meta-roj

since the news comes from the washington post, this is probably a more-lasting link.

U.S. Quits Agreement on Access to Diplomats — Paper

The United States has withdrawn from an international agreement that guarantees jailed foreigners the right to talk to consular officers, a protocol that has been used by opponents of capital punishment, The Washington Post reported on Thursday.

apparently, it’s an inconvenience in our prison economy, most particularly the parts involved in the death penalty, to let foreigners charged with crimes in the united states consult with their consular officials.

on the upside, i guess this means our foreign friends can cut back on their staffing requirements here….

i spent a few minutes looking for a copy of this, but the best i found was a little ap piece…

McNamara derides ‘illegal’ nukes policies [ap via seattle post intelligencer, march 9, 2005

“A decade after the Cold War, the basic U.S. nuclear policy has not been changed,” said McNamara, 88, adding that he believed “every leader of a nuclear power should be present at a detonation.”

it will be very interesting to put that quote in context.

just a bit of perspective from the north…

Missile Counter-Attack

eliot weinberger took better notes than i on the things he heard about iraq. i didn’t hear all these things, or if i did, i have forgotten. it’s good to be reminded.

what i heard about iraq [london review of books, 3 feburary 2005]

I heard him [secretary of defense dick cheney] say: ‘The question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth? And the answer is: not that damned many.’

Sudan, Southern Rebels End 21-Year War [reuters, january 9, 2005]

Bare-chested warriors danced and turbaned heads bowed in prayer when Sudan’s Islamist government and southern rebels sealed a comprehensive peace agreement on Sunday ending Africa’s longest-running civil war.

i know most of the world is still focused on south asia, but this was worth mentioning.

with a nod to devon largio recently of the university of illinois, and via foreign policy, i direct your attention to the chart included in this story.

between september 2001 and october 2002, george w. bush, dick cheney,richard perle, colin powell, condoleezza rice, donald rumsfeld paul wolfowitz, tom daschle, joseph lieberman and john mccain came up with no fewer than 21 reasons to go to war with iraq. the foreign policy article gives you a handy graphic representation. i’m going to put them on the text record here:

1. to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
2. for regime change.
3. to further the war on terror.
4. because of iraq’s violation of united nations resolutions.
5. because of saddam hussein’s evil dictatorship and actions.
6. because of a lack of weapons inspections in iraq.
7. to liberate iraq.
8. because of iraq’s ties to al qaeda.
9. because iraq was an imminent threat.
10. to disarm iraq.
11. to conclude the gulf war of 1991.
12. because hussein was a threat to the region.
13. for the safety of the world.
14. to support the united nations.
15. because the united states could (easy victory).
16. to preserve peace around the world.
17. because iraq was a unique threat.
18. to transform the region.
19. as a warning to other terrorist nations.
20. because hussein hates the united states and will act against it.
21. because history calls the united states to action.

with hindsight, it seems that we’ve pretty much settled on #18 for now. interestingly, this justification seems to have been presented only by richard perle back in the day.

i think this guy needs to get back to figuring out the universe. it bothers me that he’s compelled to address issues like this at all.

Scientist Stephen Hawking Decries Iraq War [ap via abc news, november 2, 2004]

“The war was based on two lies, ” said Hawking. “The first was we were in danger of weapons of mass destruction and the second was that Iraq was somehow to blame for Sept. 11.

“It has been a tragedy for all the families that have lost members. As many as 100,000 people have died, half of them women and children. If that is not a war crime, what is?”

if stephen hawking can get out and speak at a demonstration, i should be doing more myself.

the war on terror? piece of cake.

Al Qaeda ‘To Disintegrate’ in 2 Years – UK Adviser [reuters, november 10, 2004]

Al Qaeda will begin to disintegrate within two years as its various factions start to squabble and militants return to their local roots, a senior British parliamentary adviser predicted on Wednesday.

then again, senior american advisors on the defense science board seem to disagree.

i suppose they can’t both be right…

this is picking up a little traction, probably with some help from sidney blumenthal at the guardian but i like to go to the sources… so once you’ve dropped in there for an editorial, here’s the report that got it all going…

Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication September 2004 [pdf].

American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.

What was a marginal network is now an Ummah-wide movement of fighting groups. Not only has there been a proliferation of “terrorist” groups: the unifying context of a shared cause creates a sense of affiliation across the many cultural and sectarian boundaries that divide Islam.

strange, indeed.

Sudan Army Surrounds Darfur Camps, Aid Agency Says [reuters, nov 2, 2004]

“Early this morning, police surrounded two camps and later on relocated a number of IDPs (internally displace people),” the World Food Program (WFP) spokeswoman in Nyala, Bettina Leuscher, told Reuters.

now, do they starve to death, or send in the machetes?

do something