Linking back to previous music mix. Worth a re-run.
Many more music mixes coming this month. My musical taste is a little bit eclectic.
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Monday, June 12, 2006
17 Muslims arrested in Toronto. "Has Racism Invaded Canada?"
Before I post the article, I'd like to point out that the the heading "Has Racism Invaded Canada?" is merely the title of the article being posted. In fact, Canada was built around racism and it's been a part of this country for as long as it's been around. "Multiculturalism," as Toronto prides itself on, is merely a mask for the the underlying racism, classism and every other -ism that continues to befall this country behind the friendly face of diversity.
Now, onto the article...
Has Racism Invaded Canada?
By ROBERT FISK
This has been a good week to be in Canada – or an awful week, depending on your point of view – to understand just how irretrievably biased and potentially racist the Canadian press has become. For, after the arrest of 17 Canadian Muslims on “terrorism” charges, the Toronto Globe and Mail and, to a slightly lesser extent, the National Post, have indulged in an orgy of finger-pointing that must reduce the chances of any fair trial and, at the same time, sow fear in the hearts of the country’s more than 700,000 Muslims. In fact, if I were a Canadian Muslim right now, I’d already be checking the airline timetables for a flight out of town. Or is that the purpose of this press campaign?
First, the charges. Even a lawyer for one of the accused has talked of a plot to storm the Parliament in Ottawa, hold MPs hostage and chop off the head of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Without challenging the “facts” or casting any doubt on their sources – primarily the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or Canada’s leak-dripping Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) – reporters have told their readers that the 17 were variously planning to blow up Parliament, CSIS’s headquarters, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and sundry other targets. Every veiled and chadored Muslim woman relative of the accused has been photographed and their pictures printed, often on front pages. “Home-grown terrorists” has become theme of the month – even though the “terrorists” have yet to stand trial.
They were in receipt of “fertilizers”, we were told, which could be turned into explosives. When it emerged that Canadian police officers had already switched the “fertilizers” for a less harmful substance, nobody followed up the implications of this apparent “sting”. A Buffalo radio station down in the US even announced that the accused had actually received “explosives”. Bingo: Guilty before trial.
Of course, the Muslim-bashers have laced this nonsense with the usual pious concern for the rights of the accused. “Before I go on, one disclaimer,” purred the Globe and Mail’s Margaret Wente. “Nothing has been proved and nobody should rush to judgment.” Which, needless to say, Wente then went on to do in the same paragraph. “The exposure of our very own home-grown terrorists, if that’s what the men aspired to be, was both predictably shocking and shockingly predictable.” And just in case we missed the point of this hypocrisy, Wente ended her column by announcing that “Canada is not exempt from home-grown terrorism”. Angry young men are the tinderbox and Islamism is the match.
The country will probably have better luck than most at “putting out the fire”, she adds. But who, I wonder, is really lighting the match? For a very unpleasant – albeit initially innocuous – phrase has now found its way into the papers.
The accused 17 – and, indeed their families and sometimes the country’s entire Muslim community – are now referred to as “Canadian-born”. Well, yes, they are Canadian-born. But there’s a subtle difference between this and being described as a “Canadian” – as other citizens of this vast country are in every other context. And the implications are obvious; there are now two types of Canadian citizen: The Canadian-born variety (Muslims) and Canadians (the rest).
If this seems finicky, try the following sentence from the Globe and Mail’s front page on Tuesday, supposedly an eyewitness account of the police arrest operation: “Parked directly outside his … office was a large, gray, cube-shaped truck and, on the ground nearby, he recognized one of the two brown-skinned young men who had taken possession of the next door rented unit…” Come again? Brown-skinned? What in God’s name is this outrageous piece of racism doing on the front page of a major Canadian daily? What is “brown-skinned” supposed to mean – if it is not just a revolting attempt to isolate Muslims as the “other” in Canada’s highly multicultural society? I notice, for example, that when the paper obsequiously refers to Toronto’s police chief and his reportedly brilliant cops, he is not referred to as “white-skinned” (which he most assuredly is). Amid this swamp, Canada’s journalists are managing to soften the realities of their country’s new military involvement in Afghanistan.
