During his recent public relations tour of the Middle East, Secretary of State Colin Powell claims he told Arab leaders they should be 'doubly outraged at what happened to Mr. Berg' in comparison to the Arab reaction to the prisoner abuse scandal. During this same interview, Powell complained that Arab leaders have failed to adequately condemn the beheading.

Interestingly enough, Powell made those statements while being interviewed in Jordan, one of the many Arab states that publicly condemned the murder of Nicholas Berg. The official statement published on the Jordanian Embassy's web site called the act 'barbaric' and informed readers that 'Jordan has issued a death sentence against Al Zarqawi for his terrorist activities.'

Saudi Arabia also issued a strong condemnation calling the act 'criminal and inhumane.' The statement by Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan, published on their embassy's web site, went further to explain that the recent prisoner abuse scandal is no justification for the murder, which is 'condemned by all religions and contrary to the morals of all nations and peoples.'

Many words are taboo when used to describe Israel's actions against Palestinians.  One word in specific, genocide, sparks emotions that echo across Israel, Europe and America.  The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines genocide as 'the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group.' What is happening in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip today is dangerously encroaching on genocide, close enough so that the pictures of Palestinians in Rafah loading their meager belongings on carts and evacuating their homes are too reminiscent of another time, another place and another people. These very same images should be setting off alarms in the hearts and minds of Israelis. Unfortunately, at stake is not the lexicon of conflict but rather, our children, and we refuse to sit still to watch a deaf, dumb and blind world steal their future from them.

A few weeks ago, Israeli Professor and Political Sociologist at Ben Gurion University Lev Grinberg wrote an article that created an uproar in Israel titled, Symbolic Genocide [1].  In it Professor Grinberg wrote, 'Unable to
AUSTIN, Texas -- It's pretty easy to get to the point where you don't want to hear any more about Abu Ghraib prison and what went on there. But there are some really good reasons why Americans should take a look at why this happened.

            I suspect the division here is not between liberals and conservatives (except for a few inane comments made by some trying to be flippant), but between those who are following the story closely and those who are not. I particularly recommend both Sy Hersh's follow-up piece in the current issue of The New Yorker and the investigative piece in the current issue of Newsweek. What seems to me more important than the "Oh ugh" factor is just how easy it is for standards of law and behavior of slip into bestiality.

OCEANSIDE -- Head south from Los Angeles on Interstate 5 and the only respite from the houses, subdivisions and trailer parks marching down the Pacific coastline comes with the thousands of acres of the U.S. Marine Corps training base at Camp Pendleton and the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (tastefully labeled SONGS on Southern California Edison's signs). Protected by the Marines and the graceful twin domes of the nuclear plant, nature survives on the coastal bluffs above the beaches.

            If the empire's forward outpost is currently in Baghdad, surely the valley bottoms, mesas and shoreline of San Diego County, guarded on its northern edge by Camp Pendleton, offer a useful clue as to how power and privilege work in the imperial homeland. Looking beyond the laconic surfers lining up at dawn at Old Man's at San Onofre, and at the eager sightseers swarming into Legoland, we see a sour tableau of speculation, hyper-charged suburban development, dislocation and skyrocketing household debt.

Colorado bishop says that Catholics cannot receive Communion if they vote for politicians who are pro-choice, among other positions.
I am a frustrated Australian. Apart from one or to journalists with the courage to print the truth, all our daily papers are nothing but mouth pieces supporting our governments participation in this sham. Harvey Wasserman's article resonates my views precisely, except I would take it further. Apart from jailing these despots, I would also make them pay war reparations to Iraq from their own finances, I believe that would be fair.

They have lied and passed the buck enough. With the plethora of intelligence agencies at their disposal, only a complete fool could believe that the President of the United States had no knowledge of the torture that was transpiring, and that they were unaware that Saddam Hussein was not a threat to America or world peace. In both cases they had the unmitigated audacity to pass the buck pleading their ignorance. These court martials are nothing more than a diabolical  side show to appease the international the community, and the Iraqi populace.

Whether one views the 9/11 "terrorist" attacks as blow back, a wake-up call, or an unjustified outrage, they have deeply affected the American psyche and our attitudes toward war, the future, and the world. As a historian trying to understand this phenomenon, I tend to view the government's behavior, before and after 9/11, in the context of its leaders' past actions.

Before 9/11, Bush's inner circle of neoconservative advisors proclaimed the need for a dramatic expansion of U.S. military might entailing "full spectrum dominance" over all other nations and regions (including outer space), long term petro-resource control with permanent Middle East bases, and a preemptive First Strike policy against recalcitrant states. In September 2000, however, the neocon's flagship think tank, the Project for a New America Century, warned that this "process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."

After 9/11, this administration systematically nurtured the fear of further homeland attacks to justify its own
Mr. Wasserman's column has crucially glaring omissions: GWB loves Jesus, is an instrument of God, and is doing God's work so if you don't believe me, just ask them.  Sadly, possibly nothing in the column can likely be refuted: the information is out there for the entire world to see, but is in the eye of the beholder(s).  Montel recently claimed in effect it has been proved that people who are cruel to animals don't care what they do humans: if so and if reports of a particular child blowing up frogs are true, nothing in Mr. Wasserman's column should be a surprise to any of us.

What is even more sad is the fact that more than 40%, possibly more than 50%, of voters will vote for GWB in November no matter what, no matter how horrific, gruesome, and/or destructive the record/policy initiatives/actions.  What is even more sad is not even three Republicans in the House would likely ever vote to impeach no matter what, no matter how damning and serious the almost certain mountain of high crimes, whereas only thirty years ago enough Republican senators would have voted to assure Richard Nixon's conviction.  What is even more sad is that more than 40% of
There is a growing consensus in the United States that mainstream commercial media are by and large not mainstream at all but instead are supportive of the corporate agenda.  Of course, the largest media companies (which provide most Americans' news) and their large advertisers are themselves mammoth corporations.  In addition to promoting policies that advance corporate interests, our major media often appear to place profits ahead of investing in in-depth quality journalism.

To be sure, there are numerous web-based, alternative, and community-supported media challenging the corporate consensus.  But for all their integrity and brilliance, these media outlets cannot challenge corporate power.  They're too small, they don't frame issues on a national scale, they don't win debates, and they don't set the political agenda.

But there is a sleeping giant among these alternatives, one that was a major force in our country in the past * and which could be so again.  Some of its overseas counterparts already have demonstrated their power as opinion shapers.  This giant has its own potentially enormous supply of funding --

Pages

Subscribe to ColumbusFreePress.com  RSS