Let the Reign of the Colonels Begin
Last week's primary elections, both locally and nationally, could best be described as "out of the frying pan and into the fire." Or, "out of the Coal Junta, and into the Zionist Holocaust/Nakba." The best candidates won everywhere. Unfortunately, they were all "the lesser of two (or more) evils." There weren't any good candidates running, which is the real point of all this, from the point of view of those who are fervently trying to establish a military dictatorship, and end constitutional government (along with abortion and gay marriage) in Amerika.
We had a truly bizarre Congressional and Senate primary outcome in Montana. A lifelong Progressive Democrat advocate of unicameral parliamentary government won the REPUBLICAN nomination to oppose the crypto-Republican Max Baucus, running for the umpteenth time as a Democrat. And another Progressive Democrat won the nomination to oppose the major Bush Republican sycophant Denny Rehberg for Montana's only House seat. Here's the punchline: both are Army Reserve Colonels! Most Republicans (and Democrats) in Montana are chicken-hawks - at best, they were drafted or did National Guard duty for awhile as their military "service." Only the real "reformers" are higher-ranking officers, who have actually fought in wars, and have ties with the Pentagon!
Col. Bob Kelleher, the "perennial candidate" whose only prior elected office was to the Montana Constitutional Convention in 1972, is the "One House Parliament" guy. I've known him for 20 years, and supported his cause for even longer. He is a graduate of Catholic University in Washington, D.C., and his military service was as a JAG lawyer. I'm a firm believer that the present U.S. Constitution does not allow for partisan politics, and if we're going to have parties, then we need a parliamentary government in which the leading member of Congress whose party wins a general election then becomes Prime Minister. (The President is merely a ceremonial position, and has nothing to do with creating policy or legislation). This is the French model as it presently exists, but Kelleher prefers the British model (without, apparently, the House of Lords) following the Reform Acts of 1832. He knows his stuff, and has elaborated these ideas endlessly, in numerous campaigns for everything from Governor to POTUS. This is the first time (and he is in his mid-80's) he has ever run as a Republican, and the first time he has actually won a primary. He ran twice as a Green Party candidate: for Senate (also against Baucus) in 2002, and for Governor in 2004. The fact that some of us supported him, and all abortion advocates (and Demogreens) opposed him, accounts for much of the sorry state of the Green Party in Montana, today.
Last time I spoke with Bob several years ago, we were still friends. He is a very impressive and good-hearted man. I wish him well. And I will cover his campaign in this Bulletin, and probably work for him privately, if I can find some sympathetic Republicans here to work with (and I know a few). It will require a bizarre twist in campaign tactics, to say the least, but that is nothing new in Montana.
The other Progressive Democrat running - surprise - as a Democrat but without any party support (thus far at least), is Col. John Driscoll. John has an even more impressive resume, and ran against Baucus in the primary back in 1996. He is a former Public Service Commissioner, and probably the youngest Speaker of the House of the Montana Legislature in our state's history (the other contender would be Dan Kemmis). This was back in late 1970's or early '80's. He refuses to accept any special interest money for his campaigns.
A few years ago, I used to reprint articles from John's "Steward Magazine" in the Bulletin. We tried to encourage him to run for office as a Green, but he remains a loyal Democrat. He is also a close friend of Bob Kelleher's, and since they are both Army Reserve Colonels (John isn't a lawyer, but has worked with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other high-level policy-making positions,) they could immediately be influential members of any military procurement or other military affairs committee in Congress. Both candidates abhor the pork-barrel, log-rolling traditions of Montana's Congressional delegation, and both would, I suspect, support any and all withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as repealing the USA PATRIOT Act and supporting other vital reforms or restorations of republican, constitutional government. But I will leave it to them to make their speeches and present their arguments in policy statements and debates as they unfold. Hopefully, we'll be hearing a lot from them. - PHS
===========
OBITUARY
Lady Barbara Ann Carne-Foster, GFHS Class of 1957
I don't often do obituaries, and if I were still writing poetry, Barb would be a fitting subject for my finest efforts. I don't know if she appeared on any Queen's Lists, but she was definitely a Peer of the Realm - several Realms, in fact, beginning with Black Eagle. Since this is a copper-toned Realm, she might have been identified as Jody Foster's cosmic fairy godmother. She and her first husband, Jack Foster, were celebrated in many ways in popular culture.
