John Pilger: Return Of People Power

Nice to read an article which is has a positive outlook for a change. It's all too easy these days to get depressed when you turn on the news or open a newspaper and get bombarded about the seemingly constant wars, scaremongering about terrorism and corrupt business leaders and politicians.

No doubt the Internet has had huge impact on spreading truth. Never before has it been so easy to get a message across without it being filtered by the corporate media giants. Although the Internet is now under attack in the US with a new communications bill which if it is passed could be the first step towards strangling independent voices. Pray it does not happen!

From Zmag:

In researching a new film, I have been watching documentary archive from the 1980s, the era of Ronald Reagan and his "secret war" against Central America. What is striking is the relentless lying. A department of lying was set up under Reagan with the coy name, "office of public diplomacy". Its purpose was to dispense "white" and "black" propaganda - lies - and to smear journalists who told the truth. Almost everything Reagan himself said on the subject was false. Time and again, he warned Americans of an "imminent threat" from the tiny impoverished nations that occupy the isthmus between the two continents of the western hemisphere. "Central America is too close and its strategic stakes are too high for us to ignore the danger of governments seizing power with military ties to the Soviet Union," he said. Nicaragua was "a Soviet base" and "communism is about to take over the Caribbean". The United States, said the president, "is engaged in a war on terrorism, a war for freedom".

How familiar it all sounds. Merely replace Soviet Union and communism with al-Qaeda, and you are up to date. And it was all a fantasy. The Soviet Union had no bases in or designs on Central America; on the contrary, the Soviets were adamant in turning down appeals for their aid. The comic strips of "missile storage depots" that American officials presented to the United Nations were precursors to the lies told by Colin Powell in his infamous promotion of Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction at the Security Council in 2003.

Whereas Powell's lies paved the way for the invasion of Iraq and the violent death of at least 100,000 people, Reagan's lies disguised his onslaught on Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala. By the end of his two terms, 300,000 people were dead. In Guatemala, his proxies - armed and tutored in torture by the CIA - were described by the UN as perpetrators of genocide.

There is one major difference today. That is the level of awareness among people everywhere of the true purpose of Bush and Blair's "war on terror" and the scale and diversity of the popular resistance to it. In Reagan's day, the notion that presidents and prime ministers lied as deliberate, calculated acts was considered exotic; Nixon's Watergate lies were said to be shocking because presidents did not lie outright.

Drugs are bad, m'kay?

Given the recent media coverage of the legalisation issue due to the Merchants Quay drug centre hosting Jerry Cameron, an FBI trained former US chief of police and current head of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), I think it's only fair to comment on how both for and against legalisiation camps are both in someway missing the mark.

Now me shock some by saying I believe there is no such thing as a 'drugs problem' in society, the issue really is why do people have to turn to drugs? Therefore drug abuse should be dealt with as a health and welfare issue and not a criminal issue. Funneling the money wasted on fighting the war against drugs towards building better community care for the disaffected would go a lot further than throwing it on some fight that can never be won.

Now before those against legalisation fall off their chairs let me point out that just legalising every drug and using the tax money to fund better rehab programs etc is not enough. It would be very near sighted to do that without due care.

Currently if a person wants to drive a car, which is a very dangerous piece of machinery as can be seen by the many road deaths every week, they need to procure a licence after getting many lessons and passing an eye test. Therefore should a person wish to purchase a substance which can seriously harm them and others around them they should be required to have a 'drugs licence'. Obviously the granting of which would be dependant upon psychological and physical screening, even for more mundane drugs like cannabis. This would also be a very effective way of limiting and monitoring usage.

As for heroin the current system of methadone treatment solves nothing. Methadone, which many users report, is actually more addictive than heroin and is far more potent.
So for heroin,cocaine and other seriously addictive drugs should people wish to purchase with a licence then they must also attend a drug rehabilitation program until they are no longer addicted. Failure to attend means licence is revoked. There is also the option of using an inhibitor like GABA-transaminase which will negate any effects of the narcotics permanently rendering the ingestion of an opiate by an addict pointless.

The argument for a 'drugs licence' is one I have never heard before but I think it goes someway to addressing the concerns of both the pro and against camps.

And one other thing, we should never tolerate people like MEP Eoin Ryan and Grainne Kenny (the international president of anti-drugs organisation EURAD) for playing politics with peoples health. No doubt Eoin Ryan has to look to be tough on certain issues to his constituents and his party (that state being sued by cancer patients line is just plain ridiculous!) but both of them should be big enough to listen to the pro legalisation argument from experts such as Jerry Cameron and the Merchant Quay.

Corporate Globalization and Middle East Terrorism

From Information Clearing House

The Israeli and American governments have little regard for life, or human freedoms. Both thoroughly propagandize their own people and call themselves democracies. They are known to kidnap, imprison, torture, and assassinate their foes without due process. Both possess nuclear arsenals capable of destroying the world many times over. The world surely remembers that America is the only nation to hold human life in such low regard as to actually deploy the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, even with Japan’s eminent surrender at hand.

These governments are guilty of the same war crimes that the Nazi leadership was executed for after World War Two. They have histories of ethnic cleansing and genocide. The blood of innocent people runs warm on their hands, and they continually thirst for more.