The Rag Blog

Dear Peter Pace,

As a lesbian, I often turn, in my quest for moral guidance, to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. You, Peter Pace, being Chairman of the JCS, are to me a virtual guru of ethical enlightenment! So, naturally, I was struck by your recent Chicago Tribune interview, in which you said, “I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts.”

At first, your words threw me into a panic of denial. Does this mean, I asked myself, that I am basically good, and bad only when I am performing acts of a homosexual nature? What if there were more than two individuals getting it homosexually on – if I were part of an orgy of, say, 3 to 11,847 people – would I be less immoral? And what if I joined the Army and shot a lot of Iraqi insurgents, along with a few innocent civilians – would Peter Pace at last condone me?

Then I stopped bargaining with myself. I realized that you, Peter Pace, are right. Just as I have accepted the fact of my homosexuality, I now must accept the fact that I am morally depraved. Thank you for informing me of my innate evil. I will try to keep this in mind the next time I engage in acts of sordid, sin-soaked muff diving with my homosexual girlfriend.

I shall now endeavor to go on with my life, with perhaps slightly lower self-esteem, but also with joy in the knowledge that that you and I share a common humanity. For you, too, Peter Pace, have stood alone as an outcast, scorned and snickered at by your peers. In 2005, you had the guts to stand up to then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, to argue that it was the duty of American troops to prevent torture. Wow. It’s one thing to have humanitarian (or, “humo”) tendencies – but actually opposing torture in this Administration must make you feel like some noncom Army fag with his head stuffed into a barracks toilet.

Speaking of epithets, did you hear that, at the Conservative Political Action Conference, pundit Ann Coulter called Presidential hopeful John Edwards a “faggot”? I’m sure she meant that in a good way. In fact, in a recent appearance on “Hannity and Colmes,” Ann explained that her use of the word “isn’t offensive to gays; it has nothing to do with gays.”

Ann must mean that she sees John Edwards not as a homosexual, but as an annoying, effete, wussy kind of guy – a guy who possibly wouldn’t like to be tortured. After all, Ann is unwavering in her anti-wuss position, and has made her name with such actual, alpha-femme statements as: “I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantánamo.”

Ann is not pretty when she’s mad. So I worry, Peter Pace. I worry that Ann Coulter will find out about your stance against torture and call you, at some nationally-televised gathering, a “faggot.” I mean, we homosexuals can take it when we’re called names, but you people are more delicate. It’s good, then, that you reclaimed the moral high ground with your defense of the use of white phosphorous – an incendiary chemical that burns down to the bone when exposed to oxygen – in flushing out insurgents during the American siege on Fallujah. “It is a legitimate tool of the military,” you said.

I guess “legitimate,” here, is a code word for “moral.” Which is a code word for “heterosexual.” Which is the preferred libidinal default of you and God and Ann Coulter and all good people. It is natural, then, that when we meet a person, we assume she or he is heterosexual – or “moral” – unless, of course, we ask and are then told that the person we have just met is a godlessly debauched queer.

So, given that there are, according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, approximately 65,000 gay men and lesbians serving in our military, your endorsement of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy makes perfect sense. I feel truly proud, truly grateful, knowing that none of our soldiers who caused the deaths of at least 60,411 (and counting) Iraqi civilians were immoral enough to admit that they were queer.

Perhaps, in order for us all to sleep nights, Peter Pace, we Americans – straight and gay – should apply the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy to you, as well. For instance, we won’t ask you just what the military did at Fallujah and other places in Iraq, and you won’t tell us, OK? It’s one way of maintaining our national morality at its current level.

Well, gotta go. My girlfriend wants to have sex again. This time, she’s asked me to dress up as Ann Coulter. As if that could wash away the stain…

We’ve been complaining about the top-down bureaucratic agenda of the colonizers. Do we have something to replace it? Yes we do. It’s called the “Kaianerehkowa/Great Law of Peace” [the constitution of the Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy].

Our philosophy can be used to build a society based on peace, power and righteousness. These words have meanings that are deeply rooted in our culture and completely different from the kinds of expectations they raise among the colonized. Our understanding of these concepts has nothing in common with the command and obedience model of predatory capitalism or the exploitation of ordinary people for the power and profit of a few. The new (colonial) world order is opposite to our way of life based on the principles of fully informed consent and consensus in all our relationships.

Stephen Lendman, in CounterCurrent.org, describes how Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has “constructed socialism from below”, built “from the base” in the communities.” He has found a way to rebuild Venezuelan society. He wants a coalition of smaller parties whose power comes from the communities.

Chavez thinks this is the way democracy should work. A lot of ordinary people agree.

There are presently 16,000 regional federations of Communal Councils organized across the country that deal with local issues. Each represent 200 to 400 families. That number is expected to grow to 21,000 councils by the end of 2007. This new state is driven by the same basic philosophy of egalitarian human respect that underlies the Kaianerehkowa.

A decentralized government will distribute billions of dollars to these Councils. If the people so chose, billions can be put into a “National Development Fund.” Yellow journalism has been attacking this thinking. They put fear into people’s minds, calling it “nationalization”, which is a dirty word to capitalists and colonialists. Capitalism is a one way road for the privileged few. Development of democratic programs look threatening to those who are at the top of the old hierarchal heap.

As we assert our sovereignty, we have lots to think about. What can we Onkwehonwe do with all our land and resources and all the squatters who are here? The land belongs to us and our future generations. It always will. All our resource revenues can be used to compensate the colonists fairly. The rest can be put towards rebuilding a safe and healthy environment.

U.S., Canada and Mexico will, of course, become irrelevant. These cancerous organizations don’t belong. They are trying to kill the hosts. That’s us. Then they’ll kill everybody else! Where will that leave them?

The old hierarchies will cling to their delusional powers. They will keep their guns pointed at us and try to invent more lethal weapons. We’ll have to bring out the feathers and start tickling them so they can let down their defenses and so they can grab a shovel and take part. If they don’t, we might have to ask them to leave. Their hysterical megalomania is getting them involved in serious violations of international accords. If they’re not careful, they could be declared persona non grata worldwide.

With all the money from our land and resources, we could buy out the big corporations so that we have the major shares, say 40%, as Chavez is doing. The rest can be joint ventures with us. In other words, we want all these companies under the control of the people. The colonists can have shares after we take everything out of private control.

The people must control the energy sector, including oil production. Private investors can still play a role. But it will be based on joint ventures that include the people as decision makers, not just consumers.

The money should be put back into our hands, out of the hands of private for-profit bankers. We would invest it into worthwhile projects that restore and protect the land so that the coming generations can be healthy, happy and prosperous. The days of genocide and exploitation are over. We must benefit from our resource revenues and other businesses that provide essential services like public utilities. Clean drinking water and fresh air to breathe would be top priorities.

It goes without saying that Indian Affairs terrorism has to go. There is no excuse for that organization to exist. Its very existence is founded on a misinterpretation of the BNA Act, the constitution of Canada. Britain could only give Canada the authority to negotiate with us. There is no authority under the BNA Act, under international law, or under any treaty to make laws for us.

We have to dismantle the “Tower of Terror” in Hull. Communal power at the grass roots will be the order of the day. Kaianerehkowa can make this happen and can be the start of a real egalitarian and humanistic society.

All social structures will have to be reorganized. Selections of local officials, the economy, finance, banking, transportation, security, public safety and policies related to energy are part of this. There is no need for a top heavy governmental structure when everyone takes responsibility at all levels.

The current colonial bureaucracy will have to be dismantled. Corruption and greed are major problems. They are products of hierarchy. They will naturally disappear when egalitarian democratic structures are put in place.

The changes needed aren’t such a big deal. As long as existing representatives are carrying out the will of the people, they may remain in their positions.

All procedures and decision-making must be public and the work of all administrative officials will be subject to constant review. They have to look out for the people and their directions, instead of looking up to the artificial bosses. They can be removed from office if they do not follow the people’s directions or heed our warnings. All must be given the experience of being a representative so that we can all learn how to help the people. It is important for everyone to learn how difficult it is to serve.

Social justice and economic independence must be based on equitable distribution of national wealth. Education is most important. The habit of censorship has to end. Racism must be eliminated from all school curricula. All students need to learn our points of view on history. They have to know what really happened to us. They have to know that this land belongs to us and our future generations. Science and technology has to benefit all of the people. So must health, the environment, biodiversity, industry, quality of life and security. We have to take up our responsibility and take charge of our own lives.

Social issues can and must be resolved through consensus. We will have to rethink the need for a judiciary. We cannot give anyone power to harm civil or human rights of our people or even of our opponents. Resources must be taken care of, not exploited. The products of the land must be distributed fairly. No one will become desperate enough to want to sell their soul to the devil.

Our young people have a job to do. They can be part of the first wave of reeducation. Every person has a responsibility throughout their lives to educate the people they meet and the coming generations.

Our way is to manage our own relations with all other countries. The colonial states are squatting on our land. They do not represent us.

The people they brought here do not need to fear us. We will not expropriate private property. Right of occupancy can be given to people. The land will always belong as it always has to the future generations of the Onkwehonwe.

We are hoping that the last days of the colonial system are at hand. Democracy and colonialism cannot coexist. Colonialism is a military or civilian “dictatorship” derived from a combination of isolation, overarching greed and an attempt to pull local and global forces together to control all the people and the resources of the world.

Savage capitalism is in its death throes. It is fighting to stay alive. Because of this, it’s becoming more and more vicious. It is important for everyone to stay grounded at this time. We are all working for each other and for the future generations.

The colonial nations are on the tipping edge of fascism. They combine elements of corporatism, patriotism, nationalism and the delusion of an Almighty-directed mission. It requires an iron-fisted militarist agenda with thugs like “Homeland Security” illegally spying on everyone. In this system everything is for sale to the few who can pay.

Colonialism is out of date, illegal and so yesterday. No longer will the armies oppress and kill for the key resources, markets and cheap labor where “might makes right” and any difference of opinion will not be tolerated.

Our youth are precious to us. The Los Angeles Times did a story about “A wildly successful Venezuelan program that makes musical instruments and training available, free of charge, to all children.” This gives children something constructive to do. Unlike the U.S. model that Canada copies, the kids are exercising their minds instead of exercising their thumbs playing video games.

Instead of a make-work program for police and social workers who try to slot kids into a system of jail and imprisonment, Chavez created a musical education program called “El Sistema.” 500,000 children from all strata of society get training at more than 120 centers around the country. More than 200 youth orchestras have been created. Training in music is known to develop math skills in the young to prepare them later for professional training. There’s no problem keeping guns out of the kids’ hands. They’re too busy making music. That Chavez knows what he is doing.

Instead of punishing youth, we inspire them. As the author, Paul Cummins, put it, “We reap what we sow, and we don’t harvest what we don’t plant.”

The Chavez approach is actually much less expensive than the multi-billion dollar state-sponsored iron-fisted prison system and militarist Homeland Security “thuggery.”

Another savage effect of the capitalist hierarchy is homelessness. One-way wealth distribution siphons everything upwards except for a few crumbs that are handed to the middle class while nothing goes to the millions on the bottom who are the most in need. They all hope we will just go away. We won’t. Neither will our needs. We come from a participatory tradition which can eliminate the greedy fantasies of colonialism.

Many who come from repressive societies are unable to see a bottom-up model of relationships. We have shown that we always resisted enslavement.

Free expression is part of an open democratic society. No more secrecy or lies. No more corporate media support for capitalists and colonial states. No more thought-control police to mock our efforts at free expression which is vital to a healthy transition from tyranny to democracy. The “thought police” don’t want us to say what is on our minds. They don’t want us to think. We can and will do it because the Kaianerehkowa mandates it. People in the far south of the border are trying to get back on the natural path that has always been there, for us and for everyone. This can be done without a war and without global interference.

An earlier version of this article was published on Mohawk Nation News on February 26th 2007.–Socialist Voice

Kahentinetha Horn is a longtime indigenous rights activist from the Mohawk Nation. She was involved in the 1962 Conference on Indian Poverty in Washington D.C., the blocking of the International Bridge at Akwesasne in 1968, and other indigenous rights campaigns.

In the summer of 1990, she was behind the Canadian Army razor wires that surrounded the Mohawk compound in Kanehsatake. This was the historic Mohawk land rights struggle that became known as the “Oka Crisis.” After almost 20 years of service, Kahentinetha was fired by the Department of Indian Affairs for her involvement there.

More recently Kahentinetha has been involved with the Kahnawake Elders Council, and was active at the Six Nations Land reclamation near Caledonia, Ontario, publishing and distributing almost daily accounts of the developments there.

Note from “Firefly” – Unbelievable but true! These organic farmers in Bukidnon, Philippines are being EVICTED by a state owned university so the rice planted land can be leased to a CORPORATION to promote chemicalized farming!!!

ORGANIC farmers need the support of all human beings who are against the toxic chemicalized environment that PROFIT DRIVEN corporations are fast tracking into this globalized world.

Firefly
Tawo Seed Carrier
POB 1456
South Pasadena, CA 91031

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE RICE FARMING COMMUNITY TO DEFY EVICTION
By Ilang-Ilang D. Quijano

Only defiance will turn these rice fields gold.

A rice farming community in the province of Bukidnon, Southern Philippines is once again facing eviction from a 400-hectare land they have long struggled to till. But now they have more to lose than 20 years ago, when a state-owned university first tried, unsuccessfully, to take away their land.

Six hundred farming families in the municipality of Magalang do not simply cultivate rice fields: they are in control of a thriving sustainable agriculture (SA) farm and a community seedbank with hundreds of traditional rice varieties (TRVs) that have disappeared elsewhere in the country.

Yet the significance of this courageous leap from chemical-dependent rice farming to SA is lost on the Central Mindanao University (CMU), which wants to lease the land to big agri-businesses.

Harassment comeback

Last March 28, more than 20 security agents of CMU, at gunpoint, prevented farmers from working the fields. They confiscated several farming tools and machines, including a small tractor.

“CMU’s harassment is making a comeback. But we have already made a decision. We will not leave our lands. If we do not plant rice, what will our families eat?” said Jun Macote, chairperson of Buffalo-Tamaraw-Limus (BLT), a farmers association affiliated with Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP) or Peasant Movement of the Philippines.

Macote came to Manila to participate in Pesticide Action Network’s Week of Rice Action culmination events and to relate to other farmers and the international community their community’s SA practice and current land problem.

Failed land reform program

The BLT farmers experience is a classic case of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program’s (CARP) failure to redistribute land to poor farmers and wrest it from the control of landlords and agri-businesses.

In 1987, the farmers, mostly former CMU employees, were awarded Certificate of Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs) by the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). The CLOAs were issued under CARP, implemented by former president Corazon Aquino after the People Power uprising that toppled the Marcos dictatorship.

The CMU brought the case to the Court of Appeals in 1991, and lost. It elevated the case to the Supreme Court, which in 1992 overturned the lower court’s decision and ruled in favor of CMU on the grounds that land use “for educational purposes” were among CARP’s many exemptions. The farmers’ CLOAs were subsequently revoked.

But the farmers defied the Supreme Court and refused to vacate the land and asserted their rights through collective and militant struggle, even when these led to direct confrontations with CMU’s security agents.

In 2001, the Congressional Committee on Agrarian Reform visited the community to help settle the land dispute. The committee declared it a “stable area” and saw no reason to take the land away from the farmers.

Editorial Note: Israel’s foray into Lebanon last year resulted a resounding military defeat for the Zionist state. According to a confidential French Foreign Office report, seen by Brian Harring, far from losing from 116 to 120 men, as it claims, IDF losses totalled 2300 – Ranimar

Author’s Note: On a business trip to Moscow for a conference with my publishers, I stopped in Paris for four days for business, research and sightseeing. During that time, one of my French friends in their Foreign Office gave me a copy of an official report and summary of the causes, actions and losses of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 2006. This document runs to over three hundred pages and is complete with charts, graphs and many photographs. Here is a translation and condensation of that report for your interest. – Brian Harring

Subject: Causes of the attack

Both the State of Israel and the United States viewed Syria as a potentially dangerous enemy. Joint intelligence indicated that Syria was a strong supporter of the Hezbollah Shiite paramilitary group. Israel had planned a punitive military operation into Lebanon both to clip Hezbollah’s wings and send a strong message to Syria to cease and desist supplying arms and money to the anti-Israel group. Because of its involvement in Iraq, the United States indicated it would be unable to supply any ground troops but would certainly supply any kind of weapon, to include bombs, cluster bombs and ammunition for this projected operation.

A casus belli was created by the Israeli Mossad’s assassination of Rafik Haarri, a popular Lebanese politician and subsequent disinformation promulgated and instigated by both Israel and the United States blamed Syria for the killing.

The IDF was being supplied faulty and misleading intelligence information, apparently originating from Russian sources, that gave misinformation about Hezbollah positions and strengths and therefore the initial planning was badly flawed.

In full concert with the American president, the IDF launched its brutal and murderous attack on July 12, 2006 and continued unabated until the Hezbollah inflicted so many serious casualties on the Israeli forces and also on the civilian population of Israel, that their government frantically demanded that the White House force a cease fire through the United Nations. This was done for Israel on August 14, 2007 and the last act of this murderous and unprovoked assault was when Israel removed their naval blockade of Lebanese ports.

