Osama bin Laden gets a nose job ... After swelling up like a whale on food aid, Osama spends the rest of his trillions on a nose job...there is more discussion of this Bin Laden issue linked to on the December page...
Afghan war photos : page one ... page two ... page three ... page four
Media Criticism of coverage of Plan Columbia and the 'war on drugs'
OFF SITE LINKS:
BBC - Human Rights Watch report on abuses against civilians by the rebels of the left in Columbia also on the Human Rights Watch site - Cokumbian Rebel Abuses Worsening ... Some critique of Human Rights Watch - Is Human Rights Watch 'a branch of the U.S. State department'? The author of this piece makes an interesting case that the board of HRW are 'white American elites'. In a second piece written by the same author, entititled 'Why Human Rights are Wrong' the author equates 'human rights' with the ideology of 'civilizing the natives' that was used to justify colonialism, and suggests that 'human rights' are 'wrong' because the concept is being used by the American government as a wonderful sounding moral pretext for invasion of foreign countries now that the 'communist threat' is no longer credible. This certainly seemed to have been the case in the war against Iraq where blatantly false 'human rights abuses' such as the killing of sick babies were played upon in the propaganda lead up to the invasion and bombing of Iraq. The author takes a strong 'isolationist' stand and suggests that even 'when babies are being tortured to death on CNN' no one should intervene, and appears to suggest that 'national sovereignty' takes precedence over 'human rights'. While I do agree with the author's thesis that co-opting 'human rights' to promote 'American colonialism' is wrong, to then suggest that human rights are 'wrong' is a bit of stretch for me. Co-opting human rights as a propaganda ploy is wrong, and certainly setting up a human rights 'front' organization to exploit the sympathy for human rights is wrong, (and I do not like the idea that I may have been exploited in this way and duped on my web page) but it seems to be an illogical leap to suggest then that simply because the United States government cynically manipulates 'human rights' as an ideology that 'human rights are thus wrong' (rather we could argue that human rights are right' as is proved by the cynical manipulation of human rights in the service of colonialism. A similar argument could not be made for 'civilizing the natives' during the colonial period, and the analogy breaks down at this point in my judgment). Nevertheless, the author makes some good points, and in particular I found his analysis of the sources of funding and the make up of the HRW to be quite interesting and will be on my guard in the future, and the warning about the cynical manipulation of 'human rights' in support of colonial interventions is a point well taken (and something that should have been obvious after the cynical use of this ploy during the Gulf War)...
In his essay the author seems to support a concept he refers to (approvingly) as 'moral relativism' (morality is relative to a culture or to an individual). For example "Rights are voluntary. They can not be imposed on a person without consent." At the same we read, "The 'right not to be tortured' is at first sight a classic claim right of torture victims. It appears to create en entitlement for the victim, the entitlement that the torture stops. But the present political reality is that it is interpreted as an entitlement to prevent torture. This entitlement is claimed to legitimise a wide variety of acts, usually hostile acts by one state against another state. In other words, although the 'right not to be tortured' appears to be a concession by states to individuals, in reality it is a power claim by states. It is the creation of an entitlement to make war and impose sanctions. The formal declaration may say "right not to be tortured", but the Pentagon reads this as '"right to bomb torturers". Including, usually, the de facto right to cause collateral damage." Now I am having a problem with some of the logic here. First to equate all human rights with 'American imperialism' is to big a leap to make, although the warning is certainly justified. Second, I choose my right to 'not be tortured' which would hurt like hell after all. Just how do I go about getting that right respected, given that my torturers aren't likely to be swayed by a philisophical appeal to 'moral autonomy'? While I might be detached about it all, if left alone, when I am being tortured I might appreciate the efforts of Amnesty International in bringing lots of bad publicity to bear and so on, to get me the hell out of there. (As I am reading this I reminded of a discussion I had with 'moral relativist' philosopher who was trying to insist that 'nothing is wrong' and then only got angry when I asked if I could burn him at the stake while listening to him insist that it 'wasn't wrong'. Basically if you don't like something yourself, don't do it to someone else, and don't try to insist that 'it isn't wrong - that is bad philosophy and merely a cultural convention.') Equating all 'human rights' with 'the new ideology of colonialism' is, while a justifiable warning, to sweeping, and suggesting that 'moral autonomy' is the answer, while it has some merits, does leave a person wondering what to do about that torture victim, or how to respond to the torturer's claim to 'the right to torture' (you know, being an 'autonomous moral agent', who, I am sure, wouldn't mkind torturing to death a few philosophers, as well).I am having some problems with the logic of all this, but, nevertheless, the expose on HRW is much appreciated, and the cautionary warning about the cynical manipulation of human rights is well taken to heart...
Sahara desert dust storm descends on Texas
Drought reduces Rio Grande to a trickle ... See lasr years stories Texas fears return of dust bowl and Texas in desperate drought
Al Khader today: the true face of the occupation .... A hundred Israeli peace seekers, among them former Knesset Member Uri Avnery, were stopped on the way to Al Khader. The area was declared "closed military zone" - only to peace activists but settlers were allowed to pass. The demonstrators sat down to block their passage. They were forcibly dispersed and six were detained and taken to the police station at the Efrat settlement. A simultaneous demonstration of the Al-Khader people themselves was dispersed with live bullets, leaving four wounded -one in serious condition ...
Gush Shalom is "composed of Jews and Arabs, Independents as well as members of political parties and other organizations. Gush Shalom has adopted three principles: Israeli willingness to withdraw from all territories occupied since 1967. Recognition of the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people. Recognition of of the right of the Palestinian people to establish a state of its own, with East Jerusalem as its capital, alongside the state of Israel. Gush Shalom was formed in 1992 by Uri Avnery and others, in the aftermath of the infamous deportation without trial of 415 Palestinians, by Rabin's "Peace Coalition government".
Mobile phones can detect stealth bombers
BBC: Foot and mouth - the disease that refuses to die
BBC: Iran's political prisoners - although moderates win elections a small percentage of religious hardliners still wield power in the country...
Palestinian Non-violent Resistance Camp Meeting July 1st to 5th, 2001
Israel considers passing law legalizing lynch mob justice against Palestinians
BBC: UFO Video goes to Hollywood - a quote from the article: "officials at NASA are said to have asked to examine the tape, because they believe it shows the same type of craft once spotted by the space agency's own cameras during a space shuttle mission. " See also on this site, A message to the Space Shuttle crew
Internet archive of online broadcast of the UFO Disclosure project - Real media format - online apparently until November 2001.
Visit the download page of the weekly Independant Media Newspaper in PDF format - PDF documents retain all the formatting and look of the original document. You will need to download the Adobe Acrobat Reader to view documents in PDF format...
Anti-capitalist Activists from Gothenburg give their side of the story and more commentary on coverage of Gothenburg and links to independantly produced videos...
BBC - Over 700 new settlers homes a snub to Palestinians
BBC: Settlers 'claiming the Promised Land' - A few quotes from the article : "The 145 settlements dotting the West Bank and Gaza Strip today, contravene international resolutions banning the movement of settlers into land taken during war. A number of these settlements butt up against refugee camps, where Palestinian families live cheek-by-jowl in squalor.
settler violence towards Palestinian residents of the territories had increased since the intifada erupted. It says six Arabs were killed by settlers between September and March. The organisation adds that in that period, settlers had also stoned Palestinian cars, damaged property and set fire to a mosque. The report also highlights a sharp increase in attacks on settlers by Palestinians."
Links to reports by Israel's B'Tselem human rights group - Human Rights Abuses Rampant in Israel - A few quotes from the introduction to the reports : "Human Rights abuses are rampant in Israel. Until recently, torture was legal and the security forces routinely tortured political detainees, most of whom were never charged with any crimes. Methods include violent shaking of detainees, restraining in very painful conditions, sensory deprivation, sounding of loud music for prolonged periods and others. Several prisoners have died as a consequence of torture. It's hoped that a recent Supreme Court decision outlawing this practice, however, will finally put an end to this widely condemned practice."
Related Human rights links: Human Rights Watch 2001 Report on Israel ... Israeli Activists, Peace Now Shalom Achshav [Peace Now], the largest grassroots movement in Israel's history ... Peace Now America ... They describe their beliefs as Americans for Peace Now believes that Israel's security and its democratic and Jewish character cannot be maintained if it continues to rule over the West Bank and Gaza nor if it remains in a state of conflict with its Arab neighbors including the Palestinian people.
Protest.net - a list of global protests and up coming activism... PressurePoint - Corporate protests - and Flashpoints an alternative media protest zine...
MSN cookie data crosses domains
BBC: New fungus eats CDs - with the world's archives being moved onto CDs and DVDs this is bad news. Fortunately the fungus only seems to be prevalent in the tropics at the moment...
Noam Chomsky on the Crisis in the Middle East - Transcript available on line Chomsky Lecture - 110 KB - The lecture is also available in real media format ->
NoamChomsky.rmA few quotes from the lecture:
The blockade is the crucial tactic. There can be a blockade which is very effective because of the way the so-called ‘peace’ process has evolved under U.S. direction, meaning hundreds of isolated Palestinian enclaves, some of them tiny, which can be blocked off and strangled by the Israeli ... Remember that anything that Israel does, it does by U.S. authorization, and usually subsidy and support. The blockade is a tactic to fine-tune the atrocities so that they don’t become too visible ... There have been mistakes in the past ... when Shimon Peres launched yet another attack on Lebanon, killing large numbers of people and driving hundreds/thousands out of their home, it was fine and the U.S. was able to support it and Clinton did support it, up until one mistake, when they bombed a UN Camp in Qana, killing over a hundred people who were refugees in the camp. Clinton at first justified it, but as the international reaction came in, he had to back off, and Israel was forced, under U.S. orders in effect, to call off the operation and withdraw. ... the U.S.-backed slaughter in East Timor, which had been going on nicely for about 25 years, finally got out of hand to such a degree that Clinton was compelled, after the Country was virtually destroyed, to essentially tell the Indonesian generals that the game is over, and they instantly withdrew. ... Now, of course, the Kosovo story was quite different. At that time, the propaganda needs were the opposite. The killings were under fairly similar circumstances and the level of Serbian response was approximately like Israel’s response in the occupied territories. (Then, in fact, there were attacks from right across the border, so it would be as if Hizbollah was carrying out attacks in the Galili, or something like that). That time, the propaganda needs were different, so therefore, it was described passionately as genocide. A well designed propaganda system can make those distinctions. So in that case it was genocide, and in this case it’s unnoticeable and justified reprisal ... the tactics (must) be restricted to: assassination; lots and lots of people wounded (severely - many of them will die later, but that doesn’t enter into consciousness); starvation (according to the UN, there are about 600,000 people facing starvation, but again that is below the level); and curfews (24 hour curfews, like in Hebron, for weeks at a time, while a couple of hundred Israeli settlers strut around freely, but the rest of the population, tens of thousands of people, are locked in their homes, allowed out a couple of hours a week). The isolation in the hundreds of enclaves, and so on, is so that suffering can be kept below the level that might elicit a Western response. And the assumption, which is pretty plausible, is that there is a limit to what people ca n endure, and ultimately they will give up.
