Whilst Ben Ali commiserates with 1.5 tons of gold and his new Saudi hosts on the loss of his holiday homes and yachts which he and his family pilfered, the Dark Prince of Ziostan seizes upon the tyrant’s ousting as yet another reason to delay the peace talks charade. ‘Talking of Peace Talks’ is a customary game played with international elites by the Ziostanian ruling class when they are not aggressing some neighbour or Palestinians unworthy of democracy, which is perceived as a risk by Ziostan’s elite to their ‘stability, security and peace’. It is a pleasant, hands-across-the-waters effusive pastime which obscures even more enjoyable activities like home demolitions, accelerated land theft throughout the West Bank, Occupied Jerusalem and the Negev, shooting motorists, or small boys and old men who stray too close to the Gaza apartheid fence when struggling to eke out a living collecting stones and pebbles to rebuild their famous landmark – the largest civilian prison on the planet. The main game though for Ziostan, its strategy, tactic and aim, is expansionism, the taking of territory which wondrously can be justified in retrospect or even in advance, for Ziostan’s constant demand for ‘stability, security and peace’ is paramount before the most rudimentary needs for survival of those they oppress.

It is two years since Ziostan declared its massacre of the people of Gaza over, and the hideous, illegal siege remains, with the full complicity of the global political community which has chosen shining, privileged, packaged ziocolony to rule over and occupy Palestinians. Ziostan commandeered more than 3 million dunam of cultivated fields and villages during and after their genocide and expulsion of Palestinians, the Nakba, in 1948. The inconvenience of the continued presence of suffering, protesting Palestinians as a distraction from fiercely marketed tactical Ziostanian victimhood is perceived as a small price to pay in order to usurp the balance of Palestinian land and resources which Ziostan covets. Those who resist Ziostanian power even in non-violent ways, including children, are often summarily jailed, labelled terrorists and tortured. There will be no need for two states if Ziostan can appropriate all Palestinian land without resistance or approbation from the international community. The ‘talk of peace talks’ charade provides window dressing for the international ruling class and ameloriates criticism within Ziostan itself. Failure of ‘peace talks’ is routinely blamed upon Palestinians unwilling to surrender one more dunam of their indigenous birthright and heritage or to forgo the right of return guaranteed by international law. Conscience is no impediment to the elite of Ziostan, for as with other elites, Ziostanians do not flinch from their righteous dispossession of those whom they perceive as lesser humans or not human at all.

The Dark Prince remains aloof from many of his own people as he is from Palestinians and transfixed by the hunt, does not understand the lessons presently before him. Yet neither he nor the rest of his ziofascist retinue or contrived brute force, theft and calumny can withstand the people’s search for real security and peace based soundly on justice and equal rights and backed with a growing solidarity movement focussed on boycotts, divestments and sanctions. Tinpot dictatorial sociopaths with Uzis, F15s, dungeons, pain, the whole banal sex and death repertoire have limited appeal – fascistic crises and spectacles lose their lustre after their twisted motivations are exposed.

Perhaps when Nutanyahoo is finally ousted by a united people hungry for real democracy, he too can apply to Saudia for a political sinecure or respite.

In Egypt, Abul Gheit reacts furiously and with unconscious irony to Clinton’s hypocritical statements:

“We hope that the summit will adopt Egypt’s proposal which would be a message from the Arab to the Western and European world saying ‘Do not dare interfere in our affairs”, he was quoted as saying by the official MENA news agency.

MENA said he was responding to a question from one of its journalists who asked if the summit could adopt a common position concerning Western bids to interfere in Arab affairs.

On Thursday, Clinton urged Arab leaders to work with their peoples to implement reforms or see extremists fill the void, warning the “region’s foundations are sinking”.

The region’s peoples “have grown tired of corrupt institutions”, Clinton told Arab counterparts in Qatar attending the Forum for the Future, a 2004 US initiative aimed at promoting such partnerships.

“In too many places, in too many ways, the region’s foundations are sinking into the sand. The new and dynamic Middle East that I have seen needs firmer ground if it is to take root and grow everywhere,” she said.

Clinton said the region’s leaders “in partnership with their peoples” have the capacity to build a bold new future where entrepreneurship and political freedoms are encouraged.

“It’s time to see civil society not as a threat but as a partner,” she said.

“Those who cling to the status quo may be able to hold back the full impact of their countries’ problems for a little while but not forever.

“Others will fill the vacuum,” if leaders failed to offer a positive vision to give “young people meaningful ways to contribute”, Clinton warned.

Abul Gheit also dismissed the notion that people in the Arab world could be inspired by Tunisia, where violent protests forced president Zine Al Abidine Ben Ali to abandon his post.

“The talk about the spread of what happened in Tunisia to other countries is nonsense. Each society has its own circumstances,” Abul Gheit told reporters in Sharm El Sheikh.

“If the Tunisian people decide to take that approach, it’s their business.

“Egypt has said that the Tunisian people’s will is what counts,” said the foreign minister.

“Those who imagine things and seek to escalate the situation will not achieve their goals.

“The most important thing is the will of the Tunisian people. Nobody is resisting it,” Abul Gheit added..

It is most important for dictators to resist the will of the people – yet even Pharaohs may fall when the people no longer tolerate their cruelty and corruption.

Related Links

Netanyahu: Tunisia turmoil shows instability of entire Mideast
Netanyahu seizes on Tunisian turmoil as yet another pretext for iron wall
Uneasy calm in Tunisia as power talks continue
Brave soldier Netanyahu is turning out to be coward
Riots in Algeria
The Candid Guide to Arab Dictators
New Wikileaks: US Knew Tunisian Gov. Rotten Corrupt, Supported Ben Ali Anyway

Palestine / Israel Links

Peres: Probe of Leftist NGOs harms Israeli democracy (What democracy?)

Other Links

Floods, prices and mortality
Joe Hallett commentary: Snooping on journalist’s family is new low for Democrats
Ezili Dantò’s Note on the arrival of Jean Claude Duvalier into Haiti today
1974 – South East Queensland – Cyclone Wanda

The Israeli IOF spokesman attempted to muddy the waters and smear Palestinians by suggesting they created a false story about Jawaher’s death.

An Israeli military statement issued Saturday evening said Palestinians initially reported that Abu Rahmah was released from hospital Friday and died at home. “Subsequently the Palestinians changed their version of events, claiming that she died in the hospital,” the statement continued.

A military spokesman did not immediately know who the Palestinians quoted in the statement were, but said he would look into it.

Bil’in popular committee spokesman Jonathan Pollak said the statement was a “shameless lie aimed at distorting reality.”

Abu Rahmah arrived at the hospital unconscious and doctors were unable to revive her, Pollak said. She did not die because of a lack of medical treatment, but because Israeli forces used a lethal tear gas banned in several European countries, he added.

More IOF lies have bubbled up through the zionist swamp. Jewish Voices for Peace @jvplive tweeted at the time from the protest : “One eye injury and jawaher – sister of bassem who was killed last year at a demo -was taken to the hospital for gas inhalation.”

Journalist Lisa Goldman, who was also present at the protest, has translated Jonathan Pollak’s collection of witness statements.

Ali Abunimah @avinunu also notes on twitter: In report on Jawahir Abu Rahmah BBC World Service just lied that Israel’s wall is “built around the West Bank” (it’s built through it) #

Jawaher’s funeral:

Hundreds of Israelis rallied in Tel Aviv also to protest Jawaher’s murder. Lisa Goldman, who was also present at the Bil’in protest, reports:

The demonstration to protest Jawaher’s death by tear gas asphyxiation was announced mid-morning on Saturday, via Facebook and Twitter. Despite the short notice, it attracted at least 200 people. The crowd was sufficiently large to block traffic across from the Ministry of Defense (Kirya) on Kaplan Street, a main traffic artery that connects to the Ayalon Highway.

Waving poster-size mourning posters emblazoned with photos of Jawaher Abu Rahmeh and carrying placards with slogans in Hebrew and English, demonstrators chanted in Hebrew: “Citizens, awake! Fascism is already here!” “Barak! Barak! Minister of Defense! How many demonstrators have you killed today?!” ; in English: “Apartheid! Fight back!”; and in Arabic: “Min Ghaza el Bil’in, hurra hurra Falasteen!” (from Gaza to Bil’in, freedom, freedom for Palestine).

Haaretz notes that former MK Musi Raz is “reportedly arrested and beaten by Israeli police” at the Tel Aviv protest against Jawaher’s murder.

According to Joseph Dana, another participant in the Bil’in protest, there’s a new form of BDS arisen in Israel.

Israeli activists protesting the killing of Bil’in’s Jawaher Abu Rahmah ‘returned’ spent tear gas canisters to the residence of the American ambassador to Israel late Saturday evening.
…
The tear gas used by the Israeli forces in Bil’in is manufactured by Combined Systems Inc.; a United States company based in Jamestown, Pennsylvania. This is the first protest where empty tear gas canisters have been returned to an ambassador’s home.

Approximately twenty five Israeli protesters gathered in front of the residence of American ambassador to Israel, James B. Cunningham around 1am local time. The protesters ‘returned’ loads of spent tear gas canisters collected in the West Bank village of Bil’in in protest of the murder of Bil’in’s Jawaher Abu Rahmah. The demonstrators also made noise throughout the Ambassador’s neighborhood informing residents of how American military aid to Israel is being used to kill unarmed and nonviolent demonstrators in the West Bank. They chanted, “one, two, three, four stop the occupation stop the war. Five, six, seven, eight end the funding (US) end the hate.”

Meanwhile, as Israel bombs and terrorises them, the besieged people of Gaza await the arrival of the Asia to Gaza convoy.

Egypt yesterday gave permission for the Asia to Gaza Caravan — or Asia1 — to pass through Egypt to Gaza, according to Khaled Abdel Megid, a member of the Palestinian National Congress.

He said the Egyptian embassy in Damascus informed the convoy of the permit that allows only 120 activists entry to Egypt and then Gaza. It denied entry to 46 activists from Iran and Jordan.

Egypt will not allow 10 generators donated by the Iranians to enter to the besieged Gaza Strip. This will decrease the size of the humanitarian aid convoy to below 300 tons, which will be limited to food and medical aid in addition to toys, according to Abdel-Meguid.

The Asia to Gaza Caravan consists of approximately 160 people from more than 15 countries, including Iran, India, Japan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Malaysia, New Zealand and Kuwait. It was scheduled to reach Gaza by 27 December, in time for the second anniversary of Israel’s 22-day war on the Strip that started on 28 December 2008.

Approximately 1,400 Palestinians were killed and 5,000 injured or maimed in the three-week war. Half of Gaza’s infrastructure was destroyed and remains unrepaired as a result of Israel’s siege, which includes a ban on the entry of building materials into the Strip.

The time has come for justice, an end to the lies and crimes of those who consider themselves privileged and above others, who maintain their privilege by stepping on and stealing from those whom they oppress. Justice is for all, equal rights are for all. Please boycott, sanction and divest from apartheid Israel until the Occupation is ended and Palestinians have attained their just rights.

Happy new year to everyone! I am blessed with the best online friends one could imagine, sources of joy, knowledge and companionship largely absent from the elitist, white-privileged area of Queensland, Australia in which I live. Thank you

UPDATE January 7

From Mondoweiss:

It may be a nonlethal weapon, but tear gas can have serious effects. A 2003 article published by four Israeli army doctors in Archives of Toxicology noted that CS gas — the type used by the IDF at these protests — causes tearing and burning for about 15 to 30 minutes, and this is lessened if people are moved into fresh air. The army has insisted on the safety of CS beyond these immediate effects. But the Israeli army doctors’ article noted, “At high concentrations, enclosed spaces, or prolonged exposures, severe side effects may occur and human deaths from lacrimating [tearing] agents have been reported.”

A 2009 article in the British Medical Journal came to similar conclusions, noting that tear gas is “not a gas at all, but a toxic chemical irritant.”

Related Links

a postalcard from ashkenaz
five a.m. epiphany
Good guys actually won this shootout at the Hasbara Corral
Bil’in eyewitnesses: Woman killed by tear gas wasn’t protesting
IDF scales back defense over death of Palestinian protester
Israeli media acting like North Korean media

Palestine / Israel Links

Bilin protestor’s mother ‘not seeking revenge’
Gazan youth issue manifesto to vent their anger with all sides in the conflict
Demonstrators ‘return’ tear gas canisters to US ambassador home over the killing of a Bil’in protester
The teargas grenades that killed Jawaher Abu Rahmah were most likely ‘made in the USA’
Hundreds rally in Tel Aviv to protest Bil’in woman’s death
Police clash with leftists at Tel Aviv demonstration of Bil’in protester’s death
Gazans face cooking gas shortage
WikiLeaks cable: UN Goldstone resolution: NZ is watching Europe
Army investigating death of Bil’in protester
Protesters Breached the Wall in Bil’in
The first martyr of 2011 and where we go from here
Abbas: Latest Palestinian death another Israeli crime against our helpless nation
Israeli Forces Kill Female Protester in Bil’in
IMAGES: funeral of Bil’in protester Jawaher abu Rahmah
The death of Jawaher Abu-Rahma is a direct result of occupation and the inhumane violence and brutality against the nonviolent demonstrators in Bilin
Settlers set fire to home as seven Palestinians sleep inside
Sister of Bilin victim dies in anti-fence protest
How many israeli police officers does it take to guard a locked door? Four…
Report: U.S. in secret talks with Syria over peace accord with Israel
Use this site to know which Israeli products to boycott
What options exist for Netanyahu next time on the high seas?
An open letter from Gaza to Thomas Quasthoff: Do not Forget the Gaza Concentration Camp and “Tell It like It Is!”
NY Times Isabel Kershner Wasn’t At Bil’in Demo–But Still Wrongly Reports On It
More Israeli lies : Israel says direct negotiations best path to peace
Boston says: Break the Siege of Gaza!
Holocaust survivors warn of stirrings of neo-fascism
Israeli forces arrest 2 children in Jerusalem
WikiLeaks: Israel has only 12-minute warning if Iran attacks
Netanyahu Wants Nonstop Talks With Palestinians

Wikileaks Links

The Anti-Empire Report Wikileaks, the United States, Sweden, and Devil’s Island
Coming to terms with the information age : Mark Pesce
On the double-o licence of the powerful
Announcing ScienceLeaks
Invasion of privacy in Paraguay : US Collects DNA And Data On Foreign Presidential Candidates
US government knew about human experiments : Pfizer tested drugs on children
Tortured Until Proven Guilty: Bradley Manning and the Case Against Solitary Confinement
My Time with Julian Assange at the World’s Most Dangerous Website
WikiLeaks, Ideological Legitimacy and the Crisis of Empire
Wikileaks: Israel preparing for ‘large scale war’

Other Links

Egypt church bombing: Why some point to Al Qaeda-linked group
Who is Behind The Alexandria Explosion !!?
Fahem Boukadous and Tunisia’s War on Press Freedoms
US at War Since 1950: A New Year’s Meditation

NGO Monitor’s International Advisory Board consists of:

Elie Wiesel
Professor Alan Dershowitz
Fiamma Nirenstein
Elliott Abrams
Amb. Yehuda Avner
Tom Gross
Col. Richard Kemp
Douglas Murray
Judea Pearl
Judge Abraham Sofaer
Ruth Wisse
R. James Woolsey

Several of these individuals have cross-over links with US neocon and pro-Israel establishments. Click on highlighted names to find out these people’s associations and in which organisations they are involved. Some of these include the Committee on the Present Danger, Avi Chai Foundation, JINSA, Koret Foundation and the Hoover Institution. The Koret Foundation is also a major donor to NGO Monitor.

As noted in October 09, one of NGO Monitor’s co-sponsors is the Wechsler Foundation, a non-profit [sic], tax-exempt US organisation, which, along with other US-based sponsors, pad NGO Monitor with US taxpayer funds to undermine the work of peace organisations in Israel and Palestine, and the independent journalism represented by Electronic Intifada, in the interests of the Israeli and US economic elite.

Another of NGO Monitor’s major funders is the United Jewish Communities, which was formed from the 1999 merger of United Jewish Appeal (UJA), Council of Jewish Federations and United Israel Appeal, Inc and the Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA), which partners with the Jewish Agency in Israel.

From the JFNA site:

United Israel Appeal (UIA), as part of The Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA), is a principal link between the American Jewish community and the people of Israel. An independent legal entity, UIA is responsible for the distribution and oversight of funds raised by U.S. Federation campaigns on behalf of Israel for use by its operating agent, the Jewish Agency for Israel, and for securing and monitoring funds for the immigration and absorption of Jewish refugees and humanitarian migrants to Israel from countries of distress. It is with the Jewish Agency as our partner, that UIA assists American Jews to fulfill their ongoing collective commitment to contribute to and participate in the upbuilding of the Jewish State of Israel.

Further:

UIA allocates and monitors funds raised by Federation campaigns in the U.S. for UIA’s operating agent JAFI, Israeli NGO’s and the over 1000 physical projects constructed in Israel with funds from U.S. donors.

As recounted on this blog several days ago, the Israel-based parent body of the United Israel Appeal, Keren Hayesod, sealed a deal with the Israeli government in October 2010.

‘Leading the projects that Keren Hayesod will support is Prime Minister’s Office project regarding national heritage sites. Keren Hayesod has taken it upon itself to raise funds in order to supplement the Government budget and expand the scope of the project.’.

On February 21, 2010, Netanyahu presented a Cabinet Communique outlining earmark funding of the ‘national’ heritage project.

The list of sites submitted here is neither closed nor final. It can and will certainly include other sites. I also intend to include Rachel’s Tomb, to the rehabilitation of which the Jewish Agency has allocated NIS 20 million, and the Tomb of the Patriarchs. Since I was asked, I would like to make my intentions clear, and this is what will be.

UNESCO recently insisted that Israel remove the Cave of the Patriachs and Rachel’s Tomb, both located in the Palestinian West Bank, from its list of national heritage sites as they are sites of mosques. Abbas and Haniyeh have also requested the sites be removed from Netanyahu’s proposed national heritage trail. Netanyahu has refused to do so.

In essence, US taxpayer money is diverted through Israeli front organisations in the US, which also fund NGO Monitor, to illegal Israeli government projects in the Occupied Territories.

You can donate to worthy online journalism at Electronic Intifada here.

UPDATE

Haaretz journalist doubles as anti-”delegitimization” operative

Haaretz has an international reputation as Israel’s most liberal and reliable newspaper. But The Electronic Intifada has discovered that one of the newspaper’s regularly-featured reporters, Cnaan Liphshiz, used his news reports for the publication to promote the agenda of an extreme pro-Israel group with which he was also employed.

At the same time, Liphshiz appears to have made efforts to conceal his work with the Dutch Zionist group CIDI (Centre for Documentation and Information on Israel), an undisclosed conflict of interest which calls into question the reliability of his reports and the editorial standards of Haaretz.

From 2007 until the present, Liphshiz has written about 50 articles in Haaretz which quote information provided by CIDI or its executive director Ronny Naftaniel, usually without offering any countervailing opinion or sources. Many of Liphshiz’s stories are based entirely on information provided by CIDI.

CIDI has confirmed to The Electronic Intifada that Lipshiz worked for the organization, and is likely to work for them again in the future.

CIDI has earned a reputation as one of the staunchest advocates for Israel in the Netherlands, launching stinging personal attacks and smears on public figures and groups who dare to call on Israel to respect human rights. In an article for The Electronic Intifada, Stan van Houcke, a Dutch journalist and author, described CIDI as an organization whose main goal is to cover up Israel’s violations of international law (“Dutch ‘research’ group covers for Israeli crimes,” violations, 5 November 2007).

In comparison, prostitutes provide an honourable service while Washington flunkoids service mercantilism, empire and fascists of various flavours including zionists. The end of the evul empire is within sight perhaps when its hitherto formidable frontlining generals criticise it in such terms.

This unholy alliance also runs the ICA [Institute for Contemporary Affairs] in Jerusalem which “provides a forum for discussion of Israel’s strategic, defense and national security challenges”.

Thus NGO Monitor is clearly a hasbara conglomerate. Ironically, it is subsidised by the US taxpayer to undermine the work of peace organisations in Israel and Palestine in the interests of the Israeli and US economic elite.

One of its co-sponsors is the Wechsler foundation, a non-profit [sic], tax-exempt US organisation.

The foundation’s contact is Harry C Wechsler. Is this the same person as the ex CIA officer mentioned in regard to the Boston Systematics/Alltel/Vince Foster/PROMIS software affair?

The Applied Research Institute in Jerusalem claims NGO Monitor is “an organization that attempts to frame the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a one sided skewed narrative. NGO Monitor is run by pro-Israeli contributors, is funded by pro-Israeli groups, and has a proven track record of smearing Palestinian supported groups while refusing to report on pro-Israeli organizations.”

The ARI took NGO Monitor to court and won in 2007.

UPDATE:

Play Spot the NGO Monitor below – (Click on the + signs on the coloured squares to expand)

Here’s the NGO Monitor International Advisory Board:

Elie Wiesel
Professor Alan Dershowitz
Sir Martin Gilbert
R. James Woolsey
Tom Gross
Michael Gove MP
Douglas Murray
Judea Pearl
Elliott Abrams
Harry Wechsler
Nina Rosenwald

Also worth a look around is the Project for the New American Century map.

Under executive orders issued by Obama last week, the CIA still has authority to carry out what are known as renditions, or the secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the U.S.

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said the rendition program is poised to play an expanded role because it is the main remaining mechanism—aside from Predator missile strikes—for taking suspected terrorists off the street.

The rendition program became a source of embarrassment for the CIA, and a target of international scorn, as details emerged in recent years of botched captures, mistaken identities and allegations that prisoners were turned over to countries where they were tortured.

The European Parliament condemned renditions as an “illegal instrument used by the United States.” Prisoners swept up in the program have sued the CIA as well as a subsidiary of Boeing Corp., which is accused of working with the agency on dozens of rendition flights.

But the Obama administration appears to have determined that the rendition program was one component of the Bush administration’s war on terrorism that it could not afford to discard.

The decision underscores the fact that the battle with Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups is far from over and that even if the U.S. is shutting down the prisons, it is not done taking prisoners.

“Obviously you need to preserve some tools, you still have to go after the bad guys,” said an Obama administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity when discussing legal reasoning behind the decision. “The legal advisers working on this looked at rendition. It is controversial in some circles and kicked up a big storm in Europe. But if done within certain parameters, it is an acceptable practice.”

One provision in one of Obama’s orders appears to preserve the CIA’s ability to detain and interrogate terrorism suspects as long as they are not held long-term. The little-noticed provision states that the instructions to close the CIA’s secret prison sites “do not refer to facilities used only to hold people on a short-term, transitory basis.”

Washington Monthly commentator Hilzoy makes some pertinent observations in regard to the above stories:

If the LA Times is right to claim that the Obama administration has left open the possibility of extraordinary renditions, that would be a huge problem. However, I don’t think it is. Here it helps to have spent some time reading the actual orders. The order called “Ensuring Lawful Interrogations” contains the following passage:

“Sec. 6. Construction with Other Laws. Nothing in this order shall be construed to affect the obligations of officers, employees, and other agents of the United States Government to comply with all pertinent laws and treaties of the United States governing detention and interrogation, including but not limited to: the Fifth and Eighth Amendments to the United States Constitution; the Federal torture statute, 18 U.S.C. 2340 2340A; the War Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. 2441; the Federal assault statute, 18 U.S.C. 113; the Federal maiming statute, 18 U.S.C. 114; the Federal “stalking” statute, 18 U.S.C. 2261A; articles 93, 124, 128, and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 893, 924, 928, and 934; section 1003 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, 42 U.S.C. 2000dd; section 6(c) of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, Public Law 109 366; the Geneva Conventions; and the Convention Against Torture. Nothing in this order shall be construed to diminish any rights that any individual may have under these or other laws and treaties.”

Part 1, Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture states:

“1. No State Party shall expel, return (“refouler”) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.”

Obama orders people to comply with the Convention Against Torture, and that Convention states that we cannot return people to states where there are substantial grounds to believe that they will be tortured. And nothing the Obama administration has done to date suggests to me that they would engage in the kinds of creative reading of legal documents that would allow them, say, to disregard Egypt’s long record of torture in making this determination.

Moreover, Obama’s Executive Order also establishes a commission one of whose goals is:

“to study and evaluate the practices of transferring individuals to other nations in order to ensure that such practices comply with the domestic laws, international obligations, and policies of the United States and do not result in the transfer of individuals to other nations to face torture or otherwise for the purpose, or with the effect, of undermining or circumventing the commitments or obligations of the United States to ensure the humane treatment of individuals in its custody or control.”

So in addition to announcing that the administration will obey the Convention Against Torture, the administration will also study not whether to send detainees off to be tortured, but how to ensure that our policies are not intended to result in their torture, and will not result in their torture. This seems to me like a very clear renunciation of the policy of sending people to third countries to be tortured. His executive order also precludes any kind of secret detention of prisoners, and thus “secret abductions and transfers of prisoners”:

“All departments and agencies of the Federal Government shall provide the International Committee of the Red Cross with notification of, and timely access to, any individual detained in any armed conflict in the custody or under the effective control of an officer, employee, or other agent of the United States Government or detained within a facility owned, operated, or controlled by a department or agency of the United States Government, consistent with Department of Defense regulations and policies.”

Note that this has no exceptions for short-term detainees whom we quickly hand off to someone else.

…

The author of the Times article, however, defines “rendition” as “secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the United States.” It’s not clear whether he knows that rendition includes perfectly normal things like extradition. It’s also not clear that he knows that extraordinary rendition includes not just cases in which we transfer a detainee to another country, but cases in which we capture someone abroad and take them to this country to be tried.

What is clear, however, is that Obama’s executive order prohibits sending people off to other countries where there are substantial grounds to think that they will be tortured, and commits his administration not just to hoping that this will not happen, but to trying to figure out how to keep it from happening. I will continue to watch what the Obama administration does. If they backtrack on their commitment not to engage in extraordinary rendition, I will call them on it. But I don’t think that this article provides evidence that they will.

Glenn Greenwalk picks up the ball and comments on why some parties might wish to make it appear that Obama is continuing in the footsteps of Bush, cursed be his name and praise the goddess he’s gone

First, it is very important to keep in mind that there are numerous factions with a very compelling interest in claiming that the Obama administration is preserving and continuing the most extreme Bush “counter-terrorism” policies, regardless of whether or not it’s true:

(1) Bush followers eager to claim that their leader has been vindicated because Obama is replicating his policies;

(2) People who have long argued that there is no difference between the parties, that “the system” is irrevocably corrupted, and that Obama will change nothing, who are eager to claim that their “no-difference” worldview has already been vindicated by the 11-day old administration (“See! After 11 days, it’s proven that Obama is no different than Bush, just as we’ve been saying”);

(3) Members of the intelligence community who do not want any new limits imposed on their activities and thus, hiding behind anonymity, use these leaks to pressure Obama not to impose them (“intelligence officials say that Obama is just pretending to change these policies in order to fool/placate the Left, but he knows and believes we urgently need these powers to keep the U.S. safe and he will therefore keep them in place”); and,

(4) Establishment media figures, eager to depict Obama as supportive of, rather than hostile to, prevailing policies, because they spent the last eight years supporting and enabling those policies as integral servants of the political establishment and do not want Obama’s election to be perceived as a repudiation of that establishment and its various behaviors.

I want to be clear: none of this is to say that Obama won’t continue many of the worst Bush policies. He very well might (even in the case of rendition) and, in other cases, he probably will. Vigilance in this regard is absolutely required. The point here is that there are all sorts of groups eager to claim that Obama has already decided to embrace Bush policies before there is any actual evidence that he has done so, or — as here — even when there is evidence that he hasn’t. For that reason, these reports about what Obama “intends” to do ought to be taken with a huge dose of skepticism, especially where, as here, it is fed to uninformed, gullible reporters by anonymous intelligence operatives.

The culture of abuse in the United Stupids is far from over – at a black tie dinner, sociopathic Zionist Senator Joe Lieberman makes foul jokes about waterboarding.

‘We had hoped Vice President Cheney would be here tonight. I hope it’s not his back injury that’s keeping him away. Apparently, he hurt it moving some things out of his office. Personally, I had no idea that waterboards were so heavy.

Last year, Lieberman, who has voted against banning waterboarding, “reluctantly acknowledged” that he doesn’t believe that waterboarding is torture. “It is not like putting burning coals on people’s bodies. The person is in no real danger. The impact is psychological,” he said.

The law is set to be approved in March.

On Monday, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s cabinet in Baghdad approved the draft of the new Iraqi oil law. The government regards it as “a major national project”. The key point of the law is that Iraq’s immense oil wealth (115 billion barrels of proven reserves, third in the world after Saudi Arabia and Iran) will be under the iron rule of a fuzzy “Federal Oil and Gas Council” boasting “a panel of oil experts from inside and outside Iraq”. That is, nothing less than predominantly US Big Oil executives.

The law represents no less than institutionalized raping and pillaging of Iraq’s oil wealth. It represents the death knell of nationalized (from 1972 to 1975) Iraqi resources, now replaced by production sharing agreements (PSAs) – which translate into savage privatization and monster profit rates of up to 75% for (basically US) Big Oil. Sixty-five of Iraq’s roughly 80 oilfields already known will be offered for Big Oil to exploit. As if this were not enough, the law reduces in practice the role of Baghdad to a minimum. Oil wealth, in theory, will be distributed directly to Kurds in the north, Shi’ites in the south and Sunnis in the center. For all practical purposes, Iraq will be partitioned into three statelets. Most of the country’s reserves are in the Shi’ite-dominated south, while the Kurdish north holds the best prospects for future drilling.

The approval of the draft law by the fractious 275-member Iraqi Parliament, in March, will be a mere formality. Hussain al-Shahristani, Iraq’s oil minister, is beaming. So is dodgy Barnham Salih: a Kurd, committed cheerleader of the US invasion and occupation, then deputy prime minister, big PSA fan, and head of a committee that was debating the law.

But there was not much to be debated. The law was in essence drafted, behind locked doors, by a US consulting firm hired by the Bush administration and then carefully retouched by Big Oil, the International Monetary Fund, former US deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz’ World Bank, and the United States Agency for International Development. It’s virtually a US law (its original language is English, not Arabic).

Scandalously, Iraqi public opinion had absolute no knowledge of it – not to mention the overwhelming majority of Parliament members. Were this to be a truly representative Iraqi government, any change to the legislation concerning the highly sensitive question of oil wealth would have to be approved by a popular referendum.

In real life, Iraq’s vital national interests are in the hands of a small bunch of highly impressionable (or downright corrupt) technocrats. Ministries are no more than political party feuds; the national interest is never considered, only private, ethnic and sectarian interests. Corruption and theft are endemic. Big Oil will profit handsomely – and long-term, 30 years minimum, with fabulous rates of return – from a former developing-world stalwart methodically devastated into failed-state status.

Once the insurgents, guerillas and Iraqi public become aware of the impending oil rape by the Coalition of the Gobbling, it is quite possible that there will be a strategic unification and uprising against the common colonialist enemy which no Doodoo surge will be able to suppress.

“Islam is not a patriarchal religion, and we cannot accept that patriarchy continues to govern social relations in the framework of Islam.”

The Conclusions of the Second International Conference of Islamic Feminism held in November 06 in Spain defined areas where positive change within patriarchal Islamic cultures can be initiated for the benefit of women:

“We denounce the discriminatory family laws that are enforced in many countries with a Muslim majority.

We voice our commitment to continue the gender jihad for the recovery of the equalitarian message of Islam, the freedom of interpretation and conscience.

Islamic Feminism is an integral part of the Global Feminist Movement. We denounce all forms of violence against women that are justified in the name of Islam, such as honor crimes, domestic violence, mutilation of female genitalia, stoning and other forms of corporal punishment.

We call for the participation of women in all areas of society. Therefore, we are against all those cultural practices which are not truly Islamic and which inhibit this participation.

We announce the creation of the “Observatory of Islam and Gender” in Spain to be headquartered in Barcelona. This Observatory attempts to consolidate the work of the two International Conferences of Islamic Feminism, to serve as a common ground between intellectuals and Feminist organizations in the Islamic world, and to promote Islamic Feminism in Spain. The Observatory will serve the task of giving continuity to the International Conference of Islamic Feminism.”

Whilst we do not adher to any religious faith, we support all women in their peaceful quest for enlightenment and equality of opportunity and express our solidarity with feminists of all nations and creeds against that most oppressive and pervasive phenomenon affecting women – rightwing fundamentalism.

Fundamentalist movements are political movements with religious, ethnic, and/or nationalist imperatives. They construct a single version of a collective identity as the only true, authentic and valid one, and use it to impose their power and authority. They usually claim to be the representatives of authentic tradition, and they speak against the corrupting influence of modernity and ‘the West’. However, fundamentalists are far from pre-modern. To promote their project, they use all modern technological means available, from the media to weaponry. Furthermore, the vision they conjure up is a constructed and selective vision, rather than a revival of something in the past. Since 2000 the popular appeal of fundamentalisms has been growing across the world and different communities.

Feminists have particular concerns when it comes to fundamentalist movements. Although many women take part in fundamentalist movements, overall fundamentalist politics tend to constitute a threat to women’s freedom and autonomy and often their lives. Gender relations in general, and women in particular, are often used to symbolize the collectivity, its ‘culture and tradition’, its boundaries and its future reproduction.

“A leading figure in the Bush administration’s march to war in Iraq helped justify the 2003 invasion by undercutting the CIA with questionable intelligence about Saddam Hussein’s links to al Qaeda, a Pentagon watchdog agency said in a report on Friday.

Former U.S. defense policy chief Douglas Feith presented the White House with claims of a “mature symbiotic relationship” between Iraq and al Qaeda as if they were facts, while ignoring contradictory views from the intelligence community, the report by the Pentagon inspector general said.

“They did not show the other, dissenting side,” Defense Department acting inspector general Thomas Gimble told the Senate Armed Services Committee at a hearing.

A claim by Feith’s office that September 11 hijacking ringleader Mohamed Atta met with an Iraqi official months before the 2001 attacks could not be verified by intelligence, he said.

Gimble, who produced the classified report after a one-year review, concluded that Feith was authorized by former deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to pursue alternative intelligence conclusions and that the action was lawful.

But Feith’s actions were sometimes “inappropriate” because they “did not clearly show the variance with the consensus of the intelligence community,” said an unclassified two-page executive summary of the report released by the inspector general’s office.

As a result, Feith’s office “did not provide ‘the most accurate analysis of intelligence’ to senior decision-makers,” it said.”

The New York Times presentation on the Inspector General’s report goes into more depth and quotes Gimble more extensively:

“Mr. Gimble told the committee today that, while the Pentagon’s in-house intelligence-gathering was not illegal or unauthorized, “the actions, in our opinion, were inappropriate, given that all the products did not clearly show the variance with the consensus of the intel community, and in some cases were shown as intel products.””

Feith starts covering himself and dragging in his co-conspirators:

“On Thursday, as details of Mr. Gimble’s report were beginning to come out, Mr. Feith issued a statement saying his office’s activities had been authorized by former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and former Deputy Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, and that his office properly shared its findings.”

Further questions remain to be answered:

“However, Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, drew from Mr. Gimble a statement that Mr. Feith had not been entirely consistent in his intelligence briefings, in ways Mr. Gimble said he could not go into for security reasons.“He changed the briefing for his audience?” Mr. Reed asked

“There were adjustments made depending on the audience,” Mr. Gimble replied.

“Well, why would he do that?” the senator asked. “Why would he make changes based on the audience?”

“I don’t think I’m in a position to make a comment on why he would do what he did,” Mr. Gimble said.”