James
van Luik
Publisher
& Editor & Compiler
Index
2 Signature:
http://www.geocities.com/channujames/index2.htm
[By
clicking on this signature one has access to all articles of the
JvL Bi-Weekly.]
[Also,
I can be most easily reached through the following email address:
Please
forward the Bi-Weekly to any who might be interested
Saturday,
December 31st, 2005
Volume
4, No. 23
5 Articles, 13
Pages
1.
The 14 Worst Corporate Evildoers
2.
World Is At Its Hottest Since Prehistory, Say Scientists
3.
The Hidden State Steps Forward
4.
This War Cannot be Stopped By A Loyal Opposition
5.
Of Bandits and Terrorists: Harold Pinter's Broadside
1. THE 14 WORST CORPORATE EVILDOERS
BY
MEMBERS OF THE STAFF OF GLOBAL EXCHANGE
On issues like war crimes, torture, toxic dumping and stifling freedom of speech, corporations like Coca Cola, Chevron and Philip Morris are way out ahead of the rest.
Corporations
carry out some of the most horrific human rights abuses of modern
times, but it is increasingly difficult to hold them to account.
Economic globalization and the rise of transnational corporate
power have created a favorable climate for corporate human rights
abusers, which are governed principally by the codes of supply
and demand and show genuine loyalty only to their stockholders.
Several
of the companies below are being sued under the Alien Tort Claims
Act, a law that allows citizens of any nationality to sue in US
federal courts for violations of international rights or
treaties. When corporations act like criminals, we have the right
and the power to stop them, holding leaders and multinational
corporations alike to the accords they have signed. Around the
world--in Venezuela, Argentina, India, and right here in the
United States--citizens are stepping up to create democracy and
hold corporations accountable to international law.
Caterpillar
For
years, the Caterpillar Company has provided Israel with the
bulldozers used to destroy Palestinian homes. Despite worldwide
condemnation, Caterpillar has refused to end its corporate
participation in house demolition by cutting off sales of
specially modified D9 and D10 bulldozers to the Israeli military.
In
a letter to Caterpillar CEO James Owens, The Office of the UN
High Commissioner on Human Rights said: "allowing the
delivery of your ... bulldozers to the Israeli army ... in the
certain knowledge that they are being used for such action, might
involve complicity or acceptance on the part of your company to
actual and potential violations of human rights..."
Peace
activist Rachel Corrie was killed by a Caterpillar D-9, military
bulldozer in 2003. She was run over while attempting to block the
destruction a family's home in Gaza. Her family filed suit
against Caterpillar in March 2005 charging that Caterpillar
knowingly sold machines used to violate human rights. Since
Corrie's death at least three more Palestinians have been killed
in their homes by Israeli bulldozer demolitions.
Chevron
The
petrochemical company Chevron is guilty of some of the worst
environmental and human rights abuses in the world. From 1964 to
1992, Texaco (which transferred operations to Chevron after being
bought out in 2001) unleashed a toxic "Rainforest
Chernobyl" in Ecuador by leaving over 600 unlined oil pits
in pristine northern Amazon rainforest and dumping 18 billion
gallons of toxic production water into rivers used for bathing
water. Local communities have suffered severe health effects,
including cancer, skin lesions, birth defects, and spontaneous
abortions.
Chevron
is also responsible for the violent repression of peaceful
opposition to oil extraction. In Nigeria, Chevron has hired
private military personnel to open fire on peaceful protestors
who oppose oil extraction in the Niger Delta.
Additionally
Chevron is responsible for widespread health problems in
Richmond, California, where one of Chevron's largest refineries
is located. Processing 350,000 barrels of oil a day, the Richmond
refinery produces oil flares and toxic waste in the Richmond
area. As a result, local residents suffer from high rates of
lupus, skin rashes, rheumatic fever, liver problems, kidney
problems, tumors, cancer, asthma, and eye problems.
The
Unocal Corporation, which recently became a subsidiary of
Chevron, is an oil and gas company based in California with
operations around the world. In December 2004, the company
settled a lawsuit filed by 15 Burmese villagers, in which the
villagers alleged Unocal's complicity in a range of human rights
violations in Burma, including rape, summary execution, torture,
forced labor and forced migration.
Coca-Cola
Coca-Cola
Company is perhaps the most widely recognized corporate symbol on
the planet. The company also leads in the abuse of workers'
rights, assassinations, water privatization, and worker
discrimination. Between 1989 and 2002, eight union leaders from
Coca-Cola bottling plants in Colombia were killed after
protesting the company's labor practices. Hundreds of other
Coca-Cola workers who have joined or considered joining the
Colombian union SINALTRAINAL have been kidnapped, tortured, and
detained by paramilitaries who are hired to intimidate workers to
prevent them from unionizing.
In
India, Coca-Cola destroys local agriculture by privatizing the
country's water resources. In Plachimada, Kerala, Coca-Cola
extracted 1.5 million liters of deep well water, which they
bottled and sold under the names Dasani and BonAqua. The
groundwater was severely depleted, affecting thousands of
communities with water shortages and destroying agricultural
activity. As a result, the remaining water became contaminated
with high chloride and bacteria levels, leading to scabs, eye
problems, and stomach aches in the local population.
Coca-Cola
is also one of the most discriminatory employers in the world. In
the year 2000, 2,000 African-American employees in the U.S. sued
the company for race-based disparities in pay and promotions.
Dow
Chemical
Dow
Chemical has been destroying lives and poisoning the planet for
decades. The company is best known for the ravages and health
disaster for millions of Vietnamese and U.S. Veterans caused by
its lethal Vietnam War defoliant, Agent Orange. Dow also
developed and perfected Napalm, a brutal chemical weapon that
burned many innocents to death in Vietnam and other wars. In
1988, Dow provided pesticides to Saddam Hussein despite warnings
that they could be used to produce chemical weapons.
In
2001, Dow inherited the toxic legacy of the worst peacetime
chemical disaster in history when it acquired Union Carbide
Corporation (UCC) and its outstanding liabilities in Bhopal,
India. On Dec. 3, 1984, a chemical leak from a UCC pesticide
plant in Bhopal gassed thousands of people to death and left more
than 150,000 disabled or dying. Dow still refuses to address its
liabilities in Bhopal.
Dow
Chemical's impact is felt globally from its Midland, Michigan
headquarters to New Plymouth, New Zealand. In Midland, Dow has
been producing chlorinated chemicals and burning and burying its
waste including chemicals that make up Agent Orange. In New
Plymouth, 500,000 gallons of Agent Orange were produced and
thousands of tons of dioxin-laced waste was dumped in
agricultural fields.
DynCorp
Private
security contractors have become the fastest-growing sector of
the global economy during the last decade--a $100-billion-a-year,
nearly unregulated industry. DynCorp, one of the providers of
these mercenary services, demonstrates the industry's power and
potential to abuse human rights. While guarding Afghan statesmen
and African oil fields, training Iraqi police forces, eradicating
Colombian coca plants, and protecting business interests in
hurricane-devastated New Orleans, these hired guns bolster the
security of governments and organizations at the expense of many
people's human rights.
DynCorp's
fumigation of coca crops along the Colombian-Ecuadorian border
led Ecuadorian peasants to sue DynCorp in 2001. Plaintiffs argued
that DynCorp knew--or should have known--that the herbicides were
highly toxic.
In
2001, a mechanic with DynCorp blew the whistle on DynCorp
employees in Bosnia for rape and trading girls as young as 12
into sex slavery. According to a lawsuit filed by the mechanic,
"employees and supervisors were engaging in perverse,
illegal and inhumane behavior [and] were purchasing illegal
weapons, women, [and] forged passports." DynCorp fired the
whistleblower and transferred the employees accused of sex
trading out of the country, eventually firing some. None were
prosecuted.
Ford
Motor Company
Among
automakers, Ford Motor Company is the worst. Every year since
1999, the US Environmental Protection Agency has ranked Ford
cars, trucks and SUVs as having the worst overall fuel economy of
any American automaker. Ford's current car and truck fleet has a
lower average fuel efficiency than the original Ford Model-T.
Ford
is also in last place when it comes to vehicle greenhouse gas
emissions. According to a recent report by the Union of Concerned
Scientists, Ford has "the absolute worst heat-trapping gas
emissions performance of all the Big Six automakers."
Despite
the company's recent green washing PR campaign, its record has
actually worsened. According to Ford's own sustainability report,
between 2003 and 2004, the company's US fleet-wide fuel economy
decreased and its CO2 emissions went up. Ford has also lobbied
against lawmakers' efforts to increase fuel economy standards at
the national level and is also involved in a lawsuit against
California's fuel economy standards.
KBR
(Kellogg, Brown and Root): A Subsidiary of Halliburton
Corporation
KBR
is a private company that provides military support services.
Notorious for its questionable bookkeeping, dishonest billing
practices with US taxpayer dollars and no-bid contracts, KBR has
violated human rights on the U.S. dollar.
KBR's
dubious accounting in Iraq came to light in December 2003 when
Pentagon auditors questioned possible overcharges for imported
gasoline. In June 2005, a previously secret Pentagon audit
criticized $1.4 billion in "questioned" and
"unsupported" expenditures. In 2002 the company paid $2
million to settle a Justice Department lawsuit that accused KBR
of inflating contract prices at Fort Ord, California.
Many
third-country national (TCN) laborers have been hired by KBR to
"rebuild" Iraq. Generally hailing from impoverished
Asian countries, they have unexpectedly become part of the
largest civilian workforce ever hired in support of a U.S. war.
Once abroad, the workers find themselves with few protections and
uncertain legal status. TCNs often sleep in crowded trailers and
wait outside in scorching heat for food rations. Many lack
adequate medical care and put in hard labor seven days a week, 10
hours or more a day.
Lockheed
Martin
Lockheed
Martin is the world's largest military contractor. Providing
satellites, planes, missiles and other lethal high-tech items to
the Pentagon keeps the profits rolling in. Since 2000, the year
Bush was elected, the company's stock value has tripled.
As
the Center for Corporate Policy (www.corporatepolicy.org) notes,
it is no coincidence that Lockheed VP Bruce Jackson--who helped
draft the Republican foreign policy platform in 2000--is a key
player at the Project for a New American Century, the
intellectual incubator of the Iraq war.
Lockheed
Martin is not the only defense contractor that goes behind the
scenes to influence public policy, but it is one of the worst.
Stephen J. Hadley, who now has Condoleeza Rice's old job as
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, was
formerly a partner in a DC law firm representing Lockheed Martin.
He is only one of the beneficiaries of the so-called revolving
door between the military industries and the "civilian"
national security apparatus. These war profiteers have a profound
and illegitimate influence on our country's international policy
decisions.
Monsanto
Monsanto
is, by far, the largest producer of genetically engineered seeds
in the world, dominating 70% to 100% of the market for crops such
as soy, cotton, wheat and corn.
Monsanto
is the world's leading producer of the herbicide glyphosphate,
marketed as Roundup. Roundup is sold to small farmers as a
pesticide, yet harms crops in the long run as the toxins
accumulate in the soil. Plants eventually become infertile,
forcing farmers to purchase genetically modified Roundup Ready
Seed, a seed that resists the herbicide. This creates a cycle of
dependency on Monsanto for both the weed killer and the only seed
that can resist it. Both products are patented, and sold at
inflated prices. Exposure to the pesticide is documented to cause
cancers, skin disorders, spontaneous abortions, premature births,
and damage to the gastrointestinal and nervous systems.
According
to the India Committee of the Netherlands and the International
Labor Rights Fund, Monsanto also employs child labor. In India,
an estimated 12,375 children work in cottonseed production for
farmers paid by Indian and multinational seed companies,
including Monsanto.
Nestle
USA
The
problem of illegal and forced child labor is rampant in the
chocolate industry, because more than 40% of the world's cocoa
supply comes from the Ivory Coast, a country that the US State
Department estimates had approximately 109,000 child laborers
working in hazardous conditions on cocoa farms. In 2001, Save the
Children Canada reported that 15,000 children between 9 and 12
years old, many from impoverished Mali, had been tricked or sold
into slavery on West African cocoa farms, many for just $30 each.
Nestle,
the third largest buyer of cocoa from the Ivory Coast, is well
aware of the tragically unjust labor practices taking place on
the farms with which it continues to do business. Nestle and
other chocolate manufacturers agreed to end the use of abusive
and forced child labor on cocoa farms by July 1, 2005, but they
failed to do so.
Nestle
is also notorious for its aggressive marketing of infant formula
in poor countries in the 1980s. Because of this practice, Nestle
is still one of the most boycotted corporations in the world, and
its infant formula is still controversial. In Italy in 2005,
police seized more than two million liters of Nestle infant
formula that was contaminated with the chemical
isopropylthioxanthone (ITX).
Additionally,
violations of labor rights are reported from Nestle factories in
numerous countries. In Colombia, Nestle replaced the entire
factory staff with lower-wage workers and did not renew the
collective employment contract.
Philip
Morris USA and Philip Morris International (a.k.a. The Altria
Group Inc.)
Among
tobacco companies, Philip Morris is notorious. Now called Altria,
it is the world's largest and most profitable cigarette
corporation and maker of Marlboro, Virginia Slims, Parliament,
Basic and many other brands of cigarettes.
Documents
uncovered in a lawsuit filed against the tobacco industry by the
state of Minnesota showed that Philip Morris and other leading
tobacco corporations knew very well of the dangers of tobacco
products and the addictiveness of nicotine. To this day, Philip
Morris deceives consumers about the harm of its products by
offering light, mild and low-tar cigarettes that give consumers
the illusion these brands are "healthier" than
traditional cigarettes.
Although
the company says it doesn't want kids to smoke, it spends
millions of dollars every day marketing and promoting cigarettes
to youth. Overseas, it has even hired underage "Marlboro
girls" to distribute free cigarettes to other children and
sponsored concerts where cigarettes were handed out to minors.
As
anti-tobacco campaigns and government regulations are slowing
tobacco use in Western countries, Philip Morris has aggressively
moved into developing country markets, where smoking and
smoking-related deaths are on the rise. Preliminary numbers
released by the World Health Organization predict global deaths
due to smoking-related illnesses will nearly double by 2020, with
more than three-quarters of those deaths in the developing world.
Pfizer
Pfizer
is the largest pharmaceutical company in the world; it is also
one of the worst abusers of the human right of universal access
to HIV/AIDS medicine.
In
addition to Viagra, Zoloft, Zithromax and Norvasc, Pfizer
produces the drug fluconazole (an antifungal used by AIDS
patients) under the name Diflucan, and sells it at inflated
prices most poor people cannot afford. The company refuses to
grant generic licenses of fluconazole to governments in countries
like Brazil, South Africa, or Dominican Republic, where patients
are forced to pay $20 per weekly pill, though the average
national wage is only $120 per month.
Pfizer
also values shareholder profits over safety standards. In Europe
in 2005, it withdrew from scientific studies of a new class of
AIDS drugs called CCR5 inhibitors, choosing instead to rush its
own untested CCR5 inhibitor onto the European market without full
information about the drug's side effects.
Suez-Lyonnaise
Des Eaux (SLDE)
The
privatization of water has had a disastrous impact on the human
right to clean water, and the French company Suez is the worst
perpetrator of this abuse. The company's billions of dollars in
profit come at the expense of poor people living in countries
where thousands lack access to potable water, and, because of
private water contracts, are also facing skyrocketing water
prices.
Suez
goes by many names around the world--Ondeo, SITA and others--to
mask its worldwide net of controversial activities. In Manila,
Philippines, after seven years of water privatization under a
Suez company (Maynilad Water) contract, studies showed that water
rates increased in some neighborhoods by 400 to 700 percent.
These studies also showed that the negligence of the company
resulted in cholera and gastroenteritis outbreaks that killed six
people and severely sickened 725 in Manila's Tondo district.
In
Bolivia, a Suez company (Aguas de Illimani) left 200,000 people
without access to water and caused a revolt when it tried to
charge between $335 and $445 to connect a private home to the
water supply. Countless people were unable to afford this charge
in a country whose yearly per capita GDP is $915.
Unfortunately,
the IMF and World Bank are playing a key role in pushing water
privatization all over the world. Many countries have been
required to open up their water supply to private companies as a
condition for receiving IMF loans, and the World Bank has
approved millions of dollars in loans for the privatization of
water systems.
Wal-Mart
Wal-Mart
is the biggest corporation in the world. It owns 5,100 stores
worldwide and employs 1.3 million workers in the United States
and 400,000 abroad, as well as millions more in the factories of
its suppliers.
Many
people have heard of the way that Wal-Mart steamrolls its way
into every possible town, destroying local supermarkets and
countless small businesses. We have also heard about Wal-Mart's
long track record of worker abuse, from forced overtime to sex
discrimination to illegal child labor to relentless union
busting. Wal-Mart also notoriously fails to provide health
insurance to over half of its employees, who are then left to
rely on themselves or taxpayers, who provide for a portion of
their healthcare needs through government Medicaid.
Less
well known is the fact that Wal-Mart maintains its low price
level by allowing substandard labor conditions at the overseas
factories producing most of its goods. The company continually
demands lower prices from its suppliers, who, in turn, make more
outrageous and abusive demands on their workers in order to meet
Wal-Mart's requirements.
In September 2005, the International Labor Rights Fund filed a lawsuit on behalf of Wal-Mart supplier sweatshop workers in China, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Nicaragua and Swaziland. The workers were denied minimum wages, forced to work overtime without compensation, and were denied legally mandated health care. Other worker rights violations that have been found in foreign factories that produce goods for Wal-Mart include locked bathrooms, starvation wages, pregnancy tests, denial of access to health care, and workers being fired and blacklisted if they try to defend their rights.
(Editor's
note: Visit Global Exchange to read the full report of the
Most Wanted Corporate Human Rights Violators of 2005, and find
out how to connect with groups that are doing something about
corporate abuses.)
2.
WORLD IS AT ITS HOTTEST SINCE PREHISTORY, SAY SCIENTISTS
BY
GEOFFREY LEAN
The world is now hotter than at
any stage since prehistoric times, a top climatologist announced
last week. His startling conclusion comes as Nasa reported that
2005 has been the hottest year ever recorded.
Dr Michael Coughlan, head of the
National Climate Centre at the Australian Government's Bureau of
Meteorology, said: "One probably has to go back into
prehistoric times - and way back in them - to be seeing these
sorts of temperatures."
Top British climatologists agree
privately but are cautious of saying so in public because,
naturally, no measurements were taken of temperatures then.
Dr Coughlan is supported by
research that shows carbon dioxide levels in the air - the main
cause of global warming - are higher now than at any time in the
past hundreds of thousands of years.
Scientists in Bern, Switzerland,
and Oregon in the United States analysed levels of the gas in
tiny air bubbles trapped in Antarctic ice during the past 650,000
years. They found current levels were 27 per cent greater than
the highest level over that period.
Professor Sir David King, the
Government's Chief Scientist, has said the last time levels of
the gas were that high was 60 million years ago. And that was
during a period of rapid warming in the Palaeocene epoch, which
caused a massive reduction in life on Earth.
Meanwhile, top climatological
bodies around the world report that 2005 is vying with 1998 as
the warmest year on record. Nasa says it just beats it, while the
Met Office says it is just behind it, and the US government's
National Climatic Data Centre says the two years are
statistically indistinguishable.
Whichever is right, 2005 has been
a remarkable year, for 1998 was made much hotter by a strong El
Niņo, the warm Pacific current that strongly affects weather
around the globe.
Last June, September and October
were all logged as the warmest ever, world-wide. The past 10
years are all in the warmest 10 ever recorded, apart from 1996
whose place is taken by 1990.
This year Arctic sea ice dropped
to its smallest ever extent, the Atlantic suffered a record
hurricane season and an unprecedented drought reduced the flow of
the Amazon to its lowest ever level. Canada and Australia had
their hottest ever weather this year, while India, Pakistan,
Bangladesh and Algeria suffered heatwaves touching 50C.
The world is now hotter than at
any stage since prehistoric times, a top climatologist announced
last week. His startling conclusion comes as NASA reported that
2005 has been the hottest year ever recorded.
Dr Michael Coughlan, head of the
National Climate Centre at the Australian Government's Bureau of
Meteorology, said: "One probably has to go back into
prehistoric times - and way back in them - to be seeing these
sorts of temperatures."
Top British climatologists agree
privately but are cautious of saying so in public because,
naturally, no measurements were taken of temperatures then.
Dr Coughlan is supported by
research that shows carbon dioxide levels in the air - the main
cause of global warming - are higher now than at any time in the
past hundreds of thousands of years.
Scientists in Bern, Switzerland,
and Oregon in the United States analysed levels of the gas in
tiny air bubbles trapped in Antarctic ice during the past 650,000
years. They found current levels were 27 per cent greater than
the highest level over that period.
Professor Sir David King, the
Government's Chief Scientist, has said the last time levels of
the gas were that high was 60 million years ago. And that was
during a period of rapid warming in the Palaeocene epoch, which
caused a massive reduction in life on Earth.
Meanwhile, top climatological
bodies around the world report that 2005 is vying with 1998 as
the warmest year on record. NASA says it just beats it, while the
Met Office says it is just behind it, and the US government's
National Climatic Data Centre says the two years are
statistically indistinguishable.
Whichever is right, 2005 has been
a remarkable year, for 1998 was made much hotter by a strong El
Niņo, the warm Pacific current that strongly affects weather
around the globe.
Last June, September and October
were all logged as the warmest ever, world-wide. The past 10
years are all in the warmest 10 ever recorded, apart from 1996
whose place is taken by 1990.
This year Arctic sea ice dropped
to its smallest ever extent, the Atlantic suffered a record
hurricane season and an unprecedented drought reduced the flow of
the Amazon to its lowest ever level. Canada and Australia had
their hottest ever weather this year, while India, Pakistan,
Bangladesh and Algeria suffered heat waves touching 50C.
BY JONATHAN SCHELL |
| |
| When
the New York Times revealed that George W. Bush
had ordered the National Security Agency to wiretap the
foreign calls of American citizens without seeking court
permission, as is indisputably required by the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), passed by Congress
in 1978, he faced a decision. Would he deny the
practice, or would he admit it? He admitted it. But
instead of expressing regret, he took full ownership of
the deed, stating that his order had been entirely
justified, that he had in fact renewed it thirty times,
that he would continue to renew it and--going even more
boldly on the offensive--that those who had made his
law-breaking known had committed a "shameful
act." As justification, he offered two arguments, one
derisory, the other deeply alarming. The derisory one was
that Congress, by authorizing him to use force after
September 11, had authorized him to suspend FISA,
although that law is unmentioned in the resolution. Thus has Bush informed the members of a supposedly
co-equal branch of government of what, unbeknownst to
themselves, they were thinking when they cast their vote.
The alarming argument is that as Commander in Chief he
possesses "inherent" authority to suspend laws
in wartime. But if he can suspend FISA at his whim and in
secret, then what law can he not suspend? What need is there, for example, to pass or not pass
the Patriot Act if any or all of its provisions can be
secretly exceeded by the President? Bush's choice marks a watershed in the evolution of
his Administration. Previously when it was caught
engaging in disgraceful, illegal or merely mistaken or
incompetent behavior, he would simply deny it. "We
have found the weapons of mass destruction!"
"We do not torture!" However, further developments in the torture matter
revealed a shift. Even as he denied the existence of
torture, he and his officials began to defend his right
to order it. His Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales,
refused at his confirmation hearings to state that the
torture called water-boarding, in which someone is
brought to the edge of drowning, was prohibited. Then when Senator John McCain sponsored a bill
prohibiting cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of
prisoners, Bush threatened to veto the legislation to
which it was attached. It was only in the face of
majority votes in both houses against such treatment that
he retreated from his claim. But in the wiretapping matter, he has so far exhibited
no such vacillation. Secret law-breaking has been
supplanted by brazen law-breaking. The difference is
critical. If abuses of power are kept secret, there is
still the possibility that, when exposed, they will be
stopped. But if they are exposed and still permitted to
continue, then every remedy has failed, and the abuse is
permanently ratified. In this case, what will be ratified
is a presidency that has risen above the law. The danger is not abstract or merely symbolic. Bush's
abuses of presidential power are the most extensive in
American history. He has launched an aggressive war
("war of choice," in today's euphemism) on
false grounds. He has presided over a system of torture
and sought to legitimize it by specious definitions of
the word. He has asserted a wholesale right to lock up American
citizens and others indefinitely without any legal
showing or the right to see a lawyer or anyone else. He
has kidnapped people in foreign countries and sent them
to other countries, where they were tortured. In
rationalizing these and other acts, his officials have
laid claim to the unlimited, uncheckable and unreviewable
powers he has asserted in the wiretapping case. He has
tried to drop a thick shroud of secrecy over these and
other actions. There is a name for a system of government that wages
aggressive war, deceives its citizens, violates their
rights, abuses power and breaks the law, rejects judicial
and legislative checks on itself, claims power without
limit, tortures prisoners and acts in secret. It is
dictatorship. The Administration of George W. Bush is not a
dictatorship, but it does manifest the characteristics of
one in embryonic form. Until recently, these were
developing and growing in the twilight world of secrecy.
Even within the executive branch itself, Bush seemed to
govern outside the normally constituted channels of the
Cabinet and to rely on what Secretary of State Colin
Powell's chief of staff has called a "cabal."
Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill reported the same
thing. Cabinet meetings were for show. Real decisions
were made elsewhere, out of sight. Another White House
official, John DiIulio, has commented that there was
"a complete lack of a policy apparatus" in the
White House. "What you've got is everything, and I
mean everything, being run by the political arm." As in many Communist states, a highly centralized
party, in this case the Republican Party, was beginning
to forge a parallel apparatus at the heart of government,
a semi-hidden state-within-a-state, by which the real
decisions were made. With Bush's defense of his wiretapping, the hidden
state has stepped into the open. The deeper challenge
Bush has thrown down, therefore, is whether the country
wants to embrace the new form of government he is
creating by executive fiat or to continue with the old
constitutional form. He is now in effect saying,
"Yes, I am above the law--I am the law, which
is nothing more than what I and my hired lawyers say it
is--and if you don't like it, I dare you to do something
about it." Members of Congress have no choice but to accept the
challenge. They did so once before, when Richard Nixon,
who said, "When the President does it, that means
it's not illegal," posed a similar threat to the
Constitution. The only possible answer is to inform Bush
forthwith that if he continues in his defiance, he will
be impeached. If Congress accepts his usurpation of its legislative
power, they will be no Congress and might as well stop
meeting. Either the President must uphold the laws of the
United States, which are Congress's laws, or he must
leave office. |
BY JEREMY
SCAHILL |
| The
refrain of the Democrats about being misled into
supporting the invasion of Iraq has become really tired.
And someone other than the White House smear mongers
needs to say it: The Democrats cannot be allowed to use
faulty intelligence as a crutch to hold up their
unforgivable support for the Iraq invasion. What is
DNC Chair Howard Deans excuse? He wasnt in
Congress and didnt have any access to Senate
intelligence. Still, on March 9, 2003, just days before
the invasion began, Dean told Tim Russert, on NBCs
Meet The Press, "I dont want Saddam staying in
power with control over those weapons of mass
destruction. I want him to be disarmed." During the New Hampshire primary in January 2004,
which I covered for Democracy Now!, I confronted Dean
about that statement. I asked him on what intelligence he
based that allegation. "Talks with people who were
knowledgeable," Dean told me. "Including a
series of folks that work in the Clinton
administration." A series of folks that work in the Clinton
administration. How does that jibe with the official Democratic line
that they were misled by the Bush administration? Sounds
like Howard Dean, head of the Democratic Party, was
misled by....the Democrats. Deans candor offers us
a rare glimpse into the painful truth of the matter. As
unpopular as this is to say, when President Bush accuses
the Democrats of "rewriting history" on Iraq,
he is right. None of the horrors playing out in Iraq today would be
possible without the Democratic Party. And no matter how
hard some party leaders try to deny it, this is their war
too and will remain so until every troop is withdrawn.
There is no question that the Bush administration is one
of the most corrupt, violent and brutal in the history of
this country but that doesnt erase the serious
responsibility the Democrats bears for the bloodletting
in Iraq. As disingenuous as the Administrations claims
that Iraq had WMDs is the flimsy claim by Democratic
lawmakers that they were somehow duped into voting for
the war. The fact is that Iraq posed no threat to the
United States in 2003 any more than it did in 1998 when
President Clinton bombed Baghdad. John Kerry and his
colleagues knew that. The Democrats didnt need false intelligence to
push them into overthrowing Saddam Husseins regime.
It was their policy; a policy made the law of the land
not under George W. Bush, but under President Bill
Clinton when he signed the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act,
formally initiating the process of regime change in Iraq. Manipulated intelligence is but a small part of a
bigger, bipartisan 15-year assault on Iraqs people.
If the Democrats really want to look at how America was
led into this war, they need to go back further than the
current presidents inauguration. As bloody and deadly as the occupation has been, it
was Bill Clinton who refined the art of killing innocent
Iraqis following the Gulf War. One of his first acts as
president was to bomb Iraq, following the alleged
assassination plot against George HW Bush. Clintons missiles killed the famed Iraqi painter
Leila al Attar as they smashed into her home. Clinton
presided enthusiastically over the most deadly and
repressive regime of economic sanctions in history
his UN ambassador Madeline Albright calling the reported
deaths of half a million children "worth the
price." Clinton initiated the longest sustained bombing
campaign since Vietnam with his illegal no-fly zone
bombings, attacking Iraq once every three days for the
final years of his presidency. It was under Clinton that Ahmed Chalabi was given tens
of millions of dollars and made a key player in shaping
Washingtons Iraq policy. It was Clinton that
mercilessly attacked Iraq in December of 1998, destroying
dozens of Baghdad buildings and killing scores of
civilians. It was Clinton that codified regime change in
Iraq as US policy. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq but he could not
have done it without the years of groundwork laid by
Clinton and the Democrats. How ironic it was recently to
hear Clinton call the war "a big mistake." Its easy to resist war with a president like
Bush in the White House. Where were these Democrats when it was Clintons
bombs raining down on Iraq, when it was Clintons
economic sanctions targeting the most vulnerable? Many of
them were right behind him and his deadly policies the
same way they were behind Bush when he asked their
consent to use force against Iraq. As the veteran Iraq
activist and Nobel Prize nominee Kathy Kelly said often
during the Clinton years, "Its easy to be a
vegetarian between meals." The fact is that one of
the great crimes of our times was committed by the
Clinton administration with the support of many of the
politicians now attacking Bush. Herein lies the real political crisis in this country:
the Democrats are not an opposition party, nor are they
an antiwar party never were. At best, they are a loyal opposition. The Democrats
ran a pro-war campaign in 2004 with Kerry struggling to
convince people that Dems do occupation and war better.
The current head of the DNC, Howard Dean, never met a war
he didnt adore until he realized he could exploit
the energy and sincere hopes of millions of peace-loving
Americans. Dean wasnt ever antiwar. In fact, during
the 2004 campaign he attacked Kerry for opposing the Gulf
War while laying out his own pro-war record. "In 1991, I supported Gulf War. I supported the
first President Bush," declared Dean. "Senator
Kerry who criticizes my foreign policy, he voted against
that war. I supported the Afghanistan war, because I felt
it was about our national defense 3,000 of our
people were killed. I supported President Clinton going
into Bosnia and Kosovo." How can Howard Dean look people in the eye today and
pretend to speak with any credibility as an antiwar
voice? When the hawkish
Democrat Rep. John Murtha bravely stepped forward to
call for an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq
this week, he was quickly blasted by the White House and
simultaneously disowned by powerful Democrats like John
Kerry. Occupation lovers together again. The bloody scandal of the Iraq occupation has opened a
rare and clear window into the truth about this country:
there is one party represented in Washington one
that supports preemptive war and regime change. The reality is that the Democrats could stop this war
if the will was there. They could shut down the Senate
every day, not just for a few hours one afternoon. They
could disrupt business as usual and act as though the
truth were true: this war should never have happened and
it must end now. The country would be behind them if they did it. But
they wont. They will hem and haw and call for more
troops and throw out epic lies about the US becoming a
stabilizing force in Iraq and blame the Republicans for
their own complicity and enthusiasm in the 15 years of
bipartisan crimes against Iraq. All of this begs for a multiparty system in this
country and the emergence of a true opposition. The epic scale of the disaster in Iraq calls for epic
lessons to be learned at home. Like the Bush White House,
the Democrats have lost their credibility. They are
undeserving of the blank check of "Anybody But
Bush" and should never be allowed to cash it again. Rep. Rahm Emanuel, who heads up the House Democrats
election campaign, criticized Murthas call for
immediate withdrawal, saying, "At the right time, we
will have a position." It is statements like that
that should result in Emanuel and his colleagues losing
theirs. |
5. OF BANDITS AND TERRORISTS: HAROLD PINTER'S BROADSIDE
BY
CIAR BYRNE
Harold Pinter was not able to deliver his Nobel literature laureate's lecture in person in Stockholm yesterday, but his pre-recorded speech was a characteristically impassioned critique of the Anglo-American decision to go to war in Iraq.
The
British playwright called for "US crimes" to be
addressed head on and mocked Tony Blair's Britain as
"pathetic and supine". The invasion of Iraq was branded
"a bandit act" which showed contempt for international
law and systematically knocked down the justifications given for
the conflict. And in a nod back to the controversies of the Cold
War era, Pinter demanded to know why, when atrocities committed
in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the post-war period had
been so well-documented, the damaging actions of the US in
Nicaragua and elsewhere had been ignored.
The
political broadsides were preceded by a brief reflection on the
art of writing. Pinter began his speech by explaining that most
of his plays had been born from a single line, word or image that
came into his head. But the Nobel Prize winner swiftly
interrupted his literary meanderings with an impassioned tirade
against the Iraq war.
"The
invasion of Iraq was a bandit act," he said, "an act of
blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the
concept of international law ... an arbitrary military action
inspired by a series of lies upon lies and gross manipulation of
the media and therefore of the public."
He
continued: "We have brought torture, cluster bombs, depleted
uranium, innumerable acts of random murder, misery, degradation
and death to the Iraqi people and call it 'bringing freedom and
democracy to the Middle East' ... the justification for the
invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussein possessed a highly
dangerous body of weapons of mass destruction, some of which
could be fired in 45 minutes, bringing about appalling
devastation. We were assured that was true. It was not
true."
Other
assertions - that Iraq had a relationship with al-Qa'ida, thus
sharing responsibility for 9/11, and that Iraq threatened the
security of the world - proved to be equally baseless, he said.
Pinter
also took on US foreign policy more widely, contending that
"crimes" committed by the US since the Second World War
have been largely overlooked, unlike the atrocities committed by
other nations.
As he drew to a close, Pinter read his 1997 poem, Death. Prevented from travelling for reasons of ill health, Pinter was represented by his publisher, Stephen Page, of Faber and Faber, who will also attend Saturday's prize-giving ceremony on his behalf.
DEATH
(1997)
Where
was the dead body found?
Who found the dead body?
Was the dead body dead when found?
How was the dead body found?
Who was the dead body?
Who
was the father or daughter or brother
Or uncle or sister or mother or son
Of the dead and abandoned body?
Was
the body dead when abandoned?
Was the body abandoned?
By whom had it been abandoned?
Was the dead body naked or dressed for a journey?
What
made you declare the dead body dead?
Did you declare the dead body dead?
How well did you know the dead body?
How did you know the dead body was dead?
Did you wash the dead body
Did you close both its eyes
Did you bury the body
Did you leave it abandoned
Did
you kiss the dead
(Editor's
note; also sorry about some repetition here: More Pinter on
acts of state terror. In a fierce critique ahead of the Nobel
awards ceremony, literature laureate Harold Pinter has branded
the war on Iraq "an act of blatant state terrorism" and
has demanded the prosecutions of US President George Bush and
Britain's Tony Blair.)
| |
| |
| |
"The
invasion of Iraq was a bandit act, an act of blatant state
terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of
international law," Pinter said in a pre-recorded lecture
broadcast by the Swedish Academy on Wednesday.
The Academy, which awards the Nobel Literature Prize, aired the interview, recorded on Sunday in London, because Pinter was too sick to travel to Sweden for the lecture or pick up the award in person at Saturday's ceremony.
"How
many people do you have to kill before you qualify to be
described as a mass murderer and a war criminal?" Pinter
asked.
"One
hundred thousand? More than enough, I would have thought.
Therefore it is just that Bush and Blair be arraigned before the
International Criminal Court of Justice," he added.
The
75-year-old British playwright was diagnosed with oesophageal
cancer in December 2002.
Criticism
In
the recording made in London, he used nearly his entire lecture
of almost an hour to criticise the US.
| |
| |
"The
United States supported and in many cases engendered every right
wing military dictatorship in the world after the end of the
Second World War.
"I
refer to Indonesia, Greece, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay, Haiti,
Turkey, the Philippines, Guatemala, El Salvador, and, of course,
Chile," he said.
"The
crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant,
vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked
about them.
"You
have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical
manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force of
universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful
act of hypnosis."
Pinter's
criticism of Washington is nothing new.
Although
he won the 2005 Nobel Prize for his plays, which according to the
Nobel jury uncover "the precipice under everyday prattle and
forces entry into oppression's closed rooms," he has
recently focussed on political activism.
Literature
and politics
In
his lecture, he emphasised the difference between the separate
worlds of literature and political life.
In
literature "a thing is not necessarily either true or
false.
"It
can be both true and false," he said, adding however that
"as a citizen I must ask: What is true? What is false."
Politicians are not interested "in truth but in power and in
the maintenance of that power", according to Pinter.
"The justification for the invasion of Iraq was that Saddam
Hussein possessed a highly dangerous body of weapons of mass
destruction ... It was not true.
"We were told that Iraq had a relationship with Al Quaeda
and shared responsibility for the atrocity in New York of
September 11, 2001 ... It was not true," he said.
Pinter, born the son of a Jewish dressmaker in Hackney, east
London, began as an actor and made his playwriting debut in 1957,
with "The Room".
That play was followed by one of his masterpieces "The
Birthday Party" and his conclusive breakthrough came with
"The Caretaker" in 1959, followed by "The
Homecoming" in 1964.
The playwright's publisher, Stephen Page, will accept the $1.3
million prize money, a diploma and a medal on Pinter's behalf at
the ceremony.