More than 2,000 troops are deployed around Kandahar in active military operations against Taleban insurgents. They are taking the place of US troops, who will be transferred to fight even more Muslims insurgents in Iraq.
Canada is thus now involved in the Afghan war – those who doubt this should note the country has already shelled out $1.8bn in “defense spending” in Afghanistan and only $500m in “additional expenditures”, including humanitarian assistance and democratic renewal (sic) – and, by extension, in Iraq. In other words, Canada has gone to war in the Middle East.
None of this, according to the Canadian foreign minister, could be the cause of Muslim anger at home, although Jack Hooper – the CSIS chief who has a lot to learn about the Middle East but talks far too much – said a few days ago that “we had a high threat profile (in Canada) before Afghanistan. In any event, the presence of Canadians and Canadian forces there has elevated that threat somewhat.” I read all this on a flight from Calgary to Ottawa this week, sitting just a row behind Tim Goddard, his wife Sally and daughter Victoria, who were chatting gently and smiling bravely to the crew and fellow passengers. In the cargo hold of our aircraft lay the coffin of Goddard’s other daughter, Nichola, the first Canadian woman soldier to be killed in action in Afghanistan.
The next day, he scattered sand on Nichola’s coffin at Canada’s national military cemetery. A heartrending photograph of him appeared in the Post – but buried away on Page 6. And on the front page? A picture of British policemen standing outside the Bradford home of a Muslim “who may have links to Canada”.
Allegedly, of course.
This article appeared originally on Counterpunch.
Robert Fisk is a reporter for The Independent and author of Pity the Nation. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch’s collection, The Politics of Anti-Semitism. Fisk’s new book is The Conquest of the Middle East.
Now, onto the article...
Has Racism Invaded Canada?
By ROBERT FISK
This has been a good week to be in Canada – or an awful week, depending on your point of view – to understand just how irretrievably biased and potentially racist the Canadian press has become. For, after the arrest of 17 Canadian Muslims on “terrorism” charges, the Toronto Globe and Mail and, to a slightly lesser extent, the National Post, have indulged in an orgy of finger-pointing that must reduce the chances of any fair trial and, at the same time, sow fear in the hearts of the country’s more than 700,000 Muslims. In fact, if I were a Canadian Muslim right now, I’d already be checking the airline timetables for a flight out of town. Or is that the purpose of this press campaign?
First, the charges. Even a lawyer for one of the accused has talked of a plot to storm the Parliament in Ottawa, hold MPs hostage and chop off the head of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Without challenging the “facts” or casting any doubt on their sources – primarily the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or Canada’s leak-dripping Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) – reporters have told their readers that the 17 were variously planning to blow up Parliament, CSIS’s headquarters, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and sundry other targets. Every veiled and chadored Muslim woman relative of the accused has been photographed and their pictures printed, often on front pages. “Home-grown terrorists” has become theme of the month – even though the “terrorists” have yet to stand trial.
They were in receipt of “fertilizers”, we were told, which could be turned into explosives. When it emerged that Canadian police officers had already switched the “fertilizers” for a less harmful substance, nobody followed up the implications of this apparent “sting”. A Buffalo radio station down in the US even announced that the accused had actually received “explosives”. Bingo: Guilty before trial.
Of course, the Muslim-bashers have laced this nonsense with the usual pious concern for the rights of the accused. “Before I go on, one disclaimer,” purred the Globe and Mail’s Margaret Wente. “Nothing has been proved and nobody should rush to judgment.” Which, needless to say, Wente then went on to do in the same paragraph. “The exposure of our very own home-grown terrorists, if that’s what the men aspired to be, was both predictably shocking and shockingly predictable.” And just in case we missed the point of this hypocrisy, Wente ended her column by announcing that “Canada is not exempt from home-grown terrorism”. Angry young men are the tinderbox and Islamism is the match.
The country will probably have better luck than most at “putting out the fire”, she adds. But who, I wonder, is really lighting the match? For a very unpleasant – albeit initially innocuous – phrase has now found its way into the papers.
