Short Interview with Noam Chomsky and Jeremy Paxman (BBC)

If George Bush were to be judged by the standards of the Nuremberg Tribunals, he'd be hanged. So too, mind you, would every single American President since the end of the second world war, including Jimmy Carter.

Read the interview or watch the video:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/3732345.stm

Letter to Blair from a bunch of former diplomats

This letter to Blair is signed by many former British diplomats, is on the "Stop The War Coalition" web site.

A letter from Michael Berg

This article in the Guardian publishes a letter from Michael Berg, Nick Berg's father. It's clear that he feels that Bush's policy for Iraq is as much to blame for his son's murder as the people who did it. He call's Bush himself a weapon of mass destruction.

It's an interesting response to his tragedy; there is a part where he imagines his murderers may have felt a little regret:

"I take comfort that when they did the awful thing they did, they weren't quite as in to it as they might have been."

I wince at that comment, because I'm pretty sure I would not feel like that. But then who knows how we might feel until it happens to us. I think if someone close to you is killed, especially a child, you might reach out for anything that might give some high meaning or noble purpose to the death. The alternative is rage and anger. I think Mr Berg's letter is a bit of both.

I originally stumbled across this letter at a republican party support site of all places, (gopusa) but they chose to report it from an Islamic internet site - and then suggested that readers should "note the source of the information"! Five seconds search in the Guardian found the actual context of the letter. The obvious attempt to create a jaundiced view is an act of desperation, I think. There is another comment on the site claiming that WMDs have been found, on the basis of finding a single chemical warhead. So to these people it is obvious there must be more! After one year of searching, to come up with a single old chemical warhead (supplied by whom I wonder?) is seriously put forward as a significant find which the press in America are apparantly ignoring. Gosh, I wonder why. I guess they are just too left wing for gopusa writers.

More horror from the "we only came to liberate you" Coalition of the all too willing

This article from the Guardian explains exactly why The US has lost the plot.

Status Anxiety

This means anxiety about your status in life, and is the title of a new book from philosopher Alain de Boton, who is in Sydney this week for the Sydney Writers Festival . There are also some other interesting people here for the festival - from the web site:

From Iraq we have a young man with the pseudonym of Salam Pax. He’ll talk about that famous weblog and what's really going on in his war-torn country now. John W. Dean, former Nixon counsel, has an insider's view of US politics and will discuss his new book, Worse than Watergate.

I just got back from the talk given by de Boton. The Sydney Theatre in The Rocks was pretty well packed out. A very entertaining talk and question time afterward. He basically gave an overview of the ideas in his book, which I am about one third of the way through. De Boton has a knack of finding lessons to learn from even the most depressing philosophers of the past, and interpreting and applying a positive lesson to today's issues - all in plain English!

A point I thought was very interesting came out of a question from the audience related to Iraq. The lack of attention paid to matters of "status" (read pride, self esteem, national history ...) led the Coalition to believe that Iraqis would simply welcome the invasion force because after all, isn't getting rid of Saddam and then building new hospitals obviously a good thing? A whole host of factors has simply been missed out, resulting in a complete misinterpretation of what might happen.

I do want to try and hear John Dean's speech at the town hall next.

Nick Berg

The Guardian reports this story here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1214773,00.html
I am intrigued by the parents reaction:

"I think a lot of people are fed up with the lack of civil rights this thing [the war] has caused," Mr Berg added. "I don't think this administration is committed to democracy."

..and puzzled why Berg ended up in gaol, and why his parents needed to instigate proceedings to get him out because they felt he was being "held illegally".

I am not trying to imply anything at all ... it's just that it looks like there is more to the story.

Here are some reports from a radio station is Pennsylvania:
http://kyw1060.com/news_archives_detail.cfm?newsitemid=37542
http://www.kyw1060.com/news_story_detail.cfm?newsitemid=37563

It is easy to be led into some sort of conspiracy theory, but perhaps he was detained by the Iraqi Police for a while, they held him while the US officials investigated, then he was released (apparantly in the orange prison gear) - possibly just dumped - and then captured by these terrorists. I'm not inclined to believe a conspiracy, but I am inclined to believe the US officials, whoever they were, probably acted irresponsibly by not making sure he was safely escorted out of the country or to a hotel and properly dressed.

Nothing has changed

John Pilger explains why we shouldn't be surprised by acts of torture committed by "liberating" forces.
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=5477

He notes, recalling his reporting from Vietnam:

I was struck by the similarity of displays on many of their office pinboards. "That's where we hang our conscience," said an agency photographer.

There were photographs of dismembered bodies, of soldiers holding up severed ears and testicles and of the actual moments of torture. There were men and women being beaten to death, and drowned, and humiliated in stomach-turning ways. On one photograph was a stick-on balloon above the torturer's head, which said: "That'll teach you to talk to the press."

There is an understandable feeling of shock about the way the US and UK occupation forces are using torture to get information. After all, we are not supposed to be like that. We're the good guys. (Although Australians are not specifically known to be involved with these incidents, as part of the coalition of the willing, I feel I can say "we"). It makes a lie of the notion that we are there to liberate. It lays bare the motives we knew were the real ones in the first place - establishing a properly controlled base right in the middle of the middle east, so we can continue to control the resources for our benefit (the key resource being oil, of course).

In one sense, I agree with Pilger that nothing has changed. The same atrocities and humiliations have always been done, especially in war. By all sides. But in another sense, it is different. Only 12 months after the start of this war, the press are interested. It is a big issue - whereas it was not so in the Vietnam war for a very long time (read Pilger's article). The publishing of this news will have a big effect on how Iraqi's react to the occupation, and how fast this happens. I think that within 18 months or so the country will split into several parts (probably the old northern, middle and southern parts) and descent into a long period of civil war. It will be Palestine writ large, and writ faster. After that, who knows what will happen. One thing for sure, imo, it will not bring freedom to Iraqis, nor will it bring control to the US and UK. It will just be a mess, and the adventure will go down in history as a colossal failure.