Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Some Investment Cautions

[I am by career a social/political/legal philosopher. By chance as a college student I also wrote 'short stories of enterprise' for Fortune Magazine. However, my real training in the tricks and treats of the stock market was initiated when I used to read the stock results from the Wall St. Journal aloud to my father as he drove me to school as a 12 and 13-year-old. My father was one of those rare individuals who as a broker and investment counselor was totally _honest_ -- and somewhat horrified by the games played by the stock market crew -- insider information, selling bum stuff to people, not telling the whole story, getting in and out before the crowd, exploiting underdeveloped nations (there was one of the poor smaller South American ones -- which I am not sure -- that supposedly guaranteed 25% returns on concrete and beer -- the national drink there).

Rules, then, of this game:

If you are going to invest in the market:

1) DON'T BE GREEDY!

I imagine quite a few this past day and possibly with some to come are going to be hit hard, wiped out perhaps, by investments that promised high returns. If one invests or has to manage things individually along the way as we academics do with our TIAA/CREF pensions which allow us to make changes in allocations -- stocks to bonds to guaranteed return things, overseas investments etc. -- one can be more speculative early in one's career. However, as one approaches retirement, if one can, one should lock in enough to get by along with social security in totally safe things. We have traditional TIAA which guarantees interest rates reset quarterly which are currently at about 5.25%.

The general rule of thumb here is that things can crash at any moment which one cannot specifically anticipate such as the 9/11 event -- which will probably have some sort of repeat -- or the current Chinese over investment problems. One should only speculate with what one can afford to lose. Unhappily corporations now dumping people often only to enhance the holdings of CEOs rather than cultivating loyal employees make this calculation more difficult! I have had too many intelligent students starting again who found themselves dumped in middle age when one cannot as readily adjust by finding new employment or careers. I did not invent the current greedy approach along such lines, but it must be taken into consideration. I recall when one of the best paid unions -- printers -- realized that their futures were dim and became major movers here in NYC for open enrollment in the City University of NY so that their kids could find new kinds of careers.

2) DON'T TRUST THE EXPERTS -- particularly those who bill themselves as 'personal financial advisors'. These types make money from you however things turn out. They are likely to get it wrong, as the stock market is unpredictable. It took WW2 -- more than a decade later -- to pull us out of the depression which began in 1929. So things can stay bad for quite some time. The symptoms today are much like those just prior to that crash. Beware those hedge funds or small scale comparables that promise massive returns. They are the ones most likely both to crash and to bring on a general depression in doing so.

My archetypal example was the sad story of the father of one of my students several decades back. He had owned a small photography store and had had the good fortune to accumulate $300,000 of Eastman Kodak stock, a sufficient sum to retire comfortably even though his business had been made worthless by the big discount operations. Unhappily a neighbor persuaded him to sell his stock (not a bad idea as Kodak was facing stiff competition then) and let him invest it for him (a road to disaster). This personal financial advisor with legal power to buy and sell proceeded to "churn" the stock holdings (buying and selling rapidly which gave the advisor a steady cut) until the father began to get notices that his account was now negative and that he had to pay in more monies. His advisor kept telling him that these were mere office errors. But finally the truth dawned and my student asked me if I knew of any way his father could recoup his total losses. I told him to get legal advice, but I doubt that there was any recourse if he had signed away his nest egg. The bottom line here is that Bush's Social Security plan would have opened the door to the numerous vultures out there. Each day on my email a dozen or more are trying their hits and there are always naive people who can be suckered.

Sorry to say, the big guys -- big reputation investment houses, etc. -- have their interests which all too often conflict with those of the smaller investors (and sometimes with the big ones too). TIAA which is the largest investor in the nation lost a bundle to the Enron fix which was being pushed by big Wall Street operatives.

The bottom line here is that hopefully we will pull back from the brink this time, but down the line the U.S. is far too deeply into debt and vastly over committed to expensive military operations such as Iraq which may pull us down the way the Soviet Union was hit by its over investments in military solutions. It was driven out of Afghanistan by the same tactics that are now hitting us in Iraq and Afghanistan and g-d forbid that Bush start a war with Iran which can easily sink our ships over there and block the exit route for oil from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Iran -- while gas goes to up $10.00 a gallon and our economy belly up.

If you want to protect your investments, vote smart -- and don't let anyone snooker (a British term meaning 'con') you. Paul Krugman in the NY Times -- a Princeton economist -- is one of the more trustworthy voices these days -- and his is not in an optimistic mode right now:

http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/

http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/

Ed Kent]

...........................

http://news.bbc.co.uk/

Last Updated: Wednesday, 28 February 2007, 13:13 GMT

World stock slump hits second day
The markets were surprised by the speed and size of recent declines
Worldwide share prices have continued to fall, triggered by Tuesday's 9% losses on the Shanghai stock market.

The UK's FTSE 100 index fell 1.2% by midday trading. That took declines in the past two sessions to 3.4% and knocked £55bn off its total value.

France's Cac 40 index dropped by 1.1% and Germany's Dax lost 1%. Earlier, markets in Asia, Australia and India had all suffered substantial losses.

Investors are questioning the outlook for economic and earnings growth.

The current global stock sell-off was fuelled by speculation that China's government would try to clamp down on illegal share trading and might impose a capital gains tax on stock market earnings.

Stock prices and indexes had climbed to record levels in a number of key world markets, prompting some analysts to fear that shares may have gone too high, too fast.

After a flurry of activity at the start of trading and a large drop, the FTSE 100 rebounded slightly and was recently 61.80 points lower at 6,224.30.

In Japan, the Nikkei 225 share index closed down 515.8, or 2.9%, lower at 17,604.1, while in Hong Kong the Hang Seng index fell 496.36, or 2.5%, to 19,716.5.

More declines?

The question facing many investors is how far and how long the fall in prices will last and whether or not the bull run that has driven stocks and indexes higher has now broken.

"I see it as a correction within a bull market," said James Hong, head of equity derivatives trading at Dresdner Kleinwort.


This sort of move by the market is a little worrying, and it looks like it has been caused by a build-up of concerns in recent days
Angus Campbell, Finspreads

Send us your experiences
Q&A: World stocks slump

"We were looking for some sort of correction overall. It is a little bit surprising to have it all happen at the same time."

Even if a market's upwards trend is not broken, a market correction can still be significant, analysts said.

In May last year, the UK's FTSE 100 lost more than 9% as concerns about high oil prices and political global instability combined to impact on world markets.

Wide impact

China has been one of the main emerging markets for many investors, and its main stock index had more than doubled in value during the past year.

At the same time, key indexes in Asia such as Japan's Nikkei 225 were pushing to their highest levels in seven years.

Some analysts fear the fall in share prices may last a number of weeks rather than days.

"This sort of move by the market is a little worrying, and it looks like it has been caused by a build-up of concerns in recent days," said Angus Campbell, a trader at Finspreads.

"Memories of last May's correction have sent shivers through investors' spines as many market participants have used futures contracts to run for cover."

The worries hammered China's Shanghai index by nearly 9% on Tuesday, giving it its worst day in a decade.

Bounce back?

The China wobble rippled out across Europe on Tuesday, and hit the US later in the day where it coupled with disappointing economic figures to push the Dow Jones 3.3% lower by the close of trading.


The shocks of the market correction set off by China are still being felt around the world as the hangover continues
Matthew Bristow, Pacific Continental Securities

Asian markets picked up on this negative sentiment, and India's Sensex fell more than 3.8% on Wednesday.

Australia's main stock index shed as much as 3.5% and at one point was trading at a five-week low, before closing down 2.7%.

Despite the declines, by lunchtime on Wednesday there were signs of a recovery in the US markets and stock futures indicated that the key indexes would open higher.

A lot will depend on the strength of the US economic figures due out later today, analysts said.

"The shocks of the market correction set off by China are still being felt around the world as the hangover continues to dampen investor mood," said Matthew Bristow of Pacific Continental Securities.

"This will mean that investors will be more critical of economic data as the current state of the economy is still of uncertainty and the perfect storm caused panic within the markets," he added.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Russia agrees to work toward lifting PA aid sanctions

[It looks as though we may be seeing major power consensus breaking down -- on the responses to Israel/Palestine, a war on Iran, energy allocations (oil, natural gas). One fears that a hot economic war may replace the cold war nuclear standoff now. And with what consequences as the struggle to control resources heats up? Ed Kent]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1171894530572&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Feb. 27, 2007 11:40 | Updated Feb. 27, 2007 15:08
Russia agrees to work toward lifting PA aid sanctions
By ASSOCIATED PRESS

Russia will work for international support of the Palestinian Authority power-sharing arrangement and for the lifting of the crippling international aid blockade, the foreign minister said Tuesday.

Russia favors the agreement between Hamas and the Fatah group to share power because it shows "wisdom, reason and responsibility before the Palestinian people," Sergey Lavrov said before a meeting with Hamas's political leader Khaled Mashaal.

"We are pushing for all members of the international community to support this process and make it irreversible, including efforts to lift the blockade," Lavrov added.

Millions of dollars in crucial foreign aid were cut off after Hamas, which the European Union, United States and others consider a terrorist group, gained control of the Cabinet and the legislature in January 2006 elections.

The so-called Quartet of Mideast peace brokers - which includes Russia, the EU, the United Nations and the United States - has demanded that any new Palestinian government recognize Israel's right to exist, which Hamas has failed to do.

However, since the power-sharing deal worked out this month, there has appeared to be a softening in the stance of some EU countries toward Hamas.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Only in America -- I hope!

[I would venture a (probably not too wild) guess that as many as one in five American men with access to the internet has explored comparable images of child porn. The lesson here is that only those who get caught pay the penalty in this country. And this penalty is, needless to say, ludicrous. I am not recommending child porn, but it is obviously available only a few clicks of the keys away. I must receive 5 to 10 offers of same each time I open my morning mail. Sick notion of what punishment is all about here. Such neither deters nor restores.

Ed Kent]

....................................

Justices Decline Case on 200-Year Sentence for Man Who
Possessed Child Pornography
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
The Arizona man, who received the sentence for possessing
20 pornographic images of children, failed to persuade the
Supreme Court to consider whether the sentence was
unconstitutionally excessive.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/27/washington/27scotus.html?th&emc=th

--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Child Health Care Splits White House and States

[The trouble with an oligarchy is that wealthy people either have no imaginative outreach to those in need or else in this country particularly rationalize why their problems -- including children's -- are their own fault -- a sick expansion of Calvinism's doctrine of predestination (you get what you deserve from the moment of birth). Calvin got himself into trouble by rigidly following out the logic of theodicy -- the notion of a three way trilemma in which only two of the following propositions can be true: 1) God is all powerful, 2) God is all good, 3) Real evil exists. The Augustinian and Calvinist answer was the notion of original sin -- every child is the product of sex, thus sin, thus deserving of punishment unless rescued by God. If you have problems, it is your own damned fault -- sick world view!!! And very convenient for both types of U.S. conservatives -- the religious feel goods and the greedies. Ed Kent]

.........................

Child Health Care Splits White House and States
By ROBERT PEAR
Governors pressed President Bush to provide more money so
they could guarantee health insurance for children.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/27/washington/27govs.html?th&emc=th

--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Monday, February 26, 2007

Israel Could Do Such Good in That Part of the World, but . . . ?

[I have met only one Israeli settler (self-identified) first hand. This was a young man who came to a few sessions of an introductory philosophy course I taught one summer and then disappeared. During the two sessions he repeatedly interrupted the class to give spiels on behalf of the settlers and on getting rid of the Palestinians, much to the annoyance of the other class members. He was, I gather, an example of one of the extremists who engage in activities such as those reported below. From other reports I understand that the vast majority of settlers are simply taking advantage of a good economic deal -- the considerable subsidies available to those who will move into one of the existing settlements -- not religious extremists bent on driving out the Palestinians from Eretz Israel. I have heard that many of these would accept relocation back to Israel proper with economic incentives, although the longer people settle into homes, the more reluctant to leave they will be, as we saw with Gaza.

While we are at it, another far out group seems to be the ultra orthodox who are in many instances anti Zionist? I have had only one such in my classes, a convert from evangelical Christianity who was an able student and humane person. But I assume such people are only irritating complications for their fellow Israelis. Our Brooklyn ones would appear periodically at the college and ask passersby whether they were Jewish and then attempt to proselytize those who said they were.

The really dangerous right wingers (there are others) seem ironically to be the recent arrivals from the former Soviet republics such as Avigdor Lieberman who has come out for expelling Arabs from Israel proper which one must take seriously as he is one of the most popular figures in politics per polls: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigdor_Lieberman

Needless to say the majority of Israelis are none of the above, but the complications for Israel doing anything in the way of peace-making are all too often blocked by some of these.

Personally, as one who was horrified by the pictures and reports of the Holocaust as a young child and was disgusted by the American anti-Semitism that I saw around me even through my college and early teaching years, I am forced to be ambivalent about modern Israel. As I think Truman once said, Israel could do such good in that part of the world, but . . . ?

The Christian Peace Teams (cpt) reporting below are members of our peace churches (Quakers and others) who work to resolve conflicts around the world.

Ed Kent]

......................................................................

[cpthebron] At-Tuwani Update: February 1-17, 2007

On Team during this period: Bob Holmes, Sally Hunsberger, Barb Martens, Rich Meyer, Sean O'Neill, Heidi Schramm and members of Operation Dove (the Doves).

Saturday 3 February
Holmes and two Doves responded to a call from Palestinian shepherds on a hill opposite the Ma'on settlement. Eight Palestinian men, women andchildren were on the hill. The following story was reported: Two youngshepherds were herding flocks belonging to three different Palestinianfamilies when four settlers, whose faces were covered, approached them and began herding the sheep towards the settlement. When more family members approached, the settlers threw rocks at the family and threatened them with sticks. An army jeep came and separated the settlers from the shepherds and their sheep. The settlers went back to Ma'on.

Monday 5 February
Meyer and Holmes went to the Palestinian village of Jawiyeh to collect testimony about recent incidents of harassment and attempted sheep-stealing by Ma'on settlers. The Palestinians and internationals completed a formal report of the incident for The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

Tuesday 6 February
Nomfundo Walaza, a South African psychologist came to At-Tuwani to lead a workshop on non-violence. Over 100 Palestinians from At-Tuwani, the surrounding villages and Hebron gathered under a large tent set up near the village school. Walaza spoke on her experience of non-violent resistance to oppression and began by saying, "I know the pain of having people come to my country and tell me that I don't belong there. You are thinking today, 'Will I ever live free in my own land?'" She went on to speak of the peace and reconciliation process in South Africa. "We realized that we had to re-humanize our oppressors and that we owed it to ourselves to build a peaceful society with them." Some quotes: "If you can make a place for nonviolence in your heart then there is hope for peace." "Your children have to be able to look into your eyes and see that you haven't given up hope." "Peace must become your everyday language." After lunch, Walaza spent time with just the women, giving them an opportunity to share with her the specific struggles and joys of living in this place.

Thursday 8 February
In the morning Meyer, Holmes and O'Neill responded to a call from a shepherd in his fields who said that settlers were coming toward his flock. The CPTer's filmed two male settlers in the wooded outpost of Havat Ma'on. Eventually an army jeep arrived; the soldiers spoke to the settlers first and then to the shepherd. The settlers accused the Palestinian of grazing his sheep in the outpost. The shepherd denied this, and said that as the ground was wet, the soldier could look for footprints and see that he and his sheep had not even been up to the perimeter road where the army jeep was parked. The soldier seemed to accept that the shepherd was telling the truth, and that where the shepherd was grazing his sheep was not problematic. The soldier said that on Sunday a man from the Israeli military District Coordinator's Office would come to meet with the shepherds and settlers about grazing areas.

Tuesday 13 February
The military escort for the school children from Tuba was late in the morning, causing the children to decide to walk a longer, safer path on their own. O'Neill, Hunsberger and Schramm met them part way and accompanied them the rest of the way to school. The children told Schramm that a white settler car came out of the outpost and chased them as they crossed the unavoidable settler road. Hunsberger and a Dove went to an olive tree planting action in the Palestinian village of Imneizel. They watched as about fifty Palestinian men, women and children planted 600 trees. At the same time, at least four large flocks of sheep grazed in nearby fields. For over four years, the threat of attacks by Israeli settlers prevented the Palestinians from using these fields. Three Israeli activists joined the tree planting. Settler and army jeeps drove back and forth during the planting, and settlers and soldiers watched from a distance, never challenging the Palestinians' work.

Wednesday 14 February
Schramm, O'Neill, and Hunsberger responded to a call informing them that the Israeli Defense Forces were in the process of demolishing a Palestinian home in Imneizel. Later, Meyer and Hunsberger responded to a similar call from the village of Qawawis. See CPT Release: Israeli Military Demolishes Seven Palestinian Homes in South Hebron District.

Thursday 15 February
Settlers cut down twenty-six full grown olive trees in the Palestinian village of Susiya. A Palestinian asked Schramm to call the police because they routinely ignore reports made by Palestinians.

Saturday 17 February
While accompanying a shepherd from At-Tuwani, O'Neill, Schramm, and Hunsberger saw two settlers grazing their sheep in a field of Palestinian crops. The army and police arrived after numerous phone calls from the internationals and Israeli partners. The settlers returned to the outpost and the Palestinians continued to graze without incident. Later, these same settlers stood near the edge of At-Tuwani, yelling insults and threats.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Saturday, February 24, 2007

Israel is seeking US consent to fly over Iraq?

[It is hard to imagine a worse scenario than the following. Let us hope that it is a bluff. Needless to say, were Israel to launch such an attack it would mean the loss of many Iranian lives -- unlike the 1981 hit on a surface Iraqi plant. Presumably some of the following things would follow such an attack;

1) oil cut off from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Iran -- Iraq mines Strait of Hormuz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Hormuz See map showing narrow 30 mile passage by Iran through which all must pass -- including U.S. supplies to Iraq.

2) Muslims generally enraged at U.S. and Israel and a full scale culture war then launched.

3) Dominant Shiites in Iraq back Iran and condemn U.S. and Israel.

4) World opinion notes military rather than negotiating stances of Israel and U.S.

5) Russia and China (and others?) condemn U.S. and Israel in UN Security Council.

6) Gas and oil prices escalated past $100 per barrel of oil and up to $ 10.00 per gallon for gas.

7) World economic crash.

8) Bush declares martial law against protesters.

Undsoweiter!

Ed Kent]


http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1171894504905&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Feb. 24, 2007 9:24 | Updated Feb. 24, 2007 15:45
Report: Israel is seeking US consent to fly over Iraq
By JPOST.COM STAFF


Israel is negotiating with the United States for permission to fly over Iraq as part of a plan to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, the UK's Daily Telegraph reported on Saturday morning.

The report claimed that Israel plans to conduct surgical air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, although did not specify which installments Israel would strike.

# Iran: World making baseless allegations
# Israel: Hit Iran with new sanctions now
# US Affairs: Congressional cold shoulder

Deputy Defense Minister MK Ephraim Sneh denied the reports, claiming that no such plan exists and added that the reports hailed from sources that wished to renounce responsibility for a lack of diplomatic action towards the Iranian nuclear threat.

In order to conduct such an operation, the defense establishment would need to seek permission from the Pentagon, said the Telegraph.

The newspaper quoted a senior Israeli defense official who told reporters that negotiations were now underway between the two countries for the US-led coalition in Iraq to provide an "air corridor" in the event of the Knesset deciding on unilateral military action to prevent Teheran developing nuclear weapons."

"We are planning for every eventuality, and sorting out issues such as these are crucially important," said the official, who asked not to be named.

"The only way to do this is to fly through US-controlled air space. If we don't sort these issues out now we could have a situation where American and Israeli war planes start shooting at each other."

On Thursday night Israeli officials urged "crisper" and "faster" moves to sanction Iran after a UN report found the Islamic Republic had expanded its program to obtain nuclear weapons.

Iran ignored the UN's deadline last Wednesday to halt uranium enrichment. Officials will discuss arms controls and whether to cut back on the $25 billion-worth of export credits which are used by European companies to trade with Iran.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Torture - Can Face to Face Contact Makes a Difference?

[The account below by a contractor in Iraq regarding his guilt for torturing Iraqis may be part of a larger picture of abuses to which Americans and those impacted by Americans are being subject on a day to day basis.

In the good old days one had person-to-person contact with others. I can even remember as a child being told by a local phone operator (one picked up one's phone and one was asked "Number, please" by ladies who sat at a switchboard) that my grandmother was talking to her cousin (Henry Luce's mom), but that as soon as she finished she would tell her that I was ready for my Peter Rabbit story (then published in the NY Herald Tribune daily).

More and more we are being separated from each other in our daily transactions. Place a call to one of the various services which we must use these days either in routine matters or to straighten out more serious ones (denial of coverage by a medical insurance company of this and that or challenge of a credit card charge for something not ordered, etc.) and one is as likely to be talking to someone across the country or on another continent which can only be figured by slight accents or asking where the person is.

Needless to say with such distancing those employed by particular long range operations are going to protect their own interests by defending those of their employers. One is no longer dealing with a local business which can be criticized among one's neighbors when it gets out of line. And people do feel anxious about losing jobs. There are all those stories about whistle blowers being cast into outer limbo when they blow the cover on even the most egregious violations of fellow human beings.

