Who We Are

Action Calendar

Actions You Can Take NOW

Govt and Congress Contacts

Culver's Corner

The Facts

What We Do

History

News

Internships

Peace Poetry & Music

Funnies

Alternate Views

Peace Store

Join/Contact Us

Links


Latest News Index
* * * * *

From: Nina Ossanna NOssanna@IMARX.COM (4/29/03)
From: sonora01@earthlink.net (4/29/03)
From: Canfield, Laura (4/29/03)
Originally from The Nation

The Reason Why
by George McGovern

Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die.
--Alfred, Lord Tennyson, "The Charge of the Light Brigade" (in the Crimean War)

Thanks to the most crudely partisan decision in the history of the Supreme Court, the nation has been given a President of painfully limited wisdom and compassion and lacking any sense of the nation's true greatness. Appearing to enjoy his role as Commander in Chief of the armed forces above all other functions of his office, and unchecked by a seemingly timid Congress, a compliant Supreme Court, a largely subservient press and a corrupt corporate plutocracy, George W. Bush has set the nation on a course for one-man rule.

He treads carelessly on the Bill of Rights, the United Nations and international law while creating a costly but largely useless new federal bureaucracy loosely called "Homeland Security." Meanwhile, such fundamental building blocks of national security as full employment and a strong labor movement are of no concern. The nearly $1.5 trillion tax giveaway, largely for the further enrichment of those already rich, will have to be made up by cutting government services and shifting a larger share of the tax burden to workers and the elderly. This President and his advisers know well how to get us involved in imperial crusades abroad while pillaging the ordinary American at home. The same families who are exploited by a rich man's government find their sons and daughters being called to war, as they were in Vietnam--but not the sons of the rich and well connected. (Let me note that the son of South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson is now on duty in the Persian Gulf. He did not use his obvious political connections to avoid military service, nor did his father seek exemptions for his son. That goes well with me, with my fellow South Dakotans and with every fair-minded American.) Learning for admirable ultra-stylish recliners? Check this furniture modern site.

The invasion of Iraq and other costly wars now being planned in secret are fattening the ever-growing military-industrial complex of which President Eisenhower warned in his great farewell address. War profits are booming, as is the case in all wars. While young Americans die, profits go up. But our economy is not booming, and our stock market is not booming. Our wages and incomes are not booming. While waging a war against Iraq, the Bush Administration is waging another war against the well-being of America.

Following the 9/11 tragedy at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the entire world was united in sympathy and support for America. But thanks to the arrogant unilateralism, the bullying and the clumsy, unimaginative diplomacy of Washington, Bush converted a world of support into a world united against us, with the exception of Tony Blair and one or two others. My fellow South Dakotan, Tom Daschle, the US Senate Democratic leader, has well described the collapse of American diplomacy during the Bush Administration. For this he has been savaged by the Bush propaganda machine. For their part, the House of Representatives has censured the French by changing the name of french fries on the house dining room menu to freedom fries. Does this mean our almost sacred Statue of Liberty--a gift from France--will now have to be demolished? And will we have to give up the French kiss? What a cruel blow to romance.

During his presidential campaign Bush cried, "I'm a uniter, not a divider." As one critic put it, "He's got that right. He's united the entire world against him." In his brusque, go-it-alone approach to Congress, the UN and countless nations big and small, Bush seemed to be saying, "Go with us if you will, but we're going to war with a small desert kingdom that has done us no harm, whether you like it or not." This is a good line for the macho business. But it flies in the face of Jefferson's phrase, "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind." As I have watched America's moral and political standing in the world fade as the globe's inhabitants view the senseless and immoral bombing of ancient, historic Baghdad, I think often of another Jefferson observation during an earlier bad time in the nation's history: "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just."

The President frequently confides to individuals and friendly audiences that he is guided by God's hand. But if God guided him into an invasion of Iraq, He sent a different message to the Pope, the Conference of Catholic Bishops, the mainline Protestant National Council of Churches and many distinguished rabbis--all of whom believe the invasion and bombardment of Iraq is against God's will. In all due respect, I suspect that Karl Rove, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice--and other sideline warriors--are the gods (or goddesses) reaching the ear of our President.

As a World War II bomber pilot, I was always troubled by the title of a then-popular book, God Is My Co-pilot. My co-pilot was Bill Rounds of Wichita, Kansas, who was anything but godly, but he was a skillful pilot, and he helped me bring our B-24 Liberator through thirty-five combat missions over the most heavily defended targets in Europe. I give thanks to God for our survival, but somehow I could never quite picture God sitting at the controls of a bomber or squinting through a bombsight deciding which of his creatures should survive and which should die. It did not simplify matters theologically when Sam Adams, my navigator--and easily the godliest man on my ten-member crew--was killed in action early in the war. He was planning to become a clergyman at war's end.

Of course, my dear mother went to her grave believing that her prayers brought her son safely home. Maybe they did. But how could I explain that to the mother of my close friend, Eddie Kendall, who prayed with equal fervor for her son's safe return? Eddie was torn in half by a blast of shrapnel during the Battle of the Bulge--dead at age 19, during the opening days of the battle--the best baseball player and pheasant hunter I knew.

I most certainly do not see God at work in the slaughter and destruction now unfolding in Iraq or in the war plans now being developed for additional American invasions of other lands. The hand of the Devil? Perhaps. But how can I suggest that a fellow Methodist with a good Methodist wife is getting guidance from the Devil? I don't want to get too self-righteous about all of this. After all, I have passed the 80 mark, so I don't want to set the bar of acceptable behavior too high lest I fail to meet the standard for a passing grade on Judgment Day. I've already got a long list of strikes against me. So President Bush, forgive me if I've been too tough on you. But I must tell you, Mr. President, you are the greatest threat to American troops. Only you can put our young people in harm's way in a needless war. Only you can weaken America's good name and influence in world affairs.

We hear much talk these days, as we did during the Vietnam War, of "supporting our troops." Like most Americans, I have always supported our troops, and I have always believed we had the best fighting forces in the world--with the possible exception of the Vietnamese, who were fortified by their hunger for national independence, whereas we placed our troops in the impossible position of opposing an independent Vietnam, albeit a Communist one. But I believed then as I do now that the best way to support our troops is to avoid sending them on mistaken military campaigns that needlessly endanger their lives and limbs. That is what went on in Vietnam for nearly thirty years--first as we financed the French in their failing effort to regain control of their colonial empire in Southeast Asia, 1946-54, and then for the next twenty years as we sought unsuccessfully to stop the Vietnamese independence struggle led by Ho Chi Minh and Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap--two great men whom we should have accepted as the legitimate leaders of Vietnam at the end of World War II. I should add that Ho and his men were our allies against the Japanese in World War II. Some of my fellow pilots who were shot down by Japanese gunners over Vietnam were brought safely back to American lines by Ho's guerrilla forces. Мониторинг транспорта gprs системы мониторинга вашего транспорта

During the long years of my opposition to that war, including a presidential campaign dedicated to ending the American involvement, I said in a moment of disgust: "I'm sick and tired of old men dreaming up wars in which young men do the dying." That terrible American blunder, in which 58,000 of our bravest young men died, and many times that number were crippled physically or psychologically, also cost the lives of some 2 million Vietnamese as well as a similar number of Cambodians and Laotians, in addition to laying waste most of Indochina--its villages, fields, trees and waterways; its schools, churches, markets and hospitals.

I had thought after that horrible tragedy--sold to the American people by our policy-makers as a mission of freedom and mercy--that we never again would carry out a needless, ill-conceived invasion of another country that had done us no harm and posed no threat to our security. I was wrong in that assumption.

The President and his team, building on the trauma of 9/11, have falsely linked Saddam Hussein's Iraq to that tragedy and then falsely built him up as a deadly threat to America and to world peace. These falsehoods are rejected by the UN and nearly all of the world's people. We will, of course, win the war with Iraq. But what of the question raised in the Bible that both George Bush and I read: "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul," or the soul of his nation?

It has been argued that the Iraqi leader is hiding a few weapons of mass destruction, which we and eight other countries have long held. But can it be assumed that he would insure his incineration by attacking the United States? Can it be assumed that if we are to save ourselves we must strike Iraq before Iraq strikes us? This same reasoning was frequently employed during the half-century of cold war by hotheads recommending that we atomize the Soviet Union and China before they atomize us. Courtesy of The New Yorker, we are reminded of Tolstoy's observation: "What an immense mass of evil must result...from allowing men to assume the right of anticipating what may happen." Or again, consider the words of Lord Stanmore, who concluded after the suicidal charge of the Light Brigade that it was "undertaken to resist an attack that was never threatened and probably never contemplated." The symphony of falsehood orchestrated by the Bush team has been de-vised to defeat an Iraqi onslaught that "was never threatened and probably never comtemplated." Sony Ericsson Xperia Pro battery replacement

I'm grateful to The Nation, as I was to Harper's, for giving me opportunities to write about these matters. Major newspapers, especially the Washington Post, haven't been nearly as receptive.

The destruction of Baghdad has a special poignancy for many of us. In my fourth-grade geography class under a superb teacher, Miss Wagner, I was first introduced to the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, the palm trees and dates, the kayaks plying the rivers, camel caravans and desert oases, the Arabian Nights, Aladdin and His Wonderful Lamp (my first movie), the ancient city of Baghdad, Mesopotamia, the Fertile Crescent. This was the first class in elementary school that fired my imagination. Those wondrous images have stayed with me for more than seventy years. And it now troubles me to hear of America's bombs, missiles and military machines ravishing the cradle of civilization.

But in God's good time, perhaps this most ancient of civilizations can be redeemed. My prayer is that most of our soldiers and most of the long-suffering people of Iraq will survive this war after it has joined the historical march of folly that is man's inhumanity to man.

Copyright © 2003 The Nation

* * * * *

From: http://www.bulletinboardforpeace.org/warfactsheet.htm (5/1/03)

WAR - FACT SHEET

1. The 9-11 tragedy was used to go to war with a country that had nothing to do with the bombing!
Osama Bin Ladin and his followers (the Al Quaeda) from Afghanistan were the group who caused the bombings - not Iraq. The media preyed upon Americans' lack of knowledge of Mideast geography and stacked news reports together so that every time 9-11 was mentioned, Iraq was associated with it.

2. War on Arab nations was planned prior to Bush's election.
In 1997, a group of 18 men wrote a paper called PNAC (Project for the New American Century) announcing their plan to go to war on the whole Middle East. 10 are now leaders in the Bush administration, among them: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Armitage, Bolton, Khalilzad, and Perle.

3. The American people went to war to free a country. American leaders went to war for greed.
Saddam was a terrible dictator, but the U.S. helped him build weapons ... until he refused our plans to build a pipeline in his country and switched from the U.S. dollar to Euros. Politicians manipulated the nobility of the American spirit.

4. The administration intends to go to war with many other countries, one by one.
Rumsfeld said only days after the fall of Baghdad that terrorism is a "network" (meaning the U.S. doesn't have to respect any nation's borders) and will call any country "terrorist" that it wants to bully: Syria, Iran, Sudan, Egypt, Jordan and Yemen. The strategy is to make each country in turn look dangerous, until the U.S. dominates the Mideast.

5. War on the Middle East will increase terrorism, not diminish it.

What you don't see on the news is that the rest of the world now views us as the evil empire. Former allies no longer support us. American embassies are attacked. Our aggression results in a vicious circle: we intimidate nations, then have to bankrupt our economy to protect our borders . . . against people we think we may have scared into retaliation.

6. What you see on the news is strictly controlled by the administration.
Before reporters were "embedded," they had to convince the government they would report only the military's point of view. Journalists know they will be fired if they criticize the United States. All U.S. television is owned by only 6 media mega-corporations, who favor the war. You were not allowed to see or hear the details of civilian casualties because you might feel empathy for the Iraqi people.

7. The budget allots billions to military spending while cutting back on social programs.
Haliburton, Bechtel . . . companies who paid for Bush's election will make fortunes rebuilding Iraq; of Bush's 30 defense contractors, 9 have ties to companies that have already won $76 billion in defense contracts. They get rich while 1 in 3 Americans is uninsured, 1 of 4 homeless has a job, and it takes 2 1/2 full-time jobs at minimum wage in some cities to rent a 1-bedroom apartment.

8. The budget finances the military while putting the entire American economy in jeopardy.
This means that you will not be out of national debt in your lifetime. The government will need to print "funny money" (mere paper that is not backed by gold reserves) - and then the government will need to go back to war to keep things moving. Your social security is not safe if the government needs to borrow from it.

9. Recent tax cuts will make the poor of this nation much, much poorer.
The current estimated tax bill to each person in this country to pay for the war is an average of $2,000. If you earn less than $50,000 you should worry. The bottom 40% (almost half!) of wage earners has already lost 80% of their wealth during the last round of tax cuts.

10. While Americans fight for freedom abroad, PATRIOT legislation attacks their freedom at home.
Legislation is being pushed (such as Oregon Bill 742) that could imprison you for life if you exercise freedom of speech. PATRIOT bills (which were meant to be temporary) may become a permanent part of your life. In a nutshell, this allows the government to arrest or spy on you without probable cause.

11. A dangerous precedent has been set allowing the president to go to war without approval.
This undermines the U.S. Constitution's system of checks and balances and disables the UN as a peacemaker.

12. Bush supports troops only before they serve, abandoning Veterans when they come home.
Bush cut $25 billion dollars in Veteran Benefits the day he sent troops to Iraq. National Guard families lived at poverty level. Gulf War illness (caused in part by the depleted uranium in our own weapons) has been diagnosed as "stress syndrome" so the government doesn't have to pay for healthcare or disabilities of children born with birth defects connected to parents' exposure.

The majority of Americans who get their news from mainstream newspapers and television are for the war.

The majority of people who access news from the Internet are against the war. For a list of news sources, go to http://www.BulletinBoardforPeace.org

* * * * *

From Janis Paris: http://www.bulletinboardforpeace.org/bushandthenatureofevil.htm (4/14/03)

Bush and the Nature of Evil

I'm not angry. I am in shock and awe, coming from the still, cold, hard place in the heart and mind ... that knows evil is at the door.

The aberration we call our leader has thrown down the gauntlet in the last battle for human life, perhaps for all life, on this planet.

How do we know he is evil? Because Bush and his henchmen destroy life rather than promote it. And that is the nature of evil. Simply put (according to Ayn Rand in Objectivist Ethics), evil is that which renders organic material inorganic. This past military strategy would demonstrate that we also deify the inorganic &emdash; technology &emdash; as our machines move forth like artificial limbs.

I write this now because Americans have little more than 18 months to repair, ameliorate, or reverse the error we made when we accepted the results of the last presidential election. Walter Cronkite says this was our fatal error. Not just protest, he says; Americans should have challenged the election with every legal means at their disposal. That is when evil appeared at the door.

Dangerous precedents have since been set undermining the checks and balances put forth in the Constitution. The leader of our nation now needs no other approval than consensus of his Cabal (historian Marilyn Young's word for Bush's oligarchic crew) to go to war with anyone, anytime, anywhere.

While bombarding our senses and sentiments with war in a distant country, the Cabal and their minions at home have assiduously stalked the freedoms and institutions that made America a great country. Civil rights, freedom of speech, and habeas corpus are under attack, the resources of the working class have been shifted by tax strategy to the wealthy, and our social and educational programs have been crippled in favor of military expenditures. We will soon be so far in debt that self-perpetuating military activity will be the only means of forestalling bankruptcy.

An election has been tampered with, the sign of a nation in a pre-fascist state. When do we become truly fascist? When we become habituated to election rigging. If major efforts are not made now to protect against a falsified election, the door may spring open, letting the wolf in to ravage our nation.

The wolf in this case is more like a mad dog, viciously guarding the carcass of a joint kill. The planet is running out of resources yet the "alphas" insanely ignore and hide facts from us that the earth is dying. They hoard wealth and cut others from decisions instead of leading the group to conserve or explore new ways of providing food and shelter.

It almost goes without saying that the wrong decision in this case could lead us into nuclear war. Say we're lucky, and the reckoning does not involve destroying all life forms on this planet. One thing is certain. Human deaths must occur "en masse" at some point for the few to continue their present rate of consumption. What world does Bush foresee? Take your pick from any number of science fiction works: Blade Runner, The Time Machine, Terminator, Lord of the Rings?

Anthropologists have posited that you can identify a species doomed to extinction because it fouls its own nest. I don't think Bush is self-destructive or has a death-wish. I think Bush and the Cabal envision themselves high up on Mount Olympus (or the moon) &emdash; fed, clothed, and provided for by machines that filter contaminants from earth, wind, and water &emdash; protected by armed guard from the remaining population who work the planet.

How could anyone want such a thing? Pause and think for a moment. What would you do if you had unlimited political and economic resources? Many would answer that their mission in life would be to enhance the quality of life in this country and on this planet. If you are among them, how do you understand the mind of a leader who abdicates this responsibility and instead chooses to promote fear and hardship, essentially destroying rather than creating?

The simple answer is -- you can't. You can't understand the mind of George Bush any more than you can understand the mind of, say, a serial killer on a police drama. In fact, Bush fits the classic definition of "sociopath" (one who cannot empathize or "feel with" another). He and his colleagues define themselves as the center of the universe, and others are no more than cardboard characters to be pushed around in their drama. To the Cabal, moving tanks and platoons from one place to another, stealing water rights from South America, forcing tainted grain on Africa . . . is no more than a board game.

Arrogance is the usual concomitant of this kind of narcissism. Numerous psychologists and fiction writers have commented on this, but my favorite is Josephine Tey (a detective writer) who says that all villains have in common the trait of "vanity." Whether bright or not, they always overestimate their intelligence and importance in the world. (Sam Vaknin has also written, chillingly, on the subject of narcissism). This helps explain why people afflicted with this disorder don't care whether they provide a livable world for their children and grandchildren. Since they are the center of the world, and others mere fashion accessories -- when they leave the world, the world is no more.

Whether bright or not, the sociopath can outsmart you for a good long time because the innocent mind is easily baffled . . . by its own sheer determination to make sense. The destructive mind is not constrained by such rules of logic. Christians knew this when they dubbed the devil the "father of lies." Evil bullies and frightens in its false outrage. Evil digresses, reverses, and "forgets" every basic premise you thought you had agreed upon. As a tool, you must look for the lie.

In the study of classical tragedy, evil is discussed in terms of "stage theory." At the first level is one who takes active delight in causing harm, at the second level is one who couldn't bring him or herself to actually do evil but recognizes it and is willing to profit from it, at the next level is the one who suspects evil but undergoes a psychological process to deny it so that he or she does not have to act, and so on down the morality chain.

In the classic Millgram experiment of some forty years ago, students were encouraged by an authority figure to administer shocks to subjects strapped to an electric chair inside a glass booth. In fact there was no electricity, and the people supposedly receiving the shocks were actors. The vast majority of individuals could be coerced into pushing the button to a dangerous dose and many continued to a lethal, or near-lethal, voltage while actors writhed and screamed on the other side of the glass. One of the conclusions was that very very few people had the moral courage to stand up to an authority figure if that authority figure was bent on harm.

Since evil, or the toleration of it, has many degrees, let us not forget the elected officials and journalists who have respectively cowered before the regime or willingly served as its mouthpiece. The number of those with a platform who have actually used their venue to speak out against presidential policy is far less than one in ten . . . perhaps one in a thousand. Recognize and honor that minority.

Do not "forgive and forget" and reward cowards with another term of office or lend them an ear when they purport to tell you the news. Even if they change their tune, watch for when they change it. Do not let them continue as the impediment they are to the major changes called for if we are to stop this un-elected president and his circle from making war on the entire Islamic world -- while we labor in poverty and fear, too weakened to act . . . or to close the door on the beast.

* * * * *

From: http://www.bulletinboardforpeace.org/articlegray.htm (4/30/03)

Originally published Mar 20, 2003, ©2003 VallejoNews.com. Reprinted by permission.

On the Wings of a Lie
by Vicki Gray

Writing about Iraq a few weeks back and harking back to the Tonkin Gulf Resolution of 1964, Tom Friedman warned that never again should we go to war "on the wings of a lie." Today, I fear, we have.

Ever hear of Willis Conover? Probably not. Willis, however, was known round the post-war world as the world's preeminent jazz expert. You didn't hear of him, because his venue was the Voice of America (VOA), the official U.S. government radio station, which by law is not allowed to broadcast in the United States, lest the government propagandize its own people.

Willis is gone. So too is the U.S. Information Agency that oversaw VOA. And, sadly, so are the inhibitions against the U.S. government propagandizing the American people. Let me be very clear, over the past two years, especially over these last six months, you have been propagandized by the United States government &emdash; aided and abetted by the broadcast media &emdash; into believing that Iraq poses an imminent threat to the United States that must be eliminated by an aggression known officially and euphemistically as preemptive war.

In this propaganda the Administration and the media have played fast and loose with history, sometimes distorting it beyond recognition. Some examples?

September 11

Over and over, the President has raised September 11 as the bloody shirt in this foolish adventure we're now involved in. Fact is, Iraq was not there on September 11. The terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, an ally or so we're assured. Osama bin Laden? Al Qaeda? There are no links to Iraq but plenty to Saudi Arabia.

The President, moreover, has invoked September 11 as a unique watershed. Other countries, he contends, do not understand the uniqueness of our pain. And that pain, he adds, justifies actions that, before September 11, would have been unimaginable. Oh? Fact is neither he nor the American people understand how uniquely insulated we were over the course of the last century. Indeed, the shock of Europeans and Asians at our bellicosity stems from the fact that they have endured far worse over the course of the past hundred years.

I will not, dare not, denigrate the suffering inflicted upon us on September 11, but I do sense, that in its wake, we have lost all sense of historical perspective. Indeed, it's almost as if we've lost our moral bearings in our search for revenge.

We would do well to eschew the one-liners of talk show hosts and the boycotts of French wines and recall that others have endured far worse. Yes, the symbols of our economic prowess and, much more importantly, the lives of 3,000 people &emdash; Americans and foreigners &emdash; were destroyed on September 11. But how many Americans recall the suffering of the millions who died in and the many more who survived not only the Holocaust, but the five-year occupation of Paris, the bombings of London and Coventry, Hamburg, Dresden and Würzburg, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the rape of Nanking, and the over 20 million Russians killed in cities like Leningrad and Stalingrad?

The history of those latter cities cries out for understanding in the current context. Driving back from church last Sunday, I listened on my car radio to one of those many retired generals opine about the coming battle of Baghdad. There were, he said, two historical models &emdash; the siege of Leningrad and the street-to-street fighting in Stalingrad. He discussed the tactical "pros-and-cons" of both, without addressing the historic or moral ghosts of the innocent civilian deaths of Leningraders or the suffering of Russian and German soldiers in Stalingrad. Nor, did he mention that those attacking those cities were the cannon-fodder of Nazi over-reaching, the soldiers of an army that had invaded the Soviet Union. Are these fit "models" for Americans?

Israel and Palestine

And, last Friday, almost as a throwaway line, the President mumbled some words about a "road map" for Israel and Palestine &emdash; to save Tony Blair, not the Israelis or Palestinians who have been dying in their thousands during this past year of American fixation on Iraq. What a waste! What a monumental misunderstanding of history! Why do Arabs hate us? Why are there Muslim terrorists? The answer lies in the harshness of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the one-sided support of a right-wing American government for an even more right-wing Israeli government. Looking at the pictures of Rachel Corrie, in a bright orange jacket megaphone in hand, about to be plowed into the earth by an Israeli bulldozer, can you feel at last the rage of the Palestinians? Can you understand how Europeans might mentally morph those Israeli bulldozer drivers into similarly young Nazis who visited "collective punishment" on cities such as Lidice?

And, in our support of that Israeli occupation, our blindness to historic evidence approaches monumental ignorance. The full history of the region is not contained in a movie called "Exodus" but passes through such real world wounds as Deir Yassin and Sabra and Shatilla. These are places and events that inform European and Arab perspectives but are seemingly unknown to Americans.

Iraq

We are also woefully ignorant about the history of modern Iraq, the country we're about to rule. That sad and tortured history began where "Lawrence of Arabia" ended &emdash; with betrayal and British colonialism. Ever wonder why Lawrence was so disappointed at the end of the movie? Ever wonder about those incredibly straight lines that pass for borders? The rationale for Kuwait? Ever heard of the Sykes-Picot agreement that divvied up the Middle East between Britain and France after World War I? Are you aware of America's role in a variety of coups in Iraq or how many times we've hung the Kurds out to dry? Do you recall that we backed Iraq in its 1980s war with Iran, supplied Saddam with biological and chemical agents and stood by silently when he used them?

Other wars and the UN

An example of media complicity in historical distortion can be found in a recent CNN pop-up box during a story on the Security Council debate. Not to worry, it suggested, there have been many wars undertaken without UN approval. Touted among such wars were Algeria, Vietnam, Kosovo and the Soviet invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia. But Algeria, at the time, was, according to Paris, a province of France. Its war there &emdash; which I opposed &emdash; would be akin to our attacking Puerto Rico. I doubt in such an unlikely event, we'd tolerate UN "interference" in an "internal" matter. Vietnam was another war I opposed &emdash; marching in my opposition with a now-silent John Kerry. But I do recall that at least we were invited in by the Saigon government and that LBJ went to great &emdash; albeit less than truthful &emdash; pains to convince the American people that we were attacked in the Tonkin Gulf. Kosovo? In that case there was an ongoing genocide that cried out for intervention. My only objection &emdash; along with Elie Wiesel &emdash; was that NATO should have gone in sooner on the ground. When it did, it did so as a regional collective defense organization envisaged by the UN Charter and on behalf of the United Nations. Hungary? Czechoslovakia? How dare anyone roll out those Soviet atrocities as "models" or in any way suggest that they provide reference points for American actions anywhere.

And then there's Rome

A final note, invoking a far longer perspective is in order in these ides of March. The arrogance of American hyper-power has not been lost on "historians" such as Gary Trudeau. In an op-ed piece masquerading as a comic strip on Monday, Duke, that consummate CIA operative, insists that his erstwhile Maoist sidekick address him properly on their balcony overlooking the minarets of Baghdad. She complies and, thumping her breast, shouts "Ave, proconsul!"

Speaking of Latin, the resignation letter of John Brady Kiesling (one of three senior Foreign Service officers to resign this month, the others being John H. Brown and Mary Wright) quoted Caligula: "Oderint dum metuant" or, roughly, "Let them hate us, just as long as they fear us." Is that what we've become in our hubris? At this critical moment upon the ides of March, I urge our President &emdash; and my fellow Americans &emdash; to heed the far wiser advice of another eminent historian and observer of human nature, William Shakespeare: "Remember, Caesar, thou art mortal."

Finally, as you look at pictures tonight of the Tigris and Euphrates, I would urge you also to ponder yet another history lesson involving Caeser. When he crossed that infamous Rubicon in 49 B.C., Roman democracy was doomed. I fear that in espousing the morally foreign, thoroughly un-American concept of preemptive invasion &emdash; again, a euphemism for aggression &emdash; we have crossed a Rubicon of sorts in American history.

The deed is done. There's nothing more to do now but pray &emdash; for our sons and daughters in Iraq, for the millions of innocent Iraqis, for a victory that's as quick and bloodless as possible &emdash; and for American democracy.

Vicki Gray, a retired diplomat, lives in Vallejo. She sells books, writes poetry and tends Mimi's garden. She may be contacted at VGray54951@aol.com.

* * * * *

From: Daniel Patrick Welch Wpdanny@aol.com (4/22/03)

Don't Mess With Texas
by Daniel Patrick Welch

Teach them a lesson they'll never forget. So goes the thinking in Texas-on-the-Potomac. And what a lesson it has been! They'll never mess with us again, nosirree Bob! As this childish thinking worms its way around the neocon braintrust, now giddy with "success" of their own definition (like toppling the Taliban?), it is instructive what lessons might be drawn by more rational--albeit scared to death--observers around the world.

These are some of the conclusions I've drawn, doing my humble little part to follow Bush's sage advice. First, if you don't already have nukes, you'd better get some--and that right soon. Uncle Sam don't play. While you're in the catalog, get a whole bunch of night goggles, and tons more air support. Spend more on the military, and less on feeding, housing and educating your people, if you care about your own sovereignty.

The picture of the American GI lounging in Hussein's chair, plastered on front pages everywhere, sent the disturbing signal: it's ours....it's ALL ours. I can't imagine that image spun quite the way it was intended around the globe--or maybe that's just the point: we're comin' to getcha! And another thing--don't bother trying to meet the Americans head on. Lesson number two is that, in asymmetrical warfare, guerrilla campaign is the only way to go--do anything, and I mean anything (see Lesson #1: Get Nukes) to keep the mighty invading army at bay.

Lessons 3 through umpteen were learned before the war started, actually: international law doesn't apply to the U.S., The UN, EU, as well as various global aid organizations, conventions, and agreements are quaint relics of a bygone era. Oh, right--there is a caveat here: we can bring them back to life on call when it suits our purpose and we want to complain about other people's behavior.

Although it may seem incongruous, I'll allow myself a Seinfeld moment here. What the hell, Americans watch 25 hours of TV a day anyway. I couldn't help thinking of the time Kramer was boasting about his karate prowess until he was forced to reveal that he was just beating up children. In an ominous twist, the kids ganged up and waited for him in the alley, where they beat the crap out of him.

And what is all this focus on civilian dead? I mean it's horrific, of course--it's the whole ball of wax, really. But soldiers aren't people? When the tables are turned, the U.S. screams bloody murder if one of our boys is killed, TV up close and personals, etc. Enemy soldiers don't have mothers? They can be blithely incinerated from 40,000 feet by fuel-air bombs and other weapons more horrific than anything currently banned--international law, thankfully for the Americans, hasn't had time to catch up to the technology. I guess that undermining, bribing, and threatening pays off. Bush and Rumsfeld (dubbed Chemical Donald by a British columnist) even insist that we have the right to use nuclear weapons, or other gases only allowed for domestic crowd control.

Only the Americans have the sovereign right, drunk with power and arrogance, to threaten to try the invaded in US courts for "war crimes." Bush and his corporate cronies are so busy trying to teach the world a lesson that they forgot the lessons they should have learned from history. For all the distorted comparisons to Hitler, they seem to have missed this gem from the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal: "War is essentially an evil thing... To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

There are other lessons, both foreign and domestic. Before the war came the bugging of UN personnel, some in their own houses. A sort of Watergate gone global--get the message yet? For icing, Americans exploited the fog of war to shoot up convoys of diplomats with whom they just happened to have beef, and killed a few journalists who gave them bad press--one of them on air! Now THAT sends a message! Coupled with the unabashed prostitution of embedded (or "in-bed-with") journalism, and we have a pretty good idea of which way we are supposed to go.

But let's not forget the domestic lessons. The Bush Cartel is an equal opportunity terrorist. Cops in Oakland opened fire on protesters with "non-lethal" weapons (kind of like pushing someone gently down the stairs) in an incident oddly reminiscent of the San Francisco 1934 general strike--which also started on the docks. Radio hosts encourage violence against protesters, and some have obliged, plowing into one demonstration in a truck, calling in bomb or sniper threats. A high school principal pulled the plug on movies like "Bowling for Columbine" by that dangerous radical, Michael Moore.

John Kerry was attacked for speaking out against Bush. One GOP hatchet man went so far as to suggest that Kerry had no right to call for "regime change" during wartime. Hmmmm..in civics class I was led to believe we had (technically) regime change every four years. And the Democrats, for crying out loud, who have enough trouble defining the word "opposition!" Forget Syria and Iran: if the milquetoast Kerry, who voted for the war, is fair game, who's next?

But I suppose ol' George and his puppet masters might be touchy on the subject. Imagine if people learned the wrong lessons, and enforced regime change the way they do--or even ascended to power the way Bush did? Yikes! Iraqis, of course, don't speak out because they are afraid of the regime, and our freedom, by contrast, is the reason we should all just shut up (or else). Beam me up, Scottie! The whole project has the air of what Robert Parry has called Bush's Alderan, recalling the Star Wars plot line where a small rebel planet destroyed by the infamous Death Star to keep everyone else in line.

Don't worry, we are told--it will all come into focus soon. Yeah, we know. But no matter how many staged footage of toppling statues, Iraqis are a proud people. And a gun-toting one. When the US military tries to disarm Iraqi civilians, we'll see...

What is also waiting to come out is that this episode of Gilligan's Travels to Liliput hasn't been quite the romp we've been told, even in the last week. Then again, it is a fiction to think that the access will be freer under the watchful eye of the US military occupation. Government minders are no match for tanks shelling your hotel.

And as far as lies go, you ain't seen nothin yet. Suicide bombers--the term itself a manipulative attempt at a subtle link with the events of Sept. 11--will be branded terrorists (or, even more incomprehensibly, 'cowards') by an occupation force and a press corps which refuses to admit it is there illegally. What a world turned on its head: how could there possibly be any illegitimate American targets where there is an occupying army? But of course, the invaded squirming under the tread of an Abrams tank don't have the right to resist. Further resistance will be dismissed as "getting in the way of rebuilding Iraq." They will not be heroic defenders of their country, but always foreign fighters, just as they were "outside agitators" according to COINTELPRO, and "agents provocateurs" at the Haymarket. Of course. In what conceivable universe could people actually want to repel foreign invaders?

We will be treated to many more planted stories of 'potential' WMD's, the horrors of Saddam's regime, the noble cause of "Freeing" Iraq. And the horrific cost of this war and the sanctions which preceded it will be laid at Iraq's own door--with a docile press corps, the victor writes the history.

This all relies, by the way, on keeping the American bubble inflated. The Stupidity Factor doesn't appear to be evaporating any time soon. Many Americans are perfectly happy to have a "president" who is no smarter than they are--it's not threatening unless you get on his bad side. Kind of like the old drunk on the corner stool in the bar. He tells some good jokes, but watch out when he's in a mood. Remember that egghead Carter? Yuck. I used to think that the monopoly corporations who funded Bush's rise to power had picked wrong--and it may still be shown that they overplayed their hand. But my cynicism and despair have deepened in the past few months. What a coup (pun intended) to have picked a true idiot, a mean, drunken frat boy who does what he's told and then some, sticking to it like a rabid pit bull.

I can't help thinking that Randy Newman had the dark side of the American character pegged, and I keep running this old lyric through my head:

Americans dream of Gypsies I have found/and Gypsy knives and Gypsy thighs that pound and pound and pound and pound/And African appendages that almost reach the ground/And little boys playing baseball in the rain/America, America, may God shed his grace on thee/You have whipped the Filipino, now you rule the Western Sea/America, America, step out into the light/You are the best dream that man has ever dreamed/and may all your Christmases be white.

So, many of the people will eat it up. But the economy is in deep trouble and getting worse--the "what now" burp is already hitting the markets. And using the Conquering Hero spike to float their crazy economic agenda just won't work like they want it to. Even Democrats will put up some kind of a fight.

Don't forget the Afghan "model," where Special Forces casualties are said to be "staggering." Sorry for all the quotes and parentheses, but the bogus language of this war makes it almost impossible to talk without footnotes. Let's not kid ourselves, no matter how many times we watch the bogus, staged, rehashed footage of statues toppling: this "war" (slaughter) isn't "over" (left the front page) any more than its Afghan counterpart, where 11 civilians were recently killed by "mistake" (murder-from-above by an arrogant superpower that would rather kill and ask questions later, earning it the enmity of all and the certain retaliation by virtually anybody).

And I was only kidding before when I mentioned John Kerry. Of course we can't forget Syria and Iran, now in the sights of the voracious Democracy Installing Cabal (you do the letters). And then there's Colombia, Venezuela, Philippines, Syria, Iran, North Korea, Montezuma, the Shores of Tripoli.... But let's not forget the biggest lesson, looming in the shadows: the Kramer lesson (apologies to Michael Richards). The kids are waiting in the alley, George. They are learning different lessons from this war--and their numbers are growing.

© 2003 Daniel Patrick Welch. Reprint permission granted.

Welch lives and writes in Salem, Massachusetts, USA, with his wife, Julia Nambalirwa-Lugudde. Together they run The Greenhouse School. Past articles are available online: an index is available on request. His columns have also been aired on radio: those interested in the audio version may contact the author. Some columns are available in Spanish or French, and other translations are pending (translation help for more languages welcome). Welch speaks several languages and is available for recordings in French, German, Russian and Spanish, or, telephone interviews in the target language. See fringefolk.com/RFVD.html for more detail, ideas.

* * * * *

From: Bob and Kim Retka talloakshill@ns.gemlink.com (3/15/03)
From: Carol Stratton cstrat@vermontel.net (3/15/03)

Waging Peace Through Dialog (3/15/03)

This is a forwarded message. I do NOT know who the author is.