The accused 17 – and, indeed their families and sometimes the country’s entire Muslim community – are now referred to as “Canadian-born”. Well, yes, they are Canadian-born. But there’s a subtle difference between this and being described as a “Canadian” – as other citizens of this vast country are in every other context. And the implications are obvious; there are now two types of Canadian citizen: The Canadian-born variety (Muslims) and Canadians (the rest).
If this seems finicky, try the following sentence from the Globe and Mail’s front page on Tuesday, supposedly an eyewitness account of the police arrest operation: “Parked directly outside his … office was a large, gray, cube-shaped truck and, on the ground nearby, he recognized one of the two brown-skinned young men who had taken possession of the next door rented unit…” Come again? Brown-skinned? What in God’s name is this outrageous piece of racism doing on the front page of a major Canadian daily? What is “brown-skinned” supposed to mean – if it is not just a revolting attempt to isolate Muslims as the “other” in Canada’s highly multicultural society? I notice, for example, that when the paper obsequiously refers to Toronto’s police chief and his reportedly brilliant cops, he is not referred to as “white-skinned” (which he most assuredly is). Amid this swamp, Canada’s journalists are managing to soften the realities of their country’s new military involvement in Afghanistan.
More than 2,000 troops are deployed around Kandahar in active military operations against Taleban insurgents. They are taking the place of US troops, who will be transferred to fight even more Muslims insurgents in Iraq.
Canada is thus now involved in the Afghan war – those who doubt this should note the country has already shelled out $1.8bn in “defense spending” in Afghanistan and only $500m in “additional expenditures”, including humanitarian assistance and democratic renewal (sic) – and, by extension, in Iraq. In other words, Canada has gone to war in the Middle East.
None of this, according to the Canadian foreign minister, could be the cause of Muslim anger at home, although Jack Hooper – the CSIS chief who has a lot to learn about the Middle East but talks far too much – said a few days ago that “we had a high threat profile (in Canada) before Afghanistan. In any event, the presence of Canadians and Canadian forces there has elevated that threat somewhat.” I read all this on a flight from Calgary to Ottawa this week, sitting just a row behind Tim Goddard, his wife Sally and daughter Victoria, who were chatting gently and smiling bravely to the crew and fellow passengers. In the cargo hold of our aircraft lay the coffin of Goddard’s other daughter, Nichola, the first Canadian woman soldier to be killed in action in Afghanistan.
The next day, he scattered sand on Nichola’s coffin at Canada’s national military cemetery. A heartrending photograph of him appeared in the Post – but buried away on Page 6. And on the front page? A picture of British policemen standing outside the Bradford home of a Muslim “who may have links to Canada”.
Allegedly, of course.
This article appeared originally on Counterpunch.
Robert Fisk is a reporter for The Independent and author of Pity the Nation. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch’s collection, The Politics of Anti-Semitism. Fisk’s new book is The Conquest of the Middle East.
Americans About To Lose Free & Fair Access To Internet
Congress Siding With Big Companies in Net Neutrality Debate
Previous blog entries:
April, 27th
March, 13th
June, 4th
UPDATE!!!
Amy Goodman is reporting that Congress appears to be siding with the big Telecommunications companies. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.... Not really. No surprise to me. This is what many people were hoping would not happen, but were also expecting, considering the track record the the corrupt U.S. Congress which is owned and controlled by American corporations.
These companies must be promising Republicans a lot of support in future elections.... that could include everything from gifts, & campaign donations, to plenty of advertising over their networks. How convenient.
The Senate also has to vote on legislation. Right now, it is unknown what will come out of this. It's still a toss up. But based on this latest info, it doesn't look good.
Find report here from Amy Goodman's program. Audio/Video available. (NOTE: Fast forward to 36 minute mark on media player. Story begins 36 minutes into show).
Previous blog entries:
April, 27th
March, 13th
June, 4th
UPDATE!!!
Amy Goodman is reporting that Congress appears to be siding with the big Telecommunications companies. SURPRISE, SURPRISE.... Not really. No surprise to me. This is what many people were hoping would not happen, but were also expecting, considering the track record the the corrupt U.S. Congress which is owned and controlled by American corporations.
