Excellent article. Though, reading this article made me feel a little stupid. This guy is one heck of a writer - with terrific vocabulary.

I agree with most of the things he has to say. The left wing has been taken over by a bunch of clowns - and he is right - disconnected from mainstream society.

The left, by and large, is full of neglectful and jealous people. The one thing that drives them is their resentment of the rich, profits and wealth.

I have always wondered when the left stopped caring about humanity.

I'm looking forward to this as well. It seems in the last 10-15 years, both the right and the left side of the political spectrum have withdrawn into their own little ideological bastions to hurl rocks at each other, leaving your average person sitting on thin air somewhere in the middle. Most Canadians embrace neither the extreme right nor the extreme left, yet there is nothing in our political spectrum any more that mirrors this view. And politicians wonder why people are disconnected from government? The process is even further along in the US, where the division is even sharper, and there essentially is no middle ground. I'm looking forward to this column getting some real dialogue going - if nothing else, maybe it will make people see in shades of grey instead of black and white.

It hasn't.

Nice to see the first two posters on this thread are in total agreement. Why am I not surprised? They'd like to believe the lies they've been posting here for months and they're both pleased to see that someone at Tyee also smokes the same brand of dope.

Roll those dice Cappy!

Neglectful? You've got to be kidding. If the left ever comes to power in Canada then you can think about calling it neglectful and not sound like a liar.

Until there is some equity in western culture itself, the pretense that a clockwork market system will ever lead to anything except misery for 2/3 of the world is the real illusion of our modern age.

As long as the 'leftist' countries in Scandinavia are the only ones in the world that actually reach the ideals of a reasonably fair society AND contributing the G8 defined 'goal' of foreign aid this kind of apologetics is just an excuse for the smugness of the affluent in Canada, Britain and the US - the three major plutonomies of the West.

Here's another blown myth. The left asks for more handouts that only hurt.

http://globeandmail.workopolis.com/servlet/Content/fasttrack/20061011/REYNOLDS11?section=Insurance

I'd say ignore this nonsense. There's nothing substantial here to think about.

Or at least leave it to the nightblooms and capitalists to gloat over, all the while pretending that Glavin has ideas.

Oh yeah, I was an NDP supporter but the bizarre things I hear about their position on Islamic fascism (sharia in Ontario, wtf?) just leaves wondering what the helll is in their brain cases.

At times, supporting Hezbollah and others it seems like they conveniently forget that any of their activities would be met with death, disfigurement and/or prison if they lived under the rule of those they support.

Maddening that they ignore the clearly hateful ideology of these folks, just because they are also against the great satan of america and capitalism.

But Orwell was right, they are just like the right-wing loons who crave authoritarianism, they just want their own brand running the show.

Glavin has nothing to say, here...His left apostate gig is remarkably colourless; at least Christopher Hitchens used to be a great polemicist and writer.

Given everything going on in the world, I hardly think Cindy Sheehan visiting the democratically elected leader of Venezuelan is the most Orwellian thing going on. And his musings about the "anti-globalization" movement are totally incoherent. Latin America's experience would suggest that it is neo-liberalism that has failed, but I guess to acknowledge this is to subscribe to (Glavin's strawman) "left liberal" orthodoxy.

The left and right in politics have been taken over by extremists. The left, "I know better than you" crowd is no better than the right "I'm holier than you crowd".

But who is listening? Look at the NDP, which has morphed in to the great waste of time party........ no one votes for it.

In BC, the NDP has morphed into the politically correct party, with a grand wet-noodle leading it. Not only has the pycho Campbell led 'what's her name' by the nose, he has stolen democracy without a whimper from the NDP.

Remeber Bennet's "not a dime withoud debate" tour, or Falcon's "Have you had enough yet?" tour? Where is out grand wet-noodle? Not a peep! all we hear is whimper, whimper, whimper!

If I were to lead the NDP, I would be around the province screaming Campbell has stolen democray, by rejecting a fall sitting of Parliment!

But...we hear nothing from who ever is running the NDP show.......absolutely disgusting.

