Things to consider—

Since early 2011, Obama's been waging proxy war on Syria. Imported death squads masquerade as freedom fighters. The scheme's familiar. It repeats. It reflects US imperialism's dark side. In the 1980s, CIA-recruited mujahideen fighters battled Afghanistan's Soviet occupiers. Ronald Reagan called them "the moral equivalent of our founding fathers." He characterized Contra killers the same way. —Stephen LendmanFor over a century now US ambassadors have acted as fifth columns in the nations they are embedded in, their role chiefly to foster corporate and plutocratic power and coordinate machinations against any truly pro-democratic government.•••••"The dead end identity politics of SF Pride, which sells out a peace hero like Bradley Manning to curry favor with the American ruling class, is what I had in mind. The empire loves your tameness, irrelevance and cowardice, SF Pride. You don’t bother the American ruling class — a five foot two, 105 pound soldier does because he has a conscience and because he didn’t make comfort the guiding principle of his life...." —Randy Shields
Dec 012010
 
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

By Liz Langley | December 1, 2010
| [print_link]

I'm not always the fastest horse in the Derby, but even I couldn't miss the irony of pitying one species of animal while licking my chops like a cartoon wolf with the desire to eat another.
    
_____________
That's how my life was playing out the week before Thanksgiving. I was looking forward with great culinary lust to a great big turkey with bronze skin that would glisten like the Ban de Soliel girl and smell like the comfort and safety of childhood holidays. At the same time I was trying to piece together a story on how messed up it is that the fashion industry still uses fur. There seems to be a lot of fur this year, as noted on Web sites like Style.com and the Wall Street Journal blog and I only noticed it all because I'm a fan of Tim Gunn, the breakout star of Project Runway and one of the only adults on television.
     Gunn (left) is solidly anti-fur. He made this video for PETA (seen here on the unfortunately named Peta Files page) showing footage of animals being skinned, butchered, anally electrocuted and having their heads nailed to trees -- many while still alive and conscious. If you can watch it without feeling like your soul is going to barf, the FBI should have a look at you.
     So is there really a lot of fur this year? Or was I only noticing it because I'd seen this heinous video?
"Sadly fur is always a big part of fashion. It's never gone away and every fall/winter season there's a lot of it," says Maryellen Gordon, fashion industry expert and a former editor at Glamor and WWD. "There was a small moment in the '90s when PETA made teeny inroads with a few designers who switched to fake fur. But that true designer customer still loves her fur and fake just won't cut it for that person."
     So the video did affect my notice of the fur, and frankly, it baffled me. It seems so dated, like seeing a dial phone on someone's desk. Fur is a faded idea of glamor, like top hats and long cigarette holders, that may have been grand in the yellowed past, but now should just stay there, in the past.  Then there was Janet.
     Janet Jackson, who has long been a style icon of mine, recently became the latest star in the "What Becomes a Legend Most?" campaign for Blackglama furs. It's an especially interesting paradox since Janet doesn't eat meat. (Michael was also a vegetarian.)
     It would be easy for me to judge Jackson for wearing fur, but frankly it's easy to be self-righteous about things to which you have no access. Of course, I can indignantly say I'd never wear fur, but I have no access to fur. It's like boycotting a trip to the moon. Janet and I both have access to eating meat and she chooses not to, which means that Blackglama or not, she kind of wins this round.
     But how do we come to have these paradoxes at all? Why is fur OK but not meat, or meat OK but not fur? Why do some people refuse to eat red meat, but will eat chicken, or refuse chicken but eat fish? Why is eating one animal disgusting while eating another is a holiday?  
     While mulling these questions I happened onto the book, Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs and Wear Cows: An Introduction to Carnism, by Melanie Joy. Joy calls our paradoxical view of animals as either pets, clothes or meat "carnism" -- a belief system that relies on its own invisibility -- keep us from noticing what we're eating and how it's made -- so we perpetuate its dominance in the marketplace without giving it much thought.
     "If slaughterhouses had glass walls everyone would be a vegetarian," Joy quotes Paul McCartney as saying. The idea that we seldom see the process by which animals are turned into entrees is an example of invisibility. Language is another. We refer to cows as "beef," and pigs as "bacon," a small but significant way of distancing ourselves from them. Fish and fowl are less like us and so, Joy says, we're comfortable just saying what they are.
