10.30.2008

an example of the "challenges and humor in contributing to FCNL's mission"


One of the jobs that interns share at FCNL involves taking guests on green building tours. Usually, the people that get green building tours are Quaker families or tourists who happened in off the street after seeing the War Is Not the Answer sign in our window, but occasionally we give tours to larger groups. Today, Laura, Stephen and I gave a tour to a wonderful group of Methodist high school-aged students from Indiana.

Like any group of high schoolers they were a bit rowdy and had been spending their time on the church bus (10 hours!) entertaining themselves with the Word of the Day game. (Like on Pee Wee's playhouse. Remember? The game where everyone yells and screams every time they hear the word of the day?).

Anyone want to guess what their word of the day was today?

It was "green."

Needless to say, that made the tour a lot more fun (and loud) than I had been expecting.

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Labels: ,

While we were voting.

A humanitarian crisis is brewing in the Eastern part of the Congo. According to this Washington Post report, the Congolese army has lost control, leaving only a small group of U.N. peacekeepers to protect the civilian population from rebel forces.

Don't really know what to say about it, but I'm definitely going to keep the situation on my radar.

It's also another example of why investing in prevention is so important.

Update

The New York Times reports that the situation seems to be marginally better, thanks to a cease-fire. It's still bad though. I think it would be particularly terrifying to be a woman in this situation, in which your body is considered prime target for combatants on both sides.

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

10.27.2008

I met Helen Thomas--Madame of the White House Press Corps!


Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Speaking of eventful autumnal times, I want everyone to know that I had dinner with Helen Thomas! I was invited to a fancy gala event, filling in for an undoubtedly Very Important Person and ate dinner with Helen Thomas. She is the most senior White House press correspondent who has covered press conferences for every president since Kennedy. She has asked far and away the most critical questions before we invaded Iraq, and continues to ask the hardest questions of Dana Perino throughout the occupation. To give you a taste, here is a little clip of an exchange between these two women that Democracy Now picked up:

Helen Thomas: “Yesterday, according to the New York Times, we dropped a bomb on a home in Sadr City and burned alive a pregnant woman and her children. How long is the siege of Sadr—how long are we going to keep bombing Iraqis?”

Perino: “Well, I’m not aware of that particular report. I have not—I’ve not seen it.”

Thomas: “Well, it was pretty buried in the stories.”

Perino: “OK. Well, the operation against the militias in Sadr City will continue until they root them out. And that is expressly in order to protect people like you just mentioned.”

Thomas: “Root who out? The Iraqis? In their own country?”

Thinking about Events this Fall

Have you heard? FCNL is non-partisan, and we don't take sides. Nevertheless, while cleaning my apartment, eating scrambled eggs with blue cheese, and listening to my favorite radio program this Saturday, I was struck by what a historic moment we're living in right now. And for me, who feels like there weren't any terribly historic moments in my young life before the principal interrupted my AP Writing class to announce that planes had hit the World Trade Center, it's pretty amazing (and stressful) to be living through a potentially world changing autumn. The discussions raised by this election and the financial crisis are fascinating, and I can't wait to see how both turn out.

If you want to hear the show that made me tear up a little over my breakfast, listen here.

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

10.23.2008

The War Machine in my Backyard

Every day I walk by a giant, ominous building that says BAE Systems. Just one red and white sign by the road and a message about the entrance to the building being restricted. I had no reason to think this building was anything but the standard, run-of-the-mill office. Then my host family told me that it had something to do with defense or security. And I started to wonder. Then I opened up the Sept. FCNL Newsletter to an article about military contractors benefiting from taxpaper money and it mentioned BAE Systems.

So I did a little research and it turns out BAE Systems is the 3rd largest military contractor in the world! And they are the 6th most popular defense company for the US to send our tax dollars to. I would like to walk into the building and claim partial ownership because so much of my tax dollars support them...But I won't. Instead, I will just get chills every time I walk by my ominous neighbors and remember every day why I work for peace instead of war.

-Stephen

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

10.21.2008

Who, the U.S.? Nah, they're not interested in Iraqi Oil.

A 2007 Global Policy Forum poll shows that a majority of Iraqi citizens believe that the U.S. is keeping them in the dark about its plans to control their oil resources.

That doesn't sound like the U.S. - American troops are in the country just to promote democracy and leave Iraqis with a stable and free government, right?

If this is true, and the U.S. has no interest in profiting from Iraqi oil, then why did President George W. Bush issue a signing statement last week rejecting a provision in the military funding authorization bill that prohibited any finds to be used "to exercise United Sates control of the oil resources of Iraq?" Such a move sounds like paving the way to control Iraqi oil to me.

What's more puzzling is why the President has decided to take this action now. He has signed the restriction against controlling Iraqi oil into law five times since 2006, but has issued 2 signing statements this year asserting that Congress cannot rein in his power to use the U.S. military to control these resources.

What's going on here? It seems obvious that the Bush administration has designs on Iraqi oil resources, but how is that to be reconciled with U.S. goals of stability, sovereignty, and freedom in Iraq? If the U.S. involves itself with Iraqi natural resources now, when will the country move closer to ending its military presence in Iraq?

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Labels:

10.20.2008

Why We Blog

Every Friday, while I'm doing web work (which requires nimble fingers and technical prowess but not my full cerebral attention) I listen to Slate's Political Gabfest. They provide me with the deliciously pretentious and scandalously liberal injection I need once in awhile to remind me what I was like in college.

This week the crew drew my attention to an essay running in this month's Atlantic Monthly entitled "Why I Blog." The author is Andrew Sullivan, a longtime and well-respected blogger (who I actually don't read, but am familiar with) and as well as a "dead tree" journalist (that term makes the environmentalist in you want to cancel your New Yorker subscription, doesn't it?), and you can tell he is in love with the medium about which he writes.

I agree with a lot of what Sullivan says, being a big fan of blogging myself, and a lot of Sullivan's reasons resonate with me.

Sullivan describes the freedom of blogging, as well as the immediacy of it. He notes its contrast to writing for a print publication (to my fellow interns, some of this may seem familiar to you..):

"And in all this I'd often chafed as most writers do, at the endless delays revisions, office politics, editorial fights, and last-minute cuts for space… Blogging-even to an audience of a few hundred in the early days- was intoxicatingly free in comparison. Like taking a narcotic."

Now. We at FCNL do not condone narcotics. Nor, however, is this office exempt from the realities of publication that Sullivan describes above. That is why I was first drawn to this blog, and why I decided to embark on a crusade to bring it back from the one-post-every-two-months land of the dead. As I learned to write in the FCNL voice and to cope with being at the very bottom of the FCNL-editing-process food chain, I found that this blog was a space in which I could be expansive, quirky, funny, and yes, myself. Hurrah!

It also, as I soon discovered, helps me do the rest of my job better, because I have a place where I can both experiment with rhetorical flourishes and work through FCNL issues for myself, away from the grip of editors. This process of "figuring out" makes my official prose for the website, email communications, or newsletter more clear, and less fraught as I try to express some of my own opinion as well as FCNL's. I don't need to…I already got that out of my system on the blog.

What Sullivan enjoys that Of Peace and Politics does not, of course, is a robust debate in comments on his posts. But we're getting there.

I hope you all get a chance to read Sullivan's piece. It reminded me why I like blogging so much, and got me excited anew about posting on our blog. Enjoy!

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

10.17.2008

The Immigration Industrial Complex

Undocumented immigrants are typically blamed for "stealing our jobs" and "taking our benefits." That is to say, they're typically accused of making us lose money. Now, all the research shows us that this is not actually the case, that our economy in fact depends on the labor immigrants provide. But after a string of articles that have come out lately, I can't help but wonder how much money are we MAKING off of the crack down on "illegals"?

A couple of weeks ago the Washington Post wrote about the $21 million detention facility being built in Farmville, VA by private investors to "capitaliz[e] on the massive influx of detainees into the Immigration and Customs Enforcement system over the past year." The investors claim that the facility will save the government money because it is not built on taxpayers dollars. Moreover, the Washington Post reports that the "town expects to receive about $322,000 a year in revenue by collecting $1 per detainee per day. An additional $425,000 would stream into Farmville and neighboring Prince Edward County by way of taxes and fees, buttressing Farmville's annual budget of about $24 million."

The Farmville facility was not requested by ICE. It's not even sure it will be used. The investors merely saw the crackdown on immigration and the ensuing increase in detention as an opportunity to make a PROFIT. I guess that makes sense when Washington pays $95 a day to detain immigrants (at which, on any given day, there are an average of 30,000 immigrants in detention) rather than $12 a day for alternatives to detention.

Take another example from today's Wall Street Journal. As the markets crash and most airlines begin cutting cost in every possible way (charging for the first checked bag, for your bag of peanuts, etc), there is one sector of the airline industry that is growing: the flights run by Immigration and Customs Enforcement deporting undocumented immigrants---or ICE Air as it is known by its employees.

ICE Air is a thriving business. The government pays $620 per person per flight for a one way ticket back to the immigrant's home country. And as the chief of flight operations for deportations and removals at ICE says, "We are making a valiant attempt to overbook" so that ICE can get more bang for its buck. Logically that means that they try to fill every seat, waiting until they have, as WSJ put it, "a critical mass of deportees."

And as they wait for this critical mass, they keep them detained which means, in turn, more profit for the detention center.

Do I even need to get into $67 million contract granted to Boeing (which could turn into a $2.5 billion project) to build the Berlin, I mean, US wall?

There is a growing (profitable) industry being built around the arrest, detention, and deportation of undocumented immigrants. Like the racial injustice rampant in the criminal justice system in the United States--the prison industrial complex as Angela Davis so rightly labeled it--how do we expect to reach equality and justice in the treatment of all peoples, including immigrants, when companies and profits are making millions off of their abuse and denial of rights?

It seems our country has yet another complex.

Labels: , ,

10.16.2008

A Recap of Blog Action Day

I thought that after reading my contribution to Blog Action Day some of you might be interested to see what others had to say on the subject of poverty yesterday. Here's a short list of some other blogs that that covered the event:

  • The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights wrote about the “Half in Ten” campaign to cut poverty which they work on in alliance with the ACORN, the Center for American Progress Action Fund and the Coalition on Human Needs.
  • Global Voices had an interesting recap of what some Iranian bloggers had to say for Blog Action Day.
  • FCNL's very own Stephen Donahoe wrote on Sustainable Good about Outreach International’s unique approach to poverty and international development
  • Sr. Julie from A Nuns Life hosted an excellent discussion on Jon Sobrino’s book No Salvation Outside the Poor.
  • Faith and AIDS closed the day with a beautiful collection of prayers calling for protection of and justice for the most vulnerable members of our society.
If you know of any other good entries for Blog Action Day, feel free leave a comment and add to the list! Did any other Quaker (or Quaker-affiliated) blogs write things?

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Labels: ,

10.15.2008

Our Fellow Quaker Youths Have a Blog!

Our friends at William Penn House down the street have started up a blog. The group over there is also largely young, and intrigued by the experience of working for a Quaker organization. I have read what they have so far, and it's pretty great. I particularly like this post, which is describes "quaker bluntness," a trait that I have noticed, but never put a name to before. Well done William Penn House! (Is there a nickname for people who work at WPH? We call ourselves FCNLers, but what are you? Penners? That would be cool.)


Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Happy Blog Action Day '08!

I've been having so much fun reading what all the new interns have to say on the blog that I've been forgetting to write posts, myself! But today I'm making it up to you by participating in Blog Action Day 2008! Today, thousands of bloggers from all over the world are uniting to write about one single issue- poverty.

One of my favorite professors at Earlham College once said that when looking at human dynamics people often have a tendency to relate more to the character in the dynamic with the most power. For instance, if you imagine a story where a millionaire meets a homeless person you're more likely to imagine yourself as the millionaire. While things are not always that simple, I do think that his point illustrates how we do (or don't) talk about poverty.

I have been thinking a lot about how this relates to the current financial crisis. Most of the news coverage of the crisis has focused on wall street executives. It seems like every day for the last month I have opened the front page of the paper to find pictures of despondent, angry or (very occasionally) elated businessmen in suits. I have yet to open the paper to a picture of a single mother attempting to buy groceries for her children. Of course, a lot of the attention that's been paid to wall street executives has been negative, but I still think it's troubling that they seem to have become the face of this crisis. As long as we're focused on AIG's luxury retreat (as angering as it might be), we're not talking about how hard it will be for that mother to get groceries because the $700 billion bailout didn't include increasing food stamps.

That's one reason that I was grateful for Adam Taylor's post on the Sojourners blog last week. Taylor talks about how the presidential campaigns' discussion of the economy has focused on the 'middle class.' He says that while it's important to remember how the crisis effects the middle class, we can not ignore the effect that this is taking on the poor, even if many of us may more easily relate to the middle class experience.

For the first time since this crisis started I finally heard the words that I'd been wanting to hear in church last week: "As we are faced with difficult decisions of what to cut in our family budgets, we need to remember that one thing that we can not cut is our obligation to the poor, who are being left with even fewer options." As I've been struggling with how to work rising expenses into my budget, I've found that to be an important thing to reflect on.

As tempting as it may be to focus on the people who seem to be running the show, it is the people that have the least control of this situation who will be most affected by it. And those are really the people that I have the biggest obligation to.

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Labels: ,

10.14.2008

How Laura spent the past two weeks...

Our loyal readers may have noticed the absence in the past couple of weeks of one of our intrepid bloggers (no, not me -- but I've got something good cooking, I promise).

Laura has been on the road with a cluster bomb survivors' tour since October 5th, traveling around the Midwest with Raed Mokaled. Lynn Bradach, and and Soraj Habib, all of whom have lost a family member or (in the case of Soraj) been handicapped by the weapons. The tour is getting the word out about cluster bombs, and raising support for a ban. Find out more on the tour blog.

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

10.13.2008

The State of Global Conflict

Are armed conflicts more deadlier than during the cold war? Are internal violent conflicts increasing in number? Is the threat of war increasing around the world?

If you answered yes to all these questions, you are wrong. Certainly, there are shades of gray with respect to the first and third question. If you living in Darfur, Iraq or Afghanistan, the conflict in your backyard seems pretty deadly. And if you are living in Bolivia or Guinea Bissau, an increased or resumed violent conflict might be just around the corner.

But, according to a new report by the Human Security Report Project - a Canadian think tank - the number and intensity of violent conflicts has declined substantially since the end of the cold war.

The number of violent conflicts has dropped by 40 percent, according to the Canadian think tank. And fewer people are being killed in conflicts. For instance, in 1950, armed conflicts killed 38,000 people on average. In 2005, the number of deaths from violent conflict was only 700 on average.

Yet, haven't pundits and international affairs commentators told us for years that the number and intensity of internal violent conflicts increased after the cold war? Rubbish. Certainly, internal conflicts were greater in number than state-to-state military engagements. But, overall, the number and intensity of violent conflicts have decreased.

Why the drop in global violent conflicts?

The increasing influence of NGO's, advocacy groups and the media, as well as more activist governments and international organizations are a few reasons. Peacekeeping operations are at an all time high. There is also a greater awareness of the need for effective tools to prevent wars or consolidate the peace after conflict ends.

Yet, as the Human Security Project (as well as a new report by FCNL) warns, there is no guarantee this trend will continue. Climate change, increasing competition over scarce resources, the rise of populous countries like China and India, as well as the increasing socio-economic gap between rich countries and lesser developed countries could all increase the number and intensity of violent conflicts in the near future.

But, the U.S. can build on past successes and lead the world in securing the future by making significant investments in tools to prevent violent conflict. Not only would a "prevention paradigm" help restore U.S. standing in the world, but it would be far cheaper than using the military as tool to keep a lid on instability and violence.

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

10.07.2008

On this anniversary of the seemingly endless (yet forgotten) war


No--not that one. The other one--today marks 7 years since the invasion of Afghanistan. Robert Naiman from Just Foreign Policy sheds light on the British recommendation that it is high time to negotiate with groups affiliated with the Taliban to improve what is a rapidly deteriorating humanitarian catastrophe.

A stark difference from both of the major presidential candidates' nearly identical policy on Afghanistan.

2008 has been the deadliest year of the war and occupation of Afghanistan for both US troops and Afghan civilians.

And yet--the most contact that most Americans will ever have with the people of this country is from magazines like the National Geographic. One of its most famous images was the photo of this Afghan woman--Sharbat Gula. Thousands of Americans wrote to National Geographic asking to either adopt or marry her.

In 2003 National Geographic went back to Afghanistan on a search mission looking for the woman with the penetrating green eyes--and found her.

I wonder if they let her know how many marriage proposals she has received for her beauty when she was a young girl. Since many Americans have seen all Pashtus as Taliban affiliated, and since many Afghans have interpreted the war in Afghanistan as being against the Pashtu people rather than the Taliban, I can only imagine what her perception of Americans would be.

Imagine if your only experience with Americans was being hunted down by photographers 17 years after they stole a shot, approached by thousands of marriage proposals by people whom you had never met, and then their country invades and occupies your country for seven years and yet 88% of its young people--the same demographic going off to fight there-- cannot find it on a map...

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Labels:

Peace isn't Fuzzy

Peace isn't easy; it isn't comfortable; it isn't neutral--IT IS ACTION; IT IS COURAGOUS....I came to this realization this past weekend when I was representing FCNL at the Peace Colloquy, a huge peace event for the Community of Christ, my denomination. Most of the weekend I was standing at an FCNL booth with tons of materials coaxing people over and giving them tons of resources. It was really fun actually.

However, I was very disappointed with some people in my denomination. One of these people works in peacebuilding at the Community of Christ. I asked them if they would take a sign that said War Is Not the Answer. They responded that it might diminish people's view of them and cause them to not respect their work. This really bothered me as I thought about it more, not because I really needed to get rid of another sign, but because of the lack of courage. Many people in my denomination are very good at talking about the fuzzy concept of peace. We sing a billion songs about peace (unlike many Quakers, our services involve a lot of singing). And yet proclaiming that War Is Not the Answer is too risky. I wanted to take a War Is Not the Answer sign and put it in front of our Temple. And then see who took it down. But I didn't.

When I started thinking about this person's action more, I realized that we as a society have come up with a very odd conclusion--publically stating one's views about politics or religion will make other people think more or less of you. Why is it so wrong to state your beliefs? Especially if they are beliefs you can back up? I think the phenomena of avoiding discussing faith and politics (except in DC of course) is indicative of the lack of courage we have.

So, by the end of the weekend, I was pretty pleased with my denomination's response to FCNL overall, but I was even more pleased that I was representing an organization founded on the courageous action of PEACE!

-Stephen

Email the Author Del.icio.us Digg
Facebook

10.06.2008

Stop celebrating Columbus Day!

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Columbus Day is just 1 week away. On this day responsible citizens take a much needed break from work or school, applaud the parades that march down city streets, and shop "Columbus Day" sales.

Very few get that Columbus day is an outdated holiday that celebrates genocide and slavery. Our country does not celebrate the internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War with 50% off sales. School children do not get a day off to commemorate global warming. We certainly don't parade around our streets to celebrate the US history of slavery. So why do we honor a man who once wrote in his journal that the indigenous peoples he first set eyes on would make great slaves????

To this day, public school children are taught about Native American culture and history from the point of view of Euro-American colonialists. Unfortunately this kind of education is extremely biased and untrue. Many of us continue to be bereft of knowledge regarding true Native American history as well as the current lopsided relationship between the US government and Indian Country. This kind of ignorance will be played out in full revelry next week.

I just recently found out that South Dakota is the first and only state to abolish the holiday and instate a Native American day instead. A glimmer of hope!

On October 13th, do what South Dakota does. Deem October 13th a day of remembrance for the Native Americans who have lost their lives and celebrate the strong Native culture that persists today. It would also be a good day to write letters to your representatives and ask them to abolish this foolish holiday. Then write letters to the editor of your newspaper and plea that your community start looking at ways to spend the 3rd Monday of October in more reverent ways (e.g. educate people and urge leaders to respect the sovereignty and rights of Native Americans)

And happy Native American Day.

Labels:

10.03.2008

Things I noticed last night.

The serious:

1) Gwen Ifill must have been reading her E-news over the past few months (or Reuters in the past few weeks) -- because she brought up the five secretaries of state call for talks with Iran.

If only everyone just read their E-news more attentively.

And the absurd:

2) Sarah Palin's youngest daughter is a ham, and quite camera saavy. I suspected as much during the Republican convention, when she was featured on national television styling her little brother's hair with some of her own saliva. Last night she had enough sense to plant herself between Joe Biden and her mother after the debate, positioning her little body facing her mother with Senator Biden's hands on her shoulders. The cover of every newspaper this morning featured photos of the vice-presidential candidates -- and that little Palin girl.

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

10.02.2008

Immigrants as Target Practice: the new NRA ad to sway Latino voters

Anti-immigrant groups often play on myths about undocumented immigrants increasing levels of crime in the United States. While all of these allegations have been proved as absolutely false (foreign-born individuals are actually charged with crimes five-times LESS than native-born individuals), the National Rifle Assosiation (NRA) has taken this myth to a new (slightly hilarious) extreme...

While at FCNL we take a strong non-partisan stance on political affairs, the NRA has gone to another extreme with its anti-Obama website called gunbaNObama.com. The NRA has spent hundreds of thousands, if not by now millions, of dollars in tv and radio advertisements bashing Obama for eight votes he has cast during his tenure in the Senate that do not coincide with the NRA's positions. These ads most often focus on hunters, hardcore second amendment advocates, etc.

But their new ad reaches out to immigrants....kind of anyway.

In their efforts to yoke the immigrant vote (and immigration fears???), the NRA is running a spanish language ad speaking out against Obama. They say, I quote (I had to watch the English version of the ad just to make sure this translation was right on target), "Families should be able to defend themselves against rapists, drug dealers and
other criminals illegally crossing our borders. But Barack Obama didn't think we should be allowed to use a firearm for self-defense. He even voted to allow the prosecution of people who used firearms to defend their families in their own homes."

Okay, forgetting the Obama bashing, they are trying to get the immigrant vote by saying we should be able to shoot undocumented immigrants????

Most of the time, I am just disgusted with the NRA's militarized and violent images included in their ads. But with this new one...you just have to wonder...WHAT WERE THEY THINKING? As my friends at America's Voice said, do you really think that "making criminals - much less target practice- out of immigrants is...going to fly with Latino voters on Election Day"?

Labels: ,

10.01.2008

Somali Pirates tell all in exclusive NYT interview

Pirates? I used to think piracy died in the 19th century, until news kept popping up about pirates threatening ships in the Gulf of Aden. On Tuesday, a band of Somali pirates seized a Ukrainian ship loaded with arms off the coast of Somalia. Apparently, it was headed for either Kenya or Sudan (still unclear).

First thought, why is nobody talking about what are purportedly Russian arms heading to either of these countries, particularly Sudan?

Second thought, how did Somali pirates in little skiffs manage to take on a Ukrainian ship filled with arms? The Ukrainian ship was filled with grenade launchers and guns. Were the Somali's that stealthy?

Unfortunately for the pirates, there are about five American warships surrounding them off the coast of Somalia. And a Russian frigate is on the way.

For their part, the pirates have said they are in it for cold hard cash - $20 million. Apparently, they don't need the arms.

But the Somali's are also upset about the international fishing industry, which apparently plunders and loots in Somali waters. Somalia is basically a collapsed state with no strong central government and navy to police its waters. That's where the pirates step in.

"Think of us like a coast guard," they said in an interview with the New York Times.

Perhaps, someone should explain that in other countries, the coast guard tends not to be in the business of hijacking ships.

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Bull semen, bras, cigarettes, and military apparel?!



What might these items have in common?

Some of the top exports from the U.S. to Iran of course! That's right folks, the Associated Press found that under the Bush administration, the dollar value of U.S. exports to Iran have increased by more than TENFOLD from about $8 million in 2001 to nearly $150 million in 2007. The exports were sent under agricultural, medical and humanitarian exemptions to U.S. sanctions on Iran. (I'd love to know what category each of these items was under.)

I've heard from several Iranian-American aid workers that they were unable to get licenses for contributing to hospitals for the growing impoverished Iranian population and have been told by U.S. officials evaluating these licenses, "why don't you help impoverished children in the U.S.?". (One woman I talked to told me how desperately she wanted to say back "well since you pride yourselves on being the greatest government in the world...why don't you?"). Curiously, tobacco companies sure don't have a problem getting the appropriate licenses...(and wild guess that the administration doesn't argue, "well why don't you just increase the targeting of youth in the U.S. and make your profits that way?")

When Senator McCain was asked why the export of cigarettes has jumped dramatically under the Bush administration, he said "[m]aybe that's a way of killing them."

Lest one think I am being at all partisan, this kind of preference for tobacco companies over humanitarian aid to "The Enemy" has gotten wide by-in from both sides of the political aisle.

Remember perhaps the most draconian sanctions in world history against the Iraqi population that killed even more Iraqi civilians than have been killed since the 2003 invasion under the pretext of bringing down Saddam? These sanctions were imposed by the U.N. from the pressure of the U.S. and U.K. Two of the UN Humanitarian Coordinators in Iraq resigned from their position in defiance of a policy they described as genocidal, carried out by both President Bush, President Clinton, and President GWB before he decided to drop them in favor of invading and occupying the country.

Dennis Halliday, an Irish Quaker, was one of the men of conscience who stepped down from that position saying "I had been instructed," he said, "to implement a policy that satisfies the definition of genocide: a deliberate policy that has effectively killed well over a million individuals, children and adults. We all know that the regime, Saddam Hussein, is not paying the price for economic sanctions; on the contrary, he has been strengthened by them. It is the little people who are losing their children or their parents for lack of untreated water."

While we didn't let in incubators for premature infants, essential equipment for water treatment facilities, or pencils for school children (Saddam might use the lead to make WMD's!), tobacco companies only prospered under the sanctions. The regulatory laws in the developed world have shifted the tobacco industries attention to the developing world, where 80% of the world's eight million deaths projected by 2030 will occur. In 2008, smoking will kill more than five million worldwide--more than AIDS, TB, and malaria deaths combined.

But where medical gauze failed to penetrate, billions of cigarettes have made their way from the U.S. to Iraq, revealed by the EU when it filed a legal action against several international tobacco companies. (You can see the World Health Organization's investigation on this practice here.)

The World Health Organization also pointed out that like Iraqis, internal documents from tobacco companies illustrate that Iranians are viewed as a prime market for their products. "Overall," says the World Health Organization's 2003 report on The cigarette “transit” road to the Islamic Republic of Iran, "the tobacco industry’s documents suggest that the Islamic Republic of Iran was viewed by the global cigarette companies as a battlefield where the national tobacco
monopoly could be duped, government officials could be misled, and the physical health of Iranians could be sacrificed for the financial health of the companies’ shareholders."

Well that's one way to win the hearts and minds of the Iranian people! (Although perhaps McCain believes a better method is to make jokes about killing them on the campaign trail. Again, not to be partisan about the affair. While McCain makes more jokes about hurting the Iranian populationthe majority of both Democrats and Republicans in the House support a bill calling for a complete embargo of all gasoline into Iran, shutting down their energy consumption by nearly half, which, if "successful", would be undoubtedly a humanitarian catastrophe. But then folks like former Republican minority leader Tom Delay concede that that is the point since cutting off gasoline since it would mean,"[the Iranian people] would stop driving their cars. And the pressure at home would start growing by—by huge amounts.") (I guess the cigarettes are a bit of an incentive so they stop being so lazy and overthrow their regime and install one more friendly to U.S. interests.)

Oh and while bull semen is weird enough--but understandable--everyone knows about the powerful influence of the Bull Semen Lobby ;)--anyone want to guess why we are selling military clothing to The Axis of Evil?

(I really REALLY wish I was making this up)

Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook