I take only one issue here, and it is the same as before ... what says the United States military and its spy agencies can do what they like, where they like, when they like and to whom without intervention of other institutions including but not limited to the U.S. Constitution (Congress' role in matters of foreign operations military and civilian), international treaties and organizations (intergovernmental, human rights focused and otherwise), the will of other nations and their peoples and last of all international public opinion?
That said, ... check THIS out!
[Link to open content on nytimes.com/oped/]
Pakistan’s War of Choice
By MICHAEL E. O'HANLON
Op-Ed Contributor
Published: March 23, 2010
Peshawar, Pakistan
WHAT are Americans to make of all the good news coming out of Pakistan in recent weeks?
First, the Afghan Taliban’s military chief, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, was arrested in a raid in February. Around the same time, several of the Taliban’s “shadow governors” who operate out of Pakistan were captured by Pakistani forces. Last week, the C.I.A. director, Leon Panetta, announced that thanks in large part to increased cooperation from Pakistan, drone strikes along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border are “seriously disrupting Al Qaeda,” and one killed the terrorist suspected of planning an attack on an American base in December that caused the deaths of seven Americans. Meanwhile, Pakistan has mounted major operations against its own extremists in places ranging from the Swat Valley in the north of the country to Bajaur on the Afghan border to South Waziristan further south. Yes, extremists continue to do great damage, as at Lahore on March 14 when about 40 civilians were killed in bombings. But after traveling across the country in recent days as a guest of the Pakistani military, I was convinced that Pakistan has become much more committed to battling extremists over the last couple of years, as the country felt its own security directly threatened.
Things are complicated, as always in this fractious land. Pakistan’s resolve is clearest against its own internal enemies. And while its will to pursue the Afghan Taliban has grown, its policies are changing incrementally, not fundamentally. It is rebuilding trust with America only slowly. And its obsession with India will continue to constrain its ability and willingness to act against the groups that threaten the NATO mission across the Afghan border.
First, though, give credit where credit is due. Pakistan has become deadly serious about its own insurgency, loosely referred to as the Tehrik-i-Taliban. Total Pakistani troops in the North-West Frontier Province, Baluchistan and the tribal areas now number about 150,000, up from 50,000 in 2001. In addition, there are 90,000 paramilitary troops of the Frontier Corps in the area, and they are far better equipped, paid and led than in years past.
As I toured the nerve center of the Pakistani military in Rawalpindi, Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, the army’s spokesman, recited an impressive list of statistics. The army now has 821 posts on the Afghan-Pakistan border, as opposed to just 112 manned by NATO and Afghan forces on the other side. Pakistan carried out 209 operations in 2009 of brigade size or larger (that is, involving at least 3,000 troops), twice as many as in the previous two years combined. Convoys bringing supplies for the NATO mission in Afghanistan used to be preyed on frequently by terrorists and thieves; but as a result of the improved security, NATO is now losing only about 0.1 percent of the goods it ships across Pakistan.
Carrying out all these operations has been very costly, though. The Pakistani military says it had some 800 soldiers killed in operations last year, in contrast with NATO’s total losses in Afghanistan of 520. Thousands of Pakistanis have lost their lives in terrorist attacks, and several hundred village elders, critical figures in any efforts to pacify the tribal areas, have been killed as well.
Most Pakistanis feel, with some justification, they have suffered all this as the result of American decisions and interests. Pakistan didn’t experience suicide bombings until the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001. Pakistanis do not begrudge us that act of self-defense, but do expect us to appreciate the sacrifices they have made. And, while Pakistanis acknowledge American economic help, they consider the $17 billion or so that we have provided since 9/11 to equal only about half their total costs, direct and indirect, from the war on terrorism.
Still, Pakistan is hitting the terrorists hard. As a top commander of the Frontier Corps told me from his centuries-old fort here in Peshawar, since 2007 or 2008 he has known that there has been “no turning back.” This means ensuring that militants — or “miscreants,” as Pakistanis like to say — do not return to those areas that have been cleared in recent months.
This won’t be easy. Often, Pakistani military tactics amount to notifying the local population of a pending mission and asking people to leave before the assault. Afterward, the population is allowed to return — but any extremists who had snuck out with the people can then try to sneak back in with them.
Published: March 23, 2010
(Page 2 of 2)
Pakistan also doesn’t want to fight over too much of its territory at any one time. The other day I visited a camp for the displaced near here, with about 100,000 residents. Most fled from recent military operations in Bajaur and Khyber, near the Afghanistan border. Fortunately, the camp’s previous residents, from Swat, were able to go home before the new influx. Conditions at the camp are tough but tolerable, partly because Pakistan has not launched additional operations recently. Islamabad’s deliberateness makes Washington impatient at times, but there is a strategic logic to it.
In the near term, any progress will be fitful. Pakistan seems unwilling to move much more of its army away from the Indian border, meaning a further delay before operations commence in North Waziristan — home to the Haqqani network, a radical group headed by the Taliban commander Maulavi Jalaluddin Haqqani, which is believed to be behind some of the largest attacks in recent years.
I did not meet any Pakistanis who actually seemed to wish to see the Afghan Taliban back in power. But the country simply does not have the military capacity to make major moves against the Afghan fundamentalists. And, less understandably, Pakistanis tend to see Indian conspiracies behind what is happening in Afghanistan, and fear being trapped between their longtime nemesis on one side and an Indian puppet on the other.
At the headquarters of the Pakistani spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate, I was told that India was suspected of providing explosives to Tehrik-i-Taliban extremists through Afghanistan. Many Pakistanis claim that the Afghan government of Hamid Karzai is essentially a reincarnation of the old Northern Alliance from the Afghan civil war — a union largely made up of ethnic Tajiks and Uzbeks and partly financed by India. (This despite the fact that Afghanistan’s ministers of defense and interior are Pashtun, as is President Karzai.)Pakistanis wonder why India is building so many consulates in Afghanistan, and even Indian-subsidized health clinics are considered suspicious.
As he departed for a “strategic dialogue” this week in Washington, Pakistan’s foreign minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, announced that “it’s time for the United States to do more.” This isn’t what America wants to hear from an oft-unreliable ally. But we must bear in mind that the Pakistani government rules one of the most anti-American populations in the world, and even its elites see us as oft-unreliable ourselves. Washington must stay realistic, and patient, about what can be expected of Pakistan.
Michael E. O’Hanlon is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Erratum: CNN Story on Pakistan, Spying and Drone Attacks
In my last post at 6:41 pm Monday, I made a mistake in claiming CNN doesn't cover CIA drone attacks in Pakistani territory.
Reza Sayah writes, "There have been at least 21 U.S. drone strikes this year in Pakistan's tribal region, according to a CNN tally. The most recent, on Sunday night, killed five militants, according to officials. All of the strikes have hit locations in North Waziristan, where the bodies were found, or near the border with South Waziristan. The Taliban have killed dozens of people in the tribal region for allegedly providing information to the United States about militant leaders' whereabouts."
The piece is dated March 21, 2010 3:41 p.m. EDT, 3 hours to the minute ahead of the post containing my claim CNN doesn't write about this topic.
The story focuses on six murder victims in Pakistan.
Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) -- The bullet-riddled bodies of six people were found Sunday in Pakistan's tribal region, four of them near a letter that accused them of spying for the United States, two local government officials told CNN.
