The world is, rather understandably, disconcerted by the inaction of Burma’s military junta with regards to their response to the devastation caused by Cyclone Nargis. As many of you are aware, the regime has been hindering international aid efforts, causing the humanitarian crisis to worsen. As it stands now, some 78,000 to 100,000 people have been killed and a further 60,000 are thought to be missing.

While shocking to the layman, the Burmese regime has some cause for trepidation. We are, after all, talking about a military dictatorship that has imprisoned the country’s democratically elected leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, on and off since 1989. The very same regime was also responsible for using lethal force against non-violent protestors last year, among a variety of other transgressions during their tenure.

No matter how many people have to suffer in the wake of the disaster, the retention of control is, to the regime, of the utmost importance. While they might be megalomaniacal, they’re not so far gone as to not realize that organizations, such as USAID, have been used in similar situations to provide foreign powers with covert footholds. Thus, their number one fear is very probably the consequences of allowing foreign agencies and their employees access to not just those suffering, but the people themselves. In doing so, such a connection could lead to the infusion of anti-government sentiment that is backed by foreign interests. And while I hate to admit it, foreign aid agencies that are federally funded have been used repeatedly in the past to do just that.

The bottom line here is that politics, power, and agenda have no place when it comes to a disaster of this magnitude and such immense loss and endangerment of human life. Not when the number one threat to those trapped in the affected area is a lack of clean drinking water.

While brutal at the best of times, the Burmese junta is by no means completely daft. They are well aware of the dangers of allowing foreign aid agencies unrestricted access and movement. Because with them comes conditions, the sort that they are not willing to meet. And while, on the surface, such matters are viewed as simply exercises in good will on the part of major world powers, conditions are always present when their assistance is accepted.

Lost, as always, in the political haze, are the tens of thousands of people that are now facing the onset of disease and starvation. In the end, international politics will hammer the death nails into their coffins, not a lack of global, public compassion. Ultimately, through their inability to accept foreign assistance, the Burmese regime could very well find itself guilty of crimes against humanity. Their inaction could also very well lead to renewed efforts by members of the National League For Democracy and Burma’s Buddhist monks to challenge their authority. Given that that movement is steeped in the tenets of non-violent non-cooperation, perhaps, after some time, they will finally secure a free and independent Burma without the assistance of the likes of the CIA, MI6, and others who would use this terrible disaster to plant seeds of their own.

We are all human. When one of us suffers, we all suffer. When one of us is faced with disparity we must all take responsibility for allowing it to happen. Governments are simply ‘things’, they are not, nor have they ever been, the masters of human compassion or at all accurate moral compasses. What is transpiring right now in Burma in the wake of Cyclone Nargis is a human matter, and therefore governments, nor politics, have no business usurping such fundamental truths.

The Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004 took the lives of some 225,000 people in 11 different countries. As it stands now, the death toll in Burma is still being held at roughly 22,000, but given that much of the southern portion of the Irrawaddy delta remains underwater, it is estimated that the death toll could rise as high as 100,000 – just under one half of that of the 2004 tsunami in a single country.

Burma’s hard-line political leadership could also make matters worse by refusing foreign aid workers access to parts of the country. There is also the danger that international relief could be diverted by the ruling regime and not used for its intended purpose. In truth, the very same thing happened in numerous countries after the 2004 tsunami, with governments using the disaster to usurp the rights of citizens that once inhabited lucrative ocean front areas and securing them for the future development of resorts.

A statement issued by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd will hopefully be the rallying call of the day…

“Forget politics. Forget the military dictatorship. Let’s just get aid and assistance through.”

In a surprising move after reports that Turkey’s offensive in northern Iraq would be sustained for the foreseeable future, Turkish forces began withdrawing yesterday in force. It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that the withdrawal occurred just after President Bush called on the Turkish government to end the offensive and a day after US Defense Secretary Robert Gates visited the Turkish capital to deliver Washington’s message that the incursion must not be open ended. Of course, the Turkish government and military is claiming that the withdrawal was preplanned and that it had nothing to do with US pressure, but that’s obviously transparent given the fact that the withdrawal itself began before any official Turkish statements were made regarding it.

Were I to venture a guess, I would say that behind closed doors Washington rubber stamped the Turkish invasion and then used condemnation of it to remove suspicions of complicity. And, of course, the Turks played along and got what they wanted out of it.

That would be my guess anyway.

Gaza

Here’s the back story via the BBC…

I want to state, for the record, that the use of violence by both sides in this matter is, in my opinion, unforgivable given the toll that it has taken on civilians, both at present and in years past.

