No military solution to Iraq, warns new US commander

The new US commander in Iraq has admitted that insurgents have intensified their attacks during the security crackdown in Baghdad, as he warned that there was no military solution to the nation’s bloody conflict.

General David Petraeus, appointed last month to oversee the White House’s fresh plan for Iraq, said that his troops were limited in what they alone could achieve and that some of the militant groups causing violence in the country would have to be engaged in political discussions.

The latest security sweep would take months, during which “sensational attacks” would continue, he said, but there had already been encouraging signs of improvement including a fall in sectarian killings.

In his first press conference since taking command, the General added he saw no immediate need to call for yet more US troops, but that the reinforcements already requested were likely to stay well past the summer months, and would be sent to areas outside Baghdad where militants were regrouping.

One of the key regions will be Diyala province, northeast of the capital, where suspected Sunni extremists fleeing the security operation in Baghdad have been gathering, he said.

Asked about reports that his second in command, General Raymond Odierno, had recommended the additional 21,500 troops would need to stay in Iraq until early 2008, he replied: “I’ve certainly not reached a conclusion yet about that I think you generally think that if you’re going to achieve the kind of effects that we probably need, I would think it would need to be sustained certainly some time well beyond the summer, but again we’ll have to see.

On Tuesday, a senior Pentagon official said the number of US troops needed to carry out the White House's security plan could approach 30,000, significantly more than projected in January.

Essential to ending the conflict, General Petraeus insisted, was identifying militant groups who were “reconcilable” and to bring them into the political process. “Putting Iraq above personal and sectarian agendas will be critical,” he said, warning that such negotiations would “determine in the long run the success of this effort.

“There is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq. Military action is necessary to help improve security... but it is not sufficient. There needs to be a political aspect.”

The comments followed three days of unrelenting violence, in which attacks by Sunni insurgents on Shia pilgrims left more than 150 dead and dramatically increased political tensions.

Speaking inside Baghdad’s fortified Green Zone, General Petraeus acknowledged that the nation had witnessed a particularly bloody period of insurgent attacks since coalition and Iraqi forces began their much-vaunted security sweep three weeks ago.

Despite a drop in the number of bodies found shot and dumped around the capital - from around 40 to 50 a day to single digits on some days – there are few signs of a let-up in bombings, with recent attacks including a suicide bombing at a mainly Shia university and an assassination attempt against one of Iraq’s vice presidents.

Of the reinforcements promised by the Pentagon, 17,500 have been pledged to Baghdad. General Petraeus said the full contingent should be in the nation by June, with one army brigades already in place, and another was partially deployed.

© Copyright Times Newspapers Ltd

Rogue U.S. government to launch nuclear terrorist attack on sovereign nation in complete violation of domestic and international law

So what else is new?--Pete Iran Must Get Ready to Repel a Nuclear Attack By General Leonid Ivashov

Global Research, January 24, 2007

Strategic Cultural Foundation (Russia)

In the overall flow of information coming from the Middle East, there are increasingly frequent reports indicating that within several months from now the US will deliver nuclear strikes on Iran. For example, citing well-informed but undisclosed sources, the Kuwaiti Arab Times wrote that the US plans to launch a missile and bomb attack on the territory of Iran before the end of April, 2007. The campaign will start from the sea and will be supported by the Patriot missile defense systems in order to let the US forces avoid a ground operation and to reduce the efficiency of the return strike by “any Persian Gulf country”. “Any country” mostly refers to Iran. The source which supplied the information to the Kuwaiti paper believes that the US forces in Iraq and other countries of the region will be defended from any Iranian missile strikes by the frontier Patriots. So, the preparations for a new US aggression entered the completion phase. The executions of S. Hussein and his closest associates were a part of these preparations. Their purpose was to serve as a “disguise operation” for the efforts of the US strategists to deliberately escalate the situation both around Iran and in the entire Middle East. Analyzing the consequences of the move, the US did order to hang the former Iraqi leader and his associates. This shows that the US has adopted irreversibly the plan of partitioning Iraq into three warring pseudo-states – the Shiite, the Sunnite, and the Kurdish ones. Washington reckons that the situation of a controlled chaos will help it to dominate the Persian Gulf oil supplies and other strategically important oil transportation routes. The most important aspect of the matter is that a zone of an endless bloody conflict will be created at the core of the Middle East, and that the countries neighboring Iraq – Iran, Syria, Turkey (Kurdistan) – will inevitably be getting drawn into it. This will solve the problem of completely destabilizing the region, a task of major importance for the US and especially for Israel. The war in Iraq was just one element in a series of steps in the process of regional destabilization. It was only a phase in the process of getting closer to dealing with Iran and other countries, which the US declared or will declare rouge. However it is not easy for the US to get involved in yet another military campaign while Iraq and Afghanistan are not “pacified” (the US lacks the resources necessary for the operation). Besides, protests against the politics of the Washington neocons intensify all over the world. Due to all of the above, the US will use nuclear weapon against Iran. This will be the second case of the use of nuclear weapons in combat after the 1945 US attack on Japan. The Israeli military and political circles had been making statements on the possibility of nuclear and missile strikes on Iran openly since October, 2006, when the idea was immediately supported by G. Bush. Currently it is touted in the form of a “necessity” of nuclear strikes. The public is taught to believe that there is nothing monstrous about such a possibility and that, on the contrary, a nuclear strike is quite feasible. Allegedly, there is no other way to “stop” Iran. How will other nuclear powers react? As for Russia, at best it will limit itself to condemning the strikes, and at worst – as in the case of the aggression against Yugoslavia – its response will be something like “though by this the US makes a mistake, the victim itself provoked the attack”. Europe will react in essentially the same way. Possibly, the negative reaction of China and several other countries to the nuclear aggression will be stronger. In any case, there will be no retaliation nuclear strike on the US forces (the US is absolutely sure of this). The UN means nothing in this context. Having failed to condemn the aggression against Yugoslavia, the UN Security Council effectively shared the responsibility for it. This institution is only capable to adopt resolutions which the Russian and also the French diplomacy understands as banning the use of force, but the US and British ones interpret in exactly the opposite sense – as authorizing their aggression. Speaking of Israel, it is sure to come under the Iranian missile strikes. Possibly, the Hezbollah and the Palestinian resistance will become more active. Posing as victims, the Israelis will resort to provocations to justify their aggression, suffer some tolerable damage, and then the outraged US will destabilize Iran finally, making it look like a noble mission of retribution. Some people tend to believe that concerns over the world’s protests can stop the US. I do not think so. The importance of this factor should not be overstated. In the past, I have spent hours talking to Milosevic, trying to convince him that NATO was preparing to attack Yugoslavia. For a long time, he could not believe this and kept telling me: “Just read the UN Charter. What grounds will they have to do it?” But they did it. They ignored the international law outrageously and did it. What do we have now? Yes, there was a shock, there was indignation. But the result is exactly what the aggressors wanted – Milosevic is dead, Yugoslavia is partitioned, and Serbia is colonized – NATO officers have set up their headquarters in the country’s ministry of defense. The same things happened to Iraq. There were a shock and indignation. But what matters to the Americans is not how big the shock is, but how high are the revenues of their military-industrial complex. The information that a second US aircraft-carrier is due to arrive at the Persian Gulf till the end of January makes it possible to analyze the possible evolution of the war situation. Attacking Iran, the US will mostly use air delivery of the nuclear munitions. Cruise missiles (carried by the US aircrafts as well as ships and submarines) and, possibly, ballistic missiles will be used. Probably, nuclear strikes will be followed by air raids from aircraft carriers and by other means of attack. The US command is trying to exclude a ground operation: Iran has a strong army and the US forces are likely to suffer massive casualties. This is unacceptable for G. Bush who already finds himself in a difficult situation. It does not take a ground operation to destroy infrastructures in Iran, to reverse the development of the country, to cause panic, and to create a political, economic and military chaos. This can be accomplished by using first the nuclear, and subsequently the conventional means of warfare. Such is the purpose of bringing the aircraft carrier group closer to the Iranian coast. What resources for self-defense does Iran have? They are considerable, but incomparably inferior to the US forces. Iran has 29 Russian Tor systems. Definitely, they are an important reinforcement of the Iranian air defense. However, at present Iran has no guaranteed protection from air raids. The US tactics will be the same as usual: first, to neutralize the air defense and radars, and then to attack aircrafts in the air and on land, the control installations, and the infrastructure, while taking no risks. Within weeks from now, we will see the informational warfare machine start working. The public opinion is already under pressure. There will be a growing anti-Iranian militaristic hysteria, new information leaks, disinformation, etc. At the same time all of the above sends a signal to the pro-Western opposition and to a fraction of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s elite to get ready for the coming developments. The US hopes that an attack on Iran will inevitably result in a chaos in the country, and that it will be possible to bribe some of the Iranian generals and thus to create a fifth column in the country. Of course, Iran is very different from Iraq. However, if the aggressor succeeds in instigating a conflict between the two branches of the Iranian armed forces – the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps and the army – the country will find itself in a critical situation, especially in case at the very beginning of the campaign the US manages to hit the Iranian leadership and delivers a nuclear strike or a massive one by conventional warfare on the country’s central command. Today, the probability of a US aggression against Iran is extremely high. It does remain unclear, though, whether the US Congress is going to authorize the war. It may take a provocation to eliminate this obstacle (an attack on Israel or the US targets including military bases). The scale of the provocation may be comparable to the 9-11 attack in NY. Then the Congress will certainly say “Yes” to the US President. General Leonid Ivashov is the vice-president of the Academy on geopolitical affairs. He was the chief of the department for General affairs in the Soviet Union’s ministry of Defense, secretary of the Council of defense ministers of the Community of independant states (CIS), chief of the Military cooperation department at the Russian federation’s Ministry of defense and Joint chief of staff of the Russian armies

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. © Copyright Leonid Ivashov , Strategic Cultural Foundation (Russia) , 2007 The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=4581

Edwards to freeze out Fox News

By Evan Derkacz
Posted on March 7, 2007, Printed on March 8, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/evan/48926/

A couple of weeks ago it came to light that Nevada Democratic Party were having one of their presidential debates hosted by Fox News.

Fox, as many have pointed out, is less "conservative" than it is a simple propaganda network for Republicans. In any case, it is extremely disparaging of Democrats:

Insulting graphics, biased post-debate spin, loaded questions, conservative protesters -- none of that sounds very "unfiltered" to me. Further, how much of the debate will Fox cut off entirely in order to have their in-house pundits offer negative commentary while the Democratic candidates are still speaking? Four years ago, in typically unfiltered fashion, Fox cut away from the Democratic debate they hosted a couple of minutes before it ended, in order to give arch-conservative William Bennett the first shot at post-debate spin.

It's especially enraging as the Democratic Leader in the Senate is Harry Reid, of Nevada.

As a result, BlogPac set up a campaign to urge Democrats to freeze out Fox News.

John Edwards sent the following email to Daily Kos:

"We will not be participating in the Fox debate. We're going to make lots of appearances in Nevada, including debates. By the end of March, we will have attended three presidential forums in Nevada -- and there are already at least three proposed Nevada debates. We're definitely going to debate in Nevada, but we don't see why this needs to be one of them."

Evan Derkacz is an AlterNet editor. He writes and edits PEEK, the blog of blogs.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/evan/48926/

U.S. News: Mass. immigration raid strands workers' children

Immigration officials' arrest of 327 suspected undocumented Massachusetts workers has left about 100 children stranded with caretakers, said social workers who continue to learn of infants left behind. Gov. Deval Patrick worried children of the mostly female Guatemalan and El Salvadoran workers at Michael Bianco Inc., a military contractor, lack proper care, and the parents may fear disclosing the existence or whereabouts of their children.

Investigators say plant management mistreated workers, imposing onerous fines on them, such as $20 for talking at work or spending over 2 minutes in the bathroom. The company has more than $90 million in US military contracts.

Critics Say No Child Left Behind Report Misses Real Problems

by Livia Gershon

An ‘elite’ commission that has reviewed President Bush’s keystone education policy avoided difficult issues and has recommended an expansion of standardized testing.

Mar. 6 – This year, Jevon Cochran's English class has been "postponed." Instead of the usual mix of reading, writing, grammar and vocabulary lessons and discussion, Cochran, a junior at Lewis Cass Technical High School in Detroit, said he and his classmates are now drilling for the ACT exam. They must take the national scholastic test as part of Michigan's effort to evaluate students and schools under federal standards passed in 2001. That, he said, has meant a change in the classroom atmosphere.

In past years, Cochran said, "while we would be reading these novels and stories and whatnot, the teachers would try to get us to become better critical thinkers by getting us to write essays and getting us to talk about what we read in class and how it pertains to things in life that we go through today. Now we're learning just a bunch of crap that's going to be on the ACT."

Later this year, Congress will consider reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). When it does, the chairs of the House and Senate education committees have said that their evaluation of the program will be guided by a report released last month by the Commission on No Child Left Behind, an independent group that evaluated the law's effects over the past year.

But critics say that in creating its report, "Beyond NCLB: Fulfilling the Promise to Our Nation's Children," the Commission ignored the perspectives of students like Cochran as well as parents and educators who see problems with the law.

The controversial No Child Left Behind Act is the keystone of the Bush administration's education policy. Supporters argue that it is a tool for improving education and moving toward educational equality for students of all racial and economic backgrounds. The law requires schools to meet certain goals each year, based largely on students' scores on tests like the ACT. Those schools that do not do so must take specifically mandated steps that may involve providing tutors, replacing school staff, restructuring or even privatizing the school.

Educators, students and parents who oppose the law argue that it is too reliant on standardized tests and too punitive for school districts with poor test scores. Some state and local school leaders also complain that the federal government does not provide enough funding to implement the law's requirements.

The Commission, chaired by former US Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson and former Georgia Governor Roy Barnes, essentially concluded that No Child Left Behind is moving schools in the right direction, but needs to be applied more forcefully. The report recommends creating a more-uniform national standard for the tests required by law, adding a new 12th-grade test, and evaluating individual teachers and principals in part based on their students' performance on the tests.

"If anything, their recommendations would intensify the role of testing," said Robert Schaeffer, the public-education director of the National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest), a nonprofit group that promotes changes in the use of standardized testing. "It's more of the same bad thing."

The Commission, which is housed at the Aspen Institute, was launched with financial support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and six other private foundations. Its thirteen members are mostly academics and education officials, though about half of them worked as classroom teachers at some point in their careers. In the course of its study of the law, the Commission held a series of hearings across the country, where they heard almost exclusively from high-level education, government, union and business leaders.

Schaeffer argues that the Commission's conclusions are not surprising, given the way the body was formed.

"It was a very elitist operation in which they spent very little time talking to actual practitioners, the people on the ground dealing with the effects of No Child Left Behind every day," he said.

Jennifer Adams, the Commission's communications director, argued that the hearings reflect only part of the Commission's efforts. It also gathered data by visiting schools, seeking comments from the public through its website, and holding round-table discussions with teachers, parents, community leaders and education officials on a number of specific topics.

Still, Adams acknowledged to The NewStandard, the commissioners primarily sought suggestions on how to reach the law's stated goals, rather than questioning No Child Left Behind's overall framework. "The mission that we were given was to try to give recommendations to improve this law, not to get rid of the law," she said.

In particular, the report does not question the value of standardized tests, probably the most-widely criticized of NCLB's features. The Commission's summary of its hearing on the use of standardized tests begins with the statement, "There is broad agreement that testing plays a critical role in education reform by giving educators, administrators and the public a means to understand how schools and students are performing."

But critics like Cochran say emphasizing standardized tests encourages teachers to focus on skills that are ultimately not very useful to students.

"The tests are supposed to measure how good you would do in college, and I don't see how," said Cochran, who is a member of By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), a civil rights coalition that works to defend affirmative action and immigrant rights. "For instance... [in a lesson] on the English section of the test, there was this whole section on where you have to place semicolons in sentences. I don't see how learning about where you place semicolons is going to help you better prepare yourself for college."

Cochran said he would like to see his classes focus more on developing critical thinking skills and helping individual students figure out what learning techniques work best for them.

Another BAMN member, Christopher Sutton, a senior at Murray Wright High School in Detroit, said he notices teachers becoming dispirited and showing less creativity in their teaching when they are preparing students for a standardized test: "It's like, 'Okay, you all know what this is, you already know what we're preparing for, it's boring, I know, I'm sorry, but I have to go over this information because it's mandated by the district.'"

Another flaw some critics see in the report is that its discussion of funding is almost completely limited to making recommendations on how to spend money that is already allocated for education.

Caprice Taylor-Mendez, the director of the Boston Parents Organizing Network (BPON), an advocacy group for parents of Boston public-school students, said that even if test-based evaluations could determine which schools are having trouble, what is really needed is more funding to address the problems. "What does assessment do but flag problem areas?" she said. "Then where is the support?"

The report does suggest that districts provide better assistance to schools that have poor test results, but it does not encourage the federal government to provide money to help them.

"We can't offer a recommendation on [funding levels] because ultimately it lies in the hands of Congress," said Adams, the Commission's spokesperson. "How much is enough -- we can't give a recommendation on this."

Lucia Santana, an organizer with BPON and parent of six children who have gone through the Boston school system, said her children felt "traumatized" when they were required to take the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System tests. She said they did not feel their school had prepared them adequately for the high-stakes exams, and that schools must reduce their class sizes to teach students effectively.

"If we continue with No Child Left Behind," she said, "I want to see more resources, more money for the school department."

The report does recommend a minor increase in federal education funding, but it is for education research and state data systems, not individual schools' budgets.

© 2007 The NewStandard. All rights reserved. The NewStandard is a non-profit publisher that encourages noncommercial reproduction of its content. Reprints must prominently attribute the author and The NewStandard, hyperlink to http://newstandardnews.net (online) or display newstandardnews.net (print), and carry this notice. For more information or commercial reprint rights, please see the TNS reprint policy.

Looking HOT for Jesus

By Jessica Valenti
Posted on March 5, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://feministing.com/48819/

This is insane. Boltgirl finds this interesting tidbit in a recent NPR segment about the evangelical vote.

Buried in the middle of this, almost as a non-sequitur, was a snippet from a woman named Tammy Bennett, described as decked from head to toe in silver. I'm not going to bother dissecting Ms. Bennett's call for protecting the sanctity of marriage; that was predictable given the context of the story. My attention was piqued much more by the tiny biographical blurb provided:

Bennett is the founder of Makeover Ministries, which she describes as "inspiring women to look good from the inside out and to be supermodels for Christ. And it's based on Proverbs: 'just as water mirrors your face, so your face mirrors your heart.'"

Supermodels for Christ. Supermodels. For Christ.

Gotsta look hot for the lord.

Apparently Bennett has written a book, Looking Good from the Inside Out, where she tells girls that "beauty is a choice and it all begins with a relationship with Jesus Christ." And eyeshadow. Sigh.

Pic from Random Good Stuff.

Jessica Valenti is founder and editor of Feministing. Her first book, "Full Frontal Feminism," is due out in April.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://feministing.com/48819/

10 Things To Store On Your iPod

10. The top-secret Lustmord-Laibach mashups

9. Scans of Paul Laffoley's vivid artwork

8. Grant Morrison ringtones

7. Homage to Cthulhu chants

6. The Leary-Wilson "8 circuit" diagrams

5. Rain forest silence

4. White noise samples

3. YouTube's archive of occulture clips

2. Noam Chomsky's pirate lectures

1. Loose Change: iPod edition

Coulter taken to task for hateful "faggot" remark

Personally, I can't for the life of me figure out why this scumbag gets pop-culture significance from the corporate media, oh wait, oh yeah, forgot for a sec...sorry! Carry on, Glen.--Pete

From Glen Greenwald's Salon blog:

... [T]he single most prestigious political event for conservatives of the year is a place where conservatives go to hear Democrats called faggots, Arabs called ragheads, and Supreme Court justices labeled as deserving of murder -- not by anonymous, unidentifiable blog commenters, but by one of their most popular featured speakers.

Everyone knows what a rancid hate-monger she is, yet (or rather: "therefore") she continues to be invited to the highest-level "conservative" events, be drooled on with admiration by presidential candidates like Mitt Romney, and have little right-wing warriors wait in line around the corner to get her signature on their copies of the books she wrote.

... The more delicate ones will claim to repudiate her comments in the most limited terms, but their actions speak far louder than their cursory and reluctant words. Anyone who went to this event -- and that includes Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and Dick Cheney -- knew exactly what they would be getting. Coulter's face was prominently plastered on the promotional material. The right-wing political candidates who accepted the invitations to speak there knew exactly the type of people would be there -- namely, the type who continously cheer on Ann Coulter's bigoted and nakedly hateful screeds. Anyone who makes themselves a part of that event is purposely associating themselves with those sentiments. That is what this Conference is for.

Unreleased Jimmy Page Guitar Riff To Be Retrieved From Secret Vault To Save Rock And Roll

Halleh-fucking-lujah! Sons and daughters, it is time to unleash the Skronk!--Pete

March 5, 2007 | Issue 43•10

GWYNEDD, WALES—Calling it the planet's last, best hope for saving rock music, the Guardians of the Protectorate of Rock announced Monday that they would take the extraordinary step of unleashing a never-before-heard Jimmy Page riff, hidden for decades in a mythic, impenetrable vault.

Some speculate that this is the gate to the secret vault.

"We who believe in the immortality of rock took a vow 30 years ago that we would never release this incredibly powerful force unless we faced a Day of Reckoning—and that day has come," said Black Sabbath guitarist Tony Iommi, one of the chosen few who helped forge the Secret Vault to Save Rock and Roll, at a press conference in the Welsh highlands. "Just look at the pop charts, and you shall know I speak the truth."

"Let's give rock and roll its fucking balls back," he added.

The Guardians said recent developments in the music world, such as the unaccountable popularity of the Dixie Chicks and Sufjan Stevens, have created a "perfect storm of lameness" from which rock might never recover. While Iommi refused to say when the vault would be opened, hard rock sources believe it will take place just prior to next month's Fall Out Boy–Honda Civic tour, which many fear will suck the remaining lifeblood from all that still rocks.

"Citizens of Rock, we refuse to stand idly by any longer," ZZ Top founder and Protectorate High Elder Billy Gibbons said. "When a puss like James Blunt is allowed to rule the airwaves, we must respond by exposing this monster riff, and blowing minds into the stratosphere."

The Protectorate, devoted to the preservation of badass jams and blistering guitar solos, was reportedly formed in the 1970s during the rise of adult contemporary music. According to legend, the riff, played only once by Page and recorded on a special cobalt record, contains the raw power, mind-blowing skill, and unbridled passion of all the Guardians combined. Recently translated parchments from the era describe it as a soul-searing power-chord progression faintly resembling a cross between "Smoke On The Water" and "Living Loving Maid," but "basically defying all description."

It is believed that, upon the riff's release, even those who claim that the genre is dead will have no choice but to pump their fists, bang their heads, and bow down to the gods of rock for all eternity.

"May God have mercy on our souls for what we are going to set loose upon the world," proclaimed Queen guitarist Brian May, dressed in druidic robes and bathed in the rising blue smoke of a nearby fog machine. "Will it save rock or destroy mankind? We have no way of knowing—yet we have no other choice."

Members of the Protectorate were each given only partial information about the location of the vault, which they were instructed to open in unison only in the event of a total Rockopalypse. While some believed the vault was buried in Boston, Chicago, Kansas, Europe, or Asia, others claimed it could be found in the Court of the Crimson King.

However, after piecing together clues hidden in Yes album covers and Pink Floyd liner notes, rock historians now believe the riff is locked away deep beneath the Welsh countryside house known as Bron-Yr-Aur, at rock-grid coordinates SH735026. British weather satellites have also photographed an enormous cloud, shaped like a hybrid of an upside-down question mark and cross, forming above these exact coordinates.

The vault's Key, regarded as too staggering a burden for any one man to bear, was divided in two parts, with half entrusted to Eddie Van Halen and half to David Lee Roth, shortly after Roth left the rock supergroup Van Halen. The two men, who have refused to work together for 20 years, recently announced plans for a historic reunion tour.

"Before we shake Heaven and Earth with the vicious power of this riff, we of the High Council of Elders of the Guardians of the Protectorate of Rock ask you: Are you about to rock?" AC/DC guitarist Angus Young said. "If so, we salute you."

When asked to comment on the possible dangers of using the riff, Sir Paul McCartney seemed surprised.

"There's a secret vault to save rock and roll?" McCartney said. "This is the first I've heard of it."

Colorado to use inmates to fill migrant shortage

Tough laws passed last year against illegal immigration have created a need for farmworkers.

By Nicholas Riccardi
Times Staff Writer
LA Times Article Here
March 1, 2007

DENVER — Ever since passing what its Legislature promoted as the nation's toughest laws against illegal immigration last summer, Colorado has struggled with a labor shortage as migrants fled the state. This week, officials announced a novel solution: Use convicts as farmworkers.

The Department of Corrections hopes to launch a pilot program this month — thought to be the first of its kind — that would contract with more than a dozen farms to provide inmates who will pick melons, onions and peppers.

Crops were left to spoil in the fields after the passage of legislation that required state identification to get government services and allowed police to check suspects' immigration status.

"The reason this [program] started is to make sure the agricultural industry wouldn't go out of business," state Rep. Dorothy Butcher said. Her district includes Pueblo, near the farmland where the inmates will work.

Prisoners who are a low security risk may choose to work in the fields, earning 60 cents a day. They also are eligible for small bonuses.

The inmates will be watched by prison guards, who will be paid by the farms. The cost is subject to negotiation, but farmers say they expect to pay more for the inmate labor and its associated costs than for their traditional workers.

Advocates on both sides of the immigration debate said they were stunned by the proposal.

"If they can't get slaves from Mexico, they want them from the jails," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, which favors restrictions on immigration.

Ricardo Martinez of the Denver immigrant rights group Padres Unidos asked: "Are we going to pull in inmates to work in the service industry too? You won't have enough inmates — unless you start importing them from Texas."

Farmers said they weren't happy with the solution, but their livelihoods are on the verge of collapse.

"This prison labor is not a cure for the immigration problem; it's just a Band-Aid," farmer Joe Pisciotta said.

He said he needed to be sure he would have enough workers for the harvest this fall before he planted watermelons, onions and pumpkins on his 700-acre farm in Avondale. But he's not thrilled with the idea of criminals working his fields.

"I've got young kids," he said. "It's something I've got to think about."

Pisciotta said he hoped the program highlighted what he viewed as the absurdity of Colorado's position — dependent on immigrant labor but trying to chase migrants away. He said the people leaving were not just those who entered the country illegally.

"Some of them have said, 'We think our paperwork is in order, but how about if it's not and we get caught on a glitch,' " he said.

Ever since the Democratic-controlled Legislature took a tough turn on immigration, the new requirements have worried those in the country legally and illegally.

Immigrant advocates allege that some sheriffs have authorized deputies to pull over Latino drivers on supposed speeding violations and ask them whether they are in the country legally.

And more stringent requirements put into effect last year made it harder to get a driver's license. Numerous U.S. citizens, including the daughter of a state legislator, were refused licenses because they lacked proper proof of citizenship. A judge has since ruled that the requirements must be revised.

Social service agencies say they have discovered few illegal immigrants on public assistance since the laws were passed.

Immigrant and business groups agree that the heated rhetoric has led to an exodus of Latinos — though no one is sure how many. Businesses including carwashes and construction firms have complained of a worker shortage.

"It's like, 'Don't go visit that house, there's a guy with a shotgun at the door,' " said state Rep. Rafael Gallegos, who represents a heavily Latino agricultural district in south-central Colorado. He voted against most of the legislation.

Farmers on Monday met with state officials at the Capitol here to discuss using inmate labor. The Department of Corrections expects to begin sending about 100 prisoners to work on farms near Pueblo this month.

Some of the state's 22,000 prisoners have agricultural experience. Convicts can participate in programs on prison grounds to break wild horses and grow crops. About 700 inmates work in other jobs outside prison, such as on fire crews.

Ari Zavaras, the executive director of the Department of Corrections, said he knew of no other prison system in the nation using convicts to fill agricultural labor shortages.

In California, where growers also have complained about a lack of workers, inmates have not labored in private fields since the 1940s. Prisoners then were used as farmhands while laborers were fighting in World War II, said Terry Thornton, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections.

"The idea [of using prisoners on farms] has been floated before, but these are not unskilled jobs. They're jobs that require a lot of training and supervision," said David Kranz, a spokesman for the California Farm Bureau Federation. "It doesn't seem like a very practical alternative."

Krikorian, of the Center for Immigration Studies, said the Colorado prison experiment was "a sign that there are solutions other than importing foreign labor."

He said "ultimately they're going to have to improve the wages and working conditions" to attract legal workers, as well as to mechanize parts of their farming operations.

Colorado's experience shows that hard-line measures have an effect on illegal immigrants, Krikorian added, noting that arrests had dropped along the U.S.-Mexico border since security was increased last year.

"We're seeing enforcement work, not just in Colorado," he said, "but all over the country."

Marijuana Gains Wonder Drug Status

By Lester Grinspoon, Boston Globe
Posted on March 3, 2007, Printed on March 4, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/48749/

A new study in the journal Neurology is being hailed as unassailable proof that marijuana is a valuable medicine. It is a sad commentary on the state of modern medicine -- and US drug policy -- that we still need "proof" of something that medicine has known for 5,000 years.

The study, from the University of California at San Francisco, found smoked marijuana to be effective at relieving the extreme pain of a debilitating condition known as peripheral neuropathy. It was a study of HIV patients, but a similar type of pain caused by damage to nerves afflicts people with many other illnesses including diabetes and multiple sclerosis. Neuropathic pain is notoriously resistant to treatment with conventional pain drugs. Even powerful and addictive narcotics like morphine and OxyContin often provide little relief. This study leaves no doubt that marijuana can safely ease this type of pain.

As all marijuana research in the United States must be, the new study was conducted with government-supplied marijuana of notoriously poor quality. So it probably underestimated the potential benefit.

This is all good news, but it should not be news at all. In the 40-odd years I have been studying the medicinal uses of marijuana, I have learned that the recorded history of this medicine goes back to ancient times and that in the 19th century it became a well-established Western medicine whose versatility and safety were unquestioned. From 1840 to 1900, American and European medical journals published over 100 papers on the therapeutic uses of marijuana, also known as cannabis.

Of course, our knowledge has advanced greatly over the years. Scientists have identified over 60 unique constituents in marijuana, called cannabinoids, and we have learned much about how they work. We have also learned that our own bodies produce similar chemicals, called endocannabinoids.

The mountain of accumulated anecdotal evidence that pointed the way to the present and other clinical studies also strongly suggests there are a number of other devastating disorders and symptoms for which marijuana has been used for centuries; they deserve the same kind of careful, methodologically sound research. While few such studies have so far been completed, all have lent weight to what medicine already knew but had largely forgotten or ignored: Marijuana is effective at relieving nausea and vomiting, spasticity, appetite loss, certain types of pain, and other debilitating symptoms. And it is extraordinarily safe -- safer than most medicines prescribed every day. If marijuana were a new discovery rather than a well-known substance carrying cultural and political baggage, it would be hailed as a wonder drug.

The pharmaceutical industry is scrambling to isolate cannabinoids and synthesize analogs, and to package them in non-smokable forms. In time, companies will almost certainly come up with products and delivery systems that are more useful and less expensive than herbal marijuana. However, the analogs they have produced so far are more expensive than herbal marijuana, and none has shown any improvement over the plant nature gave us to take orally or to smoke.

We live in an antismoking environment. But as a method of delivering certain medicinal compounds, smoking marijuana has some real advantages: The effect is almost instantaneous, allowing the patient, who after all is the best judge, to fine-tune his or her dose to get the needed relief without intoxication. Smoked marijuana has never been demonstrated to have serious pulmonary consequences, but in any case the technology to inhale these cannabinoids without smoking marijuana already exists as vaporizers that allow for smoke-free inhalation.

Hopefully the UCSF study will add to the pressure on the US government to rethink its irrational ban on the medicinal use of marijuana -- and its destructive attacks on patients and caregivers in states that have chosen to allow such use. Rather than admit they have been mistaken all these years, federal officials can cite "important new data" and start revamping outdated and destructive policies. The new Congress could go far in establishing its bona fides as both reasonable and compassionate by immediately moving on this issue.

Such legislation would bring much-needed relief to millions of Americans suffering from cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, and other debilitating illnesses.

Lester Grinspoon, an emeritus professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, is the coauthor of "Marijuana, the Forbidden Medicine."

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/48749/

Comedy fest names Colbert person of year

By MADELEINE OSBERGER, For The Associated PressSun Mar 4, 2:46 AM ET

Stephen Colbert, a faux conservative who often honors himself on his Comedy Central show, was lauded by the U.S. Comedy Arts Festival as their "Person of the Year."

"What an honor. An honor to receive and an honor for you to give to me," Colbert said during the ceremony late Friday.

Often appearing to be a combination of Bill O'Reilly and Archie Bunker, Colbert emphasized that his television character is not him.

"He's not malicious, he's ill-informed, you know. It's just a product of his own education. And he thinks he's saying and doing the right thing, he's not actually trying to hurt anybody," said Colbert.

Colbert said he is writing a book.

It will be "what is best and what's worst about America," he said. "You know, it's 20 subjects ... all of the important things, the culture war, religion, hygiene, sports."

Colbert said he envisions his character preparing for each night's show by singing along with the Cheap Trick song "I Want You to Want Me," and doing a full-body shave.

"I never in a million years imagined that a character who was essentially based on O'Reilly a year and a half ago" would have this honor, Colbert said, and suggested he'll get weeks worth of content out of the Aspen honor.

Copyright © 2007 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

GOP House Minority Whip To Aid Group Seeking Nuclear War, Holocaust

By Bruce Wilson
Posted on March 1, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/wilson/48672/

US House minority whip Roy Blunt flew to San Antonio, last week, to pay tribute to Texas Pastor and apocalyptic nuclear war advocate John Hagee. In a "Christians United For Israel" [CUFI] mailing sent February 26th, Hagee wrote:

I am delighted to announce that Roy Blunt is a strong supporter of Israel and following our conversation about CUFI has offered to gather groups of Congressmen in his office any time I come to Washington D.C. in the future.

Blunt is not the only politician to have courted Hagee, who had a private meeting with Senator John McCain in late January to discuss Israel and "other matters". McCain has recently said, of US tensions with Iran, that the situation could be "armageddon"

John Hagee, one of several alleged religious influences on George W. Bush, has characterized liberal Jews who do not agree with his political views as "poisoned" and is a strong proponent for a "preemptive" ( or unprovoked ) US and Israeli nuclear attack against Iran. In "Jerusalem Countdown", Hagee's latest book that has so far sold over 1.1 million copies, Hagee says the Holocaust and historical persecution of the Jews is a divine punishment for the "disobedience and rebellion of the Jews, as is antisemitism... Their own rebellion [against God] had birthed the seed of anti-Semitism that would arise and bring destruction to them for centuries to come." ( Jerusalem Countdown, pages 92 and 93 ).

[image: The Holocaust, part of divine plan ?]
The Holocaust also served as a divine mechanism, suggests Hagee in the book, to scare Jews into moving to Israel where he seems to feel they properly belong, as a necessary, magical human precondition that must be in place before the Rapture, that will grant Christians physical immortality in Heaven, can occur. In Hagee's view, after Christians are "Raptured" to Heaven, Israeli Jews will be mostly killed in the End-Time apocalyptic conflict the Texas pastor has also formed a lobbying group to - apparently - encourage.

In a recent Charisma Magazine issue John Hagee, in a piece entitled "The Coming Holy War", wrote : "Israel and America must confront Iran's nuclear ability and willingness to destroy Israel with nuclear weapons."

On July 19, 2006, at a CUFI sponsored Washington DC event called "A Night to Honor Israel", with GOP Party head Ken Mehlman and US GOP Senators Sam Brownback, Rick Santorum, John Conyers, and Kay Bailey-Hutchinson ( President George W. Bush sent recorded greetings to the event ) , Pastor John Hagee declared :

"The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West... a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation [...] and [the] Second Coming of Christ."

As recounted by Terje Langeland, reporting for the Colorado Springs Independent in 2003, one of Pastor John Hagee's CUFI board members, George Morrison, expresses his sense of how Israeli and Israeli Jews will fare in the apocalytpic scenario Hagee and others long for :

" Morrison, whose casual, folksy manner belies his apocalyptic beliefs, already sees signs that the End is approaching. The European Union, he says, might be the alliance of nations that according to prophecy will join the Arabs to wage war against Israel during the final days.

"Great wars will begin to take place" Morrison says in a matter-of-fact voice. "Those wars are going to involve nukes."

The extent of the destruction will prompt Jesus to return in order to stop it, Morrison believes. Unfortunately, he says, many Jews will be killed.

"It's another Holocaust, if you will" Morrison says. "

[image, above : Hiroshima survivor's drawing of the bombing's aftermath, from the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum]

Many Christian Premillenial Dispensationalists - the theological persuasion Pastor John Hagee belongs to - believe that the majority of the Jews currently living in Israel will be killed in the period of warfare that follows the "Rapture", when "believing" Christians ( fundamentalist Christians, that is ) are bodily transported up to safety in heaven. The standard interpretation is that 2/3 or more of Israeli Jews will be slaughtered during this period but that a righteous "remnant", who have realized the error of their ways and converted to Christianity, will survive what Christian Zionists often call the "final Holocaust" or the "second Holocaust". Writings and statements made by CUFI board member Jerry Falwell, made in 1984, sum up such views:

Falwell said, in a December 2, 1984 sermon: "Millions of Jews will be slaughtered at this time but a remnant will escape and God will supernaturally hide them for Himself for the last three and a half years of the Tribulation, some feel in the rose-red city of Petra. I don't know how, but God will keep them because the Jews and the Chosen People of God." (December 2, 1984 sermon)"

From a pamphlet by Jerry Falwell entitled “Armageddon and the Coming War with Russia.” :“the stage is rapidly being set, even today in the Middle East, for the final conflict. Russia will invade Israel, communism will be defeated, the antichrist will appear and the ‘final holocaust’ at Armageddon will consume the Earth.” ( as quote by the The Oakland Tribune, October 23, 1984 )

In "Jerusalem Countdown", Pastor Hagee writes, in reference to passages from the Bibles Book Of Isaiah 10:22, 22 :

"Who is this remnant [those who will survive] ?

First, it's obvious that all of that remnant is Jewish.....

God promises that by his sovereign grace a "remnant" would be saved by the grace of God, a group of survivors who have the opportunity to receive Messiah, who is a rabbi known to the world as Jesus Christ." ( Jerusalem Countdown, paperback edition, pages 192 and 194 )

This is a continuation of a running series on Pastor John Hagee and his new "apocalypse lobby", CUFI. For the last installment, see:

What Secret "Other Matters" Did McCain Discuss With "Apocalypse Now" Hagee ?

and also these stories:

footnote: What is CUFI ?

Sarah Posner: Lobbying For Armageddon

Max Blumenthal : Israel, the US, and the Christian Right: The Menage a Trois From Hell

Bill Berkowitz : Holy Warriors Set Sights

on Iran

Esther Kaplan : Christian Zionism all juiced up

Richard Bartholomew : Armey: Bush Believes in Tribulation, but not Trying to Make it Happen

Bruce Wilson : Dick Armey Denies Bush Administration Trying To Provoke "End Times"

"As Bush's War Strategy Shifts to Iran, Christian Zionists Gear Up for the Apocalypse"

"Apocalyptic preacher John Hagee says McCain is 'on target'"

"Can Giuliani Be the Armageddon Candidate?"

Bruce Wilson writes for Talk To Action, a blog specializing in faith and politics.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/wilson/48672/

Jim Webb demands answers about Bush's authority to attack Iran

By Joshua Holland
Posted on February 28, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/joshua/48604/

Waaaay back in January, Jim Webb asked Condi Rice a simple yes or no question about the administration and Iran.

TPM had the blow-by-blow. Webb asked: “Is it the position of this administration that it possesses the authority to take unilateral action against Iran, in the absence of a direct threat, without congressional approval?”

She deferred an answer, saying, "I'm really loathe to get into questions of the president's authorities without a rather more clear understanding of what we are actually talking about. So let me answer you, in fact, in writing. I think that would be the best thing to do."

She, of course, blew him off. So, two weeks after the hearings, he sent her a letter asking how it could take so long to answer a simple question.

While he was awaiting a response, Webb did the media circuit and expressed his deep concerns about the volatile situation in the Gulf (there’s video in that link, if you care):

…if you look at where we are in the Persian Gulf right now, when I was Secretary of the Navy and until very recently, we never operated carrier — aircraft carriers inside the Persian Gulf because, number one, the turning radius is pretty close, and number two, the chance of accidentally bumping into something that would start a diplomatic situation was pretty high. We now have been doing that, and with the tensions as high as they are, I’m very worried that we might accidentally set something off in there and we need, as a Congress, to get ahead of the ballgame here.

According to The Hill, Rice finally got back to Webb, and he’s not happy with the answers she gave:

Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) said yesterday that he is not satisfied with the Bush administration’s response to his inquiries on whether the White House believes its signing statement accompanying the 2002 Iraq war authorization gives the president authority to attack Iran.

Webb first wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and newly confirmed deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte last month after a Rice appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. During questioning by Webb, Rice did not clearly state whether President Bush believes he can pursue action against Iran under his 2002 signing statement, which interprets the war authorization as a broad mandate to defend “threats to national interests.”

Webb said yesterday that he has heard from Rice and Negroponte, but that their responses were “lengthy and not to the point,” adding that he intends to pursue a clarification of presidential authority to use force in Iran in the near future.

This is what the Congress is supposed to do, and was supposed to be doing for the past six years.

I must say that the junior Senator from Virginia has really grown on me in the past few months.

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/joshua/48604/

Dolce & Gabbana: Strike the Rape Pose

By Evan Derkacz
Posted on February 28, 2007, Printed on March 1, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/evan/48603/

Guest post by Joan Conde.

If fashion is all about attitude, how about this one? Complaining that "We will only withdraw this photo from the Spanish market. They're a bit behind the times," Dolce and Gabbana have withdrawn an ad which depicts a man raping a woman.

Eager to see the D&G "rape is the new black" campaign stateside, I combed through the Sunday New York Times "Spring Fashion" magazine.. Racily titled, "Adult Content," I had high hopes that I would locate the rape ad and American hipness would be confirmed. Sadly, all I found Dolce_Gabbana ad was this lousy ad. A man in tightie whities is soooo 2004! What's their excuse is for striking the rape ad from the definitely up-to-the-minute New York market? Could it be that D&G got the memo: no women, anywhere, will accept rape-themed advertising?

Joan Conde blogs at Mamacita.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/evan/48603/

IKEA: Who Says Big Retail Can't Be Good for the Environment?

By David Roberts, Grist Magazine
Posted on March 1, 2007, Printed on March 1, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/48578/

This article is reprinted by permission from Grist. For more environmental news and humor sign up for Grist's free email service.

Last week, IKEA U.S. announced a "bag the plastic bag" initiative: the retailer will charge a nickel for plastic bags to discourage their use, donating all revenue to the nonprofit conservation group American Forests. The store will also let shoppers walk away with one of its iconic reusable blue bags for 59 cents.

Pleasant enough news, but it struck me as somewhat cosmetic. Hadn't I heard that IKEA's commitment to sustainability went much further than this?

A little poking around on the IKEA website uncovered a set of practices that puts every big U.S. retailer to shame. From the wood in its products to the factory conditions of its suppliers to the energy efficiency of its distribution network, IKEA has outlined tough, progressive standards almost unheard of in the U.S. Now it's working to move all its stores to completely renewable energy.

Why not brag about that stuff instead of the bags? I contacted IKEA's head of social and environmental responsibility, Thomas Bergmark, at the company's headquarters in Sweden to find out the details behind this unassuming approach.

Tell me a little bit about this initiative in the U.S. with the plastic bags.

It might be the first campaign where we are more on the offense. The basic strategy not only in U.S. but in all our markets has been to be quiet, low-key. We should first do and then talk. We have from time to time been a bit criticized because we have been too quiet. Different stakeholders have realized that we try hard and we do a lot -- so why don't we talk about it?

We have now for three years issued a yearly social and environmental report on the web. We communicate more in different kinds of media, of course in the catalogue and in IKEA family magazines for our customer club and so forth. This campaign is one step in that direction, to be more aggressive and more transparent in these issues.

How does IKEA view its obligation to the environment?

We have a vision for business that was written more than 30 years ago. It's about creating a better everyday life for the people. Today, it's obvious to care about the people you have to care about the environment.

The starting point for our sustainability is the people and the culture. We have a very strong company culture. One of the cornerstones since IKEA was founded more than 60 years ago is to care about resources -- we are clever with resources.

For the first 20 years, this was only about turning and twisting the materials to utilize them in the best possible way, to save on material and thereby save on costs. But today we know it's a perfect win-win also for the environment. You save on the resources, you save on the environment. That has evolved over the decades.

Then of course there is the core business side as well. We are more than aware of that. We have to take responsibility for these issues if customers are to trust us today and in the future. We are convinced that if we work hard on sustainability and make progress, it will build trust in our consumers and with the IKEA brand. The culture issues and the business issues meet with the brand and the IKEA logo.

Has IKEA tried to make its stores green?

We're focusing more and more on that. First of all, we are setting up an IKEA standard, which includes the different steps in establishing a store. The first step is to look into a site, the land and such, to make sure we are not stepping into any sensitive areas that should be protected for biodiversity or other reasons. We consider the building materials we use when building new stores. Now we also consider environmental issues.

Then, of course, it's about operations -- energy, water issues related to the stores. We do a really good job on waste sorting and recycling compared to many other retailers. Then there's the maintenance of the stores. And at the end of the day, it's the products we put in the stores.

What we recently started up on an international level is an extra focus on energy. We have set a long-term direction to supply all IKEA buildings with renewable energy, which means electricity and heating. We're also working on energy efficiency, to get 25 percent more energy efficient.

Will the renewable energy goal be met by buying offsets, or is there going to be on-site generation as well?

The basic idea is to, as far as possible, produce the energy ourselves, at the sites, with solar, wind, biomass, and geothermal heating/cooling. For new stores, we are looking to build it in. Then for all existing stores, we have to do analysis on the different options of retrofit. Some units might be tricky, and we'll have to see how to compensate that with carbon credits, or maybe by producing energy at another place and putting it back into the grid -- maybe creating a balance like that.

Do you have a specific deadline or target to get to completely renewable energy?

We have set the first step for 2009, where we're going to reach 60 percent renewable energy and 15 percent more energy efficient. Then, based on analysis we are doing right now, we will set the end goals, hopefully during this calendar year.

One traditional environmental objection to big-box chain stores is that shipping goods from all over the world is incredibly energy intensive. Is that on IKEA's radar?

Yes, for sure. Distribution is one of the focus areas for IKEA, and has been for quite a few years. What we have done for more than 50 years, which we benefit from still, is the flat pack. We save volume, which is simple but important because it makes a big, big difference in transport work. We've had a [producers] code of conduct for more than six years now, about social, environmental, and working conditions. And we have a similar code of conduct now for our transport carriers -- one and a half years ago we put requirements in these fields.

Transport is a challenging area. I have to admit, it's one of the tougher ones to change, because it is a traditional business, where you don't see too many groundbreaking solutions. What is coming now is more biofuels, and we are supporting that -- hopefully we can use more and more biofuels for trucks, especially in the near future.

What about trying to source from local or regional suppliers?

Yes, for sure. One reason for having a trading organization in America is to supply North American stores. Our stores in America are still depending on imports from Europe and Asia, no question about that. But as the market grows and we build more stores, we'll also increase the possibilities for local sourcing and thereby reduce the shipping [impacts].

Have you encountered resistance from suppliers, or have you found that they're eager to work with you when you put these kind of social and environmental restrictions on how they operate?

It differs. You can say suppliers in Europe and the Americas are generally more positive. If we speak about Asia, it differs a lot. Some suppliers, they buy the concept right away. Others are very ... I would say not resistant but questioning -- why should we do this? It is a big job to convince them to start the process.

Some of these suppliers after a while think, no, it's too much, so they'll say, we are leaving IKEA. We have to live with that. Other suppliers, they go through a different journey. They explain it like this to me, that when they first got the requirements, they thought it was a lot, but since they had a good experience with IKEA for many years, they thought, these guys from IKEA, they're clever, so we'll give it a try. Then they get going.

I have a couple of cases of suppliers I have met in Asia that tell me, "You know what happened next? I got a couple of new potential customers visiting my factory the other week, and they asked about code of conduct issues and environmental and working conditions. And I could show them what I have been doing so far together with IKEA. And I got new business."

It boils down to what it has to be about at the end of the day: business. It has to be about improving conditions in the factories, for people and the environment, and at the end of the day also improving the productivity and competitiveness of the suppliers.

Are you going to try to ramp up communications and PR around environmental issues?

Yeah, communications and information. We're definitely not the company that wants to ring the big bell and do a lot of heavy marketing. Actions like the blue bag campaign, now, that's fine, but you will not see campaigns on billboards. We will make information about our sustainability efforts more easily available to different stakeholders, including the customers in our stores. That we are working on -- to be more transparent, to be more visible in these issues. It's expected from our customers.

David Roberts is a staff writer at Grist.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/48578/

The War on Terror Is the Leading Cause of Terrorism

By Kim Sengupta and Patrick Cockburn, The Independent UK
Posted on March 1, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/48620/

Innocent people across the world are now paying the price of the "Iraq effect," with the loss of hundreds of lives directly linked to the invasion and occupation by American and British forces.

An authoritative U.S. study of terrorist attacks after the invasion in 2003 contradicts the repeated denials of George Bush and Tony Blair that the war is not to blame for an upsurge in fundamentalist violence worldwide. The research is said to be the first to attempt to measure the "Iraq effect" on global terrorism.

It found that the number killed in jihadist attacks around the world has risen dramatically since the Iraq war began in March 2003. The study compared the period between 11 September 2001 and the invasion of Iraq with the period since the invasion. The count -- excluding the Arab-Israel conflict -- shows the number of deaths due to terrorism rose from 729 to 5,420. As well as strikes in Europe, attacks have also increased in Chechnya and Kashmir since the invasion. The research was carried out by the Centre on Law and Security at the NYU Foundation for Mother Jones magazine.

Iraq was the catalyst for a ferocious fundamentalist backlash, according to the study, which says that the number of those killed by Islamists within Iraq rose from seven to 3,122. Afghanistan, invaded by US and British forces in direct response to the September 11 attacks, saw a rise from very few before 2003 to 802 since then. In the Chechen conflict, the toll rose from 234 to 497. In the Kashmir region, as well as India and Pakistan, the total rose from 182 to 489, and in Europe from none to 297.

Two years after declaring "mission accomplished" in Iraq President Bush insisted: "If we were not fighting and destroying the enemy in Iraq, they would not be idle. They would be plotting and killing Americans across the world and within our borders. By fighting these terrorists in Iraq, Americans in uniform are defeating a direct threat to the American people."

Mr Blair has also maintained that the Iraq war has not been responsible for Muslim fundamentalist attacks such as the 7/7 London bombings which killed 52 people. "Iraq, the region and the wider world is a safer place without Saddam [Hussein]," Mr Blair declared in July 2004.

Announcing the deployment of 1,400 extra troops to Afghanistan earlier this week -- raising the British force level in the country above that in Iraq -- the Prime Minister steadfastly denied accusations by MPs that there was any link between the Iraq war an unravelling of security elsewhere.

Last month John Negroponte, the Director of National Intelligence in Washington, said he was "not certain" that the Iraq war had been a recruiting factor for al-Qa'ida and insisted: "I wouldn't say that there has been a widespread growth in Islamic extremism beyond Iraq, I really wouldn't."

Yet the report points out that the US administration's own National Intelligence Estimate on "Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States" -- partially declassified last October -- stated that " the Iraq war has become the 'cause célèbre' for jihadists ... and is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives."

The new study, by Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank, argues that, on the contrary, "the Iraq conflict has greatly increased the spread of al-Qa'ida ideological virus, as shown by a rising number of terrorist attacks in the past three years from London to Kabul, and from Madrid to the Red Sea.

"Our study shows that the Iraq war has generated a stunning increase in the yearly rate of fatal jihadist attacks, amounting to literally hundreds of additional terrorist attacks and civilian lives lost. Even when terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan is excluded, fatal attacks in the rest of the world have increased by more than one third."

In trying to gauge the "Iraq effect," the authors had focused on the rate of terrorist attacks in two periods -- from September 2001 to 30 March 2003 (the day of the Iraq invasion) and 21 March 2003 to 30 September 2006. The research has been based on the MIPT-RAND Terrorism database.

The report's assertion that the Iraq invasion has had a far greater impact in radicalising Muslims is widely backed security personnel in the UK. Senior anti-terrorist officials told The Independent that the attack on Iraq, and the now-discredited claims by the U.S. and British governments about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, had led to far more young Muslims engaging in extremist activity than the invasion of Afghanistan two years previously.

Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, head of the Secret Service (MI5) said recently: "In Iraq attacks are regularly videoed and the footage is downloaded into the internet.

"Chillingly, we see the results here. Young teenagers are being groomed to be suicide bombers. The threat is serious, is growing and will, I believe, be with us for a generation."

In Afghanistan the most active of the Taliban commanders, Mullah Dadullah, acknowledged how the Iraq war has influenced the struggle in Afghanistan.

"We give and take with the mujahedin in Afghanistan," he said. The most striking example of this has been the dramatic rise in suicide bombings in Afghanistan, a phenomenon not seen through the 10 years of war with the Russians in the 1980s.

The effect of Iraq on various jihadist conflicts has been influenced according to a number of factors, said the report. Countries with troops in Iraq, geographical proximity to the country, the empathy felt for the Iraqis and the exchange of information between Islamist groups. "This may explain why jihadist groups in Europe, Arab countries, and Afghanistan were more affected by the Iraq war than other regions," it said.

Russia, like the US, has used the language of the "war on terror" in its actions in Chechnya, and al-Qa'ida and their associates have entrenched themselves in the border areas of Pakistan from where they have mounted attacks in Kashmir, Pakistan and India.

Statistics for the Arab-Israel conflict also show an increase, but the methodology is disputed in the case of Palestinian attacks in the occupied territories and settler attacks on Palestinians.

* The U.S. is joining the Iraqi government in a diplomatic initiative inviting Iran and Syria to a "neighbours meeting" on stabilising Iraq, the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said yesterday. The move reflects a change of approach by the Bush administration, which previously had resisted calls to include Iran and Syria in such talks.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/48620/

Microsoft faces fresh fines from EU

Thursday, 1 March 2007

The European Commission has warned Microsoft that it faces further fines in its competition case for seeking unreasonable prices from software makers for information which would allow them to operate with Windows.

The latest formal charges could lead to new fines against the US software giant, the Commission said in a statement.

The Commission found in 2004 that Microsoft violated EU competition rules by failing to give information to other makers of small-business servers needed to compete with Microsoft's own products.

Microsoft has said it would be charging for interoperability information because it was based on its own innovative work.

'The Commission's current view is that there is no significant innovation in these protocols,' European Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes said in a statement. Microsoft has four weeks to reply to the charges. The Commission rejected 1,500 pages of information provided by Microsoft.

The Commission said it was still reviewing whether information submitted earlier to help software makers develop programmes that run smoothly with Microsoft's Windows operating system is complete and accurate. Microsoft has appealed the original 2004 decision to a European court which is due to decide on the case this year.

Story from RTÉ Business:
http://www.rte.ie/business/2007/0301/microsoft.html

Updated: Pentagon: Wounded troops at Walter Reed can't talk to the media

By Joshua Holland
Posted on February 28, 2007, Printed on February 28, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/joshua/48598/

In the aftermath of the Washington Post's series detailing the horrendous conditions faced by some of the soldiers recovering at Walter Reed Medical Center, the Pentagon, in typical Pentagon fashion, is trying to white-wash the whole mess, both literally and figuratively.

Here's Dana Milbank last week:

It's not every day one gets to witness a whitewash in action, but Walter Reed Army Medical Center provided just such an opportunity yesterday.

... Dana Priest and Anne Hull described the woeful conditions of Room 205 in Walter Reed's Building 18: "Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole."

The Army mobilized. Painters were deployed to cover the offending wall with a fresh coat of white semigloss. And television crews were invited in to inspect the result.

"Some of the paint is still wet against that wall, so be careful," Walter Reed public affairs officer Donald Vandrey, standing on the bed in his socks, advised the film crews. "They just finished repainting it about 10 minutes ago."

Mission accomplished?

Lt. Gen. Kevin Kiley thought so. After the media tour of Building 18, the Army's surgeon general gave a news conference. "I do not consider Building 18 to be substandard," he said of a facility Priest and Hull found full of "mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses" and other delights. "We needed to do a better job on some of those rooms, and those of you that got in today saw that we frankly have fixed all of those problems. They weren't serious, and there weren't a lot of them."

Kiley might have had a stronger case if men wearing Tyvek hazmat suits and gas masks hadn't walked through the lobby while the camera crews waited for the tour to start, or if he hadn't acknowledged, moments later, that the entire building would have to be closed for a complete renovation.

It gets worse. The Navy Times [via Nitpicker] reports that the Army has ordered patients at WR not to speak to the media. In fact, some wounded vets think they're being punished because a few did talk to the WaPo.

Walter Reed patients told to keep quiet

Soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center's Medical Hold Unit say they have been told they will wake up at 6 a.m. every morning and have their rooms ready for inspection at 7 a.m., and that they must not speak to the media.

"Some soldiers believe this is a form of punishment for the trouble soldiers caused by talking to the media," one Medical Hold Unit soldier said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

It is unusual for soldiers to have daily inspections after Basic Training.

Soldiers say their sergeant major gathered troops at 6 p.m. Monday to tell them they must follow their chain of command when asking for help with their medical evaluation paperwork, or when they spot mold, mice or other problems in their quarters. [...]

The soldiers said they were also told their first sergeant has been relieved of duty, and that all of their platoon sergeants have been moved to other positions at Walter Reed. And 120 permanent-duty soldiers are expected to arrive by mid-March to take control of the Medical Hold Unit, the soldiers said. [...]

The Pentagon also clamped down on media coverage of any and all Defense Department medical facilities, to include suspending planned projects by CNN and the Discovery Channel, saying in an e-mail to spokespeople: "It will be in most cases not appropriate to engage the media while this review takes place," referring to an investigation of the problems at Walter Reed.

Support the ... yeah.

PS: How crazy are the wing-nuts when called out on the hollowness of their support-the-troops-but-only-as-symbols rhetoric? This crazy.

UPDATE: Louise Slaughter, fast becoming one of my favorite legislators, reacted to this story today:

"Any attempt to silence the very soldiers who brought their own mistreatment to light, or to hide ongoing abuses from the public eye - if such attempts are occurring - would be morally reprehensible. It would be an abdication of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of our government: the protection of those who have fought to protect us.”

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/joshua/48598/

Updated: the White House's latest bald-faced lie: 'The UN authorized our invasion of Iraq'

By Joshua Holland
Posted on February 27, 2007, Printed on February 27, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/joshua/48548/

ThinkProgress caught this wild bit of revisionism during Friday's White House presser by Mini-Tony Snow, Tony Fratto:

"The president said this isn't the fight we entered in Iraq, but it's the fight we're in," Fratto told reporters Friday. "We went in as a multinational force under U.N. authorization to take military action in Iraq. We were there as an occupying force, and now we're there at the invitation of the sovereign, elected government of Iraq."

Actually, Bush promised to go to the Security Council for a vote, but then realized he couldn't purge any of those darkie countries from the UN voter roll and blew it off. As ThinkProgress noted, Kofi Annan described the invasion of Iraq as "not in conformity with the UN charter...from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

What's pretty amazing is that a room full of journalists let the statement go unchallenged. But Fratto wasn't done. "I'm not sure if the Democrats are contemplating that the United States should not enforce U.N. Security Council resolutions," he added. "If that's something that they're contemplating, I think that would be interesting to some people, to say the least." No, Tony. What's interesting, to say the least, is that the White House's deputy press flack doesn't know that the UN charter specifically prohibits countries from enforcing UN resolutions without specific Security Council authorization.

These people are so wanton in their criminality.

Update: MediaMatters notes that the Washington Post contradicted its own reporting and "parroted [the] White House claim that Iraq war was authorized by U.N. Security Council." Thanks, WaPo, for the great journalism!

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/joshua/48548/