Needless to say outsourcing or sub contracting is only the newest American game designed for dodging responsibility. The thousands of men who sacrificed their lungs working on "the pile" (cleanup after 9/11) are still trying to collect their pay from such despite the fact that the principal contractors who subcontracted out received full governmental compensation as reported by one of my students who is doing a book on this subject with the assistance of a Pulitzer prize winning journalist.

Having said all the above Eric Fair's report below is pretty courageous. It could presumably subject him to criminal charges. G-d only knows what his employment options are now. He is to be commended for doing the right thing after having done some of the worst. May his future be better and his nightmares calmed. And note that face to face contact has made a difference.

Ed Kent]

P.S. I should mention that Paul Moses referred to above as the Pulitzer prize winner broke the story of our Brooklyn gulag where Muslim immigrants were being secretly held and tortured by (among others) one of the guards who went on to do the same at Abu Ghraib for which he was convicted and sentenced when a fellow soldier blew the story with those horrendous tapes.

........................................

An Iraq Interrogator's Nightmare
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:13:31 -0000

An Iraq Interrogator's Nightmare
By Eric Fair
Friday, February 9, 2007; Page A19
http://www.washingt onpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801680.html


A man with no face stares at me from the corner of a room. He pleads
for help, but I'm afraid to move. He begins to cry. It is a pitiful
sound, and it sickens me. He screams, but as I awaken, I realize the
screams are mine.

That dream, along with a host of other nightmares, has plagued me
since my return from Iraq in the summer of 2004. Though the man in
this particular nightmare has no face, I know who he is. I assisted
in his interrogation at a detention facility in Fallujah. I was one
of two civilian interrogators assigned to the division interrogation
facility (DIF) of the 82nd Airborne Division. The man, whose name
I've long since forgotten, was a suspected associate of Khamis
Sirhan al-Muhammad, the Baath Party leader in Anbar province who had
been captured two months earlier.

The lead interrogator at the DIF had given me specific instructions:
I was to deprive the detainee of sleep during my 12-hour shift by
opening his cell every hour, forcing him to stand in a corner and
stripping him of his clothes. Three years later the tables have
turned. It is rare that I sleep through the night without a visit
from this man. His memory harasses me as I once harassed him.

Despite my best efforts, I cannot ignore the mistakes I made at the
interrogation facility in Fallujah. I failed to disobey a meritless
order, I failed to protect a prisoner in my custody, and I failed to
uphold the standards of human decency. Instead, I intimidated,
degraded and humiliated a man who could not defend himself. I
compromised my values. I will never forgive myself.

American authorities continue to insist that the abuse of Iraqi
prisoners at Abu Ghraib was an isolated incident in an otherwise
well-run detention system. That insistence, however, stands in sharp
contrast to my own experiences as an interrogator in Iraq. I watched
as detainees were forced to stand naked all night, shivering in
their cold cells and pleading with their captors for help. Others
were subjected to long periods of isolation in pitch-black rooms.
Food and sleep deprivation were common, along with a variety of
physical abuse, including punching and kicking. Aggressive, and in
many ways abusive, techniques were used daily in Iraq, all in the
name of acquiring the intelligence necessary to bring an end to the
insurgency. The violence raging there today is evidence that those
tactics never worked. My memories are evidence that those tactics
were terribly wrong.

While I was appalled by the conduct of my friends and colleagues, I
lacked the courage to challenge the status quo. That was a failure
of character and in many ways made me complicit in what went on. I'm
ashamed of that failure, but as time passes, and as the memories of
what I saw in Iraq continue to infect my every thought, I'm becoming
more ashamed of my silence.

Some may suggest there is no reason to revive the story of abuse in
Iraq. Rehashing such mistakes will only harm our country, they will
say. But history suggests we should examine such missteps carefully.
Oppressive prison environments have created some of the most
determined opponents. The British learned that lesson from Napoleon,
the French from Ho Chi Minh, Europe from Hitler. The world is
learning that lesson again from Ayman al-Zawahiri. What will be the
legacy of abusive prisons in Iraq?

We have failed to properly address the abuse of Iraqi detainees. Men
like me have refused to tell our stories, and our leaders have
refused to own up to the myriad mistakes that have been made. But if
we fail to address this problem, there can be no hope of success in
Iraq. Regardless of how many young Americans we send to war, or how
many militia members we kill, or how many Iraqis we train, or how
much money we spend on reconstruction, we will not escape the damage
we have done to the people of Iraq in our prisons.

I am desperate to get on with my life and erase my memories of my
experiences in Iraq. But those memories and experiences do not
belong to me. They belong to history. If we're doomed to repeat the
history we forget, what will be the consequences of the history we
never knew? The citizens and the leadership of this country have an
obligation to revisit what took place in the interrogation booths of
Iraq, unpleasant as it may be. The story of Abu Ghraib isn't over.
In many ways, we have yet to open the book.

The writer served in the Army from 1995 to 2000 as an Arabic
linguist and worked in Iraq as a contract interrogator in early
2004. His e-mail address is erictfair@comcast.net.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Friday, February 23, 2007

Is Iraq a Training Ground for Attacks in U.S.?

[It is no secret that the 'insurgents' in Iraq are testing various new tactics for killing Americans and others there: shooting down planes and helicopters, new types of destructive bombs, chemical weapons attacks such as that posted at the end of this blog. Bush insists that our war on Iraq is tying up the terrorists there, but suppose Iraq is rather a testing ground for Al Qaeda attacks on us here at home?! They are notoriously patient in planning such things.

Imagine some of the rockets for shooting down planes being transported here in shipping crates -- or they could be stolen from stockpiles here. Such is no unlikely possibility, given our failure to protect our ports and general transport systems.

Try bombs in a busy people location -- say a stadium or such which could be carried in by a worker or suicide bomber dressed as a policeman.

But the worst (other than a nuclear weapon) from which we are not protected at all is an explosion in a chemical plant of tanks of hazardous materials such as was done with a tanker the other day in Iraq (chlorine). We must have hundreds of these chemical plants (and transportation systems for such stuff) scattered through the nation. One of my students who suffered lung damage working on "the pile" -- clearing the World Trade Center site after 9/11 -- explained to us that what made things additionally deadly were the dangerous chemicals that had been kept in tanks in the lower levels of the towers (not just the billion or so in gold that kept the men under scrutiny while cleaning up the mess and prohibited them from leaving the site).

Imagine some of these plants or a tanker being blown on a windy day which would rapidly spread deadly fumes in a populated area. We had such an incident in India a few years back which killed thousands -- Bhopal http://www.bhopal.net/catastrophe.html

Guess what the Bush administration has allocated for protection of these plants -- a measly $15 million which is worth about 90 minutes of our Iraq expenditures.

Needless to say we should be bringing back our troops to protect our homeland while there is still time -- not sending more of our national guard troops over there.

Put the two articles posted below together and you may want to make your vacation/retirement plans for some place else -- Mexico or maybe Canada? Ed Kent]

.................................

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/20/iraq.main/index.html?%3Cbr%20/%3Esection=cnn_topstories&eref=yahoo

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A cloud of deadly toxic gas engulfed an Iraqi town Tuesday, killing six people and leaving dozens of others choking on fumes after a tanker carrying chlorine exploded outside a restaurant.

An Iraqi Interior Ministry official said the blast in the town of Taji, 12 miles (20 km) north of Baghdad, was caused by a bomb on board the tanker.

There were contrasting figures on the casualty toll. Baghdad security plan spokesman Gen. Qassim Atta told state-run al-Iraqiya TV that five people died in the blast and 148 were poisoned by the gas. (Watch how study says Iraq war has increased terrorism Video)
[snip]

..................................

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/22/news/guard.php

National Guard May Undertake Iraq Duty Early

Article Tools Sponsored By
By DAVID S. CLOUD
Published: February 22, 2007

WASHINGTON, Feb. 21 — The Pentagon is planning to send more than 14,000 National Guard troops back to Iraq next year, shortening their time between deployments to meet the demands of President Bush’s buildup, Defense Department officials said Wednesday. [snip]
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Our Walking Wounded

[Jean came by again yesterday and raged on our intercom to the effect that we had deceived her "in 1953 when we first met," that we were really secret powerful Klan operatives based in Louisiana. Having delivered her message she went on her way again -- happily the weather not being as frigid as it has been and will be again.

Jean is a homeless African American woman who has been wondering our city streets since we in fact first met her -- she had been working at the Central Park Ice Cream Cafe where one of our teen daughters had had a brief summer job several decades ago. Jean told us that she was an NYU grad and was at that time deeply upset that a NYC hospital had diagnosed her as being schizophrenic. About that time we also met her mother when Jean brought her by -- a fine and intelligent person obviously deeply worried about Jean's wanderings about the city. Jean also has some siblings who, one gets the sense, do not welcome Jean's occasional appearances and requests for money.

For a time we tried to help Jean. We spoke to a therapist who had treated Jean briefly and then given up. We contacted the Catholic priests' residence in Far Rockaway where Jean would occasionally arrive in the wee hours and demand a ham and cheese sandwich with lettuce and tomatoes "and don't forget the mayo." Later Jean told us that they had had her arrested for disturbing the peace.

Somewhere down the line we gave up on trying to help Jean directly. She wanted to move in with us, but her rages and our lack of space would have made this impossible. After that Jean turned her anger at us and started sending us every magazine subscription for which she could find a free mail in form. Our daily mail routine became to return to sender unwanted bills for same with the notation (taught us by the post office) that this was "mail fraud."

We did seek advice as to how provision might be made for housing Jean in a room in some public facility? We were told by experts that such was unlikely as one had to start that process as a bottom feeder and work one's way up -- but that angry ones were not welcomed into the system.

We are glad that Jean is still alive and moving along. She must be in her late fifties or early sixties now. We did not see her yesterday, but on most occasions she looks healthy -- except one time when she must have been badly beaten up in some encounter.

There was a time when Jean would have been held in one of our state mental hospitals. But those have mainly been closed down now with a promise of their replacement with local facilities which was not kept.

We see any number of homeless on our prosperous streets in Morningside Heights where all the SROs that used to provide some shelter for the homeless have been replaced by co-ops and condominiums. We are now a gentrified world which is largely owned by Columbia University which leases to neighborhood stores and restaurants at rates which have converted them more or less to luxury outlets. Columbia is also moving in on lower West Harlem -- 17+ acres where it hopes to build a money-making biotech center, displacing people living and earning their income there by eminent domain procedures -- and in the surrounding neighborhoods which will also become "gentrified" and affordable only by the well off.

The only local places for our homeless to sleep now are: 1) on the steps of a local Presbyterian church (which, I gather, takes in about 6-8 a night also), 2) our subway stations at the far end away from the entrances, 3) the train tunnel running under Riverside Park (or on occasions in improvised shelters where a tree has been uprooted in a woodsy part of the park). As we live facing the river we can smell the smoke of trash being burned in the rail tunnel on relatively calm nights when it is not being dissipated by the cruel west winds blowing in from the Hudson -- now filled with floating ice.

They tell me that Jean is lucky to be a women. Were she a man, she would by now have been incarcerated in a NY state solitary confinement cell where we house many of our mentally ill 23/7. These jailings, needless to say, finish off the mentally ill and drive them fully into psychotic insanity where they can only rage against the sound proofed walls of their cells. Some commit suicide (See below). They do not often obtain the medications that might have relieved them from their madness -- except in cases where states are eager to execute murderers during a brief interlude of medically induced sanity.

If you meet Jean give her whatever help you can. Usually a few dollars will allow her to get on with her travels. Hopefully she will not end up in one of those hospitals described below which will dump her out when she is least able to cope with our cruel world. Ed Kent]

....................................

'Dumping' of Homeless by Hospitals Stirs Debate
By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
Prosecutors in California are hoping a bill introduced in
the State Senate will give them stronger legal firepower to
charge the hospitals that leave homeless patients on
downtown streets.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/23/us/23dumping.html?th&emc=th


....................................

One Immigrant Family's Hopes Lead to a Jail Cell Suicide
By NINA BERNSTEIN
Questions are being raised about the treatment in jail of a
detained immigrant who hanged himself.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/23/nyregion/23suicide.html?th&emc=th

--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Why I Am ANGRY!

[Each day I read a far wider swath of reports than I pass on. Many of these depict horrors such as the following. Since very early on in my life -- when I read Black Boy by Richard Wright, which we would have received from the Book-of-the-Month Club when I was 12 -- my mother was a great reader -- I have been appalled by discrimination against people.

Our Vermont (summer place roots and both my grandfathers') credo was that one judged individuals for what they were, not as members of groups. I did not have direct experience of the Afro-American community -- except for the discovery of a small ghetto in the center of Hartford, Connecticut where we delivered recycled newspapers as Boy Scouts for the war effort until I became aware of the anti-black discrimination in New Haven during my sophomore year at Yale when I chaired a supervised student study of housing discrimination in 1954. Later I would work with a little gang of kids in West Harlem as an intern -- which started our involvement with life there -- all but 3 now violently dead.

While still at Yale I happened upon the fact of its gross anti-Semitic discrimination against Jewish students (a quota focused on Germanic surnames and against Eastern European ones -- "We don't want too many of those types from Brooklyn and the Bronx," by the scholarship director). I editorialized against it. I also discovered through two of my Jewish philosophy teachers (Paul Weiss and Chet Lieb) that Jewish professors were not wanted at Yale either. See CCNY's Morris R. Cohen's comment in his Autobiography when finally invited to Yale .

Still later at my first teaching job at Vassar we discovered (my wife and I went together and had wide experience with such things) that Vassar was anti-African American students (had 3 out of 1,700 comparable to the 3 or 4 at Yale while I was there in my class of 1,000). Vassar was also anti-Semitic, as I discovered serving on its scholarship committee. Talented Jewish students were labeled over achievers. That year we had a 4-3 margin that voted in such Jewish students. There was one Jewish faculty member. This was in 1965.

Needless to say the Jewish quotas have disappeared. There are still battles over admissions of Afro-American students who are likely to have had poor prior school preparation. I saw a good number of these take a year or two to get on board when open enrollment began at CUNY the same year I started teaching at Brooklyn College in 1970. Now the tragedy there is that Caribbean students have the edge (with their European secondary educations much stronger than what is typical of our NYC schools) and Afro American men are outnumbered by women, 3-2 -- both in college and in access to jobs. Men applying for the same job are all too likely to be seen as threatening, given our deeply embedded cultural images of black violence.

I recall the dissonance when my wife and I first moved into the General Grand housing project on 430 W. 125th St. in West Harlem as part of an effort towards desegregation when we were Columbia grad students. At first our neighbors were nervous with us -- kids would literally flee when the elevator door opened to reveal us white folks -- truant officer or worse? And we were nervous with the adults' glowers. And then the ice broke and we were accepted. My wife was elected as our Democratic County Committee rep -- she was starting a life of service to Harlem that continues to this day.

Enough on me. The struggle for fair treatment of all continues. Needless to say we have added Muslims as targets for abuse in addition to their predecessors -- native Americans, Africans, Latinos (which the Anti-Defamation League claims are the new target of the Klan along with Jews accused of assisting such immigrants).

We in the U.S. have had an on-going struggle to treat people fairly. Group prejudices are still here -- sometimes overt, but too often covert and ready to be reflamed by incidents featured by our 'entertainment' media.

We still have some work to do and in the meantime I am angered whenever I (all too frequently) discover our latest injustices directed against defenseless weaker parties. And this, I fear, includes our blanket attacks on "terrorism" in the Middle East with the devastating death figures there (many of innocents -- 'collateral damage'). If you believe in our American innocence, I have a fine bridge to sell you. The following is a report on same by a Canadian academic. She is angry, too. Ed Kent]

..................................

WHEN IS PRISONER "ABUSE" RACIAL VIOLENCE
by Sherene Razack
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=5594


My stomach contracts and I feel a deep chill in every pore of my Brown skin when I see the
prisoner abuse photos. I know that this is about racism. So why are so many publicly reluctant to say so? Or is it that we can't get our words into print? Only a few people have noted that the photos remind them of prison abuse and police brutality of Black and Brown men in North America, and of American military and covert operations in Latin America, the Caribbean,
Vietnam and elsewhere.

Most of these writers are non-Western with the notable exception of Washington Post staff writer Phillip Kennicott. Not mincing words, Kennicott maintains that "these pictures are pictures of colonial behavior, the demeaning of occupied people, the insult to local tradition, the humiliation of the vanquished." Using the words of Aime Cesaire, Kennicott actually names the abuse "race hatred." The Egyptian writer Ahdaf Souief declares that the abuse reflects
the "deep racism underlying the occupiers' attitudes to Arabs, Muslims and the third world generally." John Pilger calls it "modern imperial racism."

Recalling Vietnam, and the way that the My Lai massacre is remembered only as a rare incident of exceptional violence, Pilger predicts that prisoner abuse in Iraq will come to be seen the same way, as exceptional and unconnected to the national project of dominating racially inferior peoples. Two weeks into the scandal, the exceptional violence argument rules the day and the word racism is not even uttered as a possible contributing factor.

While racism is not being explicitly named, outrage and condemnation are not lacking. Although CNN recently asked its viewers if they had had enough of the pictures, the Western world continues to be rocked by the images of American soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners. When the photos show a young American woman leading an Iraqi man on a leash, and both male and female soldiers grinning for the camera as they display a pyramid of naked Iraqi men forced to simulate sodomy, the conclusion that humiliation and torture of the most terrible kind had taken place is inescapable. Few try to defend the abuse although there is the occasional columnist, such as Andrew Coyne for the National Post, who insists (on the CBC's program
Counterspin) that the abuse is isolated and that 400 photos do not constitute proof otherwise. The National Post notwithstanding, even CNN has begun to use the word "systemic" as more photos and videotapes emerge.

The 'Anyone Can Torture' Arguments

But "systemic" does not mean racist. Systemic doesn't explain the grins of the torturers. The photos are "hard to explain." Struggling to keep the West on high moral ground, journalists spin out articles daily reminding us that anyone can become a torturer under the right circumstances. Racial abuse disappears into the generic. Torture is as "American as apple pie," writes Olivia Ward, but not, as we might think because of American's long racist history but because this is what militaries do. A seemingly endless list of psychologists attest that "under certain circumstances almost anyone has the capacity to commit the atrocities seen in the photos," especially when faced with a terrible enemy.

The bid to turn the grins into something we can live with requires a script of exceptionally bad soldiers or leaders, or, best of all, exceptionally bad (war-like) conditions. In its Special Report "How Did it Come to This? Time magazine's Canadian edition manages to incorporate nearly all of the 'exceptional' arguments into one article.

The reservists had no training for their prison guard jobs, discipline and morale flagged, the prison was under constant mortar raids, the detainees kept flooding in, and so on. The abuse merely represents a legitimate but slightly over-zealous interrogations policy. Prisoners had to be made to talk (war and Arabs are brutal) and what better "psychological tool" than to culturally humiliate them. Buying completely the U.S. army line that sexual humiliation, especially by women is the best way to degrade Arabs, the media, long accustomed to the orientalist line that they are simply not like us, never stops to ask if these practices would be equally degrading to any population on earth, and perhaps especially to White Americans who seldom experience anything of the kind.

The will to deny that a specifically racial encounter is taking place in Iraq is a strong one. Gratefully, everyone mouths the truth offered in the media: war pushes people to become torturers. If it is war, terrible conditions, poorly trained soldiers, an interrogations policy gone awry, and most of all a cunning enemy among whom are many terrorists, then all is forgiven. We understand. Enough said. Just be careful not to cross the line next time.

Pleased with ourselves that at least we didn't go to war in Iraq, many Canadians cannot completely buy the arguments about soldiers pushed to the brink to do terrible things. Uneasily, we recognize the grinning soldiers and the tortured bodies from the Somalia Affair, when Canadian soldiers did the same thing. But we know how to push these doubts away. Having spent the last four years researching and writing a book about the Somalia Affair, the
euphemisms and arguments about exceptional conditions and poorly trained men are deeply familiar to me.

Confronted with our own photos, we made prolific use of the line about "a few bad apples" - both rank and file and military leaders. We said that the heat and the dust, and most of all the hordes of ungrateful rock-throwing Somalis made the men lose their self-restraint. Insisting that the mission was peacemaking and not peacekeeping, we maintained that such things happen in war-like conditions. In the end, we decided that the real violence was that we were duped as a nation, betrayed by a few undisciplined men who unfairly tarnished our stellar reputation as peacekeepers to the world.

Canadians never once asked what soldiers from affluent, white, Western countries thought they were doing in Africa and why some resorted to torture and humiliation to 'help' the natives, while why so many watched and condoned what was going on. The climate and the ungrateful natives told us all we needed to know. What white militaries (and even Brown and Black soldiers are drawn in) think they are doing in the Third World today is the key to understanding Iraqi prisoner abuse. Men and women who think they are conquerors will express race hatred. The very nature of the violence confirms this.

Race Hatred

There are three features to the violence enacted by White militaries in peacekeeping that are also evident at Abu Ghraib. The violence is openly practiced (dozens witness it), recorded on film and in diaries, and sexualized (rape and sodomy, both real and simulated).

In Somalia, as in other peacekeeping encounters, the violence often involved children and youth of both genders. Belgian troops tied young children to trucks and raced at top speed (something that still happens to Black men in the United States). They roasted children over an open fire. Western troops frequently tied up children as young as six or eight and left them to sit in 90 degree weather (to the point where some of these children under Belgian care died.). Italian troops gang raped Somali women and their leaders told them not to worry because bruises don't show on Black bodies. Western troops, including Canadians, hooded detainees, beat
them, applied electricity to their genitals, and urinated on their captives.

The violence of Western troops towards Third World populations is neither exceptional nor hidden. They are not interrogations gone awry although they often happen to prisoners in custody. Trophy photos and videos abound, produced not in order to intimidate and
humiliate the enemy, as the American military claimed this week for the Iraq prisoner abuse, but for the use of individual soldiers themselves, to be tacked up on the fridge door or sent home as souvenirs. The photos tell a story of a civilizing mission. This is what must be done to savages and the soldiers, their leaders and the American president all express this view very well.

Why record the violent acts? When soldiers pose for trophy photos, as German fascists did before the second world war, they preserve for posterity their moment of superiority and, crucially, control. The fascist survives his own fears by beating others to the pulp he threatens to become, writes the German scholar Klaus Theweleit. The violence dissolves the threat of engulfment the fascist feels from the alien race, and from women. The recording of the violence tells the men and women who do it, as nothing else can, that they have survived an encounter with savages. They have remained hard, organized, phallic bodies and male egos (even when female) defending themselves against the flood. It is the body that has to express racial arrangements of domination. Words will not do the trick, so powerful are the fears of people who must constantly avoid being overwhelmed by the racial Other.

Violence of this kind, and the photos and videotapes that accompany it, can be found in every encounter that Western troops have in the Third World, whether in peacekeeping or in war. It is to be found wherever people imagine themselves to be menaced by a mass of savages, as did both Robinson Crusoe in the colonial novel, and the New York policemen who beat and sodomized with a stick Abdel Louima. It's a jungle out there, the father of Louima's torturer policeman Justin Volpp told the media.

We should understand the violence in these photos as colonial violence, the violence that is enacted whenever people feel the need to draw the line between the civilized and the uncivilized. This is W.E. Dubois's famous colour line and race wars are required to keep
it in place. Ordinary people get drawn into marking the colour line. they learn to think of themselves as people who can only feel whole and in control through dominating racially inferior Others. We are more familiar with the man who knows he is a man only when he can degrade and beat a woman. Meet the man or woman whose intimate fears are put to rest only in the moment of beating those imagined to be racially inferior.

Because it is the violence that comes out of a colonial encounter, that is an encounter that the soldiers understand to be one between conquerors and racially, morally and culturally inferior peoples, we should also understand that prisoner abuse in Iraq (and in North America) is violence done in our name. The American soldier who told 60 minutes that he was just doing the job military intelligence required him to do was almost certainly telling the truth. The soldiers and their leaders understand themselves to be performing their patriotic duty, the duty to keep the natives in line. Prison guards who torture understand that someone has to keep the scum in
line. "Tell them in no uncertain terms in language they understand, which is violence," our own Private Kyle Brown said when explaining his participation in the torture and murder of Shidane Arone during peacekeeping duties in Somalia.

The colour line is very much in evidence in the arguments of those who insist that the violence as exceptional and emerging out of the conditions of war. For these people, there is no occupation of Iraq; there is only a benevolent superpower and a people who need help.

Outraged by my argument on the CBC television show Counter Spin that the photos show racism, National Post columnist Andrew Coyne responded with angry incomprehension: "how is it racist to rescue people from the most bestial dictator?" Likewise, for Ruth Wedgewood, a Georgetown University law professor, the American presence in Iraq is nothing other than "the attempt to make it possible for Iraq to survive" and to help the Iraqis "make a decent
transition to democracy." If abuse occurs it must be put down to "young soldiers getting out of hand." Someone has to stop brutal dictators, warring tribes and fundamentalist regimes where a woman cannot even go to school. It's a dirty job but somebody has to do it.

Meet the superpower that knows itself through violence. The white knight whose violence is only a civilizing impulse. White knights believe that the dictators, tribes and fundamentalist regimes have arisen out of thin air and not out of a history in which the West is heavily implicated. You can follow this racial logic in books about their terrible cultures and religions and about a fateful "clash of civilizations" between the West and the Rest, or lately, between the
West and Islam. They form an axis of evil which must be defeated at all costs.

This is simply the way they are and civilized nations have no choice but to stop the dark threat. All imperial powers see themselves as white knights confronting dark threats. And buried deep under this fantasy is the history of the dictators they trained, the oil they took, the aspirin they wouldn't allow to reach the children of Iraq because the United States insisted that aspirin could be used to manufacture weapons of mass destruction. Its all systemic, as the incidents of torture reveal, but it's a system called colonialism and it requires the kind of violence we see in the photos. How else will white knights know who they are?


Sherene Razack is professor of Sociology and Equity studies in Education of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto and is the author of Dark Threats and White Knights: The Somalia Affair, Peacekeeping and the New Imperialism published this month by the University of Toronto Press.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Marwan Barghouti -- Terrorist or Natural Palestinian Leader?

[A number of commentators have suggested that Marwan Barghouti is the natural (pragmatic) Palestinian leader who could make peace negotiations work there -- and question his conviction by Israelis as a terrorist and murderer:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1473585.stm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwan_Barghouti

http://www.freebarghouti.org/english/index.html


Needless to say he is considered to be a prime enemy by ZOA as reported here. Info on Khalil Shikaki:

http://www.pcpsr.org/about/names.html

Ed Kent]

...............................

http://www.zoa.org/2007/02/brandeis_u_crow.htm

Brandeis U. Crown Center Fellow Khalil Shikaki Calls For Release of Palestinian Killer of Jews, Marwan Barghouti

February 20, 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Morton A. Klein, 212-481-1500

Daniel Pipes: Shikaki credibly
linked to terrorism

New York - Brandeis University’s Crown Center for Middle Eastern Studies (CCMES) Fellow Khalil Shikaki has called in a Crown Center publication for the release of convicted Palestinian Arab murderer of Jews, Marwan Barghouti. Barghouti, a leader of the ‘young guard’ of Mahmoud Abbas’ terrorist movement, Fatah, (whose Constitution calls for Israel’s destruction) headed the Tanzim armed group within Fatah at the start of the Palestinian Arab terrorist war against Israel in September 2000 and which carried out a number of suicide bombings in Israel. He was arrested by Israeli forces in Ramallah in April 2002 and subsequently tried and convicted in May 2004 on five counts of murder of Jewish Israeli civilians, resulting from three attacks, one north of Jerusalem, one in Tel Aviv and one in the West Bank. He was also found guilty of one count of attempted murder resulting from a failed suicide car bomb. In June 2004, he was sentenced to five life sentences for the five murders and 40 years imprisonment for the attempted murder.

In a February 2007 Brandeis University’s Crown Center Working Paper entitled, ‘With Hamas in Power: Impact of Palestinian Domestic Developments on Options for the Peace Process,’ Shikaki notes (p. 9) that Barghouti is one of the Fatah ‘young guards’ who supports a Fatah-Hamas Palestinian Authority (PA) coalition government and that, as part of Fatah reorganizing itself within a PA unity government, “Israel needs to release Barghouti as part of a large package of prisoner releases” (p. 12) ( Crown Center Working Paper No. 1, February 2007).

Shikaki is the founder and director of the polling institute, the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. Before he was hired by Shai Feldman, chairman of the Crown Center, and Jehuda Reinharz, president of Brandeis University, there was strong evidence that Shikaki distributed funds within the Palestinian Authority (PA) for people associated with the terrorist group, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). PIJ was founded by his brother, Fathi Shikaki. This evidence emerged from investigations into Sami Al-Arian, a Florida professor accused of operating the American wing of PIJ. Among PIJ’s more infamous acts was an April 1995 bombing in Israel that killed a Brandeis student, Alisa Flatow. PIJ has carried out most suicide bombings in Israel during the 2005 Palestinian “ceasefire”, including the suicide bombing in Netanya in December 2005 that killed 5 Israelis and maimed 49 more.

Shikaki was a founding director with Al-Arian of the Florida-based World & Islam Studies Enterprise (WISE), which was eventually shut down by Federal authorities because of its ties to PIJ. Other directors of WISE include Al-Arian’s brother-in-law Mazen al-Najjar and Ramadan Abdullah Shallah. Shallah became head of Islamic Jihad in the early 1990s. WISE regularly invited radical Islamic speakers such as Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, later convicted in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; exiled Tunisian Rashid-el-Ghanoushi, considered a terrorist by the US, who was refused a visa by the State Department; and Hassan Turabi, who is generally considered the real leader of the terrorist Sudan government. Oliver “Buck” Revell, the FBI’s former top counterterrorist official said that “anybody who brings in Hassan Turabi is supporting terrorists.”

Shikaki has denied any connection to his brother’s terrorist operation and any knowledge of the connections between WISE and the Islamic Committee for Palestine (ICP) -- both alleged by the US government to be front groups for PIJ. He has also denied any knowledge that top figures in WISE, including PIJ’s current leader, Shallah, and an Al-Arian associate affiliated with WISE, Sameeh Hammoudeh, were at all involved in PIJ. Wiretaps of conversations between Shikaki, Shallah, and Hammoudeh introduced as evidence at the Al-Arian trial, however, suggest that Shikaki distributed money for Al-Arian associates within the PA, who raised the funds in America, and then stopped the money transfers in January 1995, shortly after PIJ was declared a blocked terrorist organization by President Clinton ( New York Sun, January 17, 2006).

Experts speak out on Shikaki:


* Mideast expert Prof. Daniel Pipes, Director of the Middle East Forum (Philadelphia): Khalil Shikaki ... has been credibly accused of terrorist links and has a second-to-none record in getting it wrong in his chosen field of Palestinian public opinion?” (Brandeis Justice, February 13, 2007, available at DanielPipes.org).

* Prominent terrorism expert Steve Emerson, Executive Director of the Investigative Project : “The pattern of evidence from the wiretaps introduced at the trial ... and other material clearly show that Shikaki was intimately not just aware of, but participated in the operations of Islamic Jihad until January 1995, contrary to all of his public denials ... He was a pivotal player in the creation of these institutions -- the transfer point between the different parties in the Islamic Jihad, and their transfers of monies” ( New York Sun, January 17, 2006).

* Prof. Martin Kramer, formerly of Tel Aviv University and Wexler-Fromer Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy: “Is it possible that the Shikaki polls were ... Fatah election propaganda? ... the professionalism of his polls is very much in question” ( MartinKramer.org, January 28, 2006).

* Steven Flatow, father of the murdered Brandeis student Alisa Flatow: “What troubles me most [about Shikaki] is the fact that he’s been rehabilitated ... How ironic is it that if he is tainted by Islamic Jihad, that he be teaching at a university where one of the students was killed by Islamic Jihad? … You have to wonder what [the Crown Center at Brandeis] were thinking” (New York Sun, January 17, 2006).


Despite these remarkable revelations and commentary by top scholars, Brandeis University president, Jehuda Reinharz, has resisted investigating Shikaki’s background, dismissed revelations about Shikaki as “unsubstantiated innuendo” and Brandeis has defended him as “among the most serious, responsible, credible, committed, and courageous observers of Middle East politics” ( New York Sun, February 10, 2006). Reinharz also attacked ZOA by resorting to name-calling, referring to the ZOA as “Jewish McCarthyites” simply because we exposed Shikaki’s background.

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, “Despite all that has happened at Brandeis, including its refusal to investigate the background of Khalil Shikaki despite the revelations about his past activities and association with terrorist figures, it is surprising that Shikaki now openly calls in a Brandeis publication for the release of a Palestinian Arab terrorist with Jewish blood on his hands. Barghouti is a convicted terrorist found guilty of involvement in the murder of Israeli civilians. Accordingly, releasing Barghouti would not only negate an act of justice but harm the Israeli and world-wide war on terrorism, sending the message that one can murder innocent civilians and get of jail. But then what ideas should one expect from Shikaki, someone who according to terrorism expert Steven Emerson and the New York Sun has funneled money to the terrorist group, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which was after all founded by his own brother?

“It is clear that Brandeis University is failing to address the widespread concerns about the direction its Crown Center has taken and Shikaki’s recent call for Barghouti’s release simply reinforces ZOA’s outstanding call that donors to Brandeis should reconsider giving money to Brandeis, a university founded under Jewish auspices, funded largely by Jewish donors, and whose Crown Center was originally conceived in part to be a counterweight to the biased and politicized treatment of Israel and the Middle East at so many other North American universities. It simply reinforces Daniel Pipes’ call that donors should reconsider their gifts to Brandeis. Of Brandeis, Pipes said it has incurred ‘a sorry record when it comes to Israel ... [Brandeis professor Natana DeLong-Bas is an] ’ apologist for Al-Qaeda whose depraved thinking was exposed in several recent articles (including ’ Natana DeLong-Bas: American Professor, Wahhabi Apologist’ and ’ Sympathy for the Devil at Brandeis,’ from frontpagemag.com) ... [Brandeis has also permitted] staging that [anti-Israel] ‘Voices of Palestine’ art exhibit, hiring DeLong-Bas and Shikaki, granting an honorary degree to the anti-Zionist playwright Tony Kushner, appointing the muddled Prof. Shai Feldman (POL) to head the Crown Center, permitting an Islamist ( Qumar-ul Huda) to serve as its Muslim chaplain and setting up the http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/2533’ (Brandeis Justice, February 13, 2007, available at DanielPipes.org).”

* * *

The Zionist Organization of America, founded in 1897, is the oldest pro-Israel organization in the United States. The ZOA works to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations, educates the American public and Congress about the dangers that Israel faces, and combats anti-Israel bias in the media and on college campuses. Its past presidents have included Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis and Rabbi Dr. Abba Hillel Silver.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Amrican Fascism?

[Under Bush the fascist tendencies that right wingers have been inserting into American law have flourished -- torture, suspension of habeas corpus, rendering, violations of privacy, willful disregard of the rule of law and Constitution? We have seen increasing abuses of individual rights by our courts since Reagan began tipping them towards an American brand of fascism. Below is a prime instance. Note that Giuliani in response to questions about abortion has intimated that his appointments to the courts would resolve that and other problems!

See Chris Hedges' recently published book, American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, which tells part of this story:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Fascists:_The_Christian_Right_and_the_War_on_America

Ed Kent]

..............................

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/washington/21gitmo.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&adxn

Court Endorses Law’s Curbs on Detainees

By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: February 21, 2007

WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 — A divided federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a new law stripping federal judges of authority to review foreign prisoners’ challenges to their detention at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.


The decision set the stage for a third trip to the Supreme Court for the detainees, who will once again ask the justices to consider a complex issue that tests the balance of power among the White House, Congress and the courts in the murky context of the fight against international terrorism.

It also prompted some senior Democratic lawmakers, who have fought the Bush administration on the matter before and who now hold sway in Congress, to vow enactment of a law more favorable to the prisoners.

The Supreme Court previously ruled twice that federal statutes empowered the courts to consider Guantánamo prisoners’ habeas corpus petitions challenging the grounds for their detention. In response to those rulings, Congress twice rewrote law to limit the detainees’ avenues of appeal. The most recent rewriting was at issue in Tuesday’s 2-to-1 decision.

That law, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, was signed by President Bush last October. Its enactment followed the Supreme Court’s rejection of his administration’s earlier arguments that the right of habeas corpus — the fundamental right, centuries old, to ask a judge for release from unjust imprisonment — did not apply to foreigners being held outside the United States as enemy combatants.

The new law explicitly eliminated the federal courts’ jurisdiction over habeas challenges by such prisoners. It instead set up military panels to review the justification of detention in individual cases, with limited right of appeal to the courts afterward.

In its ruling Tuesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the new law did not violate the constitutional provision that bars the government from suspending habeas corpus except in “cases of rebellion or invasion.” Two of the three appeals court judges, citing Supreme Court and other historical precedent, held that the right of habeas corpus did not extend to foreign citizens detained outside the United States.

The majority decision was written by Judge A. Raymond Randolph, whose two earlier opinions on habeas corpus and Guantánamo prisoners had also favored the Bush administration. Those opinions were reversed by the Supreme Court, but on statutory grounds rather than constitutional ones.

The dissenting judge on Tuesday, Judith W. Rogers, said the new law did violate the constitutional provision restricting the suspension of habeas corpus.

Administration officials welcomed the decision as a vindication of its position on the rights of detainees, after years of its halting efforts to create a legal process that would withstand tests in court.

“The decision,” said Erik Ablin, a Justice Department spokesman, “reaffirms the validity of the framework that Congress established in the Military Commissions Act permitting Guantánamo detainees to challenge their detention through combatant status review tribunals with the opportunity for judicial review before the D.C. Circuit.”

Tony Snow, the White House spokesman, said at his daily news briefing, “The court decided the position that we put forward.” He declined to say more.

Lawyers representing the detainees vowed to seek a new review by the Supreme Court.

Shayana Kadidal, a lawyer at the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents many of the detainees, said, “This decision empowers the president to do whatever he wishes to prisoners without any legal limitation as long as he does it offshore.”

Mr. Kadidal said the ruling encouraged “a contempt for international human rights law” and “such notorious practices as extraordinary rendition”: sending terrorism suspects abroad for interrogation, where, rights advocates say, they may face torture.

Democrats now in control of Congress said they would move quickly on legislation they recently introduced that would unambiguously give federal courts the right to consider detainees’ habeas petitions.

“The Military Commissions Act is a dangerous and misguided law that undercuts our freedoms and assaults our Constitution by removing vital checks and balances designed to prevent government overreaching and lawlessness,” said Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Last week Mr. Leahy joined a group of other Senate Democrats, including Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin and Robert Menendez of New Jersey, in introducing the legislation restoring habeas rights for the Guantánamo prisoners. Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican, also endorsed that measure last week, and said Tuesday that he believed the dissent from the new appeals court decision would ultimately prevail in the Supreme Court.

But other Republican lawmakers, including Senators John Cornyn of Texas and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, both of whom also serve on the committee, applauded the ruling.

The decision, Lakhdar Boumediene v. George W. Bush, involved a consolidation of the cases of 63 detainees, all from foreign countries, who had sought review in two federal district courts. One judge had ruled that she had the authority to consider the cases, while another had ruled that he did not, and granted the administration’s motion to dismiss the inmates’ habeas petitions.

Writing for the appeals court, Judge Randolph first turned to the statutory issue. He said arguments put forward by the detainees’ lawyers that the new law was not meant to apply to the prisoners at Guantánamo Bay “are creative but not cogent.” Congress, he said, clearly meant to keep the federal courts from considering the detainees’ cases.

Turning to the question of whether Congress had acted within the Constitution, he said there had been no earlier cases in which a court had granted a habeas corpus petition for a foreign national held at an overseas military base. The Constitution, he said, “does not confer rights on aliens without property or presence within the United States.”

The opinion was also signed by Judge David B. Sentelle.

In her dissent, Judge Rogers said: “Prior to the enactment of the Military Commissions Act, the Supreme Court acknowledged that the detainees held at Guantánamo had a statutory right to habeas corpus. The M.C.A. purports to withdraw that right but does so in a manner that offends the constitutional constraint on suspension.”
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Chris Hedges on “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America"

[Frankly, this is what worries me about the con artist leaders of these right wing religionists -- the Falwells, etc. However, I think there is probably more common sense at work out there than we might imagine. You can't fool all of the people all of the time and I suspect many are beginning to wake up to the fact that what is wanted primarily is their money to fund these crooks. This game goes back to the revivalists of the 19th century who used to ride from town to town with their hell fire and brim stone threats -- and collection plates to hand around to the suckers. P.T. Barnum did not say that thing, but the point attributed to him holds. Let us hope for better from here on -- repulsion towards Bush and his phony religionists supporters. The 58% who want him out of there NOW must include a good number of evangelicals who have other alternatives than hate religion. Yes, I am old enough to have some dim recollections of the fascist appeals along these lines -- Mussolini ended strung up by a leg like a pig by his fellow Italians. And let us not forget the new Klan movement to expel immigrants with its anti-Semitic dispositions as well:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070214/lf_afp/usimmigrationracism_070214145654


The Klan rose to great heights with the Depression -- in every state in the union with 300,000 women associates with special white uniforms. Then it crashed as rapidly as it arose with scandals revealed.

Ed Kent]

............................

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/19/1545218


Monday, February 19th, 2007
Chris Hedges on “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On
America"

Chris Hedges's new book examines how Christian dominionists are seeking absolute power and a Christian state. According to Hedges, the movement bears a strong resemblance to the young fascist movements in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and '30s. Hedges is the former New York Times Middle East bureau chief and author of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning." [includes rush transcript] A new book by Chris Hedges called “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America” investigates the highly organized and well-funded "dominionist movement." The book investigates their agenda, examines the movement's origins and motivations and uncovers its ideological underpinnings. “American Fascists” argues that dominionism seeks absolute power in a Christian state. According to Hedges, the movement bears a strong resemblance to the young fascist movements in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and '30s.

Chris Hedges was a foreign correspondent for the New York Times for many years where he won a Pulitzer Prize. He is also the author of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning" and "Losing Moses on the Freeway." Chris has a Master's degree in theology from Harvard University and is the son of a Presbyterian minister. He is currently a senior fellow at the Nation Institute - and he is here with me now in the studio.

* Chris Hedges, Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign correspondent for the New York Times who has reported from more than 50 countries over the last 20 years. Chris is currently a senior fellow at the Nation Institute. He is author of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning" and "Losing Moses on the Freeway." Chris has a master's degree in theology from Harvard University and is the son of a Presbyterian minister. His new book is "American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America."

AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to the religious right and the rise of it in this country. A new book by Chris Hedges is called American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. It investigates the highly organized and well-funded dominionist movement. The book looks at their agenda, examines the movement’s origins and motivations and uncovers its ideological underpinnings. American Fascists argues that dominionism seeks absolute power in a Christian state. According to Hedges, the movement bears a strong resemblance to the young fascist movements in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and ’30s.

Chris Hedges was a foreign correspondent for the New York Times for many years, where he won a Pulitzer Prize. He’s also the author of War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning and Losing Moses on the Freeway. Chris Hedges has a Master's degree in theology from Harvard University and is the son of a Presbyterian minister. He is currently a senior fellow at the Nation Institute and joins me in studio now. Welcome to Democracy Now!

CHRIS HEDGES: Thank you.

AMY GOODMAN: It’s good to have you with us. Why did you write this book?

CHRIS HEDGES: Anger. I mean, I grew up in the Church and, of course, as you mentioned, graduated from seminary, and I think these people have completely perverted and distorted and manipulated the Christian message into something that is the very antithesis of certainly what Jesus preached in the Gospels.

AMY GOODMAN: Who are “these people”?

CHRIS HEDGES: These are -- you know, they’re not -- we use terms like “evangelical” and “fundamentalist” to describe them, and I think that those are incorrect terms. Traditional fundamentalists always called on believers to remove themselves from the contaminants of secular society, shun involvement in politics. Evangelical leaders like Billy Graham's always warned followers to keep their distance from political power. He, of course, was burned by Richard Nixon, came to Nixon’s defense and then when it publicly came out that Nixon lied, it taught a lesson to Graham.

This is a new movement, as embodied by people like James Dobson or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell, who call for the creation of a Christian state, who talk about attaining secular power. And they are more properly called dominionists or Christian reconstructionists, although it’s not a widespread term, but they're certainly not traditional fundamentalists and not traditional evangelicals. They fused the language and iconography of the Christian religion with the worst forms of American nationalism and then created this sort of radical mutation, which has built alliances with powerful rightwing interests, including corporate interests, and made tremendous inroads over the last two decades into the corridors of power.

AMY GOODMAN: Why the term “dominionist”?

CHRIS HEDGES: It come out of Genesis, you know, where God gives humankind dominion over creation. It’s articulated by ideologues, such as Rousas Rushdoony, Francis Schaeffer and others, and essentially is a new concept within the radical Christian right, and it’s used sparingly. And some dominionists don’t like the term, but I think it denotes or is probably a better term for denoting those people who want to take political power.

AMY GOODMAN: On the back of your book, Chris, is a quote from your professor at Harvard, Dr. James Luther Adams, who said that in a few decades we would all be fighting “Christian fascists.” Who was he, and why did he think this?

CHRIS HEDGES: James Luther Adams was my ethics professor at Harvard Divinity School. He had spent the years 1935 and 1936 in Germany working with Dietrich Bonhoeffer in the Confessing Church or anti-Nazi church and eventually was picked up by the Gestapo and told to leave the country. He came back -- and this was in the early 1980s, when I was in seminary -- and saw the articulation of this new political religion, this religion that talked about seizing control of mainstream denominations, as well as institutions, creating a parallel media empire through Christian radio and broadcasting, and ultimately taking control of the government itself.

And he understood, in a visceral way, how when countries fall into despair -- of course, this began -- it was the time that began the assault on the American working class, which has been accelerated and essentially left tens of millions of people within our own country dispossessed -- he understood how demagogues use that despair. And I think we can say there, in many ways, has been a kind of Weimarization of the American working class. And he saw what we were doing through globalization, what we were doing to our working class and our middle class, coupled with the rise of these so-called Christian demagogues, as a frightening and toxic combination, which, if left unchecked, would destroy our democracy.

AMY GOODMAN: Why do you begin with Umberto Eco? And explain who he is.

CHRIS HEDGES: Umberto Eco is the great Italian writer -- I mean, he wrote that very popular book, The Name of the Rose, and he had a nice little book of essays called Five Moral Pieces, and in it he writes about the salient qualities of what he calls “Ur-Fascism,” or eternal fascism. And I wanted to list those -- I thought it was probably as good a list as I’d ever seen compiled on what the main tenets of fascism are -- to begin the book, because my argument is that this is not a religious movement. Although it certainly depends on the support of many earnest, well-meaning, decent people who are religious, I would argue that they are manipulated not only, of course, to be fleeced for their own money, but essentially to give up moral choice and surrender to the authoritarian demands of these leaders to march forward and essentially dismantle our democratic state. And I think that when we look closely at what it is that this Christian right movement espouses, it does bear many similarities to, you know, the main pillars of fascist movements: the cult of masculinity, the war against --

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, “the cult of masculinity”?

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, the fact that, you know, they elevate male figures within the megachurches, who cannot be questioned, who speak directly for God. Any kind of questioning or self-criticism becomes essentially battling the forces of Satan. That power structure is to be replicated in the family. Much of this movement is about the disempowerment of women. Children have to be obedient. And so, that power structure of the family with the dominant male and everyone else submissive is replicated in the megachurches, which oftentimes -- and I’ve been in many over the last two years -- revolve around cults of personality.

When we look at the sort of empires that people like Pat Robertson run, you know, this man is worth hundreds of millions, some people say up to $1 billion, surrounded by bodyguards, flying around on private jets, investing in blood diamonds in Sierra Leone. He has rock star status. I mean, if you’ve ever been to an event where he appears, people are weeping and want to be touched by him. There is no question. He essentially runs a despotic little fiefdom.

AMY GOODMAN: Explain the blood diamonds part.

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, he uses the money, which he takes from, really, people who live on the fringes of American society and should not be mailing him their checks, in all sorts of very dirty investments in Africa. And one of them was essentially getting involved in the trade of diamonds essentially for weapons that rend Sierra Leone.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Chris Hedges. He’s a Pulitzer Prize-winning former foreign correspondent for the New York Times, went to seminary and has written a number of books. His latest is called American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. We’ll be back with him in a minute.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Chris Hedges. His latest book called American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. We were just talking about Pat Robertson. I wanted to go back to that famous quote of his. This had to do with foreign policy and the Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

PAT ROBERTSON: You know, I don’t know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don’t think any oil shipments will stop, but this man is a terrific danger. This is in our sphere of influence, so we can’t let this happen. We have the Monroe Doctrine. We have other doctrines that we have announced. And without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil that could hurt us very badly. We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don’t need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It’s a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.

AMY GOODMAN: Pat Robertson. Your response, Chris Hedges?

CHRIS HEDGES: That’s a deeply Christian message, calling for assassination. You know, I covered the war in Central America, and Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell came down to support the murderous rampages of Rios Montt in Guatemala, the military dictatorship that were running death squads that were killing 800 to 1,000 people a month in El Salvador, and, of course, the Contras, whose main contribution in Nicaragua was walking into towns drunk out of their mind, raping the women and killing the men and burning the villages. And they describe these battles as essentially a war against Satan, against Satanic forces, godless communism that had to be defeated. There are no international boundaries in Satan’s kingdom, if you look at it from their ideology. I think that the kinds of the wholehearted support for genocidal killers in Central America, which Pat Robertson was one of the stalwarts, is a tip-off as to, you know, without legal restraints, what they would like to do within our own borders.

And I think that the quote or the clip that you just played is a perfect illustration of how dark the intentions of this movement is and how, if we don’t begin to stand up and fight back, if we believe that these people can be domesticated and brought into the political arena where they will act responsibly, we’re very, very naive. And we should all sit down, and as unpalatable as it is, and listen to Christian -- so-called Christian radio and television to see the kinds of messages of hate and exclusion that they are spewing out over the airwaves.

AMY GOODMAN: The quote of Jerry Falwell right after September 11th that became quite famous: “I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say, ‘You helped this happen.’” He was speaking on September 13, 2001, on Pat Robertson's 700 Club program.

CHRIS HEDGES: That’s right. And, you know, this is -- I mean, essentially, when you follow the logical conclusion of the ideology they preach, there really are only two options for people who do not submit to their authority. And it’s about submission, because these people claim to speak for God and not only understand the will of God, but be able to carry it out. Either you convert, or you’re exterminated. That’s what the obsession with the End Times with the Rapture, which, by the way, is not in the Bible, is about. It is about instilling -- it’s, of course, a fear-based movement, and it’s about saying, ultimately, if you do not give up control to us, you will be physically eradicated by a vengeful God. And that lust for violence, I think that sort of -- you know, the notion, that final aesthetic being violence is very common to totalitarian movements, the belief that massive catastrophic violence can be used as a cleansing agent to purge the world. And that’s, you know, something that this movement bears in common with other despotic and frightening radical movements that we’ve seen over the past -- throughout the past century.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about some of the meetings you attended, from the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation to the Evangelism Explosion that was a seminar taught by Dr. D. James Kennedy?

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, the Evangelism Explosion was a one-week seminar taught by Kennedy, was about certifying people to be able to go out and teach this conversion technique. And what was fascinating about it is how manipulative and dishonest it was. You know, what they do is essentially they cook the testimonies. They promise people that if they commit themselves to Christ, they can get rid of the deepest existential dreads of human existence: the fear of mortality, you know, grief, one of the -- we were supposed to read testimonies. We would turn them into the teachers, and they would send them back. And it was always about, you know, I have 100% certainty that I know that if I die tomorrow, I will go to heaven. Or, I lost my son -- one of the examples was -- in the war in Vietnam, but I don’t grieve, because I know I’m going to meet him in heaven.

And they talked about targeting people who are vulnerable. They used a technique very common to cults. It’s called love-bombing -- it’s a term taken from Margaret Singer -- where you -- three or four people go and you sort of focus intently on the person and are fascinated by everything that they say. You build false friendships. And eventually, of course, the goal is to draw them into these megachurches.

This movement talks about family, but it is the great destroyer of family. And I would stand up in these -- or I would be in these meetings and see people stand up weeping, and they would be weeping for unsaved spouses or children, because once you get sucked into these organizations, your leisure time, your religious worship time, you end up becoming involved in groups, you’re essentially removed from your old community and placed into this authoritarian community, where there is no questioning of those above you. You’re often assigned -- you’re called a baby Christian when you first come, and you’re assigned spiritual guides to teach you to think and act in the appropriate manner.

When I went to the National Religious Broadcasters Association in California, the most interesting thing about it was how these radical dominionists, these people who have built an alliance around the drive to create a Christian state, have taken over virtually all Christian radio and television stations. And there are traditional evangelicals who would like to step back from this political agenda, and they have been very ruthlessly brushed aside.

You saw it in the purging of the Southern Baptist Convention, when essentially dominionists like Richard Land took it over in 1980. There were many ministers who were very conservative and thought abortion was murder, were no friends to sort of gays and lesbians, but they didn’t buy into that political agenda, which of course has been fused with rapacious capitalism.

I mean, this movement talks about acculturating the society with a Christian religion. In fact, it’s the inverse. What they’ve done is acculturate the Christian religion with the worst aspects of American imperialism and American capitalism. And there’s that kind of uneasy alliance with many of these corporate interests. But it serves their turn. I mean, when you’re creating the corporate state, it’s very convenient to have an ideology that says, “Don’t worry. You don’t need health insurance, because if you have enough faith, Jesus will cure you. It doesn’t matter if all of your jobs are outsourced and there are no labor unions, because, you know, God takes care of his own. And not only that, but God will make you materially wealthy.” This is, you know, the gospel of prosperity. So, essentially, what we’ve seen is that fusion between those who want to build a corporate state and this ideological movement that thrusts believers who come out of deep despair into a world of magic and miracles and angels.

AMY GOODMAN: And what are the corporations that are part of this?

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, DeVos, a guy who founded Amway; Target; Sam's Club. You know, they bring in -- a lot of these corporations like Wal-Mart and Sam's Club and others bring in these sort of dominionist or evangelical ministers into the plants as a way to mollify workers. Subscribing to this belief system is essentially about disempowerment.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Chris Hedges. He has written the book, American Fascists. How does this fit into the race for president in 2008?

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, certainly this movement has tremendous reach within the Republican Party, Amy, and I think we could argue it all but controls the Republican Party at this point. We see it with John McCain, who in 2000 called Falwell and Robertson “agents of intolerance” and is now sort of falling all over himself to court this movement.

I think it’s a mistake to think that George Bush somehow embodies the movement. I think there’s a great deal of frustration with Bush, remember, on the issue of immigration, and there is a tension, an uneasy alliance between these corporate interests and this radical movement, and I think, you know, we should also say, as Robert Paxton points out in his book, Anatomy of Fascism, that fascist movements always build alliances with conservative or industrial interests, and oftentimes these alliances are not seamless. But on the issue of immigration, Bush sided with the corporations, who want illegal immigrants for cheap labor. There’s a huge nativist element, a huge hostility towards immigrants within the movement, and that angered the Christian right.

I think they’re going to go searching for another candidate -- maybe Brownback, I don't know -- who they feel -- I mean, it boils down to the fact that they feel Bush was not radical enough. And they’re going to go searching for a candidate that is going to swing further right, further towards the radical agenda that they have at their core. And this clip from Robertson, I think, is a public display of -- you know, unleashed how far they would like to go.

AMY GOODMAN: Chris Hedges, Iran. Let's talk about Iraq, Iran, war, and what you call the American fascists.

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, that’s a really important point, because none of these movements can take power unless there is a period of prolonged instability or a crisis. They can make creeping gains, and they have made tremendous gains, including taking hundreds of millions of dollars of American taxpayer money through the faith-based initiative program. But I think, as weak as our democracy is, we can hold them off, unless we enter a period of instability.

From my reading of the Bush White House, I think there's a very strong possibility that before the end of the Bush administration, they will make a strike against Iran. I think that what they’ve done is -- or what Karl Rove has done is essentially adopt a corruption of Leon Trotsky's notion of a permanent revolution -- only, it’s permanent war. Now, you know, the military-industrial complex, which is making huge profits off the war in Iraq, let's not forget, is essentially driving this administration. I think these people live in an alternate reality. I think they really do believe that they dropping cruise missiles and bunker busters and making conventional air strikes against supposed sites that they’ve targeted in Iran -- 700 to 1000, according to Sy Hersh -- will bring the Iranian regime down. Having spent seven years in the Middle East, a lot of that time in Iran and Iraq, I’m quite certain that they will have no more success in Iran than the Israelis had in Lebanon.

The problem with striking Iran is that it has the potential to create a regional conflict. I mean, we’re already fighting a proxy war with Iran through Hezbollah in Iraq -- there’s no question that the Iraqi Shiites are getting assistance from Iran and always have been -- and to a certain extent with the conflict with Hamas, which probably gets some help from Iran, as well. But a strike against Iran would be, in the eyes of Shiites throughout the Middle East, a strike against Shiism. You have two million Shiites in Saudi Arabia, many of whom work in the oil sector, Bahraini Shia, huge Shia minority in Pakistan, and, of course, most of Iraq is Shia. And I think that that kind of a hit would -- has the potential to unleash a regional conflict.

I think we should remember that Iran does not have the conventional capacity to do anything to the United States, but they could very well strike Israel, especially. Of course, there’s talk of Israeli involvement in some kinds of air strikes. That would provoke a retaliation. Hezbollah would not sit by quietly. I think that in sort of unconventional weapons -- I don’t know what those would be -- I mean, you know, Iran, it’s an unprovoked attack. I mean, under international law, Iran has a right to strike back, and I think that they would. And that could really create a spiral, a kind of death spiral that frightens me deeply. And I think what really frightens me is that no one in the Democratic Party is speaking up, with the exception of Kucinich. Nobody has spoken out against hitting Iran.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you about this latest headline that we read today. You have, what came out in the last few weeks, reporters in Baghdad getting this unusual briefing where there weren’t allowed to name names or even take in their video cameras, being told that Iran was supplying -- what was it? -- highest levels of the Iranian government sending sophisticated roadside bombs to Iraq that have killed 170 coalition troops since 2004. I wanted to ask about Michael Gordon, your former colleague at the New York Times, the person who was so-called breaking the story, who was deeply involved with the weapons of mass destruction myths also in his writings with Judith Miller, and now this latest today, the Iranian government accusing the US and Britain of being involved in an attack last week that killed eleven members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. Start with Michael Gordon.

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, that’s probably the best reason to watch Democracy Now!, rather than read the New York Times, about the war in Iraq. It’s almost -- one’s left sort of speechless. I guess it’s proof that some people never learn anything. I mean, I was on the investigative team and got briefly sort of tarnished with that dirt. I was based in Paris covering al-Qaeda but did get sucked into one of these sort of sham Chalabi stories.

AMY GOODMAN: Which one?

CHRIS HEDGES: It was the one where they supposedly had a defector in Lebanon. It wasn’t my story, but, I mean, it ended up -- you tend on investigative units to work as teams. It was Lowell Bergman’s story, which was broadcast on Frontline, but he could not fly to Beirut to interview the guy, so I did. But, I mean, it was my body. I was there. And --

AMY GOODMAN: Explain who he was, the person you interviewed?

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, he was an impostor. Supposedly, he was a general, and he was talking about training camps that were being run in Iraq for al-Qaeda. I think it’s been pretty well discredited. So I find it -- I mean, I find the tactics -- and we see it, you know, ratcheting up with the rhetoric with Iran. I mean, we see that they're familiar tactics and familiar lies. And it’s just stunning that people as bright as Michael Gordon buy into it. I don’t get it.

AMY GOODMAN: Of course, it’s not just Michael Gordon. He writes the piece, and then the institution of the Times, well, they put it on the front page --

CHRIS HEDGES: Exactly.

AMY GOODMAN: -- and they’re the ones that make it the big exclusive story based on unnamed sources. And it beats this drum for war.

CHRIS HEDGES: Right.

AMY GOODMAN: What will you do if the US attacks Iran?

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, I’m not going to pay my income taxes. I just am in such despair over the consequences of that war and the fact that there just really is no -- seems to be no organized opposition. And I think that I have a kind of moral responsibility as someone who comes out of the Middle East and has, I mean, directly, you know, friends throughout the years that I spent there who would suffer tremendously from that. And I sort of -- it may not change anything, and it may be sort of futile, but I think that at least when it’s over, I’ll have earned the right to ask for their forgiveness.

AMY GOODMAN: Christian Zionist Movement, how does it fit into this?

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, the relationship between this radical movement and the radical right in Israel is one that really brings together Messianic Jews and Messianic Christians who believe that they have been given a divine or a moral right to control one-fifth of the world's population who are Muslim. It’s a really repugnant ideology. The radical Christian right in this country is deeply anti-Semitic. I mean, look at what they -- you know, when the end times come, except for this 144,000 Jews who flee to Petra and are converted -- I think this was a creation of Tim LaHaye -- Jews will be destroyed, along with all other nonbelievers, including people like myself who are nominal Christians, in their eyes. You know, there is no respect for Judaism in and of itself. It’s an abstraction. It’s, you know, Jews have to control Israel, because that is one more step towards Armageddon. And I find that alliance strange and very shortsighted on the part of many rightwing Israelis and rightwing Jews in the United States.

AMY GOODMAN: This latest story, the Anti-Defamation League calling on Georgia State Rep. Ben Bridges to apologize for a memo distributed under his name that says the teaching of evolution should be banned in public schools, because it is a religious deception stemming from an ancient Jewish sect. The memo calls on lawmakers to introduce legislation that would end the teaching of evolution in public schools, because it's “a deception that is causing incalculable harm to every student and every truth-loving citizen.”

CHRIS HEDGES: And there’s a bill now in the Texas state legislature that will abolish all mention of evolution in school textbooks and make Bible study mandatory in public schools. And the role of creationism is extremely important in this movement. It’s not just wacky pseudoscience. It is really a war against truth. It is not about presenting an alternative. It’s about saying facts are interchangeable with opinions, that lies are true, that we can believe whatever we want. And once they successfully elevate creationism, which, of course, is a myth -- I mean, teaching creation out of the Book of Genesis is an absurdity. The writers of the Book of Genesis thought the earth was flat with rivers of above and below us. But what it does is destroy the possibility or sanctity of honest, dispassionate, intellectual and scientific inquiry. And when they do that, they have made a huge step towards creating a totalitarian state.

AMY GOODMAN: Chris Hedges, I want to thank you very much for being with us. Chris Hedges is the Pulitzer Prize-winning former foreign correspondent for the New York Times, currently a senior fellow at the Nation Institute. His latest book is called American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. Thanks for joining us.

CHRIS HEDGES: Thanks, Amy.

To purchase an audio or video copy of this entire program, click here for our new online ordering or call 1 (888) 999-3877.
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollegeConversation
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EndingPoverty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/440neighborhood
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/StudentConcerns
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AcademicFreedom
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PrivacyRights
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net