Hugo Chávez Parts 1, 2 and 3: The voice of the people in Copenhagen 2009 COP15 speech
18 December, 2009
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Updates from December, 2009 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
-
InI
InI
“Nobel Peace Prize Winner Barack Obama, is Preparing for War in South America”; Interview with Eva Golinger By Mike Whitney
18 December, 2009 — Global Research
Mike Whitney—The US media is very critical of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. He’s frequently denounced as “anti-American”, a “leftist strongman”, and a dictator. Can you briefly summarize some of the positive social, economic and judicial changes for which Chavez is mainly responsible?
Eva Golinger—The first and foremost important achievement during the Chávez administration is the 1999 Constitution, which, although not written nor decreed by Chávez himself, was created through his vision of change for Venezuela. The 1999 Constitution was, in fact, drafted – written – by the people of Venezuela in one of the most participatory examples of nation building, and then was ratified through popular national referendum by 75% of Venezuelans. The 1999 Constitution is one of the most advanced in the world in the area of human rights. It guarantees the rights to housing, education, healthcare, food, indigenous lands, languages, women’s rights, worker’s rights, living wages and a whole host of other rights that few other countries recognize on a national level. My favorite right in the Venezuelan Constitution is the right to a dignified life. That pretty much sums up all the others. Laws to implement these rights began to surface in 2001, with land reform, oil industry redistribution, tax laws and the creation of more than a dozen social programs – called missions – dedicated to addressing the basic needs of Venezuela’s poor majority. In 2003, the first missions were directed at education and healthcare. Within two years, illiteracy was eradicated in the country and Venezuela was certified by UNESCO as a nation free of illiteracy. This was done with the help of a successful Cuban literacy program called “Yo si puedo” (Yes I can). Further educational missions were created to provide free universal education from primary to doctoral levels throughout the country. Today, Venezuela’s population is much more educated than before, and adults who previously had no high school education now are encouraged to not only go through a secondary school program, but also university and graduate school.
Continue reading this post...
InI
When Will It Be Our Time? By MUSTAFA BARGHOUTHI
17 December, 2009 — The New York Times
It is with deepening concern that I recognize the Obama administration is not yet capable of standing up to Israel and the pro-Israel lobby. Our dream of freedom is being crushed under the weight of immovable and constantly expanding Israeli settlements.
RAMALLAH, WEST BANK — I have lived my entire adult life under occupation, with Israelis holding ultimate control over my movement and daily life.
When young Israeli police officers force me to sit on the cold ground and soldiers beat me during a peaceful protest, I smolder. No human being should be compelled to sit on the ground while exercising rights taken for granted throughout the West.
It is with deepening concern that I recognize the Obama administration is not yet capable of standing up to Israel and the pro-Israel lobby. Our dream of freedom is being crushed under the weight of immovable and constantly expanding Israeli settlements.
Days ago, the State Department spokesman, Ian Kelly, managed only to term such illegal building “dismaying.” The Israeli foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, stands up and walks out on the U.S. envoy, George Mitchell, every time the American envoy mentions East Jerusalem.
InI
ALBA and G77 Denounce Copenhagen Sham
19 December, 2009 — Climate and Capitalism – Links International Journal of Socialist Revewal
‘Obama, acting the way he did, definitely established that there’s no difference between him and the Bush tradition’
Speaking on behalf of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA), President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela took the floor at the plenary of the COP15 climate talks in Copenhagen to denounce the final ‘deal’ that was soon to emerge and be imposed on the majority poor-country delegates, and which would fall far short of their demands.
Chavez accused US President Barack Obama of behaving like an emperor ‘who comes in during the middle of the night … and cooks up a document that we will not accept, we will never accept.’
Chávez declared that ‘all countries are equal.’ He would not accept that some countries had prepared a text for a climate deal and just ‘slipped [it] under the door’ to be signed by the others. He accused them of ‘a real lack of transparency.’
‘We can’t wait any longer, we are leaving … We are leaving, knowing that it wasn’t possible getting a deal,’ he said.
Evo Morales, the president of Bolivia, also took the floor to express annoyance at the way a climate deal was being thrashed out by a small group of world leaders at the last minute. ‘If there is no agreement at this level, why not tell the people?’, he said at the plenary meeting. He called for further consultations with the people.
‘Who is responsible?’, Morales he asked. Concluding that ‘the responsibility lies on the capitalist system — we have to change the capitalist system.’
InI
Viva Palestina Gaza convoy reaches Konya
19 December, 2009 — Viva Palestina
Freedom for Gaza convoy received a heartfelt welcome from the residents of Konya as it arrived in the city on Şeb-i Arus (the night of Rumi’s union with Allah, namely his death).
The Gaza aid convoy arrived in Konya on a cold December night. It was welcomed by local people with Palestinian flags. They waited for the convoy to arrive at town entrance for hours despite freezing temperatures.
Convoy participants spent the night at Selçuklu Cultural Center, sleeping in sleeping bags they had brought with themselves.
On 18 December at 10: a.m. a demonstration was held at Salı Pazarı with attendance of a large crowd. Huge Palestinian flags were carried and support to the Palestinian people was voiced.
Latif Selvi, president of Konya NGOs Platform, addressed the crowd saying “I greet the entire group that will go to Gaza. Let this case of sensitivity be an example to the world.”
“Gaza is people’s conscience. We call upon everyone to own the Gaza cause,” said Veli Tolu, Konya provincial head for Saadet Partisi (Felicity Party).
Kevin Ovenden, an organizer for the UK part of the convoy, said they were welcomed well in Turkey and found the people of Turkey really concerned about the Palestinian issue.
Bülent Yıldırım, president of the IHH Humanitarian Relief Foundation, organizer of the Turkish leg of the convoy, said: “If British citizens go to Gaza leaving behind their families and children, then we have to do much more. We as Muslims should help our brothers and sisters there. I am urging everyone to march to streets if this convoy is not let into Gaza from Egypt.”
“I am calling on Arab leaders in particular. If Gaza goes down, you will go down too. Gaza is the cause of all of us. I am urging everyone to support this convoy”, he added.
The convoy headed for the city of Adana after completing its program in Konya.
For further developments on the Viva Palestina convoy to Gaza visit http://www.vivapalestina.org and http://www.ihh.org.tr
———————
Alice Howard
Viva Palestina UK – Administration Manager
Tel: 07944 512 469
Email: alice@vivapalestina.org
Website: http://www.vivapalestina.org/
InI
An unholy alliance: The Media, the State and Big Business By William Bowles
19 December, 2009 — Strategic Culture Foundation
Readers might not be very familar with Private Eye, the UK’s one and only satirical magazine that’s been going for decades and long a thorn in the side of the Establishment in spite of the fact that its editors are very much a part of the Establishment. But then this why they get the ‘inside dope’ on the corruption and other neferious ‘dealings’ that occupy the ruling elite who assist their business pals in ripping off the public purse.
For me as a lifelong adsorber of information of all kinds, PE’s major strength is in its inside info on the relationship between (big) business and the state, whether at the national or local level. Pretty much every major scandal that finally breaks in the mainstream press, for example the Trafigura disaster was reported in PE first. The oil trading company Trafigura dumped thousands of tons of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, 31,000 people were injured by the foul stuff and 16 died.[1]
When the story finally broke in the corporate press, Trafigura tried to get the story squashed and they hired the solicitors Carter-Ruck to get an injunction forbidding publication of news about the catastrophe Trafigura had unleashed on The Ivory Coast (which succeeded, but only for a while, see below). Affectionately known in the pages of PE as Carter-Fuck, it is a company that seems to get mentioned in almost every issue.
“Messrs Carter-Fuck, London’s most vainglorious solicitors, tout for business by boasting of their matchless skills in “reputation management”. — ‘Carter-Rucking Hell’, Private Eye, No.1248, 30 Oct-12 Nov, 2009
The story concerns a secret injunction that Carter-Ruck obtained that actually gagged Parliament from talking about things Trafiguran. It’s called a super-injunction[2] that “anonymises” the names of those involved in the legal proceedings (the gag order on the media talking about things Trafiguran even in Parliament). Eye calls this “censorship by judicial process” and Carter-Ruck are the experts at it.
InI
Yemen: Pentagon's War On The Arabian Peninsula By Rick Rozoff
15 December, 2009 — Global Research – Stop NATO
Yemen will become a battleground for a proxy war between the United States and Saudi Arabia – whose state-to-state relations are among the strongest and most durable of the entire post-World War II era – on one hand and Iran on the other.
It is perhaps impossible to determine the exact moment at which a U.S.- supported self-professed holy warrior – trained to perpetrate acts of urban terrorism and to shoot down civilian airliners – ceases to be a freedom fighter and becomes a terrorist. But a safe assumption is that it occurs when he is no longer of use to Washington. A terrorist who serves American interests is a freedom fighter; a freedom fighter who doesn’t is a terrorist.
Yemenis are the latest to learn the Pentagon’s and the White House’s law of the jungle. Along with Iraq and Afghanistan which counterinsurgency specialist Stanley McChrystal used to perfect his techniques, Yemen is joining the ranks of other nations where the Pentagon is engaged in that variety of warfare, fraught with civilian massacres and other forms of so-called collateral damage: Colombia, Mali, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia and Uganda.