The daughter of a famous Black Eagle restaurateur, Rudy Carne, her dowry was the Italian recipes which made The Jack Club (originally a remodeled country school-house) into the hottest nightclub in town. "Be a King and take your Queen to the Jack Club" was their advertising slogan back in the 1960's.
Jack was also remembered as having the first MG-TC in north-central Montana. He and my uncle Charles were close friends, and working-class comrades in the glass business. Charles may have been the best man at their wedding. Marrying Barbara was Jack's entry into a world of higher status and respectability - surprising as that might sound to those who considered Italians, Slavs and their Black Eagle enclave (known as "Little Chicago" to themselves) a less-desirable culture and place to live. (Now it's a major superfund site because of the Anaconda Smelter, but that's another story).
As was so often the case with my father's and uncle's friends, I was never socially introduced to the Foster's, outside of having worked as a swamper temporarily for the Jack Club when I was in high school. But I heard a lot about them. More recently, I got to know Barbara very well in her later years when I was driving cab. She owned a bar, the Red Door (with probably the most diverse clientele in town), and was often in need of a ride home by the end of the night. She remembered Charles, and we often reminisced about "the good old days." She was very pleased when I ran for County Commissioner as a Green, but expressed disappointment when I came out against machine gambling and in favor of a living wage ordinance (why, I don't know. All of her employees were much better paid than that). She may have helped to get me fired from the cab company for those very reasons. If so, it probably saved my life.
I hadn't realized that she was a member of that most illustrious class in Great Falls High School history - what I now identify as "The class of Atlas Shrugged and Sputnik." Many of us in the class of 1965 had older siblings or cousins in that class, and we have been struggling to keep up or surpass them ever since. Even when we have, it was always by the standards of that earlier foundation. So, I'll count Barbara as my most recent best friend from the Class of '57, and mourn her passing. Those were Happy Days, indeed. -- PHS
Tribune Obituary
http://www.legacy.com/greatfallstribune/Obituaries.asp?Page=Lifestory&PersonId=111132687
===========
FILM
The Mouse that Roared - starring mainly Peter Sellars in a variety of roles
Directed by Jack Arnold
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053084/
This is a film that came out when I was in junior high school, but I had never seen it until I borrowed a DVD of it from the library last week. One of the trailers featured there was for "Dr. Strangelove," which is appropriate. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057012/ (The other was an obscure Jerry Lewis film, "Don't Raise the Bridge, Lower the River.")
"The Mouse that Roared" is a kind of comedy version of "Dr. Strangelove," but still features a "loose nuke" and the threat of nuclear warfare as a major plotline. I checked the dates, and found that Mouse dates from 1959, while Dr. Strangelove was made five years later. Since the former is in color, and the latter in b&w, I would have thought that Dr. Strangelove was the earlier film. So far as I know, Stanley Kubrick had nothing to do with "The Mouse that Roared." It is much lighter in tone.
The Grand Duchy of Fenwick, supposedly started by an eccentric Englishman in the Swiss Alps centuries ago, subsists entirely on the basis of a single variety of wine (a reference to "monocrop agriculture", perhaps?) Unscrupulous American trade pirates in San Rafael, California, have produced a counterfeit, thus destroying Fenwick's viability. This means war, and the Fenwick army of some 30 middle-aged mail-coated knights sails for America, hoping to engage in battle, surrender, and then become the beneficiaries of U.S. foreign aid to our defeated adversaries. Quite a bit like Iraq and other "client states," actually.