That said; when one looks at this in a very hard, cold light, there are a few realities that must be addressed, though many of you might disagree.

The governing issue of Israel and Palestine as entities and the decades old arguments about how that region has found itself where it is now aside, there are a few truths that we should be willing to admit as members of a society that is primarily pro-Israeli.

The first is that Hamas is a terrorist organization, one that is supported by numerous benefactors throughout the Middle East. They fire homemade rockets into Israel from the slums of one of the world’s foremost ghettos where millions rely on international humanitarian aid to simply survive. That aid, by the way, is also one of the most outstanding examples of international blackmail in modern history.

Israel, on the other hand, is supported by the world’s foremost military super power and is the recipient of immense military aid. They possess a state of the art air force, replete with US made fighters, bombers, and attack helicopters. They possess state of the art armour and boast one of the best-trained and equipped armed forces in the world. They also possess a nuclear arsenal, a navy, and one of the world’s most feared covert intelligence outfits.

Were Palestinian militants to possess the same military capabilities as the Israelis, the need to lob homemade rockets and employ suicide bombers wouldn’t be required. In short, they would possess the same ‘honourable’ weapons of war as the Israelis and be in the position to employ them in the exact same fashion that the IDF does. That is, of course, not something that Israel, nor those that support it, would ever stand for. Thus, those who believe in the ridiculous use of violence as a measure with which to lash out against Israel wouldn’t be lobbing homemade rockets into Israel from Gaza and, in the process, endangering the lives of innocents that end up paying the price when Israeli forces retaliate – not to mention killing Israeli civilians.

That is, if you actually believe that a fair brawl between conventional forces doesn’t produce civilian deaths, which is, of course, a fallacy. In truth, they produce far more.

In this neck of the woods, the math is simple. A single Israeli life is equal to that of maybe 100 Palestinians. Let’s face it, they’re terrorists and extremists, or at least that’s what they’re painted as being by our media. The Israelis, on the other hand, are simply trying to defend themselves. Never mind the massive economic disparities between the two, never mind that Gaza is little more than a massive prison camp for all intents and purposes, which provides the sort of atmosphere in which those desperate enough are willing to focus their anger in ways that are unconscionable. If you cage an animal long enough it’s going to do one of two things. Wither away to nothing or start taking swipes through the bars at those on the other side.

Gaza is not internationally recognized as being a part of any sovereign entity, nor is it claimed by any, though it’s currency remains the Israeli Sheqel. After Hamas’ victory in Parliamentary elections in 2006, Israel, The United States, Canada, and the EU froze all funds to the Palestinian government, economically crippling it. Due to the fact that Hamas is considered a terrorist organization, it is not viewed as a legitimate governing body, even within the tenuous confines of a government that never really had any international recognition beyond that required to placate those responsible for providing it economic aid. Thus, as long as Hamas remains in power, their presence will be used as an excuse to continue to punish the people as a whole, despite the fact that it was democratically elected – a process that those who refuse to recognize it claim to champion the world over (that is, as long as it conforms to their ideology).

Now, let me state for the record that I am not defending Hamas. Obviously, the recognition of Israeli’s right to exist is something that must occur. After decades of the same tired argument, the time has come to consider the welfare of the Palestinian people as a whole, which, for some, is a bitter pill to swallow. That said; there is certainly a reason why Hamas was successful in the elections in 2006.

Gaza is 41 kilometers long and 12 kilometers wide; that’s 360 square kilometers. In that space there are 1.4 million people, 1 million of which are officially recognized by the United Nations as refugees. Some 18% of children in Gaza between the ages of 6 months and 5 years old suffer from chronic malnutrition. 53% of women of reproductive age and children are anemic. Given such facts, one can begin to see why support for an organization that undertakes initiatives within the community to secure popular support, not to mention striking at those they view as their oppressors, might attract the support of the suffering and the disenfranchised. In truth, it’s not a phenomenon that is, by any stretch of the imagination, limited to that area of the world. It is a phenomenon that has been quintessential in the birth of Western democracies and, if we’re going to be completely honest, Israel itself.

Now, you can rush out and get a copy of The National Post and succumb to the bias that we’re exposed to on a daily basis regarding this issue, or you can spend some time trying to look at it from the other side of the fence (literally). I’ll not condone the use of violence as a method with which to enact change, but I will also not condemn those that feel they have no way out of a situation that is, in truth, entirely comparable to an existence in prison. There are better ways to go about it, I will admit that freely, and also not hesitate to suggest that such methods be embraced, but I do not live in Gaza, nor do I have to endure its realities, so that position remains one of a lofty Western idealist.

The Iranian Laptop Nuke Data

Gareth Porter provides some valuable insight regarding this issue…

“The George W. Bush administration has long pushed the “laptop documents” – 1,000 pages of technical documents supposedly from a stolen Iranian laptop – as hard evidence of Iranian intentions to build a nuclear weapon. Now charges based on those documents pose the only remaining obstacles to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) declaring that Iran has resolved all unanswered questions about its nuclear program.

But those documents have long been regarded with great suspicion by US and foreign analysts. German officials have identified the source of the laptop documents in November 2004 as the Mujahideen e Khalq (MEK), which along with its political arm, the National Council of Resistance in Iran (NCRI), is listed by the US State Department as a terrorist organization.

There are some indications, moreover, that the MEK obtained the documents not from an Iranian source but from Israel’s Mossad.

In its latest report on Iran, circulated Feb. 22, the IAEA, under strong pressure from the Bush administration, included descriptions of plans for a facility to produce “green salt,” technical specifications for high explosives testing and the schematic layout of a missile reentry vehicle that appears capable of holding a nuclear weapon. Iran has been asked to provide full explanations for these alleged activities.

Tehran has denounced the documents on which the charges are based as fabrications provided by the MEK, and has demanded copies of the documents to analyze, but the United States had refused to do so.

The Iranian assertion is supported by statements by German officials. A few days after then-Secretary of State Colin Powell announced the laptop documents, Karsten Voight, the coordinator for German-American relations in the German Foreign Ministry, was reported by the Wall Street Journal Nov. 22, 2004 as saying that the information had been provided by “an Iranian dissident group.”

A German official familiar with the issue confirmed to this writer that the NCRI had been the source of the laptop documents. “I can assure you that the documents came from the Iranian resistance organization.,” the source said.

The Germans have been deeply involved in intelligence collection and analysis regarding the Iranian nuclear program. According to a story by Washington Post reporter Dafna Linzer soon after the laptop documents were first mentioned publicly by Powell in late 2004, US officials said they had been stolen from an Iranian whom German intelligence had been trying to recruit, and had been given to intelligence officials of an unnamed country in Turkey.

The German account of the origins of the laptop documents contradicts the insistence by unnamed US intelligence officials who insisted to journalists William J. Broad and David Sanger in November 2005 that the laptop documents did not come from any Iranian resistance groups.

Despite the fact that it was listed as a terrorist organization., the MEK was a favorite of neoconservatives in the Pentagon, who were proposing in 2003-2004 to use it as part of a policy to destabilize Iran. The United States is known to have used intelligence from the MEK on Iranian military questions for years. It was considered a credible source of intelligence on the Iranian nuclear program. after 2002, mainly because of its identification of the facility in Natanz as a nuclear site.

The German source said he did not know whether the documents were authentic or not. However, CIA analysts, and European and IAEA officials who were given access to the laptop documents in 2005 were very skeptical about their authenticity.

The Guardian’s Julian Borger last February quoted an IAEA official as saying there is “doubt over the provenance of the computer.”

A senior European diplomat who had examined the documents was quoted by the New York Times in November 2005 as saying, “I can fabricate that data. It looks beautiful, but is open to doubt.”

Scott Ritter, the former US military intelligence officer who was chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998, noted in an interview that the CIA has the capability test the authenticity of laptop documents through forensic tests that would reveal when different versions of different documents were created.

The fact that the agency could not rule out the possibility of fabrication, according to Ritter, indicates that it had either chosen not to do such tests or that the tests had revealed fraud.”

I’m tired. Not a lot of sleep last night. I spent it in one of those semi-states of sleep, the sort where you’re aware that you have to be mindful of something that requires that you remain somewhat conscious but are still trying to sleep at the same time.

It’s clear and sunny here again today, as it has been this past week. In fact, it’s been uncommonly beautiful for this time of year, even given the chill the wind provides here on the West Coast that has the annoying ability to cut through everything that you’re wearing and go straight to your bones. We share that phenomenon with the UK, where it’s routine business as well.

I’m rambling, and I’m aware of it. I’m rambling because I’m having one of those mornings that I’m finding it difficult to concentrate. I’m having one of those mornings because, as has been the case over the last month, the list of things to touch upon grows so quickly every day that it seems almost impossible to retain it all and then translate it into something cogent.

Just off the top of my head there’s…

The recent revelation that the Canadian Armed Forces have stopped the transfer of prisoners to Afghan authorities because of a report of abuse on the 5th of November of last year despite the fact that last May, after a scandal broke regarding the Canadian transfer of prisoners to Afghan authorities that were known for their use of torture, the government claimed that it was taking steps to immediately rectify the situation.

The recently released Manley Report, which, although critical of numerous aspects of the mission in Afghanistan, has basically provided the government with what can only be viewed as a blank cheque with regards to Canadian combat operations in that country. Of course, the report is non-binding, but its ramifications on a political level are extremely convenient. Canada, of course, is only one of three nations involved in direct combat operations in Afghanistan, and of the three represents the smallest contingent. That being the case, our losses, compared to those of the United States and the UK, are wholly disproportionate. The debate, however, remains transfixed on our continued support of the mission’s objectives, to help stabilize the nation and provide it security, even though other members of ISAF, with considerably larger forces in country, continue to refuse to have their contingents involved in direct combat operations. There is also the concern that even though our efforts are aimed at ensuring democratic stability in Afghanistan, that its implementation is, in effect, the representation of Western regional aspirations, and therefore not dissimilar to Soviet regional aspirations in the 70’s when the USSR was responsible for aiding in the supplanting of a pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. Thus, the real test of Afghan democracy will come when the nation has been secured and Western exploitative practices begin in earnest.

That is certainly not to say that the Taliban should be allowed to run rampant and plunge the nation into complete chaos, only that precluding the possibility of negotiations for the purposes of resolution is counter productive. Ultimately, there are always going to be those that support some, if not all, of the Taliban’s agenda, which raises a very important question: must those that do be wholly eliminated before progress can be made? And if they are not, what assurances do we have that there will not be a resurgence in the future that could seriously threaten the stability of the country, even after it possesses a well trained and equipped military? Given that, is it not fair to say that Western military involvement, on even the smallest of levels, will be required in Afghanistan for years to come?

Of course, all of that doesn’t even touch on the realities of the Pakistani frontier and the support covertly supplied those in opposition to the current Afghan government by elements within the Pakistani military establishment itself.

The possibility that Kenya could explode at any moment despite last minute attempts at political reconciliation aimed at stemming violence. As it stands now, the country is already in the early stages of a humanitarian crisis and also on the cusp of what could quickly turn into a genocidal event.

The recent disparity of global markets.

The continuing unrest in Pakistan.

The case of Canadian Guantanamo detainee Omar Khadr, who has been held at the facility since 2002. Khadr was captured at the age of 15 and, as the French Foreign Ministry recently pointed out…

“…all children associated with an armed conflict should be treated accordingly. As a minor at the time of the events, Mr. Khadr must be given special treatment — a point on which there is a universal consensus.”

The Canadian government has refused to intercede in Khadr’s case.

Gaza. While many have taken to illegally entering Egypt so that they can attempt to get food, fuel, and other sundries, Israel’s position remains steadfast, that being that the blockade is a move against the continued rocket attacks emanating from Gaza into Israel. The majority of the United Nations Security Council has labeled the blockade a violation of international humanitarian law and a collective punishment against the entire population, but the United States refuses to support that position without the inclusion of language that supports Israel’s concerns regarding the actions of Palestinian militants. Caught in the middle are, as usual, the 1.5 million residents of Gaza itself.

The firing of Linda Keen, President of The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, hours before she was to appear before a House committee in Ottawa. Keen was fired, according to Federal Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn, due to the government’s ‘lack of confidence in her leadership’. This, of course, happened after the Commission’s attempt to have the Chalk River facility closed due to safety concerns and government’s decision to ignore the Commission.

The realities of the sanctions against Iran.

The ruinous economic reality of America’s imperialist adventures.

The frightening resurgence of Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.

Media attacks on Heath Ledger following his death.

The Jose Padilla affair.

The continued humanitarian crisis unfolding in Somalia.

The Sudanese government’s decision to make Musa Hilal, a man accused of coordinating the Janjiweed militias in Darfur, an advisor to Federal Affairs Minister Abdel Basit Sabderat.

And So Forth

In truth, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Iraq is, of course, absent – primarily recent events in Baquba - as is the ever-evolving telecommunications scandal in the US and the Sibel Edmonds affair, the unrest in Zimbabwe, and events in Chiapas.

Last, but certainly not least, there are also those voices that tend to make excellent arguments on a routine basis, such as Robert Fisk, Stephen Zunes, and (for your viewing pleasure), the always brilliant Chalmers Johnson…

When you’re fighting a proxy war on behalf of the United States, damage control is something that comes as part of the deal. In the case of Ethiopia’s ongoing military involvement in Somalia, that is precisely what Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi is doing – damage control.

Zenawi’s target is the United Nations, which has recently categorized the catastrophe in Somalia as one of the fasted growing humanitarian crises in Africa. According to UN estimations, some 60% of Mogadishu’s residents have fled their homes. Further, UNICEF has said that 1.5 million children have been affected by the conflict and are in need of ‘safe zones’.

Mr. Zenawi’s response? That the United Nations could “do less with hype and exaggeration”, claiming that they should play a more “positive role” in the country. Because as we’re all aware, UNICEF is in the business of over exaggerating the plight of children.

Of course, the Ethiopian military is waiting on an African Union force to arrive in strength before withdrawing. There are currently 1,600 Ugandan AU peacekeepers in Somalia out of an expected 8,000. But that shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. African Union peacekeeping initiatives are massively under funded, basically to the point of being entirely ineffectual. Darfur is proof positive of that. Without the creation of a UN mission, nothing will change, and given the UN’s past involvement in Somalia, from a US standpoint, the employment of the Ethiopian military is far more useful given that the Ethiopians are willing to play ball directly with Washington.

Let’s face it; AFRICOM’s lair is reportedly based in Ethiopia, US personnel have been training Ethiopian forces at Camp United since 2004, and notorious Ethiopian prisons just happen to be the hot new destination for African terror suspects. You do the math.

The overthrow of the ICU in Somalia was AFRICOM’s first challenge. Using Ethiopia as a military proxy, and backing their initial invasion of Somalia with air strikes and the insertion of special forces teams, the United States helped plunge Somalia back into a state of chaos that has resulted in a crisis that is being compared to that of Darfur.

The justification for their direction of the Ethiopian invasion of Somalia was that several members of the ICU had ties to al-Qaeda. The ICU’s implementation of Sharia law concerned the United States (who, ironically, has no qualms about its existence in Saudia Arabia), even though in the case of Mogadishu it provided stability where none had existed for more than a decade, with many Somalis, for the first time in a very long time, openly confessing that despite its implementation they were content to have a governing body in place that could provide stability. The US reaction, of course, was one that lent on the possible evolution of a terror-state governed by such a body.

What has occurred in Somalia since has gone largely under reported, and the situation there has become catastrophic in scope. From today’s New York Times…

“The worst humanitarian crisis in Africa may not be unfolding in Darfur, but here, along a 20-mile strip of busted-up asphalt, several top United Nations officials said.

A year ago, the road between the market town of Afgooye and the capital of Mogadishu was just another typical Somali byway, lined with overgrown cactuses and the occasional bullet-riddled building. Now it is a corridor teeming with misery, with 200,000 recently displaced people crammed into swelling camps that are rapidly running out of food.

Natheefa Ali, who trudged up this road a week ago to escape the bloodbath that Mogadishu has turned into, said Monday that her 10-month-old baby was so malnourished she could not swallow.

“Look,” Ms. Natheefa said, pointing to her daughter’s splotchy legs, “her skin is falling off, too.”

Top United Nations officials who specialize in Somalia said the country had higher malnutrition rates, more current bloodshed and fewer aid workers than Darfur, which is often publicized as the world’s most pressing humanitarian crisis and has taken clear priority in terms of getting peacekeepers and aid money.

The relentless urban combat in Mogadishu, between an unpopular transitional government — installed partially with American help — and a determined Islamist insurgency, has driven waves of desperate people up the Afgooye road, where more than 70 camps of twigs and plastic have popped up seemingly overnight.

The people here are hungry, exposed, sick and dying. And the few aid organizations willing to brave a lawless, notoriously dangerous environment cannot keep up with their needs, like providing milk to the thousands of babies with fading heartbeats and bulging eyes. “Many of these kids are going to die,” said Eric Laroche, the head of United Nations humanitarian operations in Somalia. “We don’t have the capacity to reach them.”

He added: “If this were happening in Darfur, there would be a big fuss. But Somalia has been a forgotten emergency for years.”

The officials working on Somalia are trying to draw more attention to the country’s plight, which they feel has fallen into Darfur’s shadow. They have recently organized several trips, including one on Monday, for journalists to see for themselves.

“The situation in Somalia is the worst on the continent,” said Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the top United Nations official for Somalia.

That situation has included floods, droughts, locusts, suicide bombers, roadside bombs and near-daily assassinations.

United Nations officials said the recent round of plagues, natural and man-made, coupled with the residual chaos that has consumed Somalia for more than a decade, have put the country on the brink of famine. In the worst-hit areas, like Afgooye, recent surveys indicate the malnutrition rate is 19 percent, compared with about 13 percent in Darfur; 15 percent is considered the emergency threshold.

The officials, in making the comparison, were not trying to diminish the problems in Darfur, where more than 200,000 people have died from violence and disease since 2003. But they said they were concerned that the crisis here was increasingly urgent.

Unlike Darfur, where the suffering is being eased by a billion-dollar aid operation and more than 10,000 aid workers, Somalia is still considered mostly a no-go zone. Just last week, a Somali aid worker and a guard were shot to death at an aid distribution center in Afgooye. United Nations officials estimate that total emergency aid is under $200 million, partly because it is so difficult just getting food into the country.

Pirates lurking off the coast of Somalia have attacked more than 20 ships this year, including two carrying United Nations food. The militias that rule the streets — typically teenage gunmen in wraparound sunglasses and flip-flops — have jacked up roadblock taxes to $400 per truck. The transitional government last month jailed a senior official of the United Nations food program in Somalia, accusing him of helping terrorists, though he was eventually released.”

“Installed partially with American help”. Now there’s an understatement.

This passage, though, is rather telling…

“United Nations officials now concede that the country was in better shape during the brief reign of Somalia’s Islamist movement last year. “It was more peaceful, and much easier for us to work,” Mr. Laroche said. “The Islamists didn’t cause us any problems.”

Off The Books

Since the US backed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia, the United States has been gifted use of notorious Ethiopian jails to house and question detainees, despite the fact that they have been afforded the ability to conveniently claim that such individuals are not technically in US custody…

“Ethiopia, which denies holding secret prisoners, is a country with a long history of human rights abuses. In recent years, it has also been a key U.S. ally in the fight against al-Qaida, which has been trying to sink roots among Muslims in the Horn of Africa.

U.S. government officials contacted by AP acknowledged questioning prisoners in Ethiopia. But they said American agents were following the law and were fully justified in their actions because they are investigating past attacks and current threats of terrorism.

The prisoners were never in American custody, said an FBI spokesman, Richard Kolko, who denied the agency would support or be party to illegal arrests. He said U.S. agents were allowed limited access by governments in the Horn of Africa to question prisoners as part of the FBI’s counter-terrorism work.

Western security officials, who insisted on anonymity because the issue related to security matters, told AP that among those held were well-known suspects with strong links to al-Qaida.

But some U.S. allies have expressed consternation at the transfers to the prisons. One Western diplomat in Nairobi, who agreed to speak to AP only if not quoted to avoid angering U.S. officials, said he sees the United States as playing a guiding role in the operation.

John Sifton, a Human Rights Watch expert on counter-terrorism, went further. He said in an e-mail that the United States has acted as “ringleader” in what he labeled a “decentralized, outsourced Guantanamo.”

Details of the arrests, transfers and interrogations slowly emerged as AP and human rights groups investigated the disappearances, diplomats tracked their missing citizens and the first detainees to be released told their stories.

One investigator from an international human rights group, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to speak to the media, said Ethiopia had secret jails at three locations: Addis Ababa, the capital; an Ethiopian air base 37 miles east of the capital; and the far eastern desert close to the Somali border.”

As an added tidbit, it should also come as no surprise that Ethiopia is believed to be the country in which AFRICOM’s headquarters are located.

I have yet to post anything about the massive cyclone that has taken the lives of over 1,700 people in Bangladesh. Authorities in the country believe that, as rescue efforts continue, the death toll could climb. If you’re interested in helping, check out Oxfam Canada.

More On The Dziekanski Death

After last month’s fatal Tasering of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski, the RCMP has said that it plans to review its Taser policy, though RCMP Commissioner William Elliott has already defended the use of the device and said that it is a vital tool in the RCMP’s arsenal. That comes as no surprise, nor is it why I’ve broached the subject again.

While there are currently four separate investigations underway into what happened that day - the B.C. coroner, the RCMP, the public complaints commissioner for the RCMP, and the Vancouver Airport Authority – a public inquiry into the matter is not expected to begin until at least the spring or next summer.

One thing about Dziekanski should be cleared up. He did not suffer from a mental illness, as has been speculated. He had simply been stuck inside the airport’s international arrivals area for some 10 hours and, unable to communicate, had most likely simply become “confused and agitated while waiting for his mother”.

The Serbian State Mental Institution Holocaust

The International Herald Tribune recently ran a piece about a report issued by Mental Disability Rights International on the state of Serbia’s mental institutions. The details are so horrific that it’s almost impossible to fathom…

“A 21-year-old man with Down syndrome tied to a metal crib for 11 years. Children, naked from the waist down, left to eat and defecate in their beds. A 7-year-old girl with fluid in her brain left untreated “because she will die anyway.”

These are some of alleged abuses in Serbian state mental institutions and orphanages described in a report to be released Wednesday by Mental Disability Rights International, a Washington-based group that spent four years investigating the conditions and the treatment of some of the nearly 17,200 children and adults with disabilities in institutions in Serbia.

In the report, which is expected to be read closely by European Union officials who are assessing Serbia’s readiness to join the 27-member bloc, researchers concluded that “filthy conditions, contagious diseases, lack of medical care and rehabilitation and a failure to provide oversight renders placement in a Serbian institution life-threatening.”

The institutions investigated include the Institution for Children and Youth Kolevka in Subotica; the Institute for Mentally Ill People in Curug; the Kulina Institution for Children and Youth; the Special Institute for Children and Youth in Stamnica; and psychiatric hospitals in Vrsac and Kovin, east of Belgrade.

Eric Rosenthal, executive director of the rights group, said the use of physical restraints on children for years at a time was the most extreme he had seen in 14 years as a disability rights advocate. He said there were no enforceable laws in Serbia regulating the use of such restraints. “This is the most horrifying abuse I have seen on powerless children, who are tied to beds and unable to move,” he said. “This constitutes a clear case of torture.”

Words escape me.

There is a price tag on everything, that is something that should never be overlooked when it comes to the realities of foreign aid and economic agreements. While we are able to point to the world’s richest nations as being the most prolific when it comes to humanitarian aid, including the bolstering of medical initiatives to help fight, for example, the AIDS epidemic in Africa, such practices do not, nor have they ever, come without a price.

One of the best examples of how Western powers manipulate the developing and third worlds is by way of the World Bank/IMF. It is, in no small way, a mechanism with which to manipulate those in need of financial assistance, for whatever reason, to comply with the foreign policy objectives of others, primarily the United States. In truth, the same can be said of UN programs that are funded by such powers as well.

Economic manipulation is one of the most powerful tools in the world, employing a vast arsenal of methods to accomplish its goals, from psychological operations such as media manipulation to the support of governments that, in exchange for their cooperation and, in many cases, access to arms, willfully promote domestic disinformation and allow free access to their markets and resources to international interests.

No matter what you read, or, for that matter, chose to believe, there is no such thing as free goodwill. Even in the aftermath of the Asian tsunami, billions were invested by foreign interests after numerous governments, such as that of Thailand, used the decimation of property long inhabited by generations of fisherman as an excuse to deprive them of their land, entering into lucrative agreements with foreign companies for the future development of resort properties.

Following September 11th Matters Only Became Worse

Now in exchange for assistance, many nations are made to comply with global US security initiatives before a dime crosses the table. In some instances, such as in the case of Ethiopia, lucrative arms agreements are also commonly included, as is support for their regional objectives if there happens to be others in that region that do not conform to US global ideology. Because of events in Somalia, the Ethiopians have received military training assistance from the United States, not to mention direct military support in actions involving the Ethiopian incursion into Somalia (the US deployed special forces in Somalia during the confrontation of the ICU and also conducted air strikes on Somali targets, some of which resulted in civilian deaths). With regards to the ubiquitous ‘War On Terror’, the United States has also used Ethiopian prisons renowned for their abuse to hold and interrogate detainees that have been rendered to the country, all of them, as has been the case in such situations, forbidden access to the International Red Cross/Crescent.

Interestingly, the President of the United States can stand at the United Nations and lecture the world about human rights and how others are guilty of their denial. Of course, Mr. Bush failed to single out those nations with abhorrent human rights records that are friendly to his government, primarily the Saudis. And that should, of course, come as absolutely no surprise to anyone.

Politics is power, nothing more. To believe otherwise is to believe that within the confines of our present political reality that things can be changed. That is, unfortunately, not the case, nor realistic whatsoever. But that is also not to say that the foundations of our societies are wasted because of the corruption that has befallen them. Only that they have been abused to such an extent that to alter the political landscape will require sacrifices that many are not willing to make to ensure that such fundamental principles once again become predominant.

My mention of this particular subject stems from a recent Agence France Presse article about the run up to the invasion of Iraq…

“US President George W. Bush threatened nations with retaliation if they did not vote for a UN resolution backing the Iraq war, according to a transcript published Wednesday of a conversation he had with former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar.

In the transcript of a meeting on February 22, 2003 — a month before the US-led invasion of Iraq — published in the El Pais daily, Bush tells Aznar that nations like Mexico, Angola, Chile and Cameroon must know that the security of the United States is at stake.

He says during the meeting on his ranch in Texas that Angola stood to lose financial aid while Chile could see a free trade agreement held up in the US Senate if they did not back the resolution…”

Nothing comes without a price tag attached to it, even the unwillingness to betray your beliefs in favour of the desires of those that have the power to threaten you with repercussions.

I am often interested in the response that many nations have with regards to the safety of other human beings when it does not involve military action. Case in point – currently some 28 million people in India, Bangladesh, and Nepal have been affected by severe flooding causing a humanitarian crisis that could quickly escalate because of stagnant water and the spread of disease. According to the World Health Organization, “the scale of the disaster has dwarfed relief efforts”.

It seems to me that we live in a day and age in which the invasions of nations are more seriously contemplated and sold as ‘humanitarian’ in nature than the desire to ensure that millions are protected from disease and can regain some semblance of their lives after losing everything - and not because of the actions of a tyrant or a radical group, but from something as simple as rain.

New Orleans remains a brutal example of the sort of nonchalance that is afforded those that have endured deadly occurrences compared to the seriousness that is daily applied to the disastrous entanglements in foreign wars. While many in the region affected by Hurricane Katrina are being refused coverage by insurance companies, some still forced to live in trailers fraught with problems, the war machine turns unabated. In fact, the United States is in the midst of solidifying foreign arms agreements that total some $50 billion dollars, and yet the legacy of Katrina remains prevalent for all to see.

What actually constitutes a compassionate society? Robert Kennedy once referred to the United States as a selfless nation. Of course, mere minutes after making that remark, he was gunned down in a hotel kitchen. But the question remains – if our sense of humanity extends only so far as our own national security concerns, then what right do we have to claim ourselves anything but selfish? While we view ourselves as just, and are easily convinced because of that outlook that the use of force to help ensure the supposed safety of others is, in fact, humane, then what of acting selflessly when the need for force is not required? What if, rather than bombs, all that is required is clean drinking water and that the deliverance of it does not come with some sort of underlying, beneficial future arrangement?

In truth, our sense of selflessness and compassion exists in a vacuum. It is belayed by entirely selfish concerns, rendering it pointless in many ways. True, there are examples that it indeed exists, but to what realistic extent is it employed when it is required, and in how timely a fashion?

In the case of Canada, why has the federal government not looked into deploying DART with regards to the situation in South Asia? According to the National Defense website, DART’s operational criteria is as follows…

responds rapidly, in conjunction with national and regional governments and non-governmental agencies, to stabilize the primary effects of an emergency or disaster;

provides purified drinking water and medical aid to help prevent the rapid onset of secondary effects of a disaster; and

gains time for the deployment of national and international humanitarian aid to facilitate long-term recovery in a disaster-stricken community.

All three are perfectly applicable to the disaster in South Asia and what it might very well cause in the days and weeks ahead. True, taxpayer money would ultimately be used to pay for its deployment, but therein lies the reality of the world in which we live. Are we citizens of it as a whole, or merely insular inhabitants of portions of it when such disasters strike? If we can justify our involvement in combat operations in Afghanistan, and the use of taxes to pay for it, then the inability of Canadians to support the use of DART with regards to what is unfolding in South Asia points to something very dark and very real – that when it comes to what we perceive as our own security, that it is entirely justifiable to act under the pretense of selflessness, and yet it is just as justifiable to hesitate when that is not the case.

I hope, in this instance, that will not be the reality. Because the truth of the matter is – it rains most places.

Home…finally. There is something to be said for sleeping in your own bed with your own dogs laying on your head. Empty fridges, on the other hand, are not so fun to come home to. Puts things in perspective.

I did a recent interview with CBC Radio that appeared on The House, but there is little point in checking it out. I spoke with them for more than a half hour and it was edited down to sound bites that completely make my comments sound trite. Everything I said in support of what they used with regards to information explaining my position in an in-depth manner was edited out. Personally, I’m getting a little tired of it, and such is the reason why blogging is far better. There is no editorial oversight that is out of your control, your arguments are presented in full.

Looking back over the last few days there are a few things that I wanted to touch upon.

The first is the fact that flooding in South Asia has displaced some 20 million people. That’s 10 million people shy of the population of Canada. Oxfam has information on how you can help.

It seems that Weapon is being used on a website called Caledonia Wake Up Call, with which I have absolutely no affiliation whatsoever. In truth, I am massively offended that any of my work would be used by a website such as that without my permission, and the proper steps will be taken to ensure that it is removed.

Last, The International News recently ran a frightening story about comments made by Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo…

“Republican presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo says the best way he can think of to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the US is to threaten to retaliate by bombing Islamic holy sites.

The Colorado congressman on Tuesday told about 30 people at a town hall meeting in the state of Iowa that he believes such a terrorist attack could be imminent and that the US needs to hurry up and think of a way to stop it.

“If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina,” Tancredo said at the Family Table restaurant.”

Yes, you read that correctly.