Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston

From Richard Ackland's article in SMH and reprinted at Common Dreams, If the Law Doesn't Suit,...:

... The Bush regime's position is that the President should have the power to arrest and indefinitely hold prisoner anyone, anywhere in the world, without charge and without judicial review. The view from Washington is that checks and balances are for girly-boys. Saddam would approve.

From Precision killing in Iraq:

... As a consequence, when US F-14s, helicopter gunships or other types of aircraft arrive, their targets are larger and more dispersed. Liquidating guerrillas can then require the "precise" leveling of several buildings (with "collateral damage"), or even a whole city block. Instead of 100 cannon rounds and one 500-pound (227-kilogram) bomb, such an attack can (and often does) involve several thousand cannon rounds and a combination of 500- and 2,000-pound (907kg) bombs. ...

From Revenge of the Mutt People by Joe Bageant:

... Meanwhile, their kids do the same as they did. Go uneducated. Sometimes I walk the street on which I grew up. And when I look around I see the same kinds of kids as ever. They are all fatter, but they are the same cigarette-smoking, know-nothing white punks that I was, the tough sons and daughters of the unwashed. In my old neighborhood where over one quarter of adults do not have a high school diploma, there are lots of yellow ribbons in the windows, Marine Corps and Army parent's icons on the porches and scrubby lawns, evidence enough that you do not need an education to contribute something of value the far-flung perimeter of our expanding empire of blood and commerce. Pure meanness is highly valued in Caesar's legions. Lots of Americans don't seem to mind having a pack of young American pit bulls savage some flyblown desert nation, or running loose in the White House for that matter, as long as they are our pit bulls protecting Wall Street and the 401-Ks of the upper middle class.  

The problem is this: pit bulls always escalate the fight and keep at it until the last dog is dead, leaving the gentler breeds to clean up the blood spilled. We mutt people, the pit bulls, have always been your own, whether you claim us or not. And until you accept that you are your brother's keeper, and help deliver us from ignorance, you will continue to have on your hands some of every drop of blood spilled . . .  from the sands of Iraq to the streets of East L.A. All the socially responsible stock portfolios, little hybrid cars and post modernist deconstruction in the world will not wash it off.

Add in another of Bageant's - A Whore that Sitteth on Many Waters: What the Left Behind Series Really Means - to make a very disturbing brew.

This is more like it.

From Guardian article,  Residents given access to live CCTV footage:

... Shoreditch Trust said it would review the initiative if it was abused. Its spokesman added: "We are confident that housesholds won't use this in a voyeuristic way, it's for security." ...

This will prove very popular, and Aussies ought to demand this community service, too.

Think of the possibilities.

First-hand, real-time views of car smashes and drunken brawls, from the comfort and safety of your own lounge. Patch in uploaded handicam footage from scenes of "devastation", like the bus crash in Egypt. When civic-minded on-the-spot voyeurs are unable to continue their reportage to our ABC, due to gagging at sights of loose body parts, simply point and shoot. CCTV on popular beach spots may even capture the latest shark attack, in progress. A well-placed set of CCTVs could keep citizens engaged with cultural events, like street riots.

If nothing else, CCTV on-tap will kill off those pathetic current affairs hosts, who struggle to rephrase their questions and comments so they don't sound too much like the previous dozen reports of the exact same tragedy.

We all need to know every development in Ariel Sharon's recovery. I can hear the cheers going up from households round the country, as patriotic Aussies rejoice at the very instant he first twitches his little toe. And what a market for recordable DVD. We will be able to replay that toe-twitch, perhaps at communal gatherings organised in commemoration.

Jack Abramoff is the kind of go-getting bagman who would make an ideal US ambassador to Oz.

Australia is setting up to be the market leader for sale of innovative pharmaceuticals out of the US, and these must be protected by long-lasting patents. What price for a life, though? That's a no-brainer. For example, the sooner 50%, or more, of our young people are medicated with life-saving psychoactive drugs, the better.

On hardware, Australia is uniquely placed to offer democracy-enhancing technologies to our struggling neighbours.

These initiatives, and many others on the tax-cutting agenda, require the expertise of a person who can cut through the redtape, and get down to election-saving business with key advertisers. Get Abramoff!

With a wink to the future and a nod to the past, Bruce Wolpe (director, corporate affairs, for Fairfax) manages to sputter between grabs at the 14th titty on the great Sow, in An American stench that should not choke Australia:

... But while Australia's political system is cleaner, and will require vigilance to keep it that way, the stench that is choking Washington won't erupt here.

Bruce sounds like he thinks the Howard government's policies of regional funding, directing taxpayers money into the pockets of media barons, via "government advertising", and lifting the bar on limits to undisclosed political donations, are very good things.

I wonder what Bruce thinks about tighter FOI regulations, and the pursuit of whistleblowers, under the guise of the Global War On Terror? And does Bruce's thoughfulness extend to an opinion on global warming?

From The unrestrained president by Tom Engelhardt:

... For these cultists of an all-powerful presidency, the holy war, the "crusade" to be embarked upon was, above all, aimed at creating a president accountable to no one, overseen by no one, and restricted by no other force or power in his will to act as he saw fit. And so, in the Bush White House, all roads have led back to one issue: how to press ever harder at the weakening boundaries of presidential power. ...

... The permission to commit such acts, once released into the world, mutates and spreads like wildfire from top to bottom in any command structure and across all boundaries. You may start out with a relatively small program of secret imprisonment, torture, spying or whatever, meant to achieve limited goals while establishing certain prerogatives of power, but in no case is the situation likely to remain that way for long. ...

... How the United States handles this crossroads presidential moment will tell us much about whether or not "some kind of dictatorial position" for the nation's imperial, imperious, and impervious president will be in the American grain for a long, long time to come.

Why is it said there is a political vacuum in Israel, with Ariel Sharon at the end of the road? Surely, good leadership invests in its succession. So, why didn't Sharon's deputy tap him on the shoulder immediately after that first "minor" stroke? Any medical opinion would have said his prognosis could not have been settled for some weeks after that event. It was dereliction of duty for the media to pretend that he could continue on in his lion-like forays. Even while he is on life-support, the august opinions held up pretense of a possible comeback. That was just stupid.

Is that the problem - that a political vacuum develops around a certain type of leader? The style of leadership that requires a praetorian guard? Consider the mouthpieces who guard Bush, Blair and Howard, and the manner of the warfare brought on anyone who sets out to oppose them.

2006 will see more, a lot more, of the dominance of the philosophy of ultimate power, and how it can be invested in a single, frail person. Where there should be a marketplace, crowded  with all kinds of energetic ideas, we will have more silence. And fear, fear of advancing alternatives because they will be torn apart by the guardians.

Humankind may be making huge technological advances, but for those who believe in progressive, organic evolution, we may need to pause and consider the past. One of the Attenborough documentaries (The Trials of Life, part 4) showed an unforgettable scene. A cohort of meat-craving chimps hunted and captured a monkey. They didn't bother to kill, or even stun, the monkey - they ate it, alive, from the legs up. Our ancestors? Where next, with the gifts of intelligence and power? Ask GWB, the puppet princeling.

When I looked at this stack of cards, I was reminded of the games we played as children, trying to erect towers higher than the others. It is a tower of Babel, which famously was incomplete due to human pride and an inability to communicate. That is, I suppose what empire building is all about.

Liberty looks to be on very shaky ground, because it is anomalous to the whole structure. In fact, it stands in the way of building the cards higher. In the US, the debate about torture and personal liberties are indeed framed, in some quarters, as being inimical to the best interests of the preservation of the USA and it's way of life.

The 'all seeing eye' speaks to me of the CIA, its intelligence gathering and prescience in knowing what's going to happen before it happens... not. Like all 'horrorscopes', it makes a pig's ass out of a sow's ear. The joker of a president who interprets these secret knowledges bears the burden of sustaining liberty which would account for the stoic look on her face as she faces judgment day.

The appearance of the dice might account for the rather haphazard way the empire tosses the dice with regard to policy and lives of the people, and the devils number is hard to resist as Osama's rationale for 9/11.

The relationship between Christianity and the Muslim world could be about the Crusade the US imagines it is on. That David's star is propped up and in turn is propped up by the Dollar is the subject of conspiracy theories which are historical, anti-semitic and the reality of Middle East realpolitik. It could also be extended to the American industrial military complex, which relies heavily on the tensions in the Middle East to make a buck. And what a lot of money it is making these days.

Finally there is the shadow this whole edifice throws. Big, scary and blurry, thank goodness. Who would want to know what's coming in the days ahead?

Michael Coleman, I read your link by Ray McGovern. I especially liked this quote and find it a chillingly prescient and astute assessment of current US and Israeli relations. A bit sad really given all the good intentions on both sides.

An earlier American warned: "A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation facilitates the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, infuses into one the enmities of the other, and betrays the former into participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification... It also gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, who devote themselves to the favorite nation, facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country." (George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796).

Russell Edwards, I’m well aware of the literal translation of Eretz Yisra’el. I’m also well aware of the metaphoric meaning – both for Israelis and the Palestinians. Most of the rest of the world is also aware of the meaning – ‘Greater Israel’ and its implications. Eretz Yisra’el is not the same as the land that was given to the Jewish peoples in '48. Eretz Yisra’el does not include land that belongs to Palestine. Once right-wing Israel gets used to this idea the world and the region will be much better off. You get over it and make the world a better place!!

Russell Edwards, you have a better idea? Forget “…national and subnational eg Iran, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad etc.,” interests. These will soon fall into line once the world shows it doesn’t accept their behaviour under a different attitude from Israel – an Israel that has fallen back to the Green Line and begins displaying a truly genuine desire for peace. Until Israel does this Israel will get little sympathy from the rest of the world and especially the world of Islam (apart, of course, from the US government and the neoconservatives). The world of Islam will then be less inclined to get its back up against the rest of the world.

The bottom line is Israel must fall back to the Green Line and they and their American-Jewish neoconservative allies in the Bush administration must totally disengage from the anti-Islam rhetoric that has inflamed the entire Islamic world.

The world now knows what liars these right-wing American-Jewish neoconservatives with their Israeli alliances really are. Israelis should disassociate themselves from these warmongering lunatics and rid themselves of their Islam-hating government that has given them so much grief over the last sixty years.

America and its allies the UK and Australia should withdraw immediately from Iraq. Israel should immediately withdraw to the Green Line and negotiate true unconditional peace with its Arab neighbours.

You have a better idea?

 
Geoff Pahoff says: “Israel was attacked with overwhelming might by enemies who clearly calculated was sufficient to wipe Israel out. And her population.”

Complete garbage!! Read some history about air warfare!! You are talking rubbish.

The 1967 Israeli-Arab War did feature a pre-emptive strike by Israel on the Egyptian air force, which basically took Egyptian air power out of the military equation. The conditions under which this pre-emptive strike took place were such that, in my opinion and that of many historians and diplomats, it is unlikely any other nation would have acted differently.

Again I point interested readers to Oren's book.

Overwhelming force? Well the Israelis certainly didn't have it, given they were lined up against the combined forces of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq. They were outnumbered in terms of numbers of troops, planes, tanks, artillery pieces, or any other quantitative meaasure. They had some qualitative advantages, and definitely were better trained, led, and organised, as the subsequent course of the war proved.

I note that the usual right-wing Israeli apologists rise to defend Israeli aggression with the usual claim of ‘pre-emption’ forgetting entirely Israel’s earlier aggression of overrunning the Sinai in the 1956 war when they took advantage of British aggression against Egypt in what became the ‘Suez Crisis’.

Nothing has changed really – the Israeli-allied neoconservatives that contrived the war against Iraq from the Pentagon claimed ‘pre-emption’ to get that act of aggression going as well.

Nearly forty years after the Six Day War and Israel is still occupying the West Bank and killing civilians and still building settlements in territory that is not theirs.

Damian's  problem here is that there are just too many people around,  like me, who remember exactly  what happened in June 1967 for him to get away with the "Israel was the aggressor" lie. That is precisely what it is  - a lie. His constant screeching about Western leaders being liars can now be put in context  - a particularly ugly form of transference.

The six day war did not happen in a vacuum. The whole world watched as the inevitable war approached. They watched as Nasser blockaded Eilat. When U Thant pulled UN troops out of the Sinai on a few hours notice, on Nasser's demands, so as to give the Egyptian military a free rein. They watched the forging of the military alliance with Syria, the huge public rallies organised by the state "to throw the Jews into the sea". Nasser made no secret of what his intentions were. His language was as violent as Mussolini's or Hitler's and he did not care who heard. For him , Egypt and the Arab world, the "hour had arrived".

Egypt and Syria mobilised. So did Israel. The armies massed on three fronts. For a few days the world held its breath. No one doubted that Israel was about to be attacked. Brave young volunteers flooded in from all over the world to keep Israel's essential sevices working after the mobilisation of the Reserve. Most people thought that Israel would lose the war. Certainly it did not look good on paper. Certainly Nasser thought so. And the tyrants in Damascus. Ultimately the King in Amman as well.

If Israel had not attacked the air forces of Egypt and Syria when it did, perhaps just hours before the invasion on three fronts by numerically far superior forces, this would have been no ordinary negligence on the part of its Government and military.

It would have been criminal. Nothing less.

As it turned out Israel managed to defend itself against the most flagrant aggression aimed at eliminating the state and its population. It did this at considerable loss of life. But it did it.

It is that fact that has got up the noses of the Damians of this world ever since. It is just too much for them to bear.

There will never be any peace until Israel moves back to its pre-1967 Green Line. 

Contrary to what Justin Wilshaw says Israel attacked Egypt, Syria and Jordan – not the other way around. Will Howard asserts that had the Arabs states prevailed in this war then they would not have been negotiating with Israel for Israel to have its territories back. This ludicrous and totally unsubstantiated argument is somehow supposed to justify Israeli aggression and land grabs in the West Bank. No wonder the region has known nothing but trouble since the creation of Israel with that kind of attitude. Even mainstream Israelis are now getting fed up with the constant bickering over right-wing Zionist and Israeli government land grabs in the West Bank. The tit-for-tat war and killings that have been going on for over sixty years has to end.

Israel should move back to the Green Line. Problem solved.

Will Howard reckons: “Thus, presumably, Jews should have the right to live in the lands of their births and coexist with non-Jews? Like, say, in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Libya... etc?”

Yes! Why not?

I am one of those that believe that this planet is the place of my birth. Wherever I have been throughout my life, whenever someone asks me where I’m from I simply answer ‘here’. Naturally, if I seize that right for myself, then I accept that all others have that same right.

Jews should live where ever they want on this planet. Israelis should live in Israel. Arabs should live wherever they want on this planet. Jordanians… You get the picture!

Justin Wilshaw, you said: “…but doesn't Israel occupy lands that it seized as a result of wars?” They do. They seized that land through overwhelming might. There presumably is no problem if their enemies also use overwhelming might to regain their lands?!

You also assert that, had the Israelis not been attacked, “… there is no evidence to suggest that they would be occupying those lands now.” Complete garbage. Right-wing Zionists have always eyed off all of the lands that are now occupied by Israel and well beyond – it was to be called Eretz Yisra’el and many far-right Zionists are still insisting upon it.

"Palestinians should also have the right to live in the lands of their birth and coexist with Israelis."

Thus, presumably, Jews should have the right to live in the lands of their births and coexist with non-Jews? Like, say, in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Libya... etc? All these are countries from which hundreds of thousands of Jews were expelled after 1948. About half the population of Israel is descended from these Jews, ie millions of people. (Large communities of these "oriental" Jews also live in Western countries - the US, etc.)

Justin Wilshaw writes: "Weren't the wars (the three of them) instigated by countries other than Israel? In my humble opinion if you commence a war, then get your ass whipped (three times), and as a result lose territory to the nation you attacked in the first place."

The Arabs are lucky Israel doesn't think so. So far, of the territories "expansionist" Israel occupied in the 1967 War, a lot has been given back: The entire Sinai Peninsula, as part of the peace treaty with Egypt, and most recently the Gaza Strip and some West Bank settlements in the northern West Bank. Israel withdrew its forces from Lebanon in 2000, five years before Syria did likewise. That leaves the Golan Heights, to be negotiated with Syria, the remainder of the West Bank, and East Jerusalem, both to be negotiated with the Palestinian Authority.

It's worth noting there has been no clear recognised national sovereignty on the West Bank for nearly a century, and especially since Jordan relinquished its claims on the WB in 1988. Now let's ask the question: if the Arabs had overrun Israel in any of their attempts, would they now be negotiating any sort of territorial compromises? Would there be any Jews alive for them to negotiate with? I think the answer is "no." And I suspect that even the most ardent "anti-Zionist" Webdiarists know this deep down in their hearts as well.

I note from this piece in the Washington Post that Rumsfeld, Blair and the Polish PM Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz all made surprise visits to their respective nations’ troops. I wonder if Howard will be following suit. Perhaps not. The security problem is now too obvious.

Justin Wilshaw: "I find it quite interesting that you (Damian) seem to be sanctioning Iran's procurement of nuclear weapons on the basis that another regional power (Israel) is reported to have them."

I should point out, too, that the logic of Damian's argument, which implicitly acknowledges Israel's right to a nuclear deterrent, is all the more compelling given the enormous disparity in size and population between Israel and the vastly larger Iran, which has threatened to wipe Israel off the map.

Justin Wilshaw reckons: “…if you commence a war, then get your ass whipped (three times), and as a result lose territory to the nation you attacked in the first place. More fool you!” Most certainly, but then where does it end? Presumably, based on your ‘might is right’ principle, there’s no problem if the people that lose out try to regain what’s lost by whatever means available. Might is right?! Is that it? Everlasting war? Great philosophy. Everyone’s a loser.

As for the question of the ‘warmongering fascist Howard’, as you put it, gaining nuclear parity because of China’s and North Korea’s nuclear arms, first, why? Neither N Korea nor China is a threat to us. Secondly, even if they were a threat to us, what makes you think we don’t have nuclear arms at least available to us if they did become a threat? Thirdly, they will only become a threat to us if the US and Australia keep goading them. Why would they otherwise be a threat to us – any more, indeed, than Iran is or even Iraq was. You leave them alone and they’ll leave you alone. Simple really.

Finally, I don’t believe that Iran should be nuclear armed. I’m merely pointing out that if its enemies are armed then you can’t really blame it, from their point of view, for seeking arms to counter what they consider to be a menace to them. Perhaps if every one disarmed we’d all be better off.

Damian, I find myself agreeing with some of your comments.

ed Hamish: What? Is it Christmas?

I agree that Israel has a right to exist, as do the Palestinians.

My grasp of history in the Mid east is rudimentry, but doesn't Israel occupy lands that it seized as a result of wars?

Weren't the wars (the three of them) instigated by countries other than Israel?

In my humble opinion if you commence a war, then get your ass whipped (three times), and as a result lose territory to the nation you attacked in the first place. More fool you!

I find it quite interesting that you seem to be sanctioning Iran's procurement of nuclear weapons on the basis that another regional power (Israel) is reported to have them.

I would therefore assume that you would support the war mongering fascist Howard procuring nuclear weapons for Australia based on the fact that China and North Korea possess nuclear weapons?

Damian Lataan: "C Parsons, you clearly missed my last post directed to you."

No, I saw that.

But clearly you missed mine. Anyway, here's a follow up...

Damian Lataan: "Why then should Iran not take a page out of Israel’s book, or, indeed, out of the book of all those nations that are nuclear armed and haven’t been attacked since becoming so armed?"

Well, one reason is that Iran has actually threatened to wipe another state "off the map" and is in the process of developing an arsenal of nuclear weapons, presumably in order to do that.

Moreover, its probable intended target is a predominantly Jewish state, and as I have shown you the Iranian government is the architect of an overt and systematic policy of racial harassment, persecution, dispossession and, it seems, forced mass deportation directed specifically against Jews.

Sound familiar?

If not, read, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany by William L Shirer.

Anyway, that's why nobody is very likely to share your view that it would be "silly"  to prevent Iran seeking "nuclear parity" with the USA.

C Parsons, you clearly missed my last post directed to you.

Stuart Lord asks: “…but wasn't Israel attacked three times before it had nuclear weapons?” Exactly the point, Stuart Lord – it hasn’t been attacked since. Why then should Iran not take a page out of Israel’s book, or, indeed, out of the book of all those nations that are nuclear armed and haven’t been attacked since becoming so armed? The nuclear deterrent, it seems, at least from the perspective of Israel, as you concede, works. Why should it not then work for Iran which is under direct threat?

As for the matter of Israel’s right to exist; of course it has a right to exist but it does not have the right to exist in territory that is not theirs. It should exist only within its own borders, which is back to the Green Line of 1967 and well outside of the West Bank. All of the Israeli settlements within the West Bank should be removed. Palestinians should also have the right to live in the lands of their birth and coexist with Israelis.

Damian Lataan: "Paranoia over Iran’s so-called attempt to procure nuclear weapons has got right up Israel’s nose."

So called?

Is that because Iran's "so called" oil reserves are running out, or something?

Damian Lataan: "Like North Korea, Iran would be rather silly not to have nuclear parity with a nation that has threatened it. Israel has nuclear weapons."

So, suddenly it's not a "so called" to procure nuclear weapons  anymore, and indeed they'd be "silly" to not have a nuclear arsenal on "parity" with the USA?

Damian Lataan: "This is particularly so while the US continually support a right-wing Zionist expansionist Israel, especially under the thug Sharon and, more particularly, one under the even more right-wing Netanyahu."

Well, Damian, here's a few reasons why Israel might be a bit "paranoid" over what you frankly acknowledge is Iran's push for nuclear parity with the United States.

"At the time of the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948, there were approximately 100,000 Jews living in Iran, the historical center of Persian Jewry.

At the time of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, 80,000 still remained in Iran. From then on, Jewish emigration from Iran turned into a mass exodus similar to that witnessed in neighbouring Iraq three decades earlier."

There are an estimated 11,000 Jews left in Iran.

"Iran's official government-controlled media often issues anti-Semitic propaganda. A prime example is the government's publishing of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a notorious Czarist forgery, in 1994 and 1999. Jews also suffer varying degrees of officially sanctioned discrimination, particularly in the areas of employment, education, and public accommodations."

"The Islamization of the country has brought about strict control over Jewish educational institutions. Before the revolution, there were some 20 Jewish schools functioning throughout the country. In recent years, most of these have been closed down. In the remaining schools, Jewish principals have been replaced by Muslims."

"Finally, one of the abhorrent and despicable dimensions of discrimination and persecution is the daily humiliation of a non-Moslem Iranian in a religiously fanatical Moslem environment. The fact that from early childhood, a non-Moslem learns that, at best, he is a second class citizen, not equal to his peers, able to enjoy the same rights and privileges, and subject to their ridicule and humiliations."

I'd say the persecution of Jews and other religious minorities in Iran is now more or less at the same stage that the persecution of Jews in Germany reached in the late 1930s.

Official discrimination, racist scapegoating, anti-Semitic state propaganda, state sanctioned harrassment of Jews and other cultural minorities, second class citizenship, forced mass emigration.
And threats to 'wipe out' another, nearby, and much smaller nation.

All we need, now, to make the analogy complete, are neo-Nazi fifth columnists in the west who will regurgitate the official anti-Semitic propaganda of the regime.

Oh, look. Here comes Indymedia Melbourne now...

"Approximately 85,000 [Jews] have left of their own volition. (I guess those Zionist bombings in Tehran that were designed to hurry Jewish emigration from Iran and boost the population of Israel worked)."

- Indymedia Melbourne

Now, let's see? Is that "multiculturalism" in action? Or mere "anti-Zionism"?

It seems that the world can look forward to the possibility of more death and destruction on a really grand scale in the Middle East at sometime during the first half of next year, possibly around March, at about the same time as the Israeli elections. Iran, apparently and not surprisingly, is in right-wing Israel’s sights. Paranoia over Iran’s so-called attempt to procure nuclear weapons has got right up Israel’s nose.

One would have to wonder why Iran would not attempt to procure nuclear weapons, if, indeed they are; after all, were they not named as part of the ‘Axis of Evil’? Look what happened to Iraq, that other nation so named and, as it turned out, known NOT to have nuclear weapons. Like North Korea, Iran would be rather silly not to have nuclear parity with a nation that has threatened it. Israel has nuclear weapons. Why should one not expect Iran not to have parity, especially when the US, also with a nuclear capacity, is threatening Iran? Perhaps if Israel gave up its nuclear weapons then other nations in the region would also give up their supposed nuclear aspirations.

While there is a nuclear armed expansionist Israel in existence there will always be the kind of tensions that exist now in the ME – and there will certainly always be antagonism toward the US from Middle Eastern Islam. This is particularly so while the US continually support a right-wing Zionist expansionist Israel, especially under the thug Sharon and, more particularly, one under the even more right-wing Netanyahu.

I wish I could say the world can look forward to a peaceful new year but I don’t think so – at least not while Bush, Blair and Howard are in power.

It would seem that the Iraqi people took advantage of their one big day of ‘democracy’ and voted in huge numbers to say ‘no’ to US style ‘democracy’!

The election itself was about as close the Iraqis are going to get to the kind of ‘democracy’ that the US wants to force down their throats. They have turned out to the polls in big numbers to tell the world they want their religion to rule them and not the kind of secular ‘democracy’ that the US supported ex-pat Iraqi criminals Alawi and Chalabi represented. The election is a win for Islam.

Now, of course, the two religious factions are going to have to either negotiate some kind of compromise on power or battle it out in an expansion of the existing civil war. Somewhere in between the Kurds will also be wanting to find a way for a bit of autonomy which neither the Shiites nor the Sunnis will want to give them.

So much for ‘democracy’ running rampant through the Middle East.

Will Howard,  "second wave" (in the article by Aharon Ze'evi) is probably a reference to Alvin Toffler.

Patrick Cockburn writes about the results of the elections in Iraq, in Counterpunch (Iraq Election Spells Total Defeat for US) and elsewhere (Iraq's election result: a divided nation) Juan Cole - Shiite Religious Parties dominate 10 of 18 Provinc...

Cole: I think I pretty much nailed this election last October [...]. Note that I was often contradicted by observers on the ground in Iraq, who kept saying they perceived a groundswell for the secular party of Allawi, even in the Shiite-dominated provinces. This allegation never made any sense to me. Michael Rubin of the AEI was predicting 5 percent for Chalabi (the neocon favorite) and 20 percent for Allawi, a prediction that demonstrates that after 2 1/2 years the neocons still just can't understand anything about contemporary Iraq. R.J. Eskow shreds the Neocon vision of what Iraq would become to pieces. Iraq is going to be pro-Iran, and will not recognize Israel (Muqtada al-Sadr will be part of the ruling coalition!)

Ze'evi, again  -

A fourth factor I regard as a primary force shaping Israel's strategic environment is Israeli policy. Without delving into this subject, let me suggest that in my reading of the overall strategic picture, the more time passes, the more Israel will be forced to take unilateral steps to assume responsibility for its future and its existence.

Ze'evi: US-Iran diplomatic process 'stuck in the mud'

I wouldn't be surprised if discussions about the future of Israel start to put 'Bush' and 'liability' in the same sentence.

Sid Walker: ".... 400 pounds of high-powered plastic explosive was lifted from the premises of "Cherry Engineering, a company owned by Chris Cherry, a scientist at Sandia National Labs. The site, located outside Albuquerque, had no guards and no surveillance cameras. It was the site's second theft in the past two years."

Chris Cherry, hey?

"One night in April 1996 Sandia bomb-disablement expert Chris Cherry got an urgent call at home in Albuquerque. It was the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI, investigating Unabomber suspect Theodore Kaczynski's cabin in Montana, had found a bomb. The investigators said they could not continue on into the cabin."

Well, hello.

Israel and the Middle East, 2005: A Strategic Overview appears in the most recent Jaffe Center for Strategic Studies Assessment. In it, Maj. Gen. Aharon Ze'evi Farkash, Head of IDF Military Intelligence looks at the strategic challenges he sees affecting Israel. His views are highly relevant to this thread. He opens,

"Let me begin by underlining the intellectual humility necessary when attempting to analyze enemies and adversaries in times of uncertainty, such as today. I say this neither out of lip service to a slogan nor as a platitude for the record, rather because I believe it is true. Our world is not a traditional world like the one in which we lived during the 'second wave'* era. It is characterized by ups and downs and far-reaching changes. We must therefore be modest enough to appreciate the difficulties involved in gathering information, making assessments, and understanding the complex and integrated processes that impact on us."

His comment on democracy is particularly apt, I think:

"We must differentiate between democracy and processes of democratization. In my mind, there is still no democracy in the Middle East, but there has been a different use of the democratization process aimed at bringing about profound change. This is what occurred in Lebanon, and this is what is underway in Egypt and the Palestinian Authority. Palestinian Authority president Abu Mazen appears to be the first leader in the Arab world to be elected by a 63 percent majority and not the customary 99.9 percent majority."

* I don't know what this means. Anyone?

According to their ABC, 400 pounds of high-powered plastic explosive was lifted from the premises of "Cherry Engineering, a company owned by Chris Cherry, a scientist at Sandia National Labs. The site, located outside Albuquerque, had no guards and no surveillance cameras. It was the site's second theft in the past two years."

Repeat: no guards and no surveillance cameras.

Now let's see if I've got this right...?

In the USA today, you can operate a plant manufacturing C4 and not bother employing guards and surveillance cameras?

If Mr Howard cared zip about protecting Australians (or anyone) against terror, he'd append a 'please explain' note to George and Barbara's Xmas card.

Ah, if only my Christmas cards to George were read personally by the great man's chief minders, instead of 15th level minions.

I'd ask how them how the anthrax investigation is going, four years on. Remember? The inquiry into the anthrax murders that followed 9-11, panicking Congress into signing the 'Patriot Act' in the first place.

For some 'inexplicable' reason, media moguldom lost interest in the story, shortly after an attempt to frame an Egyptian scientist fell apart.

Such ineptitude in hoaxing the public - and the obvious role of the Western mass media and its poodles as perpetrators, not victims, of terror and deception - would be amusing really, if only C4 didn't actually blow people up and anthrax make them sick.

Anyone in our ABC awake and able to cover stories such as these with honesty?

Silly question.

How's the cricket?

A future worthy of our humanity requires understanding of the past.

Les Visible has a wry take on mass homicide and deception.

Highly recommended for holiday listening.