Unfortunately, the plan backfires, and the Fenwickians return home with an Einstein-like nuclear scientist, Professor Kokintz, and his beautiful daughter, Helen (Jean Seaberg), along with a bomb which can destroy half of Europe. All of the major powers are at Fenwick's beck and call, hoping to form an alliance with them.
Of course, we knew in Great Falls that this movie, like most others, was really about us and our "third largest nuclear arsenal in the world" promoted by Senator Mansfield and President Kennedy right about that time. It is also a precursor to many later films besides Dr. Strangelove, including "The Manhattan Project" about a high school student who builds his own atomic bomb for a science project (with John Lithgow's assistance), as well as a later comedy about Einstein and his daughter. "The Princess Diaries" also draws heavily on this Fenwickian "history." -- PHS
==========
Viewer comment from the IMDb
"Although it's considered a harmless entertainment, 'The Mouse That Roared' is chock full of satiric jibes at the dirty politics, international relations, and paranoid culture of The Cold War- its just that the jokes are so quick and subtle that you might miss them if you blink (one of my favorite touches concerns a radio report of 'aliens'- actually the chain-mailed soldiers of Grand Fenwick- sighted in Central Park. Upon hearing the report amongst a crowd of shocked New Yorkers, one well-dressed, perfectly normal looking gent mutters about the supposed alien invasion: 'I knew it - it HAD to come to this!' This is the filmmakers' fairly accurate portrayal of how far some Americans had descended, by this time, into Atomic, Cold War and Space-Crazed paranoia).
It should be said that the diplomatic relations between America and the World, as portrayed in this film, are even MORE RELEVANT now than they were during the Cold War; except that the American statesmen seem so virtuous and well-meaning in comparison to some of our current ones. Rent it and you'll see what I mean."
==============
MUSIC
The Piatigorsky-Grossman Concerts, Great Falls
http://www.piatigorskyfoundation.org/Gregor.cfm
I was looking at the USC Thornton School of Music website the other day, and I see they've recruited 'cellist Ralph Kirshbaum to the Gregor Piatigorsky Chair. http://www.usc.edu/uscnews/stories/14865.html
A few weeks ago, Piatigorsky's grandson, Evan Drachman, also a 'cellist, was in Great Falls for what has become an unheralded and poorly-attended annual stop for the Piatigorsky Foundation's touring musicians. I've heard three of these ensembles, and I have yet to see any of the regular symphony crowd or even student musicians there - even though the recitals are free. Each group plays about 5 different venues locally over a week or so, many of them in very small towns, and all of them in schools, nursing homes, and even prisons. This was my first opportunity to actually meet Evan, who created the program, and thank him personally for what must be the only classical music "outreach" of its kind in the world.
In past years, I've heard an opera-singer named Erika, and a Scottish-Canadian Harp and Flute duo play here under the auspices of the Piatigorsky Foundation. Randy Barrett, the Cascade County Aging Services director and a public radio announcer on KGPR met Evan at some sort of conference, and that is why the Piatigorsky Foundation has made Great Falls a regular stop ever since. I should also mention Jeffrey Grossman, Evan's pick-up accompanist, who with only a day or two's preparation was able to do a masterful job in the Debussy Sonata as well as orchestral reductions in other works like Tchaikovsky's Roccoco Variations, playing on small, upright pianos of poor quality. I could close my eyes and imagine I was hearing a young James Levine in Carnegie Hall! A recent Harvard graduate, he is also co-founder of the Harvard Early Music Project. http://www.jeffreygrossman.com
I am probably the only person in Great Falls who actually heard Gregor Piatigorsky play live - at UCLA's Royce Hall, with the Debut Orchestra conducted by Michael Tilson Thomas, who was then in his early 20's. Evan resembles his grandfather, and took pride in sharing a number of anecdotes about Gregor's early career during the Russian Revolution, his objections to the Beethoven Quartet being renamed the Lenin Quartet, and his escape across the border into Poland, which was anxious to send him back, except that some of the soldiers assigned to do that were musicians, and working class solidarity prevailed.
