Archive for the 'human rights' Category

Oct 16 2010

Propaganda Roundup. Sudan, Libel Tourism, Iran and More

Some great new articles at The Propagandist, your one-stop shop for brass-knuckles political commentary.

Confusion to our enemies!

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

No responses yet

Sep 21 2010

How Beijing Brought Peace To The Middle East

For this International Day of Peace, I was generously invited by The Mark to write about a possible pathway to peace. To no one’s surprise, I chose the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And I’d like to think that if reality played out this way, we’d have a solution in about 24 hours. Read the full article, China Can Solve Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. An excerpt:

Middle East watchers and pundits are gobsmacked at the sheer speed of the talks. How could these leaders hash out an agreement in mere hours after decades of wrangling and bloodshed?

That morning, an utterly forgettable American envoy named Joe walked into the room and sheepishly addressed the Israeli and Palestinian leaders. He turned out to be an accountant. Querulous introductions followed. Next, he outlined some harsh truths.

“Look, the U.S. just can’t afford to keep pouring money down the drain and neither can our European pals,” Joe said with a shrug. “We’re broke. And our Chinese creditors, to whom we owe trillions, are threatening to call in our loans. And they’ve given us certain … conditions on our discretionary spending.”

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

No responses yet

Sep 20 2010

1984 In Real Life

Ever wondered what George Orwell’s 1984 might be like in real life? Try chatting up someone who’s spent any time in Iran. They can tell you.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

No responses yet

Aug 11 2010

Blood Diamonds, A Geeky War Criminal And The Propagandist Manifesto

It’s been a wild, weird week and it’s not even half over. A regulator that’s supposed to prevent the sale of blood diamonds in Zimbabwe does exactly the opposite. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is up for a Taliban Award. And The Propagandist reveals its master plan for destroying the enemy.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

One response so far

Jun 16 2010

A Little Self-Interest In Afghanistan Is Not A Bad Thing

I’ve often attempted to remind readers of the importance of holding the line in Afghanistan for progressive reasons and firm principles: support for the universality of human rights, defense of women and children targeted by the thugs in the Taliban, support for democracy, the institutions of modernity and a better life for people who deserve something more than tyranny.

I’ve noted that this mission is something both in the finer tradition of Canadian interventions on behalf of freedom abroad. It is also a shining example of a United Nations-supported mission that has brought together the brave soldiers, aid workers and resources of dozens of nations in the fight against fascism and darkness.

On this note, the signs coming from Canadian politicians like Bob Rae and Michael Ignatieff as well as a growing number of Conservative politicians and commentators about a renewed role for Canada in Afghanistan are very encouraging. Their brave words calling for a public debate on this important issue ought to be heeded by the Prime Minister, and quickly.

But the confirmation of perhaps $1 trillion worth of mineral deposits in Afghanistan changes the equation for some people. With reptilian logic, they will point to a conspiracy of international neo-cons and their shadowy corporate masters being the real reason for international intervention — as though 9/11 never happened and Afghanistan had never served as a safe haven for some of the worst examples of thuggery and terror that this planet has to offer.

As any rational thinking person would, I dismiss these conspiracists out of hand. But their cynical response does certainly beg the question: what precisely is wrong about foreign mining companies making a decent profit and employing thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of Afghans in good, high-paying jobs that don’t involve the heroin trade or freelance work for the insurgency? And if keeping the insurgency down permanently and avoiding a return of terror bases to Afghanistan also provides some insurance that our trade routes and economies will not be sabotaged into recession, resulting in more financial hardship for both Wall Street and Main Street, what’s wrong with that, either?

I explore these questions further in my latest Mark Op Ed, Self-Interest in Afghanistan:

Ever since the Taliban got turfed out of office by American daisy cutters from above and horseback-riding Northern Alliance fighters on the ground, Al Qaeda hasn’t been able to use Afghanistan as a base to attack our cities.

Critics will point out that the bad guys are still using places like Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and the odd apartment in Denver, Colorado.

But that isn’t an argument against finishing the job in Afghanistan. On the contrary, it’s an argument for building on our successes and taking down the rest of the terrorist enclaves in failed states, as well as those in middle-of-nowhere, USA.

Other critics will say that the cost of keeping the boys in the black turbans on the run just isn’t worth it. Way more people die from car accidents than terrorist bombs. Besides, if we stay out of their countries, won’t they just leave us alone?

Again, let’s look at it from the perspective of our pocketbook. We’ve just come through a bitch of an economic meltdown. Many of us are still hurting pretty bad. So how do you think it’s going to affect the world economy if the Taliban wins in Afghanistan and an endless stream of “martyrs” the world over are emboldened to carry out even more brazen terror attacks than they do now?

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

4 responses so far

Next »