Thursday, July 24, 2003
A definitive statement
The report of the joint congressional inquiry into the suicide hijackings on Sept. 11, 2001, to be published Thursday, reveals U.S. intelligence had no evidence that the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein was involved in the attacks, or that it had supported al-Qaida, United Press International has learned.
"The report shows there is no link between Iraq and al-Qaida," said a government official who has seen the report.
-clip-
The revelation is likely to embarrass the Bush administration, which made links between Saddam's support for bin Laden -- and the attendant possibility that Iraq might supply al-Qaida with weapons of mass destruction -- a major plank of its case for war.
"The administration sold the connection (between Iraq and al-Qaida) to scare the pants off the American people and justify the war," said Cleland. "What you've seen here is the manipulation of intelligence for political ends."
Repeat: NO evidence.
posted by chris at 12:40 PM
Mistakes were made
The deputy secretary of defense said yesterday that some key assumptions underlying the U.S. occupation of Iraq were wrong, tacitly acknowledging the judgment of current and former U.S. officials critical of the occupation planning.
Paul D. Wolfowitz, briefing reporters after a 41/2-day trip to Iraq, said that in postwar planning, defense officials made three assumptions that "turned out to underestimate the problem," beginning with the belief that removing Saddam Hussein from power would also remove the threat posed by his Baath Party. In addition, they erred in assuming that significant numbers of Iraqi army units, and large numbers of Iraqi police, would quickly join the U.S. military and its civilian partners in rebuilding Iraq, he said.
-clip-
Before the invasion, for example, U.S. intelligence agencies were persistent and unified in warning the Defense Department that Iraqis would resort to "armed opposition" after the war was over. The Army's chief of staff warned that a larger stability force would be needed.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and his team disagreed, confident that Iraqi military and police units would help secure a welcoming nation.
The State Department and other agencies spent many months and millions of dollars drafting strategies on issues ranging from a postwar legal code to oil policy. But after President Bush granted authority over reconstruction to the Pentagon, the Defense Department all but ignored State and its working groups.
And once Baghdad fell, the military held its postwar team out of Iraq for nearly two weeks for security reasons, and then did not provide such basics as telephones, vehicles and interpreters for the understaffed operation to run a traumatized country of 24 million.
Just a reminder about how these things are planned, in case there's a next time . . .
posted by chris at 11:28 AM
------------------
Wednesday, July 23, 2003
A picture says a thousand words
U.S. soldiers have been dying on a daily basis in Iraq since the war "officially ended." The nightly news drones on about the deaths, but doesn't really place them in any kind of context. This editorial cartoon by Jeff Danziger focuses on the reality of the situation with a simple, yet extremely powerful illustration.
posted by chris at 12:51 PM
In the people's interest?
The people don't want it, the elected representatives of the people don't want it, but apparently, the White House thinks it knows better than the people what the people want:
The Bush administration said on Tuesday it would veto a large government-spending bill if it reimposed media-ownership caps that were recently relaxed by the Federal Communications Commission.
A House of Representatives committee altered a spending bill for the FCC and other government agencies last week to block deals that would allow television networks to own individual stations that reach more than 35 percent of the audience.
The agency recently raised the national audience limit from to 45 percent 35 percent, sparking a firestorm of criticism from both Democrats and Republicans who argued the move could hurt local reporting and diversity of viewpoints.
The Bush administration said any move to roll back the changes would scuttle the $37.9 billion spending bill, which also sets the budgets for the Justice, State and Commerce departments.
"The Administration believes that the new FCC media ownership rules more accurately reflect the changing media landscape and the current state of network station ownership, while still guarding against undue concentration in the marketplace," the Office of Management and Budget said in a statement.
"If this provision or a provision like it with respect to any one of the other FCC Rules is contained in the final legislation presented to the President, his Senior Advisors would recommend that he veto the bill," OMB said.
Or maybe, the White House is just focusing on a different group of people:
The four major networks, Walt Disney Co.'s ABC, Viacom Inc.'s CBS, News Corp. Ltd.'s Fox and General Electric Co.'s NBC oppose any attempt to roll back the new, higher ownership cap.
More here.
posted by chris at 11:33 AM
------------------
Tuesday, July 22, 2003
They don't even listen to themselves anymore
U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz warned foreigners Monday not to interfere in Iraq, in remarks aimed at Iraq's neighbors and suspected foreign fighters who may have arrived in the country.
Wolfowitz, one of the architects of the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein, told a news conference in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul that Washington would, however, welcome outside help.
"I think all foreigners should stop interfering in the internal affairs of Iraq," said Wolfowitz, who is touring the country to meet U.S. troops and Iraqi officials.
Ahh, the irony.
Thanks to August.
posted by chris at 4:34 PM
Super size this!
The New York Times has an interesting article about recent studies showing that America as a culture has an effect on the growing levels of obesity in the country.
Rather, social scientists are finding, a host of environmental factors — among them, portion size, price, advertising, the availability of food and the number of food choices presented — can influence the amount the average person consumes.
"Researchers have underestimated the powerful importance of the local environment on eating," said Dr. Paul Rozin, a professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, who studies food preferences.
Give moviegoers an extra-large tub of popcorn instead of a container one size smaller and they will eat 45 to 50 percent more, as Dr. Brian Wansink, a professor of nutritional science and marketing at the University of Illinois, showed in one experiment. Even if the popcorn is stale, they will still eat 40 to 45 percent more.
Keep a tabletop in the office stocked with cookies and candy, and people will nibble their way through the workday, even if they are not hungry. Reduce prices or offer four-course meals instead of single tasty entrees, and diners will increase their consumption.
In a culture where serving sizes are mammoth, attractive foods are ubiquitous, bargains are abundant and variety is not just the spice but the staple of life, many researchers say, it is no surprise that waistlines are expanding. Dr. Kelly D. Brownell, a professor of psychology at Yale and an expert on eating disorders, has gone so far as to label American society a "toxic environment" when it comes to food.
Now I don't think this means that the responsibility for obesity rests with American culture and not with the consumer. It is still the responsibilty of the consumer to eat a sensible diet and exercise. But in our super-size-all-you-can-eat-for-one-low-price society, the consumer also needs information about the constructs of their culture which work against them. If you can understand those cultural elements that tend towards overindulgence or understand the psychology of eating habits, that knowledge can help you better navigate this Fast Food Nation. I think this article is helpful in that regard.
posted by chris at 11:54 AM
Ladies' Night
A girls' night out has become official policy in a small southern Spanish town after the mayor announced yesterday he would ban men from going out on a Thursday night.
The radical move by Javier Checa will see any men who go to bars in Torredonjimeno between 9pm and 2am on a Thursday evening fined by the local police.
Mr Checa has explained that he expects the town's men to stay at home on Thursdays to look after the children and do the washing up.
The women, on the other hand, are to be given a free run of the town's bars and night-clubs which, presumably, will be free of the opposite sex.
Money from the fines will go towards groups that deal with domestic violence and equality between the sexes.
El noche de las mujeres.
posted by chris at 10:04 AM
------------------
Monday, July 21, 2003
International Boycott of Coca-Cola
The World Social Forum, an international gathering of activists and fighters for social justice that was established as a response to the World Economic Forum, has announced July 22, 2003 as an international day against Coca-Cola. The boycott was established partially in response to accusations by SINALTRAINAL, the trade union that represents workers at Coke facilities in Colombia. SINALTRAINAL has long maintained that Coke is among the most notorious employers in Colombia and that the company maintains open relations with murderous death squads as part of a program to intimidate trade union leaders.
Other reasons for the boycott include:
- For the violation of the human rights of workers and communities.
- For the profits made on the back of assassinations, imprisonment, displacement, kidnapping, death threats and dismissals of trade union leaders in Colombia, Guatemala, Peru, Brazil, the United States, Venezuela, Palestine, Turkey, Iran and other parts of the world.
- For the contamination of water sources with the waste from their bottling plants.
- For racial discrimination against black communities and those suffering from AIDS in the United States and Africa.
- For using coca to make its products and its support of the criminal policies of the United States against communities whose culture and survival depends on coca leaves, especially in Bolivia, Peru and Colombia.
- For its unfettered use of the world’s water and the criminal theft of water sources from communities in India.
- For supporting the criminal oligarchy in Venezuela which is attacking the government and its plans to bring dignity into the lives of the people of our sister Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, as well as for its historic interference in the internal affairs of peoples.
The boycott will commence on 22 July 2003 and will initially be for one year. The Second World Social Forum declared 22 July 2003 as the international day against Coca Cola. The boycott will not only consist of NOT CONSUMING THE PRODUCTS OF THIS TRANSNATIONAL COCA COLA, but will also mark the start of a sustained campaign of condemnation, mobilisation and struggle against its policies. In order to realise the declared boycott, we will undertake the following plan of international action:
On 11 February 2003, a proposal for integral reparation was delivered to Coca Cola along with signatures and a political declaration from the three sessions of the APP. We are hoping that the transnational will organise the relevant meetings with SINALTRAINAL in order to come to an agreement which enables us to resolve the problems we have denounced.
On 22 July 2003, there will be a press conference in Rome, Chicago and Bogota in which the start of the boycott will be announced to the world. In countries where it is possible to have access to the press, we ask comrades to do the same simultaneously.
More information here and a list of Coca-Cola products here.
Update: Several mainstream mentions of the boycott, mostly in California and Australia. A Google search brings up more of the same in other CA and AU papers.
posted by chris at 2:39 PM
There's a reason Cheney doesn't want you to know about that meeting
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption and abuse, said today that documents turned over by the Commerce Department, under court order as a result of Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit concerning the activities of the Cheney Energy Task Force, contain a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as 2 charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts.” The documents, which are dated March 2001, are available on the Internet at: www.JudicialWatch.org.
More here, here and here.
posted by chris at 1:26 PM
The war was started before it began
The Iraq war began in mid-2002 with intensive air strikes under the guise of enforcing the southern no-fly zone over the country, a senior US officer admitted in remarks published yesterday.
Lieutenant General Michael Moseley, the chief allied war commander, said that the previously secret plan, Operation Southern Focus, was launched last summer - before President Bush took his case against Baghdad to the United Nations.
The operation involved dropping 606 precision-guided bombs on 391 targets, in an effort to destroy Saddam Hussein's air defences.
Of course it was.
posted by chris at 11:53 AM
------------------
Sunday, July 20, 2003
Another milestone
Another U.S. soldier was killed on Friday when a bomb exploded under his vehicle in a convoy west of Baghdad, the Pentagon said.
The number of American troops killed in combat in Iraq is now 148, one higher than during the first Persian Gulf War a decade ago.
I thought the war was over . . . More here.
Thanks to August for pointing it out.
posted by chris at 10:58 AM
------------------
|