Evan started on the 'cello quite late, and his grandfather had little hope that he would excel at it. However, no less than Mstislav Rostropovich encouraged him later on, and took Evan back to Russia after 1989 where they played several concerts, with Rostropovich conducting.
As one might imagine, Evan is not the normal up-and-coming classical music "star." In fact, he is egalitarian to a fault, and sees his mission as sharing the blessings of music with those who need it the most. I told him, as a personal aside, that his performance "made up for a year of abuse and neglect" in my own life, and that many other people here no doubt felt the same. The next time I hear someone describe classical music as "elitist," I'm going to punch him in the face. -- PHS
/\/\/\/\/\
CARBON TAXES
[Last week, the coal and oil junta, the auto industry, and their associated unions managed to defeat even the pale and weakened Senate bill to cap carbon emissions and implement carbon taxes. Do you know how your Senators voted? I'm afraid to look, but I'd give odds that both of Montana's Senators voted against it. -- PHS]
WE CAN'T AFFORD THE HIGH COST OF DOING NOTHING
By RICHARD BARRETT And THOMAS M. POWER
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/200805270500/OPINION/805270306
Several American business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Council for Capital Formation, have launched nationwide campaigns to convince the public that a serious effort to limit the pollution that causes global warming would have catastrophic consequences for the American economy, while providing no significant benefits. It is hard to believe that organizations claiming to represent business interests could be so out of touch with economic and energy reality.
The target of their ire is the Climate Security Act, introduced in Congress by Sens. John Warner, R-Va., and Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and approved by Sen. Barbara Boxer's, D-Calif., Environment and Public Works Committee. It would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 70 percent, by 2050.
Two of the opposed groups, NAM and ACCF, recently released an economic study they say demonstrates the "enormous" costs we would incur from this legislation. For instance, they claim it would lead to a "loss" of about 1.3 million American jobs. But this grossly misrepresents what their own study actually shows, which is no net job loss as a result of greenhouse gas regulation.
Actually, the study projects that job growth would slow very slightly.
Instead of the American economy creating 15.4 million new jobs over the next 12 years, 14.1 million new jobs would be added. At the beginning of 2020, there would be only about 0.8 percent fewer jobs in the economy, and by the end of the year normal job growth would eliminate even this small shortfall. What is startling is not how many jobs we will lose, but rather how many we will gain as we move towards a low emissions economy.
And even the finding of slower growth is questionable. That's because the study makes unreasonably pessimistic assumptions regarding the technical and entrepreneurial creativity and adaptability of the businesses they claim to represent. In the face of a new energy reality, in which greenhouse gas emissions carry a steep price, businesses and households will find ways of reducing them - through renewable energy, conservation and technological transformation.
We've repeatedly seen this type of rapid and pervasive adaptation and innovation, in the spread of computer technology, the rise of the Internet and the revolution in telecommunications. If public policy creates the right set of incentives to reduce global warming pollution, we'll find enormous opportunities open to us, with negligible resulting costs.
The study opposing the climate change legislation also fails to recognize the potential of increased energy efficiency. Yet national research organizations have identified many simple measures to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions, such as switching to compact fluorescent bulbs.
The business groups seek to scare Americans about high electricity and gasoline prices under the Climate Security Act. But this misrepresents the way prices work. Although an increase in energy prices is needed to stimulate energy innovation, higher energy prices need not burden families and businesses because innovative energy technologies will significantly reduce how much energy they must buy.
Beyond the scare tactics, the core argument offered by the opposed organizations is that we gain nothing by acting on our own. The logic is flawless but severely limited, since it applies with equal force to those other countries - China shouldn't act unless the United States does, the European Union shouldn't act before India, and so forth.
This type of thinking points inexorably toward a "race to the bottom," resulting in global inaction and ultimately self-destruction. We need international negotiations leading to global agreements to reduce emissions, and we only gain an influential place at the negotiating table if we're prepared to take significant action. Right now, we simply discredit ourselves by whining about the costs of reducing emissions while suggesting that much poorer nations bear the burden. And finally, though the study never addresses the issue, it's ignored a huge elephant in the room - the costs of doing nothing. In fact, the former chief economist of the World Bank, Nicholas Stern, recently said that a 2006 report - estimating the adverse impacts of climate change at up to one-fifth of the world's gross domestic product - had underestimated the risks.
If we fail to act because of poorly constructed and deceptively reasoned economic arguments, we will assure changes in world climate that will fundamentally affect the America that we know, leaving behind for our children and grandchildren a dramatically diminished natural landscape, society, and economy.
Thomas Michael Power is a research professor and former chairman of the Department of Economics at the University of Montana, where Richard Barrett is an emeritus professor of economics.
/\/\/\/\/\
FROM GREEN LISTS
At Primaries' End, American Indians in Rare Focus
By Adam Tanner Mon Jun 2,
LAME DEER, Montana (Reuters) - Often paid scant attention in U.S. presidential elections, Native Americans are taking an unusually high profile in the final stretch of the Democratic primary campaign.
Both Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and front-runner Barack Obama recently have visited remote Indian reservations in the rugged Western states of Montana and South Dakota, which hold the final contests in the drawn-out state-by-state battle on Tuesday.
One Montana tribe, the Crow Nation, has ceremoniously adopted Obama, giving him a name which means "one who helps people throughout this land."
"Never before have we had such hope for a candidate, except maybe a Kennedy," said Crow Chairman Carl Venne, who said Obama was the first U.S. presidential candidate ever to visit his tribe in southeastern Montana.
In previous elections, the party's candidate has been decided long before primary voting in Montana and South Dakota. Obama is looking to wrap up the nomination in these two final contests June 3.
Just above 1 percent of the U.S. population is Native American, but the numbers rise to more than 6 percent in Montana on the Canadian border. Depending on turnout, they could represent as many as 15 percent of Montana's Democratic voters, numbers that could tip the state's outcome although Obama appears poised overall to win the national contest.
Poverty is widespread among many tribes -- especially in remote areas of the Western states -- and many Native Americans see Democrats as more sympathetic to issues important on the reservations including more jobs and better health care and education.
But should the Democrat lose in the November general election, some say Republican Sen. John McCain represents a better-than-usual second choice for Indians.
"Hillary and Obama are getting up to speed on Indian affairs, while McCain in Arizona already represents the largest Native American community in the country, the Navajos," said Clara Caufield, an assistant to the Northern Cheyenne president in Lame Deer, Montana.
McCain has twice served as the chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs and is knowledgeable about the complex issues facing Native Americans. Many also respect his past military service.
As for the adoption of Obama by the Crow tribe next door, Caufield scoffed: "We take our traditions more seriously than that. The Crow adopt people at the drop of the hat."
As among all voters, Indians are divided. Within her own office, Caufield's boss, Northern Cheyenne president Geri Small, has endorsed Clinton, a New York senator.
INDIAN LEADER CRITICIZES MCCAIN
One prominent Native American who has worked with McCain is Elouise Cobell, a Montana member of the Blackfeet Tribe. She is leading a multibillion-dollar lawsuit again the U.S. government, charging that tribes were cheated for more than a century out of payments made for the rights to mine, farm and graze on their land.
"He's sympathetic, but that's the problem we have here with Indian issues," Cobell said about McCain. "We really get a lot of promises, especially around election time: oh gosh, they have been treated so horrible. But then nobody does anything about it, so what good are all these words and promises?"
For Charlie Vaughan, chairman of the Hualapai nation in the wilderness flanking a 100-mile (160-km) stretch of the Grand Canyon's southern rim in Arizona, the big issue for members is the high price of gas.
"Given the remoteness of a lot of reservation lands and the tribes that live on them, and how they are impacted by rising fuel costs ... we think that a McCain presidency would be more harmful," Vaughn said. "He favors continuing the war and that's going to tend to drive up fuel prices, and it will hurt us."
Tribal members in these parched lands have a 50-mile (80-km) drive to the nearest town to buy groceries, fuel and clothes, distances not uncommon for remote reservations.
Many Native Americans, who have long suffered discrimination, also say that either Obama, who would be the first black U.S. president, or Clinton, who would be the first woman U.S. president, would better understand their plight.
"We have had the same mind-set for 500 years, with white men running the country," said Ofelia Rivas, a tribal elder of the Tohnono O'odham Nation on the Arizona- Mexico border. "I prefer the idea of either a woman or a so-called minority person in the White House, so that we will have a different perspective."
(Additional reporting by Tim Gaynor in Phoenix)
============
WHY GREENS DO NOT SUPPORT BARACK OBAMA
FROM JOHN PILGER
From Kennedy To Obama; Liberalism's Last Fling
http://www.johnpilger.com/
As their contest for the White House draws closer, watch how, regardless of the inevitable personal smears, Obama and McCain draw nearer to each other. They already concur on America's divine right to control all before it. "We lead the world in battling immediate evils and promoting the ultimate good," said Obama. "We must lead by building a 21st-century military . . . to advance the security of all people." McCain agrees. Obama says in pursuing "terrorists" he would attack Pakistan. McCain wouldn't quarrel. Both candidates have paid ritual obeisance to the regime in Tel Aviv, unquestioning support for which defines all presidential ambition. In opposing a UN Security Council resolution implying criticism of Israel's starvation of the people of Gaza, Obama was ahead of both McCain and Hillary Clinton. In January, pressured by the Israel lobby, he massaged a statement that "nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people" to now read: "Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognise Israel [emphasis added]." Such is his concern for the victims of the longest, illegal military occupation of modern times. Like all the candidates, Obama has furthered Israeli/Bush fictions about Iran, whose regime, he says absurdly, "is a threat to all of us".
=========================
COMMENT by Paul Stephens
Why does Obama think he has to support Zionist Apartheid? Is it only the money?
We might wishfully think that, as the Rev. Wright said, Obama is simply doing what he has to do as a politician to be elected President. And he probably supposes that he must reassure, appease, or capitulate to the Zionist lobby if he wants to win. Whether or not he has taken money from them (and apparently he has) is beside the point. They have the power to destroy his campaign in the minds of the entire "East Coast Liberal Establishment," American Zionists (including many Black Americans), as well as the Military-Industrial Complex which thrives on these Middle Eastern wars and arms build-ups.
Obama and his advisors no doubt believe that he cannot win if he doesn't unconditionally support Israel. Once he is elected President, some of them might imagine that he can then "be his own man", and do whatever he thinks is right and just, in the manner of Jimmy Carter. Unfortunately, Jimmy Carter (or any other President) was never free to act on his conscience, either - not, at least, until he was out of office. JFK may have been the last President to vigorously oppose the Zionist lobby and its nuclear aspirations after they helped (probably decisively) to get him elected. The more I read about this, the more I'm convinced that American Zionists were complicit in his death - Jack Ruby being only the final instrument of their attempts to "seal the record" on the assassination and its aftermath.
Still, we think that Obama could at least speak the truth, and stand up for Palestinian rights while defending Israel's right to exist as a free, democratic, and ethnically integrated state. He doesn't have to follow the punishing Zionist-Apartheid agenda (indeed, how could he possibly do so?) which only a third or so of Jewish Israeli's actually support. He needs to join with Ilan Pappe and the Israeli peace and reconciliation parties and movements, not the militaristic, fascist Zionists. But of course we know by now that Obama is anything but "the peace candidate." More on this, below. -- PHS
=============
FROM AL JAZEERA.NET
Arabs shocked by Obama speech
Barack Obama said he spoke as a "true friend" of Israel [EPA]
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/93FE247B-452D-4022-8374-088D8704C1DE.htm
THURSDAY, JUNE 05, 2008
Arab leaders have reacted with anger and disbelief to an intensely pro-Israeli speech delivered by Barack Obama, the US Democratic presumptive presidential nominee.
Obama told the influential annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Council (Aipac): "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided."
His comments appalled Palestinians who see occupied East Jerusalem as part of a future Palestinian state.
Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, told Al Jazeera on Thursday: "This is the worst thing to happen to us since 1967 ... he has given ammunition to extremists across the region".
"What really disappoints me is that someone like Barack Obama, who runs a campaign on the theme of change - when it comes to Aipac and what's needed to be said differently about the Palestinian state, he fails."
RELATED
Reporter's diary: Divided Jerusalem
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/A1BA180A-6B42-4EB2-8171-2E182F74FF4A.htm
Inside the US-Israel lobby
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/69604333-7916-439E-8919-434C76B4149E.htm
"I say to Obama ... please stop being more Israeli than the Israelis themselves, leave the Israelis and Palestinians alone to make decisions required for peace."
Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, rejected the statement, saying: "We will not accept an independent Palestinian state without having Jerusalem as the capital.
"I believe that case is clear."
He said: "Jerusalem is part of the six points that are subjects on the negotiations' agenda.
"And the whole world knows that East Jerusalem, Arab Jerusalem and Holy Jerusalem were occupied in 1967."
'Hope slashed'
Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for Hamas, the largest Palestinian resistance group, also condemned the speech, saying on Thursday: "These statements slash any hope of any change in the American foreign policy.
"[They] assure that there is a total agreement between the two parties, the Democratic and the Republican, on support for the Israeli occupation at the expense of the rights of Arabs and Palestinian interests."
IN DEPTH
Israel and the Nakba
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/15D014B8-32B9-4F08-A258-8EB37B0DDF49.htm
The ancient city of Jerusalem is divided into East and West. Israel captured East Jerusalem in the 1967 war and unilaterally annexed it, in a move condemned by the United Nations as illegal.
Jerusalem's status as part of Israel is not internationally recognised and remains a central issue in peace negotiations.
'Unbreakable bond'
Obama, hours after securing his party's nomination on Wednesday, had gone on to say the US bond with Israel was "unbreakable today, unbreakable tomorrow, unbreakable for ever" and drew a standing ovation.
He told the gathering of one of US politics' most influential lobbying groups that, as president, he would "never compromise when it comes to Israel's security."
He also said any deal between Israelis and Palestinians should preserve Israel's identity as a Jewish state and that Hamas should be isolated and pledged to approve $30bn in aid to Israel over the next 10 years.
'Impressive speech'
Ehud Olmert, Israel's prime minister, called the Illinois senator's speech "very impressive".
"His words on Jerusalem were very moving," Olmert told reporters after meeting George Bush, the US president, at the White House.
The Illinois senator's comments come a day after US media projected that Obama had enough delegates to win the Democratic nomination and face John McCain, the presumptive Republican candidate, in the November election.
Iranian 'threat'
Obama also had harsh words for Iran, vowing to work to "eliminate" the threat it posed to security in the Middle East and around the globe.
Obama said an "undivided Jerusalem should remain the capital of Israel" [AFP]
"There's no greater threat to Israel or to the peace and stability of the region than Iran," he told the Aipac assembly.
Calling for "aggressive, principled diplomacy" with Tehran, he also warned he would never take the military option off the table in guaranteeing US and Israeli security.
Iranians responded cautiously, but optimistically, with officials expressing hope he can bring about change in Iran-US relations.
Hamidreza Hajibabaee, member of Iranian parliament, said: "We hope that Obama turns his words into actions, helps the Islamic Republic of Iran believe that the US has given up enmity and paves the way for fair negotiations."
=============
Ilan Pappe says Israel needs to acknowledge the crime it committed against the Palestinian people
As part of Al Jazeera's coverage of the anniversary of the creation of Israel and the Palestinian 'Nakba', Israeli historian Ilan Pappe reflects upon the events of 1948 and how they led to 60 years of division between the Israelis and Palestinians.
Between February, 1948 and December,1948 the Israeli army systematically occupied the Palestinian villages and towns, expelled by force the population and in most cases also destroyed the houses, looted their belongings and took over their material and cultural possessions. This was the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
During the ethnic cleansing, wherever there was resistance by the population the result was a massacre. We have more than 30 cases of such massacres where a few thousand Palestinians were massacred by the Israeli forces throughout the operation of the ethnic cleansing.
read more>> http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/5C0036C5-83C9-4720-853D-0BFA9A4E1BC4.htm
/\/\/\/\/\/\
FROM Soldier Say No / Project Safe Haven
www.SoldierSayNo.blogspot.com
Canadian Parliament votes in favor of American war resisters
Today the Canadian Parliament made a historic vote in favor of U.S. war resisters who are seeking a safe haven in Canada rather than fight in the illegal occupation of Iraq. The vote in the House of Commons was 137-110, with all the opposition parties - the Liberal Party, the New Democratic Party, the Bloc Quebecois and the Green Party - voting for the motion, and the ruling Conservative Party voting against.
The Parliament calls on the minority Conservative government to create a program that will allow war resisters to immigrate to Canada, and it also calls for a halt to all deportation proceedings.
This is a VERY BIG victory for war resisters in Canada and everywhere. It will strengthen our hand considerably.
But the struggle for sanctuary in Canada is far from over. The Conservative government, a staunch ally of the Bush administration, may choose to defy the will of the Canadian people by ignoring this advisory motion.
Corey Glass, an Iraq veteran and war resister, was recently ordered to leave Canada by June 12 or face deportation.
So even as we celebrate this victory, we must step up the pressure on Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Immigration Minister Diane Finley. [See action alert from War Resisters Support Campaign, below, along with their press release and a news article.]
Yes, it does help for the Canadian government to hear from many people in the U.S. who want them to provide sanctuary for our war resisters. Courage To Resist (www.couragetoresist.org) has generated thousands of letters from people in the U.S. to Canadian government and political leaders and these have clearly helped, as have the vigils and delegations to the Canadian Embassy in Washington and Canadian Consulates around the U.S.
Project Safe Haven, a network of Vietnam War resisters who are supporting war resisters today, is calling for people to contact Canadian representatives in the U.S. this week.
* THANK the Canadian people and their Parliament for supporting our war resisters.
* CALL on the Conservative government to follow the will of the Canadian people and implement this motion.
* DEMAND an end to deportation proceedings against Corey Glass and other war resisters
You can visit the Canadian Consulate in person. In Seattle, we will have a Celebration outside of the Canadian Consulate, 1501 4th Ave. at Pike St., on Thursday, June 5, at noon. There will also be vigils and delegations in several other cities.
And you can call them, fax them, or email them.
Canadian Consular offices are in over 20 U.S. cities. Here are their addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses.
If you want to participate in visits to the Canadian Embassy or Consulates, please send an email to
If you are a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War or Veterans For Peace, you may want to get in touch with your local chapter or national office to let them know you want to participate, and to help organize these events.
U.S. war resisters and their wonderful Canadian supporters have won a historic victory. By acting decisively at this time, we in the U.S. can participate in this victory and help to make it an even bigger one.
Thank you for whatever you may be able to do at this time.
for peace and justice,
Gerry Condon
(206) 499-1220
Soldier Say No / Project Safe Haven
SoldierSayNo@yahoo.com
projectsafehaven@hotmail.com
www.SoldierSayNo.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment