CommonPrejudice

Why not Michael Jackson instead?

Joining Wolfowitz (ignore his horrendous record and complete lack of experience; he's a nice, sincere guy so I'm sure he'll do fine) and Bolton as nominees for the world stage is Ann Veneman.

According to John Nichols at the Nation, Veneman is Bush's likely nominee to be the new executive director of UNICEF (the U.N. agency that is responsible for protecting children's health, welfare and rights).

But it turns out Veneman has years of experience dealing with needy and undernourished children in Africa while serving as a volunteer for various relief agencies in the region.

Just kidding.

She's an agribusiness whore.

Ravi Narayan, coordinator for the global secretariat of the People's Health Movement, wrote in a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the members of the executive board of UNICEF: "Ms. Veneman's training and experience as a corporate lawyer for agribusiness do not qualify her for the substantial task of leading the agency most responsible for the rights of children worldwide. There is no evidence in her tenure as U.S. secretary of agriculture, secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, or deputy undersecretary for international affairs of the USDA of her interest in the world's children or their health and well-being.

"Indeed, her performance in these positions has been characterized by the elevation of corporate profit above people's right to food (U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, Article 25). Such a philosophy and practice would reverse almost six decades of UNICEF's proud humanitarian history and prove disastrous for the world's children."

There really is no worthy analogy to this farce. Basically the only qualifications necessary to represent the Bush administration in the international community are to be overwhelmingly ill-suited to the position and have the capacity to offend the vast majority of people of common sense and compassion.

You know, like Bush.

Getting More Ignorant By The Day

We all know by now that an astonishing number of Americans believe that Saddam had something to do with 9/11.

What is really unbelievable is that this figure is going up.

A Harris Poll conducted after the recent Iraqi elections has found that more Americans than ever believe that Iraq was behind the September 11 attacks...

...Forty-seven percent of Americans now believe that deposed Iraqi president Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the 9-11 terrorists, up six points from last November. He did not.

Forty-four percent of Americans actually believe that several of the terrorists were Iraqis, up significantly from 37 percent in November. None were Iraqi, nor was there any connection between the attacks and Iraq.

Thirty-six percent believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the Bush administration invaded. It did not.

You wonder, are Americans that self-delusional or are they really that ignorant?

And it goes without saying that the MSM, with their he/she said manner of 'balanced' reporting has everything to do with this travesty.

If "ifs and buts" were "candies and nuts" ...

Of course the following is silly speculation. Nevertheless, this is for those who want to point to any surge of Middle Eastern democracy as vindication of the Bush doctrine (in the process usually committing the fallacy of believing anything that happened after something else must have been a result of it).

What if Gore had been elected and very real and substantial progress on the Palestine/Israeli peace had resulted as a continuation of Clinton's engagement policy in the region? That certainly would have changed the dynamic.

Basically most of the Bush supporters' claims rest on the assumption that the world would have stood still if Bush hadn't been elected president (or after 9/11 if you must) and embarked on his imperialistic adventures.

That is ridiculous.

The only response to those purveyors of poor logic  is to say, 'yes, you are indeed right ... if things were different, they wouldn't be the same."

Three Possibilities for Bush's Rhetoric

According to the Independent, the UN will release a report implicating the Syrian (and probably the Lebanese government) in the death of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

The United Nations inquiry into the death of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri will reveal evidence of a cover up by Syrian and Lebanese authorities, according to a report published in London's The Independent newspaper.

And today hundreds of thousands of those opposed to the Syrian influence in Lebanon responded to the rally last week of those in favour.

There were Christians, Sunnis, and Druze, and veterans and first-timers -- united in a common cause to make sure their anti-Syria rally in Beirut was the biggest and noisiest in the country's history.

Martyrs Square, occupied by a camp of live-in protesters for the past four weeks, was overflowing with flag-waving masses on Monday demanding an international investigation into the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri ...

...Organisers said a million people had joined the protest. No independent estimate was available, but witnesses said the rally looked even bigger than Hizbollah's Beirut demonstration.

"We are not afraid things will escalate. We shouldn't be afraid because we carry the Lebanese flag," Riad Rishani, a banker said.

Things appear to be heating up. I don't believe head counting (more so since no independent estimates are in yet) is overly important. Obviously two huge rallies supporting very different visions of their country have occurred. More than anything, it seems kind of ominous.

Given the logic of the right, any attempt to open-mindedly assess and respect what the majority (or at least huge numbers) of Arabs support will be portrayed as support for the dictatorships and today's events I imagine will follow that pattern. This is, of course, a non sequitur.

It is simply commonsense to appreciate that a vast majority of Arabs and Muslims in the Middle East are hostile toward the Bush administration.

And as far as I understand democracy must involve some form of popular rule, and certainly, as well, independence.

So all this democracy talk in the Middle East by the Bushies boils down to either outright disingenuousness, an incredible naiveté that holds that once the heads of the evil regimes have been removed  "the formerly oppressed masses will rise up in joy and shower their liberators with rose petals," or an extraordinary "born again" about- face which flies directly in the face of anything they've ever said or done in the past will respect to US Middle East policy and support for legitimate democracy abroad.

That's it.

And one other obvious note;  There, as here, anti-Syrian is not synonymous with pro-American  - or more precisely pro-Bush - Middle Eastern foreign policy.

On a side note;  While the right half of the blogosphere, I expect, in their simplicity will be ablaze with gloating, I wonder if they'll source the article.

I mean they can't possibly be using Robert Fisk?!

...The paper's respected Middle East correspondent Robert Fisk reported that President George W. Bush "is expected to announce on Wednesday that Syrian - and perhaps Lebanese - military intelligence officers were involved" in the killing.

In his article, Fisk said the report of the United Nations inquiry team "will be so devastating that it will force a full international investigation of the murder of 'Mr. Lebanon' and his entourage, perhaps reaching to the higher echelons of the Syrian and Lebanese governments."

Jamas they would believe a word from his mouth!

Making a Fashion Statement.

Do you think that some group of "liberal, tree-hugging, Birkenstock-wearing, hippie, tie-dyed liberals"  - as opposed to the conservative tree-hugging, Birkenstock-wearing, hippie, tie-dyed liberals -  are  playing the right for fools?

Apparently these are for sale.

$19.50
men's & women's

"Awesome," says Jay777 of the " Official Blog of WWW.STOPTHEACLU.ORG!" (there are a lot of imposters trying to ride on their coattails) . Now, no cussing.

Damn, type fast..gotta get one...

"3/11 * 5 FREE TEES LEFT TO BLOGGERS WHO POST ABOUT I HEART BLOGGERS on their sites!"

Don't you see? I'm altering the world!

iHeartBloggers.com is the ONLY online store dedicated to the world-altering phenomenon, Weblogging ... witty, satirical & politically-minded tee shirts, stickers, & other necessary novelties fashionably designed to keep you Blogging in Style.

"...necessary novelties fashionably designed..." What are they getting at?

JT Slerling loves the fun, funny shirts.

...To commemorate Dan's departure, check out the fun t-shirts at http://www.iheartbloggers.com

they're very funny!

And at the place where" truth, honesty and integrety are honored above all else!" GMRoper marvels at the wide array of media options we have - On TV alone you have CNN and Fox! -,  while throwing in a quick plug for the satirical and politically-minded blog lovers .

"today, we can get news from a variety of sources, the internet, BLOGS (for rather/blog appearal look here at "IHeartBloggers. Com), CNN, Fox, other cable outlets etc.

What can I say? There is no other word. This is some "awesome" blog apparel.
And I knew this was true. I KNEW IT!

Hey, if Kevin Claver at Rathergate likes it, maybe we all should be proud of our inner cyber-selves and buy one (and prove our value to society too!):

I’m picky when it comes to t-shirts, but who can resist advertising your cyber-self and taking a small part of the credit for media accountability?

Visit iHeartBloggers.com and pick up some clothing in case you’re worse off than us pajamahedeen and you blog in the nude. My particular fave? A picture of Dan Rather with the words “I fought the blog and the blog won.”

Personally, I don't think you can be worse off than a "pajamahedeen"
And blog in the nude?

Don't worry. Somebody is on this (How is it that the iheartbloggers site posts this in their 'press' section? Call me a skeptic, but I'm sensing a little irony here)

A dramatic increase in Web Logging in the nude has law enforcement scrabbling and inspired one entrepreneurial couple to take matters into their own hands (not literally). iHeartBloggers.com, owned and operated by a Los Angeles-based husband and wife who both Blog fully-clothed, has launched a line of trendy, vintage-inspired tee-shirts made especially for Bloggers.

“It’s reaching epidemic proportions,” a distressed law enforcement official stated under condition of anonymity. “My Anti-Buff Blogger Unit (ABBU) has been working around the clock, but it’s a no-win situation. We just can’t keep up.”

Indeed, with an estimated 4 million Weblogs in the Blogosphere and more created every day, that’s a lot of buff. ..

They're playing 'em for fools I tell ya.

No RV on OBL

I think I smell a conspiracy.

Although the U.S. government officially shut down its Remote Viewing Unit in 1995, the unit was actively used by the CIA and other military intelligence agencies, to assist in sensitive intelligence matters for 23 years prior to its closure. Furthermore, there is evidence that some of these original psychic spies from secret units named “Sun Streak,” “Grill Frame,” and “Star Gate” are still being asked to use their paranormal skills as consultants to the military. If the U.S. government is calling upon its psychic operatives for this type of intelligence, why haven’t they yet found Osama Bin Laden?

Yes, Why haven't they found Bin Laden? What are they hiding?

I bet the psychic spies were working on Bin Laden, but Rumsfeld ordered them to "remote view" Iraq.

We need Targ on this right away.

What is remote viewing, you ask, or, more importantly, can we use it to make war?

Sadly, N... mmmm, Sadly, I don't think so.

Remote viewing  is a novel perceptual discipline for gaining information not available to the ordinary physical senses. Used extensively by so-called "psychic spies" during the Cold War for classified military projects, it has a long history both as an intelligence gathering tool and as the subject of research and applications in the civilian world. Remote viewing has now taken a long step into the public domain with the formation of a professional association to propose standards, test performance, and promote peaceful use and development of this unique human mental capacity.

Is this a communist plot?
No supper.

Welcome to Remote Viewing Instructional Services, Inc. We are a company dedicated to the responsible promotion and commercialization of the novel psi_based skill known as remote viewing, or RV.

Would I need to be able to herd ducks with a stick?
Yes.

The first day, Friday, June 15, about noon-thirty, the Master of Ceremonies, [of theThe 2001 Remote Viewing (RV) Conference] Lieut. Col. Kent D. Johnson, USAF, a retired fighter pilot, opened the conference. His job was to keep three days of about 22 right-brained speakers on track while managing about 300 attendees. Kind of like herding ducks with a stick. But he did it...

The whole thing kinda sounds like you've got a little TV in your head or something? Is that it?
No.

...Pettingell then explained Remote Viewing criteria, RV types and how controlled Remote Viewing works. She said that RV is accomplished when the viewer gleans little packets of information and that it’s not like ‘TV in the brain.

Do any of its sinister aims involve cross-pollination?
Yes.

The goals of the conference were to ... Foster communication, expand friendships, and facilitate intellectual cross-pollination among those wishing to help expand the boundaries of human consciousness.

But this all can't be about the peaceful use of RV. Sometimes war is necessary.
Don't worry. When you view remotely you can see that a few deaths here and there is nothing that should make you queasy, especially when you consider how the family factor complicates things.

... to say that the American public is so squeamish that it is unwilling to accept casualties in all military engagements is wrong-headed and ignores many complicating factors, such as the role of the media, mission objectives, the threat to US vital interests, and a phenomenon I call the “Family Factor,” Kent D Johnson.

Finally, do I have to have an intense interest in the subject or can I become involved just to make fun of them?
Happily, yes, you can just be "curious," if you'd like.

Whether you are merely curious about remote viewing, or instead have developed an intense interest in it, you have come to the right place. This website has information on everything from the basic facts on remote viewing's origins to how you can become a remote viewer by taking one of our highly-regarded courses in Controlled Remote Viewing (CRV)...

I probably should be careful. Maybe they're viewing me now ... remotely.

Just 1/1000th of the cost, 1/10th of the manpower...

While the right gallops around claiming now that they have found their true calling as liberators of the oppressed, conquerors of evil regimes and champions of democracy, how is it they stand idly by while Darfur falls to pieces?

Where's the conservative outrage? It seems to me that the tragic events in Darfur should be a violation of their new found, yet highly cherished, principals principles (ha ha, again, ... getting sloppy).

The neo-cons will now have you believe the invasion and occupation of Iraq was primarily done for humanitarian reasons (as all other reasons have melted away). I mean Iraq couldn't have just been about Israel and control of a country in the prime oil producing region in the world, could it?

(They cry out whenever cornered on the huge quantity of death and destruction, the horrid post-war planning and the abysmal security situation, 'what? you want Saddam back?' ... If any conservative tries that nonsense on you, the simple response should be; 'what? you approve of tens of thousands of innocent people killed? ...no? ...you prefer to look at the bigger picture? ... well we do too'... then go from there)

But as the death toll is estimated at 300 000 in Darfur, the saddest part is that just a tiny fraction of the cost and effort in Iraq would suffice in Sudan. While the occupation forces in Iraq are well over hundred thousand and the weekly cost is upwards of a billion dollars with over 300 billion already spent, African Union estimates that a force of only 10 000 is needed to stabilize the Darfur region. And a tiny force of 200 African peacekeepers currently in place is actually making a difference.

A tiny African peacekeeping force is creating pockets of security in Sudan's western Darfur region - successfully heading off attacks on civilians, negotiating the release of hostages and providing safety for some villagers to return to their homes, officials said on Friday.

The limited success of the ... 200-strong force shows that a bigger force with more support from the international community could stabilise the region, said Kenneth Bacon, a former Pentagon spokesperson who now heads the advocacy group Refugees International. ...

In January, another AU commander foiled an attack on Labado, a town of 27 000 people, by deploying 100 peacekeepers to the area and a nearby town. He was acting on information that pro-government forces planned to raid the town that was levelled in late December in a bid to drive out rebels.

The AU Mission in Sudan, or AMIS, "is doing a spectacular job in the areas in which it has deployed. The best example is Labado, where it has stationed about 100 troops since January. More than 10 000 people have returned to the area because AMIS forces are providing a sense of security," Bacon said....

The AU force, however, needs to expand to at least 10 000 troops to fully stabilise Darfur, Bacon said..."As long as our hands and legs are tied by a lack of resources to finance peacekeeping operations, Africa cannot move forward to solve the crisis in Darfur," said AU spokesperson Desmond Orjiako.

And in terms of how much money is needed:

He [Alpha Oumar Konare, Chairperson of the AU Commission]  stated that only one tenth of the required 300 million US dollars has been secured for the Darfur mission.

So they need about 1/1000th of the money spent on Iraq but have only received 1/10000th. And they only need less than 1/10th of the manpower.

It is clear where their priorities lie, and they aren't on the humanitarian side.

In other developments in Darfur, the Sudanese government demonstrates that they may be the equals of the Bushies in creative distortion.

Sudan on Tuesday accused three international aid agencies of an orchestrated political campaign to play up the issue of rape in its troubled Darfur region to distract from problems in the rest of the world.

State Minister for Humanitarian Affairs Mohamed Yousif Abdalla told reporters it could not be coincidental that Oxfam, the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) and Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) had all produced reports on rape at the same time.

"It is not normal that, coincidentally, three organisations come together and say one word. This is a kind of political, orchestrated kind of a movement," he said in Khartoum. [Or maybe it is so well-documented and obvious.]

...An MSF report on rape obtained by Reuters on Monday produced some of the first medical evidence that at least 500 rapes had occurred in Darfur in the past 4 1/2 months and said the number was likely to be much higher. The government had asked the agency not to release the report...

The government has in the past accused the international community of focusing on Darfur, rather than crimes it says the United States and Britain are committing in Iraq...

Yes, those international aid agencies are such Bush apologists...

What a tragedy the whole mess.

There they go again

Remember the days of the election campaign when any mention of Kerry by Bush or Cheney would turn their supporters into rabid dogs shrieking in approval.

"John Kerry has been one of 100 votes in the United States Senate--and very fortunately on matters of national security, his views rarely prevailed," said Cheney...As Cheney spoke of Kerry's political record, delegates sporting rubber sandals on their hands began chanting, "Flip-flop, flip-flop."

Well, just a few days after the NYTimes announced that the US was preparing to involve Hezbollah in Lebanon, we learn today that the administration is changing its position on Iran.The Guardian:

The Bush administration on Friday softened its hardline stance on how to thwart Iran's suspected nuclear arms program, agreeing to support a European plan that offers economic incentives for the Tehran government to give up any weapons ambitions.

The point isn't that complex issues shouldn't be approached with an open mind, one's opinion evolving as the reality changes and facts become clearer. (ie the neocon definition of 'flip flop')

It is the rank hypocrisy. (And here's one list of the many examples of Bush's flip flops)

"Something" Tells Me He's a Fool

Friedman today using that invaluable source of his, "something."

...But something tells me that those Hezbollah demonstrators who were waving the picture of Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, were uncomfortable.

From a thread on a blog called astuteblogger, via Unfairwitness.

...if the truth is what you want. i saw the marchers heading out to the rally. they were men, women and some children. the call was out to 30 political parties. there were christians and sunnis, druez and commies... you name it and the lebanese parties were there. the intent of the rally was three fold. 1. to thank syria, the soldiers they lost, blood they shed to help lebanon. 2. to make a statement to the u.n., rejecting res. 1559. 3. to voice their opinion that we need to get to the truth on the murder of hariri. maybe the concept of 1mil. participants is mind-blowing but when looking at the real crowd, it could well be that many people. the congestion was all throughout the country. this is a country who's land mass is virtually eaqual to mi.'s upper penninsula. so you can walk to downtown in a half hour. the roads were clogged with teenagers all pumped up, which is different than angry. there was also, an important fact ignored by all the media, not one single incident of violence against a woman or a man, by security or the army or the police. this is a country that g.w. would have the world believe was a country not ruled by law. lebanon is special, the lebanese are special people. the war has made them willing, willing to live and willing to die. i believe that the lebanese people want syria as a friendly neighbor, who will kick-ass if anyone wants to try anything. syria is not perfect, but it has a history and future linked with lebanon.

I was just talking to "something" myself and she tells me that Friedman is full of it.

What Would it Take to Stop This?

It's been far too long since I've posted on Darfur. I was away for awhile and have not felt like I've been up-to-date. That's no excuse, though, just laziness I suppose.

Anyway, we see in this editorial from the Washington Post today that precious little has changed to the international community's shame.  (via the ever vigilant Sudan: The Passion of the Present.)

It's been a year since the world woke up to the mass killings in the Darfur region of Sudan, and six months since the Bush administration termed them "genocide." Revulsion at the death toll, which stands at an estimated 300,000, has produced a humanitarian relief effort and the deployment of 1,900 armed cease-fire monitors by the African Union; both responses have saved lives. But Darfur's people still live in fear of rape, murder and starvation; perhaps 10,000 of them die monthly. And the worst of it all is the low-tech nature of this butchery. Sudan's government has armed a primitive militia that goes about on horses and camels; the government has supported the militia with rudimentary airpower, which NATO could cripple easily. So many lives could be saved with relatively little Western effort. But the killing continues...

So Bush and others take the holier than thou attitude regarding the spreading of 'democracy' in the Middle East while hundreds of thousands are dead in Sudan.  Why the hell can't the world get really involved in what is clearly the worst crisis on the planet today.

Those numbers again: 300, 000 dead, 10 000 dying every month.