Four of the bodies were found in front of a bus stop near the village of Mir Ali in North Waziristan, the officials said. The other two were found just outside the town of Miranshah, also in North Waziristan.
The letter was found near the four bodies. The officials said they did not know the exact wording of the letter, but said it was written in Pashto and warned that this would be the fate of those who spy for the United States.
http://www.cnn.com
My only complaint is that these stories should appear more frequently in mainstream U.S. media outlets. I say this because, as I have stated in these pages, I don't think Pakistan is any place for U.S. military action without the involvement of Congress or some official announcement that the United States is at war in Pakistan, and Pakistan's citizens are made aware their country is a target of U.S. military aggression. Not retaliation, aggression.
Reza Sayah writes, "There have been at least 21 U.S. drone strikes this year in Pakistan's tribal region, according to a CNN tally. The most recent, on Sunday night, killed five militants, according to officials. All of the strikes have hit locations in North Waziristan, where the bodies were found, or near the border with South Waziristan. The Taliban have killed dozens of people in the tribal region for allegedly providing information to the United States about militant leaders' whereabouts."
The piece is dated March 21, 2010 3:41 p.m. EDT, 3 hours to the minute ahead of the post containing my claim CNN doesn't write about this topic.
The story focuses on six murder victims in Pakistan.
Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) -- The bullet-riddled bodies of six people were found Sunday in Pakistan's tribal region, four of them near a letter that accused them of spying for the United States, two local government officials told CNN.
Four of the bodies were found in front of a bus stop near the village of Mir Ali in North Waziristan, the officials said. The other two were found just outside the town of Miranshah, also in North Waziristan.
The letter was found near the four bodies. The officials said they did not know the exact wording of the letter, but said it was written in Pashto and warned that this would be the fate of those who spy for the United States.
http://www.cnn.com
My only complaint is that these stories should appear more frequently in mainstream U.S. media outlets. I say this because, as I have stated in these pages, I don't think Pakistan is any place for U.S. military action without the involvement of Congress or some official announcement that the United States is at war in Pakistan, and Pakistan's citizens are made aware their country is a target of U.S. military aggression. Not retaliation, aggression.
Drone Attack in Pakistan Blamed on Anonymous Dead Victims
The following low-quality report possesses as its only merit that it is reporting on the incident, whereas I didn't see this one on CNN. Notice how there is no issue regarding operations in Pakistan, the Cambodia of current U.S. military ambitions because there is no grounds for the U.S. to be performing military operations there.
Also note the sources are official and unidentified, the targets are referred to as militants without verification of identity.
The stories I have seen on these CIA drone attacks continually refer to the suicide attacks on the CIA forward operating base as though it were sound and cleared for the CIA to seek retribution rather than trying to determine how the Taliban is organized in southern Afghanistan.
This report comes from a media venture formed by non-media companies, DNA--Daily News and Analysis. At least they're reporting the drone attack instead of ignoring it.
Three militants killed in US drone attack
http://www.dnaindia.com
Sunday, March 21, 2010 22:38 IST
Peshawar: At least three suspected militants were killed in a US drone attack in the restive North Waziristan tribal region in northwest Pakistan today, official sources said.
The drone fired two missiles that struck a house in the Datta Khel area, about 50 km west of Miranshah, the main town in North Waziristan Agency, the sources said.
The exact identity of the three persons killed could not immediately be ascertained.
The US has stepped up drone attacks in North Waziristan since a suicide bomber linked to the Pakistani Taliban killed seven CIA operatives at a forward base in neighbouring Khost province in Afghanistan in December last year.
Also note the sources are official and unidentified, the targets are referred to as militants without verification of identity.
The stories I have seen on these CIA drone attacks continually refer to the suicide attacks on the CIA forward operating base as though it were sound and cleared for the CIA to seek retribution rather than trying to determine how the Taliban is organized in southern Afghanistan.
This report comes from a media venture formed by non-media companies, DNA--Daily News and Analysis. At least they're reporting the drone attack instead of ignoring it.
Three militants killed in US drone attack
http://www.dnaindia.com
Sunday, March 21, 2010 22:38 IST
Peshawar: At least three suspected militants were killed in a US drone attack in the restive North Waziristan tribal region in northwest Pakistan today, official sources said.
The drone fired two missiles that struck a house in the Datta Khel area, about 50 km west of Miranshah, the main town in North Waziristan Agency, the sources said.
The exact identity of the three persons killed could not immediately be ascertained.
The US has stepped up drone attacks in North Waziristan since a suicide bomber linked to the Pakistani Taliban killed seven CIA operatives at a forward base in neighbouring Khost province in Afghanistan in December last year.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Follow-up: March 17 Drone Attack in Pakistan
Pakistani officials: Suspected US missile kills 9
This Associated Press story written by Rasool Dawar clearly outlines the problem with this CIA drone program ...
"Pakistan publicly criticizes the U.S. missile attacks, saying they violate its sovereignty and fuel more anti-Americanism among the population, but Islamabad is widely believed to be sharing intelligence with the Americans on at least some of the strikes.
Washington refuses to publicly discuss the program, which uses unmanned drones, but Pakistani intelligence and government officials say privately the attacks have killed several senior al-Qaida and Taliban commanders in recent years."
By RASOOL DAWAR (AP) – 5 days ago
MIR ALI, Pakistan — An apparent U.S. missile attack destroyed a suspected militant compound in a tribal region of northwestern Pakistan on Tuesday, killing at least nine people, intelligence officials said.
It was not immediately clear who was targeted in the strike, in the Datta Khel region of North Waziristan, the two officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media. An unknown number of people were injured.
The area is the home of Hafiz Gul Bahadur, a powerful warlord whose fighters are battling U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan.
The CIA has stepped up missile strikes on militant positions in Pakistan's tribal regions since December, when a suicide bomber killed seven CIA employees in neighboring Afghanistan.
Pakistan publicly criticizes the U.S. missile attacks, saying they violate its sovereignty and fuel more anti-Americanism among the population, but Islamabad is widely believed to be sharing intelligence with the Americans on at least some of the strikes.
Washington refuses to publicly discuss the program, which uses unmanned drones, but Pakistani intelligence and government officials say privately the attacks have killed several senior al-Qaida and Taliban commanders in recent years.
The complete article appears at the following link ...
The Associated Press
A similar story dated March 16 from India claims the count at 11 instead of 9.
http://sify.com/news/
US drone attack kills 11 in Pakistan
2010-03-16 17:40:00
A suspected US drone strike killed at least 11 militants Tuesday in Pakistan's tribal region near the Afghan border, an intelligence official said.
Several more people were injured in the aerial strike in the Datta Khel area of the North Waziristan tribal district, a known hub of Islamic militancy.
An intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity said four missiles were fired from a drone at two insurgent camps in the mountains.
According to the official, some of those killed were 'foreigners', a term that generally refers to Al-Qaeda-linked militants of Arab or Central Asian origin.
The toll and identities of the victims could not be independently verified as the area is out of reach of the media.
US authorities have intensified drone strikes in the North Waziristan district, which is used by insurgents to launch attacks across the border on NATO forces in Afghanistan.
This Associated Press story written by Rasool Dawar clearly outlines the problem with this CIA drone program ...
"Pakistan publicly criticizes the U.S. missile attacks, saying they violate its sovereignty and fuel more anti-Americanism among the population, but Islamabad is widely believed to be sharing intelligence with the Americans on at least some of the strikes.
Washington refuses to publicly discuss the program, which uses unmanned drones, but Pakistani intelligence and government officials say privately the attacks have killed several senior al-Qaida and Taliban commanders in recent years."
By RASOOL DAWAR (AP) – 5 days ago
MIR ALI, Pakistan — An apparent U.S. missile attack destroyed a suspected militant compound in a tribal region of northwestern Pakistan on Tuesday, killing at least nine people, intelligence officials said.
It was not immediately clear who was targeted in the strike, in the Datta Khel region of North Waziristan, the two officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media. An unknown number of people were injured.
The area is the home of Hafiz Gul Bahadur, a powerful warlord whose fighters are battling U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan.
The CIA has stepped up missile strikes on militant positions in Pakistan's tribal regions since December, when a suicide bomber killed seven CIA employees in neighboring Afghanistan.
Pakistan publicly criticizes the U.S. missile attacks, saying they violate its sovereignty and fuel more anti-Americanism among the population, but Islamabad is widely believed to be sharing intelligence with the Americans on at least some of the strikes.
Washington refuses to publicly discuss the program, which uses unmanned drones, but Pakistani intelligence and government officials say privately the attacks have killed several senior al-Qaida and Taliban commanders in recent years.
The complete article appears at the following link ...
The Associated Press
A similar story dated March 16 from India claims the count at 11 instead of 9.
http://sify.com/news/
US drone attack kills 11 in Pakistan
2010-03-16 17:40:00
A suspected US drone strike killed at least 11 militants Tuesday in Pakistan's tribal region near the Afghan border, an intelligence official said.
Several more people were injured in the aerial strike in the Datta Khel area of the North Waziristan tribal district, a known hub of Islamic militancy.
An intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity said four missiles were fired from a drone at two insurgent camps in the mountains.
According to the official, some of those killed were 'foreigners', a term that generally refers to Al-Qaeda-linked militants of Arab or Central Asian origin.
The toll and identities of the victims could not be independently verified as the area is out of reach of the media.
US authorities have intensified drone strikes in the North Waziristan district, which is used by insurgents to launch attacks across the border on NATO forces in Afghanistan.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Understanding Palestinian-Israeli Relations at the Root
Writing for Salon.com, Juan Cole had an excellent article about the history of Israeli and Palestinian territories, containing a broader context in the Middle East. His explanation shows how the League of Nations, today the United Nations, instituted in San Francisco in 1943 to deal with issues facing a post-WWII world, was approaching Palestine and the problem of refugees from concentration camps (and other Jewish survivors of WWII) from a 19th Century historical perspective. British colonialism, French colonialism and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire all played a role.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/03/16-6
Published on Tuesday, March 16, 2010 by Salon.com
The Unmaking of the Palestinian Nation
by Juan Cole
That is, the purpose of the later British Mandate of Palestine, of the French Mandate of Syria, of the British Mandate of Iraq, was to 'render administrative advice and assistance" to these peoples in preparation for their becoming independent states, an achievement that they were recognized as not far from attaining. The Covenant was written before the actual Mandates were established, but Palestine was a Class A Mandate and so the language of the Covenant was applicable to it. The territory that formed the British Mandate of Iraq was the same territory that became independent Iraq, and the same could have been expected of the British Mandate of Palestine. (Even class B Mandates like Togo have become nation-states, but the poor Palestini
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/03/16-6
Published on Tuesday, March 16, 2010 by Salon.com
The Unmaking of the Palestinian Nation
by Juan Cole
That is, the purpose of the later British Mandate of Palestine, of the French Mandate of Syria, of the British Mandate of Iraq, was to 'render administrative advice and assistance" to these peoples in preparation for their becoming independent states, an achievement that they were recognized as not far from attaining. The Covenant was written before the actual Mandates were established, but Palestine was a Class A Mandate and so the language of the Covenant was applicable to it. The territory that formed the British Mandate of Iraq was the same territory that became independent Iraq, and the same could have been expected of the British Mandate of Palestine. (Even class B Mandates like Togo have become nation-states, but the poor Palestini
9 Killed in U.S. Drone Attack; ACLU Files Drone Attack Law Suit
From Democracy Now headlines Wednesday, March 17
democracynow.org
9 Killed in U.S. Drone Attacks in Pakistan
In Pakistan, at least nine people have been killed in two apparent U.S. drone strikes. The attacks struck a suspected militant compound and two vehicles in North Waziristan.
ACLU Sues U.S. for Disclosures on Drone Attacks
This comes as the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit demanding the U.S. government disclose the legal basis for its drone attacks overseas. The lawsuit seeks details under the Freedom of Information Act on the circumstances under which drone attacks are authorized as well as the number and rate of civilian casualties. The ACLU first filed its request in January but says the government simply refused to respond. Jonathan Manes of the ACLU’s National Security Project said: “The public has a right to know whether the targeted killings being carried out in its name are consistent with international law and with the country’s interests and values.”
democracynow.org
9 Killed in U.S. Drone Attacks in Pakistan
In Pakistan, at least nine people have been killed in two apparent U.S. drone strikes. The attacks struck a suspected militant compound and two vehicles in North Waziristan.
ACLU Sues U.S. for Disclosures on Drone Attacks
This comes as the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit demanding the U.S. government disclose the legal basis for its drone attacks overseas. The lawsuit seeks details under the Freedom of Information Act on the circumstances under which drone attacks are authorized as well as the number and rate of civilian casualties. The ACLU first filed its request in January but says the government simply refused to respond. Jonathan Manes of the ACLU’s National Security Project said: “The public has a right to know whether the targeted killings being carried out in its name are consistent with international law and with the country’s interests and values.”
Monday, March 15, 2010
Noam Chomsky as Relevant as Ever
Longtime public speaker on subjects of international relations, world history, political science and linguistics--particularly the specific use of language intended to achieve political ends, that is to say propaganda, Noam Chomsky is still as on point today as when he first took on power relations in the political realm in the early 1960s.
Among other news sources, Democracy Now captured Chomsky's public address in Cambridge, Mass. in mid-March.
"In a wide-ranging public conversation at the Harvard Memorial Church in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Chomsky talks about President Obama’s foreign and national security policies, the lessons of Vietnam, and his own activism. 'You just can’t become involved part-time in these things,' Chomsky says. 'It’s either serious and you’re seriously involved, or you go to a demonstration and go home and forget about it and go back to work, and nothing happens. Things only happen by really dedicated, diligent work.'"
This challenge comes across to each of us individually. For me this scrutiny cuts to the core of my view of the struggle. My largest grievance with the existing system is an old one--I am called upon to spend half of my waking hours working towards and commuting to and from a project the ultimate ends with which I disagree. Those ends include driving profit to the consolidation of wealth, enabling a way of life that is largely exclusive to myself and anyone else whose work contributes to it. Wealth issues the orders in this society, spreading under the rubric of globalization since the early 1970s. Those who labor are contributing to wealth inequality, sacrificing the quality of their own lives to that of the holders of great fortunes. These fortunes would not be possible, would not be able to exist without mass consent specifically from those who produce the goods, those who build the infrastructure, sail the ships and deliver the cargo, providing profit the spoils of which are redirected upward as reward to those making the decisions--democracy window dressing or not. Chomsky continues to keep this impetus for the shape of captialist economics and politics in accurate perspective.
What Chomsky tells us in his speech about Iran fits appropriately into a larger picture of a long evident desire of the world's wealthy for the United States to control the Middle East. He continues, answering questions from Amy Goodman to describe what he sees in the 1960s that has much more of a foothold in global policy today and comes not from the center of power but from below, from the citizenry.
This is classic Chomsky, on point as he has been stridently for half a century.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/15/noam_chomsky_on_obamas_foreign_policy
VIDEO: interview with Chomsky occurs in second half of the day's episode.
ALSO: http://www.commondreams.org/video/2010/03/15
Among other news sources, Democracy Now captured Chomsky's public address in Cambridge, Mass. in mid-March.
"In a wide-ranging public conversation at the Harvard Memorial Church in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Chomsky talks about President Obama’s foreign and national security policies, the lessons of Vietnam, and his own activism. 'You just can’t become involved part-time in these things,' Chomsky says. 'It’s either serious and you’re seriously involved, or you go to a demonstration and go home and forget about it and go back to work, and nothing happens. Things only happen by really dedicated, diligent work.'"
This challenge comes across to each of us individually. For me this scrutiny cuts to the core of my view of the struggle. My largest grievance with the existing system is an old one--I am called upon to spend half of my waking hours working towards and commuting to and from a project the ultimate ends with which I disagree. Those ends include driving profit to the consolidation of wealth, enabling a way of life that is largely exclusive to myself and anyone else whose work contributes to it. Wealth issues the orders in this society, spreading under the rubric of globalization since the early 1970s. Those who labor are contributing to wealth inequality, sacrificing the quality of their own lives to that of the holders of great fortunes. These fortunes would not be possible, would not be able to exist without mass consent specifically from those who produce the goods, those who build the infrastructure, sail the ships and deliver the cargo, providing profit the spoils of which are redirected upward as reward to those making the decisions--democracy window dressing or not. Chomsky continues to keep this impetus for the shape of captialist economics and politics in accurate perspective.
What Chomsky tells us in his speech about Iran fits appropriately into a larger picture of a long evident desire of the world's wealthy for the United States to control the Middle East. He continues, answering questions from Amy Goodman to describe what he sees in the 1960s that has much more of a foothold in global policy today and comes not from the center of power but from below, from the citizenry.
This is classic Chomsky, on point as he has been stridently for half a century.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/15/noam_chomsky_on_obamas_foreign_policy
VIDEO: interview with Chomsky occurs in second half of the day's episode.
ALSO: http://www.commondreams.org/video/2010/03/15
Thursday, March 11, 2010
The Wealth Gap v. a Victory Against Overdraft Fees
My preoccupation with the following matters is ... as follows. What kind of world are we living in where money gets taken from us in a sort of ordinary day-to-day occurrence (I was charged $30 for each $1.20 use of my debit card over the three days I was out of money before I got paid? It must be my fault, not a product of insane greed), and then on the flip side of that day-to-day world, the number of people who've got it made in the shade increases by double digits amid double-digit unemployment?
One of my classic very long sentences, but let me offer you this. Steven Wright, way back in the mid-'80s quipped, "How come it's a penny for your thoughts, but you've got to get your two cents in? Somebody's makin' a penny." We must think more like Steven in this world of perpetual yet opportune collapse ... and act more like that guy in that old movie who shouts, "I'M MAD AS HELL! AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!!" I think Thomas Paine would've said, "Hey ... sometimes ... we need that Mad-As-Hell guy."
March 10, 2010 Democracy Now
Study: Number of US Millionaires Increased 16% in 2009
A new study says the number of millionaires in the United States grew by 16 percent last year. The jump in wealthy households coincided with a rising unemployment rate and stagnant wages for most American workers. The research firm Spectrem Group says that if income inequality continues apace, the divide between rich and poor in the United States “will resemble that of Mexico by year 2043.”
Spectrem Group study
Okay, just an observation about the status quo and reasoning: merging information must simply be stated as supporting testimony to the ongoing success of the existing system in order to prevent that merging information to be taken as testimony to the ongoing failure of the existing system. This is not John Maynard Keynes here, this is Alec Guiness demonstrating the Jedi mind trick. Actually, it goes further. It's a technique of indoctrination. What's good for the economy is good for you (so long as we don't attempt to define the word economy together, what it means for people with jobs and money and what it means for everyone else). To properly redirect this indoctrination onto the path of critique and inquiry, if you see the documentary The Corporation by Joel Bakan, an economist is quoted as saying, "The rising tide lifts all boats. If you don't have a boat, you're fucked."
Bank of America to End Overdraft Fees on Debit Purchases
The banking giant Bank of America has announced it will end overdraft charges on debit card purchases. Customers with insufficient funds will now have their purchases declined instead of being hit with large fees. The decision comes amidst a federal push to regulate overdraft fees. The Federal Reserve has proposed to bar banks from charging overdraft fees without consumer consent. Banks collected at least $32 billion dollars in overdraft fees last year.
One of my classic very long sentences, but let me offer you this. Steven Wright, way back in the mid-'80s quipped, "How come it's a penny for your thoughts, but you've got to get your two cents in? Somebody's makin' a penny." We must think more like Steven in this world of perpetual yet opportune collapse ... and act more like that guy in that old movie who shouts, "I'M MAD AS HELL! AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!!" I think Thomas Paine would've said, "Hey ... sometimes ... we need that Mad-As-Hell guy."
March 10, 2010 Democracy Now
Study: Number of US Millionaires Increased 16% in 2009
A new study says the number of millionaires in the United States grew by 16 percent last year. The jump in wealthy households coincided with a rising unemployment rate and stagnant wages for most American workers. The research firm Spectrem Group says that if income inequality continues apace, the divide between rich and poor in the United States “will resemble that of Mexico by year 2043.”
Spectrem Group study
Okay, just an observation about the status quo and reasoning: merging information must simply be stated as supporting testimony to the ongoing success of the existing system in order to prevent that merging information to be taken as testimony to the ongoing failure of the existing system. This is not John Maynard Keynes here, this is Alec Guiness demonstrating the Jedi mind trick. Actually, it goes further. It's a technique of indoctrination. What's good for the economy is good for you (so long as we don't attempt to define the word economy together, what it means for people with jobs and money and what it means for everyone else). To properly redirect this indoctrination onto the path of critique and inquiry, if you see the documentary The Corporation by Joel Bakan, an economist is quoted as saying, "The rising tide lifts all boats. If you don't have a boat, you're fucked."
Bank of America to End Overdraft Fees on Debit Purchases
The banking giant Bank of America has announced it will end overdraft charges on debit card purchases. Customers with insufficient funds will now have their purchases declined instead of being hit with large fees. The decision comes amidst a federal push to regulate overdraft fees. The Federal Reserve has proposed to bar banks from charging overdraft fees without consumer consent. Banks collected at least $32 billion dollars in overdraft fees last year.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Congress Marks Time Waiting for Part II of the Meltdown
Danny Schechter writes for the Disinformation site (disinfo.com) the gap between convincing evidence a second economic meltdown looms on the horizon and Congress is unwilling to take action to prevent it is rapidly yawning.
http://www.disinfo.com/2010/03/what-are-they-waiting-for-whither-financial-reforms-fears-of-a-second-crash-are-real-but-congress-lacks-%e2%80%9cappetite%e2%80%9d-for-action/
In his March 6 piece Schechter details some of the court cases and awards that have resulted from corporate negligence that helped provide the crash from which we're still currently reeling ...
All too quietly, Wall Street firms are being sued for their many transgressions. A study by Gary Null found that over $430 billion has been paid to victimized parties by Wall Street firms in over 1500 cases.
Some examples:
Bank of America has spent $14.9 billion to settle 15 cases alleging various charges such as securities violations and mismanagement;
Citigroup has spent over $13.9 billion to settle 12 cases alleging various charges including abusive lending practices and involvement in fraudulent activities;
Merrill Lynch has spent $12.2 billion to settle cases involving various allegations including negligence and mismanagement of funds;
Morgan Stanley has spent over $5 billion to settle 11 cases involving various allegations including failure to disclose material information to customers;
Wachovia has spent over $9.5 billion to resolve allegations including misleading investors and conflicts of interest;
UBS has spent $19.5 billion to settle 6 cases with various charges including misleading investors.
http://www.disinfo.com/2010/03/what-are-they-waiting-for-whither-financial-reforms-fears-of-a-second-crash-are-real-but-congress-lacks-%e2%80%9cappetite%e2%80%9d-for-action/
In his March 6 piece Schechter details some of the court cases and awards that have resulted from corporate negligence that helped provide the crash from which we're still currently reeling ...
All too quietly, Wall Street firms are being sued for their many transgressions. A study by Gary Null found that over $430 billion has been paid to victimized parties by Wall Street firms in over 1500 cases.
Some examples:
Bank of America has spent $14.9 billion to settle 15 cases alleging various charges such as securities violations and mismanagement;
Citigroup has spent over $13.9 billion to settle 12 cases alleging various charges including abusive lending practices and involvement in fraudulent activities;
Merrill Lynch has spent $12.2 billion to settle cases involving various allegations including negligence and mismanagement of funds;
Morgan Stanley has spent over $5 billion to settle 11 cases involving various allegations including failure to disclose material information to customers;
Wachovia has spent over $9.5 billion to resolve allegations including misleading investors and conflicts of interest;
UBS has spent $19.5 billion to settle 6 cases with various charges including misleading investors.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Why the National Deficit, Why Now?
Ellen Brown writes for Truthout.org March 3 new austerity measures for working and out-of-work Americans are not as directly related to the outside influence of foreign investment as one might think.
http://www.truthout.org/deficit-fear-mongering57346
"What the president seems to have missed is that all of our money except coins now comes into the world as "red ink," or debt. It is all created on the books of private banks and lent into the economy. If there is no debt, there is no money; and private debt has collapsed. This year to date, US lending has been contracting at the fastest rate in recorded history. A credit freeze has struck globally; and when credit shrinks, the money supply shrinks with it. That means there is insufficient money to buy goods, so workers get laid off and factories get shut down, perpetuating a vicious spiral of economic collapse and depression. To reverse that cycle, credit needs to be restored; and when the banks can't do it, the government needs to step in and start "monetizing" debt itself, or turning debt into dollars."
http://www.truthout.org/deficit-fear-mongering57346
"What the president seems to have missed is that all of our money except coins now comes into the world as "red ink," or debt. It is all created on the books of private banks and lent into the economy. If there is no debt, there is no money; and private debt has collapsed. This year to date, US lending has been contracting at the fastest rate in recorded history. A credit freeze has struck globally; and when credit shrinks, the money supply shrinks with it. That means there is insufficient money to buy goods, so workers get laid off and factories get shut down, perpetuating a vicious spiral of economic collapse and depression. To reverse that cycle, credit needs to be restored; and when the banks can't do it, the government needs to step in and start "monetizing" debt itself, or turning debt into dollars."
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Back to the War at Home: Stop the Next Collapse Now
ABC News' Matthew Jaffe writes March 3 the Roosevelt Institute has released a report indicating the U.S. economy may be headed in the direction of systemic crisis yet again due to failure to make specific revisions in policy affecting banks and risk.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/03/03-0
"Risk-taking at banks," the report cautions, "will soon be larger than ever." Without more stringent reforms, "another crisis -- a bigger crisis that weakens both our financial sector and our larger economy -- is more than predictable, it is inevitable," Johnson says in the report, commissioned by the nonpartisan Roosevelt Institute.>> When one takes into account how well the argument has fared in the health care debates how attentive regulation of powerful entities by properly funded government staff translates to "big government" invading the lives of ordinary people, some explanation becomes apparent of how challenging it is to convince Republican legislators to cooperate on a regulatory bill that might change their banking friends' freedom to operate the central economy like a car in a Formula One race. When we asked you nicely in an underregulated, free market environment not to overheat the engine and to avoid collision above 140 mph, we said, "Please?" This aversion of corporations to minimizing risk--in fact the obsession with increasing risk on investments and ultimately place culpability for poor choices into the hands of taxpayers (whose elected representatives then exclaim, "BALANCE THE BUDGET--THE DEBT IS GETTING RIDICULOUS" ... tell that to the gamblers on Wall Street three years ago, please)--is driven by the fundamental concern of corporations in form and function: to create jobs? Well, in a way--to create executive-level compensation packages that are attractive to prospective execs and competitive with other bloated, top-heavy corporations across all industries and around the globe. If you're going to think of corporate investments, you have to think in terms of corporate priorities (don't forget in the end to reconcile those priorities with your own Main Street concerns: jobs, public infrastructure including transportation, social programs for anyone you know who relies on them to live, affordable health care, capital investment for development of industry where there is too little or none [small business loans]). Take for example in Michael Moore's last film, "Captialism: a Love Story" his interview with a woman whose deceased husband's employer took out "peasant insurance" on his life. When he died, the company received millions. His wife was mistakenly informed by letter of the insurance award. If you search web sites and read a few articles about peasant insurance you find the motivation for what seems to be a regulatory loop hole and some bad logic that hasn't been tended to by regulators, is driven forth by one motivation: the need to offer executive compensation. Executive bonuses is one of the highest expenditures of large corporations. Meanwhile many are watching television shows devoted to the fantasy of one day being wealthy enough to never work again and make some eccentric purchases in shopping centers while followed by strangers with video cameras, it may just be coming at a cost to working people (not to even begin to mention the formerly employed) to store all this extra wealth at the top of the economy. Executive compensation seems like a distant concern to most of us. But when the president and his allies in Congress are talking about job creation and the press seems to only acknowledge "jobless recovery," the capital that makes executive salaries and bonuses attractive is the same captial that would be used to create those jobs that bring the stability back to the economy that seems to be what all of us are yearning for but few of us know exactly how to attain.
Monday, February 22, 2010
At Least 27 More Afghan Civilians Dead in Special Ops Airstrike
The Wall Street Journal reported Monday, Feb. 22 that a U.S. Special Operations airstrike destroyed a group of minibuses, claiming the lives of at least 27 civilians near the Pakistani border between Uruzgan and Daykundi provinces.
Matthew Rosenberg's article appears here:
wsj.com
Business Week's Eltaf Najafizada and Mark Williams reported up to 33 were killed in the strike.
businessweek.com
The language used to describe dead civilians continues to be twisted into depictions of a situation in which ordinary people, not unlike the intended readers of the articles, parents and children unarmed and fending for their lives in their own land now being occupied, are being described as an inconvenience for the U.S. Military public relations effort in Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East.
In the WSJ article, Rosenberg writes, "The area is hundreds of miles from Marjah, where the largest allied offensive since 2001 is now in its second week. But the airstrike nonetheless illustrated one of the major problems for coalition forces as they try to win over civilians in Marjah and across Afghanistan: figuring out who is a civilian and who is an insurgent—and not killing the civilians."
Is the WSJ not defending U.S. Special Operations, implying that they are doing their best whoever and wherever they are regardless of how they are conducting top secret, classified actions that result in murder of noncombatants?
Matthew Rosenberg's article appears here:
wsj.com
Business Week's Eltaf Najafizada and Mark Williams reported up to 33 were killed in the strike.
businessweek.com
The language used to describe dead civilians continues to be twisted into depictions of a situation in which ordinary people, not unlike the intended readers of the articles, parents and children unarmed and fending for their lives in their own land now being occupied, are being described as an inconvenience for the U.S. Military public relations effort in Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East.
In the WSJ article, Rosenberg writes, "The area is hundreds of miles from Marjah, where the largest allied offensive since 2001 is now in its second week. But the airstrike nonetheless illustrated one of the major problems for coalition forces as they try to win over civilians in Marjah and across Afghanistan: figuring out who is a civilian and who is an insurgent—and not killing the civilians."
Is the WSJ not defending U.S. Special Operations, implying that they are doing their best whoever and wherever they are regardless of how they are conducting top secret, classified actions that result in murder of noncombatants?
Rosenberg reports, "'Nobody has an idea what were they doing there because they don't share anything with the Afghans,' said an official at the presidential palace. He added that U.S. Special Operations Forces 'arrest people and they raid houses without keeping the Afghans in the loop.'"
And a gem from General Stanley McChrystal sheds light on just how modern modern warfare can be in the United States' broader conquest in the Middle East: "'I have made it clear to our forces that we are here to protect the Afghan people, and inadvertently killing or injuring civilians undermines their trust and confidence in our mission. We will re-double our efforts to regain that trust,' Gen. McChrystal was quoted as saying by the NATO statement."
Would it be any different to have said, "I have made it clear to our forces that killing the Afghan people is not the same as protecting them?" McChrystal's statements do nothing to raise the issue that U.S. Special Forces are accountable in the light of day to no one and that their clandestine actions do not produce results that in any way attempt to complete the logic of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, namely apprehension of the members of Al Qaeda in response to the 9/11 attacks.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Pakistan and U.S. Angering Populace in At Least One of Those Countries
Thank you Radioactivegavin (see link at right) for the heads up to GRITtv with Laura Flanders and a Monday, Feb. 8 piece,
Flanders writes, "Among the Pakistani public, surveys constantly show that Pakistanis consider the US a greater threat than the Taliban, despite 3,021 Pakistani deaths in terrorist attacks last year. If the drones are controversial, the presence of US soldiers on Pakistani soil is far more so. If the US war is quietly shifting, it’s not quiet inside Pakistan. People are kicking up a stink."
The NY Times article appears at the following: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/world/asia/04pstan.html
Lifting the Veil on US Troops in Pakistan
Flanders alerts us to a Feb. 3 New York Times piece on the inadvertent exposure in U.S. media of operations inside Pakistan resulting from the loss of three U.S. soldiers in a late January suicide bombing in the region of Lower Dir.Flanders writes, "Among the Pakistani public, surveys constantly show that Pakistanis consider the US a greater threat than the Taliban, despite 3,021 Pakistani deaths in terrorist attacks last year. If the drones are controversial, the presence of US soldiers on Pakistani soil is far more so. If the US war is quietly shifting, it’s not quiet inside Pakistan. People are kicking up a stink."
The NY Times article appears at the following: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/world/asia/04pstan.html
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
CIA Drones & Defense Secretary Robert Gates' Visit to Pakistan
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates flew to Pakistan in late January to discuss CIA drone attacks (mentioned here extensively in other entries) and furnishing unarmed drones to Pakistan's military for the purpose of additional surveillance.
http://pakistan.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2010/01/22/still-trying-to-reconcile-cia-drones/
A reiteration: what's going on, exactly? What is the change in language from "War on Terror" and "War in Afghanistan" to "AfPak" and "AfPak War" supposed to mean? A sudden glitch in CNN word choice that's not supposed to raise any suspicion or questions about a grossly overfinanced, murderous and poorly timed, poorly focused and seemingly unending act of aggression in Pakistan, a part of the world that is not part of the deal in the war launched in Afghanistan at the end of 2001 might potentially raise questions of at least legality.
Apparently in the age of globalization and asymmetrical warfare, "Wherever Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters may or may not be" is a metageographical location and the postmodern interpretation of international and U.S. law of the moment follows the actions of military operatives who were once under mandate of the state system before the borders became porous.
The article on the Foreign Policy Blog Network's Pakistan site is written by Zainab Jeewanjee, who comments in a chilling tone, "It’s been a polarizing issue from the onset because while it’s convenient to fly unmanned CIA predator aircraft over potential terrorist havens, they result in significant civilian casualties, and displaced persons. So it’s no surprise that over a year later, reconciling their use in Pakistan is still on the agenda." Try reading this passage again, replacing the word "convenient" to whatever you imagine and switch out "civilian casualties" for something similar but sounding more like "innocent Americans." Why are we talking about civilians like this in any country? Shouldn't we be talking about due process or even war crimes tribunals?
http://pakistan.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2010/01/22/still-trying-to-reconcile-cia-drones/
A reiteration: what's going on, exactly? What is the change in language from "War on Terror" and "War in Afghanistan" to "AfPak" and "AfPak War" supposed to mean? A sudden glitch in CNN word choice that's not supposed to raise any suspicion or questions about a grossly overfinanced, murderous and poorly timed, poorly focused and seemingly unending act of aggression in Pakistan, a part of the world that is not part of the deal in the war launched in Afghanistan at the end of 2001 might potentially raise questions of at least legality.
Apparently in the age of globalization and asymmetrical warfare, "Wherever Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters may or may not be" is a metageographical location and the postmodern interpretation of international and U.S. law of the moment follows the actions of military operatives who were once under mandate of the state system before the borders became porous.
The article on the Foreign Policy Blog Network's Pakistan site is written by Zainab Jeewanjee, who comments in a chilling tone, "It’s been a polarizing issue from the onset because while it’s convenient to fly unmanned CIA predator aircraft over potential terrorist havens, they result in significant civilian casualties, and displaced persons. So it’s no surprise that over a year later, reconciling their use in Pakistan is still on the agenda." Try reading this passage again, replacing the word "convenient" to whatever you imagine and switch out "civilian casualties" for something similar but sounding more like "innocent Americans." Why are we talking about civilians like this in any country? Shouldn't we be talking about due process or even war crimes tribunals?
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
U.S. Secret Afghan Prisons and Accompanying JSOC Night Raids
From Democracynow.org Feb. 2, 2010
A new investigation by journalist Anand Gopal reveals harrowing details about US secret prisons in Afghanistan, under both the Bush and Obama administrations. Gopal interviewed Afghans who were detained and abused at several disclosed and undisclosed sites at US and Afghan military bases across the country. He also reveals the existence of another secret prison on Bagram Air Base that even the Red Cross does not have access to. It is dubbed the Black Jail and is reportedly run by US Special Forces.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/2/americas_secret_afghan_prisons_investigation_unearths
**Similar to night raids in Iraqi homes, Anand Gopal's descriptions of these U.S. military Joint Special Ops Command (JSOC) raids sound similar to terror tactics employed in Central America which appear in the transcripts of the Iran-Contra hearings. The psychological operations (psyops) techniques described in this report violate U.S. Military Counterinsurgency Manual descriptions of limitations and legal techniques.**
A new investigation by journalist Anand Gopal reveals harrowing details about US secret prisons in Afghanistan, under both the Bush and Obama administrations. Gopal interviewed Afghans who were detained and abused at several disclosed and undisclosed sites at US and Afghan military bases across the country. He also reveals the existence of another secret prison on Bagram Air Base that even the Red Cross does not have access to. It is dubbed the Black Jail and is reportedly run by US Special Forces.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/2/americas_secret_afghan_prisons_investigation_unearths
**Similar to night raids in Iraqi homes, Anand Gopal's descriptions of these U.S. military Joint Special Ops Command (JSOC) raids sound similar to terror tactics employed in Central America which appear in the transcripts of the Iran-Contra hearings. The psychological operations (psyops) techniques described in this report violate U.S. Military Counterinsurgency Manual descriptions of limitations and legal techniques.**
Forty Civilians to One Al Qaeda Target in Pakistan War
From Democracynow.org Feb. 2, 2010
Report: US Drone Attacks Killed 123 Civilians in January
In other news from Pakistan, the US is being accused of killing dozens of civilians in a record twelve drone attacks last month. The Pakistani newspaper The News is reporting the US botched ten of the attacks, killing 123 civilians and just three al-Qaeda leaders—a ratio of forty-one to one.
**How is this ongoing effort, run by the U.S. Military JSOC (Joint Special Operations Command) and alleged to be staffed largely by civilians under the employ of private contractors such as the coroporation formerly known as Blackwater, Inc. helping the U.S. effort in Afghanistan? Presumably, the U.S. and NATO are fighting to bring democratic process to the people of Afghanistan. What is it about Pakistan that must be kept low profile in the American press according to efforts by the U.S. government to hide operations that are not subject to international laws the same as they would be if the armed drone flight operations were run by U.S. Military personnel? What do American citizens have to say about Pakistani children, women and non-combatant civilian males being killed by U.S. missles fired remotely from a forward operating base? Why would such activity not reflect upon public opinion toward the U.S. overseas? Why wouldn't a congressional committee convene over these civilian deaths?**
Report: US Drone Attacks Killed 123 Civilians in January
In other news from Pakistan, the US is being accused of killing dozens of civilians in a record twelve drone attacks last month. The Pakistani newspaper The News is reporting the US botched ten of the attacks, killing 123 civilians and just three al-Qaeda leaders—a ratio of forty-one to one.
**How is this ongoing effort, run by the U.S. Military JSOC (Joint Special Operations Command) and alleged to be staffed largely by civilians under the employ of private contractors such as the coroporation formerly known as Blackwater, Inc. helping the U.S. effort in Afghanistan? Presumably, the U.S. and NATO are fighting to bring democratic process to the people of Afghanistan. What is it about Pakistan that must be kept low profile in the American press according to efforts by the U.S. government to hide operations that are not subject to international laws the same as they would be if the armed drone flight operations were run by U.S. Military personnel? What do American citizens have to say about Pakistani children, women and non-combatant civilian males being killed by U.S. missles fired remotely from a forward operating base? Why would such activity not reflect upon public opinion toward the U.S. overseas? Why wouldn't a congressional committee convene over these civilian deaths?**
Sunday, January 24, 2010
When a Republican Calls for the CIA to be "Taken Out," the World is Most Certainly On Its Ear
Republican representative Ron Paul took an approach to the Central Intelligence Agency, its involvement in U.S. Military operations in the Middle East and its shady history regarding narcotrafficking seldom if ever heard from fellow statesmen the weekend of Jan. 17 in Atlanta.
During an annual presentation to members of Paul's Campaign for Liberty at its conference in Atlanta, he underlined the importance to the U.S. mission of removing CIA operatives and private contractors like the soldiers employed by the scandalized security firm formerly known as Blackwater, Inc.
This post appeared on RawStory Jan. 20 and is accompanied by a YouTube video segment of Paul's presentation.
Ron Paul and the CIA on rawstory.com
During an annual presentation to members of Paul's Campaign for Liberty at its conference in Atlanta, he underlined the importance to the U.S. mission of removing CIA operatives and private contractors like the soldiers employed by the scandalized security firm formerly known as Blackwater, Inc.
This post appeared on RawStory Jan. 20 and is accompanied by a YouTube video segment of Paul's presentation.
Ron Paul and the CIA on rawstory.com
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Pakistan, Drones and the Unpopularity of the U.S. War in Afghanistan
Amid the climate of escalation and apparent shuffling of tactics in the Pentagon today, most folks aren't noticing that the U.S. War in Afghanistan is largely run by the CIA, that its frequently being fought in a destabilized Pakistan where the conventions of international conflict (Congressional declaration of war, official status as an ally downgraded to enemy, some kind of responsibility informally but publicly pinned on leader of offending nation, U.S. Military announcements of strategy for achievement of objectives in target region and an outline of those objectives ... ) are being flouted by both invader and invaded, and civilian contractors, namely a U.S. Corporation whose employees and officers under investigation by the FBI for murder and corruption formerly known as Blackwater, appear to be running the operation.
The question I would be asking if I was, say, a proud American parent of a U.S. soldier, "Are our soldiers there just to provide cover for the CIA operation of drone strikes into Pakistan?" Is the CIA running intelligence missions under the rifle sights of U.S. sentries in crowded markets in southern Afghanistan so that Blackwater can fly remote controlled missle drones in violation of international law and the conventions of combat to murder four to six civilians--mostly women and children--for each military target, probably Al Qaeda, probably not Osama Bin Laden?
Furthermore, with embedded media present under strict agreements with the Pentagon, can U.S. and other major media outlets even begin to address let alone answer this question?
The question I would be asking if I was, say, a proud American parent of a U.S. soldier, "Are our soldiers there just to provide cover for the CIA operation of drone strikes into Pakistan?" Is the CIA running intelligence missions under the rifle sights of U.S. sentries in crowded markets in southern Afghanistan so that Blackwater can fly remote controlled missle drones in violation of international law and the conventions of combat to murder four to six civilians--mostly women and children--for each military target, probably Al Qaeda, probably not Osama Bin Laden?
Furthermore, with embedded media present under strict agreements with the Pentagon, can U.S. and other major media outlets even begin to address let alone answer this question?
What Constitutes Unpopular Aggression, and for that matter, Illegal Aggression
Suspected U.S. Drone Strike Kills 15 in Pakistan
Thursday, December 17, 2009 
DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan — Pakistani intelligence officials say the latest suspected U.S. missile strike along the Afghan border has killed 15 people, including seven alleged foreign militants.
The officials say the strike involved five drones and 10 missiles, a massing of resources that suggests the U.S. had homed in on a high-profile target.
The missiles Thursday hit two compounds in the Ambarshaga area of the North Waziristan tribal region. It was the second such strike of the day in the Pakistani territory.
The two officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media.
The U.S. rarely confirms such strikes. Pakistan protests them, but is believed to secretly aid them.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
News from the Underwire: Highlights of the Underreported
At the opposite end of the spectrum from the joyous outpouring at Wall Street's Dow Jones Industrial Average closing above 10,000 for the first time since 1999, the United Nations Food Program announced this month an enormous lack of food aid to hungry people all around the world. International food aid, both from public funds and private donations, will meet massive shortfalls in the next year largely due to the effects of the global economic downturn.
A Sept. 16 Reuters story, http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLG270557 quotes UN World Food Program (UNWFP) executive director Josette Sheeran detailing the inexorable increase in famine resulting from cuts to food aid by the world's wealthiest nations and the relationship of this crisis to the current international financial crisis.
Sharon Lindores writes for Reuters, "The number of hungry people passed 1 billion this year for the first time, [Sheeran] said, adding the WFP has barely a third of the funding it needs to feed 108 million people this year. To date the WFP has confirmed $2.6 billion in funding towards its $6.7 billion budget for 2009. It would take less than 0.01 percent of the global financial crisis bailout package to solve the hunger crisis, [Sheeran] said.
Following Sheeran's comments by a month, major news channels trumpeted the Wall Street achievement while the story was reported only by the fringes of the business press.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2285493/dow_jones_average_climbs_above_10000.html
Still many on and off Wall Street consider genuine indicators of recovery--for instance reduction of monthly job losses, the re-issuing of loans to small business and decrease in monthly home foreclosures--to follow strength in consumer confidence.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/confidence-drops-for-second-straight-month-2009-10-27
Wall Street Journal's MarketWatch reporter Greg Robb writes on Oct. 27, "U.S. consumers doubt that the much-touted economic recovery is under way, according to the latest report on consumer confidence released by the Conference Board on Tuesday. The consumer confidence index was much weaker than expected, falling for the second straight month as the assessment of present-day conditions fell to its lowest level in 26 years."
Analysis: Monitoring economic indicators that tell you only about the daily lives of a specific range of citizens can only provide false readings on recovery or any kinds of stability trends. Current economics, under the constant influence of Wall Street culture, do not look at the lives of the poor in the US and elsewhere to tell them about the health of financial institutions, which is most often the health analysts and investors are concerned about. People all around the world with no access to regulation of banks (or lack thereof entirely) are not facing the repair of central financial institutions like it is something we all caused and haven't the expertise to fix, but monitoring the usual media outlets we don't get that impression. Instead, powerful individuals who knew precisely what would happen and what to ask for when it did happen are looking at the rest of the world's literate population trying to interpret the current financial crisis as a routine system crash that seemingly caused itself and only our patience and adherence to the notion we're dealing with forces we can't understand without a masters degree in economics. There are perpetrators here with names and families and lives who, unlike Bernard Madoff, are getting away. They have been getting away since December of 2007 while the rest of us tried to make sense of what happened to the financial sector. They are not absconding to a secret island in the South Pacific or a mountain redoubt in the far reaches of the Swiss Alps. They are retreating into the rhetoric created by so many people who have worked so hard to obfuscate justice in economic crime, to make the situation appear so complicated that not only is it impossible to bring the culprits to a fair hearing and ultimately to justice, but also to construe this as the impossibility of even defining what justice is, therefore rendering it unattainable. What this allows is not only the exoneration of those who knew what the consequences of their enormously reckless acts would be. This prevarication also creates the possibility to commit these crimes again on the same order of magnitude, arguably by the same names and faces now running to safety behind a flimsy wall of "financial might makes financial right."
For a more critical look at the financial crisis, don't miss Jeff Madrick's piece on financial regulation in the Nov. 5 issue of the New York Review of Books: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/article-preview?article_id=23323 (online content is premium with three pay options available; newsstand copy runs about $6 and can be found at many bookstores)
Also, the action group Showdown in Chicago rallied just this weekend to raise awareness about banking and decisions being made right now by financial institutions. Under the "What's Broken" tab on their site are both html and pdf versions of a sensible prognosis in the woe that is our current financial predicament. http://www.showdowninchicago.org/whatsbroken.html
A Sept. 16 Reuters story, http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLG270557 quotes UN World Food Program (UNWFP) executive director Josette Sheeran detailing the inexorable increase in famine resulting from cuts to food aid by the world's wealthiest nations and the relationship of this crisis to the current international financial crisis.
Sharon Lindores writes for Reuters, "The number of hungry people passed 1 billion this year for the first time, [Sheeran] said, adding the WFP has barely a third of the funding it needs to feed 108 million people this year. To date the WFP has confirmed $2.6 billion in funding towards its $6.7 billion budget for 2009. It would take less than 0.01 percent of the global financial crisis bailout package to solve the hunger crisis, [Sheeran] said.
Following Sheeran's comments by a month, major news channels trumpeted the Wall Street achievement while the story was reported only by the fringes of the business press.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2285493/dow_jones_average_climbs_above_10000.html
Still many on and off Wall Street consider genuine indicators of recovery--for instance reduction of monthly job losses, the re-issuing of loans to small business and decrease in monthly home foreclosures--to follow strength in consumer confidence.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/confidence-drops-for-second-straight-month-2009-10-27
Wall Street Journal's MarketWatch reporter Greg Robb writes on Oct. 27, "U.S. consumers doubt that the much-touted economic recovery is under way, according to the latest report on consumer confidence released by the Conference Board on Tuesday. The consumer confidence index was much weaker than expected, falling for the second straight month as the assessment of present-day conditions fell to its lowest level in 26 years."
Analysis: Monitoring economic indicators that tell you only about the daily lives of a specific range of citizens can only provide false readings on recovery or any kinds of stability trends. Current economics, under the constant influence of Wall Street culture, do not look at the lives of the poor in the US and elsewhere to tell them about the health of financial institutions, which is most often the health analysts and investors are concerned about. People all around the world with no access to regulation of banks (or lack thereof entirely) are not facing the repair of central financial institutions like it is something we all caused and haven't the expertise to fix, but monitoring the usual media outlets we don't get that impression. Instead, powerful individuals who knew precisely what would happen and what to ask for when it did happen are looking at the rest of the world's literate population trying to interpret the current financial crisis as a routine system crash that seemingly caused itself and only our patience and adherence to the notion we're dealing with forces we can't understand without a masters degree in economics. There are perpetrators here with names and families and lives who, unlike Bernard Madoff, are getting away. They have been getting away since December of 2007 while the rest of us tried to make sense of what happened to the financial sector. They are not absconding to a secret island in the South Pacific or a mountain redoubt in the far reaches of the Swiss Alps. They are retreating into the rhetoric created by so many people who have worked so hard to obfuscate justice in economic crime, to make the situation appear so complicated that not only is it impossible to bring the culprits to a fair hearing and ultimately to justice, but also to construe this as the impossibility of even defining what justice is, therefore rendering it unattainable. What this allows is not only the exoneration of those who knew what the consequences of their enormously reckless acts would be. This prevarication also creates the possibility to commit these crimes again on the same order of magnitude, arguably by the same names and faces now running to safety behind a flimsy wall of "financial might makes financial right."
For a more critical look at the financial crisis, don't miss Jeff Madrick's piece on financial regulation in the Nov. 5 issue of the New York Review of Books: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/article-preview?article_id=23323 (online content is premium with three pay options available; newsstand copy runs about $6 and can be found at many bookstores)
Also, the action group Showdown in Chicago rallied just this weekend to raise awareness about banking and decisions being made right now by financial institutions. Under the "What's Broken" tab on their site are both html and pdf versions of a sensible prognosis in the woe that is our current financial predicament. http://www.showdowninchicago.org/whatsbroken.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)