The contrived incident that launched the Israeli attack was an alleged attack by Hezbollah into Israeli territory where they were alleged to have ‘kidnapped” two Israeli soldiers and subsequently launched a rocket attack to cover their retreat.

The conflict killed over six thousand people, most of whom were Lebanese, severely damaged Lebanese infrastructure, displaced 700,000-915,000 Lebanese, and 300,000-500,000 Israelis, and disrupted normal life across all of Lebanon and northern Israel. Even after the ceasefire, much of Southern Lebanon remained uninhabitable due to unexploded cluster bombs. As of 1 December 2006, an estimated 200,000 Lebanese remained internally displaced or refugees

During the campaign Israel’s Air Force flew more than 12,000 combat missions, its Navy fired 2,500 shells, and its Army fired over 100,000 shells. Large parts of the Lebanese civilian infrastructure were destroyed, including 400 miles of roads, 73 bridges, and 31 other targets such as Beirut International Airport, ports, water and sewage treatment plants, electrical facilities, 25 fuel stations, 900 commercial structures, up to 350 schools and two hospitals, and 15,000 homes. Some 130,000 more homes were damaged.

Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz ordered commanders to prepare civil defense plans. One million Israelis had to stay near or in bomb shelters or security rooms, with some 250,000 civilians evacuating the north and relocating to other areas of the country.

On 26 July 2006 Israeli forces attacked and destroyed an UN observer post. Described as a nondeliberate attack by Israel, the post was shelled for hours before being bombed. UN forces made repeated calls to alert Israeli forces of the danger to the UN observers, all four of whom were killed. Rescuers were shelled as they attempted to reach the post. According to an e-mail sent earlier by one of the UN observers killed in the attack, there had been numerous occasions on a daily basis where the post had come under fire from both Israeli artillery and bombing. The UN observer reportedly wrote that previous Israeli bombing near the post had not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to “tactical necessity,” military jargon which retired Canadian Major General Lewis MacKenzie later interpreted as indicating that Israeli strikes were aimed at Hezbollah targets extremely close to the post.

On 27 July 2006 Hezbollah ambushed the Israeli forces in Bint Jbeil and killed eighteen soldiers. Israel claimed, after this event, that it also inflicted heavy losses on Hezbollah.

On 28 July 2006 Israeli paratroopers killed 5 of Hezbollah’s commando elite in Bint Jbeil. In total, the IDF claimed that 80 fighters were killed in the battles at Bint Jbeil. Hezbollah sources, coupled with International Red Cross figures place the Hexbollah total at 7 dead and 129 non-combattant Lebanese civilian deaths.

On 30 July 2006 Israeli airstrikes hit an apartment building in Qana, killing at least 65 civilians, of which 28 were children, with 25 more missing. The airstrike was widely condemned.

WASHINGTON, March 29 (UPI) — Hassan Jumaa Awad wants Iraq’s oil to stay under state control, and the unionists, who have long worked the rigs, to be supported in developing the national resource. But this is no request from the president of the Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions.

It’s a demand.

“Since we are working to make progress in production, we need a real participation in all the laws that are related to the oil policy,” Awad told United Press International, speaking on his mobile phone from the southern port city of Basra. “We are the sons of this sector and we have the management and technical capability and we have the knowledge on all the oil fields.”

The IFOU represents more than 26,000 workers organized under various unions in the oil-rich southern and northern areas of Iraq. Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, together they’ve operated Iraq’s oil sector before, during and after Saddam Hussein. Their rights to officially unionize are still denied under a 1978 Saddam law, one of a few of the former president’s laws the U.S. occupation and the Iraqi Parliament upheld.

Iraq’s oil production is still around 2 million barrels per day, down from the 2.6 million bpd before the war, but far below its potential since most of its 115 billion barrels of reserves are untapped. Investment in the world’s third-largest oil market is hampered by conditions past and present, and an unknown future.

Saddam pushed certain oilfields too hard while neglecting maintenance and new technologies. The sector was hit with war starting in 2003, and now regular sabotage and a shortage of electricity.

Kurdish and central government negotiators reached a deal last month on the framework for a law governing Iraq’s oil. Details on ownership rights and revenue sharing are still far from finalized. The Iraq National Oil Co. would restart but compete with foreign oil companies, who could win contracts giving them partial ownership of the respective fields.

INOC “should have full privileges,” Awad said, “and we don’t agree on the production partnership.”

Iraq’s oil has been nationalized for four decades. Iraqis view it with a pride of ownership, something the law would reduce if the contract language allowing for foreign ownership stands.

“We think that to reserve sovereignty of Iraq is to be able to control the oil wealth,” Awad said, and foreign investment should be limited to technical assistance. “I wish if the foreign companies were to come into Iraq, that they help us,” Awad said. “Not to suck the blood of the Iraqi people.”

The unions were kept in the dark, as were most members of Iraq’s parliament, until the draft law was leaked to the media. Even then it was still out the reach of most of Iraq’s citizens.

I have been asked to comment on the question of “whether President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela poses a threat to regional stability and how his critics, including the Bush administration, should respond.” This is an easy one.

One may agree or disagree with any of President Chavez’s policies or statements, but the idea of him or his government posing a threat to regional stability is ridiculous. In fact, a far more reasonable argument can be made that his government has contributed to stabilizing the region.

It has done so by using its $50 billion dollars of foreign exchange reserves to act as a lender of last resort, and provide other forms of financial aid to countries throughout the region. This is what the International Monetary Fund was alleged to have done in the past but almost never did. It is especially important now that Latin America is going through a major historical transition, where governments of the left now preside over about half of the population of the region.

Latin America is emerging from a long period of failed economic reform policies, known as “neoliberalism” there, which resulted in the worst economic growth performance in more than 100 years. From 1980-2000, regional GDP (gross domestic product) per capita grew by just 9 percent, and another 4 percent for 2000-2005. By comparison, it grew by 82 percent in just the two decades from 1960-1980. As a result of the unprecedented growth failure of the last 25 years, voters have demanded change in a number of countries, including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Uruguay.

Venezuela has loaned more than $3 billion to Argentina, and has loaned or committed hundreds of millions of dollars to Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and other countries. It also provides subsidized credit for oil to the countries of the Caribbean, through its PetroCaribe program, and provided many other forms of aid to neighboring countries. These resources are provided without policy conditions attached – unlike most other multilateral (IMF, World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank) and bilateral aid. By providing these resources, Venezuela is helping other countries to bring their policies more in line with what voters have demanded, and greatly reducing the threat of economic crises in the process of doing so.

For example, before the Nicaraguan elections last November, US government officials made many threats to the voters of that country that if they elected Daniel Ortega, they would suffer greatly from cutoffs of loans, aid, and even the remittances that many Nicaraguans depend upon from their relatives in the United States. None of these threats have been carried out. This is partly because Washington knows it would be useless and counterproductive to do so, since Nicaragua would simply replace US-controlled funding sources with more borrowing from Venezuela. The same is true for Bolivia, which has vastly increased its hydrocarbon revenues, and is in a stronger bargaining position knowing that it has an international lender that will not try to interfere with its domestic political agenda. The new progressive president of Ecuador, who faces a number of important political battles to deliver on his promises of governmental reform, pro-poor and pro-development policies, is also strengthened by having Venezuela as a lender. When the Argentine government decided to say goodbye to the IMF in January of 2006 by paying off their remaining $9.9 billion in debt, Venezuela’s loan of $2.5 billion helped that government to avoid pushing its reserves down to dangerously low levels.

In all of these cases and more, Venezuela’s financial support is helping other governments to deliver on their promises to their own voters, thereby contributing not only to stability but to the strengthening of democracy in the region. Washington-sponsored aid, by contrast, has often had the opposite effect – provoking “IMF riots,” and sometimes economic crises (e.g. the 1998-2002 Argentine depression), by trying to impose policies that were deeply unpopular and, as we now know, economically flawed.

No other government in the region accepts the Bush Administration’s charge that Chavez is a threat to regional stability – not even President Alvaro Uribe of Colombia, which shares a 1300 mile conflict-ridden border with Venezuela. When Uribe met with members of the US Congress last year, he refused to criticize Chavez – reportedly even in private. The vast majority of Latin American governments also supported Venezuela’s bid for the UN Security Council last year, even after he called President Bush “the Devil” at the UN, and despite all the pressure that the United States – whose economy is 67 times the size of Venezuela’s – brought to bear on them.

None of the Democratic Contenders Has Called for the Closure of the Guantanamo Prison

Guantanamo is awash in confessions these days. Walid Mohammad bin Attash claims to have blown up the USS Cole. Khalid Sheik Mohammed confessed to planning 9/11, the bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, and night clubs in Bali. He also confessed to killing of Daniel Pearl and perhaps Anna Nicole Smith, too.

An Australian prisoner, David Hicks, has confessed to terrorist activity. He spent 5 years at Guantanamo and recently pleaded guilty to providing material support for terrorism, which wasn’t even against U.S. law until October 2006. The only way for him to return home was to confess. He also had to sign an agreement denying his previous statements that he had been tortured. He had to promise not to sue the U.S. government, make any money from telling the story of his ordeal, or talk to the media for at least one year.

These confessions are not taken seriously by any intelligent people in this country and they are certainly not taken seriously by anyone outside of it. Even the namby pamby Congressional actions on Iraq are sending the Bushites into a frenzy of show trials to justify waging endless war on the rest of humanity. The confessions will surely be repeated when the bombing of Iran begins.

Not only are these military tribunals a travesty and a great injustice to the people involved, but they have doomed our country. The hatred that spawned the 9/11 attacks has only grown with time. Now all Americans have bulls eyes on their heads because of the evil people who run this government.

There have been many brave efforts to stop this evil doing, but so far it has come to naught. U.S. courts have dismissed lawsuits, Congress enabled the administration by approving the kangaroo court system. Truth tellers like Democratic Senator Richard Durbin are sent to the wood shed by their own party for rightly comparing Guantanamo to a Nazi prison.

David Hicks is a white Australian who converted to Islam and lived in Afghanistan in 2001. He has been held for five years and was denied the most basic constitutional rights that he would have enjoyed in Australia or the United States. His family made his case a cause celebre in his country and forced his Bush-loving prime minister, John Howard, to negotiate for his release.

Howard is facing a tough election in November, so he doesn’t want Hicks mucking things up by telling his harrowing tales. Get him out but don’t let him talk until a more opportune time. So the man who was called terror enemy number one and originally threatened with a 20 year sentence will now be allowed to serve nine months in his native Australia.

Even if America survives until November 2008 and manages to get the Republicans out of the White House, none of the Democratic front runners has said anything about closing Gitmo and using the court system that successfully tried terror suspects before Bush came to office. Barack Obama thinks military courts are better.

“I’ve heard, for example, the argument that it should be military courts, and not federal judges, who should make decisions on these detainees. I actually agree with that. The problem is that the structure of the military proceedings has been poorly thought through.”

Senator Smarty Pants also predicted that terror suspects would have counsel and be able to present evidence on their behalf.

“He (Khalid Mohammed) will have counsel, he will be able to present evidence, and he will be able to rebut the Government’s case. The feeling is that he is guilty of a war crime and to do otherwise might violate some of our agreements under the Geneva Conventions. I think that is good, that we are going to provide him with some procedure and process.”

It is news to me that guilt of war crimes is determined by a Senator’s feelings. No one at Gitmo checked with the superstar media darling before they kept Khalid Sheikh Mohammed from calling witnesses or having attorneys present. Hillary Clinton, in her typical fear of saying anything of substance, has said nothing about the process.

There will be no respite from the destruction of the Constitution and the dismissal of International Law followed by the rest of the world. We are in great danger from our own government and that danger will not lessen after the inauguration of a new president in January of 2009.

WASHINGTON (April 4) – President Bush named Republican fundraiser Sam Fox as U.S. ambassador to Belgium on Wednesday, using a maneuver that allowed him to bypass Congress, where Democrats had derailed Fox’s nomination.

The appointment, made while lawmakers were out of town on spring break, prompted angry rebukes from Democrats, who said Bush’s action may even be illegal.

Democrats had denounced Fox for his donation to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth during the 2004 presidential campaign. The group’s TV ads, which claimed that Sen. John Kerry exaggerated his military record in Vietnam, were viewed as a major factor in the Massachusetts Democrat ‘s election loss.

Recognizing Fox did not have the votes to obtain Senate confirmation in the Foreign Relations Committee, Bush withdrew the nomination last week. On Wednesday, with the Senate on a one-week break, the president used his power to make recess appointments to put Fox in the job without Senate confirmation.

This means Fox can remain ambassador until the end of the next session of Congress, effectively through the end of the Bush presidency.