Den udenrigspolitiske kommentator Poyâ Pâkzâd har skrevet nogle ret interessante blogindlæg om NATOs missilskjold som jeg hermed anbefaler.
Missilskjold! Et forsvar? pt. 1
Missilskjold! Et forsvar? pt. 2
Missilforsvaret skal muliggøre et angreb på Iran.
søndag den 21. november 2010
Afghanere ved ikke hvorfor deres land er besat.
Citat fra en artikel på MSNBC.com. den 19. Oktober.
"Few Afghans in Helmand and Kandahar provinces, Taliban strongholds where fighting remains fiercest, know why foreign troops are in Afghanistan, says the "Afghanistan Transition: Missing Variables" report to be released later on Friday.
The report by The International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) policy think-tank showed 92 percent of 1,000 Afghan men surveyed in Helmand and Kandahar know nothing of the hijacked airliner attacks on U.S. targets in 2001."
"Few Afghans in Helmand and Kandahar provinces, Taliban strongholds where fighting remains fiercest, know why foreign troops are in Afghanistan, says the "Afghanistan Transition: Missing Variables" report to be released later on Friday.
The report by The International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) policy think-tank showed 92 percent of 1,000 Afghan men surveyed in Helmand and Kandahar know nothing of the hijacked airliner attacks on U.S. targets in 2001."
lørdag den 20. november 2010
Professor Stephen Zunes om Obama-administrationens støtte til repressive regimer.
Ekspert i amerikansk udenrigspolitik i Mellemøsten, Professor i international relations Stephen Zunes, har skrevet en række læseværdige kritiske artikler omhandlende Obama-administrationens udenrigspolitik i Nord-Afrika og Mellemøsten, samt om ledende Demokraters holdninger til samme.
[Foreign Policy in Focus] Zunes: "How Not to Support Democracy in the Middle East."
[stephenzunes.org] Zunes: "U.S. Lawmakers Support Illegal Annexation."
[The Huffington Post] Zunes: "Arming the Saudis."
[Foreign Policy in Focus] Zunes: "U.S. Support for Israel Mirrors 80s Support for El Salvador Junta."
[Foreign Policy in Focus] Zunes: "Democratic Party Defends Israeli Attack."
[Truthout] Zunes: "Iraq: The Democrats' War."
[Foreign Policy in Focus] Zunes: "How Not to Support Democracy in the Middle East."
[stephenzunes.org] Zunes: "U.S. Lawmakers Support Illegal Annexation."
[The Huffington Post] Zunes: "Arming the Saudis."
[Foreign Policy in Focus] Zunes: "U.S. Support for Israel Mirrors 80s Support for El Salvador Junta."
[Foreign Policy in Focus] Zunes: "Democratic Party Defends Israeli Attack."
[Truthout] Zunes: "Iraq: The Democrats' War."
torsdag den 18. november 2010
Træk tropperne hjem.
Meldingerne omkring krigens forventede afslutning er meget forskellige. Førhen hed det sig, at man ville trække sig ud i 2011, nu tales der om 2014. Den britiske forsvarschef Gen. Sir David Richards udtaler imidlertid til den britiske avis, Daily Mail, at NATO bliver nødt til at fortsætte tilstedeværelsen i Afghanistan i mange årtier endnu: “Nato now needs to plan for a 30 or 40 year role to help the Afghan armed forces hold their country against the militants.” [1]
Den amerikanske befolknings opbakning til Afghanistan-krigen er imidlertid faldende. Nu er 50% procent iflg. den seneste undersøgelse imod krigen mens 44% er for.[2] At krigsmodstanden ikke er større, midt i en krisetid hvor fattigdommen er voksende, har nok at gøre med, at krigspropagandaen fra de højreorienterede medier flyder i en lind strøm, mens kritiske røster meget sjældent interviewes. Når der er kritik er den som regel af strategisk beskaffenhed, sjældent af doktrinær.
Krigen mod terror er sandsynligvis den dyreste krig USA nogensinde har befundet sig i. Professor i public finances v. Harvard University, Linda Bilmes, forfattede for to år siden “The Three Trillion Dollar War” sammen med Joseph Stieglitz, hvor de estimerede at de reelle omkostninger ved krigene løb op i flere billioner. Der var dog iflg. de to økonomiprofessorer tale om et konservativt estimat. Jeg anbefaler at læse Bilmes vidnesudsagn omkring krigsudgifterne foran House Comittee of Veterans’ Affairs tidligere i år.[3]
Krigen mod terror, som nu ikke længere kaldes dette officielt, har spredt sig. Den føres nu på mindst fire fronter, nemlig i Afghanistan og Irak samt i Pakistan og Yemen, og muligvis snart også i Iran. Samtidig påståes det, at der nu også strømmer en stor terrortrussel fra Somalia. Alligevel forsikres vi om, at vi er lige ved at være der. Krigen er måske ikke så stor en succes som håbet, men i det mindste en relativ succes. Dette er imidlertid usandt.
Karzais styre er gennemsyret af korruption og religionsfriheden i Afghanistan er aftagende under hans styre [4]. Blot fyrre kilometer fra hovedstaden hersker Taleban (dvs. en af de oprørgrupper uden fælles ledelse, vi i de vestlige medier kender under fællesbetegnelsen Taleban.)[5]
Der er ikke ret mange reelle fremskridt at spore for den civile og uskyldige afghaner, selv efter hele ni års krigsførelse. Den afghanske feminist Malalai Joya påpegede i et interview forleden, at koalitionsstyrkerne anses for at være endnu en fjende af store dele af den afghanske befolkning - de to andre er Nord-Alliancen og Taleban. Hun sagde:
“The only solution is the troops should withdraw because their presence is making the situation worse. Troops are daubed by Afghans as “enemies” rather than “friends”. Afghan people are squashed between three enemies: the Taliban, the fundamentalist warlords and foreign troops.
If the foreign enemy leaves Afghanistan, my people would only face two internal enemies and it would be easier to combat them. All the war criminals of the past 30 years should be put on trial and punished for their unforgivable crimes against the men, women and children of this nation. There are some that say the Taliban may get back to power, but my people, despite being wounded and tired of all the war, may lead a decisive combat against these dinosaurs with the extreme hatred that they have for them.
And then, a democratic, independent and secular government should be installed, free of all kinds of fundamentalist, mafia and criminal germs.” [6]
Vi må heller ikke glemme, at krigen i Afghanistan ikke har hjemmel i international lov. (jvf. juraprofessor Marjorie Cohns behandling af sagen.) [7]
Danmarks tilstedeværelse i Afghanistan er af forhenværende forsvarsminister, Søren Gade, gentagne gange blevet begrundet med, at vi er der for at forhindre terrorangreb på vestlige interesser, men hverken terrorangrebene i London eller Madrid havde deres rod i Afghanistan, hvorfor intet tyder på, at vores tilstedeværelse skulle kunne garantere at der ikke sker terrorangreb i Vesten.
Af alle disse grunde bør Danmark trække tropperne hjem.
Den amerikanske befolknings opbakning til Afghanistan-krigen er imidlertid faldende. Nu er 50% procent iflg. den seneste undersøgelse imod krigen mens 44% er for.[2] At krigsmodstanden ikke er større, midt i en krisetid hvor fattigdommen er voksende, har nok at gøre med, at krigspropagandaen fra de højreorienterede medier flyder i en lind strøm, mens kritiske røster meget sjældent interviewes. Når der er kritik er den som regel af strategisk beskaffenhed, sjældent af doktrinær.
Krigen mod terror er sandsynligvis den dyreste krig USA nogensinde har befundet sig i. Professor i public finances v. Harvard University, Linda Bilmes, forfattede for to år siden “The Three Trillion Dollar War” sammen med Joseph Stieglitz, hvor de estimerede at de reelle omkostninger ved krigene løb op i flere billioner. Der var dog iflg. de to økonomiprofessorer tale om et konservativt estimat. Jeg anbefaler at læse Bilmes vidnesudsagn omkring krigsudgifterne foran House Comittee of Veterans’ Affairs tidligere i år.[3]
Krigen mod terror, som nu ikke længere kaldes dette officielt, har spredt sig. Den føres nu på mindst fire fronter, nemlig i Afghanistan og Irak samt i Pakistan og Yemen, og muligvis snart også i Iran. Samtidig påståes det, at der nu også strømmer en stor terrortrussel fra Somalia. Alligevel forsikres vi om, at vi er lige ved at være der. Krigen er måske ikke så stor en succes som håbet, men i det mindste en relativ succes. Dette er imidlertid usandt.
Karzais styre er gennemsyret af korruption og religionsfriheden i Afghanistan er aftagende under hans styre [4]. Blot fyrre kilometer fra hovedstaden hersker Taleban (dvs. en af de oprørgrupper uden fælles ledelse, vi i de vestlige medier kender under fællesbetegnelsen Taleban.)[5]
Der er ikke ret mange reelle fremskridt at spore for den civile og uskyldige afghaner, selv efter hele ni års krigsførelse. Den afghanske feminist Malalai Joya påpegede i et interview forleden, at koalitionsstyrkerne anses for at være endnu en fjende af store dele af den afghanske befolkning - de to andre er Nord-Alliancen og Taleban. Hun sagde:
“The only solution is the troops should withdraw because their presence is making the situation worse. Troops are daubed by Afghans as “enemies” rather than “friends”. Afghan people are squashed between three enemies: the Taliban, the fundamentalist warlords and foreign troops.
If the foreign enemy leaves Afghanistan, my people would only face two internal enemies and it would be easier to combat them. All the war criminals of the past 30 years should be put on trial and punished for their unforgivable crimes against the men, women and children of this nation. There are some that say the Taliban may get back to power, but my people, despite being wounded and tired of all the war, may lead a decisive combat against these dinosaurs with the extreme hatred that they have for them.
And then, a democratic, independent and secular government should be installed, free of all kinds of fundamentalist, mafia and criminal germs.” [6]
Vi må heller ikke glemme, at krigen i Afghanistan ikke har hjemmel i international lov. (jvf. juraprofessor Marjorie Cohns behandling af sagen.) [7]
Danmarks tilstedeværelse i Afghanistan er af forhenværende forsvarsminister, Søren Gade, gentagne gange blevet begrundet med, at vi er der for at forhindre terrorangreb på vestlige interesser, men hverken terrorangrebene i London eller Madrid havde deres rod i Afghanistan, hvorfor intet tyder på, at vores tilstedeværelse skulle kunne garantere at der ikke sker terrorangreb i Vesten.
Af alle disse grunde bør Danmark trække tropperne hjem.
onsdag den 17. november 2010
Søren Pind om den aktivistiske udenrigspolitik
I en kronik i Jyllands-Posten den. 20.07.08 med titlen "Dette moralske tomrums røst: Fortsat dialog." går Søren Pind til angreb på modstanderne af den aktivistiske udenrigspolitik. Pind lader os forstå, at modstanderne af state-building gennem krig mod verdens diktaturer, herunder modstanderne mod Irak-krigen, blot ønsker "fortsatte cocktailpartys med disse moderne svar på Hitler og Stalin." mens "Argumentet om, at en blodig diktator er fjernet" ikke bider på krigsmodstanderne.
Først og fremmest er det intet mindre end overordentlig interessant, at Pind karakteriserer begivenhederne som ledte op til den anden Golf-krig som et cocktailparty, idet det anslås at sanktionspolitikken har kostet op mod en halv million børn livet, mens opretholdelsen af No-Fly Zones bombardementerne forvoldte at Irak var under angreb fra luften fra august 1992 frem til den anden Irak-krigs begyndelse i marts 2003.
Når Pind fremhæver "at en blodig diktator er fjernet" uden at nævne krigens mange negative konsekvenser er det vanskeligt at undlade at se hans argumentation som et forsøg på hvidvaskning af krigen, idet de mange negative konsekvenser af krigsførelsen bekvemt udelades. Et kort men ufuldstændigt overblik over de negative konsekvenser lyder således: 1.9 millioner mennesker er flygtet ud af landet og bor nu i flygtningelejre i nabolandene; 2,6 millioner mennesker er ligeledes flygtet fra deres hjem men befinder sig fortsat indenfor landets grænser; det er fortsat uvist hvor mange omkomne der er tale om, men tabstallene er sekscifrede; de økonomiske omkostninger måles i mange hundreder milliarder dollars, hvis ikke i billioner; krigen har gjort Irak til et arnested for terrorisme og Al-Qaeda har nu en tilstedeværelse i landet; en stor dels af verdens kulturarv er forsvundet og landets infrastruktur ligger mange steder i ruiner.
Dette nævner Pind som sagt ikke med et eneste ord i sin kronik, men fortsætter i stedet med at beskylde krigsmodstanderne for at svigte den vestlige verdens værdier: "De, der befordrer løgnen, svigter dermed ikke kun de undertrykte i disse lande verden over. De svigter samtidig den verdensdel, der siden den amerikanske uafhængighedserklæring har stået fast på, og været en lysende fakkel for den afmægtigt bastede og bundne med påstanden om, at hvert enkelt menneske er en unik skabning og at denne skabning, har ret til liv, frihed og stræben efter lykke."
Når vi holder de negative konsekvenser for de mange irakere jeg ovenfor nævnte in mente, fremstår det netop citerede nærmest demagogisk. Pinds argumentation er endvidere igen mangelfuld, idet han bekvemt undlader at nævne, at det netop er en væsentlig del af den vestlige verdens juridiske og kulturelle arv, at man ikke begiver sig ud i krig med mindre der er tale om (selv)forsvar. Irak-krigen kan imidlertid ikke retfærddigøres som en forvarskrig, da Irak ikke truede Danmark eller nogle af de andre krigsførende parter på daværende tidspunkt. Krigen var heller ikke sanktioneret af FNs sikkerhedsråd som ikke gav hjemmel for krigsførelse. Krigen var altså en ikke-sanktioneret angrebskrig og en sådan er ulovlig i henhold til international lov, men ikke alene er angrebskrig ulovlig, det er intet mindre end den største internationale forbrydelse man kan begå iflg. dommer ved Nurnberg-processerne Ross H. Jackson. Da Søren Pind er cand.jur må vi antage at han er bekendt med gældende international lov.
Først og fremmest er det intet mindre end overordentlig interessant, at Pind karakteriserer begivenhederne som ledte op til den anden Golf-krig som et cocktailparty, idet det anslås at sanktionspolitikken har kostet op mod en halv million børn livet, mens opretholdelsen af No-Fly Zones bombardementerne forvoldte at Irak var under angreb fra luften fra august 1992 frem til den anden Irak-krigs begyndelse i marts 2003.
Når Pind fremhæver "at en blodig diktator er fjernet" uden at nævne krigens mange negative konsekvenser er det vanskeligt at undlade at se hans argumentation som et forsøg på hvidvaskning af krigen, idet de mange negative konsekvenser af krigsførelsen bekvemt udelades. Et kort men ufuldstændigt overblik over de negative konsekvenser lyder således: 1.9 millioner mennesker er flygtet ud af landet og bor nu i flygtningelejre i nabolandene; 2,6 millioner mennesker er ligeledes flygtet fra deres hjem men befinder sig fortsat indenfor landets grænser; det er fortsat uvist hvor mange omkomne der er tale om, men tabstallene er sekscifrede; de økonomiske omkostninger måles i mange hundreder milliarder dollars, hvis ikke i billioner; krigen har gjort Irak til et arnested for terrorisme og Al-Qaeda har nu en tilstedeværelse i landet; en stor dels af verdens kulturarv er forsvundet og landets infrastruktur ligger mange steder i ruiner.
Dette nævner Pind som sagt ikke med et eneste ord i sin kronik, men fortsætter i stedet med at beskylde krigsmodstanderne for at svigte den vestlige verdens værdier: "De, der befordrer løgnen, svigter dermed ikke kun de undertrykte i disse lande verden over. De svigter samtidig den verdensdel, der siden den amerikanske uafhængighedserklæring har stået fast på, og været en lysende fakkel for den afmægtigt bastede og bundne med påstanden om, at hvert enkelt menneske er en unik skabning og at denne skabning, har ret til liv, frihed og stræben efter lykke."
Når vi holder de negative konsekvenser for de mange irakere jeg ovenfor nævnte in mente, fremstår det netop citerede nærmest demagogisk. Pinds argumentation er endvidere igen mangelfuld, idet han bekvemt undlader at nævne, at det netop er en væsentlig del af den vestlige verdens juridiske og kulturelle arv, at man ikke begiver sig ud i krig med mindre der er tale om (selv)forsvar. Irak-krigen kan imidlertid ikke retfærddigøres som en forvarskrig, da Irak ikke truede Danmark eller nogle af de andre krigsførende parter på daværende tidspunkt. Krigen var heller ikke sanktioneret af FNs sikkerhedsråd som ikke gav hjemmel for krigsførelse. Krigen var altså en ikke-sanktioneret angrebskrig og en sådan er ulovlig i henhold til international lov, men ikke alene er angrebskrig ulovlig, det er intet mindre end den største internationale forbrydelse man kan begå iflg. dommer ved Nurnberg-processerne Ross H. Jackson. Da Søren Pind er cand.jur må vi antage at han er bekendt med gældende international lov.
tirsdag den 16. november 2010
[Iraq] No-Fly Zone War.
NYTimes (August 13, 1999): "With Little Notice, U.S. Planes Have Been Striking Iraq All Year."
The Guardian (December 4, 2002): "Britain and US step up bombing in Iraq."
IraqJournal.org (December 10, 2002): "No-Fly Zones Over Iraq: Washington's Undeclared War on "Saddam's Victims".
Washington Post (December 22, 2002): "Casualties of an 'Undeclared War': Civilians Killed and Injured as U.S. Airstrikes Escalate in Southern Iraq."
The Independent (23 February 2003): "US and Britain Pound Iraqi Defenses in Massive Escalation of Airstrikes."
NYTimes (July 19 2003): "U.S. Attacked Iraqi Defenses Starting in 2002."
The Guardian (December 4, 2002): "Britain and US step up bombing in Iraq."
IraqJournal.org (December 10, 2002): "No-Fly Zones Over Iraq: Washington's Undeclared War on "Saddam's Victims".
Washington Post (December 22, 2002): "Casualties of an 'Undeclared War': Civilians Killed and Injured as U.S. Airstrikes Escalate in Southern Iraq."
The Independent (23 February 2003): "US and Britain Pound Iraqi Defenses in Massive Escalation of Airstrikes."
NYTimes (July 19 2003): "U.S. Attacked Iraqi Defenses Starting in 2002."
Extraordinary Renditions.
BBC: Amnesty says EU 'failing' over CIA renditions.
BBC: What happened in Europe's secret CIA prisons?
BBC: CIA 'tortured suspects' in secret prison in Poland.
Huffington Post: Breaking the Conspiracy of Silence: Europe and Extraordinary Rendition.
The Guardian: The necessary reckoning on rendition and waterboarding.
BBC: What happened in Europe's secret CIA prisons?
BBC: CIA 'tortured suspects' in secret prison in Poland.
Huffington Post: Breaking the Conspiracy of Silence: Europe and Extraordinary Rendition.
The Guardian: The necessary reckoning on rendition and waterboarding.
mandag den 15. november 2010
Obama og Indonesiens specialstyrker.
Tidligere i år valgte man fra Obama-administrationens side at genoptage støtten til Kopassus, Indonesiens specialstyrker, som ellers var faldet i unåde grundet specialstyrkens centrale rolle i folkemordet i Øst-Timor, der estimeres at have kostet op mod en sjettedel af Øst-Timors befolkning livet.
Umiddelbart samtidig med Obamas besøg i Indonesien kom det imidlertid frem, grundet et lækket internt dokument fra Kopassus, at specialstyrken fortsat idag gør sig i uhyrligheder, idet dokumentet omtaler, at specialstyrken begår mord og foretager bortførelser samt generelt betragter civile kritikere i den besatte West Papua region som fjenden. Obama nævnte imidlertid ikke dette med et eneste ord under sit besøg.
OMTALE:
The Guardian: West Papua deserves Barack Obama's attention.
AllainNairn.com: Secret Files Show Kopassus, Indonesia's Special Forces, Targets Papuan Churches, Civilians. Documents Leak from Notorious US-Backed Unit as Obama Lands in Indonesia.
The Guardian: Obama's missed opportunity in Jakarta.
Umiddelbart samtidig med Obamas besøg i Indonesien kom det imidlertid frem, grundet et lækket internt dokument fra Kopassus, at specialstyrken fortsat idag gør sig i uhyrligheder, idet dokumentet omtaler, at specialstyrken begår mord og foretager bortførelser samt generelt betragter civile kritikere i den besatte West Papua region som fjenden. Obama nævnte imidlertid ikke dette med et eneste ord under sit besøg.
OMTALE:
The Guardian: West Papua deserves Barack Obama's attention.
AllainNairn.com: Secret Files Show Kopassus, Indonesia's Special Forces, Targets Papuan Churches, Civilians. Documents Leak from Notorious US-Backed Unit as Obama Lands in Indonesia.
The Guardian: Obama's missed opportunity in Jakarta.
Irak-krigens konsekvenser.
Den amerikanske tænketank Center for American Progress om Irak-krigens menneskelige, strategiske og økonomiske omkostninger.
Link.
Lancet-undersøgelsen:
OM FLYGTNINGEPROBLEMATIKKEN:
Think Progress: Confronting The Iraqi Nakba.
Link.
Lancet-undersøgelsen:
The Lancet, one of the oldest scientific medical journals in the world, published two peer-reviewed studies on the effect of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and subsequent occupation on the Iraqi mortality rate. The first was published in 2004; the second (by many of the same authors) in 2006. The studies estimate the number of excess deaths caused by the occupation, both direct (combatants plus non-combatants) and indirect (due to increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poor healthcare, etc.).Link til Wikipedia artikel om undersøgelsen.
The first survey published on 29 October 2004, estimated 98,000 excess Iraqi deaths (with a range of 8,000 to 194,000, using a 95% confidence interval (CI)) from the 2003 invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq to that time, or about 50% higher than the death rate prior to the invasion. The authors described this as a conservative estimate, because it excluded the extreme statistical outlier data from Falluja. If the Falluja cluster were included, the mortality estimate would increase to 150% over pre-invasion rates (95% CI: 1.6 to 4.2).
The second survey published on 11 October 2006, estimated 654,965 excess deaths related to the war, or 2.5% of the population, through the end of June 2006. The new study applied similar methods and involved surveys between May 20 and July 10, 2006.[4] More households were surveyed, allowing for a 95% confidence interval of 392,979 to 942,636 excess Iraqi deaths. 601,027 deaths (range of 426,369 to 793,663 using a 95% confidence interval) were due to violence. 31% (186,318) of those were attributed to the Coalition, 24% (144,246) to others, and 46% (276,472) unknown. The causes of violent deaths were gunshot (56% or 336,575), car bomb (13% or 78,133), other explosion/ordnance (14%), air strike (13% or 78,133), accident (2% or 12,020), and unknown (2%).
OM FLYGTNINGEPROBLEMATIKKEN:
Think Progress: Confronting The Iraqi Nakba.
between 2003 and 2009, in addition to the more than 100,000 Iraqis killed and many more wounded and maimed, more than 4.5 million Iraqis were expelled and displaced amid Iraq’s sectarian civil war — new, grim details of which are contained in the WikiLeaks trove. Around 2.6 million remain internally displaced in Iraq, unable to return to their homes. Another 1.9 million remain refugees, mostly in neighboring Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. It has utterly changed the face not only of Iraq, but of the region. If Americans are going to learn the right lessons from Iraq, and satisfy the huge moral debt we’ve incurred, we’ve simply got to regain our sense of shock about the enormity of what we have done there: Through a combination of hubris, idealism, incompetence, and plain ignorance, the United States facilitated, sponsored, and oversaw Iraq’s Nakba.Link.
[Afghanistan-krigen] Økonomiske aspekter.
MANGLENDE FINANSIELT TILSYN:
Wireds Dangerroom-skribent Spencer Ackerman om manglende fnansielt tilsyn med millioner af dollars som lander i lommerne på afghanske embedsmænd og regeringsrådgivere:
"According to a new report from the U.S.’ independent Afghanistan-reconstruction auditor, Arnold Fields, American agencies spent at least three years paying Afghan government officials and “technical advisers” off the books — outside official channels and without “collecting any information” on who they paid and how much they doled out. From 2005 to 2008, and in some cases into 2010, both agencies declined to “centrally manage” their record keeping, allowing an untold amount of aid money to disappear into the pockets of their favored Afghans.
And that went into a lot of pockets. The Afghan Ministry of Finance estimates that U.S. and international donors pay $45 million annually to support 6,600 government employees and advisers, but that’s an undercount, reliant on “incomplete data.” Just this year, after the Ministry demanded the U.S. start a tally of who it pays, at least 900 government officials received U.S. cash, totaling $1 million each month."
Kilde.
Wireds Dangerroom-skribent Spencer Ackerman om manglende fnansielt tilsyn med millioner af dollars som lander i lommerne på afghanske embedsmænd og regeringsrådgivere:
"According to a new report from the U.S.’ independent Afghanistan-reconstruction auditor, Arnold Fields, American agencies spent at least three years paying Afghan government officials and “technical advisers” off the books — outside official channels and without “collecting any information” on who they paid and how much they doled out. From 2005 to 2008, and in some cases into 2010, both agencies declined to “centrally manage” their record keeping, allowing an untold amount of aid money to disappear into the pockets of their favored Afghans.
And that went into a lot of pockets. The Afghan Ministry of Finance estimates that U.S. and international donors pay $45 million annually to support 6,600 government employees and advisers, but that’s an undercount, reliant on “incomplete data.” Just this year, after the Ministry demanded the U.S. start a tally of who it pays, at least 900 government officials received U.S. cash, totaling $1 million each month."
Kilde.
fredag den 12. november 2010
Reagan's udenrigspoliitk.
Støtten til Saddam Hussein:
Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein: The U.S. Tilts toward Iraq, 1980-1984.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
Dawoody: "Reagan & Saddam: The Unholy Alliance."
http://www.counterpunch.org/dawoody06082004.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Støtten til Muhammed Zia ul-Haq, Pakistansk fundamentalistiske muslimske diktator:
“Zia’s longevity as a ruler was made possible by the unstinting support he received from President Ronald Reagan and the U.S. administration after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in December 1979.”
“General Zia’s eleven-year rule was to have the most long-lasting and damaging effect on Pakistani society, one still prevalent today. Zia, who seized power from Bhutto in a coup in 1977, dealt with Pakistan’s identity crisis by imposing an ideological Islamic state upon the population. Many of today’s problems—the militancy of the religious parties, the mushrooming of madrassas and extremist groups, the spread of drug and Kalashnikov culture, and the increase in sectarian violence took place during the Zia era.”
“Between 1982 and 1990 the CIA, working with the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence; det pakistanske efterretningsvæsen, som USA var med til at opbygge] and Saudi Arabia’s intelligence service, funded the training, arrival, and arming of some thirty-five thousand Islamic militants from forty-three Muslim countries in Pakistani madrassas to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. This global jihad launched by Zia and Reagan was to sow the seeds of al Qaeda and turn Pakistan into the world center of jihadism for the next two decades.”
Kilde - Ahmed Rashid: ”Descent into Chaos: The U.S. And the Disaster in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia.”
History Commons: Context of 'April 1981: Reagan Administration Says It Can Turn a Blind Eye to Pakistani Nuclear Program'
The Guardian: "The man who knew too much."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GUATEMALA.
Robert Parry: "Guatemala: A Test Tube of Repression."
http://www.truth-out.org/guatemala-a-test-tube-repression63859
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EL SALVADOR:
Washington Post: Former Salvadoran Foes Share Doubts on War.
Dennis Hans. "From Afghanistan to El Salvador: Reagan's Dark Global Legacy".
http://www.counterpunch.org/hans06072004.html
Wiki-article on the Salvadoran Civil War:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_Civil_War
http://www.pbs.org/itvs/enemiesofwar/elsalvador2.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29546-2004Jun9.html
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/reagans_bloody_legacy.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRAN-CONTRA SCANDAL:
the lost chapter.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/062908.html
Perception Management.
Lost History: CIA's Perception Management
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/lost12.html
The October Surprise.
Key October Surprise Evidence Hidden.
http://consortiumnews.com/2010/050610.html
The Tricky October Surprise Report.
http://consortiumnews.com/2010/061710.html
Richard Allen's Notes on Bush 'October Surprise' Call.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/allen-shackley-notes.html
How Two Elections Changed America.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/110409.html
The Russian Report.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/russiantext.html
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/russianreport1980.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein: The U.S. Tilts toward Iraq, 1980-1984.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
Dawoody: "Reagan & Saddam: The Unholy Alliance."
http://www.counterpunch.org/dawoody06082004.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Støtten til Muhammed Zia ul-Haq, Pakistansk fundamentalistiske muslimske diktator:
“Zia’s longevity as a ruler was made possible by the unstinting support he received from President Ronald Reagan and the U.S. administration after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in December 1979.”
“General Zia’s eleven-year rule was to have the most long-lasting and damaging effect on Pakistani society, one still prevalent today. Zia, who seized power from Bhutto in a coup in 1977, dealt with Pakistan’s identity crisis by imposing an ideological Islamic state upon the population. Many of today’s problems—the militancy of the religious parties, the mushrooming of madrassas and extremist groups, the spread of drug and Kalashnikov culture, and the increase in sectarian violence took place during the Zia era.”
“Between 1982 and 1990 the CIA, working with the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence; det pakistanske efterretningsvæsen, som USA var med til at opbygge] and Saudi Arabia’s intelligence service, funded the training, arrival, and arming of some thirty-five thousand Islamic militants from forty-three Muslim countries in Pakistani madrassas to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. This global jihad launched by Zia and Reagan was to sow the seeds of al Qaeda and turn Pakistan into the world center of jihadism for the next two decades.”
Kilde - Ahmed Rashid: ”Descent into Chaos: The U.S. And the Disaster in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia.”
History Commons: Context of 'April 1981: Reagan Administration Says It Can Turn a Blind Eye to Pakistani Nuclear Program'
The Guardian: "The man who knew too much."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GUATEMALA.
Robert Parry: "Guatemala: A Test Tube of Repression."
http://www.truth-out.org/guatemala-a-test-tube-repression63859
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EL SALVADOR:
Washington Post: Former Salvadoran Foes Share Doubts on War.
Dennis Hans. "From Afghanistan to El Salvador: Reagan's Dark Global Legacy".
http://www.counterpunch.org/hans06072004.html
Wiki-article on the Salvadoran Civil War:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvadoran_Civil_War
http://www.pbs.org/itvs/enemiesofwar/elsalvador2.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29546-2004Jun9.html
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/reagans_bloody_legacy.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRAN-CONTRA SCANDAL:
the lost chapter.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/062908.html
Perception Management.
Lost History: CIA's Perception Management
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/lost12.html
The October Surprise.
Key October Surprise Evidence Hidden.
http://consortiumnews.com/2010/050610.html
The Tricky October Surprise Report.
http://consortiumnews.com/2010/061710.html
Richard Allen's Notes on Bush 'October Surprise' Call.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/allen-shackley-notes.html
How Two Elections Changed America.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/110409.html
The Russian Report.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/russiantext.html
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/russianreport1980.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fredag den 24. september 2010
mandag den 20. september 2010
Contractors research
lørdag den 18. september 2010
Prison Industrial Complex Research
Etnicitet og fængsling.
IPS NEWS: Money for Prisons, Not for Social Services.
Litteraturhenvisninger.
Wikiartikel om The Prison-Industrial Complex.
PRISONS: HUMAN RIGHTS.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_gawande
http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/11/confronting-human-rights-abuses-in-us-prisons/
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0712-08.htm
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Human_Rights/Rights_Police_USA_RFA.html
IPS NEWS: Money for Prisons, Not for Social Services.
Litteraturhenvisninger.
Wikiartikel om The Prison-Industrial Complex.
PRISONS: HUMAN RIGHTS.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_gawande
http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/11/confronting-human-rights-abuses-in-us-prisons/
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0712-08.htm
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Human_Rights/Rights_Police_USA_RFA.html
War on drugs.
According to FBI data released yesterday, police arrested 1,663,582 people on drug charges in the United States last year, slightly fewer than the 1,702,537 arrested in 2008. A little more than half of the drug arrests involved marijuana, and nearly 9 out of 10 marijuana arrests involved possession, as opposed to sale or manufacturing. The number of marijuana arrests, 858,408, was up slightly from the previous year's total, 847,863, but still lower than the historic peak of 872,721 in 2007.
As I've noted before, there is no obvious relationship between marijuana arrests and marijuana use. Although arrests have more than doubled since the early 1990s, the number of pot smokers was no lower in 2008 than it was in 1990 and perhaps somewhat higher, even allowing for methodological changes that seem to have boosted self-reported drug use after 2001.
http://reason.com/blog/2010/09/16/drug-arrests-down-pot-arrests
Omtale af en ny rapport som omhandler narkorelaterede fængslinger i USA.
“Despite comparable usage of illicit drugs, in 2008, African Americans, who make up 12.2 percent of the general population, comprised 44 percent of those incarcerated for drug offences, according to the report.
Researchers say that disproportionate enforcement of drug laws in communities of colour destabilises families and communities and decreases the likelihood of positive outcomes for children and other family members left behind.
Due to the prolonged economic meltdown, many states are now making drastic cuts in funding for social services - such as health, education, and public housing - but not on policing and prison improvement and expansion.”
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=52868
Abonner på:
Opslag (Atom)