31st December 2009 (except for the months of May 2004 and March 2009) as told by soldiers in the United States Army. Each is a 'SIGACT' or Significant Action in the war. They detail events as seen and heard by the US military troops on the ground in Iraq and are the first real glimpse into the secret history of the war that the United States government has been privy to throughout.”
    This time around, and unlike the earlier dissemination of what they called Afghan “war logs, they sanitized these documents to remove names that might become targets for retribution. The gesture did not satisfy the Pentagon that said they would provide aid and comfort to the enemy. Forcibly retired General Stanley McCrystal called the release “ sad.”
    The Los Angeles Times reported, “In addition to the Times, the documents were made available to the Guardian newspaper in London, the French newspaper Le Monde, Al Jazeera and the German magazine Der Spiegel, on an embargoed basis.
    The New York Times said it had edited or withheld any documents that would "put lives in danger or jeopardize continuing military operations.'' It said it redacted the names of informants, a particular concern of the Defense Department
    The Pentagon had been bracing for the release for months. Fearing more compromises of national security and more embarrassment for practices they wanted hidden, they had set up a Wkileaks war room staffed with 120 operatives in anticipation. The Central Command in Tampa Florida has been fully engaged in trying to get newspapers not to run “stolen” documents.
    A special intelligence unit called the Red Cell was involved. The task has been to prod the American spy networks to operate in a cleverer and more intelligent manner. (Ironically, Wikileaks had leaked some of their internal reports earlier.)
    One report dealt with perceptions abroad that the US supported terrorists. Another was oriented toward how to sell support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in Western Europe, counseling that “counting on apathy is not enough."
    I can testify to their savvy. I met members of the unit at a University of Westminister conference in London in September on war and terrorism. There were three of them. Two stood out because of their crew cuts and military demeanor. A third was a Muslin woman. They were clearly on a reconnaissance mission probably linked to Wikileaks detection since it been reported that English students were helping the covert citizens agency target covert government activities.
    I spoke at some length with their leader, an active duty Army Major in plain clothers, who told me that his unit in Iraq handled high value prisoners including Saddam Hussein. (They escorted him to the hangman, he revealed.) He was very friendly, made no secret of his affiliation but clearly was not at a leftist academic conference to collect footnotes.
    As we know now, the Pentagon were unable to stop the release but may have pressured Wikileaks not to name names. We may never know what happened until Wikileaks finds some document about their anti-wikileaks operations.
    Wikileaks founder Julian Assange accused the Pentagon or more than document editing. CNN reported, “The founder of Wikileaks was denied a Swedish residency permit on Monday and said his whistleblowing website had been cut off by a company that handled many of its donations. Julian Assange blamed the financial cutoff on the U.S. government, which denied any involvement.” Reports of Death Squads have received little pick up even as they were routinely reported during wars in Central America.
    He had earlier intimated the US might have been behind the other incidents in Sweden that led to his being accused of sexual harassment, So called “honey pot” traps used in seduction scenarios have always been part of espionage operations.
    It’s not just the government that's been out to discredit Ausaage or perhaps try to prosecute/persecute him. On Sunday, the New York Times ran a front page “profile” of the leader of WikiLeaks that many reders in the comment session saw as a hit job because it insinuated a mass defection in his organization and painted him as arrogant and unstable. It spoke of his problems in Sweden where he was threatened with arrest without noting no charges were filed. Later, CNN seemed to take its cue to go on the offensive and grilled him more on his personal life than the issues the new Wikileaks disclosures raised. He ended up walking off the set in the middle of the tabloid-style "interview."
    A week earlier, an American veteran of the Iraq “surge” published an open letter urging the Administration to heed the revelations and change its policies.
    Josh Stieber wrote, “Dear members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and other willing parties,
This is an anticipatory letter aimed to advise you on your response and responsibility for the coming Wikileaks release, expected on October 23rd. Based on the White House’s response to the last leak about Afghanistan, the temptation seems strong to once again divert attention away from accountability.
    I write as a young veteran who once fully embraced the concept of a preemptive war to keep my fellow citizens safe and, as President Bush declared, because “America is a friend to the people of Iraq.” I now hope to preempt your response to the information regarding that war in which I fought”
    The full brunt of the US response has yet to be felt. The media outlets that worked with Wikileaks have a new scoop of unprecedented depth and dimension. Yet, the different ways media outlets reported the disclosures reveals continuing media biases against allegations of torture. Few newspapers reported that the documents about civilian deaths minimized the total or that it was US troops that trained Iraqis now accused of abuse.
    The New York Times played up the revelations in a page one spread but downplayed their meaning writing : , “…the Iraq documents provide no earthshaking revelations, but they offer insight, texture and context from the people actually fighting the war.”
    Not surprisingly, reports of widespread torture that American forces knew about, and in some cases reported with nothing done, is not “earthshaking.” 15,000 unreported civilian deaths are also minimized. The Times devoted more ink to evidence of abuses by Iraqi forces without mentioning most were trained by Americans who were the occupying power. It fleshes out US military allegations of Iranian intervention more than reports of killings by American soldiers, an emphasis that conveniently contributes to the demonization of Iran by American politicians.
    Contrast this with the Guardian coverage which called its package "Iraq: The War Logs", and goes high with revelations of "serial detainee abuse" and "15,000 [previously] unknown civilian deaths."
    The Times approach infuriated writer Rob Beschizza who came up with what he called “The New York Times Torture Euphemism Generator!”
  • Here

  • “Reading the NYT's stories about the Iraq War logs, I was struck by how it could get through such gruesome descriptions ­ fingers chopped off, chemicals splashed on prisoners ­ without using the word 'torture.' For some reason the word is unavailable when it is literally meaningful, yet is readily tossed around for laughs in contexts where it means nothing at all.” Oddly, the New York Times- owned Boston Globe had no reservations in using Torture in its headline.
    The New York based Columbia Journalism Review surveyed global coverage and, weirdly, criticized Al Jazeera for a video it produced, “All in all, Al Jazeera's coverage of the secret files is straightforward, “except perhaps” (my emphasis) for a six-and-a-half minute documentary video posted prominently throughout the site, a video that is awkwardly edited and features weird, cable-TV-style reenactments and dramatic readings of some of the reports.” This condescending comment betrays a lack of insight into the differences between TV coverage and newspaper formulas.
    While all of the press seems to be reporting the story, few media outlets are going back to their own coverage and acknowledging how they had failed.at the time, to report many of the atrocities we now know the US military knew about, and covered up. One glaring example: The killings that took place in Falujah where Al Jazeera correspondents were banned.
    Much of the media, as we now see, especially leading American media outlets, were complicit in a multi-year cover-up of truths and crimes that continue to this day, not just in Iraq or Afghanistan, but in our living rooms at home.
    News Dissector Danny Schechter wrote two books and made the film, WMD,(Weapons of Mass Deception) about media coverage of the war in Iraq. He edits Mediachannel.org and can be reached at dissector@mediachannel.org His new film is Punderthecrimeofour time (Plunderthecrimeofourtime.com)
    www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.
    For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
    © Copyright Danny Schechter, Global Research, 2010
    The url address of this article is:
  • globalresearch.ca

  • © Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca

    Iraq War Logs

    Excellent Video Presentation of Iraq War Logs

    The Shaming of America

    FYI
    The Shaming of America By Robert Fisk, 24 October, 2010 - The Independent
    Robert Fisk delivers a searing dispatch after the WikiLeaks revelations that expose in detail the brutality of the war in Iraq - and the astonishing, disgraceful deceit of the US
    As usual, the Arabs knew. They knew all about the mass torture, the promiscuous shooting of civilians, the outrageous use of air power against family homes, the vicious American and British mercenaries, the cemeteries of the innocent dead. All of Iraq knew. Because they were the victims.
    Only we could pretend we did not know. Only we in the West could counter every claim, every allegation against the Americans or British with some worthy general - the ghastly US military spokesman Mark Kimmitt and the awful chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Peter Pace, come to mind - to ring-fence us with lies. Find a man who'd been tortured and you'd be told it was terrorist propaganda; discover a house full of children killed by an American air strike and that, too, would be terrorist propaganda, or "collateral damage", or a simple phrase: "We have nothing on that."
    Of course, we all knew they always did have something. And yesterday's ocean of military memos proves it yet again. Al-Jazeera has gone to extraordinary lengths to track down the actual Iraqi families whose men and women are recorded as being wasted at US checkpoints - I've identified one because I reported it in 2004, the bullet-smashed car, the two dead journalists, even the name of the local US captain - and it was The Independent on Sunday that first alerted the world to the hordes of indisciplined gunmen being flown to Baghdad to protect diplomats and generals. These mercenaries, who murdered their way around the cities of Iraq, abused me when I told them I was writing about them way back in 2003.
    It's always tempting to avoid a story by saying "nothing new". The "old story" idea is used by governments to dampen journalistic interest as it can be used by us to cover journalistic idleness. And it's true that reporters have seen some of this stuff before. The "evidence" of Iranian involvement in bomb-making in southern Iraq was farmed out to The New York Times's Michael Gordon by the Pentagon in February 2007. The raw material, which we can now read, is far more doubtful than the Pentagon-peddled version. Iranian military material was still lying around all over Iraq from the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war and most of the attacks on Americans were at that stage carried out by Sunni insurgents. The reports suggesting that Syria allowed insurgents to pass through their territory, by the way, are correct. I have spoken to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers whose sons made their way to Iraq from Lebanon via the Lebanese village of Majdal Aanjar and then via the northern Syrian city of Aleppo to attack the Americans.
    But, written in bleak militarese as it may be, here is the evidence of America's shame. This is material that can be used by lawyers in courts. If 66,081 - I loved the "81" bit - is the highest American figure available for dead civilians, then the real civilian mortality score is infinitely higher since this records only those civilians the Americans knew of. Some of them were brought to the Baghdad mortuary in my presence, and it was the senior official there who told me that the Iraqi ministry of health had banned doctors from performing any post-mortems on dead civilians brought in by American troops. Now why should that be? Because some had been tortured to death by Iraqis working for the Americans? Did this hook up with the 1,300 independent US reports of torture in Iraqi police stations?
    The Americans scored no better last time round. In Kuwait, US troops could hear Palestinians being tortured by Kuwaitis in police stations after the liberation of the city from Saddam Hussein's legions in 1991. A member of the Kuwaiti royal family was involved in the torture. US forces did not intervene. They just complained to the royal family. Soldiers are always being told not to intervene. After all, what was Lieutenant Avi Grabovsky of the Israeli army told when he reported to his officer in September 1982 that Israel's Phalangist allies had just murdered some women and children? "We know, it's not to our liking, and don't interfere," Grabovsky was told by his battalion commander. This was during the Sabra and Chatila refugee camp massacre.
    The quotation comes from Israel's 1983 Kahan commission report - heaven knows what we could read if WikiLeaks got its hands on the barrels of military files in the Israeli defence ministry (or the Syrian version, for that matter). But, of course, back in those days, we didn't know how to use a computer, let alone how to write on it. And that, of course, is one of the important lessons of the whole WikiLeaks phenomenon.
    Back in the First World War or the Second World War or Vietnam, you wrote your military reports on paper. They may have been typed in triplicate but you could number your copies, trace any spy and prevent the leaks. The Pentagon Papers was actually written on paper. You needed to find a mole to get them. But paper could always be destroyed, weeded, trashed, all copies destroyed. At the end of the 1914-18 war, for example, a British second lieutenant shot a Chinese man after Chinese workers had looted a French military train. The Chinese man had pulled a knife on the soldier. But during the 1930s, the British soldier's file was "weeded" three times and so no trace of the incident survives. A faint ghost of it remains only in a regimental war diary which records Chinese involvement in the looting of "French provision trains". The only reason I know of the killing is that my father was the British lieutenant and told me the story before he died. No WikiLeaks then.
    But I do suspect this massive hoard of material from the Iraq war has serious implications for journalists as well as armies. What is the future of the Seymour Hershes and the old-style investigative journalism that The Sunday Times used to practise? What is the point of sending teams of reporters to examine war crimes and meet military "deep throats", if almost half a million secret military documents are going to float up in front of you on a screen?
    We still haven't got to the bottom of the WikiLeaks story, and I rather suspect that there are more than just a few US soldiers involved in this latest revelation. Who knows if it doesn't go close to the top? In its investigations, for example, al-Jazeera found an extract from a run-of-the-mill Pentagon press conference in November 2005. Peter Pace, the uninspiring chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is briefing journalists on how soldiers should react to the cruel treatment of prisoners, pointing out proudly that an American soldier's duty is to intervene if he sees evidence of torture. Then the camera moves to the far more sinister figure of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who suddenly interrupts - almost in a mutter, and to Pace's consternation - "I don't think you mean they (American soldiers) have an obligation to physically stop it. It's to report it."
    The significance of this remark - cryptically sadistic in its way - was lost on the journos, of course. But the secret Frago 242 memo now makes much more sense of the press conference. Presumably sent by General Ricardo Sanchez, this is the instruction that tells soldiers: "Provided the initial report confirms US forces were not involved in the detainee abuse, no further investigation will be conducted unless directed by HHQ [Higher Headquarters]." Abu Ghraib happened under Sanchez's watch in Iraq. It was also Sanchez, by the way, who couldn't explain to me at a press conference why his troops had killed Saddam's sons in a gun battle in Mosul rather than capture them.
    So Sanchez's message, it seems, must have had Rumsfeld's imprimatur. And so General David Petraeus - widely loved by the US press corps - was presumably responsible for the dramatic increase in US air strikes over two years; 229 bombing attacks in Iraq in 2006, but 1,447 in 2007. Interestingly enough, US air strikes in Afghanistan have risen by 172 per cent since Petraeus took over there. Which makes it all the more astonishing that the Pentagon is now bleating that WikiLeaks may have blood on its hands. The Pentagon has been covered in blood since the dropping of the atom bomb on Hiroshima in 1945, and for an institution that ordered the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 - wasn't that civilian death toll more than 66,000 by their own count, out of a total of 109,000 recorded? - to claim that WikiLeaks is culpable of homicide is preposterous.
    The truth, of course, is that if this vast treasury of secret reports had proved that the body count was much lower than trumpeted by the press, that US soldiers never tolerated Iraqi police torture, rarely shot civilians at checkpoints and always brought killer mercenaries to account, US generals would be handing these files out to journalists free of charge on the steps of the Pentagon. They are furious not because secrecy has been breached, or because blood may be spilt, but because they have been caught out telling the lies we always knew they told.
    US official documents detail extraordinary scale of wrongdoing
    WikiLeaks yesterday released on its website some 391,832 US military messages documenting actions and reports in Iraq over the period 2004-2009. Here are the main points:
    Prisoners abused, raped and murdered
    Hundreds of incidents of abuse and torture of prisoners by Iraqi security services, up to and including rape and murder. Since these are itemised in US reports, American authorities now face accusations of failing to investigate them. UN leaders and campaigners are calling for an official investigation.
    Civilian death toll cover-up
    Coalition leaders have always said "we don't do death tolls", but the documents reveal many deaths were logged. Respected British group Iraq Body Count says that, after preliminary examination of a sample of the documents, there are an estimated 15,000 extra civilian deaths, raising their total to 122,000.
    The shooting of men trying to surrender
    In February 2007, an Apache helicopter killed two Iraqis, suspected of firing mortars, as they tried to surrender. A military lawyer is quoted as saying: "They cannot surrender to aircraft and are still valid targets."
    Private security firm abuses
    Britain's Bureau of Investigative Journalism says it found documents detailing new cases of alleged wrongful killings of civilians involving Blackwater, since renamed Xe Services. Despite this, Xe retains extensive US contracts in Afghanistan.
    Al-Qa'ida's use of children and "mentally handicapped" for bombing
    A teenage boy with Down's syndrome who killed six and injured 34 in a suicide attack in Diyala was said to be an example of an ongoing al-Qa'ida strategy to recruit those with learning difficulties. A doctor is alleged to have sold a list of female patients with learning difficulties to insurgents.
    Hundreds of civilians killed at checkpoints
    Out of the 832 deaths recorded at checkpoints in Iraq between 2004 and 2009, analysis by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism suggests 681 were civilians. Fifty families were shot at and 30 children killed. Only 120 insurgents were killed in checkpoint incidents.
    Iranian influence
    Reports detail US concerns that Iranian agents had trained, armed and directed militants in Iraq. In one document, the US military warns a militia commander believed to be behind the deaths of US troops and kidnapping of Iraqi officials was trained by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard.
    Robert Fisk is Middle East correspondent for The Independent newspaper. He is the author of many books on the region, including The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East.
    © 2010 Independent/UK
  • independent.co.uk
  • Monday, October 25, 2010

    DHS Social Media Monitoring

    New FOIA Documents Reveal DHS Social Media Monitoring During Obama Inauguration
    Deeplink by Jennifer Lynch
    As noted in our first post, EFF recently received new documents via our FOIA lawsuit on social network surveillance, filed with the help of UC Berkeley’s Samuelson Clinic, that reveal two ways the government has been tracking people online: Citizenship and Immigration’s surveillance of social networks to investigate citizenship petitions and the DHS’s use of a “Social Networking Monitoring Center” to collect and analyze online public communication during President Obama’s inauguration. This is the second of two posts describing these documents and some of their implications.
    In addition to learning about surveillance of citizenship petitioners, EFF also learned that leading up to President Obama’s January 2009 inauguration, DHS established a Social Networking Monitoring Center (SNMC) to monitor social networking sites for “items of interest.” In a set of slides [PDF] outlining the effort, DHS discusses both the massive collection and use of social network information as well as the privacy principles it sought to employ when doing so.
    While it is laudable to see DHS discussing the Fair Information Practice Principles [PDF] as part of the design for such a project, the breadth of sites targeted is concerning. For example, among the key “Candidates for Analysis” were general social networking sites like Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and Flickr as well as sites that focus specifically on certain demographic groups such as MiGente and BlackPlanet, news sites such as NPR, and political commentary sites DailyKos. According to the slides, SNMC looks for “‘items of interest’ in the routine of social networking posts on the events, organizations, activities, and environment” of important events. While the slides indicate that DHS scrutinized the information and emphasized the need to look at credible sources, evidence, and corroboration, they also suggest the DHS collected a massive amount of data on individuals and organizations explicitly tied to a political event.
    In addition, while the slides do emphasize the minimization and elimination of “Personally Identifiable Information” (PII) from the public data, the slides note that “[o]penly divulged information excluding PII will be used for future corroboration purposes and trend analysis during the Inauguration period.” Thus, it is unclear whether or not the information was deleted permanently after the inauguration proceedings were complete. Moreover, there have been several recent studies and papers showing how, even without PII, comments and information about people online can be “re-identified” through the use of sophisticated computational techniques and thus create privacy concerns.
    Finally, while there have been some reports in the past year of similar social network monitoring for large-scale public events, to date the public has not seen such detailed information about the government’s approach to monitoring, especially on its data preservation practices. As our FOIA lawsuit continues, we hope to learn more about such activities and help bring further transparency and accountability to the ways in which government agencies and law enforcement officials collect and analyze information about us online.
  • Source
  • Peaceful

    Well after weeks of tension my morning breakfast and cup of tea can
    perhaps report something more than the leaking of war documents.
    Today I will sit and take in the birds and the trees or any
    other critter who comes by to impart some peace into my mind.




    Sunday, October 24, 2010

    Julian Assange - Wikileaks

    Congratulations to Wikileaks crew/team and Julian Assange for once again exposing the truth - I applaud you all - thank you.


    I will refrain from commenting on the next clip.

    Saturday, October 23, 2010

    WikiLeaks released the largest classified leak in history

    At 5pm EST Friday 22nd October 2010 WikiLeaks released the largest classified military leak in history. The 391,832 reports ('The Iraq War Logs'), document the war and occupation in Iraq, from 1st January 2004 to 31st Decemc'est un padber 2009 (except for the months of May 2004 and March 2009) as told by soldiers in the United States Army. Each is a 'SIGACT' or Significant Action in the war. They detail events as seen and heard by the US military troops on the ground in Iraq and are the first real glimpse into the secret history of the war that the United States government has been privy to throughout.
    The reports detail 109,032 deaths in Iraq, comprised of 66,081 'civilians'; 23,984 'enemy' (those labeled as insurgents); 15,196 'host nation' (Iraqi government forces) and 3,771 'friendly' (coalition forces). The majority of the deaths (66,000, over 60%) of these are civilian deaths.That is 31 civilians dying every day during the six year period. For comparison, the 'Afghan War Diaries', previously released by WikiLeaks, covering the same period, detail the deaths of some 20,000 people. Iraq during the same period, was five times as lethal with equivallent population size.
    This average does not include the slain working in the Iraqi security services or those claimed by US soldiers to be 'insurgents'. When these are added in, almost 50 Iraqis died on average in every single day reported by the logs.
  • Read More
  • Wikileaks

    Update Saturday 23/10/2010
    From twitter:
    See TBIJ, IBC, Guardian, Spiegel, NYT, Le Monde, Al Jazeera, Chan4, SVT, CNN, BBC and more in the next few hours. We maximise impact. end.

    Well looks like it is finally happening I just hope everyone will play safe.

    "Sky News will feed to BT Tower. Make arrangements with BT Tower to receive the feed. Local feed will be by LDIL 3. Time: 09:30AM to 15:30PM, London time."

    Wikileaks

    Update Friday 22/10/2010
    From twitter yesterday:
    # WikiLeaks communications infrastructure is currently under attack. Project BO move to coms channel S. Activate Reston5. about 18 hours ago via web
    # Leaked reports detail Italian black ops in Afghanistan | RT http://bit.ly/9wzz53 about 21 hours ago via web
    Well apparently there are tickets available for the release or opening of the Iraq files well one would assume the press conference would be for that reason?
    #From twitter "Major WikiLeaks press conference in europe coming up; to book [press/NGO only, mail sunshine.booking@mail.be"

    Pentagon ‘Warning Iraqis’ Ahead of WikiLeaks Release
  • Read More

  • Wikileaks is also under consideration of several criminal charges. Currently, it has been reported that the Obama Administration is attempting to limit the travel of heads of Wikileaks, and is likely planning on pressing charges on the site for encouraging theft of government property. Internationally, the site is also gaining much heat as it is possibly putting other nations at risk. Neil James, the executive director of the Australian Defense Association stated that, “Put bluntly, Wikileaks is not authorized in international or Australian law, nor equipped morally or operationally, to judge whether open publication of such material risks the safety, security, morale and legitimate objectives of Australian and allied troops fighting in a UN-endorsed military operation.”
  • BS Warning
  • Friday, October 22, 2010

    The revolution is coming.

    You say you want a revolution
    Well you know, we all want to change the world
    Lennon/McCartney

    Is the revolution coming soon?
    Seems to be some signs out there.

    Stand Up for the Fight
    Stand Up for Freedom
    Stand Up for Peace and Love
    Stand Up for Your Rights

    You say you want a revolution
    Well write for your Rights
    Write every Company that supports war
    and tell them to withdraw their support

    You know we the common people, have the right
    We the People are no longer Sheeple
    We have the right to stop purchasing
    The money we spend supports the war machine

    Start slow to achieve much, personally boycott
    Yes folks, boycott the profiteering products
    Boycott the big Chain Stores, the Take-a-ways
    The Oil Companies, I know most need fuel

    Support the independent business people
    Support the local shop keepers
    Support the local farmers, the primary producers
    Support ourselves by supporting our community

    Build networks of local products, gain knowledge
    Start small, remember Rome wasn't built ........
    Assist each other in these times of greed
    Combine our efforts to enrich our environment

    There are already networks in place for various endeavors
    Infiltrate, educate, listen and learn
    Save our own earth space by sharing others
    Compassion for our neighbor will spread

    Before we will know what happened
    Our Planet will be saved
    Saved by the common people
    With Love not War
    chela

    Thursday, October 21, 2010

    Warning

    October 14, 2010
    A Warning… and why it matters.
    Clif High describes himself as a ‘Radical Linguist’. He’s multi-lingual
    and also proficient in several computer programming languages. Around 1997 he
    began analyzing language patterns scavenged from the internet by his ‘web
    bots’ or spiders. He found that people’s language patterns changed in
    response to certain emotional impacts. He analyzed this by putting certain
    emotional subjects into various ‘buckets’ that he gave generalized and
    sometimes whimsical names to, in order to group various subjects for analysis.
    Then he found that people’s emotional language actually began to change IN
    ADVANCE of certain events that impacted them. It seems that people are
    subconsciously prescient to a degree, and this subconscious knowledge leaks out
    in the language they choose to use.
    In a nutshell, that is how the ‘predictive linguistics’ of the web bots
    project works. Scavenging data is purely mechanical. But the interpretation is
    human labor, software, and knowledge intensive by Clif and assistants. His
    ‘hit rate’ exceeds pure chance by something better than 50%. It’s not
    perfect, and it becomes more and more ‘foggy’ as one tries to elicit fine
    details out of a subject.
    It does not predict actual events, but the emotional ‘headline’ response to
    those events, with certain keywords or phrases attached to them. So yes, it’s
    kinda ’squishy’…. but still stunning when it gets a ‘hit’ and you see
    the actual language anticipated that is later used to describe an event.
    Sometimes, some strong language pops out everywhere and grabs his attention and
    can be used as a ‘temporal marker’ to verify a chain of possible events
    upcoming.
    In July of 2001, Clif found a large ‘emotional tipping point’ coming in a
    matter of months. It had keyword associations of ‘military’ and
    ‘accident’, among others. It had an intense emotional impact lasting about
    four hours, and lingering emotional release lasting several days. He wasn’t
    sure what it was, until Sept. 11, 2001. The event lasted several hours, and the
    lingering effect of grounded airlines lasted for several days. It changed life
    as we know it.
    In trying to financially support the bandwidth for the web bots, Clif offered
    the technology to the government. They were not interested then. He found a
    foreign investor who paid him to keep it running, and this foreign investor made
    large sums of money by using the information the project supplied. That has
    since ended.
    In one scan of the net, the web bots made it into a Chinese server that was
    doing the same kind of work, so Clif knows that the Chinese are actively doing
    this kind of project also. There are also indications that the US government has
    taken the idea and quietly started using it, also.
    In predictive linguistics, it seems that the further in advance they sense
    something coming, the bigger the event, or emotional impact is. For a year or
    two now, Clif has been looking at the largest ‘emotional tipping point’ he
    has ever analyzed. This one is predicted for Nov. 8-12 approximately. It has an
    intense emotional impact over four full days, and a cascading emotional release
    period well into March 2011. This event is predicted to have 10 to 100 times the
    impact of 9/11 in changing our lives forever after. Clif says it will start in
    the US and spread globally.
    What could it be? Much speculation and an array of various clues and aspects
    from the ‘time monks’, but there is much, much happening in the world
    tensions, as you may have noticed in recent months. Nuclear war? Global
    Financial collapse? False Flag attack on the US? All the above?
    Clif was in the process of a short-term analysis this month, attempting to
    resolve what was coming as we get closer. His previous reports have been
    antagonistic to TPTB [the powers that be], and it seems they do not want this
    information released. Yesterday the ISP for Clif’s website shut him down
    without explanation, and not for financial reasons. It seems apparent the
    government is trying to silence him.
    This is great reason to fear what is coming. It is also highly suspicious that
    the President will be on his longest overseas trip and out of the country when
    this timeframe ‘goes hot’. They know something is coming. You should know,
    too, and that is why I wrote this. Caveat Emptor. Something wicked, this way
    comes.

    Professor Emiritus Hal Lewis Resigns

    Professor Emiritus Hal Lewis Resigns from American Physical Society
    The following is a letter to the American Physical Society released to the public by Professor Emiritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara.
    Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
    From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
    To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
    6 October 2010
    Dear Curt:
    When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).
    Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
    How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
    It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
    So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
    1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate
    2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.
    3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
    4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.
    5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
    6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
    APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
    I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
    I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
    Hal
    Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
  • telegraph.co.uk
  • Wikileaks

    WikiLeaks communications infrastructure is currently under attack. Project BO move to coms channel S. Activate Reston5.

    Israel army bans social networking sites

    Well I suppose this will keep occurring. The US Military has banned soldiers from certain sites. watching, watching

  • Read More
  • Wednesday, October 20, 2010

    The Internet War

    Nadim Kobeissi has stated very honestly and openly better than all my rantings.

    On one side, WikiLeaks has assembled the brightest and most dedicated hacker-activists in an effort to turn the Internet into a bastion of transparency and information freedom.
    On the other side, the United States has combined its Department of Defense, Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Security Agency in an attempt to clamp down on the Internet with censorship and encryption-banning laws.
    Both parties, however, have fully realized the importance of the Internet and the outcome of their battle will change the face of the world.
  • Read More
  • Julian Assange - Wikileaks

    It reads like an espionage novel.
    If I had the time I would put all the pieces together and write a best seller
    Julian Assange is like a movie star trying against all odds to conquer the darkside.
    Well guess what he is fighting the darkside, he is just like you and me except for one difference.
    Julian Assange is actually doing something to change the dark to Light.
    I fear for him because he is pursuing the big boys and they do not like having a rouge human speaking the truth.
    Maybe there have been some errors by the team in the management of wikileaks accountability but this would not be the first time an organisation has grown faster than expected. And I would assume the wikileaks team are mostly techies and not much
    experience of admin/accounts.
    Then are there really spies in the team? Are the US and Australian Governments waiting like a cat watching it's prey, waiting to jump as soon as there is a loophole for them to grab J and close down wikileaks?
    The NON sex scandal was the biggest sham and those girls/women really should hang their heads in shame. Sex is a beautiful and personal experience not to be used for bringing people's reputation down.
    Now the swedish government has refused J the chance to live and work in Sweden, I always thought Sweden was a strong country standing against the corruption in the world but she is no different when pressured sweden has crumbled. Freezing wikileaks funds. Another shame.
    So world people let us unite to stand behind wikileaks/Julian Assange and the truth.
    Lets unite to stand against the criminal governments and change the way of the world.
    Lets unite to stop killing our planet, stop fossil fuels.
    Enough I wanted a rant to get things off my chest but I just feel worse now, is there a John Doe out there. I am going for a walk and listen to the birds :-)

    Australia's airport porn checks

    Australia's airport porn checks cause problems. Daft puritan laws of our time
    19 Oct 2010 10:00 | by Nick Farrell
  • techeye.net

  • Comment: Such a shame I have no plans to visit the fascist state of Australia.
    Chela: ouch that hurt. Australia is down the drain unless we stand up are we really a fascist nation?

    Enormous Ring is Developing on the Sun

    For any watchers this is interesting.
  • Read More
  • Truth

    Sometimes when the truth is spoken

    it hurts, sometimes it helps

    and at other times it enlightens

    facing the truth is what we must do

    if we do not take this step of truth

    we will live forever in darkness

    nothing will ever seem right

    the dark shadows will stay over our lives


    But when we can look at ourselves, and others

    and speak the truth, the light will shine

    the doors will open, the internal garden will bloom

    life will be good and we will be well

    Life and truth need courage

    we must find our own strength

    when we do our lives will be beautiful and serene

    Live in Light and the Dark can never come in