These companies must be promising Republicans a lot of support in future elections.... that could include everything from gifts, & campaign donations, to plenty of advertising over their networks. How convenient.
The Senate also has to vote on legislation. Right now, it is unknown what will come out of this. It's still a toss up. But based on this latest info, it doesn't look good.
Find report here from Amy Goodman's program. Audio/Video available. (NOTE: Fast forward to 36 minute mark on media player. Story begins 36 minutes into show).
More Lunacy From Israel-Palestine
A New Intifada between Israel & Palestine? Looks that way.
**Hamas ends cease fire.
**Israel Targeting Hamas Leaders.
**Israel Attacks Hamas On Sunday.
Could there ever be Peace between Israelis and Palestinians?
Due to the religious lunacy that grips the region (on both sides) and because of biased U.S. support for Israel, I don’t believe that Peace is really possible there. At least not until there are changes in the circumstances mentioned…which probably won’t happen in my lifetime. Religion is the cloud that makes it impossible for the two sides to think and see things clearly. To make things more complicated, the political situation which allows one side to be treated differently by the international community only fuels the hatred and mistrust that lead to the terrorism and fighting.
**Hamas ends cease fire.
**Israel Targeting Hamas Leaders.
**Israel Attacks Hamas On Sunday.
Could there ever be Peace between Israelis and Palestinians?
Due to the religious lunacy that grips the region (on both sides) and because of biased U.S. support for Israel, I don’t believe that Peace is really possible there. At least not until there are changes in the circumstances mentioned…which probably won’t happen in my lifetime. Religion is the cloud that makes it impossible for the two sides to think and see things clearly. To make things more complicated, the political situation which allows one side to be treated differently by the international community only fuels the hatred and mistrust that lead to the terrorism and fighting.
16 Year Old Girl Flies To Middle East To Meet Stranger
WHERE ARE THE PARENTS???!!!
Bill Cosby was so right when he said parents are not parenting. This is not only a problem for African American families, but is a problem across the board.
16 Year old girl just returned home safely.... after being pursuaded to come back by authorities overseas.
How does a 16 year old girl get her passport ready, obtain the funds, buy the ticket, etc etc without parents noticing anything along the way? What kind of world are we living in?
Was she a bonehead? Yes...of course, many 16 year olds are. I'd say most of them are, especially in this culture where irresponsibility is almost celebrated. Nothing new there. But, that's what parents are supposed to be there for. To be there when they screw up...preferably acting before they screw up....providing them with information beforehand so that they can make good choices, and to guide boneheads into adulthood.
CBS has the story....
Bill Cosby was so right when he said parents are not parenting. This is not only a problem for African American families, but is a problem across the board.
16 Year old girl just returned home safely.... after being pursuaded to come back by authorities overseas.
How does a 16 year old girl get her passport ready, obtain the funds, buy the ticket, etc etc without parents noticing anything along the way? What kind of world are we living in?
Was she a bonehead? Yes...of course, many 16 year olds are. I'd say most of them are, especially in this culture where irresponsibility is almost celebrated. Nothing new there. But, that's what parents are supposed to be there for. To be there when they screw up...preferably acting before they screw up....providing them with information beforehand so that they can make good choices, and to guide boneheads into adulthood.
CBS has the story....
Friday, June 09, 2006
REPUBLICAN COMMENTATOR LA SHAWN BARBER RUNS FROM DEBATE
REPUBLICAN COMMENTATOR LA SHAWN BARBER RUNS LIKE HELL FROM 'THE ANGRY INDEPENDENT' WHEN CHALLENGED TO A DEBATE.
The discussion was concerning Ms. Barbers' support for Ann Coulters crazy, offensive comments about the 9/11 widows. On her blog, "LaShawn Barbers Corner", Barber rants about her support for what Ann Coulter did regarding the victims of the 9/11 attacks, and for Coulters new book.
***(For those not familiar with Ms. Barber, she is a very religious Conservative Christian-- or at least she claims to be a Christian).
So I simply wanted to have a biblical discussion about scriptures, since Barber is such a serious Christian. I wanted to pose a fair question to Ms. Barber and her "religious" Conservative followers.
Much of the exchange went as follows (In the public 'comment'/debate section of her website)
---------------------------------------------
'The Angry Independent' wrote on 6/9/06
A Christian? Please.
On what basis can you support Ann Coulters sickening comments and hideous behavior on one hand, and on the other hand call yourself a Christian?
“Christians” often kill me with their hypocrisy.
-----------------------------------------------
LaShawn Barber's response was to delete the message.
Why? I presented a fair question.... I simply wanted to bring a biblical angle into the discussion. Keep in mind that she is a VERY religious Conservative Christian.... How could such a question be too hot for her to handle?
-----------------------------------------------
In response to the deletion, The Angry Independent wrote
I was edited for framing this in a biblical context? Hmmmmm
Why?
If you wear the Christian badge and wear it so prominently, then you have to be prepared to be challenged on the scriptures.
I'm willing to debate the scriptures with you at any time regarding the subject of Ann Coulter.
-----------------------------------------------
La Shawn Barbers response was the same.... she deleted the message and offered no willingness to discuss her support for Ann Coulter in the context of the Holy Bible.
-----------------------------------------------
I must have struck a nerve. This is why more people must challenge these "religious" Republicans who support this kind of behavior by people like Ann Coulter, and support policies that are anti-Christian.
When they are challenged on their own level (from a biblical view), they will often run the other way. Why? Because they know that under a biblical context, there is no way that they can explain their support for people like Coulter and for policies that are contrary to Christianity, & contrary to scripture. When faced with these contradictions, these religious Conservatives attempt to avoid the discussion. They know that they cannot defend their hypocrisy.
The discussion was concerning Ms. Barbers' support for Ann Coulters crazy, offensive comments about the 9/11 widows. On her blog, "LaShawn Barbers Corner", Barber rants about her support for what Ann Coulter did regarding the victims of the 9/11 attacks, and for Coulters new book.
***(For those not familiar with Ms. Barber, she is a very religious Conservative Christian-- or at least she claims to be a Christian).
So I simply wanted to have a biblical discussion about scriptures, since Barber is such a serious Christian. I wanted to pose a fair question to Ms. Barber and her "religious" Conservative followers.
Much of the exchange went as follows (In the public 'comment'/debate section of her website)
---------------------------------------------
'The Angry Independent' wrote on 6/9/06
A Christian? Please.
On what basis can you support Ann Coulters sickening comments and hideous behavior on one hand, and on the other hand call yourself a Christian?
“Christians” often kill me with their hypocrisy.
-----------------------------------------------
LaShawn Barber's response was to delete the message.
Why? I presented a fair question.... I simply wanted to bring a biblical angle into the discussion. Keep in mind that she is a VERY religious Conservative Christian.... How could such a question be too hot for her to handle?
-----------------------------------------------
In response to the deletion, The Angry Independent wrote
I was edited for framing this in a biblical context? Hmmmmm
Why?
If you wear the Christian badge and wear it so prominently, then you have to be prepared to be challenged on the scriptures.
I'm willing to debate the scriptures with you at any time regarding the subject of Ann Coulter.
-----------------------------------------------
La Shawn Barbers response was the same.... she deleted the message and offered no willingness to discuss her support for Ann Coulter in the context of the Holy Bible.
-----------------------------------------------
I must have struck a nerve. This is why more people must challenge these "religious" Republicans who support this kind of behavior by people like Ann Coulter, and support policies that are anti-Christian.
When they are challenged on their own level (from a biblical view), they will often run the other way. Why? Because they know that under a biblical context, there is no way that they can explain their support for people like Coulter and for policies that are contrary to Christianity, & contrary to scripture. When faced with these contradictions, these religious Conservatives attempt to avoid the discussion. They know that they cannot defend their hypocrisy.
More News and Analysis of Zarqawi Death
More on the Death of Zarqawi
Analysis from NPR
(My earlier analysis turned out to be on target)
1. Zarqawi's Death Is Political and Propaganda Success
2. The Rise and Fall of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. How the Bush government and Western Media Created Zarqawi
3. Zarqawi's Death and the Iraqi Insurgency
4. A Symbolic Victory with Limited Tactical Effect
Full Zarqawi Coverage from NPR
CNN Report- Iraq Violence Continues
For More information about the War in Iraq and the insurgency, take a look at a documentary about how the insurgency functions there. You can view documentary online.
Analysis from NPR
(My earlier analysis turned out to be on target)
1. Zarqawi's Death Is Political and Propaganda Success
2. The Rise and Fall of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. How the Bush government and Western Media Created Zarqawi
3. Zarqawi's Death and the Iraqi Insurgency
4. A Symbolic Victory with Limited Tactical Effect
Full Zarqawi Coverage from NPR
CNN Report- Iraq Violence Continues
For More information about the War in Iraq and the insurgency, take a look at a documentary about how the insurgency functions there. You can view documentary online.
More On Republican Spokeswoman Ann Coulter
John Kerry finally says something that I agree with in his response to Coulter.
Read here...
Link Back to my original post about Coulter.
Read here...
Link Back to my original post about Coulter.
Thursday, June 08, 2006
IRAQ AL-QAEDA CHIEF KILLED IN AIRSTRIKE
SO-CALLED IRAQ AL-QAEDA CHIEF DEAD
Sources:
MSNBC
CNN
BBC
So, What Does All This Mean?
Very little. What has this kind of situation meant in the past? Very little.
But I will say, this is one of the bigger fish (A fish mostly created by the American media) that the U.S. has ever killed or captured so far, since 2001.
The American media, and the Bush administration, will no doubt turn this into an infomercial and they are going to bombard the American people with it as long as they can, especially with the Mid-Term Congressional elections coming up. Bush may even get a boost of a couple of points in the Polls. But any benefits will be short lived.
This means very little in terms of impacting the reality on the ground in Iraq. Dozens of Al-Qaeda chiefs have been killed or captured since Sept. 11th, 2001. And Dozens of other Lieutenants have filled those spots very quickly once those leaders are killed or captured. And the cycle just keeps going and going. Americans should not be fooled into believing that this guy conducted day-to-day operations in Iraq by himself. He had assistant commanders and deputy thugs to carry out his bloody terror plots. There are plenty of Lieutenants eager to take his place. In fact, this is a big part of their doctrine...being able to take the place of leaders in case of death or injury. This is how that organization has lasted for well over 5 years. This is built into their way of thinking because they expect to die.
If killing these top Lieutenants meant victory, then the U.S. would have won a long time ago and Al-Qaeda would be a topic for the history books. But we know this is not the case. When one of their leaders dies, another rises to the forefront. Within the next 30-60 days you will begin to hear about the new villain in Iraq- The next Al-Qaeda leader in that country. This is unfortunate, but true. I wish it were as easy as killing a terror leader in an airstrike, and the Republican U.S. government wishes it were that easy too, but it's just not that easy. The Al-Qaeda problem is not going away for a long time. Fundamental changes in U.S. strategy will be the only way to gain any ground in Iraq and in the battle against terrorism. Notice I try to avoid the phrase "War on Terror". "War" implies that there will be an "ending". But with this war there will be no clear end, as in a traditional war. And any such end will be several years away- possibly decades from now. Calling it a "War" was one of the first mistakes made by Bush & Co.
Zarqawi being dead good news? YES, Absolutely. The animal killed a lot of people, including innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds.
Will it solve the problems for the U.S. in Iraq? NO. There may be a lull as Al-Qaeda has to regroup. But the carnage and chaos will unfortunately continue.
What people need to understand is that Al-Qaeda is just a single component in the larger insurgency in Iraq. There are probably a few dozen different tribes and insurgent groups, many of which operate independently, under their own leadership, under their own philosophy, and with their own aims and objectives. But Al-Qaeda is one of the more brutal groups, responsible for the more spectacular attacks that cause the most carnage.
Al-Qaeda will probably try to stage a large event in Iraq within the next few months, to prove that they are still around and still the biggest monster on the block, despite the death of Zarqawi.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