     In a phone interview Joy told me that she interviewed people for her doctoral dissertation who had raised and killed their own animals (as opposed to industrial meat production or CAFOs -- Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations). One man who was originally from Zimbabwe, where he had a farm, said, "I make sure I keep all the animals I know I'm going to eat on the other side of the yard. I don't give them names and I don't interact with them too much because if I did I know I couldn't kill them."
     Joy sees his reasoning as carnistic defense: "In order to carry out harm against somebody else human or non-human we can't allow ourselves to identify with them, to see something of you in them and something of them in you, even if the only thing we identify with is the desire to be free from harm or suffering. It's very important for us to block our awareness...which blocks our empathy."  
     Presentation is another way we distance ourselves from the reality of how meat gets to us. It often loses any tell-tale bones, shells and certainly heads (though I have seen fish served with heads attached) on its way to the table. In talking with Joy I mention McNuggets; she mentions turkey-and-rice baby food that's "like pudding." We seldom see the 10 billion animals that Joy says go into our diets annually (not including fish), the often unsanitary conditions they're processed in, the "death-saturated" environment slaughterhouse workers cope with and the toll on our ecology. Cattle-produced methane, she writes, "has a global warming effect equivalent to that of 33 million automobiles," plus all the land used for grazing and the grain and fish used for feeding.
     Combine all this distancing with our cultural attachment to meat and it's no wonder we can easily slip into denial about the reality of meat production. Often we want to. Frankly I want to.
Joy once had the same paradox at work.
     "There are plenty of people, I was one of them... I would never have worn a fur coat but I would eat meat regularly... and my leather coat, I loved," she says. It's easier to be distanced from clothing than from food. "Fur is something you put on your body. Meat is something you put in your body," she says. Oral incorporation is more intimate, there's no mass culture built around fur like there is around food.
Joy dabbled in vegetarianism in her teens, read the literature, knew what was what but "preferred not to know," so she could eat meat like her peers. That changed when eating a tainted hamburger put her in the hospital on IV antibiotics.
     "It was one of the best experiences of my life and one of the worst experiences of my life," she says, because while the illness was horrible it enabled her to make a paradigm shift.
     "Once I stopped eating meat then I wasn't so defensive," she says. "I was able to take in more information about what happens to animals who become our food, because I didn't have anything to defend at that point."
She began teaching workshops on vegetarianism around Boston and found that though her students were gung-ho at the workshops, some even crying at the imagery, they would go right back to eating meat. Her desire to understand this paradox led her back to school to study psychology and eventually to write her book, which is an excellent read.
     Melanie Joy is starting the Carnism Awareness & Action Network, which will be a resource for carnists, like me, who aren't so defensive they won't look for information, as well as vegans and vegetarians. Joy says carnists are not the enemy but are "participants in a system that victimizes everyone. And the more direct victims of carnism, the human victims are those who have the least financial power, people who work in meat-packing plants and slaughterhouses. Human Rights Watch, for the first time ever, criticized a single industry, the meat industry for working conditions so egregious they violate human rights."
     It's also the people on the lower end of the economic scale who eat the cheapest, least healthy kinds of meat, so there's a classism at work in carnism as well.
     "Most people do carry around a certain kind of cognitive moral dissonance around eating animals," Joy says, "the internal moral discomfort that we feel when our values and our practices are out of alignment."
     Full disclosure: I didn't totally deny myself some turkey over the holiday. But I ate significantly less of it than I ever have. Having marinated in the irony of my paradoxical views on fur and meat and in Melanie Joy's wonderful book, I may be doomed to being far more conscious from here on out.
     They say you are what you eat. There may come a day when I no longer want to be a chicken.
___________________
Liz Langley is a freelance writer in Orlando, FL.
© 2010 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.

 

 

 

Did you like this? Share it:
Dec 012010
 
julianAssange345

The unfolding WikiLeaks story, from different angles.

________________

Julian Assange should receive a special Nobel prize. It reflects on the uselessness and corruption of all the world’s establishment institutions that the Nobels, for example, do not choose (any more than the Pope and other highly placed figures) to back up a heroic David like Assange. He’s nothing if not a desperately needed disinfectant for the putrid system gradually drowning us all—human, beast and nature alike—in a perfect storm of pathological greed, corruption, selfishness and idiotic short-term thinking. —The Editor

________________

1

Wikileaks’ next target: A major US bank
By Sahil Kapur | November 30th, 2010  [print_link]
He's been relentlessly revealing some of the US government's most deeply held secrets, but for his next act, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says he will expose the corruption of a major American bank.
In an interview with Andy Greenberg of Forbes earlier this month, Assange said his whistleblower website possesses and intends to disclose tens of thousands of secret documents from a major US financial institution early next year.
     "It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume," Assange (left) said.
     He declined to provide any additional details but boldly predicted that the leak will be as high-impact as the Enron emails, which revealed the corruption of the Houston-based energy company and led to its demise in 2001.
     "Usually when you get leaks at this level, it’s about one particular case or one particular violation," he said. "For this, there’s only one similar example. It’s like the Enron emails."
     Assange added: "You could call it the ecosystem of corruption. But it’s also all the regular decision making that turns a blind eye to and supports unethical practices: the oversight that’s not done, the priorities of executives, how they think they’re fulfilling their own self-interest. The way they talk about it.
     The Australian-born Wikileaks chief became a household name around the world upon regularly exposing internal US government documents pertaining to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
     This week, he has put the US in damage-control mode after revealing 250,000 classified diplomatic cables obtained from the Department of State without permission, exposing the modus operandi of American foreign relations and countless diplomatic secrets of world leaders.
     For this, he has earned the wrath of the United States government and its allies while winning the affections of transparency lovers across the world. And now, Assange hints he will take greater interest in the private sector, from which he says his website has received many documents.
     Greenberg reports that Assange "confirmed that WikiLeaks has damaging, unpublished material from pharmaceutical companies, finance firms (aside from the upcoming bank release), and energy companies, just to name a few industries."
________________________________
2
Why Wikileaks is Good for Democracy
By Bill Quigley
Information is the currency of democracy. --Thomas Jefferson.
Since 9-11, the US government, through Presidents Bush and Obama, has increasingly told the US public that “state secrets” will not be shared with citizens. Candidate Obama pledged to reduce the use of state secrets, but President Obama continued the Bush tradition. The Courts and Congress and international allies have gone meekly along with the escalating secrecy demands of the US Executive.
    By labeling tens of millions of documents secret, the US government has created a huge vacuum of information.  But information is the lifeblood of democracy. Information about government contributes to a healthy democracy. Transparency and accountability are essential elements of good government. Likewise, “a lack of government transparency and accountability undermines democracy and gives rise to cynicism and mistrust,” according to a 2008 Harris survey commissioned by the Association of Government Accountants.
     Into the secrecy vacuum stepped Private Bradley Manning, who, according to the Associated Press, was able to defeat “Pentagon security systems using little more than a Lady Gaga CD and a portable computer memory stick.”
     Manning apparently sent the information to Wikileaks – a non profit media organization, which specializes in publishing leaked information. Wikileaks in turn shared the documents to other media around the world including the New York Times and published much of it on its website.
     Despite criminal investigations by the US and other governments, it is not clear that media organizations like Wikileaks can be prosecuted in the US in light of First Amendment. Recall that the First Amendment says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
     Outraged politicians are claiming that the release of government information is the criminal equivalent of terrorism and puts innocent people’s lives at risk. Many of those same politicians authorized the modern equivalent of carpet bombing of Baghdad and other Iraqi cities, the sacrifice of thousands of lives of soldiers and civilians, and drone assaults on civilian areas in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen. Their anger at a document dump, no matter how extensive, is more than a little suspect.
____________________
Ex Bush enabler MARC THIESSEN suggest on Hannity that Julian Assange should be kidnapped and liquidated. What else can we expect from such scum? 
Watch it:
[flv]http://www.greanvillepost.com/videos/marcThiessen-Hannity-onAssange.flv[/flv]
____________________
     Everyone, including Wikileaks and the other media reporting the documents, hopes that no lives will be lost because of this. So far, that appears to be the case as McClatchey Newspapers reported November 28, 2010, that ‘US officials conceded that they have no evidence to date that the [prior] release of documents led to anyone’s death.”
     The US has been going in the wrong direction for years by classifying millions of documents as secrets. Wikileaks and other media which report these so called secrets will embarrass people yes. Wikileaks and other media will make leaders uncomfortable yes. But embarrassment and discomfort are small prices to pay for a healthier democracy.
     Wikileaks has the potential to make transparency and accountability more robust in the US. That is good for democracy.
________________
Bill is Legal Director at the Center for Constitutional Rights and a law professor at Loyola University New Orleans.  He is a Katrina survivor and has been active in human rights in Haiti for years with the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti.  Quigley77@gmail.com
Crosspost with CommonDreams.org  November 30, 2010
_________
3
MEANWHILE, THE CRIMINAL SCUMBAGS' PARADE MARCHES ON
The Guardian (UK) December 1, 2010
US embassy cables culprit should be executed, says Mike Huckabee
Republican presidential hopeful wants the person responsible for the WikiLeaks cables to face capital punishment for treason 
By Haroon Siddique and Matthew Weaver 
The Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee has called for whoever leaked the 250,000 US diplomatic cables to be executed.
   Huckabee (left), who ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination at the last election but is one of the favourites for 2012, joined a growing number of people demanding the severest punishment possible for those behind the leak, which has prompted a global diplomatic crisis.
His fellow potential Republican nominee [the utterly vile] Sarah Palin had already called for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to be "hunted down", and an adviser to the Canadian prime minister has echoed her comments.
     Huckabee said: "Whoever in our government leaked that information is guilty of treason, and I think anything less than execution is too kind a penalty." [So much for this repulsive and pious phony, a fitting specimen in the Reagan-worshipping Republican mob.)
     He added, according to Politico: "They've put American lives at risk. They put relationships that will take decades to rebuild at risk. They knew full well that they were handling sensitive documents they were entrusted.
     "And anyone who had access to that level of information was not only a person who understood what their rules were, but they also signed, under oath, a commitment that they would not violate. They did … Any lives they endangered, they're personally responsible for and the blood is on their hands."
     Bradley Manning, a US army intelligence analyst suspected of leaking the diplomatic cables, is currently being held at a military base. He has been charged with transferring classified data and delivering national defence information to an unauthorised source. He faces a court martial and up to 52 years in prison.
     The 23-year-old was arrested after boasting in instant messages and emails to a high-profile former hacker, Adrian Lamo, that he had passed the material to WikiLeaks along with a highly classified video of US forces killing unarmed civilians in Baghdad.
     Kathleen McFarland (left), who served in the Pentagon under the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations, concurred with Huckabee. "It's time to up the charges," said McFarland, now [fittingly] a Fox News national security analyst. "Let's charge him and try him for treason. If he is found guilty, he should be executed."
It is not just the Americans who are demanding blood. Tom Flanagan, a senior adviser to the Canadian prime minister, Stephen Harper, issued what has been described as a fatwa against Assange, on the Canadian TV station CBC.
     "I think Assange should be assassinated, actually," he said. "I think Obama should put out a contract and maybe use a drone or something." Flanagan chuckled as he made the comment but did not retract it when questioned, adding: "I wouldn't feel unhappy if Assange does disappear."
     Revelations directly relating to Canada have been few and far between so far, although there was some embarrassment for Harper in the leak of a US embassy note from one of the French president's key foreign advisers. It explained that Harper was invited to last year's D-day commemorations in Normandy only because his government was in trouble.
     Assange is facing growing legal problems around the world.
     The US has announced it is investigating whether he has violated its espionage laws, and his details have been added to Interpol's worldwide wanted list, based on an arrest warrant issued by Swedish prosecutors in connection with rape allegations.
     On Monday, Sarah Palin wrote on Facebook: "He is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaida and Taliban leaders?"
______________
4
Global Research  November 30, 2010
Wikileaks and the New Global Order: America’s Wake-up Call
By Jonathan Cook
The Wikileaks disclosure this week of confidential cables from United States embassies has been debated chiefly in terms either of the damage to Washington’s reputation or of the questions it raises about national security and freedom of the press.
     The headlines aside, most of the information so far revealed from the 250,000 documents is hardly earth-shattering, even if it often runs starkly counter to the official narrative of the US as the benevolent global policeman, trying to maintain order amid an often unruly rabble of underlings.
     Is it really surprising that US officials appear to have been trying to spy on senior United Nations staff, and just about everyone else for that matter? Or that Israel has been lobbying strenuously for military action to be taken against Iran? Or even that Saudi Arabia feels threatened by an Iranian nuclear bomb? All of this was already largely understood; the leaks have simply provided official confirmation.
     The new disclosures, however, do provide a useful insight, captured in the very ordinariness of the diplomatic correspondence, into Washington’s own sense of the limits on its global role -- an insight that was far less apparent in the previous Wikileaks revelations on the US army’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
     Underlying the gossip and analysis sent back to Washington is an awareness from many US officials stationed abroad of quite how ineffective -- and often counter-productive -- much US foreign policy is.
     While the most powerful nation on earth is again shown to be more than capable of throwing its weight around in bullying fashion, a cynical resignation nonetheless shines through many of the cables, an implicit recognition that even the top dog has to recognise its limits.
     That is most starkly evident in the messages sent by the embassy in Pakistan, revealing the perception among local US officials that the country is largely impervious to US machinations and is in danger of falling entirely out the ambit of Washington’s influence.
     In the cables sent from Tel Aviv, a similar fatalism reigns. The possibility that Israel might go it alone and attack Iran is contemplated as though it were an event Washington has no hope of preventing. US largesse of billions of dollars in annual aid and military assistance to Israel appears to confer zero leverage on its ally’s policies.
    The same sense of US ineffectiveness is highlighted by the Wikileaks episode in another way. Once, in the pre-digital era, the most a whistleblower could hope to achieve was the disclosure of secret documents limited to his or her area of privileged access. Even then the affair could often be hushed up and make no lasting impact.
    Now, however, it seems the contents of almost the entire system of US official communications is vulnerable to exposure. And anyone with a computer has a permanent and easily disseminated record of the evidence.
     The impression of a world running out of American control has become a theme touching all our lives over the past decade.
     The US invented and exported financial deregulation, promising it to be the epitome of the new capitalism that was going to offer the world economic salvation. The result is a banking crisis that now threatens to topple the very governments in Europe who are Washington’s closest allies.
     As the contagion of bad debt spreads through the system, we are likely to see a growing destabilisation of the Washington order across the globe.
     At the same time, the US army’s invasions in the Middle East are stretching its financial and military muscle to tearing point, defining for a modern audience the problem of imperial over-reach. Here too the upheaval is offering potent possibilities to those who wish to challenge the current order.
     And then there is the biggest crisis facing Washington: of a gradually unfolding environmental catastrophe that has been caused chiefly by the same rush for world economic dominance that spawned the banking disaster.
     The scale of this problem is overawing most scientists, and starting to register with the public, even if it is still barely acknowledged beyond platitudes by US officials.
     The repercussions of ecological meltdown will be felt not just by polar bears and tribes living on islands. It will change the way we live -- and whether we live -- in ways that we cannot hope to foresee.
     At work here is a set of global forces that the US, in its hubris, believed it could tame and dominate in its own cynical interests. By the early 1990s that arrogance manifested itself in the claim of the “end of history”: the world’s problems were about to be solved by US-sponsored corporate capitalism.
     The new Wikileaks disclosures will help to dent those assumptions. If a small group of activists can embarrass the most powerful nation on earth, the world’s finite resources and its laws of nature promise a much harsher lesson.
________________
Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is http://www.jkcook.net.

 

 

_________________
Did you like this? Share it: