STWR - Share The World's Resources

The "Last Taboo" was the title of eminent Palestinian-born writer, scholar and activist Edward Said's essay written shortly before his death in September, 2003. It was also the title of distinguished author and documentary filmmaker John Pilger's chapter about Palestine in his important new book Freedom Next Time that's reviewed and can be read at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Said explained his title in what he wrote: "The extermination of the Native Americans can be admitted, the morality of Hiroshima attacked, the national flag (of the US) publicly committed to flames. But the systematic continuity of Israel's 52-year oppression and maltreatment of the Palestinians is virtually unmentionable, a narrative that has no permission to appear." It appeared boldly and courageously in Pilger's book, and it's long past time for it be prominent in the mainstream as well to finally expose Israeli crimes and demand they end. It's especially important now as Israel just began an intensive military assault against the defenseless people of Gaza, which, before it ends, may result in many deaths, great destruction of property and an overwhelming humanitarian disaster even beyond the one already existing in The Occupied Territories.

In any discussion of the war in Iraq and its consequences, it is obligatory for everyone to acknowledge the sacrifices required of the men and women who have been sent there. More than 2,500 of them have died and about 18,000 have been wounded. The rate of post-traumatic stress disorder among those who have returned has been estimated to be as high as 20 percent.

I was a soldier once in a war similar in many respects to this one. Like members of our current military, I was a volunteer. I remember that when I returned from Vietnam, I was struck by how little society knew or cared about what was happening there. I didn't expect anyone to understand or be grateful for what I had done because it was apparent to me that the nation had not benefited from my service. No one was any safer. Our freedoms were no more secure. I never felt that the lives of the Vietnamese had been materially improved by our efforts. Quite the contrary, our primary gifts to that small country had been death, destruction and a flourishing sex industry. I came away from the experience believing that the American lives I had seen lost were wasted sacrifices. We who had served had been betrayed. Why would I expect a grateful homecoming?

When I saw what the war in Vietnam was really like, I wrote to my wife in a "letter to be opened in the event of my death" that she was not to accept any medals and, above all, I was not to have a military funeral. I could not abide the prospect that my flag-draped coffin might serve as a justification for further bloodshed.

With al-Zarqawi's death, Bush went on the defensive to help Republicans win in November.

Sycophants are clogging the airwaves and the campaign trail to tell us, "This is the turning point," as the Iraq government overcame internecine struggles to appoint government ministers in a country torn apart by civil war.

Said to be in "high spirits," Bush claims the US won't "cut and run, but will "complete the mission," to make Iraq a stable, functioning democracy. To counter the horrifically bad news from Iraq, Republicans are rallying to convince the public that the US "will be victorious" because the troops "knew their cause was noble." GOP House Speaker Dennis Hastert says, "our cause is right and we are proud of it," as he attacks Democrats who "lack the will to win" and promises that 2006 will be "a year of significant transition" in Iraq, as he vilifies opponents as unpatriotic.

But truth belies war supporters' efforts to crank up a propaganda campaign. Days after al-Zarqawi's death, dozens of Iraqis died from six tightly spaced bombings in Kirkuk. Daily bombings and killings continue in Baghdad. Reports from once-peaceful Basra reveal warlords, militias, organized crime and political parties fighting "a turf war" to control the government. Once considered part of "the coalition of the willing," US allies continue to withdraw their troops from Iraq.

It’s all becoming clear-not that Mr. Bush has any responsibility for starting Hurricane Katrina. His responsibility began where the hurricane left off. And it proved as much of a windfall for his friends as the war in Iraq.

One of the hallmarks of the Bush administration has been the creation of situations in which the assistance of large contractors is required to fix what Bush broke. Once hired they are left to do their work without interference from the meddlesome feds who, Republican lore has it, wouldn’t know how to supervise even if given the opportunity. The stories of big business doing well by doing worse are legion-beginning in Iraq, traveling through New Orleans and now ending up at the other end of the United States in the fence construction project. Of course the incompetence and over billing of those constructing the fence cannot yet be known since as of this writing the work has scarce begun. It can only be anticipated.

Incompetence and fraudulent billing first came to light in Iraq when the antics of Dick Cheney’s friends and former colleagues at Halliburton’s Kellogg Brown and Root, now called KBR, ripped off the American taxpayer. Among its myriad ruses was overcharging by $27.4 million for food served U.S. troops in Iraq, the receipt of kickbacks by two KBR employees from a Kuwaiti subcontractor who was permitted to provide services to U.S. troops, and so forth.

In his radio address and press conferences this week, President Bush highlighted the Senate debate and vote on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. He didn't mention that Congress is also geared up to repeal the estate tax -- and hand a staggering trillion-dollar benefit to the richest of Americans.

Similarly, the president has been touting the "success" of his economic plans -- profits up, stocks up, CEO salaries up. He has not mentioned that the Conference of Mayors reports rising hunger and homelessness in our cities. Or that wages for most Americans aren't keeping up with prices.

The administration, desperate to shore up its own base, is back to posturing on symbolic issues -- a constitutional amendment on gay marriage, a constitutional amendment on burning the flag -- and throwing money at the affluent who pay for the party. Meanwhile, the poor are simply ignored. The cities abandoned. Working people slighted.

Bush's budget simply abandons the cities. He would cut spending on a range of programs that go to the poor, the elderly and the disabled -- Medicaid, education, day care, home-heating assistance, special food assistance. He says this is vital to bring down the deficits. At the same time, he insists on new tax cuts -- largely for the very wealthy -- that add more to the deficit than the cuts for the poor save. And he demands increases in military spending and homeland-security spending -- even while cutting the programs for the poor.

For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, especially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.