Sandra Finley

Sep 272012
 

I replied to a friend:

From my perspective,

human brains are wired to find patterns.  We need to be able to do that, in order to make sense of the world and our lives.  And, in order to survive – – recognize the patterns that lead to harm.

My brain seems to be good at “connecting the dots”, which the video you sent does too.

A few years ago, I came to the conclusion that I had to be careful because I know for certain that there are times when I make connections that seem absolutely, unrefutably real, but which later turn out to have a different explanation.

So sometimes the connections are correct.  Sometimes they are not.

I think the video falls into that category.  Some of the connections are real, some are not.

Coincidentally, I am currently struggling with a book titled The Believing Brain.  There are some things which I think the author has not got quite right  (INSERT: the last thought on this page (by Carl Sagan) says it better than the author of The Believing Brain, I think.)

There is this quote in The Believing Brain , that seems to me to be appropriate for our times.

– – – – – – – – – – – –

Carl Sagan:

“I worry that, especially as the Millennium edges nearer,  pseudoscience and superstition will seem year by year more tempting, the siren  song of unreason more sonorous and attractive.

Where have we heard it before?  Whenever our ethnic or national prejudices are aroused, in times of scarcity,  during challenges to national self-esteem or nerve, when we agonize about our diminished cosmic place and purpose, or when fanaticism is bubbling up around  us – then, habits of thought familiar from ages past reach for the controls.

The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir.”

― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

I didn’t want to type up the whole quote and didn’t have to – – someone else posted it on the internet!  along with these other quotes, which I think are inciteful.  I found a Treasure Box!

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

All are quotes from Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.

MANY THANKS to the website:
http://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/252618-the-demon-haunted-world-science-as-a-candle-in-the-dark

Note:  I often copy (capture) good material because sometimes the webpages become inaccessible later.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

“If we can’t think for ourselves, if we’re unwilling to question authority, then we’re just putty in the hands of those in power. But if the citizens are educated and form their own opinions, then those in power work for us. In every country, we should be teaching our children the scientific method and the reasons for a Bill of Rights. With it comes a certain decency, humility and community spirit. In the demon-haunted world that we inhabit by virtue of being human, this may be all that stands between us and the enveloping darkness.”

“We’ve arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements profoundly depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster. We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces.”

“Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. When we recognize our place in an immensity of light‐years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual. So are our emotions in the presence of great art or music or literature, or acts of exemplary selfless courage such as those of Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.”

“I find many adults are put off when young children pose scientific questions. Why is the Moon round? the children ask. Why is grass green? What is a dream? How deep can you dig a hole? When is the world’s birthday? Why do we have toes? Too many teachers and parents answer with irritation or ridicule, or quickly move on to something else: ‘What did you expect the Moon to be, square?’ Children soon recognize that somehow this kind of question annoys the grown-ups. A few more experiences like it, and another child has been lost to science. Why adults should pretend to omniscience before 6-year-olds, I can’t for the life of me understand. What’s wrong with admitting that we don’t know something? Is our self-esteem so fragile?”

“I don’t think science is hard to teach because humans aren’t ready for it, or because it arose only through a fluke, or because, by and large, we don’t have the brainpower to grapple with it. Instead, the enormous zest for science that I see in first-graders and the lesson from the remnant hunter-gatherers both speak eloquently: A proclivity for science is embedded deeply within us, in all times, places, and cultures. It has been the means for our survival. It is our birthright. When, through indifference, inattention, incompetence, or fear of skepticism, we discourage children from science, we are disenfranchising them, taking from them the tools needed to manage their future.”

“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”

“Books, purchasable at low cost, permit us to interrogate the past with high accuracy; to tap the wisdom of our species; to understand the point of view of others, and not just those in power; to contemplate–with the best teachers–the insights, painfully extracted from Nature, of the greatest minds that ever were, drawn from the entire planet and from all of our history. They allow people long dead to talk inside our heads. Books can accompany us everywhere. Books are patient where we are slow to understand, allow us to go over the hard parts as many times as we wish, and are never critical of our lapses. Books are key to understanding the world and participating in a democratic society.”

“But nature is always more subtle, more intricate, more elegant than what we are able to imagine.”

“The chief deficiency I see in the skeptical movement is its polarization: Us vs. Them — the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you’re sensible, you’ll listen to us; and if not, to hell with you. This is nonconstructive. It does not get our message across. It condemns us to permanent minority status.”

“An extraterrestrial being, newly arrived on Earth – scrutinizing what we mainly present to our children in television, radio, movies, newspapers, magazines, the comics, and many books – might easily conclude that we are intent on teaching them murder, rape, cruelty, superstition, credulity, and consumerism. We keep at it, and through constant repetition many of them finally get it. What kind of society could we create if, instead, we drummed into them science and a sense of hope?”

“One of the reasons for its success is that science has a built-in, error-correcting machinery at its very heart.  Some may consider this an overbroad characterization, but to me every time we exercise self-criticism, every time we test our ideas against the outside world, we are doing science.  When we are self-indulgent and uncritical, when we confuse hopes and facts, we slide into pseudoscience and superstition.”

“If we long to believe that the stars rise and set for us, that we are the reason there is a Universe, does science do us a disservice in deflating our conceits?”

“Avoidable human misery is more often caused not so much by stupidity as by ignorance, particularly our ignorance about ourselves.”

“Now, what’s the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there’s no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I’m asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.”

“All over the world there are enormous numbers of smart, even gifted, people who harbor a passion for science.  But that passion is unrequited.  Surveys suggest that some 95 percent of Americans are “scientifically illiterate.”

That’s just the same fraction as those African Americans, almost all of them slaves, who were illiterate just before the Civil War—when severe penalties were in force for anyone who taught a slave to read.  Of course there’s a degree of arbitrariness about any determination of illiteracy, whether it applies to language or to science.  But anything like 95 percent illiteracy is extremely serious.”

“But I try not to think with my gut. If I’m serious about understanding the world, thinking with anything besides my brain, as tempting as that might be, is likely to get me into trouble.”

“There are wonders enough out there without our inventing any.”

“Science is an attempt, largely successful, to understand the world, to get a grip on things, to get hold of ourselves, to steer a safe course. Microbiology and meteorology now explain what only a few centuries ago was considered sufficient cause to burn women to death.”

“But, Jefferson worried that the people – and the argument goes back to Thucydides and Aristotle – are easily misled. He also stressed, passionately and repeatedly, that it was essential for the people to understand the risks and benefits of government, to educate themselves, and to involve themselves in the political process.   Without that, he said, the wolves will take over.”

“Nevertheless, (Jefferson) believed that the habit of skepticism is an essential prerequisite for responsible citizenship. He argued that the cost of education is trivial compared to the cost of ignorance, of leaving government to the wolves. He taught that the country is safe only when the people rule.”

“There is much that science doesn’t understand, many mysteries still to be resolved. In a Universe tens of billions of light-years across and some ten or fifteen billion years old, this may be the case forever. We are constantly stumbling on new surprises”

“There are naive questions, tedious questions, ill-phrased questions, questions put after inadequate self-criticism. But every question is a cry to understand the world. There is no such thing as a dumb question.”

“In the way that scepticism is sometimes applied to issues of public concern, there is a tendency to belittle, to condescend, to ignore the fact that, deluded or not, supporters of superstition and pseudoscience are human beings with real feelings, who, like the sceptics, are trying to figure out how the world works and what our role in it might be. Their motives are in many cases consonant with science. If their culture has not given them all the tools they need to pursue this great quest, let us temper our criticism with kindness. None of us comes fully equipped.”

“I have a foreboding of an America in my children’s or grandchildren’s time — when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness…

The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance”

“The fact is that far more crime and child abuse has been committed by zealots in the name of God, Jesus and Mohammed than has ever been committed in the name of Satan. Many people don’t like that statement, but few can argue with it.”

“Science is a way to call the bluff of those who only pretend to knowledge. It is a bulwark against mysticism, against superstition, against religion misapplied to where it has no business being.”

“In college, in the early 1950s, I began to learn a little about how science works, the secrets of its great success, how rigorous the standards of evidence must be if we are really to know something is true, how many false starts and dead ends have plagued human thinking, how our biases can colour our interpretation of evidence, and how often belief systems widely held and supported by the political, religious and academic hierarchies turn out to be not just slightly in error, but grotesquely wrong.”

“Our perceptions are fallible. We sometimes see what isn’t there. We are prey to optical illusions. Occasionally we hallucinate. We are error-prone.”

“We saw a pale echo of what is now possible in 1990-1991, when Saddam Hussein, the autocrat of Iraq, made a sudden transition in the American consciousness from an obscure near-ally – granted commodities, high technology, weaponry, and even satellite intelligence data – to a slavering monster menacing the world. I am not myself an admirer of Mr. Hussein, but it was striking how quickly he could be brought from someone almost no American had heard of into the incarnation of evil. These days the apparatus for generating indignation is busy elsewhere. How confident are we that the power to drive and determine public opinion will always reside in responsible hands?”

“You squeeze the eyedropper, and a drop of pond water drips out onto the microscope stage. You look at the projected image. The drop is full of life – strange beings swimming, crawling, tumbling; high dramas of pursuit and escape, triumph and tragedy. This is a world populated by  beings far more exotic than in any science fiction movie…”

“Cutting off fundamental, curiosity-driven science is like eating the seed corn. We may have a little more to eat next winter but what will we plant so we and our children will have enough to get through the winters to come?”

“If you’re only sceptical, then no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything. You become a crochety misanthrope convinced that nonsense is ruling the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) Since major discoveries in the borderlines of science are rare, experience will tend to confirm your grumpiness. But every now and then a new idea turns out to be on the mark, valid and wonderful. If you’re too resolutely and uncompromisingly sceptical, you’re going to miss (or resent) the transforming discoveries in science, and either way you will be obstructing understanding and progress. Mere scepticism is not enough.”

“Likewise, if we offer too much silent assent about mysticism and superstition – even when it seems to be doing a little good – we abet a general climate in which scepticism is considered impolite, science tiresome, and rigorous thinking somehow stuffy and inappropriate.”

“Gullibility kills.”   (INSERT:  that’s also the lesson of “Women Who Run With the Wolves”!

“Seances occur only in darkened rooms, where the ghostly visitors can be seen dimly at best. If we turn up the lights a little, so we have a chance to see what’s going on, the spirits vanish. They’re shy, we’re told, and some of us believe it. In twentieth-century parapsychology laboratories, there is the ‘observer effect’: those described as gifted psychics find that their powers diminish markedly whenever sceptics arrive, and disappear altogether in the presence of a conjuror as skilled as James Randi. What they need is darkness and gullibility.”

“The impediment to scientific thinking is not, I think, the difficulty of the subject. Complex intellectual feats have been mainstays even of oppressed cultures. Shamans, magicians and theologians are highly skilled in their intricate and arcane arts. No, the impediment is political and hierarchical.”

“The technological perils that science serves up, its implicit challenge to received wisdom, and its perceived difficulty, are all reasons for some people to mistrust and avoid it.”

“Pseudoscience speaks to powerful emotional needs that science often leaves unfulfilled. It caters to fantasies about personal powers we lack and long for.”

“Nearly everyone in ancient Egypt exhorted the gods to let the Pharaoh live ‘forever. These collective prayers failed. Their failure constitutes data.”

“To make a contented slave,’ [Frederick] Bailey later wrote, ‘it is necessary to make a thoughtless one. It is necessary to darken his moral and mental vision, and, as far as possible, to annihilate the power of reason.’ This is why the slaveholders must control what slaves hear and see and think. This is why reading and critical thinking are dangerous, indeed subversive, in an unjust society.”

“When conventional medicine fails, when we must confront pain and death, of course we are open to other prospects for hope.

And, after all, some illnesses are psychogenic. Many can be at least ameliorated by a positive cast of mind. Placebos are dummy drugs, often sugar pills. Drug companies routinely compare the effectiveness of their drugs against placebos given to patients with the same disease who had no way to tell the difference between the drug and the placebo. Placebos can be astonishingly effective, especially for colds, anxiety, depression, pain, and symptoms that are plausibly generated by the mind. Conceivably, endorphins -the small brain proteins with morphine-like effects – can be elicited by belief. A placebo works only if the patient believes it’s an effective medicine. Within strict limits, hope, it seems, can be transformed into biochemistry.”

“Every now and then, I’m lucky enough to teach a kindergarten or first-grade class. Many of these children are natural-born scientists – although heavy on the wonder side and light on scepticism. They’re curious, intellectually vigorous. Provocative and insightful questions bubble out of them. They exhibit enormous enthusiasm. I’m asked follow-up questions. They’ve never heard of the notion of a ‘dumb question’.

But when I talk to high school seniors, I find something different. They memorize ‘facts’. By and large, though, the joy of discovery, the life behind those facts, has gone out of them. They’ve lost much of the wonder, and gained very little scepticism. They’re worried about asking ‘dumb’ questions; they’re willing to accept inadequate answers; they don’t pose follow-up questions; the room is awash with sidelong glances to judge, second-by-second, the approval of their peers.”

“The values of science and the values of democracy are concordant, in many cases indistinguishable.”

“Keeping an open mind is a virtue—but, as the space engineer James Oberg once said, not so open that your brains fall out.”

“Scientists make mistakes. Accordingly, it is the job of the scientist to recognize our weakness, to examine the widest range of opinions, to be ruthlessly self-critical. Science is a collective enterprise with the error-correction machinery often running smoothly.”

“Dreams are associated with a state called REM sleep, the abbreviation standing for rapid eye movement. The REM state is strongly correlated with sexual arousal. Experiments have been performed in which sleeping subjects are awakened whenever REM state emerges, while members of a control group are awakened just as often each night but not when they’re dreaming. After some days, the control group is a little groggy, but the experimental group – the ones who are prevented from dreaming – is hallucinating in daytime. It’s not that a few people with a particular abnormality can be made to hallucinate in this way; anyone is capable of hallucinations.”

“Another glorious feature of many modern science museums is a movie theater showing IMAX or OMNIMAX films. In some cases the screen is ten stories tall and wraps around you. The Smithsonian’s National Air & Space Museu, the popular museum on Earth, has premiered in its Langley Theater some of the best of these films. ‘To Fly’ brings a catch to my throat even after five or six viewings. I’ve seen religious leaders of many denominations witness ‘Blue Planet’ and be converted on the spot to the need to protect the Earth’s environment”

“Both scepticism and wonder are skills that need honing and practice. Their harmonious marriage within the mind of every schoolchild ought to be a principal goal of public education. I’d love to see such a domestic felicity portrayed in the media, television especially: a community of people really working the mix – full of wonder, generously open to every notion, dismissing nothing except for good reason, but at the same time, and as second nature, demanding stringent standards of evidence; and these standards applied with at least as much rigour to what they hold dear as to what they are tempted to reject with impunity.”

“There is child abuse, and there are such things as repressed memories. But there are also such things as false memories and confabulations, and they are not rare at all. Misrememberings are the rule, not the exception. They occur all the time. They occur even in cases where the subject is absolutely confident – even when the memory is a seemingly unforgettable flashbulb, one of those metaphorical mental photographs.”

“Paid product endorsements, especially by real or purported experts, constitute a steady rainfall of deception. They betray contempt for the intelligence of their customers. They introduce an insidious corruption of popular attitudes about scientific objectivity.”

“A deception arises, sometimes innocently but collaboratively, sometimes with cynical premeditation. Usually the victim is caught up in a powerful emotion – wonder, fear, greed, grief. Credulous acceptance of baloney can cost you money; that’s what P.T. Barnum meant when he said, “There’s a sucker born every minute’. But it can be much more dangerous than that, and when governments and societies lose the capacity for critical thinking, the results can be catastrophic, however sympathetic we may be to those who have bought the baloney.”

“Arguments from authority carry little weight – authorities have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.”

“A statement: children who watch violent TV programmes tend to be more violent when they grow up. But did the TV cause the violence, or do violent children preferentially enjoy watching violent programmes? Very likely both are true. Commercial defenders of TV violence argue that anyone can distinguish between television and reality. But Saturday morning children’s programmes now average 25 acts of violence per hour. At the very least this desensitizes young children to aggression and random cruelty. And if impressionable adults can have false memories implanted in their brains, what are we implanting in our children when we expose them to some 100,000 acts of violence before they graduate from elementary school?”

“Telepathy’ literally means to feel at a distance, just as ‘telephone’ is to hear at a distance and ‘television’ is to see at a distance. The word suggests the communication not of thoughts but of feelings, emotions. Around a quarter of all Americans believe they’ve experienced something like telepathy. People who know each other very well, who live together, who are practised in one another’s feeling tones, associations and thinking styles can often anticipate what the partner will say. This is merely the usual five senses plus human empathy, sensitivity and intelligence in operation. It may feel extrasensory, but it’s not at all what’s intended by the word ‘telepathy’. If something like this were ever conclusively demonstrated, it would, I think, have discernible physical causes -perhaps electrical currents in the brain. Pseudoscience, rightly or wrongly labelled, is by no means the same thing as the supernatural, which is by definition something somehow outside of Nature.”

Sep 262012
 

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/us-calls-assange-enemy-of-state-20120927-26m7s.html

THE US military has designated Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as enemies of the  United States – the same legal category as the al-Qaeda terrorist network and  the Taliban insurgency.

Declassified US Air Force counter-intelligence documents, released under US  freedom-of-information laws, reveal that military personnel who contact  WikiLeaks or WikiLeaks supporters may be at risk of being charged with  “communicating with the enemy”, a military crime that carries a maximum sentence  of death.

Julian Assange ... "enemy of the state".Julian Assange … “enemy of the state”. Photo: AFP

The documents, some originally classified “Secret/NoForn” – not releasable to  non-US nationals – record a probe by the air force’s Office of Special  Investigations into a cyber systems analyst based in Britain who allegedly  expressed support for WikiLeaks and attended pro-Assange demonstrations in  London.

The counter-intelligence investigation focused on whether the analyst, who  had a top-secret security clearance and access to the US military’s Secret  Internet Protocol Router network, had disclosed classified or sensitive  information to WikiLeaks supporters, described as an “anti-US and/or  anti-military group”.

The suspected offence was “communicating with the enemy, 104-D”, an article  in the US Uniform Code of Military Justice that prohibits military personnel  from “communicating, corresponding or holding intercourse with the enemy”.

The analyst’s access to classified information was suspended.  However, the  investigators closed the case without laying charges. The analyst denied leaking  information.

Mr Assange remains holed up in Ecuador’s embassy in London. He was granted  diplomatic asylum on the grounds that if extradited to Sweden to be questioned  about sexual assault allegations, he would be at risk of extradition to the US  to face espionage or conspiracy charges arising from the leaking of hundreds of  thousands of secret US military and diplomatic reports.

US Vice-President Joe Biden labelled Mr Assange a “high-tech terrorist” in  December 2010 and US congressional leaders have called for him to be charged  with espionage.

Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee – both once involved in presidential campaigns  – have both urged that Mr Assange be “hunted down”.

Mr Assange’s US attorney, Michael Ratner, said the designation of WikiLeaks  as an “enemy” had serious implications for the WikiLeaks publisher if he were to  be extradited to the US, including possible military detention.

US Army private Bradley Manning faces a court martial charged with aiding the  enemy –  identified as al-Qaeda – by transmitting information that, published by  WikiLeaks, became available to the enemy.

Mr Ratner said that under US law it would most likely have been considered  criminal for the US Air Force analyst to communicate classified material to  journalists and publishers, but those journalists and publishers would not have  been considered the enemy or prosecuted.

“However, in the FOI documents there is no allegation of any actual  communication for publication that would aid an enemy of the United States such  as al-Qaeda, nor are there allegations that WikiLeaks published such  information,” he said.

“Almost the entire set of documents is concerned with the analyst’s  communications with people close to and supporters of Julian Assange and  WikiLeaks, with the worry that she would disclose classified documents to Julian  Assange and WikiLeaks.

“It appears that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are the ‘enemy’. An enemy is  dealt with under the laws of war, which could include killing, capturing,  detaining without trial, etc.”

The Australian government has repeatedly denied knowledge of any US intention  to charge Mr Assange or seek his extradition.

However, Australian diplomatic cables released to Fairfax Media under  freedom-of-information  laws over the past 18 months have confirmed the  continuation of an “unprecedented” US Justice Department espionage investigation  targeting Mr Assange and WikiLeaks.

The Australian diplomatic reports canvassed the possibility that the US may  eventually seek Mr Assange’s extradition on conspiracy or  information-theft-related offences to avoid extradition problems arising from  the nature of espionage as a political offence and the free-speech protections  in the US constitution.

Mr Assange is scheduled this morning to speak by video link to a meeting on  his asylum case on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly in New  York. The meeting will be attended by Ecuadorean Foreign Minister Ricardo  Patino.

In a separate FOI decision yesterday, the Department of Foreign Affairs  confirmed that the release of Australian diplomatic cables about WikiLeaks and  Mr Assange had been the subject of extensive consultation with the US.

Poll: Do you agree with the US designation of Julian  Assange as an “enemy of state”?

Yes          10%

No           87%

Don’t know  3%

Total votes: 12288.

Sep 262012
 

The contract for Lockheed Martin’s F-35 stealth bombers.  Taking citizens to the cleaners.

Watch CTV’s  W5 documentary, AIR RAGE.   (Only one ad at the beginning. It plays straight through, part 1 and then part 2.  It’s excellent.)    http://www.ctvnews.ca/f-35-fighter-jet-is-it-the-pinnacle-of-technology-its-creators-claim-1.966893

 

NOTE:    I don’t see any on-line comments below the video that address WHY Harper is operating outside the law.  (The contract for the F-35’s was not put out to tender.)

I believe the explanation is the Canada First Defence Strategy” (2008-06-19). The American military-industrial-congressional complex being duplicated in Canada.   “The boys” decided we would have “interoperability and compatibility” with the Americans.  As I read it, if Lockheed Martin greases the palms of enough boys in the U.S., it has Canada in the bag automatically.  Canadians don’t have any say. Canadian quislings sold us out.

If you think sovereignty might be important, well . . .

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

All we have to do is lend a hand to www.ceasefire.ca !

Steve writes:

We are confronting the defenders of this flawed and wasteful purchase at every step. We are calling out arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin, the defence lobby, and their friends in the media on their misleading statements about the F-35s. You can read about the cozy relationship between the Canadian Press and the Stealth Lobbyist over on our blog.

Many thanks to ceasefire.ca for all their work.

Where Lockheed Martin goes, there corruption flows  (well supported by the facts! – – “the cozy relationship” is just another addition to the list).

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

You may recall:  Lockheed Martin is trying to move into Canadian universities, notably and recently, the University of Saskatchewan.  Will get an update on that out later.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I now expect the continuation of my trial (Lockheed Martin’s involvement in the Canadian census) at the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal to be during the first week of November.  I’ll let you know, when I know.

BACKGROUND FOR NEWCOMERS:

In 2003 Statistics Canada contracted out work on the Canadian census to Lockheed Martin Corporation (American military).  We protested; I (and thousands of others) did not fill in my 2006 census form.  I was charged in March 2008.

The reason is Lockheed Martin, but the legal argument to defend my action is a Charter Right:  In fostering the underlying values of dignity, integrity and autonomy, it is fitting that s. 8 of the Charter should seek to protect a biographical core of personal information which individuals in a free and democratic society would wish to maintain and control from dissemination to the state.”  (The Government cannot force citizens to provide the biographical core of personal information demanded by StatsCan, under threat of prosecution, jail time and a fine.)

I was found guilty in the lower court, but given an absolute discharge.  I will have done a disservice to Canadians if the “guilty” decision stands.  The first round of Appeal (Court of Queen’s Bench) upheld the Provincial Court decision.  The next round of Appeal will hopefully be heard in November, 2012, as mentioned.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The complete file of information on Lockheed Martin, assembled by this network is at  Lockheed Martin, War Economy (also info on Census, Trial

Sep 232012
 

(Reported on page C8 of the Saskatoon Star Phoenix.  I think the article deserves front-page coverage, if Canadians are going to be an informed lot.)

By Jason Fekete, Postmedia News  September 21, 2012

As the Harper government reviews a proposed takeover of a Calgarybased energy  company by a state-owned Chinese oil giant, Canada’s spy agency is warning such  acquisitions can pose a threat to national security.

The shareholders of petroleum producer Nexen overwhelmingly approved Thursday  the $15.1-billion US foreign takeover of the company by the China National  Offshore Oil Corporation.

The proposed takeover – and the political environment for future foreign  acquisitions – now rests in the hands of a Conservative government conflicted on  the issue.

The vote by Nexen’s shareholders came on the same day the Canadian Security  Intelligence Service warned in its latest annual report that some state-owned  foreign companies are pursuing “opaque agendas” in Canada and that attempts to  acquire control over strategic sectors of the Canadian economy pose a threat to  national security.

The CSIS report does not identify specific state-owned companies or  associated countries, but highlights several potential security threats from  foreign investment in Canada.

“While the vast majority of foreign investment in Canada is carried out in an  open and transparent manner, certain state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and private  firms with close ties to their home governments have pursued opaque agendas or  received clandestine intelligence support for their pursuits here,” CSIS says in  its annual report, tabled Thursday in Parliament.

“When foreign companies with ties to foreign intelligence agencies or hostile  governments seek to acquire control over strategic sectors of the Canadian  economy, it can represent a threat to Canadian security interests. The foreign  entities might well exploit that control in an effort to facilitate illegal  transfers of technology or to engage in other espionage and other foreign  interference activities,” the report adds.

“CSIS expects that national security concerns related to foreign investment  in Canada will continue to materialize, owing to the increasingly prominent role  that SOEs are playing in the economic strategies of some foreign  governments.”

The CSIS report also highlights that knowledge is power in today’s global  economy, especially in areas of science and technology, meaning Canada is a  prime target for economic espionage.

With that in mind, many countries are going to great lengths to find an  advantage, the report says, which has led to “a noticeable increase in  clandestine attempts” to gain unauthorized access to proprietary information or  technology.

“As a world leader in communications, biotechnology, mineral and energy  extraction, aerospace and other areas, Canada remains an attractive target for  economic espionage. Several countries engage in economic espionage against  Canada to acquire expertise, dual-use technology and other relevant information  related to those and other sectors,” the report adds

The CSIS warnings pose yet another challenge for a Conservative federal  government examining CNOOC’s proposed takeover of Nexen under the Investment  Canada Act and whether the deal is of “net benefit” to Canada.

Under the act, the government’s review will consider a number of factors,  including whether CNOOC, as for all state-owned enterprises, adheres to Canadian  standards of corporate governance as well as how and the extent to which the  non-Canadian company is owned or controlled by a state.

The takeover bid is sparking heated debate, including within the Conservative  cabinet and caucus, about how much foreign investment Canada should allow when  it comes to strategic natural resources such as oil and gas.

Calgary Conservative MP Rob Anders, an outspoken critic of China’s human  rights record, said Thursday the Chinese “don’t play fair, they don’t believe in  fair trade.”

Anders said he believes that most Canadians oppose the deal and “have serious  objections with China’s human rights abuses and frankly even their record on  trade.”

© Copyright (c) The StarPhoenix
Sep 212012
 

CONTENTS

(The caption is misleading inasmuch as the plan is to “ease us along” by baby steps so we don’t get hostile.  Boiling frog.)

Plan to have US agents on Canadian soil ‘on hold:’ Government

Scroll down to the article.  My commentary first.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

COMMENTARY

The integration and harmonization of the American and Canadian, police and military forces is marching forward.

The integration is well advanced.

The American military, in the form of Lockheed Martin Corporation, is also moving into our Universities.  (ref PLANNING DOCUMENT for Lockheed Martin Corporation’s funding to the University of Saskatchewan.)  At the April 2012 meeting of University Senate, the Acting Dean of the Engineering College, Ernie Barber,  defended the collaboration.   In the past we circulated news articles about Lockheed Martin’s forays into Dalhousie University and UNB.

The  PLANNING DOCUMENT is not difficult text.  The University will collaborate, to conduct Research to wage more effective war.  Those are the “Learning opportunities” that will be offered to our young people.  The “Collaboration Topics” will help to create an economy based on war.  The people of the Province of Saskatchewan are being robbed of their University, their ethics and the future imagined by them.

We have the SMARTS to figure out creative non-violent resistance to injustice.  It is stupidity and brawn that has no imagination beyond bombs, destruction, torture and surveillance.

 

FOR NEWCOMERS,  INFO ON “SHIPRIDER

2011-11-29 US cops now allowed to operate in Canada. Important article, Toronto Star.

Legislative Summary Bill C-60: Keeping Canadians Safe (Protecting Borders) Act.
“Shiprider” Agreement. Integrated Border Enforcement Teams (IBETs).

2011-11-29 MORE re “US cops now allowed to operate in Canada.”

Some cContext:

  • The Troop Exchange Agreement in 2008
  • the roll-out of armoured vehicles (which are for combat zones) in cities across Canada (and the U.S.)
  • the deployment of unmanned drones along the U.S.-Canadian border
  • Lockheed Martin moving into Saskatoon (a series of 3 articles from the Star Phoenix), and so on.

The article, 2011-11-29 US cops now allowed to operate in Canada. Important article, Toronto Star, shows that the American police are now more or less integrated with the Canadian police – – all part of the integration of North America.  Loss of sovereignty, thanks to the quislings.

= = = = =  = = = = = = = = =

TODAY’S ARTICLE

From “Embassy Magazine”, September 19, 2012

http://www.embassymag.ca/page/view/usagents-09-19-2012

The Harper government’s plan to permit United States law enforcement agents to pursue suspects across the land border and onto Canadian soil is “on hold” while legal issues are resolved, the government says.

The program, part of the 2011 perimeter plan between Canada and the United States that is reshaping the two nations’ cross-border trade, security, and policing, was supposed to be tested through two pilot projects by the summer of 2012.

Plan to have US agents on Canadian soil ‘on hold:’ Government

By Carl Meyer, Published September 19, 2012

The Harper government’s plan to permit United States law enforcement agents to pursue suspects across the land border and onto Canadian soil is “on hold” while legal issues are resolved, the government says.

The program, part of the 2011 perimeter plan between Canada and the United States that is reshaping the two nations’ cross-border trade, security, and policing, was supposed to be tested through two pilot projects by the summer of 2012.

The land-based program could give the green light to US Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration agents to cross the border and pursue suspects into Canada, the RCMP has told Embassy.

In May, two top Mounties told a Senate committee that the force was planning on easing Canadians into the idea of American agents in Canada through “baby steps.”

The government put amendments into its spring budget bill to make it permanently legal for US agents to be certified as police in Canadian waters. The maritime program, called Shiprider, was seen as the first step towards the same program over land, since the land program is referred to as the “next generation” of cross-border policing.

But Jean Paul Duval, a spokesperson for Public Safety Canada, wrote in an email to Embassy on Sept. 18 that “The Next Generation Pilot is on hold while the legal and governance framework for the program is finalized.”

Meanwhile, Shiprider is proceeding with the selection of officers and training, wrote Mr. Duval.

The RCMP has picked the officers it wants on the teams, and they are “in the process of being relocated to the areas of operation,” he added.

“Joint training sessions have been conducted over the course of the summer months to qualify selected officers for cross-designation.”  that will be rolled out slower than anticipated. While the 2011 plan said two permanent Shiprider teams would be deployed by the summer, Mr. Duval wrote that the RCMP and the US Coast Guard won’t be in a position to deploy the teams until “late October 2012.”

Pre-clearance and wait times

On Sept. 13, the Harper government also highlighted two milestones in the perimeter plan:
killing the residency requirement for a pre-clearance program, and the installation of wait-time sensors near Niagara Falls, Ont.

That day, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews met with United States Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in Montreal to talk perimeter, and a Canadian government press release from the meeting reviewed the two accomplishments.

Those occurred on July 10, when the Canada Border Services Agency said it was allowing Canadian and American citizens living abroad, and those who recently returned to their home countries, to apply for NEXUS, a pre-clearance program-and on July 17, when Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announced new sensor technology at two international bridges at the Ontario-New York border.

The government says the sensors, which will measure traffic on the bridge approaches and broadcast the information online, will reduce border wait times “by up to one million hours per year.”

The government points to its website, www.borderactionplan.gc.ca, for a more extensive list of accomplishments so far.

Mr. Duval also wrote that there would be more announcements “over the coming months” as well as the first annual report, expected Dec. 31.

The press release also mentioned that there was “ongoing work” on information-sharing between Canada and the US for national security purposes.

That has driven the largest amount of public controversy for the two nations so far. Chantal Bernier, Canada’s assistant privacy commissioner, took issue with a June 28 bilateral pact on privacy principles, suggesting it could allow the personal details of Canadians to be sent to countries with bad human rights records. As well, critics raised concerns that the government’s decision in June to permanently legalize cross-border policing over water would trample Canadian privacy laws-although the government has insisted such laws will be respected.

Another summer perimeter change was that David Moloney, a Privy Council Office senior adviser and the official implementing the government-wide process, took on more responsibility on Aug. 1.

He assumed the job of Bob Hamilton, who became deputy environment minister after being assigned to the joint council charged with hammering out more efficient regulations for cross-border commerce.

Bersin’s third time

Ms. Napolitano was in Montreal to give a speech at an International Civil Aviation Organization conference on aviation security.

She came with her departmental colleague, Assistant Secretary for International Affairs Alan Bersin, as well as John S. Pistole, the Transportation Security Administration’s administrator, according to the US government.

Ms. Napolitano also met with Transport Minister Denis Lebel.

For Mr. Bersin, it was his second appearance in Montreal in only a few months-he spoke at a June session at the Conference of Montreal, and outlined to Embassy how an executive steering committee would be meeting in Ottawa during the summer.

He was also in Ottawa in March to discuss the border security plan, urging a Rideau Club audience to sign up for pre-screening programs.

cmeyer  AT   embassymag.ca

Sep 192012
 

Three articles:

  1. University corporate funding, Aug 30 (Carleton University experience related to U of Saskatchewan)
  2. But the University of Saskatchewan is opaque, lack of access to information
  3. Not correct, U of S is subject to access to information law

Listed in reverse order:

= = = = = = =  = = = = = = =

3.   Not correct, U of S is subject to access to information law

Information and Privacy Commissioner (Sask)  letter to editor:

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/Records+accessible/7263773/story.html

Re: No accountability (SP, Sept. 6). Contrary to this letter commenting on  universities and academic freedom, Saskatchewan’s universities and colleges are  subject to The Local Authority Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy  Act.

This has been the case since Sept. 1, 1994. This means that citizens have the right to make requests for access to records in the possession or under the control of a university or college, just as they can for any other public sector body.

Universities in Saskatchewan have a designated FOIP co-ordinator to deal with  such requests. If citizens are dissatisfied with the response of the  institution, they have the right to ask our independent Office of the  Information and Privacy Commissioner to review the decision of the  institution.

R. Gary Dickson Information and Privacy Commissioner

© Copyright (c) The StarPhoenix
= = = = = = = = = =  = ==  = = = =
Note:  the Carleton University issue referred to in the next article is at:
= = = = = = = = = =  = ==  = = = =
2.  But the University of Saskatchewan is opaque, lack of access to information

No accountability

By Chris Gallaway, The StarPhoenix,  Sept 6, 2012

I was pleased to read the editorial, Tale of caution on universities (SP,  Aug. 30). It raises the situation of Carleton University’s Riddell Program as an  important warning of what can happen to academic freedom at our public  institutions when cash-strapped universities turn to corporate donors to fill  funding shortfalls.

What the editorial doesn’t mention is the reason this agreement finally  became public after a year of stonewalling by Carleton’s administration. Unlike  in Saskatchewan, Ontario’s universities are subject to freedom of information  legislation requiring them to disclose requested information.

The University of Saskatchewan currently is under no obligation to divulge  corporate sponsorship agreements to the public. The lack of accountability  required of Saskatchewan’s public post-secondary institutions is concerning.

When receiving corporate sponsorship for starting a nuclear research centre,  negotiating an exclusive contract for a beverage provider, or renaming the  business college on campus, the public should have the right to know the details  of what our university is agreeing to when deciding to accept these funds.

In 2007, a report submitted to the Saskatchewan government by the Canadian  Federation of Students noted that, relative to other Canadian universities, the  U of S has the most secretive and non-transparent board of governors in Canada.  In fact, the U of S is one of few whose board of governors meetings, agendas,  minutes or comprehensive financial information aren’t available for public  scrutiny.

It is time to include our universities in provincial freedom of information  legislation as a bare minimum for transparency and accountability to the  taxpayers who fund them.

Chris Gallaway Saskatoon

© Copyright (c) The StarPhoenix
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  = = ==  =
1.  University corporate funding, Aug 30 (Carleton University experience related to U of Saskatchewan)

Tale of caution on universities

The StarPhoenixAugust  30, 2012

As cash-strapped universities across Canada look to private donors to add to  their array of facilities and expand programs at a time of increasing government  restraint, the controversy brewing over a sponsorship deal at Carleton  University offers a cautionary tale.

The Canadian Press reports that the university has now rewritten a donor  agreement it had made with Calgary businessman Clayton Riddell to make it clear  that his donation of $15 million to create a namesake school of political  management doesn’t give the patron the final say on faculty hiring or program  curriculum.

Administrators at the university had stonewalled disclosing terms of the deal  for nearly a year, CP reports. When those details finally were revealed this  summer, Carleton faculty members and the Canadian University of University  Teachers complained that the control wielded by the program’s five-member  steering committee, dominated by Mr. Riddell’s appointees, on key hiring and  curriculum decisions was a major infringement on academic freedom.

University president Roseann O’Reilly Runt this week released a revisions to  the deal to make it clear that the committee’s role will be to provide “timely  and strategic advice” instead of approving hiring and curriculum decisions, and  also made it an explicit requirement that the committee operate in accordance  with Carleton’s policies, procedures and practices.

Even though this might at first blush appear to be little more than an  academic tiff, the issues identified go much further and are particularly  relevant in Saskatoon and Saskatchewan where university operations play such a  large role.

By necessity, given this province’s size and economic structure, academic  institutions seeking support that goes beyond government and Crown corporations  have but a few private sector donors to whom they can turn.

The Carleton case, which shows that faculty members are justified in  expressing concern that any real or perceived corporate control over an academic  program would damage the university’s reputation, its ability to compete for  students and financial resources and invite censure, underlines the need for  great caution by university administrators in signing agreements with donors,  however generous the contributions.

Whether it’s in establishing centres for nuclear or other energy research, or  a specialized masters program such as Carleton’s Riddell School of political  Management that takes a cross-partisan approach to training political staff for  government-related work, a university’s credibility and reputation are at stake  if it’s perceived to have compromised academic independence in granting  concessions to donors.

CP reports that in the United States, numerous problematic deals have been  found that involve universities and major energy companies. Meanwhile, the  Canadian Association of University Teachers is currently examining as many as 18  research deals between post-secondary institutions and third parties, and  expects to release its findings this fall.

At a time of government restraint, of course universities should be seeking  help from the public sector to enhance the quality and array of programs they  can provide to enhance the knowledge and skills of young Canadians. However, in  entering agreements, administrators should keep uppermost in mind what their  institutions represent and what’s at stake in the long run.

The editorials that appear in this space represent the opinion of The  StarPhoenix. They are unsigned because they do not necessarily represent the  personal views of the writers. The positions taken in the editorials are arrived  at through discussion among the members of the newspaper’s editorial board,  which operates independently from the news departments of the paper.

© Copyright (c) The StarPhoenix
Sep 182012
 

NOTE:  this is #3 in a series: 

  1. 2012-09-02 Bush, Blair should face trial for role in Iraq war, says Desmond Tutu
  2. 2012-09-10 Letter to the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu also calling for arrest of Bush & Blair et al
  3. 2012-09-18 Reply from the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu and arrest of Bush

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Click on:   Reply from ICC 2012-09-18

Sep 182012
 

NOTE:  this is #2 in a series: 

  1. 2012-09-02 Bush, Blair should face trial for role in Iraq war, says Desmond Tutu
  2. 2012-09-10 Letter to the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu also calling for arrest of Bush & Blair et al
  3. 2012-09-18 Reply from the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu and arrest of Bush

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

 

September 10, 2012

 

TO:   The International Criminal Court

The Honourable Luis Moreno-Ocampo

otp.informationdesk   AT   icc-cpi.int

Office of the Prosecutor

The Hague

FROM:   Sandra Finley

sabest1  AT   sasktel.net

Saskatoon, SK Canada

306 373 8078

 

Dear Luis Moreno-Ocampo;

 

Archbishop Desmond Tutu recently boycotted a seminar in Johannesburg at which Tony Blair was a speaker.

I am thereby prompted to contact the ICC a second time (the first time was in 2009).

1.     Has a decision been taken by the ICC to prosecute George Bush, Tony Blair, Dick Cheney and others for war crimes under Article 15 of the Rome Statute?  Can you please tell me if not, why not?

2.     Did you receive my communication to the ICC with documentation of the laws and the evidence against Bush and Company (copy at 2009-03-08)?   I requested that you issue a warrant for the arrest of Bush.  There needs to be Equal Treatment with the ICC prosecution of Sudanese President Al-Bashir, for example.  As far as I know, I did not receive a reply, no explanation from the ICC.  I sympathize – – I think you are badly under-funded, but would it be possible for you to reply now?

3.   On January 19, 2010, Law Professor Francis Boyle from the University of Illinois filed a request with the ICC for the arrest of Bush and his companions.  See http://www.redress.cc/global/redress20100206.  Will you please send me a copy of the reply the ICC sent to Professor Boyle?

4.     2011-2012:  “ In Kuala Lumpur, after two years of investigation by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCC), a tribunal (the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, or KLWCT) consisting of five judges with judicial and academic backgrounds reached a unanimous verdict that found George W Bush and Tony Blair guilty of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and genocide as a result of their roles in the Iraq War. . . .

Has the ICC been in contact with the KLWCC?  It seems to me that  they have amassed an extremely valuable body of information and legal opinions that the ICC could use to expedite work on the file of Bush-Blair-Cheney-and-others?

Democracy is dependent upon an informed citizenry.  Mainstream media did not tell citizens that Tutu’s action is but one in a lengthy international effort to bring Bush and company to justice.  It is left to bloggers to inform their friends.  There is a listing of efforts by famous and not-famous people, as well as the Law and the Evidence at:  Arrest George Bush. Rule of Law essential to democracy.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu strongly stated (yet again) the need for George Bush and his companions to be brought to trial by the International Criminal Court. (Tutu:  “I couldn’t sit with someone who justified the invasion of Iraq with a lie”,  see  2012-09-02 Bush, Blair should face trial for role in Iraq war, says Desmond Tutu)

Tutu’s question,

  • On what grounds do we decide that Robert Mugabe should go the International Criminal Court, Tony Blair should join the international speakers’ circuit, bin Laden should be assassinated, but Iraq should be invaded, not because it possesses weapons of mass destruction, as Mr Bush’s chief supporter, Mr Blair, confessed last week, but in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein?

is reiterated in the press,  The Guardian, U.K.:

  • But it is Tutu’s call for Blair and Bush to face justice in The Hague that is most startling. Claiming that different standards appear to be set for prosecuting African leaders and western ones, he says the death toll during and after the Iraq conflict is sufficient on its own for Blair and Bush to be tried at the ICC.

“On these grounds, alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in The Hague,” he says.

Thank-you very much for your consideration of my questions.

Best wishes to you, in your work that is extremely important for justice, peace, humanity and the environment,

Sandra Finley

Sep 082012
 

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair could face trial in Scotland for his war crimes in Iraq after the proposal was backed by Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs).

Margo MacDonald, an independent MSP, called for the alteration of the International Criminal Court (Scotland) Act 2001, asking the law to consider an aggressive war with the intention of changing a regime as illegal.

The suggestion to try Blair gained support from backbenchers of the Scottish National Party (SNP), Annabelle Ewing, Gordon MacDonald, John Finnie, Chic Brodie and Jim Eadie.

Jim Sillars, husband to a former SNP deputy leader called on bold Scottish MPs to “introduce retrospective legislation to indict the former prime minister on war crimes.”

“Blair knew aggressive war was a crime. He believed he was safe, there being no legal system that could touch him. There is one now – ours,” he added.

Last week, Archbishop Desmond Tutu called for Blair and former US president George W. Bush to be tried at the International Court of Justice at The Hague for war crimes in the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Tutu, the Nobel Peace prize winner said that the former leaders of the UK and the US would have already faced trial, if they were former African leaders. Tutu also stated that the death toll in Iraq alone was sufficient for Blair and Bush to be prosecuted.

BGH/SSM/HE

Sep 022012
 

NOTE:  this is #1 in a series: 

  1. 2012-09-02 Bush, Blair should face trial for role in Iraq war, says Desmond Tutu
  2. 2012-09-10 Letter to the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu also calling for arrest of Bush & Blair et al
  3. 2012-09-18 Reply from the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu and arrest of Bush

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

New and influential allies add their voice to the call for justice.

Note the news coverage:   NO MENTION of CONTEXT, the fact that Tutu is one in a long stream of prominent (and not prominent!) people who are weighing in on the efforts to bring Bush, Blair, Cheney and others to trial.  Tutu’s action is reported as a one-of event.

A file of on-going efforts that will eventually bring these people before the International Criminal Court (ICC) is at:    Arrest George Bush.  Rule of Law essential to democracy.

 

CONTENTS (BELOW)

  1. DESMOND TUTU’S ARTICLE IN THE OBSERVER, Why I had no choice but to spurn Tony Blair
  2. THE GUARDIAN (U.K.) REPORT ON TUTU’S STATEMENT
  3. THE GLOBE & MAIL REPORTS TUTU’S STATEMENT

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

1.  DESMOND TUTU’S ARTICLE IN THE OBSERVER, Why I had no choice but to spurn Tony Blair

I couldn’t sit with someone who justified the invasion of Iraq with a lie

The Observer,  Sunday 2 September 2012

Desmond Tutu

Photograph: Str/REUTERS
Desmond Tutu: pulled out of a seminar which Tony Blair was scheduled to attend.

The immorality of the United States and Great Britain’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003, premised on the lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, has destabilised and polarised the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history.

Instead of recognising that the world we lived in, with increasingly sophisticated communications, transportations and weapons systems necessitated sophisticated leadership that would bring the global family together, the then-leaders of the US and UK fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand – with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us.

If leaders may lie, then who should tell the truth? Days before George W Bush and Tony Blair ordered the invasion of Iraq, I called the White House and spoke to Condoleezza Rice, who was then national security adviser, to urge that United Nations weapons inspectors be given more time to confirm or deny the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Should they be able to confirm finding such weapons, I argued, dismantling the threat would have the support of virtually the entire world. Ms Rice demurred, saying there was too much risk and the president would not postpone any longer.

On what grounds do we decide that Robert Mugabe should go the International Criminal Court, Tony Blair should join the international speakers’ circuit, bin Laden should be assassinated, but Iraq should be invaded, not because it possesses weapons of mass destruction, as Mr Bush’s chief supporter, Mr Blair, confessed last week, but in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein?

The cost of the decision to rid Iraq of its by-all-accounts despotic and murderous leader has been staggering, beginning in Iraq itself. Last year, an average of 6.5 people died there each day in suicide attacks and vehicle bombs, according to the Iraqi Body Count project. More than 110,000 Iraqis have died in the conflict since 2003 and millions have been displaced. By the end of last year, nearly 4,500 American soldiers had been killed and more than 32,000 wounded.

On these grounds alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in the Hague.

But even greater costs have been exacted beyond the killing fields, in the hardened hearts and minds of members of the human family across the world.

Has the potential for terrorist attacks decreased? To what extent have we succeeded in bringing the so-called Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds closer together, in sowing the seeds of understanding and hope?

Leadership and morality are indivisible. Good leaders are the custodians of morality. The question is not whether Saddam Hussein was good or bad or how many of his people he massacred. The point is that Mr Bush and Mr Blair should not have allowed themselves to stoop to his immoral level.

If it is acceptable for leaders to take drastic action on the basis of a lie, without an acknowledgement or an apology when they are found out, what should we teach our children?

My appeal to Mr Blair is not to talk about leadership, but to demonstrate it. You are a member of our family, God’s family. You are made for goodness, for honesty, for morality, for love; so are our brothers and sisters in Iraq, in the US, in Syria, in Israel and Iran.

I did not deem it appropriate to have this discussion at the Discovery Invest Leadership Summit in Johannesburg last week. As the date drew nearer, I felt an increasingly profound sense of discomfort about attending a summit on “leadership” with Mr Blair. I extend my humblest and sincerest apologies to Discovery, the summit organisers, the speakers and delegates for the lateness of my decision not to attend.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

2.  THE GUARDIAN (U.K.) REPORT ON TUTU’S STATEMENT

Anti-apartheid hero attacks former prime minister over ‘double standards on war crimes’

Toby Helm, political editor

Tony Blair in London
Photograph: Stefan Wermuth/Reuters

Tony Blair has strongly contested Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s views.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has called for Tony Blair and George Bush to be hauled before the international criminal court in The Hague and delivered a damning critique of the physical and moral devastation caused by the Iraq war.

Tutu, a Nobel peace prize winner and hero of the anti-apartheid movement, accuses the former British and US leaders of lying about weapons of mass destruction and says the invasion left the world more destabilised and divided “than any other conflict in history”.

Writing in the Observer, Tutu also suggests the controversial US and UK-led action to oust Saddam Hussein in 2003 created the backdrop for the civil war in Syria and a possible wider Middle East conflict involving Iran.

“The then leaders of the United States and Great Britain,” Tutu argues, “fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand – with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us.”

But it is Tutu’s call for Blair and Bush to face justice in The Hague that is most startling. Claiming that different standards appear to be set for prosecuting African leaders and western ones, he says the death toll during and after the Iraq conflict is sufficient on its own for Blair and Bush to be tried at the ICC.

“On these grounds, alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in The Hague,” he says.

The court hears cases on genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. To date, 16 cases have been brought before the court but only one, that of Thomas Lubanga, a rebel leader from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), has been completed. He was sentenced earlier this year to 14 years’ imprisonment for his part in war crimes in his home country.

Tutu’s broadside is evidence of the shadow still cast by Iraq over Blair’s post-prime ministerial career, as he attempts to rehabilitate himself in British public life. A longtime critic of the Iraq war, the archbishop pulled out of a South African conference on leadership last week because Blair, who was paid 2m rand (£150,000) for his time, was attending. It is understood that Tutu had agreed to speak without a fee.

In his article, the archbishop argues that as well as the death toll, there has been a heavy moral cost to civilisation, with no gain. “Even greater costs have been exacted beyond the killing fields, in the hardened hearts and minds of members of the human family across the world.

“Has the potential for terrorist attacks decreased?  To what extent have we succeeded in bringing the so-called Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds closer together, in sowing the seeds of understanding and hope?” Blair and Bush, he says, set an appalling example. “If leaders may lie, then who should tell the truth?” he asks.

“If it is acceptable for leaders to take drastic action on the basis of a lie, without an acknowledgement or an apology when they are found out, what should we teach our children?”

In a statement, Blair strongly contested Tutu’s views and said Iraq was now a more prosperous country than it had been under Saddam Hussein. “I have a great respect for Archbishop Tutu’s fight against apartheid – where we were on the same side of the argument – but to repeat the old canard that we lied about the intelligence is completely wrong as every single independent analysis of the evidence has shown.

“And to say that the fact that Saddam massacred hundreds of thousands of his citizens is irrelevant to the morality of removing him is bizarre. We have just had the memorials both of the Halabja massacre, where thousands of people were murdered in one day by Saddam’s use of chemical weapons, and that of the Iran-Iraq war where casualties numbered up to a million including many killed by chemical weapons.

“In addition, his slaughter of his political opponents, the treatment of the Marsh Arabs and the systematic torture of his people make the case for removing him morally strong. But the basis of action was as stated at the time.

“In short, this is the same argument we have had many times with nothing new to say. But surely in a healthy democracy people can agree to disagree.

“I would also point out that despite the problems, Iraq today has an economy three times or more in size, with the child mortality rate cut by a third of what it was. And with investment hugely increased in places like Basra.”

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

3.  THE GLOBE & MAIL REPORTS TUTU’S STATEMENT

by David Stringer

LONDON — The Associated Press

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Desmond Tutu called Sunday for Tony Blair and George Bush to face prosecution at the International Criminal Court for their role in the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq

Archbishop Tutu, the retired Anglican Church’s archbishop of South Africa, wrote in an op-ed piece for The Observer newspaper that the ex-leaders of Britain and the United States should be made to “answer for their actions.”

The Iraq war “has destabilized and polarized the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history,” wrote Archbishop Tutu, who was awarded the Nobel prize in 1984.

“Those responsible for this suffering and loss of life should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian peers who have been made to answer for their actions in the Hague,” he added.

The Hague, Netherlands, based court is the world’s first permanent war crimes tribunal and has been in operation for 10 years. So far it has launched prosecutions only in Africa, including in Sudan, Congo, Libya and Ivory Coast.

Archbishop Tutu has long been a staunch critic of the Iraq war, while others opposed to the conflict — including playwright Harold Pinter — have previously called for Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair to face prosecution at the Hague.

“The then-leaders of the U.S. and U.K. fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now stand — with the specter of Syria and Iran before us,” said Archbishop Tutu, who last week withdrew from a conference in South Africa due to Mr. Blair’s presence at the event.

While the International Criminal Court can handle cases of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, it does not currently have the jurisdiction to prosecute crimes of aggression. Any potential prosecution over the Iraq war would likely come under the aggression category.

The U.S. is among nations which do not recognize the International Criminal Court.

In response to Archbishop Tutu, Mr. Blair said he had great respect for the archbishop’s work to tackle apartheid in South Africa, but accused him of repeating inaccurate criticisms of the Iraq war.

“To repeat the old canard that we lied about the intelligence is completely wrong as every single independent analysis of the evidence has shown,” Mr. Blair said. “And to say that the fact that Saddam (deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein) massacred hundreds of thousands of his citizens is irrelevant to the morality of removing him is bizarre.”

However, Mr. Blair said that “in a healthy democracy people can agree to disagree.”

In Britain, a two-year long inquiry examining the buildup to the Iraq war and its conduct is yet to publish its final report. The panel took evidence from political leaders including Mr. Blair, military chiefs and intelligence officers. Two previous British studies into aspects of the war cleared Mr. Blair’s government of wrongdoing.

The Iraq war was bitterly divisive in the U.K. and saw large public demonstrations. However, Mr. Blair subsequently won a 2005 national election, though with a reduced majority.