BBC News reported on December 14 that 70 civilians were killed when aircraft bombed a market in the village of Bani Maan in northern Yemen.
The nation’s armed forces claimed responsibility for the deadly attack, but a website of the Houthi rebels against whom the bombing was ostensibly directed stated “Saudi aircraft committed a massacre against the innocent residents of Bani Maan.” [1]
InI
Boys from Bullingdon are bad for Britain By George Anthony
20 December, 2009
George Anthony asks can Labour win in May 2010?
The boys from Bullingdon had a bit of a shock when they opened the Sunday papers of November 29th for the Ipso MORI survey put the Tories on 37% and Labour on 31%, with the Lib-Dems on 17%. This means-on the present parliamentary line up with a Labour bias in the distribution of voters per constituency-the Tories need to win 117 seats to achieve a simple majority, but 140 for a working majority, which is a huge mountain to climb.
A fairly reliable political weather vane and right-winger, Andrew Rawnsley wrote in the Observer of 6/12/2009,
“The Tories have put all their chips on Cameron. The downside to his adroitness at catching the prevailing wind is uncertainty about where he’ll drop anchor. It has been fluent, slick and largely well-modulated talk, but the strain of sustaining the act is beginning to show. There are evident Tory jitters about the recent erosion of their poll lead and more behind the scenes angst about why this is happening.”
But, true to form, on December 12th, he wasn’t so sure, finding holes in the Pre-Budget Report.
The Bullingdon Club members are composed of wealthy hooligans whose qualification for membership is that they are able to pay for the damage they cause after a drunken spree.
Cameron for instance has £30 million, plus his wife’s money as Lady Astor’s daughter.
Osborne’s personal wealth is estimated at £4.3 million, in addition being next in line to inherit the family baronetcy of Ballentaylor in County Tipperary. As well as a substantial share of Osborne & Little, his father’s luxury wallpaper company.
InI
The Moment Of Truth By Fidel Castro
17 December, 2009 — countercurrents
The President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela addressed the Summit on the 16th, at 8:40 a.m. Cuban time. He made a brilliant speech that was much applauded. His phrases were remarkable.
He challenged a document proposed to the Summit by the Danish minister chairing the conference. He said:
‘…this text has come out of the blue; we shall not accept any text that has not been produced by the working groups, I mean, the legitimate texts that have been the subject of negotiations for the past two years.’
‘There is a group of nations that feel above us in the South, in the Third World…’
‘…it’s not a surprise, there is no democracy, we are facing a dictatorship.’
‘…I was reading some slogans painted in the streets by the youths… one read: ‘don’t change the climate, change the system,’ and another: ‘if the climate had been a bank it would have been bailed out.’’
‘Obama […] received the Nobel Peace Prize the same day he sent 30 thousand troops to kill innocent people in Afghanistan.’
‘I support the view of the representatives of Brazil, Bolivia and China, I only wanted to express my support […] but I was not given the floor…’
‘The rich are destroying the planet, could it be they are planning to move to another when this one is destroyed?’
InI
Voices of developing world urge action
18 December, 2009 – Real News Network
CCTV: Many African leaders stressing that the voice the of the majority needs to be heard.
Many of the African leaders had their say this week at the Copenhagen climate talks, now with less than 24 hours to go.
They say, at this point, there’s no room for anything but action. They’re stressing that the voice the of the majority needs to be heard.
more about “Voices of developing world urge action“, posted with vodpod
The Indian Ocean nation of Seychelles says it understands the growth desires of industrialized countries. The island chain also comprehends the need for emerging economies to accelerate their development. But there is one group in Copenhagen that is extremely vulnerable to the world’s changing climate.
James Alix Michel, Seychelles President, said, “I am standing before you as the president, and a leader, of a small island state. For us, this agreement is about our right to exist. The commitment we expect to adopt on Friday should be better than what it is today.”
Kenya’s President is emphasizing the need for the UN Framework Convention to live up to its noble principle of protecting the climate system for the benefit of the present and future generations.
He, along with other African leaders, called on industrialized nations to assist developing countries.
InI
Copenhagen: Chavez Salutes Climate Protestors By Kiraz Janicke
17 December, 2009 — Venezuelanalysis
‘I have been reading some of the slogans painted in the streets … One said, ‘Don’t Change the Climate, Change the System!’ – And I bring that on board for us. Let’s not change the climate. Let’s change the system!’
During his speech to the 15th United Nations Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen, Denmark, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez slammed the ‘lack of political will’ of the most powerful nations to take serious action to avert climate change, and called for systemic change to save the planet.
Chavez, who received a standing ovation for his speech, said the process in Copenhagen is ‘not democratic; it is not inclusive.’ In particular, he criticised an attempt by rich countries to overturn the Kyoto Protocol. Doing so would eliminate differentiation between the obligations of rich and poor countries, treating countries from the Global North and South as equally responsible for climate change.
‘There is a group of countries that believe they are superior to those of us from the South, to those of us from the Third Word … this does not surprise us … we are again faced with powerful evidence of global imperial dictatorship,’ Chavez said.
The Venezuelan president also applauded the initiative of the protesters outside the summit who were calling for serious measures to stop catastrophic climate change.
InI
Adib S. Kawar – Democratizing Colonialism!!! (part of the First Word War)
17 December, 2009 — Palestine Think Tank
Part of Tlaxcala and Palestine Think Tank’s “First Word War”
Colonizers try to justify their invasion and colonization of other peoples’ lands by means of various claims, unlike the earlier western colonizers of the 18th and 19th and early 20th centuries, modern colonizers try to justify their invasion of these lands by claiming that they are aiming at democratizing and liberating the targeted countries, peoples and lands.
European invaders of the Americas, Australia, New Zealand etc., right away declared that their aim was to find new lands to colonize and exploit for their civilized white man without beating around the bush with unfounded justifications such as to modernize or to liberate the indigenous populations and democratize them. On the contrary, the invaders declared without shame that they were exterminating the indigenous populations in order to have empty lands for the European civilized white man to colonize.
The United States, which claims to be the greatest democracy in the world, invaded Iraq and justified their action by aiming at liberating Iraqi Arabs from their dictatorial regime and then to democratize them. The invasion by the two Bush presidents – father and son, resulted in great damage of Iraq – both people and land. Iraq was a state that enjoyed a considerably high standard and quality of infrastructure. The invasion ended in threatening the unity of Iraq, human casualties totaling about one and half million deaths, millions of wounded with a high percentage of total physical disablement, and many newborn babies were badly deformed as a result of bombarding the cities and towns with illegal weapons, especially using ammunitions coated with depleted uranium. Thousands of scientists and university professors were targeted and assassinated and whoever of them escaped death had to flee in order to save their lives, which resulted in the destruction of the Iraqi academic life and standards, about 4.7 million Iraqis had to flee their places of residence to safer places in Iraq and/or outside it, agriculture, industry and other types of sources of production and income were badly damaged in addition to destroying most every other aspect of their lives…
InI
Allies suspected of war crimes should not be above the law By Greg Barns
16 December, 2009 — http://www.crikey.com.au/author/gregbarns/
Israeli politician Tzipi Livni and her supporters are outraged that last weekend a British court issued a warrant to allow police to arrest her and question her about allegations that she committed war crimes during the Gaza offensive last Christmas. Ms Livni, Israel’s foreign minister at the time of the offensive, was planning a trip to the UK. The British government is under pressure to change the law to ensure that Israeli citizens are less likely to be subjected to the universal jurisdiction that the UK courts have to deal with allegations of war crimes. And it looks like it will do so, after foreign secretary David Miliband issued a grovelling apology yesterday to Israel for what has transpired.
The British government’s actions in seeking to elevate Israeli officials above the UK war crimes law is breathtaking given the UN commissioned Goldstone Report’s detailed findings about the breaches of the law by Israeli and Palestinian forces in that tragic conflict, which left more than 1300 Palestinians dead. No one, irrespective of who they are or what their nationality is, should be allowed to escape investigation for war crimes. That is why the UK has on its statute books war crimes laws that allow its courts universal jurisdiction.
Even though British behave unscrupulously and will manipulate the law to suit the Israeli government, Australia should not follow suit. In fact, the Rudd government should use the Livni case to make the point that we have similar war crimes laws in Australia and that any person, even if they hail from an ally such as Israel or the US, but who is suspected of committing war crimes should think carefully about visiting this country, because the government will not stand in the way of individuals and groups using the courts to ensure the Federal Police do their job and investigate allegations given to them should be properly investigated.
But don’t hold your breath.
The recent visit to Australia of the political leadership that orchestrated the Gaza offensive, former Prime Minister Elmud Olmert, is a case in point. Olmert, who visited Australia earlier this month, was feted by politicians from both sides. This, despite the fact that Richard Goldstone observed only six weeks earlier about Gaza offensive, that; “Repeatedly, the Israel defence forces failed to adequately distinguish between combatants and civilians, as the laws of war strictly require [and that] Pursuing justice in this case is essential because no state or armed group should be above the law.” Failure to do so “will have a deeply corrosive effect on international justice, and reveal an unacceptable hypocrisy. As a service to hundreds of civilians who needlessly died and for the equal application of international justice, the perpetrators of serious violations must be held to account.”
Despite entreaties from individuals and Palestinian groups in Australia to the Attorney-General Robert McClelland and AFP Commissioner Tony Negus about Olmert, the impression that would have been gained by Israelis, who have become more careful about travelling to countries where there is universal jurisdiction in relation to war crimes, is that Australian authorities, even when armed with the Goldstone Report, will not lift a finger to take action.
InI
Being Anti-Israel and Anti-Zionist Is the “New Anti-Semitism” By Sharmine Narwani
16 December, 2009 — Huffington Post
A Jewish woman, deriding protesters at a UK rally on Sunday in support of charging former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni with war crimes, declared loudly into a TV camera that being anti-Israel and anti-Zionist is the “new anti-Semitism.”
Such licentious language. Meant primarily, I might add, to inflame passions and mislead public opinion by invoking a word – anti-Semitism – that we have been well-conditioned to condemn above all other forms of racism or prejudice.
I am sorry the woman fears anti-Semitism, pogroms and hatred around every corner. It’s not my problem, frankly. Let her get therapy. Does that sound harsh? Sorry, again. But I for one get pretty irritated hearing false cries of anti-Semitism against anyone who criticizes Israel, its human rights crimes, its crazy settler movement, its unique brand of crypto-racism against non-Jews living within the state and its occupied territories.
InI
Sir Geoffrey Bindman: Livni has no right to claim immunity from prosecution
16 December, 2009 — The Independent
The protestations of Israel’s government should not be allowed to interfere
It is not at all surprising that the Israeli government is outraged at the attempt – initially successful – to obtain an arrest warrant in Britain against their former foreign minister Tzipi Livni. But their characterisation of it as a “diplomatic offence” is wide of the mark. Those who come to Britain are subject to its laws.
It is necessary to step back from the particular case and look at the broader picture. War crimes and crimes against humanity are international crimes transcending national boundaries. Universal jurisdiction to put those accused of them on trial is a logical development of that recognition. Such crimes are unlikely to be redressed in the country where the perpetrators hold political power. If they are not, they can only be adjudicated in courts of another state, or in an international court or tribunal.
Since the Second World War there has been a steady expansion of legal mechanisms designed to ensure that there is no hiding place for the perpetrators of international crimes. Complying with UN treaties such as the Geneva Conventions, many countries, including the UK, give their courts jurisdiction to try specific crimes committed outside their own territory.
There is an inherent tension between the sovereignty of nation states and the aspirations of international law. And, of course, there is the day-to-day practicality of international diplomacy between nation states under the threat of prosecution. Compromises always have been and will continue to be made.
Traditional immunities – of the head of state, of its diplomatic representatives, and of the state itself – have been sufficient to enable normal inter-state relationships to proceed. But these immunities are being whittled away where international crimes are concerned, and Tzipi Livni appears to have no claim to any of them. She is not a head of state; nor does it appear that her visit has a diplomatic purpose.
Ex-president Pinochet of Chile failed in his challenge to the attempt to extradite him to Spain to stand trial for torture. His case encouraged progress towards universal jurisdiction over crimes against humanity. The protestations of the Israeli government should not be allowed to interfere with that progress.
Sir Geoffrey Bindman represented Amnesty International and others in the Pinochet case. He is currently chairman of the British Institute of Human Rights
©independent.co.uk
InI
Re Tzipi Livni: Attention foreign secretary David Miliband
17 December, 2009
Dear Mr Miliband,
I wish to urge you to resist the Israeli government’s claims of immunity from universal jurisdiction regarding its war crimes against the Palestinian people. As a Jew concerned about the human rights of everyone, regardless of ethnicity or faith, I find suggestions that Israel should be held to lower standards than other perpetrators of war crimes indicative of Zionism’s perverse racism.
I commend to you a short discussion of the legal issues by Sir Geoffrey Bindman, a prominent lawyer and signatory of Jews for Justice for Palestinians, of which I am also a member. See this link:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/sir-geoffrey-bindman-livni-has-no-right-to-claim-immunity-from-prosecution-1841992.html
Could you please explain to me the government’s position on the following points:
- The government has a duty under the Fourth Geneva Convention to ‘seek out and prosecute’ alleged war criminals. Under the Geneva Conventions Act 1957, the UK has universal jurisdiction to arrest and try suspected perpetrators of “grave breaches” of the Fourth Geneva Convention 1949 (IVCG). War criminals should be pursued – Britain must not become a ‘safe haven’.
- The judicial system is meant to be independent and the government’s role is not to intervene. If a judge believes there is sufficient evidence for an arrest warrant to be granted, it is irrelevant whether this embarrasses or causes problems for the British government.
- The Goldstone Report detailed war crimes and potential crimes against humanity committed by Israel in Gaza. It was shameful that the government abstained on the vote for the Report at the UN Human Rights Council and General Assembly.
- Instead of responding to pressure from the Israeli government to end the right to charge and prosecute war criminals, the government should immediately change its position – it should support international law and justice, and act itself to uphold the Fourth Geneva Convention.
- Britain cannot be a true and independent ‘partner’ for peace if its policies are one-sided, and it allows those responsible for war crimes against Palestinians to avoid justice.
- Tzipi Livni is just the latest in a list of Israelis who have come under scrutiny over allegations of war crimes. Our government should reflect on this, and change its foreign policy, including ending its arms trade with Israel . I have copied this correspondence to my Member of Parliament, Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith. I look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely, Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi
InI
JAZZ AID Concert: LIANNE CARROLL SOLO & WITH SIMON PURCELL, PIANO JULIEN SIEGEL, SAXOPHONES
Compassion in action presents:
LIANNE CARROLL SOLO & WITH SIMON PURCELL, PIANO JULIEN SIEGEL, SAXOPHONES
A Christmas Concert to raise funds for the great work done for the homeless by St Leonard’s Church during the cold winter nights
Winner of 2 BBC Jazz awards, the great star of Ronnie Scott’s club, since 1995, is here to do another charity gig with us.
Liane has worked with such people as Gerry Rafferty, Long John Baldry, Paul’s Weller and McCartney, and the great American guitarist, Jerry Donahue.
She has toured Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, USA, Japan, as well as most of Europe.
Her choice of songs is an eclectic mix of compositions from writers such as Tom Waite, Leonard, Cohen, Carol King, Joni Mitchell and Lou Reed and of course some classics from the great American song-book, as well as her own startlingly beautiful and sometimes emotional compositions.
It is hard to categorise her style – she says “I suppose I am more jazz and blues than anything, but I
hate to be pigeon-holed!”
If you do not already know her, you are in for an unexpected and extraordinary musical treat. The odds are, you will become a lifelong fan, as we all are!
On: Friday 18th December 2009 at 7.00pm
At: St Leonard’s Church, Shoreditch High Street, London. E1 6JN
Tickets: Adults £15, Students £10, Children £5.00
Available from: Reverend Paul Turp on p.turp48@btinternet.com or
Reg Simmonds on 07979 504582 or admin@simmondsmetals.co.uk
A glass of mulled wine will be served on arrival. Also in the interval with bread & cheese and mince pies
InI
Media Alert: Chilcot Inquiry – the establishment goes to work – part 2
17 December, 2009 — MEDIA LENS: Correcting for the distorted vision of the corporate media
Buckling Under Bush
In an early leading article on the Chilcot inquiry, the Guardian observed:
“What is already clear from the first week alone is that the decisions, secret or otherwise, that led to war were the product of systemic failure. Intelligence analysts, diplomats, in fact the entire machinery of the British government, proved supine against Washington’s will. Under that pressure, almost everyone buckled.” (Leading Article: ‘Iraq inquiry: Dancing to American drums,’ The Guardian, November 28, 2009)
They certainly did. The Guardian’s Martin Woollacott wrote in January 24, 2003:
“Among those knowledgeable about Iraq there are few, if any, who believe he is not hiding such weapons. It is a given.” (Woollacott, ‘This drive to war is one of the mysteries of our time – We know Saddam is hiding weapons. That isn’t the argument,’ The Guardian, January 24, 2003)
This was close to being an exact reversal of the truth. Hans Blix, former head of UNMOVIC arms inspections in Iraq (November 2002-March 2003), said in June 2003:
“If anyone had cared… to study what UNSCOM [arms inspections in Iraq from 1991-1998] was saying for quite a number of years, and what we [UNMOVIC] were saying, they should not have assumed that they would stumble on weapons.” (Miles Pomper and Paul Kerr, ‘An Interview With Hans Blix,’ Arms Control Today, June 16 2003)
InI
The Chilcot ‘Inquiry’, a theatre of the absurd – ‘It ain’t me Guv’ By William Bowles
16 December 2009 — Strategic Culture Foundation
Why does the extermination of an entire culture cause not a ripple in our public discourse? The answer is obvious: we don’t have any kind of discourse with those who wield power. The Chilcott ‘Inquiry’ demonstrates this down to a tee. It’s brazen in its disregard for the reality of the crimes the British state has committed in Iraq and continues to commit in Afghanistan. And brazen in the way it scoots a lot of very guilty-looking ‘witnesses’ through the process as painlessly as possible. How has this come to pass?
My ‘co-conspirators’ over at Media Lens put it this way:
“When public scepticism erupts in response to resultant extremes of criminality and violence that even the media are powerless to deny, the illusion must be bolstered. Then Tweedledum-Tweedledee will choose from their own to rig an “inquiry”, while their media allies present the process as something other than a farce.” — Chilcot Inquiry – The Establishment goes to work – Part 1 [1]
But I don’t think it is public skepticism that has made it so, I think it’s the public’s total lack of trust and ultimately indifference to anything the state puts its bloodstained hands on. Which in turn explains why the Chilcott ‘Inquiry’ farce or not, ends up being tedious, state-inspired theatre that ‘Uncle Joe’ would have been proud of. Even better, it’s not even a trial, show or otherwise! They don’t care what we think as they know we have given away what little power we used to possess to a gangster political class who consequently behave with total impunity knowing full well that there is nothing we can do about it.
As far as Chilcot and his handpicked accomplices are concerned there are no guilty people here, merely passive witnesses to the crime, who regurgitate what is already known and has been for years. And if it made no difference the first (and second) time round, why should it this time? Indeed, Chilcot went out of his way to inform us that it wasn’t a trial, there was to be no attempt assign culpability or responsibility, no serious cross-examination. So what’s the point?
And to rub some more salt into the gaping wound that is Iraq there is no pretense at impartiality, just look at the five ‘eminent’ persons selected to perform the whitewash[2]. The media of course goes along with entire charade, what choice do they have (except make their coverage as boring as the ‘Inquiry’ itself is)? It’s all theatre of the worst, mediocre kind.
So by now, anybody still interested in the alleged inquiry into the origins of the illegal invasion, occupation and subsequent destruction of the most developed country in the Middle East, will have been bored witless by the ‘witnesses’ to the barbarity that has seen fully half the population of Iraq either killed, wounded or driven into exile, internal or abroad. Iraq’s health, education, transportation, housing and communications infrastructure, blasted to pieces. Add to this the poisoning of the land and people with depleted uranium and we have a crime of gargantuan dimensions, fully comparable with the Nazi slaughter of millions. What makes it worse, just as with the barbarity that was Operation Cast Lead, it was done in full view of the world’s public, nay, lauded as the work of civilized and ‘civilizing’ man. Have they inured us totally to the suffering our state (and many others) are raining down on defenceless men, women and children 24/7?
Yet judging from the coverage of the Chilcott ‘inquiry’, you’d think it was just a Sunday afternoon stroll in the park. The testimony is made by a variety of suits masquerading as members of the human race, all desperately doing a mea non-culpa on the whole, sordid conspiracy. ‘It weren’t me guv!’
But if what these barbarians did was so noble, why are they are they all to a man, trying to put so much distance between themselves and their political masters?
As a result the Chilcott ‘Inquiry’ is in fact little more than a cynical PR exercise, designed largely to placate those members of the political class who are more than a little uncomfortable with the fact that they have been accomplices in the commission of a gigantic war crime and hence felt it necessary to make some kind of attempt at shifting the blame onto ‘mistakes’ or ‘lack of intelligence’ but definitely not themselves. ‘It ain’t me guv!’
And in any case, we’ve been here before and with same result as inevitably this one will have. And just to make sure the BBC did its bit for the state, reinforcing the lie that ‘nobody knew’.
“Iraq details ‘scanty’ before war
“In it [the Dodgy Dossier], he said the 45-minute claim arose because British intelligence was ‘squeezing’ agents in Iraq for information, under pressure from Downing Street to back up its case that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
“‘The provenance of this information was never questioned in detail until after the Iraq invasion, when it became apparent that something was wrong,’ he said.
“‘In the end it turned out that the information was not credible, it had originated from an emigre taxi driver on the Iraqi-Jordanian border, who had remembered an overheard conversation in the back of his cab a full two years earlier.’
“Mr Holloway stated that an intelligence analyst had at the time flagged up – via a footnote – that the claims were ‘demonstrably untrue’.
“‘Despite this glaring factual inaccuracy… the report was characterised as reliable,’ he said. The government has yet to respond to his claims.” — Adam Holloway Tory MP and Commons Defence Committee member — ‘Ex-spy chief says Iraqi WMD claims not manipulated’ BBC News at 6, 8 November, 2009
“Factual inaccuracy”? Newsspeak for lie, the word that dare not be mentioned, not once, not ever in the eight long years of this obscenity.
Take the testimony of Sir John Scarlett, the man who produced the ‘Dodgy Dossier’ in September of 2002. The BBC carried a video of Scarlett’s brazen lies and ‘it ain’t me guv’, and from the look on the man’s face as he spoke, it was clear he wasn’t too happy about it either (see below).
“Sir John, who was in charge of the dossier, said it was produced in good faith: ‘There was absolutely no conscious intention to manipulate the language or to obfuscate or to create a misunderstanding as to what this might refer to.
/../
“Sir John defended the dossier but said it should have stated the 45-minute claim referred to battlefield munitions not ballistic missiles to avoid the information ‘getting lost in translation’.
/../
“He [Scarlett] went some way to distance himself from Tony Blair’s foreword. Sir John said he had made small corrections, but he insisted it had been Mr Blair’s wording.”
“Discussing the general reliability of intelligence ahead of the war, he said the nature of Iraqi society – where policy revolved around the ‘whims and personality’ of Saddam Hussein – meant it was difficult to produce intelligence, particular about secretive weapons programmes.” — ‘Ex-spy chief says Iraqi WMD claims not manipulated’ BBC News at 6, 8 November, 2009
Now I’ve read the ‘Dodgy Dossier’ and it is packed full of extremely detailed information about Iraq’s military arsenal, but the kicker is that it’s mostly based on the military capabilities that Iraq had before the USUK bombed the hell out the place for twelve years. In other words, it mostly describes the situation as it was back in 1991 in full knowledge of the fact that between 1991 and the invasion in 2003, Iraq had been bombed back into the stone age or as the barbarians put it, its military capacity ‘degraded’. All contemporary information is based on fabrications and outright lies.
This is from the Executive Summary:
6. As a result of the intelligence we judge that Iraq has:
- continued to produce chemical and biological agents [False];
- military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, including against its own Shia population. Some of these weapons are deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them [False];
- command and control arrangements in place to use chemical and biological weapons. Authority ultimately resides with Saddam Hussein. (There is intelligence that he may have delegated this authority to his son Qusai) [False];
- developed mobile laboratories for military use, corroborating earlier reports about the mobile production of biological warfare agents [False];
- pursued illegal programmes to procure controlled materials of potential use in the production of chemical and biological weapons programmes [False];
- tried covertly to acquire technology and materials which could be used in the production of nuclear weapons [False];
- sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa, despite having no active civil nuclear power programme that could require it. [False. No doubt a reference to the fabricated ‘Niger Yellowcake’ document];
Pretty definite don’t you think? But this didn’t stop Scarlett, author of the report from shifting the blame for the lies onto Tony Blair’s introduction, yet compare the wording of Blair’s introduction to Scarlett’s:
“…the document discloses that his [Hussein’s] military planning allows for some of the WMD to be ready within 45 minutes of an order to use them.” — Tony Blair
“Some of these weapons are deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them” — Sir John Scarlett [my emph. Ed]
In fact, the words are almost identical, so it’s obvious where Blair got them from in spite of Scarlett’s protestations to the contrary:
“He went some way to distance himself from Tony Blair’s foreword. Sir John said he had made small corrections, but he insisted it had been Mr Blair’s wording.”
But the additional crime here is the way these war criminals simply ignore the reality of what has been done to Iraq, its people and its culture. In fact, searching through the media coverage of the ‘Inquiry’, the destruction of Iraq with the loss of well over one million lives doesn’t even get a mention (and this doesn’t include the over one million who died during the twelve years of sanctions)!
What we have then is a parade of the accomplices to the crime, ably ‘facilitated’ by the Chilcot ‘Inquiry’ that guides them through the process as painlessly as possible, in full knowledge of the fact that there are no avenues open to us to challenge this fraudulent process.
But let us be realistic, there is no way the government are going to investigate themselves, let alone prosecute, to believe otherwise is nothing other than self-delusion. There is only one way that justice can be done for the victims of this monstrous crime and that is through public action that demands that these war criminals be prosecuted.
Notes
1. For an excellent analysis of the media’s complicity in the Big Lie see Part 1 and Part 2 of MediaLens’ ‘Chilcot Inquiry – the establishment goes to work’.
2. See ‘The Iraq Inquiry: The who, what and why of Gordon Brown’s hand-picked ‘independent’ panel’ By Kevin Blowe
InI
Get the war criminals arrested now By Khalid Amayreh
16 December, 2009 — Palestine Think Tank
(artwork by Edna Spennato)
The recent arrest warrant issued in London for former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni is more than justified.
This woman, along with two other Israeli leaders, Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak, stood at the helm of the Israeli government that ordered, supervised and charted the genocidal onslaught against the Gaza Strip this time last year.
She was a chief participant in the decision-making process who also supervised the progress of the hideous massacre from the beginning to the end.
Needless to say, the decisions taken by Livni, and other suspected Israeli war criminals, did lead to the murder of more than 1440 people, including hundreds of innocent children whose lives were terminated by indiscriminate bombings from air, land and sea. This is in addition to the pornographic destruction of a huge part of Gaza’s civilian infrastructure, including tens of thousands of homes, mosques and public buildings of every kind.
The monstrous, satanic and evil lady knew perfectly what she was doing. She knew that her SS-like army was murdering kids in their mothers’ laps, annihilating entire families, frightened and huddling in their refugee shanties or whatever other places they thought would shield them from death.
