the national free press - past feature editorial

the national free press - past feature editorial  the national free press      nfp information     the publisher's notes blog the nfp store the front page editorials environment section nfp directory the back page contributor's page subscriptions nfp organization info site map contact us publishing standards the new national free press.org is online! please click here to go to the new site. the national free press.ca will be available until december 31st, 2007 past feature editorials when soldiers die in vain by jack random - nfp regular columnist “it is…for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us – that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion – that we here highly resolved that these dead shall not have died in vain.” - abe lincoln, gettysburg address. when do we finally admit that our soldiers are dying in vain? the people have come to accept that the iraq war was from the beginning unnecessary, immoral and painfully misguided. our nation has not yielded on the contracts that transfer essential control of iraqi oil to international oil companies. we have not given up or even disavowed the permanent military installations that would keep the iraqi government under our thumb in perpetuity. “if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all ‘we died at such a place’ – some swearing, some crying for a surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.” - william shakespeare, king henry v. we are occupiers, not liberators. no government gives up control of its most valuable resource voluntarily. we are oppressors and usurpers. under these circumstances, it is the duty of all iraqi citizens to oppose us, even if it means perpetual guerrilla war, even if it means iraqis fighting iraqi collaborators, even if it means that more and more iraqi and american blood must be spilled on the fields of battle. there was a time it might have made sense to protest that our forces volunteered for service to the nation, right or wrong, but that time has long expired. only highly paid mercenaries volunteer to fight for corporate oil. the fighting men and women of our armed forces did not volunteer to become what they have become in iraq and to a lesser extent in afghanistan. “on april 26, 2004…my brother…was killed. since that day, my family and i have lived with the grief of losing a loved one. we have struggled to explain his death to his son. we have gazed at the shards of life scattered at our feet, in wonder of its fragility, in perpetual catharsis with god.” - dante zappala, sister of the late sergeant sherwood baker. the time has arrived for all of us to accept that when the president dismissed the expressed will of the people to roll back the war and instead escalated the war, he condemned our soldiers, marines, guard and sailors to pointless death and, equally damning, pointless killing of those iraqis who oppose us, as well as those caught in the crossfire. where do we draw the line? the november election? attacks on the green zone? passage of an appropriations bill calling for phased withdrawal? condemnations by our arab allies? “in so far as they died for their devotion to america, for their love of their comrades, for their loyalty to our nation’s ideals, their deaths…were not in vain. but in so far as they were put into battle under false pretences, for unrealistic objectives, by a feckless commander who was never committed to the task, their deaths were indeed in vain. i hate to write those words. when i think about the families of our troops reading them, i imagine the outrage and indignation that they must feel, that i would feel if my son had died in iraq.” - blogger kid bitzer, obsidian wings, november 13, 2006. should we draw the line at 3,500 american dead? 4,000? 5,000? should we hold out for four or five more years and 10,000 or 20,000 dead? how many more iraqis must die to save the face of a failed american president? at some point, even the most stubborn defenders of war and the bush administration must come to terms with the solemn fact that our soldiers are dying without reason, without cause, without hope of success and without the kind of honor that grows from noble intent. the verdict of history is certain: all of our soldiers died for a needless and grossly immoral war, a war of naked aggression, a war built on a foundation of lies, a despicable attempt to remake the world under our dominance. “contemplating the scale of the american-british failure in iraq, i have been struggling to see if there are any future circumstances, any lines of long-term strategic action, which would one day enable us honestly and credibly to say to the mother of a soldier who died in iraq: ‘your son did not die in vain.’ at the moment, that seems nearly impossible.” - timothy garton ash, the guardian, october 26, 2006.   for those young men and women who are now being subjected to a four billion dollar pentagon recruiting drive, do not be fooled into believing that serving in the bush wars is fulfilling a duty to country. this is not a war for america. it is not a war for american ideals. it is not a war that our founders would embrace. it is a war of corporate greed and avarice and one that all true americans should despise. do not be trapped by an economy that bolsters the ultra rich but offers the children of working folk no way out and no way forward but military service. rest assured there is another way for while it may be considered noble to die for one’s country, to die or kill for this war is ignoble and insane. “what’s the purpose of this war? what have they accomplished? somebody please give me some kind of answer. why did my son die in vain?” - marion flint sr., father of staff sergeant marion flint jr., killed in iraq. if you wish to answer the call of your nation in the hour of greatest need, your place is in the streets of protest. the only redemption, the only good that can come of such wanton and unnecessary death and destruction, is the hope and the vow that we will never repeat the tragic chain of events that led to war and continues to carry it forward. unfortunately, for many of us, that was the redeeming lesson of the war in vietnam. jack random is the author of the jazzman chronicles (crow dog press) and ghost dance insurrection (dry bones press). the chronicles have appeared on the albion monitor, peace-earth-justice, the national free press, pacific free press, leftward, dissident voice and counterpunch. see random jack: www.jazzmanchronicles.blogspot.com. to top menu back to past feature editorial page   too guilty to fly, too innocent to charge? by faisal kutty as the canadian government forges ahead with its cleverly named passenger protect program, the timing could not be better to seriously reconsider what is, for all intents and purposes, a no-fly list. the attention to the issue of watch lists generated by the struggles of maher arar (the canadian citizen detained by americans and shipped off to torture and interrogation in syria) to clear his name should make us all sit back and reflect. there are many lessons to be learned from the canadian government’s recent apology and financial settlement with arar for its role in his “extraordinary rendition.”one of these lessons is that hasty and ill considered national security initiatives, which are essentially aimed at managing perceptions more than they are in really addressing legitimate and manageable security concerns, are not harmless. in fact, they cause disproportionate harm in return for very minor gains in terms of intelligence and law enforcement. the innocent and unintended victims of such initiatives are real human beings with lives, rights and dignity. when not properly designed to address the negative impacts such initiatives can significantly disrupt and even destroy lives. another lesson from the arar saga is that religious and racial profiling, no matter how vigorously it is denied, is too often the reality for a growing number in canada’s muslim and arab communities, at least in the national security context.  in fact, this was confirmed by none other than the department of justice in a report leaked a couple of years ago.a number of other men of muslim/arab heritage have made similar allegations as arar. three of them will get their own less comprehensive inquiries. one of the common denominators of each of their stories is the fact that they were placed on one kind of watch list or the other.  the proliferation of government watch lists is a troubling development in the “war on terrorism.” the challenges of such lists include differences of opinion on who’s actually a security threat and consolidating information across agencies by making the computer systems communicate with one another. in fact, canada’s auditor general sheila fraser found in 2004 that watch-lists used to screen visa applicants, refugee claimants and travelers seeking to enter canada were in disarray because of inaccuracies and shoddy updating. and now we have another list to worry about. as we consider the need to improve our intelligence and law enforcement systems, we must have an open and informed dialogue about what measures truly make us safer while ensuring that our fundamental values, liberties and rights are not sacrificed. the proper forum for such a debate is our legislature. bypassing this vital and necessary debate – as was done with the passenger protect program – is irresponsible and cavalier, particularly given the findings of justice dennis o’connor in the arar inquiry, the canadian track record with watch lists to date as well as the experience with such lists south of the border. the information sharing protocols and mechanisms which were criticized by justice o’connor have not been improved, yet the government continues with the no-fly initiative which mandates that we share – and even merge and consolidate information – with foreign entities and agencies, which may have less scruples in listing and targeting innocent people on flimsy grounds. making lengthy watch lists based on subjective and political criteria and then giving the power to add and remove names to agencies that have a vested interest in the national security agenda is akin to asking the fox to guard the hen house. such lists – which will inevitably fill up very quickly with “false positives”, political dissidents and those whom our friends and neighbours subjectively designate as threats – will not make us any safer or interrupt any terrorists, if the u.s. experience is any indication. to make matters worse, real terrorists may not even be placed on the list for fear of tipping them off. according to the u.s. homeland security department, known terrorists are not placed on the list for fear that they would know they are being watched. even this new “made-in-canada” list will be shaped by the u.s. and other nations’ lists as they cross-fertilize pursuant to intelligence agreements, the smart border declaration and the security and prosperity partnership of north america (spp), both of which call for increased cooperation and information sharing. how can such a list provide anything more than a false sense of security while leaving it rife for blacklisting innocent people as well as racial and religious profiling? indeed, canadians should be asking the government how an individual can be too dangerous to fly, yet be free to roam the streets and plot terror.the no-fly list threatens liberty, equality and mobility rights guaranteed in the canadian charter of rights and freedoms. moreover, it leaves little practical recourse to get off the list.the experience of some individuals who are already encountering difficulties in flying within canada without even having a list of our own does not give one much confidence. the extraterritorial application of u.s. watch lists is already impacting on canadians  – how will canadians fare once transport canada introduces its own official list and over time it becomes increasingly shaped by other nations’ intelligence, criteria and practices? as the cato institute’s jim harper pointed out, the unilateral process is alien to our legal system: “rather than watch-listing, people who are genuinely suspected of being criminals or terrorists should be sought, captured, charged, tried, and, if convicted, sentenced. watch-listing allows law enforcement to be very active and intrusive without actually doing what it takes to protect against crime and terrorist acts. ... watch listing and identification checking [are] like posting a most-wanted list at a post office and then waiting for criminals to come to the post office.” anti-terrorist watch lists may serve a very limited useful function, such as separating individuals deserving of increased investigative attention, but they will never be complete or be totally accurate. they should not, however, be the basis for serious restrictions on liberty such as the denial of transportation or violations of privacy or other rights without the benefit of due process and the principles of fundamental justice. they may have a limited role in designating who to investigate further or watch so long as there is no deprivation of rights or privacy violations and provided that they are compiled pursuant to due process of law and without resort to subjective criteria or racial/religious profiling.in raising her voice against the no-fly list, the privacy commissioner of canada, jennifer stoddart, said the list “represents a serious incursion into the rights of travelers in canada, rights of privacy and rights of freedom of movement.” to this i would add, increasing likelihood of racial and religious profiling, silencing dissent and persecuting unpopular religious and political views. transport canada must not be given a carte blanche to deprive canadians of our liberty, mobility, equality and privacy rights, even though aviation security has now become a legitimate national security concern. the government’s appeal to national security should not exempt it from due process, principles of fundamental justice, accountability, transparency, oversight and a full parliamentary debate. the system envisaged by passenger protect is wholly inadequate, as it will be over inclusive, with a high likelihood of false positives, pose a serious potential for racial profiling and completely lack any meaningful redress mechanism or process. perhaps what is needed is not this list, but better investigative and intelligence work to gather evidence so that those who are real threats are charged and kept off the streets, not just flights. faisal kutty is a toronto lawyer, writer and doctoral candidate at osgoode hall law school of york university.  he serves as vice chair and counsel to the canadian council on american islamic relations and filed submissions against the canadian no-fly list on behalf of more than two dozen organizations from across the country.  the submission entitled “canada’s passenger protect program: too guilty to fly, too innocent to charge?” is available at www.caircan.ca  his articles are archived at www.faisalkutty.com.  his articles have appeared in all of the leading canadian dailies including the globe and mail, toronto star, montreal gazette, ottawa citizen, edmonton journal, windsor star, as well as in arab news, indian express, the daily mail, yemen times, al-ahram weekly, and others. to top menu back to past feature editorial page   australia: the new 51st state by john pilger march 4 2007 john howard's servility to the us is even greater than tony blair's and has earned him the nickname bush's deputy sheriff. the conspiracy between washington, the media and politicians is eroding the country's freedoms in june this year, 26,000 us and australian troops will take part in bombarding the ancient fragile landscape of australia. they will storm the great barrier reef, gun down "terrorists" and fire laser-guided missiles at some of the most pristine wilderness on earth. stealth, b-1 and b-52 bombers (the latter alone each carry 30 tonnes of bombs) will finish the job, along with a naval onslaught. underwater depth charges will explode where endangered species of turtle breed. nuclear submarines will discharge their high-level sonar, which destroy the hearing of seals and other marine mammals. run via satellite from australia and hawaii, operation talisman sabre 2007 is warfare by remote control, designed for "pre-emptive" attacks on other countries. australians know little about this. the australian parliament has not debated it; the media is not interested. the result of a secret treaty signed by john howard's government with the bush administration in 2004, it includes the establishment of a vast, new military base in western australia, which will bring the total of known us bases around the world to 738. no matter the setback in iraq, the us military empire and its ambitions are growing. australia is important because of a remarkable degree of servility that howard has taken beyond even that of tony blair. once described in the sydney bulletin as bush's "deputy sheriff", howard did not demur when bush, on hearing this, promoted him to "sheriff for south-east asia". with washington's approval, he has sent australian troops and federal police to intervene in the pacific island nations; in 2006, he effected "regime change" in east timor, whose prime minister, mari alkatiri, had the nerve to demand a proper share of his country's oil and gas resources. indonesia's repression in west papua, where american mining interests are described as "a great prize", is endorsed by howard. this sub-imperial role has a history. when the six australian states federated as a nation in 1901, "a commonwealth . . . independent and proud", said the headlines, the australian colonists made clear that independence was the last thing they wanted. they wanted mother england to be more protective of her most distant colony which, they pleaded, was threatened by a host of demons, not least the "asiatic hordes" who would fall down on them as if by the force of gravity. "the whole performance," wrote the historian manning clark, "stank in the nostrils. australians had once again grovelled before the english. there were fatman politicians who hungered for a foreign title just as their wives hungered after a smile of recognition from the governor-general's wife, who was said to be a most accomplished snubber." australia's modern political class has the same hunger for the recognition of great power. in the 1950s, prime minister robert menzies allowed britain to explode nuclear bombs in australia, sending clouds of radioactive material across populated areas. australians were told only the good news of being chosen for this privilege. an raf officer was threatened with prosecution after he revealed that 400 to 500 aborigines were in the target zones. "occasionally we would bring them in for decontamination," he said. "other times, we just shooed them off like rabbits." blindness and unexplained deaths followed. after 17 years in power, menzies was knighted by the queen and made lord warden of the cinque ports. an undeclared maxim of australian politics is that prime ministers become "statesmen" only when they serve imperial interests. (honourable exceptions have been dealt with by smear and subversion). in the 1960s, menzies connived to be "asked" to send australian troops to fight for the americans in vietnam. red china was coming, he said. howard is more extreme; in his decade of power, he has eroded the very basis of australia's social democratic institutions and cast his country as the model of a washington-style democracy, where the only popular participation is that of voting every few years for two "opposing" parties which share almost identical economic, foreign and "cultural" policies. for "cultural", read race, which has always been important in creating an insidious state of fear and compliance. in 2001, howard was re-elected after manipulating the "children overboard affair", in which his senior advisers claimed that afghan refugees had callously thrown their children into the sea in order to be rescued by an australian naval vessel. they produced photographs that were proven false, but only after howard had touched every xenophobic nerve in the white electorate and was duly re-elected. the two officials who brought the "crisis" to its fraudulent fever pitch were promoted after one of them admitted that the deception had "helped" the prime minister. in a more scandalous case, howard claimed his defence department had been unaware of another leaking, stricken boat filled with iraqi and afghan refugees heading for australia until after it had sunk. an admiral later revealed this, too, was false; 353 people were allowed to drown, including 146 children. (howard got blood on his hands) above all, it is the control of dissent that has changed australia. rupert murdoch's influence has been critical, far more so than in britain. whenever howard or one of his more oafish ministers want to bend an institution or smear an opponent, they carry out the task in alliance with a pack of rabid mostly murdoch commentators. as stuart macintyre describes in a new book, silencing dissent, the melbourne herald-sun columnist, andrew bolt, conducted a campaign of ridicule against the independent australian research council which, he claimed, had fallen into the hands of a "a club of scratch-my-back-leftists" whose work was "hostile to our culture, history and institutions", as well as "peek-in-your-pants researchers fixated on gender and race". the then minister of education, brendan nelson, vetoed one project grant after another without explanation. the national museum of australia, the national child benefits centre, aboriginal policy bodies and other independent institutions have been subjected to similar intimidation. a friend who holds a senior university post told me: "you dare not speak out. you dare not oppose the government or 'the big end of town' [corporate australia]." as embarrassing corporate crime rises, the treasurer, peter costello, has blithely announced a ban on moral or ethical boycotts of certain products. there was no debate; the media was simply told. one of costello's senior advisers, david gazard, recently distinguished an american-run seminar in melbourne, organised by the public relations institute of australia, at which those paying a$595 were taught the tricks of conflating activism with "terrorism" and "security threat". suggestions included: "call them suicide bombers . . . make them all look like terrorists . . . tree-hugging, dope-smoking, bloody university graduate, anti-progress . . ." they were advised on how to set up bogus community groups and falsify statistics. schoolteachers who do not fly the flag or music concert organisers who discourage the attendance of racist thugs wrapped in the flag are at risk of a dose of murdoch poison. equally, if you reveal the shame of australia's vassal role you are deemed "anti-australian" and, without irony, "anti-american". few australians are aware that murdoch, who dominates the press, abandoned his own australian citizenship so that he could set up the fox tv network in the us. the university of sydney is to open a united states study centre, backed by murdoch after he complained about the inability of australians to appreciate the benefits of the bloodbath in iraq. (howard got blood on his hands too) stifling dissent having recently spoken at overflowing public meetings in brisbane, sydney and melbourne, i am left in no doubt that many are deeply worried that freedoms in their sunny idyll are slipping away. they were given a vivid reminder of this the other day when vice president dick cheney came to sydney to "thank" howard for his support. the new south wales state government rushed through a law that allowed cheney's 70 secret service guards to carry live weapons. with the police, they took over the centre of sydney and closed the harbour bridge and much of the historic rocks area. seventeen-vehicle motorcades swept theatrically here and there, as if howard was boasting to cheney: "look at my control over this society; look at my compliant country." and yet his guest and mentor is a man who, having refused to fight in vietnam, has brought back torture and lied incessantly about iraq, who has made millions in stock options as his halliburton company profits from the carnage and who has vetoed peace with iran. almost every speech he gives includes a threat. by any measure of international law, cheney is a major war criminal, yet it was left to a small, brave group of protesters to uphold the aussie myth of principled rebellion and stand up to the police. the labor party leader, kevin rudd, the embodiment of compliance, called them "violent ferals"; one of the protesters was 70 years old. the next day, the headline in the sydney morning herald read: "terrorists have ambitions of empire, says cheney." the irony was exquisite, if lost. john pilger's bestselling history of australia, "a secret country", is available through http://www.johnpilger.com courtesy of... eddie hwang president unity party wa info@unitywa.org www.unitywa.org (updated) to top menu back to past feature editorial page war on terror:  reinventing the cold war   by paris kaye   on the evening of january 17, 1961, president dwight david eisenhower concluded his term with a historical farewell address to the nation.  in that address, eisenhower made reference to a concept known as the military industrial complex and its “grave consequences”, warning the american people to be vigilant in this regard.   in short, the military industrial complex is a triangular construct which exercises undue influence within foreign policy.  the three components of this construct include the military, corporate entities and the government.   arguably, a case can be made that the symbolic conception of the military industrial complex occurred during a fateful week in august 1945 when the united states of america became the first and only nation thus far to utilize atomic armaments in warfare.  president truman’s decision to utilize the bomb in both hiroshima and nagasaki was not the only option of ending our conflict with imperialist japan, but was the one option wherein we could make a clear and concise statement about our strength as a super power.    the conventional super powers took on their defining shapes throughout the second world war and even more so through the yalta conference and subsequent discord between the u.s.-soviet over postwar european issues.  arguably, it was the growing soviet question that weighed heavily into truman’s decision to utilize the atomic bomb.    consequently, the cold war era began, giving birth to the military industrial complex wherein armaments research, development and production fueled its own economy.  the passion, the motive for this growing concept was a preservation of our way of life, and a means to combat the evils of communism.   in 1991, the weight of the arms race caused, in part, the implosion of the soviet union which some term the “new rome”; so termed because both suffered a similar fate.  in the dissolution of the soviet union, the united states lost a worthy and commendable adversary and, more importantly, that which fueled the military industrial complex.    over a decade, we confined our global military involvement to mostly un backed skirmishes wherein human rights violations and crimes against humanity were being committed.  this relatively quiet period was the adolescence of this growing entity known as the military industrial complex just as the previous era was its childhood.   the childhood stage was a time wherein it was fed, nurtured and given delicate care.  within its adolescent stage, the military industrial complex, as an entity, strove for independence, seeking policies and systems that would eventually make it self-sustaining.   when the new “axis of evil” was discovered, it ushered in the “war on terror”.  the “war on terror” is the cold war reinvented.  it was tailored to fit the new century and the global dynamics of this era.   we have not been vigilant as eisenhower strongly admonished in his prophetic outlook some 46 years ago.  we have sat back and watched the unimpeded development, from birth to adulthood, of the military industrial complex.  it has become inculcated into our governmental policies and political practices.  it is now self-sustaining and requires no nurturing or care.  the ubiquitous and nebulous nature of our “war on terror” has given it an unlimited fueling source.   as the “war on terror” and the military industrial complex consume vital resources, we, as a nation, place ourselves at risk of implosion.  implosion occurs when resources are taken from vital domestic programs and used elsewhere.  it occurs when a nation decays, internally, through neglect of vital domestic programs and its people.  the strength of a nation is predicated on a delicate balance between the external and the internal; the latter and former being of equal importance.    more from paris kaye to top menu back to past feature editorial page not a prophet...just a thinker! “there is no expedient to which a man will not go to avoid the labour of thinking.” thomas a. edison so, let's try to read some 'writings on the wall'. home... any bets that the general election will take place well before the end of this year? accusations of manipulating the country into an election frenzy are being hurled all around like leaves in autumn. "will the prime minister call an election for late november, should malta be cleared by mid-year to adopt the euro on january 1, 2008?", asked lino spiteri. in a sly artful way, he predicted the answer. of course!! in the first sentence of his last paragraph of his article he states; "should labour win the election in a post-euro scenario of galloping prices......" and who would ever dream of holding an election following 'a post-euro scenario of galloping prices'? the nationalist party is more shrewd than that! on january 14, 2007, tonio fenech, parliamentary secretary at the ministry of finance, was quoted as saying that "by the end of 2006, foreign investment is expected to exceed lm 500 millions." it would be interesting to know if this figure had been reached and if in it is included the selling of malta and its family silver! does he expect any revival of our economic situation, once all our heirloom has been sold? i'm sure he's not betting on it and he knows that the earlier the chance of a premature election, the better. before things get worse! the np government knows well enough what's coming - and it's definitely not for the better. eddie fenech adami knew it and he quickly made way. there is no time to lose . if the np still enjoys any credit (very doubtful), it would do well to work on it early before it's totally lost. folks who had earlier believed the promises of benevolences and advantages of malta's entry into the european union and unwittingly voted in favour, have long since been asking; 'where are the jobs?', 'why so much unemployment?' and 'why such increases in the cost of living?' the government knows very well that things are not going to ameliorate but rather to worsen. so, why should it go to the risk of staking an election in a still worse situation? does anyone think that the changeover to the euro would not bring additional hardships to both businessmen and consumers? if so, better think again. anyhow, the burden will start to afflict us after the election. do you believe that the prime minister will not call an election till after the maltese lira would be replaced by the euro, with all its negative effects of inflation and conceivable devaluation? then there is the issue of the divorce law, especially concerning eu citizens seeking divorce in the maltese courts. recently, malta was labelled as a 16th century country in that it's the only country in the eu that does not have any divorce legislation. how many believe that this will continue to last? yes, definitely up to election time! anyhow, it is understood that the eu will not conclude this issue before long. this makes it more imperative for an early election so as not to lose the votes of the anti-divorcists and also lose favour with the church. and the latest gamble! smart city!! a project said to create 5,600 jobs over eight years, amounting to an average of 700 employments yearly. again another promise - and you can say on the eve of a general election. what a boost for the party! will this evaporate like the declaration of hundreds of jobs promised on the cottonera waterfront project? anyhow, it would have served its purpose. maybe the prime minister thinks that he could keep the people guessing but good thinkers will not miss the signs. hurry up, mr. prime minister. time is running out!! ...and away who will attack iran, the us or israel? you guessed it, israel! a recent report in one of britain's leading newspaper, 'the sunday times', claimed that israel was making preparations for a conventional attack on iran to destroy its uranium enrichment facilities. it stated that the israeli air force has been making practice runs far out into the mediterranean. although denied by israel, such reports could not be just sheer nonsense. us vice-president dick cheney has for long been saying that "perhaps israel will one day act on their own", maybe in view of the constant prodding by israel, especially by the aipac (american israel public affairs committee) in the united states. definitely, this is more likely as the us is not in a position, both militarily and politically, to engage itself in such a new war. spokesman for the us national security council, gordon johndroe, said that action would be taken only inside iraq, not across the border, while secretary of defence, robert gates, also stated that the united states had no intention of going into iranian territory. who is going then? so the us administration would be delegating the attack on iran to the israelis! the threat of a us strike on iran is all propaganda and the media mission is to create outrage in the world against iran. the us media group is beginning to release stories to sell a strike against iran. moreover, israeli prime minister, ehud olmert, also has called the possibility of an iranian nuclear bomb as an "existential threat" that cannot be tolerated. although israel would find itself on the front-line of this madness, us support would not be lacking. the recent deployment of two aircraft-carrier strike groups and patriot air defence systems would be useful to deter or defend against any retaliatory action on israel. so, israel would attack teheran and the us will come to its aid and further destabilize the middle east. as senator hilary clinton prattled during her visit to israel in december, 2005: "it became even more clear how important it is for the united states to stand with israel." most assume that the planned us military surge in iraq fits a scenario for attacking iran's nuclear facilities. rather, with the support of the two aircraft-carrier groups poised off iran's coastline, these would undoubtedly serve as support for israeli air-strikes against iran. it is no speculation that this escalation doesn't involve iran. i mean, who would be so stupid as to throw more troops in iraq? note the oxymoron: 'let's send more troops to iraq, so we can pull our troops out of iraq.' but all this points to these lines in bush's speech: " i recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. we will expand intelligence sharing - and display air defence systems to reassure our friends and allies." as israeli prime minister, ehud olmert, is under mounting pressure from likud and other right-wing parties in the knesset, a daring israeli air-strike against iran could salvage his reputation. besides, olmert has left himself little manoeuvring room, since he has labelled iran's alleged development of a nuclear bomb an 'existential threat' to israel. the american people might also be more sympathetic to israel lashing out to protect its survival than to bush entangling the united states in another middle east war. so, if the bush-olmert duo has any hope of accomplishing the neo-conservative remaking of the middle east time is running out. something dramatic must happen soon. that something would possibly mean a rush to armageddon!! joseph m. cachia vittoriosa, malta to top menu back to past feature editorial page "the hanging of saddam hussein is a phase four advance of the global empire" by connie fogal the execution of saddam hussein is a failure of social justice and of democracy. no developed civilized society imposes the death penalty. world leaders who are just condemn the execution. on december 30, 2006, cardinal renato martina, representative for the vatican on questions of justice, said the execution of saddam hussein is punishing crime with another crime. further he said: "la peine de mort n'est pas une mort naturelle. et personne ne doit donner la mort, pas meme l'etat." romano prodi, président du conseil italian counsel, a dit "aucune faute ne peut déterminer un homme à se faire le porteur de mort d`un autre homme." josé luis rodriguez, premier ministre espagnol a dit, " je ne défendre jamais le principe de la peine de mort, meme pour le pire des politiciens " (i never defend the death penalty, even for the worst politicians.") the hanging of saddam hussein by the usa -installed iraquian puppet government is a public relations effort to legitimate the u.s.a.'s illegal invasion of iraq. neither the invasion nor this execution have anything to do with democracy for iraq, but rather everything to do with justifying the usa's conquest of the geopolitical control over the middle east along with the control of iraq's water and oil. it is common knowledge that whoever controls iraq has the key to control of the middle east and its resources. the execution of saddam hussein is an operational disguise and cover up of the corporacratic creed in process- huge profits, promotions, raises for the corporations and their employees, i.e., the us corporations who rushed in with infrastructure and industrial programs after the destruction of the invasion- engineering and construction companies, computer system suppliers, aircraft, missile and tank manufacturers, pharmaceutical and chemical companies. because saddam hussein would not submit iraq to the global empire, and because he avoided assassination, iraq was invaded. invasion is the third phase of what john perkins, a self proclaimed economic hit man (ehm), calls the drive to effect the global empire. saddam's "crime" was his refusal to submit to the "corporatocracy". this name was coined by john perkins, in his book confessions of an economic hit man, as the collective name for the forces of power that are the global empire builders-- corporations, banks, and governments who use their political and financial muscle to satisfy their greed. perkins defines economic hit men as the people who are paid outrageous salaries to do the bidding of the corporatocracy. he describes them as an elite group who use international financial organizations to foment conditions that make other nations subservient to the corporatocracy running the u.s.’s biggest corporations, the u.s. government and the u.s. banks. comparing them to the mafia, he exposes the favors used to impose the will of the corporatocracy- massive loans for infrastructure which are impossible to pay back along with a condition that u.s. engineering and construction companies get the contracts to build the projects. perkins points out that most of the money never leaves the u.s.a., but rather is transferred from banking offices in washington to engineering offices in new york, houston or san francisco, while leaving the recipient country to pay back the full debt, principal and interest. when the debtor eventually and inevitably defaults, the debtor is required to submit to the demands of the corporatocracy, i.e., control over united nations votes, or installation of military bases, or surrender of precious resources like oil or water. iraq under saddam hussein had enough oil, water, and geopolitical power to thumb its nose at the corporatocracy and its advancing global empire. this “finger” was saddam’s “sin” for which he was hanged. john perkins lists the three phased attack conducted by the corporatocracy. first, the economic hit men go in. if they fail, the “jackals” go in to assassinate as phase two. if assassination fails, phase three is implemented- a military attack . the hanging of saddam hussein could be called phase four of the drive to advance the global empire. it is the white wash of orwellian double speak. that is, a crime against morality is committed and called an act of democracy. connie fogal canadian action party leader www.canadianactionparty.ca to top menu back to past feature editorial page return to a cause: an american revolution by jack random as a common man with a life outside of politics, i entered the world of political discourse with a cause born of the conviction that the future of american democracy depended on the emergence of an independent movement that could break the stranglehold of two parties dominated by the same corporate interests. something happened along the way that caused me to defer my primary cause. the nation was attacked, the people were terrified and the government launched a policy of aggressive war designed to capture a lion’s share of the world’s most precious resource. somehow, the cause of political independence – freedom from corporate governance – no longer seemed pressing. suddenly, stopping the war machine became a moral imperative, overwhelming all other concerns. the war is not over – not by a long shot. in many ways, the threat of war and more wars is as great now as it was in the mind-numbing daze of late september 2001. the nation’s leading warmongers outside the white house are positioning for another presidential run in 2008 and the corporate media is falling in line. the war is not over but i am beginning to understand that all our pressing issues, from the policies of war and global “free trade” to government incompetence and indifference to the plight of the poor and working class, from the poisoning of the planet to election fraud, are intimately interrelated. the war in iraq would not have been possible without corporate control of government and corporate control of government is made possible by an inherently corrupt two-party system where both are dependent on corporate sponsorship. it may seem abstract or radical but it is not difficult to understand when you break it down. when we laid siege to iraq, we did not claim iraqi oil as a nation; we contracted it to private corporations – corporations that owed no allegiance to any nation or ideology but to capital and only capital. to the uninformed american, this was a war of pride and prejudice (the pride of patriotism and prejudice against all things arabic) but to exxon-mobil and british petroleum, it was a corporate takeover. check the record: the first requirement of the occupying army on the handover of sovereignty and the adoption of a new iraqi constitution was that all contracts of the occupying authority would be honored. america and the iraqi people have lost a great deal in this war but the oil barons and the corporate scavengers are still tallying their profits. win, lose or prolonged engagement, the ceo’s of halliburton and bechtel will not fail to cash their checks and dick cheney will still collect his dividends. the corporate overlords have little interest in geopolitical strategies, little interest in the currency of choice, and are markedly disinterested in the democratic form of government. they require an unlimited supply of energy to fuel the industrial machine and massive quantities of capital to dominate technology. beyond oil, the only strategy that engages the corporate monoliths is the expansion of the “free trade” zone. the dirty little secret of “free trade” is that it is not “free” trade at all. it is a devious and extremely effective assault on labor that transcends national boundaries. every trade agreement operating under the banner of “free trade” regards a cheap working force, devoid of labor rights and unburdened by expectations of a living wage, as a marketable commodity. there could not be a better operational definition of “selling the working stiff down the river.” with every expansion of the “free trade” zone, job migration accelerates the erosion of wages and labor rights in relatively affluent nations and institutionalizes exploitation in poorer nations. as the process continues under the illusion of inevitability (a myth perpetuated by both ruling american parties and the corporate media), the eventual outcome is clear: universal exploitation of labor (i.e., the wal-mart model). and so i return to the cause of independence, knowing that the odds remain long and the last six years have been utterly wasted. in the recent midterm elections, only one independent candidate managed a winning campaign and that was the republican democrat of connecticut. ironically, the election of joe liebermann illustrates the potential power of independence, as he now becomes the most powerful figure in the united states senate – a free agent who can tip the balance of power by changing party allegiance at any time. the only campaign i am aware of that carried the seed of a winning idea was that of kevin zeese for senator in maryland. a member of the green party, zeese managed to win the support of the maryland libertarian and populist parties. despite that substantial accomplishment, his candidacy attracted only one percent of the vote in the general election. the zeese campaign illustrates the best and worst of the independence movement. on the positive side, he demonstrated that third parties with distinct ideas and philosophies could be united in the cause of independence. on the dark side, by reaching too high he doomed his campaign to the status of tokenism. in modern american politics, without the backing of a major party machine, trying to leap from citizen activist to the united states senate is like defying the law of gravity. it is admirable to dream big but, without a viable goal of victory, the dream cannot be sustained. dream big but think small. the policies advanced by kevin zeese may well represent a majority of american voters. what might have happened had he targeted a congressional district gerrymandered for democratic control? with the republicans reduced to tokenism, zeese could have taken dead aim at the muddled middle ground of democratic politics. with the backing of a national organization allied with the antiwar movement, he might have won. two terms in congress and he would be positioned for a real run at the senate. four years as a senator and he would be poised for a run at the white house. what is required, then, is a national movement with a national organization whose objectives are twofold: first, to unite third parties with the fastest growing sector of the american electorate: independent voters. second, to identify vulnerable congressional districts and run candidates who can win. some candidates will be progressive, others libertarian, but all will be mortal enemies to the corporate political machine. the revolution begins in earnest with the first victory and with that victory the age of third party tokenism will end. in our peculiar, two-party system, as few as a dozen congressional seats and one or two senators would radically alter the political landscape. the independence movement would be in position to demand election reform, media reform, internet freedom, and, at a minimum, trade policy and foreign policy review. like joe liebermann today, the independence movement would hold the key to the balance of power in the halls of congress. every revolution begins with a first step and the first step is securing the necessary backing to build the infrastructure and brain trust of a national organization. it requires visionaries of acquired wealth, political foresight and a spirit of philanthropy that transcends the combined works of bill gates, warren buffet and the celebrities of the day. it requires that the leaders of third parties step forward in the cause of unity. the political climate has rarely been better. trust in our congressional leaders has never been lower. if the democrats, tied down by their dependence on the same corporate overlords that created this despair, fail to end the war and affect real change, they will be playing into the hands of independence. let the revolution begin. for more of jack random, one of the nfp's regular columnists, please click here! to top menu back to past feature editorial page  the new middle east: the us democracy in middle eastern key countries! by karim el-koussa well before the 9/11 terrorist attack on the american soil, the us foreign policy has been for many years concentrating all its effort to claim a pre-emptive war on what they called the “axis of evil”, composed of north korea, iran and syria. after 9/11, two important heads of evil were re-added, added again to that axis, osama bin laden and saddam hussein. immediately, the us president george w. bush invited his european allies to join him in a “holy war” - a crusade against al-qaida in afghanistan, led by bin laden who countered him and the christian west, back with the same dialectic of the “holy war”- the jihad. same crazy perception of the divine! anyway, several months later, the us president renewed his invitation to the europeans and launched, without the approval of the united nations, another divine war on iraq to oust the iraqi regime and destroy its hypothetical nuclear power. two divine wars that didn’t end until now! there is no doubt that after the fall of the soviet union, the us became the only world power, an empire that does not surely need divine intervention to win wars against relatively poor enemies. but holy legitimacy is needed! thus, the us has chosen to take god on its side like all preceding world empires have done before it in history, and hence, the us government, endowed now with the divine right doctrine, uses it to dominate the world. consequently, the successful pax romana of the roman empire has been poorly mirrored lately with pax americana of secretary of state mrs. condoleezza rice - a project fondly elaborated by her forerunner, mrs. madeleine albright. democracy and liberty! something like, “we must build a community of democracies for the expansion of liberty in the world. amen,” became their daily slogan, their daily bread. beautiful slogan indeed, but where is liberty now in afghanistan? the killing persists almost every day and bin laden is still in the cave or rather taking a sun bath somewhere in the world. where is democracy now in iraq? iraqi community is dying almost every day and saddam hussein is on trial or rather playing the hero in a theatrical play. lately, like a powerful thunderclap, the us officials suddenly declare that iraq had not possessed nuclear weapons whatsoever. why the war then? ah, they didn’t know that before. at the end of the day, however, the two important heads of that so-called “axis of evil” are still there… and who was really judged in the end of it, but the innocent people! where is world justice and where it has been served? lately, however, saddam hussein has been found guilty of crimes against humanity. shall they execute him and make him pay the price of his murders!! maybe, after all, there is a us hidden agenda for saddam to come back to power, only to succeed where they failed - stabilizing iraq. at any rate, since north korea is not in the middle east, it has no place here in this article, so let us have a look now at the other two players of that axis, iran and syria. but surely, the state of israel is included with them! why? israel! the balfour declaration to baron rothchild, on the 2nd of november, 1917, says: “his majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in palestine of a national home for the jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-jewish communities in palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by jews in any other country.” the idea of the creation of the state of israel began with theodore herzl, the founder of the world zionist organization, who wrote, speaking of the arabs of palestine, in his complete diaries of june 12, 1895: “spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.” and one of the most enduring and deceptive slogans of zionism was coined by israel zangwill almost 100 years ago. he stated that: “palestine was a land without people for a people without land.” though, the reality was and still is different. but almost all jewish rabbis, leaders and thinkers like, yitzhak shamir, chairman heilbrun, israel koenig, uri lubrani, vladimir jabotinsky, joseph weitz, moshe dayan, golda maier, yoram bar porath, benyamin netanyahu, raphael eitan, ehud barak, moshe katsav, menahim begin, yitzhak ginsburg and ariel sharon, who managed the political ideologies of israel, worked in defiance to the british mandate of the balfour declaration just mentioned. in fact, they followed the words of herzl, and seemed to have been executing, until now, the orders of david ben gurion, the first israeli prime minister, known as the armed prophet, who declared: “the present map of palestine was drawn by the british mandate. the jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill - from the nile to the euphrates. we must expel arabs and take their places.” very rare were those moderate jews who strongly refused the idea of the state of israel; the most famous ones were albert einstein, and the jewish philosopher, martin buber. however, with general common racist thoughts in mind - not to mention also some words in the talmud - the successive israeli military governments continued challenging the will of the free world and the un, throwing many of its resolutions into the dustbin. thoughts and slogans like: “we have to kill all the palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves.” “we must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the galilee of its arab population.” “how can we return the occupied territories? there is nobody to return them to.” “there was no such thing as palestinians, they never existed.” “[the palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs.” and “jewish blood and a goy’s [gentile’s] blood are not the same,” echoed strongly in their minds. but the us president, george w bush and british prime minister tony blair are committed to a two state solution, israel and palestine living side by side in peace. even ehud olmert stated many times that he is committed to that solution. the us president, however, still has almost 17 months in his oval office, to fulfill his promises he gave to the palestinians. time is running fast though, and the situation on the ground, in gaza and the west bank, does not show any flare of optimism. however, the free world hopes that the us, the quartet, the eu and the un keep committing themselves to implement fully the “road map” for a long fair enduring peace. during the 2002 arab league summit held in beirut, the arabs unanimously voted for both, the creation of a palestinian state and the recognition of israel. but the israeli government led by sharon, did not show any positive reaction towards the arabs and their historical proposal. on the contrary, it pressured more the palestinians and held yasser arafat hostage in his headquarter in gaza. such a counter action seemed to have blown off the arabs peace proposal. what democracy is there in israel? one would definitely question. truth be told, at the time, in an interview on bbc, hosted by tim sebastian on hard talk, dr. zbigniew brzezenski, the former american national security adviser under jimmy carter administration, said openly something like that: “the total american and british support to israel came from the belief that israel would be the only democratic nation in the middle east, but the israeli consecutive governments seem to have been wearing masks and fooling with us!” “are you making fool out of the pope?” tim asked his guest dani neveh, one of the ministers in the sharon cabinet, in a previous interview, after israeli soldiers had besieged the church of nativity in jerusalem. in fact, at the time, the israelis ignored the un, eu, us, uk and the vatican calls to cease the killing of palestinians. at any rate, in the late 2006 elections, and under the close watch of the former us president jimmy carter and other european observers, the palestinians had willingly and democratically voted for hamas, a militant group, considered terrorist by israel. but whose voice counts more here? israel or the palestinians? of course, the voice of the people of palestine. a voice, israel still refuses to comply with even today. a little reflection back to the atlantic charter signed in august 1941 is needed here. both the former president of the united states, franklin d. roosevelt, and his majesty’s government, mr. winston s. churchill signed that charter but rarely committed to it! it says in its third item: “third, they (both of them and their countries) respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self-government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them.” but… there is israel here! indeed, the palestinian free and democratic election of the government of hamas strongly meets the terms of us secretary of state mrs. condoleezza rice and her forerunner, mrs. madeleine albright long hailed slogan for a world community of democracies for the expansion of liberty! why the us contradiction and double standard policy then? one would absolutely ask again. what democracy the americans want if not the palestinian electoral example, or the similar one that brought hezbollah ministers into the lebanese government? despite their strong religious and political ties with iran, hezbollah’s social fabric is purely lebanese. for subjective and irrational reasons, of course, the us and israel consider hezbollah a terrorist organization, while the europeans refuse to call them a terrorist group. the arabs and the lebanese look at hezbollah as a resistance force against israeli occupation. in the last july-august 2006 war between israel and hezbollah, lebanon has been left with more than 1100 civilian children, women and men of gray hairs killed, and more than 3500 wounded. this war also caused the destruction of the lebanese infrastructure and an estimated loss of billions of dollars. the wmr (wayne madsen report) reported that during the war on lebanon, the israeli military used poison gas on villages in the south. indeed, israel used horrible weapons, like heavy bombs, poison gas or chemical weapons, phosphorescent bombs and cluster bombs, all do not comply with international laws. we have also seen little israeli girls writing messages on the missiles before dropping them on the head of lebanese children. the un humanitarian coordinators have put a lot of pressure on israel for using those deadly cluster bombs, but israel always try to find excuses, for her terrorist acts, that no one will accept. in fact, israel dropped more than three hundred thousand (300.000) cluster bombs over lebanon in the last few days. many children are still dying from them as we speak. what a horrifying scene? don’t you think! what a racist culture indeed! teaching children hatred and leading them to war. but they want peace, they say! what a schizophrenic state of mind they usher. in addition, israeli troops ignored the plea from un peacekeepers in south lebanon for 10 times before a precision-guided missile hit their post killing four of them. at any rate, after all that barbaric savage war on lebanon, the un security council finally met in ny on the 11th of august, the 30th day of war, and voted unanimously for the resolution (1701) to end the fighting. three days later, on the 14th of august, the 34th day of war, at 8am, an agreement between the two countries has been reached to cease fire. the un resolution urged both sides to implement all its items, but until now, after more than two and a half months from signing that resolution, israel is still breaking it daily with its arrogant air flights over lebanese territories, something that was recently considered by the french foreign policy as a hostile act against the unifil (united nations interim force in lebanon) forces that came to lebanon with a great mission: observe the implementation of un resolution and protect lebanese civilians. hezbollah, on the other hand, has been committed to it from the first day it was issued. but of course, israel has a long history of breaking un resolutions, throwing them in the dustbin. in fact, lebanon has been dragged into political and insecurity turmoil, ever since the terrorist attack on the former lebanese prime minister, rafic hariri. many car bombs followed suit killing many important lebanese figures and injured others. all fingers point out at neighbouring syria who has been pressured to pull out its armed and intelligence forces from lebanon after 30 years of occupation in implementation of un resolution 1559. consequently, when prominent us political figures and some of the lebanese politicians demanded a change of the syrian regime, israel was the first to reject such a change! why? one would ask. it seems though that the old-fashioned dictatorship rule of assad suits best the political interest of israel. both israel and syria have a long history of political assassination on lebanese soil. the mossad and syrian intelligence service were very active for a long time in lebanon. hence, non-democratic regimes do applause each other. who said israel is a democracy anyway? but israel and syria keep on attacking each other (only in words, of course) ever since israel took final hold of the golan heights back in 1973. however, syria never exercised any resistance against israel. in fact, all the wars between the arabs and israel that followed the 1973 war were achieved on both lebanese and palestinian territories. it is quite reasonable to think that both countries, syria and israel, are in balance to an under table agreement. hence, it could be concluded that lebanon is like jesus christ, crucified between two thieves, israel and the syrian regime. both countries occupied lebanon for so many years before they were driven out. so, such an agreement between them both, whether theoretical or realistic, will not be reached between hezbollah and israel as long as israel still occupies lebanese territories such as shebaa farms. in fact, consecutive lebanese governments and today’s government led by mr. fouad siniora, a great man indeed, have always declared that lebanon will be the last arabic country that will sign peace with israel. even a treaty is not officially considered unless israel pulls out. this is quite logical, and that logic is backed up by iran who influenced the creation of hezbollah in the early eighties precisely after “iran gates”- a scandal that revealed israeli-iranian military collaboration during the iraqi-iranian war! iran then continued supporting hezbollah against israeli occupation. this iranian support to hezbollah combined with lebanese official and social support, led to the withdrawal of israel from lebanon in 2000 and the recent victory over israeli killing machine in the july-august 2006 war. talking of iran, nowadays, under ahmadinejad’s regime, brings two main issues to light: first, its nuclear ambition, and second, its continuous attacks against israel. whether iran has the right to obtain nuclear technology or not, is related to whether other neighboring or faraway countries have or not this technology. regionally wise, since israel has this technology, and has it for military purposes, iran would be then eligible to obtain it. religiously wise, since almost all religions have this technology - the west (christians), israel (jews), pakistan (muslim sunnis) and india (hindus) - iran (muslim shiite) would then be qualified to have it too. thus world equilibrium! right? no. in fact, not only we should strive to make the middle east empty of wmd (weapons of mass destruction), or any other technology that might be used to deploy killing machines to kill each other, but we should also strive to make the whole world empty of the evil devices that are ruining our selves and our only planet. after all, this is a wish, a dream! but if making the whole people of the world living in a utopia is quite hard to achieve, we can still start by making peace in the middle east. hence, making it clean of wmd, the wise leaders of the world, must then begin with israel. israel! not only israel has all kind of deadly weapons, internationally refused, but used on lebanese and palestinians, it also have no ambitions for peace and no wish to accept a palestinian free state. the only palestinian state that israel accepts is a state that abides by israel’s rules. what democracy can we expect from israel, the last stronghold of apartheid? south africa’s apartheid regime, by the way, has long been gone, destroyed by the free world. a great victory to humanity, indeed. even the falashas, the black jews of ethiopia, or the other jews of the east, are considered by the ashkenazi, the ruling western jews, as second or third rate jewish citizens. at any rate, this is an internal affair of jews to settle between themselves! recently, the former president of iran, mr. khatami, has identified the us many attempts to impose western-style democracy in the middle east as a great joke. of course, what could be other than that, if such a democracy is going to be on the image of a dictatorship like israel, the spoiled arrogant murderer child of the west - a freak! however, ahmadinejad’s continuous attacks against israel, the jewish holocaust, and his promises to wipe it out from the face of the earth, are probably based on the fact that israel is not showing any glimpses of willing to do changes. it still occupies, kills and destroys. “israel was founded on claims about the holocaust for which the palestinians were paying the price,” he spoke on jerusalem day, in front of a large demonstration in iran in support of the palestinians. it’s logical what he said. the palestinians are suffering and we all know it… if the holocaust really happened and caused great suffering to the jews, then they must have learned not to do the same to other people, instead they should embrace high feelings of love and human compassion. so many times have the us president, george w bush and british prime minister tony blair, committed themselves to a two state solution, israel and palestine living side by side in peace. and, so many times have they said that “they must deal with the root problem in the middle east.” well, the root problem in the middle east, is not only seen by the blind, but also known by the ignorant. both leaders should also remember by heart the first two articles of the universal declaration of human rights, written back in december 1948. 1- all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. they are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. 2- everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedom set forth in this declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. the root problem is not the popular forces of resistance in a country, such as hezbollah and the palestinian resistance, but the military forces and killing machines of the occupation. thus, the root problem in the middle east is not only syria and the world terrorist organization, al-qaida, but israel, as well. everybody knows it. the vatican knows it, so does the british. the americans know it too. israel is not to be wiped out from the face of the earth though, but israel must change its way of life, and start complying with the international laws while embracing a long fair lasting peace with its neighbours. israel must put down its weapons and open up its heart, unless, of course, it has gotten too cold, ruthless and inhuman. and it did. it has a long history of crimes against humanity. what happened in lebanon (kana 1 & 2, etc) and palestine (jenin and beit hanoun, etc) are not but living examples of its crimes. yes, we should also remember the article 5 of the universal declaration of human rights that says, “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” if the un, eu, us, uk and the vatican can not force israel to comply with the international laws and abide by the articles of the universal declaration of human rights, who can!? to go back to the law of the jungle, at the early dawn of the twenty first century and after thousands of years of human evolution, can not be seen other than just a great error in our supposedly evolved communal system, a real flaw in our expansion towards liberty. the law of the jungle or the lawless world is not the world we ought to live in as humans - or better say - as civilized conscious free democratic human beings. amen. karim el-koussa lebanese author. http://www.el-koussa.com sunday, november 12, 2006. to top menu back to past feature editorial page  responding to: the new middle east, by karim el-koussa by robert dailey that there is a pro-israeli bias among the governments of what is defined as “the west,” and particularly in the united states, is undeniable. however, there are qualifying and equally undeniable facts that must be faced and understood. prior to world war ii, jews and muslims were lumped into the same category by many (both individuals and governments). there was a sort of “coded” hierarchy that placed african americans at the bottom, semites (people) of jewish and arab descent on a slightly higher level on a slightly higher level, and the so-called “white” people of western european descent on top. and even among the “white” class, people of irish, italian, greek and others, occupied the lower rungs of the “white” class. we already know of the struggle of african americans, which is still ongoing in some places today. prior to world war ii, especially in the united states, but also elsewhere in the west, jews, arabs and african americans, and many times roman catholics, were not allowed into traditionally “western european” institutions: country clubs, social organizations, civic organizations, insider political groups, finance and a plethora of other institutions and professions. at some time after world war ii, the terms “anti-semite” and “anti-semitic” somehow began to mean “anti-jewish.” people of jewish descent were somehow defined in the eyes of the people who lived in the “west” as “semites.” people of arab descent, and therefore linguistic and cultural first cousins of people of jewish descent (all semites), were still perceived to be in the class and racial rung that they had occupied before world war ii, while people of jewish descent moved up a rung or two…becoming more closely identified with the “white” majority. today, jews are allowed to become members of country clubs, live in exclusive developments, belong to social and civic organizations, run for public office, become political insiders. in short, jews have joined the “white” class of western europeans to a large extent, although there is still some bias against jews in some quarters. why this dimensional shift in perception? population does not warrant it. there are approximately 5.22 million muslims living in the usa. contrast this with just under 6 million jews in the usa. therefore, the voting populations of jews and muslims are very similar. of course, we must take into account that approximately 19 percent of muslims in the usa are converts from other religions (mostly christian sects). we must also take into account that there are many other members of islam who are not arab: pakistanis, indonesians, persians, and many eastern european nationalities, to name a few. there are at least 1 million people who are us citizens who have identified themselves as arab in the last census. this number could be an underestimation, because there are many peoples from the middle east and northern africa who do not consider themselves arab, berbers and kurds for instance. now, let us look at another set of facts. there are 43 members of the u.s. congress who are jewish. there are 67 members of the us congress who are african american. there is one member (just elected) who is muslim. the nation of islam has failed to recognize what their semitic cousins, and african american brothers have already not only recognized but have taken advantage of: the american political process. additionally jewish and african american organizations have funneled money and support to non-jewish and non-african american politicians who are favorable to their views. islamic organizations have done this on an extremely small scale, but not enough to make a difference. therefore, african americans and americans of jewish descent have powerful voices in the legislative body of the us. the legislative body (congress) is the elected arm of the government that actually makes the laws of the land. additionally there are two members of the us supreme court who are jewish, and an african american. innumerable african americans and jewish americans also serve in state legislatures, state court systems, as governors of states, and in various other governmental capacities. unfortunately, there are very few muslims who do this. as a very wise (and muslim) nigerian friend once said, “nothing can be accomplished until you win the hearts and minds of the people.” winning the hearts and minds of americans (and much of the west) means that one must join them…not in their morality, or their religions, or their racial biases and perceptions…but in the process of their government. no matter what can be said about americans (pax americana e.g.), they are still passionate about their government and their politics. the sooner american members of islam (and other islamic citizens of other western countries) recognize this; the sooner things will begin to change. robert dailey texas, usa december 14/06 to top menu back to past feature editorial page  got freedom?  by fred dungan "i have been gagged all my life, and whether they are appreciated or not, america needs some honest men who dare to say what they think, not what they think people want them to think." - general george s. patton, jr. "the true character of liberty is independence, maintained by force." - voltaire to speak out against the way things were done in colonial times was to risk a charge of sedition. the american revolution changed all that, giving people the right to freedom of speech as guaranteed by the first amendment. in the 19th and early 20th centuries, americans said what they meant and meant what they said. it may not have made us loved - but we certainly gained the world's respect.  how soon we forget. in an age of "political correctness" it has almost become a sin to say something that might hurt someone else's feelings. have we become so soft and delicate that we suffer permanent injury from mere words? verbal abuse? give me a break. the wonderful thing about freedom of speech is that if someone - anyone, regardless of position and power-says something you don't like, you can let them have it with both verbal barrels. don't be intimidated. your opinion is just as good as that of the so-called experts. that is what democracy is all about. like anything else, freedom of speech soon atrophies if you don't employ it. god gave you a voice for a reason - to fail to use it to the best of your ability is an insult to the almighty. stress is a killer. quit stuffing it all inside. you don't need valium or prozac-the best medicine in the world is to let off a little steam. be yourself. stop worrying about unseen consequences. offending isn't a crime. not to get on someone when they truly deserve it often compounds the problem. how is someone supposed to know they are acting like a jerk if you don't tell them? sucking up is for sycophants, lackeys, and the insincere. have some dignity. make it on your own merits. cervantes, milton, and martin luther king, jr., went to jail for what they had to say. no such fate awaits you. the strongest prison is the one you build for yourself. break out now before it's too late. sometimes it's not what you say, but what you refuse to say. on july 20, 2001, novice writer vanessa leggett was found in contempt of court by a federal district court judge and sent to prison for an indefinite term for refusing to surrender a portion of her interviews for an upcoming book about the 1997 murder of texas socialite doris angleton, the wife of millionaire bookie robert angleton. the court believes that her notes will shed light on the shooting and subsequent jailhouse suicide of a suspect. vanessa is the victim of an entrenched system of justice that demands unquestioning obedience from the citizens it is supposed to serve regardless of mitigating circumstances. how ironic that a writer who is only tangentially connected to the crime is the only person serving time. she originally cooperated with the fbi and gave them information concerning the crime. but they wanted more and when she refused to become an undercover snitch, they resorted to strong-arm tactics. first they subpoenaed her and when that didn't intimidate her, they had her thrown in jail. and they did it in a sneaky way-the proceedings were closed to the public. the federal government has taken the ridiculous stance that vanessa isn't entitled to first amendment rights guaranteeing freedom of the press because she is a freelance journalist rather than a salaried employee. while it is true that leggett took an unconventional path to becoming a journalist-the texas native worked as a legal assistant, a private eye, and a part-time teacher of english and criminal justice before turning her attention to writing books-there is no law that prevents people from following the career path of their choice. the long and the short of it is that vanessa has been left to rot in jail because she had the guts to stand up to a bunch of bullies. in a decision dated august 17, 2001, the 5th u.s. circuit court of appeals in new orleans ruled that "the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering leggett incarcerated for contempt." so they think she failed to show the court respect, do they? it seems to me that it was the other way around. tossing a law abiding citizen into the slammer for refusing to compromise her integrity is about as rude and disrespectful as it is possible to get. writing from her 8 by 10 cinder block cell in downtown houston to newsweek, leggett describes her ordeal: i am not a gambler or a murderer. i am a 33-year-old college english teacher and freelance writer.  four years ago i began investigating the murder of houston socialite doris angleton in order to write a book about the case. i interviewed countless witnesses and chased leads in houston and in six states. doris was the wife of robert angleton, a bookie who took bets from houston's rich and powerful. he had friends (and clients) in high places, including the district attorney's office and the police department. doris filed for divorce in february of 1997, threatening to expose robert's illicit empire if he didn't share the millions he had stashed away. on april 16, police found her bullet-ridden body sprawled on her kitchen floor. robert immediately fingered his brother roger. when authorities arrested roger angleton in las vegas, he was carrying a briefcase with $64,000 in cash that had robert's fingerprints on it. they say roger's briefcase also revealed notes about the killing and a cassette tape of the two brothers plotting the murder. a houston grand jury charged both brothers with capital murder. the prosecutor's theory was simple: robert angleton paid his brother to kill his wife. over four months of extensive interviews with roger in jail, i gained intimate details of the case from this alleged triggerman. our sessions came to a halt when roger was found dead in his cell with a suicide note shortly before his brother's trial. the d.a.'s office insisted my interviews with roger made me an essential witness. i was subpoenaed, but never called on to testify.... i was stunned when the judge read the "not guilty" verdict. two years after the state-court acquittal, the fbi sought my help in its investigation of robert angleton for federal charges.... agents offered me a confidential-informant contract, which stipulated that i would provide them with my research in exchange for cash. i declined. my research was for a book, and not for sale to the fbi. the contract also gave the agency the power to control the dissemination of my research. i felt strongly that this infringed on my right to free speech. as i pushed the document back across the table to one agent, another agent handed me a federal-grand-jury subpoena.... complied, the feds would have had sole access to my work, preventing me from writing my book and substantiating my research for a publisher. more important, i would have violated the confidentiality agreements i had made with my sources.... the feds responded to my noncompliance by sending me to jail. i spend my days alone for the most part in my cell.... i can stand in line to use the phone, although sometimes the wait is so long it is turned off before it's my turn. the government listens to all our conversations anyhow. my mail...is read by the prison.  my new home is one block from enron field, home of the astros. i can glimpse the stadium from a narrow window in the prison day room. on weekdays my students are not far: the campus where i am scheduled to teach this fall is six blocks away. though all of this is around me, i'm living a lonely existence. my belief that i am doing the right thing buoys my morale. it's uncertain how much longer my government will keep me in prison..... but for the near future at least, maintaining my journalistic freedom will mean sacrificing my personal liberty.  in a letter addressed to attorney general john ashcroft, congresswoman sheila jackson lee urged that legget be released on bail because she "presents no risk of flight, nor does she pose any danger to society or to herself. her only 'crime' was to protect her confidential sources in keeping with the traditional notions of a free press." by refusing to release leggett our government is sending a message to other nations that we condone sending the press to prison when they show some spunk and refuse to go along to get along. throughout the western hemisphere, only three journalists are in prison for doing their jobs. leggett is one and the other two are in cuba (note: vanessa leggett was finally released from custody on january 5, 2002, one day after her attorney filed a motion with the u.s. supreme court to review her case). she had been incarcerated for 168 days and federal prosecutors were considering filing further charges against her. a journalist languishing in jail is a sure sign of an authoritarian regime. the justice department appears to be long on vengeance and short on civil liberties-a mean-spirited caricature of the image of fair and impartial justice that the united states endeavors to project to the rest of the world. on april 12, 2002, the pen american center whose ranks include many of the country's most prestigious writers, announced that vanessa leggett had won the pen first amendment award which includes a $25,000 prize. her fellow journalists cited her as "a powerful example of personal conviction and courage in the face of the most extreme pressure" and "a hero in the effort to preserve investigative freedom for writers and journalists in the u.s." three days later, a different panel of judges-the justices of the united states supreme court-put a damper on the celebration by refusing to consider ms. leggett's bid for a hearing on the constitutionality of the contempt charges and associated legal issues facing u.s. journalists. on august 1, 2006, josh wolf, a san francisco, california, freelance journalist and political activist was sent to federal prison where he could be held for nearly a year after refusing a grand jury's demand that he turn over unaired videotapes of a 2005 anarchist demonstration in which protesters clashed with san francisco police. u.s. district judge william alsup found josh wolf, 24 years of age, in contempt of court for failing to comply with a subpoena that the federal grand jury issued on february 1, 2006. alsup rejected wolf's claim that a reporter has a right to withhold unpublished material, and he said federal prosecutors were seeking the videos for a legitimate investigation into a possible crime-the attempted burning of a san francisco police car. wolf's attorney later speculated that the real reason the court wanted the videos was to intimidate and/or punish citizens who stood up against globalization and other questionable policies that the government was attempting to implement in the name of the american people. freedom of speech and freedom of the press amount to pretty much the same thing-the right to express yourself in any way you choose to whomever you want to communicate your opinions, ideas, and thoughts to-with one important exception: while everyone has a voice, not many have ready access to the media and fewer still own a printing press. this is a real shame, considering that a printing press, radio station, or television network amplifies a person's voice, enabling him/her to reach a wider audience. and reaching a wider audience is a sure-fire way to gain power. the rest of us, regardless of our individual education, experience, and/or common sense, are left hanging.  that's all changing. almost anyone can gain access to the internet. even if you can't afford a computer, you can go to your local public library and use one of its computers (the bill and melinda gates foundation donated two state-of-the-art computers to the branch library in my community-part of a nationwide effort to provide universal access). alluding to the value of the internet as a free and open forum, the u.s. supreme court recently observed that the worldwide web is the place where "any person can become a town crier with a voice that resonates farther than it could from any soapbox." but there are people who want to limit that voice. and the danger is that they are keeping it out of schools and libraries - the very institutions that we built to teach the principles of free speech found in the first amendment. the children's internet protection act (sneaked through congress on december 21, 2000 as part of an omnibus appropriations bill) requires all institutions receiving federal funds to install filtering software designed to block access to obscene content on their computer terminals. but the software is seriously flawed. a study by consumer reports found that "filters block harmless sites" because they have no way of determining "the context in which a word or phrase is used." even worse, they can lull responsible, caring adults into a false sense of security. no filtering technology available today can catch 100 percent of the garbage that is out there.  in my opinion, if we are going to censor anything - a recent informal msnbc opinion poll found that of 8344 people responding, 58 percent believed that government should not be in the business of censorship-the job is better performed by humans than machines. teachers and librarians aren't stupid. i think we can trust them to supervise the materials our children are viewing. and we always have the option of firing any that fail to live up to our expectations.  this was not congress' first attempt to censor the internet. in june 1997, the u.s. supreme court found it necessary to strike down an earlier law known as the communications decency act. the problem, of course, is that there are things on the internet that we don't want our children to see. the best way to regulate is to just say no. it is impossible to devise a software program or a law that can substitute for the traditional role of parents and educators. a federal court has ruled that a missouri school district violated a student's freedom of speech when it suspended him for criticizing his teachers on his personal web page. brandon beussink, 17, in conjunction with his sister, used his parents' computer to set up a personal web page on the internet in which he criticized woodland high school's official website and urged visitors to e-mail the school's principal. although he got rid of the webpage after receiving complaints from school officials, they went ahead and gave him a 10 day suspension and subsequently failed him for the semester as a result of his absences. in december 1998, u.s. district court judge rodney sippel acted to bar the woodland school district from restricting what students could post on the internet when at home. writing in summation, he affirmed that "dislike or being upset by the content of a student's speech is not an acceptable justification for limiting student speech." edwin darden, an attorney for the national school boards association believes that courts are performing "a balancing act" in weighing students' freedom of speech against school districts' need to maintain discipline. "these really are untested waters," he remarked. long ago, powerful people who desired to limit what others had to say on the internet figured out that the easiest way was to intimidate a commercial internet service provider (isp's connect people to the internet) into doing the dirty work for them. by pulling ads and organizing boycotts, they can exert leverage on isps to pull the plug on controversial websites. while the first amendment prevents the government from interfering with your freedom of speech, there is nothing to prevent a corporation or group that is giving you a bad time from writing to your isp and complaining about something you posted on the internet. in my experience, far too many isp's-especially those who know the value of good public relations - won't even bother to investigate the charges. if it is a choice between keeping you as a subscriber and turning a profit, you had best be prepared to kiss your website goodbye. one noteworthy example is that of a website dedicated to anne frank which was set up by a university student. an excellent site, it included pictures and quotes from the famous diary. being excerpts, they in no way violated copyright law. however, the organization which owns the rights to anne frank was able to get the university to shut down the site by lodging a complaint. this approach is far more effective than one might expect. my publisher, domhan books, began business in 1998 by advertising its e-books on the web via the free (in exchange for running a banner ad) services of a san francisco based isp. such were the host's policies, that the very first complaint generated prompt removal with no possible means of appeal. subdomains (hosted - usually at no charge - by large dot coms like fortune city, talk city, spree, and tripod) are particularly vulnerable. but even individuals and companies who go to the expense of purchasing their own domains are not completely safe. anonymity will not necessarily protect you. while services such as america online (aol) and hotmail permit you to set up fictitious accounts (or sometimes force you to do so because your name is not available), they either expose or dump you (aol did it to my son) as soon as anyone begins to throw dirt. aol has a reputation for disclosing user identities upon receipt of a subpoena, and, occasionally, even without one. in july 1996, aol (the largest isp in the world with more than six million subscribers), decided to ban messages written in spanish from its chat rooms and message boards. at the height of the 1996 olympics, aol's "grandstand forum" was deluged with messages written in spanish and portuguese-two languages which it claimed were not spoken by any of its monitoring staff. because aol didn't want to be responsible for messages over which it had no control, the company elected to delete them as soon as they appeared. however, aol continued to maintain chat rooms and message boards for its french and german subscribers. allegations of racism were rampant. "why did this rule apply only in the latin folders. why didn't it apply in the german or french rules?," inquired marcello rossetti, a frequent contributor to grandstand forum. "this rule should have applied across the boards...you're going to tell me that in the united states they can't find anyone who speaks spanish?...maybe in iceland, but not here." rossetti posted messages-in english-on grandstand forum outlining his case and asking other subscribers for their support, but his messages were erased by aol almost as quickly as they were written. it took a complaint to the american civil liberties union and a threat of legal action by the mexican american legal defense fund to make aol back down. on december 11, 1998, america online closed most of the 23 discussion groups in its irish heritage forum. according to aol, they were shut down due to profanity and personal attacks which were expressly prohibited under the terms of service contract with its subscribers. however, there were reports that aol's actions were precipitated by unionist subscribers who complained about the forum's pro-republican content. activist kate sheridan claimed that aol's actions were "politically motivated, intended to extinguish a growing firestorm of pro-republican news and comment in the forum." on december 28, 1998, aol re-instituted the irish heritage forum after erasing all previous postings. a notice was posted by an aol manager lecturing users on internet protocol. america online continues to garner criticism for over-policing its sites. official monitors roam the chat rooms and forums looking for forbidden words and phrases. the terms of service agreement signed by subscribers gives aol carte blanche to delete posts, shut down websites, and, following three violations, disconnect offenders. the fine print in the contract obligates subscribers to avoid "posting on or transmitting through the aol service any unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, profane, hateful, racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable material." the premise is that subscribers enter into these agreements voluntarily. however, the reality is that it is next to impossible to gain access to the internet without signing a terms of service agreement with an isp. in the wake of the terrorist attack on the world trade center and the pentagon, the patriot act and other legislation was enacted that placed severe limitations on civil liberties. on may 30, 2002, the department of justice announced new guidelines giving fbi agents greater latitude to monitor internet sites, libraries, and religious institutions without having to offer any evidence of potential criminal activity. under the new guidelines, field office directors are allowed to launch terrorism investigations and undercover probes against individuals and organizations without clearance from headquarters. according to a department of justice spokesperson the changes were made because "investigations of criminal groups were impeded by limits on scope, duration, and red tape." by red tape, one can assume the fbi is referring to constitutional requirements. these new guidelines, in effect, remove all reasonable control of the agency, giving them the authority to act pretty much as they please. under the guise of protecting the public from terrorism, internet service providers have moved to silence controversial viewpoints. in what appears to be a knee jerk reaction to 9-11, we have seen a record number of websites deleted from the internet by their isp's: a.. in february, 2003, the well known alternative news publication yellowtimes org was shut down without explanation by its hosting company after it published an article by an iraqi nuclear scientist. a.. in march 2002, angelfire closed a website devoted to discussing issues surrounding 750 florida detainees. a.. in october 2001, a fan discussion forum devoted to the popular alternative band rage against the machine was shutdown after the fbi purportedly called the internet service provider, saying there was too much anti-american rhetoric on that board. a.. allewislive.com, a website about al lewis, who played grandpa on the munsters television show, was shut down by web hosting provider hypervine without explanation. i belong to a military discussion group where the discipline exercised by the parent body is so strict that i once got kicked out for engaging in a dialogue concerning whether or not certain members of the armed forces were required to file state income tax returns (a subject not military enough, in the opinion of my superiors, to warrant posting). although i was later reinstated, our local chapter's president was subsequently expelled for expressing her views in private correspondence. this must sound draconian in the extreme. however, the regulations appear to enjoy the approval of the membership who support the parent non-profit organization through voluntary donations. for the free spirits who prefer to play without rules, there are thousands of newsgroups in hundreds of categories serving every imaginable subject from alt.binaries to zoom.quake (the software required to access these sites-free agent and microsoft's outlook 5.0 among others-are shareware programs which can be downloaded at no charge). be forewarned, however: un-moderated sites are frequently chaotic, disruptive, and/or downright repulsive. all but a handful are deserted archives frequented by outcasts and spam artists. the wild frontier of the infant worldwide web is rapidly disappearing. flaming diatribe has given way to intelligent, meaningful discussion. for the most part it is welcomed.  my chief gripe with cnn.com, msnbc, and similar online media outlets is that they are rapidly becoming as fearful of offending the status quo as traditional print and broadcast sources. it took a matt drudge to unveil the clinton-lewinsky scandal. while a good case could be made for not airing such trash in public, the right of the public to get wind of potential corruption and abuse of authority is indisputably paramount. democracy functions best in an atmosphere of tolerance where there are minimum restrictions placed on the free exchange of information. having been treated as a commodity in the labor market for more than 30 years, afraid to speak out lest i be terminated by my employer since i did not possess the means to do so effectively, i can readily testify that the internet and its interactive offshoots (e-mail, message boards, newsgroups, forums, etcetera) are effecting the liberation of the common man such as no amount of do-goodism and liberal sentiments could ever accomplish. for the price of a computer (much less than that of a model t in henry ford's heyday), anyone can put the pedal to the metal on the information superhighway, escaping the stultifying confines of modern existence, and be transported to a universe of the mind that knows no boundaries. bash the military-industrial complex as one might - and, in truth, i have done my share-it should be remembered that the pentagon gave us the internet. not since the marshal plan has there been such an outbreak of altruism. i invite you, the reader, to join me at http://www.fdungan.com and tell me what you think needs to be done to further ensure freedom of expression on the internet. you can save a 37 cent stamp by writing me at fdungan@fdungan.com. this article is an excerpt from chapter 16 of bushwhacked by fred dungan.   to top menu back to past feature editorial page  copyright © 2006 - 2007  the national free press all rights reserved.

Acceuil

suivante

the national free press - past feature editorial  Bulletin Board  Das aktuelle Kinoprogramm - Filmdatenbank  MVlib - Action movies  Magyar Nemzeti Filmarchívum  THE SALARIES THREAD :: Players and coaches - Page 3 - BigSoccer  Schnauzer page  Chicago Reader The Reader's Guide to the Chicago International ...  Mirren MAD - Ex Saints: Christopher Wreh  November 2007  The Four Word Film Review  heroism DVD Movies Library,Download in DVD, DivX, iPod quality ...  Öğretmenleri tehdit ettiler [ Haber Sitesi EnSonHaber.Com ...  Charles Leski Auctions - Autographs - Auction 293  John Ford: A Short Bibliography of Materials in the UC Berkeley ...  2007 August « Frontier Former Editor  Brown Alumni Magazine - Class Notes - 1980  MAGIJA  Festival  blue page confidential University of Waterloo SENA TE Notice of ...  PC 16.2-03 Yang  MySpace.com - UVE - 85 - Male - Madrid, ES - www.myspace.com/djuve  The Charley Project: Alphabetical Indexes: A through E  News Indexed by Topic - COGNITIVE SCIENCE ARCHIVE  index_filmy Mi-My  Thrillville , la suite en images par Jeuxvideo.fr  La Passione di Cristo  San Francisco Giftcenter and Jewelrymart  Årbog 2004  DVDventas.com  DVDventas.com  Round 11  Category - dvdqt  Living thing  TÊTU  TITRES EN W  bardachreports  cantilangnon  The Salvia divinorum Research and Information Center  Championnat de France espoirs difficulté 2007 Le10/07/07 àCHAMONIX ...  USCITE in DVD - Maggio 2006  COMICON.com: R.I.P. IBOOKS BYRON PREISS  Kanguhru's Spirit  Resist 13  Driver Database - keeping track of race results and statistics  2002-03 Theatre Season Reviews  DVDcollection  Bulletin 44.qxp  Saatchi Online - Blog On News, Views, Diaries, Photo-Journals  Dream Factory: Happy 2nd Anniversary To The Valley Patriot!  Qigong Institute  Fall '03 Alumni Newsletter  And thus, the insanity begins!  Biographie de Asia Argento  Biographie de Christian Clavier  Liste des stars vues au 56e Festival de Cannes  Buy Kabbalah Yoga Restoring Your Soul to Wholeness DVD $20.29 ...  Just Like Heaven: Definition and Much More from Answers.com  The Tortilla Curtain film movie trailer review at The Z Review  Ultimate source of Video reviews and legal downloads  Ultimate source of Video reviews and legal downloads