Ethel the Blog
Observations (and occasional brash opining) on science, computers, books, music and other shiny things that catch my mind's eye. There's a home page with ostensibly more permanent stuff. This is intended to be more functional than decorative. I neither intend nor want to surf on the bleeding edge, keep it real, redefine journalism or attract nyphomaniacal groupies (well, maybe a wee bit of the latter). The occasional cheap laugh, raised eyebrow or provocation of interest are all I'll plead guilty to in the matter of intent. Bene qui latuit bene vixit.

The usual copyright stuff applies, but I probably won't get enraged until I find a clone site with absolutely no attribution (which, by the way, has happened twice with some of my other stuff). Finally, if anyone's offended by anything on this site then please do notify me immediately. I like to keep track of those times when I get something right.

How to blog? METABLOGGING Blog Madness Blog Portal linkwatcher Monitor BLOGS (YMMV) abuddhas memes alamut apathy arms and the man baghdad burning bifurcated rivets big left outside boing boing booknotes bovine inversus bradlands bushwacker camworld cheek chess log cogent provocateur cool tools counterspin crooked timber delong digby drat fink drmike d-squared dumbmonkey electrolite eschaton estimated prophet ezrael fat planet flutterby! follow me here geegaw genehack ghost glare gmtplus9 hack the planet harmful hauser report hell for halliburton honeyguide hotsy totsy club juan cole kestrel's nest k marx the spot kuro5hin lake effect lambda large hearted boy leftbanker looka looking glass macleod maxspeak medley memepool metagrrrl mike's monkeyfist more like this mouse farts my dog norbizness off the kuff orcinus pandagon pedantry peterme philosoraptor pith and vinegar plastic portage q quark soup quiggin randomwalks rip post rittenhouse see the forest shadow o' hegemon sideshow simcoe south knox bubba slacktivist smudge submerging markets sylloge synthetic zero talking points tbogg twernt unknownnews vacuum vanitysite virulent memes whiskey bar windowseat tv wood s lot TECH Librenix use perl rootprompt slashdot freshmeat Ars Technica 32BitsOnline UGeek AnandTech Linux Today Tom's Hardware DevShed

"When they say, 'Gee it's an information explosion!', no, it's not an explosion, it's a disgorgement of the bowels is what it is. Every idiotic thing that anybody could possibly write or say or think can get into the body politic now, where before things would have to have some merit to go through the publishing routine, now, ANYTHING." - Harlan Ellison JOLLY OLD PALS Other stuff of mild interest to some: unusual literature scientific software blog physical oceanography glossary computer-related tutorials and texts Friday, April 26, 2002 QUASI-CATHARTIC SHIT There are times when one wants to abandon this stuff. Like, for instance, right now, while my cancerous pooch lies at my feet and I try to imagine a future without her constant presence. That's called existential angst, by the way, and I thought I'd gotten over all that sort of stuff last year. Apparently not. On the other hand, as long as I know I can piss off the mouth-breathers who want to ride the Bush Cabal's Forever War Train all the way to Mars, I've at least got some cheap entertainment to look forward to. Well, that and the cheap beer supply. Have a good weekend. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 09:27:19 PM | link A RETURN While I've not always agreed with Dan he's one of the first webloggers I ever read (indeed, he was among the first dozen or so I listed) and I've always found him a cut above most of the rest in both style and content. It's good to see one of the old farts back at it. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 08:59:12 PM | link CROSSFIRE GEM Towards the end of the Thursday Crossfire - wherein David Brock put in a fascinating appearance - is a marvelously telling utterance by Tucker Carlson, whose snot-nose, frat-boy, bowtie-wearing, born-to-rule arrogance makes you want to bitch-slap him even before he opens his mouth ... sort of like with George Will, come to think of it. He and James Carville are trading quips and reading viewer mail. Carlson's email obviously pertains to the current controversy about the GOP boycotting "Crossfire" because they think Carville and Begala - recent liberal additions who are every bit as mean and ornery as the conservatives have been in the past - are "unfair." Here's Carlson's email and his reponse: And the next e-mail, "I hope the GOP doesn't boycott, it would be a shame. Most of my family votes and donates Republican. They may be a little shell-shocked to see real debate." Heather Uhlemann. I'm not sure I understand the gist of that. Yeah sure, Tucker. You have no idea what Heather's talking about, do you? posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 05:34:02 PM | link STRANGE SCHIZOPHRENIA Marc Cooper writes of The coup that wasn't in the Nation, although the article is a bit schizophrenic. Through the first six paragraphs, he sticks to the basic facts about who said what, what happened when, etc. Then he strangely throws in a couple of paragraphs that wouldn't seem out of place in the "American Spectator" or "National Review". That said, no one should confuse Hugo Chávez with Salvador Allende, the democratically elected Chilean president overthrown thirty years ago by a similar US-supported alliance of the economic upper class and the military. Chávez has failed to produce much of the radical change he promised. He showed little of the respect that Allende did for authentic democratic institutions. Unlike Allende, whose public support increased before his overthrow, Chávez has seen his original 80 percent support drop to just over 30 percent. And Allende never turned police and armed supporters against peaceful protesters as Chávez did, provoking a shootout that injured scores and killed more than a dozen. This paragraph is really nothing more than a stringing together of baseless accusations that have been repeated ad nauseaum elsewhere. No details are produced as to just what parts of the "radical change he promised" weren't delivered by Chavez. Is the change from an inflation rate of over 20% when he took office to about 15% now insufficiently radical? Is the OPEC agreement to limit oil production to raise prices to increase oil revenue insufficiently radical? And then we come to Chavez's supposed disrespect for "authentic democratic institutions". And what would that consist of? His campaigning in and winning two elections, or aren't elections sufficiently "authentic"? Two paragraphs later Cooper seemingly praises Chavez for replacing a discredited congress - which I presume Cooper would consider an inauthentically democratic institution - with a unicameral house, and for exposing and punishing corruption. Which of these lack authenticity, democracy-wise? Once again, all assertion and no detail. Then we get to the mantra chanted by damned near every media outlet on the planet. That the gunfire started when Chavez supposedly ordered his stormtroopers to open fire is trotted out as if the mere statement thereof is equivalent to a mathematical proof. This is repeated as doctrine despite eyewitness accounts to the contrary, and statements like the following by Greg Palast: There remains the charge that, in the words of the New York Times, "Chavez ordered soldiers to fire on a crowd [of protesters]." This bloody smear, sans evidence, stained every Western paper, including Britain's newest lefty, the Mirror. Yet I could easily reach eyewitnesses without ties to any faction who said the shooting began from a roadway overpass controlled by the anti-Chavez Metropolitan Police, and the first to fall were pro-Chavez demonstrators. At the very least, such accounts should cause a journalist to drag out that old warhorse word "disputed" to describe such a loaded accusation. Geez, if Sharon were to execute a thousand civilians in front of a worldwide TV hook-up, the claim that he did so would be described as "disputed" if he or any other senior Israeli official said it didn't really happen. Then we get to the really meaty accusations: Chávez's undeniable charisma flirts with megalomania, his denunciations of all opposition borders on the paranoiac and his antidote to the hollower forms of democracy is often ham-fisted demagogy. Golly, Chavez is asserted to have all the qualities of the current GOP leadership. That certainly qualifies him for worldwide admonishment, if not another, more successful coup if he doesn't straighten up and fly right. Corruption within his regime, an increasingly autocratic style and an inability to make much of a dent in poverty have swollen Chávez's opposition far beyond the ranks of the pro-American economic elite. Saints preserve us! There's still corruption in a country that's been swimming in it for decades! What a bastard Chavez is for not utterly wiping it out in 3 or 4 years. And he hasn't made "much of a dent in poverty", either! Well, other than getting another half million kids in school who were denied this route out of poverty by the previous administrations. As for "an increasingly autocratic style," this might as well be "a penchant for gerbilling" for all the evidence given to support it. Then we get to the really damning stuff: But Chávez's authoritarian ways and his failure to make good on deep reform suggest that consensus-winning alternatives championing social justice and authentic democracy are still works in progress. Hide my guns! Even buggering infants after getting them addicted to crack pales on the horror scale compared to one's plans being "still works in progress." After this 180 degree turn in the article, going from providing the details of the failed coup to damned near being a mouthpiece for Otto Reich in the matter of insubstantial character assassination, Cooper magnanimously decides that Chavez has "almost magically ... been granted another chance." But if he screws up again and doesn't get that work progressing a whole lot faster, Carmona or someone like him are going to reluctantly take up the mantle of respecting "authentic democratic institutions." Just like Carmona did when he dissolved the Supreme Court, the legislature and the constitution. The only thing I can figure is that Cooper, who's usually a very fine and entertaining journalist, must be going through some sort of initiation ritual into one of the hot journalism societies where they won't let you exchange the secret handshake with Henry Kissinger if you don't occasionally engage in a little (sur)realpolitik. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 04:36:48 PM | link A BOTCHED 1997 ASSASSINATION This Eric Margolis item from 1997 provides some interesting data points on the eternal Shakespearean tragedy called the Middle East. Netanyahu's support was evaporating when this happened, which naturally brings a "wag the dog" scenario to mind. This item is especially topical seeing how Netanyahu is trying to get back into power, with his campaign message largely being that Sharon isn't being vicious enough. Israel's botched attempt to assassinate an official of the Palestinian Hamas movement on 25 September in Amman, Jordan has changed the Mideast's political landscape, brought worldwide condemnation down on Israel, and shows dramatically why state-sponsored murder is best avoided. Assassination is always a tricky, dangerously unpredictable, business. So concluded the best minds in US intelligence a decade ago. Israel's floundering prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has just learned this important lesson. You don't send out assassins without first asking, `what happens if the attempt fails?' Mossad is probably the world's ablest intelligence service. Even so, some operations are bound by the law of averages to go awry. The attack on Khalid Meshal by five or six Israeli agents disguised as Canadian tourists looked like of a rushed mission mounted without Mossad's usual meticulous preparation, suggesting someone high up ordered an immediate hit. Why was a not-so-important Hamas political official targeted? The Israeli press says Meshal was not even involved in previous Hamas bombings. Why not go after hard core Hamas bombers instead? One easily sympathizes with the Israeli government's desire to take drastic action to counter terrorism. Israel has been shocked and terrified by Hamas suicide bombers blowing up Jewish civilians. The public demanded action. But what would killing Meshal have accomplished? His murder would certainly have triggered new Hamas bombings. Had the Mossad assassins gotten away with killing Meshal by an unknown poison injected into his ear that apparently left no trace, who would have known of Israel's revenge? How many other Mideast figure have been killed by Mossad's invisible venom? If Arafat dies of natural causes, will Israel be blamed - and bombed? As a democracy, civilized society and military superpower, Israel should not be running a Mideast version of Murder Inc. To see how wrong this policy is, put the shoe on the other foot. Last year, a UN investigation found Israel specifically shelled the Qana refugee camp in south Lebanon which was packed with families of Hizbullah guerillas. Over 100 Lebanese civilians, women and children, were killed. They died as surely and bloodily from Israeli 155mm shells as did Jews from nail-packed Hamas bombs. Does Lebanon's government have the right under Israel's eye for an eye policy to send hit teams to kill Israeli generals and officials who authorized the Qana attack? Can Palestinians go after Israeli officers who used anti-personnel cluster bombs and napalm against refugee camps? Can Lebanon rightfully assassinate Israel's Gen. Ariel Sharon, who, in 1982, ordered the invasion of Lebanon, and massive shelling of Beirut that killed 15,700 Lebanese civilians? Two days before attempting to kill Meshal, Israel apparently received a message from Hamas offering a 10-year cease fire in exchange for Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and ending Jewish settlements. Netanyahu claims he only got this exceptionally important message after the botched assassination. His supporters blame Mossad chief Danny Yatom for sitting on the message. Yatom denies it. This is part of a furious battle of leaks raging between Mossad and Netanyahu's cabinet. Some Netanyahu supporters claim the Mossad hit was a rogue operation never authorized by the prime minister. Mossad partisans leak back that it was all Netanyahu's harebrained idea - and that he's now trying to make Mossad chief Yatom fall guy for the fiasco. Other critics say a hard-line cabal inside Mossad is determined to thwart any peace with Palestinians - which is likely true. ... Meanwhile, the failed plot has ignited a train of strange events. To take divert blame from Israel, a former Canadian ambassador to Israel endangered his countrymen's lives by suggesting Canada was involved in the plot. In another bizarre twist, while publically ordering Arafat to keep arresting Hamas members, Netanyahu freed from prison Hamas founder Sheik Yassin, and 70 other Hamas 'terrorists' in order to get his Mossad assassins back from Jordanian custody. Palestinians, enraged by Netanyahu's crude sabotage of the peace process and economic punishments, see the increasingly unpopular Arafat as an American-Israeli stooge. Half now support Hamas. Netanyahu's blunders have suddenly transformed Hamas into a major, even legitimate political player. Small wonder Netanyahu and Arafat have resumed talks. They've been scared into each others unloving arms by surging Hamas. A horrified Netanyahu may even find he's created a sort of Palestinian Khomeini. A nice irony, since Israel helped found Hamas in the 1980's to rival the PLO. ... posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 03:05:52 PM | link DESTROY THE ANTHRAX, BOYS Professor Francis A. Boyle has some very interesting things to say about the recent anthrax scare. ... Now this gets us to the anthrax attacks on the United States government. Obviously it was not clear what was going on, at least to me, until the New York Times published the technology behind the Daschle letter. The technology behind the Daschle letter, later the Leahy letter, was very sophisticated. Trillion spores per gram. That is super-weapons grade. Second, tied in there was a special treatment to eliminate electrostatic charges so it would float in the air. You have to have special equipment, special treatment, special everything. The only people who would have the capability to do this would be individuals who either are currently employed by the Department of Defense or the CIA doing biowarfare work, or had been employed by the Department of Defense or the CIA doing biowarfare work. And would probably have access to one of the government's biowarfare labs. This stuff is so dangerous. You could not do it unless you were wearing one of these space suits. And there are only a handful of these labs in the country. That very day I called up a senior official in the FBI who handles terrorism and counter-terrorism, he knows who I am because of the work I have done in this field, and discussed this matter with him. I said: Look there are very few people who have this capability. I have a list of them under the Reagan administration. That is where you have to start to look. I went down the list and I said you know, this person worked with this government lab, that person worked with that government lab, etc., etc. He said, well, we are coordinating our efforts with Ft. Deitrick. I said well, Ft. Deitrick could very well be the problem here. They are one of the few labs with the capability to do something like this. And you could have a Timothy McVeigh type situation where someone who was once on the reservation is now off the reservation. So you need to start looking at this list of these people who have worked with the Pentagon, I do not have a list of the CIA people, and my guess is you are going to find your person. He told me he would pass the information along to the right people. This was just before I ran the CRG workshop at Harvard on Biowarfare the first weekend in November. There my colleague Jonathan King, Professor of Microbiology at MIT and the head of their electron-microscope lab, publicly stated the same exact conclusion independently of me. He had reached the exact same conclusion that I had. Likewise Dr. Barbara Rosenberg who is now with the Federation of American Scientists, she independently of both King and me later reached the exact same conclusion, that whoever did this was working for the United States government now, in the Pentagon or the CIA or had in the immediate past, and must have had access to a U.S. biowarfare lab. I was interviewed on FOX, I was interviewed on BBC World Service and I was interviewed on Pacific Network in Washington DC. What happened? Soon thereafter the FBI authorized the destruction of the anthrax culture collection at Ames, Iowa. It had been determined that this was Ames-strain anthrax. The FBI authorized the destruction of that entire supply. It is obvious it was a cover-up. If you had access to that supply you could do a genetic reconstruction of the origins of the Daschle letter. If you had access to the Ames collection scientists would be able to do a genetic reconstruction of where the Daschle and Leahy agents originated. I believe the FBI knows exactly who was behind this attack and they have probably concluded that yes, it was someone who was currently involved in illegal and criminal biological warfare research by the United States government. Either the Pentagon or the CIA or one of their private contractors. And for that reason they are not going to apprehend and they are not going to indict him because obviously he would spill the beans on the whole thing and implicate the Pentagon, CIA, whoever is behind this. So this is where we are today, where the FBI says well we are working on it, but of course, that is ridiculous. Here's some independent verification of the destruction of the Ames anthrax strains, and that the strain had indeed originated from Ames. Around 5:30 P.M. on October 12th, college staff members wearing biosafety gloves removed the anthrax specimens from the laboratory cabinet and placed them in an autoclave, a steam sterilizer about the size of a filing cabinet. The scientists knew that an hour or so in the autoclave would do the trick, but they let the machine run all night. At eight-thirty the following morning, the bacilli, although certainly dead, were placed in an incinerator for good measure. Some of the biologists and academics who attended the destruction felt a trace of regret. "We said to each other, 'This is kind of sad we have to destroy this,' " Dr. Jim Roth, an assistant dean for international programs at the school, recalls. "Especially the cultures we'd had since 1928." Less than two weeks later, Tom Ridge, the director of Homeland Security, announced at a Washington press conference that investigators had identified the anthrax that had been sent through the mail as belonging to the Ames strain. It now seemed likely that there was an Iowa State connection to the Ames strain, and that the original culture of the Ames isolate was sterilized and incinerated with the rest of the veterinary school's collection. Jim Roth had wondered about that possibility, and the school had contacted the F.B.I. and the Centers for Disease Control before killing the specimens. Both agencies approved the destruction. "They may be having some second thoughts about that, but it's too late now," Roth says. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 01:58:42 PM | link THE EXECUTION SQUAD Chris Floyd writes of yet on more thing sacrificed on the altar of post-9/11 political expedience by the Bush Cabal. ... Jose Bustani is an accomplished Brazilian diplomat, a man of learning and enlightenment, with extensive experience in international affairs, including postings in Vienna, Montreal, the United Nations and Moscow. For decades, he has served as a high-level negotiator on a number of international treaties, hammering out agreements on disarmament, pollution, scientific research and maritime law. In 1997, he became director general of the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which enforces the international Chemical Weapons Convention. In that post, as The Guardian reports, Bustani engineered the destruction of 2 million chemical weapons and the dismantling of two-thirds of the world's production facilities for biological mass murder. He was so well regarded by his colleagues that he was re-elected to a five-year term -- unanimously -- in May 2000. Just a few months ago, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell publicly lauded him for his "very impressive work." There was one thing wrong with Jose Bustani, however. He was negotiating to bring Iraq into the Chemical Weapons Convention. That was his job, after all: to get as many nations as possible under the treaty's umbrella. So he was trying to persuade Iraq to accept the Convention and its strictures -- including the destruction of chemical weapons stores and facilities, and constant independent monitoring to ensure compliance. If he had succeeded, the Middle East -- and the world -- would have been an immeasurably safer place. But there were sinister forces -- thugs -- who didn't want Bustani to succeed. These thugs have big plans for Iraq, you see. They're going to puff up their chests, beat their hairy bellies and rape Iraq, force it down into the dirt and have their way with it. But they can only do that if Iraq remains a threat -- or at least can be credibly framed as a threat to the little ones back home. And so George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and the rest of the pack started in on Bustani. First they softened him up with some bureaucratic brass knuckles: they illegally withheld U.S. funding for the Convention, leading to a cash crisis at the agency. Next came a boot in the groin: having themselves engineered the Convention's money troubles, they accused Bustani of "financial mismanagement" and demanded that Brazil recall him. The Brazilians refused. Then the switchblades came out. Last month, the thugs called for a vote of "no confidence" in Bustani from the Convention's 145 member nations. This was foiled -- like the gang's recent attempt to muscle in on Venezuela -- by an unexpected show of nerve from the "little guys" who normally quake when the thugs start to bellow. The no-confidence vote failed. Now the pack was in full cry. They called an unprecedented (and illegal) "special session" of the Convention to force Bustani's ouster. In good thug fashion, they put the squeeze on, threatening to bankrupt the agency or pull out of it altogether -- a move that would have collapsed the treaty and set off a world-wide explosion in chemical weapons production. (Even as it is, the thugs have arbitrarily excluded themselves from most of the treaty's provisions -- including the very same inspection programs that Iraq is condemned for rejecting.) And this week, they finally unloaded with both barrels. At the "special session" in The Hague on Monday, the thugs strong-armed 47 of the little guys into voting against Bustani. Seven countries, including Russia, stood their ground for the man they had all unanimously elected less than two years before, while 43 other countries abstained. More than 50 countries boycotted the shameful spectacle altogether. So the thugs had their way, as they always do in the end. (That Venezuela hiccup will be rectified soon enough, never fear. Chavez might as well book his room in Havana right now -- or else measure himself for a pine box. His days are numbered.) The pack bared their teeth, threw back their heads and brayed their triumph through the marble halls of Washington. After all, it was their second bloody carcass in as many weeks -- just a few days before, they had manipulated the ouster of Robert Watson, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Watson's crime? Taking a strong stand on global warming. In this case, the Thug-in-Chief acted on orders from on high -- the oil companies that bought and paid for him. Exxon Mobil sent a memo to the Bush administration "suggesting" that Watson be removed from his post -- and lo and behold, Watson is gone. Watson was replaced by Indian scientist Rajendra Pachauri. And what was his primary qualification? Well, last year he fought against a bid by the Indian government to investigate a gigantic financial boondoggle at the controversial Dabhol Power Plant, Rediff.com of India reports. And who built Dabhol? A little ole Texas company called Enron -- the thugs' biggest paymaster. ... For those saddened by what an obsequious toady Powell's become to apparently much lesser mortals, all I can say is don't shed too many tears. While he's usually been able to retain at least a semi-dignified composure while the rest of the pack was howling and frothing at the mouth, he's not the stuff of which great leaders are made. His true colors were established back at My Lai: ... On March 16, 1968, US soldiers from the Americal Division slaughtered 347 civilians--primarily old men, women, children, and babies--in the Vietnamese village of My Lai 4 (pronounced, very appropriately, as "me lie"). The grunts also engaged in torture and rape of the villagers. Around six months later, a soldier in the 11th Light Infantry Brigade--known among the men as "the Butcher's Brigade"--wrote a letter telling of widespread killing and torturing of Vietnamese civilians by entire units of the US military (he did not specifically refer to My Lai). The letter was sent to the general in charge of 'Nam and trickled down the chain of command to Major Colin Powell, a deputy assistant chief of staff at the Americal Division, who was charged with investigating the matter and formulating a response. After a desultory check--which consisted mainly of investigating the soldier who wrote the letter, rather than his allegations--Powell reported that everything was hunkey-dory. There may be some "isolated incidents" by individual bad seeds, but there were no widespread atrocities. He wrote: "In direct refutation of this portrayal is the fact that relations between Americal soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent." The matter was closed. To this day, we might not know about the carnage at My Lai if it hadn't been for another solider who later wisely sent a letter to his Congressman. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 01:36:35 PM | link ISRAELI AND PALESTINIAN FANTASIES Robert Toplin writes of unrealistic ideas each side has to abandon. ... Mindful of the Jewish people's historic experience with persecution, Israelis consider proposals for massive Palestinian resettlement totally unacceptable. The genocidal Nazi policies that destroyed six million European Jews followed three millennia of repression, intimidation and slaughter of Jews. Modern Israel grew out of a determination to create a safe homeland for Jews. Israel's settlers vowed never again to live as a persecuted minority under the thumb of a hostile majority. Placing millions of additional Palestinians within the tiny nation of Israel could lead, eventually, to an Arab majority in the country. (The high birth rate of Palestinians presently living in Israel is, in itself, alarming to the Israelis.) The continuing violence involving Palestinians and Israelis suggests that a large infusion of Palestinian settlers would create a volatile mix of cultures. Resettlement would also allow terrorists to take up residence in or near all Israeli communities. Not surprisingly, Jews consider peace proposals that include plans for resettlement grossly flawed. They will not accept arrangements that could make them vulnerable to a second Holocaust. Therefore, if Yasser Arafat, the Saudi crown prince and other Arab leaders wish to advance the cause of peace, they will have to remove this emotion-laden proposal from their plan. While the idea of resettlement is a Palestinian fantasy that greatly complicates efforts to resolve the crisis, Israelis, too, indulge in a fantasy that is an obstacle to peace. The Israelis have constructed numerous cities and villages in the West Bank and Gaza since the 1967 war. They have answered the Palestinian fantasy of resettlement in Israel with their own fantasy of settlement in Palestine. More than 200,000 Israeli settlers currently live in the West Bank. Jewish settlers travel regularly over highways connecting their communities, and soldiers in the Israeli army guard the routes and stop Palestinians at checkpoints. These practices, appropriately criticized by the Palestinians as forms of "occupation," fuel Palestinian resentment. Israel's proposals for Palestinian nationhood contrast glaringly with the global trend since World War II of giving peoples absolute control over their own contiguous territory. The Israelis have created a unique map for Palestine that is unlike the design of any independent state in the world. Imagine if Mexico controlled California and then promised to turn the area over to the Californians but demanded continued Mexican control of "settlements" in Los Angeles, San Francisco and other cities as well as military control of numerous highways connecting these urban centers. Would the Californians calmly accept such a strange approach to nationhood? No doubt, they would cry out against foreign occupation, much as the Palestinians do today with reference to the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. ... posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 01:27:05 PM | link MORE BLOWBACK The Bayani Magazine (via BuzzFlash) tells how the Philippine contingent of U.S. forces in the Forever War are facing CIA-trained adversaries. Unknown to most, the U.S. troops especially the Special Forces now in this Abu Sayyaf lair, are facing not merely a rag-tag band of bandits but hard core Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)-trained fighters. Most of the Abu Sayyaf leaders have fought Rambo-like in the deserts and mountains of Afghanistan in the 1980s after receiving training from the CIA, battling some of Russiašs best fighting paratroopers, a reality the Philippine military seemed to have forgotten. And they are now better and well armed, thanks to the millions of dollars of ransom collected from the so many hostages they have taken, some of which they brutally tortured, beheaded and killed. ... It certainly seems that they've not forgotten their training. Further details on the travels and current whereabouts of the former Afghan "freedom fighters" can be found in the revised edition of Unholy Wars: Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism by John K. Cooley, an ABC news correspondent based in Cyprus. ... Thousands of Muslim fighters from many parts of the world, including many young men from the Muslim-dominated but impoverished areas in Mindanao, enlisted to fight in Afghanistan with pay incentives ranging from $100 to $300 a month. The training of the moujahideens for guerilla warfare was undertaken by the CIA with the active collaboration of secret, usually, intelligence, services of the armed forces or select military officers in various countries, including our own. When the Russians pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989, the Moujahideens either returned to their home countries or proceeded to other countries and put their Afghan war military experience at the service of certain fundamentalist causes of Islam. This group (of Filipino Muslim Moujahideens) was the core of an armed guerilla band of several hundred men who moved from its Peshawar, Pakistan base to the southern Philippine Islands after the end of the Afghan war. Under the name of the Abu Sayyaf group, it operated on the fringe of the Moros Muslim insurgency. You can bet that the CIA was buying a few dozen copies of this book concurrent with their mouthpieces in the press denouncing it as a pack of lies. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 01:06:12 PM | link CRIMINAL NEGOTIATIONS FALL THROUGH A Reuters item tells us how some criminals are being frustrated in making a deal to avoid prosecution. The U.S. Justice Department has rejected an offer from embattled accounting firm Andersen to settle an obstruction of justice charge arising from the Enron collapse, the firm said on Thursday. Rusty Hardin, attorney for the Chicago-based firm said, "they just rejected it out of hand." ... The Big Five firm had said it would acknowledge its employees should not have destroyed thousands of Enron-related audit documents last fall after learning the Securities and Exchange Commission wanted to inspect the files. ... Hardin is similarly frustrated in his ongoing negotations to obtain deferred prosecution for client Harry "Slats" Grobnik, who's in the dock for the third time for mugging retirees and stealing their Social Security checks. Grobnik has indicated his willingness to admit his mistakes in return for a five-year deferred prosecution period, after which his indictment will be dropped if he's a good boy. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 11:33:56 AM | link ANOTHER STUPID DRUG LAW BACKFIRES A USA Today op-ed piece tells of the ramifications of yet another "git tuff on drugs" law that's the drug warrior equivalent of a dog licking its balls, except of course that the latter's not trying to fuck up the rest of the universe in the meantime. When Congress passed a law four years ago taking federal financial aid away from college students who had been convicted of drug crimes, it was hailed as a miracle cure. ''The best thing we can do for education is to get somebody clean and then get them back into school,'' said Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., the law's chief sponsor. Not a bad goal. But the supposed benefits haven't materialized. Instead, the law has sparked countermeasures at several universities and protests on more than 80 campuses by students who are seeing other results. Among the most problematic: * While the most trivial drug offenses can cost students their chance for a college education, students who commit rape, robbery and murder face no such outcome. So the sponsors' stated goal of showing that actions have consequences is scoffed at. By withholding federal financial aid, the program hurts low-income students with drug convictions who can't afford to attend college without aid. Wealthier students with similar convictions are not penalized if they don't depend on federal financial aid. By refusing aid to students who have already been punished for drug crimes, the law ''undermines the process'' in which colleges offer students a fresh start, says Hampshire College President Gregory Prince Jr. After the Bush administration began aggressively enforcing the law, which had been largely ignored, more than 15,000 students with drug records lost financial aid for all or part of this year. Another 10,000 who failed to answer a question on government loan applications about whether they had a drug conviction also were denied aid. The vast majority of the students penalized have family incomes of $30,000 or less. ... Look for the same knuckle-dragging dumbasses to "fix" the problem by proposing legislation to deny financial aid to anyone with anything worse than a parking ticket. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 11:22:42 AM | link A FUN EDITORIAL? JUDGE FOR YOURSELF Here's an entertaining editorial about the GOP and the federal judiciary (via BuzzFlash). A mass will be held May 1 at St. Andrew's Cathedral in Little Rock to pray for the judicial system. The judicial system has never needed it more. The Arkansas lawyers and judges who attend should aim some of their prayers at a special guest, Justice Clarence Thomas of the United States Supreme Court, who will speak at a luncheon following the mass. The blood of democracy is on Thomas' hands. He was one of five justices who rushed past judicial activism all the way to judicial assault, forcing an unelected president on the American people. District of Columbia Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman needs tons of prayer. He may need impeachment too. In his book, "Blinded by the Right," David Brock, once an intimate of Silberman, says the judge reveled in guerilla politics, conniving with Clinton-haters and conservative crackpots. Silberman is lying low. A colleague of Silberman's at the D.C. court, Judge David Sentelle, has much to answer for. Sentelle was chiefly responsible for assigning Kenneth Starr to investigate President Bill Clinton, even though he knew Starr was a savage partisan with a personal grudge against Clinton. Exactly the sort of person who should never be appointed "independent counsel," in other words. The judges of the 8th Circuit Court in St. Louis could use some high-intensity praying, particularly the trio of Pasco Bowman, James Loken and Clarence Beam, who accommodated Starr by removing Judge Henry Woods of Little Rock from one of Starr's Whitewater cases. The judges evidently feared, and with good reason, that Woods would preside impartially. Judicial impartiality was poison to Starr's causes. Like Roy Cohn, he was always more interested in having the right judge than in having the right law. It'll take long, hard prayer to save Judge John F. Nangle. Nangle not only dismissed ethical complaints brought against Starr by a public-spirited Connecticut lawyer, he ridiculed and threatened the lawyer. When the federal district judges in Arkansas raised similar questions about Starr and asked for an investigation, Nangle denied their request too, and he ordered both request and denial kept secret. Robert Ray, who succeeded Starr, spilled the beans about the judges' petition when he filed his final report on the Whitewater affair. Despite a clear public interest in full disclosure, Nangle keeps the file sealed, for no apparent reason except to shield Starr. More judicial sinners are the judges who dallied with the Federalist Society, an elitist group funded by Richard Mellon Scaife, the dotty right-wing millionaire who also financed much of the anti-Clinton movement and was a patron of Starr's. Some of the complaints against Starr were about conflicts of interest stemming from the Scaife connection. The federal court system began to degenerate when Ronald Reagan made conservative ideology and party loyalty the principal qualifications for judicial appointment. It was that kind of judge who appointed George W. Bush president, and now President Bush is appointing that kind of judge. A vicious circle, indeed. One mass will not be nearly enough. posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 11:09:03 AM | link AD OF THE WEEK posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 11:01:15 AM | link PROPAGANDA VIA OMISSION A USA Today item that sounds like it was written by Otto Reich is most telling for what it omits. The goal of the piece is to convince the proles that more money needs to be sent to Colombia to kill all the terrorists, who are all drug-running evil bastards in league with satan. But, while the article prominently mentions and discusses the leftist/marxist/commie/pinko FARC and ELN groups, not a word is said about the AUC or the Colombian government itself, which at the very least tolerates if it doesn't support the AUC which, by the way, has finally been listed as a "terrorist" organization along with the others. Let's see what the State Department's 2001 Colombian country report has to say about the AUC. By the way, it also has plenty to say about the FARC and ELN, but the commie moles at State managed to "sabotage" the report and include a bit about the AUC and the Colombian government. ... The authorities sometimes infringed on citizens' privacy rights. A number of journalists were killed, and journalists continued to work in an atmosphere of threats and intimidation, in some instances from local officials, but primarily from paramilitary groups and guerrillas. Journalists practice self-censorship to avoid reprisals. The paramilitaries and guerrillas targeted religious leaders. There were some restrictions on freedom of movement, generally because of security concerns. Violence and instability in rural areas displaced between 275,000 and 347,000 civilians from their homes in during the year. Almost one-fourth of these movements occurred in massive displacements. Exact numbers of displaced persons are difficult to obtain because some persons were displaced more than once, and many displaced persons do not register with the Government or other entities. However, while no consensus exists regarding the exact number of internally displaced persons (IDP's), observers agreed that there has been a significant increase in displacements over the past 3 years. The total number of internally displaced citizens during the last 6 years may exceed 1 million. There were reports that security force members, paramilitaries, and guerrillas killed, threatened, and harassed members of human rights groups. Violence and extensive societal discrimination against women, abuse of children, and child prostitution are serious problems. Extensive societal discrimination against indigenous people and minorities continued. Labor leaders and activists continued to be targets of high levels of violence. Child labor is a widespread problem. Trafficking in women and girls for the purpose of sexual exploitation is a problem. "Social cleansing" killings of street children, prostitutes, homosexuals, and others deemed socially undesirable by paramilitary groups, guerrillas, and vigilante groups continued to be serious problems. NGO's attributed a large majority of political killings, social cleansing killings, and forced disappearances to paramilitary groups. According to military estimates, the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) paramilitary umbrella organization has a membership of between 8,000 and 11,000 combatants. The AUC exercised increasing influence during the year and fought to extend its presence through violence and intimidation into areas previously under guerrilla control while conducting selective killings of civilians whom it alleged collaborated with guerrillas. Throughout the country, paramilitary groups killed, tortured, and threatened civilians suspected of sympathizing with guerrillas in an orchestrated campaign to terrorize them into fleeing their homes, to deprive guerrillas of civilian support and allow paramilitary forces to challenge the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) for control of narcotics cultivations and strategically important territories. They also fought guerrillas for control of some lucrative coca-growing regions and engaged directly in narcotics production and trafficking. The AUC increasingly tried to depict itself as an autonomous organization with a political agenda, although in practice it remained a mercenary vigilante force, financed by criminal activities and sectors of society that are targeted by guerrillas. Although some paramilitary groups reflect rural residents' desire to organize solely for self-defense, most are vigilante organizations, and still others are actually the paid private armies of narcotics traffickers or large landowners. Popular support for these organizations grew as guerrilla violence increased in the face of a slowly evolving peace process. The Government continued to insist that paramilitary groups, like guerrillas, were an illegal force and significantly increased efforts to apprehend paramilitary members. State security forces captured three times as many paramilitaries during the year as during the same period in 2000; however, the public security forces' record in dealing with paramilitary groups remained mixed, and in some locations elements of state security forces tolerated or even collaborated with paramilitary groups. ... posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 10:21:23 AM | link DESTRUCTION FOR DESTRUCTION'S SAKE You can cut the self-loathing with a knife over at Ha'aretz today. ... The IDF has given up denying that some soldiers looted - money, jewels and video cameras - private homes. That can be explained by officers too weak to impose discipline on their soldiers and by soldiers too weak to fight material temptation. But the systematic destruction of the data banks was not a matter of personal weakness by either officers or soldiers. Let's not deceive ourselves; this was not a mission to search and destroy the terrorist infrastructure. If the forces breaking into every hard disk of every bank and clinic, commercial consultant's office or PA ministry, thought that a list of weapons or wanted men was inside the disk, all they had to do was copy the information and pass it on to the Shin Bet. If they thought incriminating evidence was hidden in the Education Ministry and the International Bank of Palestine and in a shop that rents prosthetics, the soldiers would have examined document after document, and not thrown the files on the floor without opening them. This was not a whim, or crazed vengeance, by this or that unit, nor a personal vandalistic urge of a soldier whose buddies didn't dare stop him. There was a decision made to vandalize the civic, administrative, cultural infrastructure developed by Palestinian society. Was it an explicit order or one given with a wink? Was it an order or was it the result of permission given to soldiers to do what they want? Did the order - or wink - come down from the battalion commander or from the brigadier? Was it from the headquarters of IDF forces in the West Bank or from IDF Operations? Did it come from the general in command of the Central Command or from general headquarters? Either way, the scenes of systematic destruction show how the IDF translated into the field the instructions inherent in the political echelon's policies: Israel must destroy Palestinian civil institutions, sabotaging for years to come the Palestinian goal for independence, sending all of Palestinian society backward. It's so easy and comforting to think of the entire Palestinian society as primitive, bloodthirsty terrorists, after the raw material and product of their intellectual, cultural, social and economic activity has been destroyed. That way, the Israeli public can continue to be deceived into believing that terror is a genetic problem and not a sociological and political mutation, horrific as it may be, derived from the horrors of the occupation. ... posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 10:14:47 AM | link DO YOU FEEL A DRAFT? Looks like the Cabal's going to have to replenish Big Oil's mercenary squad with some additional warm bodies. The commander of U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf has told senior Pentagon officers that a new war against Iraq would likely take five divisions and 200,000 troops. Gen. Tommy Franks "wants to do a Desert Storm II," said one official, referring to the 550,000 troops deployed to the region in 1990-91 to evict Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Two defense sources said the briefings by Gen. Franks, who heads the U.S. Central Command that oversees U.S. forces in Central Asia and the Persian Gulf, came as the Bush administration is moving closer to deciding on a general military campaign to topple Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Officials say it likely will rely on fewer ground troops than suggested by Gen. Franks and call on extensive use of air power and indigenous rebel forces. ... Not to worry. That last paragraph is, if anything, an understatement. The Powell Doctrine still rules. The sacred Iraqi Kurds will be used to absorb most of the gunfire. That is, if they don't want to be ceded to Turkey after Saddam is replaced with a UNOCAL VP. Also, most of the U.S. action will be, as always, via the air. This not only prevents U.S. ground troops from having to be sent in, but also requires trainloads of money to be sent to the Carlyle Group to build more bombs. As they used to put it daily in the corridors at Enron, "talk about win-win synergies!" posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 09:57:58 AM | link FOX ANNOUNCES NEW SHOW Fox News has announced the creation of a new program to compete directly with CNN's "Crossfire". The move was prompted by concerns that the CNN program had become too unfair and Marxist since the arrival of Paul Begala and James Carville. Both were described by a Fox spokesman as "too politically biased" for the debate format program to be fair. Fox had originally planned for its "Hannity and Colmes" program to compete with "Crossfire", but guests complained that ultra-liberal co-host Colmes - who has since been released - had become too biased and unfair in his questioning. One famous guest even stormed off the set, complaining that he'd had more than enough of Colmes constantly badgering him with queries like, "But isn't there another side to this issue?" and "I beg to disagree." Fox News president Roger Ailes said that while they were still ironing out the rough spots, it looked like the new debate program, tentatively called "Circlejerk", would be variously co-hosted by a wide spectrum of respected commentators and political insiders including Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan, Mary Matalin, Elliot Abams, Robert Novak, Oliver North, Ann Coulter, Tom DeLay and several others still in early negotations. Ailes said he not only expected but would demand a vigorous, no-holds-barred debate format wherein all sides of an issue would be thoroughly examined, "unlike another so-called debating forum dominated by doodyheads that I'll not dignify by naming." An innovative touch promised by Ailes is a weekly "liberal roast" wherein a liberal will be spit-roasted and eaten by the co-hosts and the guests. Ailes chuckled while discussing this novel twist, "While none of those satanic baby-killers even approaches good taste, I sure hope a few of them will taste good. Dibs on the cojones!" posted by Steven Baum 4/26/2002 09:19:18 AM | link Thursday, April 25, 2002 "SHARON'S WORD IS WORTH NIL" The folks at Intel Briefing aren't mincing any words about Ariel Sharon, even while maintaining general respect and support for Israel. I guess they're only partially anti-semitic or, of course, self-loathing. The present Israeli Prime Minister, the former and highly controversial General, 'Arik' Sharon has been in the forefront and his views often appear to go well beyond a hatred of the Arabs merely because of their terrorist activities. While Officer Commanding (OC) IDF Southern Command he went so far as to advocate the formation of a special military command under direct General Staff control to eradicate Palestinian opponents of Israel throughout the world. Sharon had amply proved his ferocious anti-Palestinian credentials as Commander of the special Unit-101 and during his tenure as OC Southern Command when his violent and unorthodox military actions proved effective against an Arab insurgency. Much later he was to be held responsible for the massacre of over 1500 Palestinian refugees in Sabra and Shatilla camps in Beirut by Israel's Lebanese Christian allies. Sharon, Minister of Defence at the time was accused of negligence by Israel's own Kahan commission into the events during the invasion of the Lebanon in 1982, for not using the Israeli troops surrounding the camp to prevent the massacre. However, many expert observers are much less charitable towards Sharon and lay the blame squarely at his feet, some would even argue that he deliberately encouraged the massacre, but though the suspicion remains no conclusive evidence that might prove him guilty of this war crime has been forthcoming. A former Lebanese warlord Elie Hobeika was reportedly intending to tell a Belgian court that Ariel Sharon was behind the 1982 massacre of Palestinian refugees, but was conveniently killed in January 2002 when his booby-trapped car exploded, making it even less likely that Sharon need concern himself with the past. Ambassador Philip Habib was President Ronald Reagan's Special Middle East Envoy in 1982 and he gave a frightening estimation of Sharon's character that should be remembered when Colin Powell or any other US envoy is negotiating with him "Sharon was a killer obsessed with hatred of Palestinians. I had promised Arafat that his people would not get any harm. Sharon, however, ignored this commitment entirely. Sharon's word is worth nil." The warnings were posted as long ago as March 2001 that Sharon had not changed his views on becoming Prime Minister, when on returning from talks with President Bush in Washington he made it clear that any proposed US plans to build a new Arab coalition to confront Iraq could not be achieved at Israel's expense. Sharon indicated his forces would continue to target Palestinian militants for killing, a policy that has come under fire from the US and that Israel might be prepared to be flexible, but not "when it comes to the lives of Israeli citizens and their security." The appalling crimes committed against Israel and many Western countries by Arab terrorists over the years are rightly condemned and such terrorist groups must be destroyed. Israel as a profound friend of the West and the only liberal democracy in the Middle East deserves both respect and support, but its reputation has been severely tarnished by the actions of a violent and prejudiced leader. Israel's offensive against a largely defenceless Palestinian population has been rightly condemned by much of the international community and the IDF's actions in the Jenin refugee camp so reminiscent of a small scale version of the Nazi destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto has been castigated by human rights groups worldwide. Just how long a people with a tradition of both justice and compassion, and particularly with centuries of experience of prejudice and oppression can condone the rule of a man such as Sharon is questionable. posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 05:01:09 PM | link AN EARLIER AND UNLUCKIER VENEZUELA Just the other night I was pondering the parallels between the successful U.S.-engineered coup in Iran in 1953 and the recent unsuccessful coup attempt in Venezuela. Mark Almond went a bit beyond pondering. ... There is an interesting parallel with Muhammad Mossadeq, prime minister of Iran in 1953. He was the victim of a coup co-ordinated by the CIA in August that year. It put a stop to Mossadeq's campaign to use Iran's vast oil wealth for domestic development schemes at the expense of western oil companies which, in collusion with the corrupt elite grouped around the shah, were milking the country. The west's fear then was that radical nationalists would seize control of Iranian oil; this month, a Middle Eastern crisis coincided with Chavez's restrictions on oil output to the United States. In 1953, as now, reporters detected growing opposition to a recently elected leader who was flouting US interests. The western press reported a popular uprising against Mossadeq and ignored the presence of American intelligence officers, partly because some journalists were actually passing on CIA-produced propaganda and cash to the anti-Mossadeq forces. The CIA chief Allen Dulles was better informed about Iran than newspaper readers, because those journalists who relayed romantic tosh about the "quasi-religious devotion" of Iranians to the shah were actually sending Dulles more detailed reports. The only contemporary mention of any CIA connection was Newsweek's charming report about the excitement in the shah's temporary refuge in Rome at Mossadeq's fall. The "hubbub" was such that, when Dulles arrived at the Excelsior, "no one paid any attention to him". The New York Times called Mossadeq "a rabid self-seeking nationalist" and "an appalling caricature". Its editorials decided that the events surrounding his fall "bring us hope"; but they warned that "now Iran's big task is to salvage her economy". This, apparently (though it was not mentioned), was to be achieved by selling oil at knockdown prices to a new US-led consortium. Change the name to Chavez and substitute links to Cuba for Mossadeq's alleged links to Moscow, and the New York Times could have reprinted its 49-year-old material in 2002 without anyone noticing. There is one big difference, however, between Iran then and Venezuela now. Iranians took another 25 years to topple the shah, during which their anti-Americanism was nurtured with well-known consequences. But hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans - always derided as "poor" in the western media - took only 48 hours to reverse the oil barons' putsch. Representatives of the paragovernmental International Republican Institute, which channelled money and expertise most recently to Serbia in 2000 and Peru last year, described the change in Caracas to a regime of oilmen, bankers and generals as the triumph of "people power" and "civic society" and (most Orwellian) as "a restoration of normal democracy". The price of Venezuelan crude slid to its natural, good-neighbourly market level again. The new regime made it clear that it would adopt IMF prescriptions - more poverty for the many, more exports of capital for the few. Joy all round! But the usually reticent US technicians of regime change had celebrated too openly and too quickly. Real crowds, rather than the synthetic variety, stormed the Miraflores Palace and ousted the successor regime before it even had time to finish toasting itself with champagne. There is still work to be done if the Venezuelan people are to correct their unfortunate failure to accept the verdict of "people power". Chavez is certainly not out of the woods yet. It was only because the shah's subordinates bungled an earlier attempt to topple Mossadeq that Dulles had to send in the experts to settle things in August 1953. George Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, warned: "I hope that Hugo Chavez takes the message that his own people are sending him." This is people power lite, with no nonsense about majorities, certainly not sweaty ones. Don't be surprised if the Mossadeq model is played out in full and that, next time, the anti-Chavez forces manage to suppress protests from the barrios. And don't be surprised if the overall Iranian model is played out in full. A post-Chavez regime, ruthlessly suppressing dissent, could well provoke a Latin American equivalent of the 1979 Iranian revolution. ... Later in the same article, he delivers a well-deserved pummeling to the IMF. ... The International Monetary Fund's model is based on the experience of exchange rate stability in northern countries with highly developed economies and reasonably honest politicians. It does not easily transfer south. As Argentina recently showed, the IMF's obsession with predictable exchange rates (as crude as US$1 = 1 peso) can have revolutionary consequences. This is not only because absurdly high fixed exchange rates choke economies and enrage the poor by throwing them out of work and forcing down their living standards. It is also because the corrupt political elites of such states adopt the IMF's "tough medicine" not in order to stabilise their economies, but in order to make their ill-gotten gains, stolen from the rest of the population, easily transferable abroad. This is the ultimate effect of IMF currency policies. They have proved to be a bonanza for the controlling mafias, politely called "reform-minded" politicians. Unlike their predecessors, who operated irresponsibly inflationary rackets, they have been able to squirrel away their swag in western banks without any loss on the exchange. In Argentina, the implosion came and the regime could not control the tumult. In Russia, which embarked on a similar journey after 1991, Boris Yeltsin closed down the parliamentary opposition and sent in tanks to suppress dissent on the streets in October 1993, while Bill Clinton cooed: "Boris, you just get stronger and stronger." Exhausted by decades of Soviet-style communism and, with their low birth rates, hardly able to replenish the population, Russians and other east European peoples may lack the vitality to rebel against further decades of western-imposed austerity - particularly as so many believed that the western model would make them all rich quickly. Poles used to rise when the price of sausages went up, as they did in 1956, 1970, 1976 and 1980. But since 1989, post-communism, with its deflation of expectations, has knocked the stuffing out of them. With vast sections of the once militant working class on the dole or reduced to penury, wives of ministers talk like arriviste Marie Antoinettes, one remarking that conversation in Polish society has become so advanced that people ask not what sort of mobile phone you have, but whether you have an ISDN connection. (What is the Polish for "Let them eat broadband instead"?) ... posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 04:57:23 PM | link WALL STREET BANDITS UNDER FIRE The folks at Forbes have taken a break from sipping on their Molotov cocktails to report on further corruption and illegal practices on Wall Street vis a vis the Internet and telecom bubble, i.e. the most recent tulip frenzy. So why are the authorities going after those poor guys just trying to make a billion bucks or two? Wall Street is qualitatively no different than Las Vegas. You're gambling money to try to make more money. If the casinos weren't honest and the proles knew that they weren't honest, the casinos would disappear. And if the proles figure out what a huge pack of grifters and con artists run Wall Street, then well .... let's just say the system would go through a transient phase. Nail a few of the biggest offenders now and then and the proles will happily keep shoveling their money at a house that keeps a hell of a larger percentage of the take than any casino. First, the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) is widening its probe of alleged cheating by Wall Street firms in the underwriting of hot technology stock offerings. J.P. Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and the Robertson Stephens unit of FleetBoston Financial have been told that they could face civil charges for taking excessive commissions from big investors who were allocated shares in oversubscribed initial public offereings in 1999 and 2000, according to The Wall Street Journal. Second, the New York attorney general has issued a subpoena to Salomon Smith Barney, a unit of Citigroup, seeking information about reports issued by its star telecom analyst Jack Grubman. The information request covers what Grubman was telling Salomon's investment bankers, information about how he was compensated and drafts of research reports, according to The New York Times. The NASD investigation of J.P. Morgan Chase follows a similar inquiry into IPO dealings by Credit Suisse First Boston. Credit Suisse recently settled charges with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the NASD relating to its possibly corrupt allocation of IPO shares by agreeing to pay $100 million and admitting to technical violations of securities regulations. The NASD wants to know whether Wall Street firms gave favored investors outsized portions of IPOs that were oversubscribed and therefore sure to rise on the first day of trading. There are essentially no rules for how such shares are allocated, but if the firms allotted the shares in exchange for kickbacks--as has been alleged--that is illegal. The kickbacks could come in the form of excessive commissions on apparently unrelated stock trades or in promises to do other business, such as investment banking deals, with the IPO underwriters down the road. During the late 1990s boom, receiving shares in IPOs such as VA Software or Amazon was free money. The question is whether the Wall Street firms supposedly serving the interests of the issuers grabbed some of that money back. The SEC also wants to know whether the firms engaged in fraud in creating the IPO pops in the first place by coercing investors who got the shares into placing orders for the same stocks at higher prices on the first day of trading. This practice is known as "laddering." As was the case for CSFB, an additional danger for the firms being investigated is that findings or admissions will provide fodder for civil lawsuits. There are already 1,000 suits involving 300 offerings and 45 securities firms on file. Once the shares were issued, the cry on Wall Street was "Buy!" One of the loudest criers was Salomon's Grubman. Grubman has already been named in civil suits, including one highly publicized arbitration claim earlier this month. He allegedly earned $20 million a year as an analyst. As with New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's allegations against Merrill Lynch and its Internet stock guru Henry Blodget, the charge is that Grubman and others recommended the stocks not based on their analysis but because they hoped to curry favor with the recommended firms, who would then throw investment banking business Salomon's way. Unlike Blodget, Grubman remains on Salomon's payroll. Salomon generated more investment banking fees from telecom companies than any other firm on Wall Street and Spitzer is seeking information about AT&T, Verizon, Worldcom and the bankrupt Global Crossing, among others, the Times says. Beyond the regulatory investigations and the horrible publicity--as well as possible fines--the potential civil damages claims based on related allegations are unfathomable. Allegations of corrupt research and IPO allegations have been in the air for at least the last two years. But it would have been hard for even well-financed plaintiffs to pursue cases against the firms or to effectively demand information that could lead to specific allegations. But it's much harder to fob off subpoenas from the NASD or the New York attorney general, who is now starting to make common cause with the SEC and other states. Even if civil claims cannot be proven, the tough talkers on Wall Street have a history of settling, not fighting, when the heat is on. And suddenly the cauldron is boiling. posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 03:29:08 PM | link DEBUNKING ARGENTINIAN MYTHOLOGY As usual, Dean Baker cuts through the steaming piles of bullshit the major media outlets are attempting to pass off as economic news. Here, he deconstructs a Washington Post article parroting IMF pronouncements like they were holy writ. This article discusses the IMF and World Bank's recent record as they prepare for their spring meetings. At one point the article presents comments from IMF director Horst Koehler, asserting that Argentina will have to adjust to lower living standards because of its past profligacy. It is worth noting that Argentina's central government actually kept its non interest-payment spending constant, measured as a share of GDP, from 1994 -- when it was held up as a model by the IMF and World Bank -- until 2001, when it had to default on its debt. It developed large deficits over this period primarily because it had to pay higher interest rates on its past debt. The rise in interest rates was in turn explained both by the peg of its currency to the dollar, which was supported by the IMF, and also by a series of international financial crises, including the 1995 Mexican peso crisis, the 1997 East Asian financial crisis, and the Russian and Brazilian financial crises of 1998-99. The other major factor contributing to Argentina's deficits were the transition costs associated with its decision to privatize its social security program, at the recommendation of the World Bank, in 1994. If Argentina had not privatized social security, it would have had a balanced budget in 2001. In other words, Argentina's recent horrible economic performance is attributable to and not in spite of the eternal wisdom of the IMF. The IMF told it how to peg its currency and to privatize social security, both of which aggravated deficits. Also, the various financial crises mentioned were arguably worsened or even created by similar IMF "fixes." posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 03:01:41 PM | link CAN I GET A WITLESS? Chris Floyd shares some sunny, upbeat observations about a holy future so bright ... well, you know how bright it is. You will be much relieved to know that President Bush's witless dithering while the Holy Land burns is, in fact, a manifestation of the will of God. That's because Witless was appointed to his post not, as you might think, by five corrupt bagmen on the Supreme Court, but by the Almighty Himself. The revelation of this divine anointing was proclaimed at a Texas church this week -- on Easter Sunday no less -- in the presence of Bush the Father and Bush the Son. The latter received the Word of his apotheosis with a humble chuckle and lordly nod of his head, AP reports, as the Reverend Michael Taylor of Canaan Baptist Church looked back on the glorious five weeks of recount litigation that parked Junior's blessed butt in the Oval Office. "My friend, President Bush, for us who believe, that day of the counting it was all over but the shouting," cried Taylor, as the rafters rang with "Amen!" from the congregation. The recount result, Taylor said, was "the will of God, who appoints those who are in authority to be there." (Including, of course, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Slobodan Milosevic, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Mullah Omar, Idi Amin, Ayatollah Khomeini, King George III -- God's little sunbeams every one, raised up and confirmed in power by His mighty hand.) Taylor promised there would be "blessings to the believer" on the final day of reckoning, but warned that God would take a break from meddling in electoral politics to "launch the most terrifying judgement on the unbelievers," who will burn in eternal hellfire for their failure to subscribe to the narrow set of superstitions, prejudices and self-selected cultural norms embraced by a certain number of white American fundamentalists in the early 21st century. Braced by this message of exquisite theological subtlety, Bush ran out and ordered the divinely appointed leader of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat, to "denounce terrorism" by making a speech, in Arabic, to that effect to his people. At that very moment, of course, Arafat was barricaded in his office by the divinely appointed Ariel Sharon, with no electricity and no access to communications, save for a few cell phones with fading batteries, and Israeli tanks pointing their gun barrels at the door. Bush also urged Arafat to use his Palestinian Authority police to "do more" to round up suspected terrorists. At that very moment, of course, Israeli military forces were arresting and/or shooting Palestinian Authority police by the hundreds and destroying their offices all across the West Bank, effectively destroying their ability to operate in any capacity whatsoever. Hellbound disbelievers in Bush's divine wisdom might be forgiven (as if hellbound disbelievers could be forgiven, of course!) for thinking these presidential adjurations were nothing more than the senseless blatherings of a weak and ignorant mind overwhelmed by events. But as always, hellbound disbelievers would be wrong. ... posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 02:52:06 PM | link FURTHER ENRON CRIMES REVEALED Andrea Cappannari reports on how Enron engineered the California "energy crisis". Note how current Secretary of the Army Thomas White ran the division most engaged in the swindle. In a hearing before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee on April 11, California Public Utilities Commission President Loretta Lynch and California Power Authority Chairman S. David Freeman charged that Enron Corporation's manipulation of the energy market was at the root of California's energy crisis last year. According to authorities, by late 2000 Enron oversaw 30 percent of energy bought and sold in the state's deregulated market, giving it enormous leverage over supply and pricing. California is currently demanding Enron and other energy suppliers refund the state $8.9 billion because of unfair trading practices. Wenonah Hauter, from the watchdog group Public Citizen, testified that Enron's subsidiaries acted in concert with one another so the giant energy trader could inflate prices. This occurred under the oversight of Thomas White, Bush's secretary of the army who is under pressure to resign because of his actions as an Enron executive. "In the first three months of 2001 at the height of skyrocketing prices and rolling blackouts, White's division traded more than 11 million megawatts of electricity in the California market alone, making nearly 98 percent of these trades," Hauter said. At the same time, she said, "Enron divisions set astronomical prices up to $2,500 a megawatt hour [the standard price at the time was less than $340 a megawatt hour]. By selling power to itself at inflated prices, Enron helped skyrocket prices in California's deregulated market." Hauter continued, "Federal and state regulators found it very difficult to trace Enron's trades, since the company had four separate divisions interacting in the wholesale and retail markets, and with each other.... Engaging in transfer pricing allowed these various Enron divisions to overstate revenue and contribute to the accounting gimmickry that inflated the company's share price," Hauter stated. In addition to these methods, Lynch and Hauter said Enron used its transmission capacity to drive up the cost of electricity by creating congestion on the power grid. According to Hauter, inside traders have reported Enron used its control of transmission points throughout California and on its borders to influence wholesale energy trading. Currently, the Nevada Public Utilities Commission is investigating allegations made against the company with regards to illegal practices at the power grids located on the California-Nevada state line. ... Enron utilized its close connections with the Bush administration to facilitate its price-gouging and profiteering practices. Earlier this year the San Francisco Chronicle reported about the memo passed to Vice President Dick Cheney by former Enron President Kenneth Lay in April 2001 during a one-on-one meeting between the two. The memo outlined the company's position on federal energy policy and spelled out Enron's strong disagreement with government-imposed price caps, something several state officials were recommending to stabilize the situation. While California's treasury was being drained of what eventually totaled $11 billion and residents faced huge energy bills, Lay wrote, "Events in California and in other parts of the country demonstrated that the benefits of competition have yet to be realized and have not yet reached consumers." ... posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 02:03:56 PM | link NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR COUPS The NYTimes tells of one U.S. funding mechanism for the coup plotters in Venezuela. In the past year, the United States channeled hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to American and Venezuelan groups opposed to President Hugo Chávez, including the labor group whose protests led to the Venezuelan president's brief ouster this month. The funds were provided by the National Endowment for Democracy, a nonprofit agency created and financed by Congress. As conditions deteriorated in Venezuela and Mr. Chávez clashed with various business, labor and media groups, the endowment stepped up its assistance, quadrupling its budget for Venezuela to more than $877,000. While the endowment's expressed goal is to promote democracy around the world, the State Department's human rights bureau is examining whether one or more recipients of the money may have actively plotted against Mr. Chávez. The bureau has put a $1 million grant to the endowment on hold pending that review, an official said. ... One wonders how much the endowment spent last year promoting "democracy" in, say, Uzbekistan. posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 11:37:19 AM | link DELAY PIMPS DAUGHTER FOR CASH Remember the Tom DeLay who was caught on tape telling an audience of ultra-Baptist knuckle-draggers not to send their children to Texas A&M and Baylor because both notoriously conservative schools were too liberal? One of the things DeLay (who was booted out of Baylor for partying too much, by the way) said was: "My daughter went there. You know, she had horrible experiences with coed dorms and guys who spent the weekends in the rooms with girls, and all this kind of stuff went on there." So just what has DeLay done to protect his sacred daughter from such things since she left school? The following, according to a Sept. 22, 2000 Washington Post article. House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), legendary on Capitol Hill for his aggressive efforts to cultivate corporate interests, hit on a new way of rewarding his friends last weekend, flying more than 30 lobbyists to Las Vegas for a golf tournament and a round of partying. ... The weekend included a late-night party Saturday in DeLay's suite at the Rio Hotel and Casino, which featured a living room, bar and hot tub on the balcony. DeLay was not present, aides said; the event was hosted by his daughter, Dani Ferro, the campaign manager for DeLay's reelection campaign. After the party, Ferro told associates that a lobbyist poured champagne on her while she was in the hot tub. posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 11:30:38 AM | link QUOTE OF THE WEEK This week's quote is one that was apparently allowed out of the White House propaganda ministry because they thought it would evoke sympathy. Talk about tin ears. "When my son is mad at me and he looks at me and says, 'Mom, don't spin me,' it just hurts me." Karen Hughes, the White House communications chief who's moving back to Texas posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 11:18:27 AM | link PURE ENTERTAINMENT BartCop quotes some anencephalic Freeper who has no idea how thoroughly and loudly he's proving the illegitimacy of he and his ideological cohorts. This pertains to the appearance of James Carville and Paul Begala on "Crossfire", i.e. the appearance of liberals who actually fight back at the reactionary screamers who've dominated the show since its inception. "The GOP avoiding Crossfire is a start -- though it makes them look like wimps or whiners. Too bad there doesn't seem to be anybody on our side capable of standing up to Carvile and Bugala. It would be nice if there was, but there ain't. So the only REAL solution to this Crossfire problem is to drive the show off the air. It isn't enough for GOP leaders to boycott it." "Carvile will just crow about what cowards they are. Besides, if the GOOD conservative debaters avoid Crossfire, that means only BAD conservative debaters will be there to defend GOP positions. Kind of like the liberals being stuck with Alan Colmes for a champion. If that happens, Serpenthead and his feeder will score even MORE points against us than they already are. Crossfire the show has to go. Boycott. Blast Fax. Complaint Calls -- everything that can be done has to be done. We have to shut these guys up and get them off the air." I'll have to contact BartCop and ask if he's got an address so I can send a "KICK ME I'M STUPID" t-shirt along to the Freeper. He's earned every thread of it. Further down in today's BartCop we find the following from USNews: "The GOP whisper campaign to boycott CNN's political show Crossfire has become official policy. Top leaders have told members not to go on the show because they feel James Carville and Paul Begala are unfair to them and their views." I concur. Both Carville and Begala should be forced, at gunpoint if necessary, to attend one of Pat Buchanan and Robert Novak's seminars on fairness and manners. By the way, for "top leaders" you can read Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin and Karl Rove, the ideological purity squad that currently controls every word coming out of the White House. And for that extra bit of entertainment, remember that Matalin is married to Carville. The GOP boycotters of "Crossfire" are appearing instead on Fox's "Hannity and Colmes", where Colmes, the token wimp liberal, is much "fairer". As BartCop puts it: Remember, when conservatives lose a debate, they don't get even, they quit and go to Fox. posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 10:57:47 AM | link "I KILLED A POLICEMAN" It's nice to see Jesse Ventura occasionally participate in the public realm in something other than a self-congratulating, preening mode. Gov. Jesse Ventura is again speaking out strongly in favor of legalizing marijuana, particularly for medical use. He sent a video address in support of legalization to the conference of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws at its meetings in San Francisco this week. "I'm sending you this greeting to show my support for the good work you're doing, especially in the field of medical marijuana," he said, according to a transcript of the video. "What are we waiting for? How much should people suffer because others won't use common sense?," Ventura added. ... If this movement gets any legs, I can see it now. The Holy War on Drugs Propaganda Ministry will hire an anorexic actress, have her shave her head and put on make-up to achieve a deathly pallor, and have her say, "I killed a policeman" from her deathbed on one of their commercials conflating drug use with funding terrorism. Anyone wanna bet how soon? It's times like this I almost wish I believed in a real hell. posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 10:45:32 AM | link HAPPY FUN TIMES IN UZBEKISTAN The Marines are setting up bases in Uzbekistan, one of the new happy fun time friends of the U.S. since 9/11. Here are some excerpts from the State Department's Human Rights Report for Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan is an authoritarian state with limited civil rights. The Constitution provides for a presidential system with separation of powers between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches; however, in practice President Islam Karimov and the centralized executive branch that serves him dominate political life. ... The Government's human rights record remained very poor, and it continued to commit numerous serious abuses. Citizens cannot exercise the right to change their government peacefully; the Government does not permit the existence of opposition parties. Security force mistreatment resulted in the deaths of several citizens in custody. Police and NSS forces tortured, beat, and harassed persons. Prison conditions were poor, and pretrial detention can be prolonged. The security forces arbitrarily arrested and detained persons, on false charges, particularly Muslims suspected of extremist sympathies, frequently planting narcotics, weapons, or banned literature on them. Human rights groups estimated that the number of persons in detention for political or religious reasons and for terrorism, primarily attendees of unofficial mosques and members of Islamist political groups, but also members of the secular opposition and human rights activists, was approximately 7,500. During the year, the Government implemented an agreement allowing the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) access to convicted prisoners; however, the ICRC suspended its prison visits after it was not able to get the Government to agree to pretrial detention visits. The judiciary does not ensure due process and often defers to the wishes of the executive branch. Parliament passed several laws on judicial reform. Police and NSS forces infringed on citizens' privacy, including the use of illegal searches and wiretaps. Those responsible for documented abuses rarely are punished. The Government severely restricts freedom of speech and the press, and an atmosphere of repression stifles public criticism of the Government. Although the Constitution expressly prohibits it, censorship is practiced widely. The Government limits freedom of assembly and association. The Government continued to ban unauthorized public meetings and demonstrations and police forcibly disrupted some protests during the year. The Government continued to deny registration to opposition political parties as well as to other groups that might be critical of the Government; unregistered opposition parties and movements may not operate freely or publish their views. The Government restricted freedom of religion. The Government harassed and arrested hundreds of non-official Islamic leaders and believers, citing the threat of extremism. The Government tolerates the existence of minority religions but places limits on their religious activities. Following fighting with the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) in 2000, the Government forcibly resettled five villages and the villagers were not permitted to return home during the year. The resettlement of other villages reportedly continued during the year. The Government restricted local nongovernmental organizations (NGO's) working on human rights and refused to register the two main human rights organizations. Security forces abused human rights activists. The Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman reported that it assisted hundreds of citizens in redressing human rights abuses, the majority of which involve allegedly unjust court decisions and claims of abuse of power by police; however, most of the successfully resolved cases were relatively minor. ... It might be instructive to compare the Uzbekistan report with the Country Report for Venezuela which, unlike Uzbekistan, the Bush Cabal explicitly said was a supposedly hellish place that really, really needed a new government to replace the democratically elected one already in place. posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 10:02:38 AM | link MERCENARIES IN BOSNIA The Daily Telegraph writes of mercenaries hired by the U.S. to protect young women from the sex trade using them in the sex trade. A HUMAN rights investigator who claims she was sacked for exposing the sexual abuse of Bosnian women by her United Nations colleagues, told a tribunal yesterday that girls as young as 15 were offered for sex. Kathryn Bolkovac, 41, said women were forced to dance naked in Bosnian bars frequented by UN police officers. Mrs Bolkovac is using a British employment tribunal to bring her case of unfair dismissal from an American recruitment agency which has an office in the UK. The former American policewoman claims she was sacked because she sent an email to Jacques Paul Klein, the chief of UN mission in Bosnia-Hercegovina, which highlighted the sexual exploitation of women by those who had been sent to protect them from the sex trade. Details of the email, sent in October 2000, were given to the tribunal at Southampton, Hants, yesterday. In it, Mrs Bolkovac, a mother of three from Lincoln, Nebraska, claims that bars were frequented by UN police officers and other humanitarian workers who availed themselves of women forced into prostitution. The tribunal has heard that her employer, the US-based agency DynCorp, which is registered with the State Department to provide American police officers to work on humanitarian and peacekeeping duties, admits that there was a problem with officers using prostitutes and that one was sacked for paying for a woman to live with him to provide sexual services. ... For those without a program, DynCorp is basically a pack of mercenaries who've incorporated themselves and hired Ari Fleischer clones to candy-coat their "business practices." posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 09:51:38 AM | link MILITARY INTELLIGENCE: OXYMORON Whoever first said that military intelligence is a contradiction in terms sure knew what he was talking about, as we learn from the Herald: A SHORTAGE of linguists has hampered both the US war effort in Afghanistan and slowed the interrogation of Taliban and al Qaeda prisoners, according to a preliminary Pentagon intelligence study on the conflict. Funding has now been allocated to produce interpreters fluent in the local languages of Pashto, Dari, Uzbek and Turkmen to avoid repeating embarrassing early mistakes which could have killed innocent civilians. At one stage, leaflets were dropped in an area marked for a bombing strike which should have read: "Stay in your houses or we will kill you." But the rushed translation produced pamphlets which actually said: "Stay in your houses and we will kill you." The error resulted in a mass exodus of confused locals convinced that their homes were about to be pulverised by a B52 bombardment. ... That's probably what happened with the Canadians as well. The intel guys just couldn't understand canuckspeak well enough to discern between "no, we're not the Taliban, you stupid fucksticks" and "yes, we are the Taliban, you stupid fucksticks." posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 09:43:13 AM | link ONCE UPON A TIME IN JENIN The Marxist, anti-semitic, biased and/or self-loathing folks at the Independent have put in the hours. ... The Israeli army insists that its devastating invasion of the refugee camp in Jenin earlier this month was intended to root out the infrastructure of the Palestinian militias, particularly the authors of an increasingly vicious series of suicide attacks on Israelis. It now says the dead were mostly fighters. And, as always - although its daily behaviour in the occupied territories contradicts this claim - it insists that it did everything possible to protect civilians. But The Independent has unearthed a different story. We have found that, while the Israeli operation clearly dealt a devastating blow to the militant organisations - in the short term, at least - nearly half of the Palestinian dead who have been identified so far were civilians, including women, children and the elderly. They died amid a ruthless and brutal Israeli operation, in which many individual atrocities occurred, and which Israel is seeking to hide by launching a massive propaganda drive. ... Meanwhile, the unbiased chief of staff of the Bush Cabal had this to say at the annual meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. "The United States and Israel may not always agree, but our differences are the differences of true friends -- friends who respect each other, friends who share the same values and the same dreams, friends whose affection for one another is genuine and abiding and unshakable." This was followed by unbiased Benjamin Netanyahu, who's thirstier than even Sharon for Palestinian blood and land, saying: "There has never been a greater friend of Israel in the White House than President George W. Bush." Additional wholly unbiased speakers included Tom Daschle, John McCain and party animal Tom DeLay. It's a darned good thing that we have such august, unbiased personages to balance out all those biased anti-Semites at the Independent who believe every lie uttered through crocodile tears by Palestinians hovering over the bodies of the 5- and 80-year-old terrorists the glorious forces of freedom have sent to hell. posted by Steven Baum 4/25/2002 09:33:11 AM | link Wednesday, April 24, 2002 RABBANI SPEAKS Izvestia, a Russian daily, had a most interesting interview (via Progressive Review) with Burhanuddin Rabbani, the head of the Northern Alliance (NA) in Afghanistan. For those without an official scorecard, since 9/11 the NA have been officially the "good guys" as opposed to the "very, very, double-evil bad" Taliban and Al Qaida. That is, everything they (the "good guys", keep it straight, now) say is the pure truth, while everything the "bad guys" say is evil disinformation doubleplusungood propaganda. So what does the leader of the "good guys" have to say? Q: Are Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar still alive? If so, where are they now? RABBANI: Their fate doesn't interest me. They are very small fish. Q: But they destroyed the peace of the whole world. RABBANI: It interests me very much, to know, how such a complex, multilayered, painstakingly planned and technically masterfully organized terrorist operation, as the attack on the U.S.A. on Sept. 11, could have been organized and carried out by a small group of bandits, sitting in uninhabited Afghan mountains. Personally this is incomprehensible to me. Q: You mean, you doubt, that the guilty party in the American tragedy of the 21st Century was bin Laden? RABBANI: And don't you doubt it, too? A big investigation is absolutely necessary. Of course, anything is possible. I never met bin Laden, but people have come to me, who sat at the same table with him, and observed him in various situations. Not a single one of these told me that bin Laden is a great personality. On the contrary, all who knew him spoke of him as a simple field commander. Bin Laden sat for a long time in the caves. One does not control the world from such a place. Q: Is it possible, that other people were behind bin Laden? And are behind him now? RABBANI: Without a doubt. And I would like to know who exactly. Yep, it looks like some things are gonna have to be revised. Chiefly, since Iraq and Saddam are the new, sexy obsessions of hunky Donald Rumsfeld, we can revise the post-9/11 revisionism vis a vis the Northern Alliance, i.e. we can go back to officially categorizi