Dr. Robert Muller, former assistant secretary general of the United Nations, now Chancellor emeritus of the University of Peace in Costa Rica was one of the people who witnessed the founding of the UN and has worked in support of or inside the UN ever since. Recently he was in San Francisco to be honored for his service to the world through the UN and through his writings and teachings for peace. At age eighty, Dr. Muller surprised, even stunned, many in the audience that day with his most positive assessment of where the world stands now regarding war and peace.

I was there at the gathering and I myself was stunned by his remarks. What he said turned my head around and offered me a new way to see what is going on in the world. My synopsis of his remarks is below:

"I'm so honored to be here," he said. "I'm so honored to be alive at such a miraculous time in history. I'm so moved by what's going on in our world today."

(: I was shocked. I thought -- Where has he been? What has he been reading? Has he seen the newspapers? Is he senile? Has he lost it? What is he talking about?)

Dr. Muller proceeded to say, "Never before in the history of the world has there been a global, visible, public, viable, open dialogue and conversation about the very legitimacy of war".

The whole world is in now having this critical and historic dialogue--listening to all kinds of points of view and positions about going to war or not going to war. In a huge global public conversation the world is asking-"Is war legitimate? Is it illegitimate? Is there enough evidence to warrant an attack? Is there not enough evidence to warrant an attack? What will be the consequences? The costs? What will happen after a war? How will this set off other conflicts? What might be peaceful alternatives? What kind of negotiations are we not thinking of? What are the real intentions for declaring war?"

All of this, he noted, is taking place in the context of the United Nations Security Council, the body that was established in 1949 for exactly this purpose. He pointed out that it has taken us more than fifty years to realize that function, the real function of the UN And at this moment in history-- the United Nations is at the center of the stage. It is the place where these conversations are happening, and it has become in these last months and weeks, the most powerful governing body on earth, the most powerful container for the world's effort to wage peace rather than war. Dr. Muller was almost in tears in recognition of the fulfillment of this dream.

"We are not at war," he kept saying. We, the world community, are WAGING peace. It is difficult, hard work. It is constant and we must not let up. It is working and it is an historic milestone of immense proportions. It has never happened before-never in human history-and it is happening now-every day every hour-waging peace through a global conversation. He pointed out that the conversation questioning the validity of going to war has gone on for hours, days, weeks, months and now more than a year, and it may go on and on. "We're in peacetime," he kept saying. "Yes, troops are being moved. Yes, warheads are being lined up. Yes, the aggressor is angry and upset and spending a billion dollars a day preparing to attack. But not one shot has been fired. Not one life has been lost. There is no war. It's all a conversation."

It is tense, it is tough, it is challenging, AND we are in the most significant and potent global conversation and public dialogue in the history of the world. This has not happened before on this scale ever before-not before WWI or WWII, not before Vietnam or Korea, this is new and it is a stunning new era of Global listening, speaking, and responsibility.

In the process, he pointed out, new alliances are being formed. Russia and China on the same side of an issue is an unprecedented outcome. France and Germany working together to wake up the world to a new way of seeing the situation. The largest peace demonstrations in the history of the world are taking place--and we are not at war! Most peace demonstrations in recent history took place when a war was already waging, sometimes for years, as in the case of Vietnam.

"So this," he said, "is a miracle. This is what "waging peace " looks like."

No matter what happens, history will record that this is a new era, and that the 21st century has been initiated with the world in a global dialogue looking deeply, profoundly and responsibly as a global community at the legitimacy of the actions of a nation that is desperate to go to war.

Through these global peace-waging efforts, the leaders of that nation are being engaged in further dialogue, forcing them to rethink, and allowing all nations to participate in the serious and horrific decision to go to war or not.

Dr. Muller also made reference to a recent New York Times article that pointed out that up until now there has been just one superpower-the United States, and that that has created a kind of blindness in the vision of the U.S. But now, Dr. Muller asserts, there are two superpowers: the United States and the merging, surging voice of the people of the world.

All around the world, people are waging peace. To Robert Muller, one of the great advocates of the United Nations, it is nothing short of a miracle and it is working.

* * * * *

Boone County, Missouri GOP Chair Resignation Letter (3/12/03)

From: "PhoeBe ANNE (thomas/sorgen)" phoebeso@earthlink.net (3/12/03)
From: Global Network
From: Jack Walters, ex-Chair, Boone County, MO, GOP

Boone County, Missouri GOP Chairman Resignation Letter
Our Country Above Politics

As the Bush administration moves toward certain war in the Middle East - a war which I believe nothing good will come from, a war which is unjust, unnecessary, and a war which will undoubtedly widen, perhaps even into world war, thereby placing our nation in dire peril - I have made a decision regarding my position as Boone County Republican Chairman.

Wars are easy to get into, but very difficult to get out of. They can sap the moral and spiritual fiber of a nation, squander lives and resources, deplete scarce funds, cause undue hardship on all involved, destroy families, and engender hopelessness.

I have questioned both the motives for military action at this time, and the ever-changing, illogical justifications presented to us in what has to be one of the greatest media propaganda blitzes ever force-fed a populace. Any time ground troops are deployed, serious questions must be asked and real answers demanded. The jingoistic rhetoric we are receiving does not constitute legitimate answers.

The consequences of our planned attack on Iraq (and also probably Iran, given the size of our forces and their location in proximity to Iran), should cause us all to pause. The Pentagon has announced that we will hit Baghdad with a force almost equal to the bombing of Hiroshima. Obviously many thousands of civilians will perish, with untold thousands maimed. And for what? To liberate them? To bring them freedom? Or democracy? Or is it to really secure the world's second largest oil reserve and establish a base from which to subjugate other Middle Eastern nations? Is it also the plan for Israel to use the cover of war to forcibly relocate the Palestinian population (as has been publicly stated by some members of Israel's current government)?

How on earth have we arrived at this crucial juncture in our country's history? How has a war on terrorism been converted into an attack on Iraq? What threat does Iraq pose to us? We must lay the blame squarely on our congress, who according to our Constitution, only has the power to declare war. For congress to cede it's war-making power to the executive branch is unconstitutional on the very face of it and effectively destroys our three branches of government. Circumventing our Constitution is very bad, and the undeclared wars, which have resulted in our recent history, have had disastrous results. Undeclared wars have no declared objectives, and therefore can widen at will, and our foray into the Middle East will likely set in motion a long-term wave of retaliation. Indeed, I believe that the administration would like to entice Iraq into firing the first blow so some justification could be paraded at the United Nations. If the United States government can adopt this unreal doctrine of preemptive attack.

What we are about to do in the Middle East is abhorrent to me. It is made doubly so since this is a contrived and fraudulently justified war with hidden objectives. The coming mass slaughter of innocents, the harm our own troops are being placed in, and the potential for wars on several fronts have brought home to me the sobering realization that by remaining Boone County Republican Chairman, I would be giving tacit approval to this imminent war, and tacit approval to the belligerent and reckless language coming from the White House. The safety and integrity of our country outweighs politics.

I therefore resign as Chairman of the Boone County Republican Central Committee effective at noon, March 10, 2003. I do not wish to be Chairman when this tragedy starts. I am not resigning to placate those who have demanded same. I do not fear them in the least. I was quite willing to stand and face an ouster vote. I am resigning because I cannot support the Republican position on this war. I only sought the position of Chairman originally in the hope that I could recruit God-fearing, thinking, pro-life believers in our Constitution to stand for office.

I grieve for our nation, and the untold suffering that will be wrought. As history has shown, you can possess the greatest armaments in the world, but if your cause and motives are not right, only catastrophe will result.

Jack Walters, March 8, 2003
P.O. Box 512, Columbia, MO 65205
Phone: 573-474-4449 Email: rapid.press@verizon.net

* * * * *

Human Shields
A Perspective (3/11/03)

The Human Shields have been in the news. This is a piece about them from my connections here in Baghdad.

More than 120 Human Shields have gathered from 34 countries to be a positive witness against the escalating war against Iraq. Their incentive came from the horror experienced by US veteran Ken O'Keefe in the 1991 Gulf War. They are a dedicated, creative lot of peacemakers.

Media and war advocates have denigrated the term "human shields" by focusing on times governments have forced persons to go to vulnerable sites, often military, as a barrier to an attack. Forgotten in this mindset is the mother who shields her child from an attacker or a friend who offers his life to save another. This present day experiment is an offspring of the action of the mother and friend.

This experiment in peacemaking was complicated as the volunteers accepted the room and board hospitality of the Iraqi government. The site selection committee of the Human Shields had been visiting sites (water treatment, electrical generation, food storage, oil refinery, and hospitals) to check out living facilities, neighborhood connections, communication capabilities, and compromising factors such as nearby military encampments. Problems escalated as the government tried to push the presence of Shields at certain sites.

The initial response was to pull back even those Human Shields who had gone out, to form a united response. Some chose to leave; others wanted to maintain the commitment to the Iraqi people and to work out some compromise to continue what was trusted to be a nonviolent barrier to US attacks on facilities that sustain the civilian infrastructure in Iraq. The dialogue continues in its stumbling fashion.

In mid-February two IPTers, one from CPT, joined a Human Shield witness at the Ameriyah Shelter as a silent, prayerful protest of that 1991 US bombing of a civilian bomb shelter in a family neighborhood of Baghdad that resulted in 407 deaths. A major US media presence treated that witness kindly.

Since last October, IPT/CPT has been visiting similar sites (along with families, churches and universities) to remind the US government that they promised not to target such sites. Banners reminded the military that to target such sites is a war crime.

IPT/CPT continues visiting these sites and is preparing to be a presence should the war escalate. IPT/CPT deaths would be a grim reminder that war usually targets the places the places where civilians are the ones that die.

Being here, Cliff Kindy

* * * * *

US Diplomat's
Letter of Resignation

The following is the text of John Brady Kiesling's letter of resignation to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. Mr. Kiesling is a career diplomat who has served in United States embassies from Tel Aviv to Casablanca to Yerevan.

Dear Mr. Secretary:

I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service of the United States and from my position as Political Counselor in U.S. Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so with a heavy heart. The baggage of my upbringing included a felt obligation to give something back to my country. Service as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was paid to understand foreign languages and cultures, to seek out diplomats, politicians, scholars and journalists, and to persuade them that U.S. interests and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my country and its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic arsenal.

It is inevitable that during twenty years with the State Department I would become more sophisticated and cynical about the narrow and selfish bureaucratic motives that sometimes shaped our policies. Human nature is what it is, and I was rewarded and promoted for understanding human nature. But until this Administration it had been possible to believe that by upholding the policies of my president I was also upholding the interests of the American people and the world. I believe it no longer.

The policies we are now asked to advance are incompatible not only with American values but also with American interests. Our fervent pursuit of war with Iraq is driving us to squander the international legitimacy that has been America's most potent weapon of both offense and defense since the days of Woodrow Wilson. We have begun to dismantle the largest and most effective web of international relationships the world has ever known. Our current course will bring instability and danger, not security.

The sacrifice of global interests to domestic politics and to bureaucratic self-interest is nothing new, and it is certainly not a uniquely American problem. Still, we have not seen such systematic distortion of intelligence, such systematic manipulation of American opinion, since the war in Vietnam. The September 11 tragedy left us stronger than before, rallying around us a vast international coalition to cooperate for the first time in a systematic way against the threat of terrorism. But rather than take credit for those successes and build on them, this Administration has chosen to make terrorism a domestic political tool, enlisting a scattered and largely defeated Al Qaeda as its bureaucratic ally. We spread disproportionate terror and confusion in the public mind, arbitrarily linking the unrelated problems of terrorism and Iraq. The result, and perhaps the motive, is to justify a vast misallocation of shrinking public wealth to the military and to weaken the safeguards that protect American citizens from the heavy hand of government. September 11 did not do as much damage to the fabric of American society as we seem determined to so to ourselves. Is the Russia of the late Romanovs really our model, a selfish, superstitious empire thrashing toward self-destruction in the name of a doomed status quo?

We should ask ourselves why we have failed to persuade more of the world that a war with Iraq is necessary. We have over the past two years done too much to assert to our world partners that narrow and mercenary U.S. interests override the cherished values of our partners. Even where our aims were not in question, our consistency is at issue. The model of Afghanistan is little comfort to allies wondering on what basis we plan to rebuild the Middle East, and in whose image and interests. Have we indeed become blind, as Russia is blind in Chechnya, as Israel is blind in the Occupied Territories, to our own advice, that overwhelming military power is not the answer to terrorism? After the shambles of post-war Iraq joins the shambles in Grozny and Ramallah, it will be a brave foreigner who forms ranks with Micronesia to follow where we lead.

We have a coalition still, a good one. The loyalty of many of our friends is impressive, a tribute to American moral capital built up over a century. But our closest allies are persuaded less that war is justified than that it would be perilous to allow the U.S. to drift into complete solipsism. Loyalty should be reciprocal. Why does our President condone the swaggering and contemptuous approach to our friends and allies this Administration is fostering, including among its most senior officials. Has 'oderint dum metuant' really become our motto?

I urge you to listen to America's friends around the world. Even here in Greece, purported hotbed of European anti-Americanism, we have more and closer friends than the American newspaper reader can possibly imagine. Even when they complain about American arrogance, Greeks know that the world is a difficult and dangerous place, and they want a strong international system, with the U.S. and EU in close partnership. When our friends are afraid of us rather than for us, it is time to worry. And now they are afraid. Who will tell them convincingly that the United States is as it was, a beacon of liberty, security, and justice for the planet?

Mr. Secretary, I have enormous respect for your character and ability. You have preserved more international credibility for us than our policy deserves, and salvaged something positive from the excesses of an ideological and self-serving Administration. But your loyalty to the President goes too far. We are straining beyond its limits an international system we built with such toil and treasure, a web of laws, treaties, organizations, and shared values that sets limits on our foes far more effectively than it ever constrained America's ability to defend its interests.

I am resigning because I have tried and failed to reconcile my conscience with my ability to represent the current U.S. Administration. I have confidence that our democratic process is ultimately self-correcting, and hope that in a small way I can contribute from outside to shaping policies that better serve the security and prosperity of the American people and the world we share.

* * * * *

Sharon Sides With The Settlers - Scraps the Peace Road Map (2/28/03)

From: Jan Mosgofian JMosgofian@aol.com (3/12/03)

Jesus, this is infuriating. "Baby Bush" Sharon is growing bolder and more evil by the moment. This me-and-my-shadow dance only reinforces the notion that our ultimate plan is to rule the middle east and wipe out anyone who stands in our way. Monkey see - monkey do .... together.

Jan

-----------

From: portsideMod@netscape.net (3/1/03)
From: The Guadian February 28, 2003

Sharon in Palestine State U-Turn PM Drops Road Map to Peace In Favour of Settlers
By Chris McGreal
Jerusalem

Ariel Sharon yesterday virtually ruled out the creation of a Palestinian state under his hawkish new government just a day after President Bush pledged to broker a peace deal once he has dealt with Iraq.

Hours before his cabinet was sworn in, the prime minister revealed to the Knesset that he has backed away from his commitment to the Palestinian state envisioned by Washington's "road map" for a settlement, as part of the deal to put together his government.

Mr Sharon told the Knesset that the road map is "a matter of controversy in the coalition" and had been dropped from the written agreement which drew far right, pro-settler and anti-religious parties into the administration.

The prime minister will also have frustrated his American friends by promising to expand Jewish settlements in the occupied territories.

A Palestinian cabinet minister, Saeb Erekat, said Mr. Sharon's speech killed any prospect of a peace process under the new government.

"He is saying there is no road map, no peace process. It's a government for the settlers, from the settlers and by the settlers," he said. "I think Sharon made it clear tonight that he wants the Palestinians to surrender to him. I hope President Bush will see the light."

The leader of the Labour opposition, Amram Mitzna, told the Knesset that the composition of the government meant there is little chance of a breakthrough toward a settlement with the Palestinians.

Foreign diplomats in Israel were no less pessimistic. One source said: "Everything has been invested in keeping the road map alive and Sharon pledged his support for it even if he wasn't particularly sincere. That illusion is crumbling away even though I suppose he will continue paying lip service to it for the sake of relations with the US. The best hope is that this government will not survive for long."

Although Mr Sharon would clearly have preferred to avoid undermining Mr Bush, he appears to believe he had little choice if he was to put together a coalition.

Mr Sharon indicated that talks might still take place with the Palestinians once a series of conditions have been met, including removing Yasser Arafat from power. However, he revealed that any agreements will be hostage to a vote by a cabinet whose ministers come from parties hostile to a Palestinian state and some of whom advocate ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

The prime minister repeated his mantra that he is ready to make "painful compromises" for peace. "We will always live alongside each other. The conflict hurts us all, and I intend to open a new chapter of Israeli relations with its Arab citizens," he said.

But the speech made clear that he has paid a higher price than was previously known for the support of the far right National Union, which advocates the "transfer" of Palestinians from the West Bank, and the pro-settler National Religious Party.

But it is now clear that the prime minister brought the NRP into the government with a commitment to continue expanding Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, even though they are seen the single largest obstacle to a settlement with the Palestinians.

The coalition agreement commits the government to the continued "development of existing Jewish settlements" in the occupied territories in place of Mr. Sharon's more circumscribed pledge to permit only "natural growth".

Ultra-orthodox Knesset members shouted down Mr. Sharon when he hinted that he would scrap the exemption from military service for ultra-religious men and promised to end the effective ban on inter-religious marriage.

"I don't think any state in particularly a Jewish state can accept a situation when some of its citizens are unable to get married in their country," Mr. Sharon said.

Hours earlier, Benjamin Netanyahu reversed his refusal of the finance portfolio the day after he was sacked as foreign minister. He finally agreed after M.r Sharon agreed to give him a free hand on key economic issues dear to Mr. Netanyahu, particularly privatisation and other Thatcherite policies.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003

* * * * *

Turkish Parliament
Gives Peace a Chance

from Peace Initiative/Turkey (NY, USA) www.peace-initiative-turkey.net
from Murat Paker muratpaker@earthlink.net (3/4/03)

In a country where 95% of the people are against the war, the Turkish Parliament voted on Saturday against a motion that would have authorized American ground troops to use Turkey as a base for attack and allowed Turkish occupation of northern Iraq in case of war. The resolution did not pass because of the failure to support a majority vote. But the government may re-submit the motion for approval this week.

Some parliament members voted "no" either because final agreement with the U.S. has not been reached regarding the deployment of troops or because they do not trust the U.S. stance. Others voted no because they could not bring themselves to accept a loan that is stained with the blood of thousands, perhaps millions.

The Turkish Parliament has thus given peace yet an-other chance, at least until it reconvenes this week. Whether or not we seize this chance is up to us, the ones who created it in the first place. As citizens of Turkey, we will continue to do all that is in our power for the parliament to persist in its determination to say no.

We are prepared to accept the full consequences of refusing American aid because we still hold human life to be dearer than money. We do not want to live under the shadow of governments that do not represent us, nor under the shadow of bombs, chemical weapons, red alerts, oil, multi-national corporations and the greed for profit. As ordinary people of Turkey and of the world, we want to live our lives in tranquility and peace.

We believe that war can be permanently banished not only from Turkish terrain but from each and every corner of the world. We believe that another world, one that does not require armed forces, is possible. We will be the pursuers of the Turkish parliament's perse-verance in its decision.

Peace is in our hands; we know it. Another world is possible.

* * * * *

WAR
by Howard Zinn (2/27/03) 

Sent in by Joseph Woodard (2/27/03)
Forthcoming from The Progressive

As I write this, it looks like war. This, in spite of the obvious lack of enthusiasm in the country for war. The polls that register "approve" or "disapprove" can only count numbers, they cannot test the depth of feeling.

And there are many signs that the support for war is shallow and shaky and ambivalent.. That's why the numbers showing approval for war have been steadily going down.

This administration will not likely be stopped, though it knows its support is thin., In fact, that is undoubtedly why it is in such a hurry; it wants to go to war before the support declines even further.

The assumption is that once the soldiers are in combat, the American people will unite behind the war. The television screens will be dominated by images showing "smart bombs" exploding, and the Secretary of Defense will assure the American people that civilian casualties are being kept to a minimum. (We're in the age of megadeaths, and any number of casualties less than a million is no cause for concern). This is the way it has been. Unity behind the president in time of war. But it may not be that way again.

The anti-war movement will not likely surrender to the martial atmosphere. The hundreds of thousands who marched in Washington and San Francisco and New York and Boston - and in villages, towns, cities all over the country from Georgia to Montana - will not meekly withdraw. Unlike the shallow support for the war, the opposition to the war is deep, cannot be easily dislodged or frightened into silence.

Indeed, the anti-war feelings are bound to become more intense. To the demand "Support Our GIs", the movement will be able to reply: "Yes, we support our GIs, we want them to live, we want them to be brought home. The government is not supporting them. It is sending them to die, or to be wounded, or to be poisoned by our own depleted uranium shells".

No, our casualties will not be numerous, but every single one will be a waste of an important human life. We will insist that this government be held responsible for every death, every dismemberment, every case of sickness, every case of psychic trauma caused by the shock of war.

And though the media will be blocked from access to the dead and wounded of Iraq, though the human tragedy unfolding in Iraq will be told in numbers, in abstractions, and not in the stories of real human beings, real children, real mothers and fathers - the movement will find a way to tell that story. And when it does, the American people, who can be cold to death on "the other side", but who also wake up when "the other side" is suddenly seen as a man, a woman, a child - just like us - will respond.

This is not a fantasy, not a vain hope. It happened in the Vietnam years. For a long time, what was being done to the peasants of Vietnam was concealed by statistics, the "body count", without bodies being shown, without faces being shown, without pain, fear, anguish shown. But then the stories began to come through - the story of the My Lai massacre, the stories told by returning GIs of atrocities they had participated in.

And the pictures appeared - the little girl struck by napalm running down the road, her skin shredding, the mothers holding their babies to them in the trenches as GIs poured rounds of bullets from automatic rifles into their bodies.

When those stories began to come out, when the photos were seen, the American people could not fail to be moved. The war "against Communism" was seen as a war against poor peasants in a tiny country half the world away.

At some point in this coming war, and no one can say when, the lies coming from the administration - "the death of this family was an accident", "we apologize for the dismemberment of this child", "this was an intelligence mistake", "a radar misfunction" - will begin to come apart.

How soon that will happen depends not only on the millions now - whether actively or silently -- in the anti-war movement, but also on the emergence of whistle blowers inside the Establishment who begin to talk, , of journalists who become tired of being manipulated by the government, and begin to write to truth. . And of dissident soldiers sick of a war that is not a war but a massacre --how else describe the mayhem caused by the most powerful military machine on earth raining thousands of bombs on a fifth-rate military power already reduced to poverty by two wars and ten years of economic sanctions? The anti-war movement has the responsibility of encouraging defections from the war machine. It does this simply by its existence, by its example, by its persistence, by its voices reaching out over the walls of government control and speaking to the consciences of people. Those voices have already become a chorus, joined by Americans in all walks of life, of all ages, in every part of the country.

There is a basic weakness in governments, however massive their armies, however wealthy they are, however they control the information given to the public, because their power depends on the obedience of citizens, of soldiers, of civil servants, of journalists and writers and teachers and artists. When these people begin to suspect they have been deceived, and withdraw their support, the government loses its legitimacy, and its power.

We have seen this happen in recent decades, all around the globe. Leaders who were apparently all-powerful, surrounded by their generals, suddenly faced the anger of an aroused people, the hundreds of thousands in the streets and the reluctance of the soldiers to fire, and those leaders soon rushed to the airport, carrying their suitcases of money with them. The process of undermining the legitimacy of this government has begun. There has been a worm eating at the innards of its complacency all along - the knowledge of the American public, buried, but in a very shallow grave, easy to disinter, that this government came to power by a political coup, not by popular will. The movement should not let this be forgotten.

The first steps to de-legitimize this government are being taken, in small but significant ways. The wife of the President must call off a gathering of poets in the White House because the poets have rebelled, because they see the march to war as a violation of the most sacred values of poets through the ages.

The generals who led the Gulf War of 1991 speak out against this impending war as foolish, unnecessary, dangerous. The C.I.A. contradicts the president by saying Saddam Hussein is not likely to use his weapons unless he is attacked.

All across the country - not just the great metropolitan centers, like Chicago, but places like Boesman, Montana, Des Moines, Iowa, San Luis Obispo, California, Nederland, Colorado, Tacoma, Washington, York, Pennsylvania, Santa Fe, New Mexico, Gary, Indiana, Carrboro, North Carolina -- fifty-seven cities and counties in all -- have passed resolutions against the war, responding to their citizens.

The actions will multiply, once the war has begun. The stakes will be higher. People will be dying every day. The responsibility of the peace movement will be huge - to speak to what people may feel but are hesitant to say. To say that this is a war for oil, for business. Bring back the Vietnam-era poster: "War Is Good For Business - Invest your Son". (In this morning's Boston Globe, a headline: "Extra $15 Billion for Military Would Profit New England Firms") Yes, no blood for Oil, no blood for Bush, no blood for Rumsfeld or Cheney or Powell. No blood for political ambition, for grandiose designs of empire. No action should be seen as too small, no non-violent action should be seen as too large. The calls now for the impeachment of George Bush should multiply. The constitutional requirement "high crimes and misdemeanors" certainly applies to sending our young halfway around the world to kill and be killed in a war of aggression against a people who have not attacked us.

Those poets troubled Laura Bush because by bringing the war into her ceremony they were doing something "inappropriate". That should be the key; people will continue to do "inappropriate" things, because that brings attention - the rejection of propriety, the refusal to be "professional" (which usually means not breaking out of the box in which your business or your profession insists you stay in).

The absurdity of this war is so starkly clear that people who have never been involved in an anti-war demonstration have been showing up in huge numbers at recent rallies. Anyone who has been to one of them can testify to the numbers of young people present, obviously doing this for the first time.

Arguments for the war are paper thin and fall apart at first touch. Weapons of mass destruction? Iraq may develop one nuclear bomb (though the UN inspectors find no sign of development) - but Israel has 200 nuclear weapons and the US has 20,000 and six other countries have undisclosed numbers. Saddam Hussein a tyrant? Undoubtedly, like many others in the world? A threat to the world? Then how come the rest of the world, much closer to Iraq, does not want war? Defending ourselves? The most incredible statement of all. Fighting terrorism? No connection found between Sept. 11 and Iraq.

I believe it is the obvious emptiness of the administration position that is responsible for the unprecedentedly quick growth of the anti-war movement. And for the emergence of new voices, unheard before, speaking "inappropriately" outside their professional boundaries. 1500 historians have signed an anti-war petition. Businessmen, clergy, have put full page ads in newspapers. All refusing to stick to their "profession" and instead professing that they are human beings first.

I think of Sean Penn traveling to Baghdad, in spite of mutterings about patriotism. Or Jessica Lange, speaking at a movie festival in Spain: "I despise George Bush and his administration." The actress Renee Zellweger spoke to a reporter for the Boston Globe, about "how public opinion is manipulated by what we're told. You see it all the time, especially now….The good will of the American people is being manipulated. It gives me the chills…I'm so going to go to jail this year!" Rap artists have been speaking out on war, on injustice. The rapper Mr. Lif says: "I think people have been on vacation and it's time to wake up. We need to look at our economic, social and foreign policies and not be duped into believing the spin that comes from the government and the media."

In the cartoon, "The Boondocks", which reaches 20 million readers every day, the cartoonist Aaron Magruder has his character, a black youngster named Huey Freedman, say the following: "In this time of war against Osama bin Laden and the oppressive Taliban regime, we are thankful that OUR leader isn't the spoiled son of a powerful politician from a wealthy oil family who is supported by religious fundamentalists, operates through clandestine organizations, has no respect for the democratic electoral process, bombs innocents, and uses war to deny people their civil liberties. Amen." The voices will multiply. The actions, from silent vigils to acts of civil disobedience (three nuns are facing long jail terms for pouring their blood on missile silos in Colorado), will multiply.

If Bush starts a war, he will be responsible for the lives lost, the children crippled, the terrorizing of millions of ordinary people, the American GIs not returning to their families. And all of us will be responsible for bringing that to a halt.

Men who have no respect for human life or for freedom or justice have taken over this beautiful country of ours. It will be up to the American people to take it back.

* * * * *

Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and Ron Paul (R-TX) Introduce Bill to Repeal Iraq Use of Force Legislation
Feb 5, 2003 

http://www.house.gov/defazio/020503DERelease.shtml February 05, 2003, Contact: Kristie Greco 202-225-6416

WASHINGTON, DC: Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Ron Paul (R-TX) today introduced legislation to repeal the Iraq Use of Force Resolution passed by Congress and signed into law by the President last fall. Following is DeFazio's statement:

I heard no new evidence today from Secretary Powell's address to the United Nations, that would convince me that military action in Iraq is necessary to improve security of Americans.

Americans want the President to lay a clear case for immediate military action in Iraq, but the Administration's message keeps changing- six months ago, their case hinged on regime change, three months ago it was Saddam thwarting inspections, three weeks ago it was possible possession of chemical weapons, today its tenuous terrorist links. If the case was clear, it would have been clear from day one.

Our nation's immediate threat is still Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda terrorist network. We have full knowledge of North Korea's equally rapidly developing nuclear weapons program under the control of an equally diabolical leader. There's well-published accounts of several Mid-east governments aiding and funding known terrorists. Of America's imminent threats, Saddam Hussein is much lower on the list.

Saddam Hussein is a brutal untrustworthy tyrant, but he is being contained, and we should allow weapons inspectors to continue their work.

The President seeks war, this is clear. The Constitution grants the Congress sole authority to declare war, and I believe the President should come before Congress to seek that authority. Our resolution allows him that option.

The legislation introduced today would repeal Public Law 107-243. The bill text reads in total:

"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Section 1. Repeal of Public Law 107-243.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243; 116 Stat. 1498) is hereby repealed."

The legislation repeals the broad delegation of authority Congress gave to the President in October, to launch military action against Iraq. Under this legally-binding resolution, the President would have to return to Congress to seek authority to launch a preventive attack on Iraq.

* * * * *

Veterans For Common Sense
from Scott Hess Feb 6, 2003 

From: MoveOn (2/8/03)

The following letter is written by a veteran of the first Gulf War. He's started Veterans for Common Sense -- a group of former military folks who oppose the current plans for war on Iraq. If you or someone you know are interested in joining him, please check out their website: http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org

Sincerely, --Eli Pariser MoveOn.org

__________________

Dear MoveOn member,

Twelve years ago, in February of 1991, I crossed the border between Saudi Arabia and Iraq with the 24th Infantry Division. Back then I was a 20-year-old Abrams tank crewman, and I fought in several battles in southern Iraq. I can say from personal experience, the media got it wrong. The first Gulf War wasn't clean, it wasn't pretty, and it wasn't precise. In the chaos and destruction of battle, anything can happen. We killed a lot of people.

Like many of the men and women I served with, I do not believe that President Bush or Secretary of State Powell, in his presentation at the United Nations on Wednesday, has made the case that Iraq poses an imminent threat to the United States. Without proving imminent threat, the administration has failed outright to justify its rush to war. Many senior military leaders, including Generals Norman Schwarzkopf, Anthony Zinni and Wesley Clark, have all questioned the wisdom of another war with Iraq.

Thousands of veterans of all U.S. wars have stepped forward, marched in demonstrations and raised their voices to say that the nation they defended should not be attacking other nations. There is no sense of just cause in the U.S. armed forces today. Most recently we veterans have been joined in our message by families with loved ones in the military.

Tens of thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis could die in a long, drawn-out war in Iraq.

We need your help to spread our message that veterans oppose this war. We can win without war.

How can you help? Join Veterans for Common Sense. Whether you are a veteran, or you have a family member in the military, or you simply support our message, you can join us in calling for a common sense approach to Iraq. We need your support.

To find out more, please visit: http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org

Already we have reached across the country through successful press conferences, innumerable appearances on television and radio programs, and op-eds, letters to the editor and interviews published in local, regional and national newspapers. Already we have visited innumerable congressional offices, winning impressive support across the political spectrum.

Add your voice to the growing chorus of voices speaking common sense against the rush to war.

For more information, and to find out the latest news about a possible war in Iraq, visit our web site: http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org

Together we can win without war,
Charles Sheehan-Miles Veterans for Common Sense

* * * * *

US Claim Dismissed by Blix
by Dan Plesch in NY for The Guardian Feb 5, 2003 

From: Jan Mosgofian (2/8/03)

US Claim Dismissed by Blix
by Dan Plesch in New York
The Guardian UK www.guardian.co.uk (Wednesday 05 February 2003)

The chief UN weapons inspector yesterday dismissed what has been billed as a central claim of the speech the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, will make today to the UN security council.

Hans Blix said there was no evidence of mobile biological weapons laboratories or of Iraq trying to foil inspectors by moving equipment before his teams arrived.

In a series of leaks or previews, the state department has said Mr Powell will allege that Iraq moved mobile biological weapons laboratories ahead of an inspection. Dr Blix said he had already inspected two alleged mobile labs and found nothing: "Two food-testing trucks have been inspected and nothing has been found."

Dr Blix said that the problem of bio-weapons laboratories on trucks had been around for a while and that he had received tips from the US that led him to inspect trucks in Iraq. The Iraqis claimed that the trucks were used to insp ect the quality of food production.

He also contested the theory that the Iraqis knew in advance what sites were to be inspected. He added that they expected to be bugged "by several nations" and took great care not to say anything Iraqis could overhear.

He said he assumed the US secretary of state would not be indicating sites that the inspectors should visit that he had not told them about. "It is more likely to be based upon satellite imagery and upon intercepts of telephone conversations or knowledge about Iraqi procurement of technical material or chemicals," he said.

Dr Blix is travelling to Baghdad for further meetings with Iraqi officials before reporting to the security council on February 14 and March 1.

He said the choice for the UN was between continued containment and invasion. Both strategies had problems, but an invasion required 250,000 troops and over $100bn while for containment the numbers were 250 inspectors and $80m.

* * * * *

Web Pointers from
Red Rock Eater Alternative News

WAR

US Propaganda in the Middle East: The Early Cold War Version
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB78

"This American Life" show on the prospect of war with Iraq http://www.thislife.org/ra/227.ram

North Korea Special Weapons Guide http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk

North Korea Special Collection http://cns.miis.edu/research/korea

US Grants North Korea Nuclear Funds (April 2002)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1908571.stm

 

CIVIL LIBERTIES AND SECURITY

The Law and Policy Implications of Biometric Use
http://www.search.org/policy/bio_conf/02_bio_conf_1.asp
http://www.search.org/policy/pab_newsletter.pdf

Automakers Block Crash Data Recorders
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/29/national/ 29CRAS.html?pagewanted=print

Smallpox and Smallpox Vaccination (temporary link) http://nejm.org/earlyrelease/early.asp

Government Openness at Issue as Bush Holds On to Records
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/03/politics/ 03SECR.html?pagewanted=print

report of advisory panel on security against weapons of mass destruction
http://www.rand.org/nsrd/terrpanel/terror4.pdf
http://www.gcn.com/cgi-bin/udt/im.display.printable?client.id=gcndaily2&story.id=20702

extensive resources on terrorism risk and insurance
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/CHRR/Roundtable/Notes.html
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/CHRR/Roundtable/Kunreuther_Howard_Note.pdf
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/CHRR/Roundtable/Skees_Jerry_Note.pdf
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=3168&sequence=0
http://www.nber.org/~confer/2002/insw02/woo.pdf

precursor to the "total information awareness" program (look at the hidden revision log to find out who might have written it)
http://calder.ncsa.uiuc.edu/ACCESS/PPT/001213mscmc/Project_Genoa_White_Paper.doc

Military Seeks Limits on Wireless Internet Access
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/technology/17WIRE.html?pagewanted=print

OTHER

pork-barrel spending related to the war on terror
http://www.cdi.org/products/mr_smith.pdf

no logical relationship between policies and the stated reasons for them
http://www.latimes.com/templates/misc/printstory.jsp?slug=la%2Dna%2Decon4jan04001430&section=%2Fnews%2Fprintedition

analysis of Bush tax proposals http://www.ctj.org/stim03.pdf

Minute Shift in Temperature Has Had a Major Effect on Earth, Studies Show
http://www.latimes.com/templates/misc/printstory.jsp?slug=la%2Dsci%2Dspecies2jan02&section=%2Fnews%2Fnationworld%2Fnation http://www.nature.com/nature/links/030102/030102-3.html

Genetically Modified Crops Are Breeding With Plants in the Wild
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story= 365021