The NDP are a complete waste of time, a perfect sidekick to the most corrupt provincial government we have ever had!

And the NDP, politically correct to the end and when they are through with the NDP, they become a federal Liberal!

A great idea and congratulations to Mr Beers for the idea. This site is all too often a love-in of people who all agree with each other. The comments section then gets monopolised by two or three bitter people with enough time on their hands to spout tired rhetoric. It is a shame they don't realise how outmoded that rhetoric is and how it keeps them from holding any real power. That is the basic problem the left in Canada has and as it further loses influence and power, it retreats even further into dogma, even further margainalizing itself. The recent NDP performances are an excellent example and the author very effectively illustrates them here. I have never been able to figure out why the left cannot follow examples of other parties on the left of centre and actually win an election or two. Alas, this will not happen in Canada and we are better off for it. Dogma looks great on paper but it works less well in practice.

I agree with much the writer says in his article, especially the left's love of left wing thugs and hate of right wing thugs. It is the same thing in my book. I do not, however, agree with the Afghanistan mission. That country has never been colonised or conquered by anyone. If there are terrorist training camps by all means take them out but stationing large numbers of troops on the ground is simply a waste of scarce rescources.

By the way, anyone see Frontline on PBS last night? It showed in excellent detail all the wrong things done in the "war on terror."

Grumpy, I am amazaed how often I agree with you. The BC NDP is a bleeding joke, the most awful oppostion I have ever had the displeasure of seeing. Somewhere voters are going ask themselves if these people are fit to govern. The answer in 2001 and 2005 was "no" and the NDP can't figure out why.

The answer is so plain it is slapping them in the face yet they cannot realise that in politics you don't try to please everyone, you try to please people who might vote for you and sway those who might.

It ain't rocket science. I am not exactly fond of the present government but I don't see much of an alternative.

I loved the Last Great Sea and have recommended this wonderful book by Terry Glavin to many people. Unlike that book, however, this article is more of a blast of verbiage than researched conclusions.

Looking logicallly at the hot button issues raised by Mr. Glavin is unlikely to occur in our present climate of "she said/he said" form of debate. But nevertheless, logic will still sort out truth from opinion.

In order to test the statements made by Mr. Glavin, one must distinguish his opinions and irritations (of which there are many) from his verifiable hypothesis (of which there are some). One must then test those hypothesis against the evidence and see whether they stand up.

His general contention, not uncommon among disallusioned lefties and others who feel overwhelmed by the trajectory of our sick society, is to ascribe todays"failures" (e.g. the failure of anti-globalization, failure of the left, etc, etc,) to the failures of the left. Since the left opposed them and failed, it must be their fault. So the argument goes.

This hypothesis can be measured. And in measuring it, what Glavin appears to overlook is the systematic, highly organized, deliberate efforts by economic and political elites to achieve these very goals.

By describing those who opposed these intitiatives as failures is to leave out the people who implemented them. So to be accurrate, one must describe each group: those who were opposed and those who stood to gain financially.

Then, one must describe what the left tried to do to prevent the events from occuring (while almost never being in power); and contrast that with what the financial elites did to achieve them (while in power).

In the end, one can then suggest what a group of people needs to do to counter the successfull techniques adopted by those in power.

And in that endeavor, I predict Mr. Glavin will find the same things that Noam Chomksy has been describing for years, and which have been described by political scientists and sociologists for years: for the few to have power over the many, one must adopt long known techniques: control of the media; control of the monetary system; control of the police; control of the army.

Another chapter in history I suggest Mr. Glavin reveiw is the decade of legislative enlightenment which was the 1930's. When a rioting underpaid labour movement brought about: the legalization of unions: the 8 hour day; the 5 day work week; the concept of minimum wage;

All of which were followed by the introduction of many, many progressive developments in North America, including the CPP and universal medicate. None of which were welcomed by the economic elites. All of which were bitterly opposed by those elites. Those same elites who have now returned, to take their rightful place on the throne, while the rest of society can go back to its Darwinian ordained place in the grand pecking order.

But I salute the Tyee to have an open minded policy to publish thoughtful articles like this one. I believe most of the Tyee's readership is interested in clarity and truth, and as such we can always read an opposing view, especially if the author retains an ability to accept evidence which may require a change to ones conclusions.

Interesting that the Tyee's "new dissenting columnist" is someone who has gravitated to the right. While I agree there is lots wrong with the left, adopting the ideas of the right are not the answer. We have already had that with Tony Blair's so-called Third Way, and look where that got the Labour Party...

Really, the best way to get this mindless Ann Coulterian protege- provocateur out of here is to ignore him.

I intend to, after today, honest.

So Chavez buys some arms (a huge rarity in the world) and Cindy Sheehan visiting him is the "greatest betrayal of the historic mission of the left."

What's the "historic mission of the left?" Suckholing to the Yanks?

What would America's $550 billion spent on arms every year, not to mention its rank as the number one supplier of arms to the world, be in terms of "greatest betrayals?"

And "certain leftists," who might admire the nerve of Chavez are those "whose real, though unacknowledged motive, appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration of totalitariansm."

A scatter-brained tribute to Dershowitzianism! Never expected to see this kind of stuff on the Tyee.

Apologies to Ann Coulter, though. She would have been too embarrassed to write this kind of silliness.

Chavez should know better than to try to protect himself from the Americans, I guess--even after they tried to do a coup to get rid of him.

Even Glavin doesn't believe this, I bet.

Well, maybe!

Generally agree with Jeffrey J's contribution above; except for the first sentence of his last paragraph.

This was not 'a thoughtful article' - and balanced opposing view it is, in fact no more thoughtful than the usual nonsense from working man and Capitalism/Maybelle.

As long as the right controls the media - and it seems determined to get its two-bits worth in even here at Tyee - the idea that the left has had nothing to do with the disaster of globalization which, as Glavin says:
“lift(ed) hundreds of millions of people out of abject poverty while leaving perhaps just as many people worse off, and making untold numbers of millionaires along the way”. He completely ignores the real achievements of the left in all sorts of places other than Vancouver and reduces the positive gains of the poor and landless in places like Venezuela where, for more than half a century previously, the robber barons had had their own way.

When the whole of the world is laughing sadly at the antics of the main clown posse down south, the odd joke from the left is not even light entertainment – David Beers, Terry Glavin and working man notwithstanding. How about a column pointing out the intellectual poverty and malfeasance of a former globalizer from the Right, someone like, for example, that great ‘former Canadian’ Conrad Black. How about a column on the post-mortem canonization of Kenneth Lay. Rule of law my ass.

If the left ever gets into power in this country, there will be plenty of time for criticism of what it’s actually done. Until then, this is utter nonsense.

And if Glavin is trying to be BC's version of Chrisopher Hitchens, he should be remined that at least Hitchens is amusing (though not intentionally, of course) which is more than can be said of Glavin petulant outburst.

Don't bet on it Jeffrey, there's a big chunk that have an agenda that precludes any diversion from the socialist manifesto - and a few have already fessed up. Their minds were up in the long distant past and they will not be confused with facts. It's too bad, the left used to be where one could find lively, creative and compassionate discourse mingled with all manner of artistic expression and innovation. No more. They're almost all stuck in a negative time warp, coupled with palpable hate for unbelievers, and seemingly unable to grasp that evolution has occured. Natural ossification perhaps.

...this new column will be an opportunity to read about the fashions of muddled centre orthodoxy. Does Terry Glavin have nothing better to do with his time than criticize the left? Does he offer an alternative to what he criticizes on the left? What does he suggest should be done in Iraq or Afhanistan that will be concrete, practical and achieve positice results? Why does this column read like it was written by a speechwriter for Stephen Harper?

Exactly Alcibiades. Intelligent, serious criticism of events from the right or left is a godsend, but this kind of random whining is an insult to Tyee readers.

I'm pleased to see the addition of Mr. Glavin as a regular contributor, and not because he appears to the IAMConfused/RonErwin/Maybelle crowd (or multiple personalities of the same buffoon) to reinforce their illogical attempts to explain the way the world works to us deluded lefties. Mr. Glavin is indeed articulate and he is very talented at describing what is wrong with just about everybody and their ideas and proposed remedies to the world's problems.

He hits the nail right on the head with:

Then he proceeds to produce a very literate laundry list of how successful the politics of division have been at maintaining the status quo for the elite - in spite of what those concerned with the environment, globalization, war, human rights or basic justice issues have attempted in their desire to effect change and perhaps even save the planet for anything other than the insects.

I detect a patronizing tone in Mr. Glavin's approach as in:

.
Duh, and the canary in the coal mine had nothing to do with the care and feeding of canaries.

Again:

Sorry for the repetition, but Duh!, or as Homer would say Doh!

I could go on, but won't except to point out the disconnect between the following and the paragraph that preceded it.

Mr. Glavin seems to assume everyone that doesn't perceive the same wisdom as he is a cartoon one-dimensional character. "Peace Mom" Cindy Sheehan isn't necessarily a total pacifist, otherwise she might not have raised a son who volunteered to join the US military. However she has every right to question the motives for the current US assault on pretty much any country on earth that has the unfortunate "luck" of sitting on oil reserves and lacks the means of defending itself and doesn't choose to be a crony ala Saudi Arabia.

Hell, if I was Hugo Chavez and had the US Navy doing war games off my coast and wingnuts with influence like Rush Limbag and Pat Robertson calling for my head, not to mention the CIA trying to subvert the will of my electorate, I'd be shoring up my defenses too. Heck until Dick and George and the rest of their cabal are locked up, I'd feel better with my own personal nuke or make that a dozen.

Islamic fascism is a threat, but no more than the Christo fascists who can't wait to get to the Rapture.

But...we hear nothing from who ever is running the NDP show.......absolutely disgusting.

The NDP are silent because they have a worse record regarding the decision hold a Fall Legislative session. Hansard shows the following regarding Fall sittings under the NDP from their 91 election:

38 days 92
no fall 93
no fall 94
no fall 95
no fall 96
no fall 97
9 days 98
no fall 99
2 days 2000

Compared to that, the Liberals had no fall session in 01 or 06 while choosing to sit from 02-05. It is sad how the same faces are arguing a position diametrically opposed to that which they held in the other office, and it has extended to their fans as well. Naturally everyone will now claim to have been put out by the low priority the NDP held for Fall Legislative sessions during their tenure in office, but the fact is that neither party is particularly interested in an inconvenience like the Legislature.

Oh goody, another tired old white man to tell us all how the world works. "Open the door. Get on the floor. Everybody do the dinosaur."

Let's take a quick look at some of the more specious points:

"(environmentalism) as a worldview that places nature outside of culture.."

On it's face this is simply a foolish thing to say. Environmentalism is thoroughly embedded in culture, and it seeks to make sustainability a cornerstone of civilization. To suggest otherwise is simply to ignore it's message over the last 40 years.

"It (environmentalism) ended up speaking a language unintelligible to the masses of people that gave it its founding strength. Just one result of this is that we've lost the battle against global warming."

Riiight, losing the "battle" against global warming is the fault of environmentalists, not big oil, and big business, or plain old lazy ass incompetence on the part of people of your generation in positions of power to do something about it. And let's forget the oil industry junk science used to refute real climate science.

"That's not an environmental problem. It's a political problem. It's a macro-economic, cultural and class problem."

None of these things are separate, and parsing them out as such is a rhetorical flourish you use to simplistically buttress your empty argument.

Your paragraphs on globalization, however, are simply a confusing mismash of contradictory assertions. Lots of rich and even vastly greater numbers of poor. A good thing. China, a shining example of totalitarian capitalism. A good thing. But what takes the cake, the piddling military purchases of Hugo Chavez as an example of creeping totalitarianism. Chavez was at least democratically elected, unlike the dictator of the empire to our south. The only place that globalization is looked upon with any kind of favour is amongst the privledged in this world. That small slice of the Earth's population living off the fat of globalization is all in favour of it, eh Terry.

Ah yes, and of course Islam. What better example is there in the world today that the backward and ignorant elites of the western world, with their reactionary prejudices, and fear of the other are all too ready and willing to paint an entire civilization as evil. Ignore the evidence and look only to the extremists. Keep the rabble in control by terrorizing them with an abstracted and fictionalized evil.

Fundamentalist Islam is only as much of a threat as we make it. As we bomb select nations back into the stone age, murdering hundreds of thousands of Muslims in the process, we are creating Muslim radicalization. 9/11 enabled the warmongers in the US to characterize fundamentalist Islam as an enemy on par with the Soviet empire. What a joke. Immediately post-9/11 fundamentalist Islam was at it's weakest. The whole world had sympathy for the US. But the actions of that criminal gang in the White House has since completely reversed that sympathy. An amazing accomplishment of staggering incompetence. All of course led by people who share your views Terry. Mass murder as a solution to the world's problems. Sounds like terrorism to me.

Distractions of "support our troops" and bitching about the abuses of dictatorial Middle Eastern regimes that the west is still supporting to maintain the flow of cheap oil is also simply laughable.

If all you're going to do is trot out the exhausted reactionary cliches of privledged senior citizens and the elite's paid spin doctors, then you're certainly not adding anything new, original, or even intelligently argued. You're just blowing more smoke in the faces of those trying to find a way to put out the fires.

Well Terry I don't know who is more qualified to dissect our presence in Afghanistan - you from your Mayne Island home or me with 5 years of cheap Asian travel as the dirty hitchhiking backpacker I was 30 years ago...oh yeah a couple of times in Afghanistan too. I'm serious! Anyway all of the sudden we've got "experts" spouting anything that comes to mind about a country many didn't have a clue about 5 years ago. Shouldn't we call that Hubris? Do you really think Afghanistan is working towards democracy or is it "the best democracy money can buy"? I'll say the same thing now as I did in 2001 and when the Soviet army were "invited" into that country. "They're crazy! Didn't Vietnam teach anybody anything?". At least a top British soldier has the brains to see the long term outcome of fighting "the enemy" http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060914&articleId=3229

If the left ever gets into power in this country, there will be plenty of time for criticism of what it’s actually done. Until then, this is utter nonsense.

Absolutely right James Burns. If the right wing globalizers haven't managed to create a 'class of civilizations' and a ‘battle of fundamentalist ideologies’ it certainly isn't because they haven't been trying.

Now Beers appears to have hired Glavin to do the same nonsensical thing here that nightbloom's been doing very methodically, and equally inanely, for the past dozen months or so. And I thought his assistant was Shannon Rupp!

We needed more of this nonsense like a hole in the head.

Is the left too smug?

Judging from the article and the accompanying picture, I would suggest that perhaps Mr. Glavin is the smug one here. Perhaps he should talk to Barbara's wayward son the wingnut Frum about speech writing for the Bush/Cheney/Harper administration. You don't have to make sense, just hit the buttons and shift the focus and ignore any unpleasant realities.

My apologies for doubting you on the Sheldrake thread, James Burns.

Damn, that was well said!

Just one addition, if I might. In my opinion Glavin doesn't really believe any of the nonsense he wrote.

There are writers who do this kind of thing, just to get attention.

It's just too weird to comprise anybody's sincerely-held perspective.

For instance, lefties apparently hate western democracy and love totalitarianism, he says.

Who actually believes THAT?

And what's with all the Islam-baiting?

And lefties abandoned the people of Iraq, Glavin opines.

By not supporting shock and awe, I suppose.

Well said Rhea! I've been trying to make that point ever since I first started participating on these threads. There's no middle ground anymore - we're trapped between the insane orthodoxies on either side of the spectrum.

errata: my post above meant to say 'clash of civilizations' not 'class'
mea culpa

Well put Truman.

Hehe - good on you Grumpy - I've gotta write that down somewhere.

Except, nightbloom, as you and your confreres constantly ignore, since 1989 there has been no countervailing 'power' on the left.

The globalizing, lying, obfuscating right has had its way with the world: Hugo Chavez, Cindy Sheehan, Fidel Castro and Noam Chomsky notwithstanding - and look what they've done with it.

Credit where credit's due after all.

Oh joy! It's not enough that everyone has to suffer Glavin's hit pieces on the left in The Straight, now we get him polluting the information highway with his counter-constructive nonsense.

Of course there's nothing wrong with dissent and criticism, and the left (especially the NDP) deserves much, but when you have a prominent writer accusing anti-war protesters of stalking and supporting terrorists, I say he's crossing a line and doing the Right a far bigger favour than anything you'll read in The Post, or by simply ignoring them, which most people do anyway. I can think of few things easier than to hurl insults at a tiny group of impoverished students and union members, objected to people dying on both sides of the Atlantic.

In a time where human rights are dangling by a thread, subordinate to corporate rule, do we really need more space for yahoos like Glavin muddying the waters and spreading lies about people as vulnerable as the disorganized left? This guy actually supports the war in Afghanistan! Come on!

Let's see the CIA paycheque, Glavin, you stooge.

Oh, Alcibiades, lighten up...call me perverse but there's something about your backhanded salvoes that are downright ticklish.

p.s. thanx for the Foreign Affairs article link on that other thread. It was fascinating to read.

Alci, did you hit the 9 when you meant to hit the 0? I would definitely go back to Ronnie "the hostage rescuer" Raygun who took the oath (lied with his hand on the bible) in January of 1980. Or maybe this regression began when the Raygun Guy moved into the governor's mansion in Sacramento.

If you can't take the heat you ought to stop stirring the embers my friend. I thought it was an interesting article too.

You and Shannon Rupp were gadfly content enough for this place. We didn't need Glavin's hired gun to make an already stale point again and again and again.

I'd be interested in your response to the feature on special deals for religion(s) in the Weekend New York Times btw.

Good point rkewen but I did mean 1989. The fall of the Soviet Union and the loss of the countervailing power of its own hegemony as a balance to the full-blown hubris of the neocon West - of which ronnie was only a pale precursor - was what I was thinking of.

Even the Clinton interregnum, of which the GOP congress was more typical than anything Clinton actually achieved, was little more than a pause in the rhetoric.

Gotcha Alci, I forgot about the "wall" and all. Besides, according to Darth Cheney, Russia expert Mistress Condi, Rummy, et. al. the Soviet Union was just trying to fool everybody. They weren't willing to admit the war was over until they brainstormed a new "terra guy" enemy.

As far as:

.
Clinton has a great deal of personal charm and could give the Chimp 49% of his brain and still be smarter than the preznit. However he was effectively crippled by Newt's revolution and as far as I'm concerned is basically Republican-lite.

I'd take Repug lite any day over what they have now - which is fascism backed up by high technology. I'm sure Stalin and Hitler are watching the cabal in DC jealously while they sweat profusely in their permanent lower suite. Hopefully we can get out from under the current thugs before they subject the world to as much death and suffering as WWII visited upon so much of the planet.

Looks promising. But I often wished we could get rid of these "left" and "right" terms. Feels to me like the left justify itself with the right and vice-versa. Not the way to move forward IMO. Like Bush and Bin Ladden to justify each other. Just smokescreens really. Divide them in order to rule... Should we not learn someday?

That was my small bit of dissent. Good luck to this new series.

PS Is Glavin part of this Left/Right conspiracy too along with the Tyee???
;-)

Grumpy - I would reverse the two. I don't believe the Conservative Party is made up of extremists though. Harper is relatively moderate as a conservative.

Yes, the extremists feed off each other, and give each other a reason for being. It's the apathetic majority in the middle (and we are dreadfully apathetic) that pays the price.

Scary stuff!

Welcome Mr. Glavin, it's nice to see The Tyee branching out.
Conservative thought is more creative than liberal. This may explain why in the talk radio world, that Air America is toast while Limbaugh and Hannity rule the airwaves.
It's always fresh and creative to listen to these guys.

I am very pleased to see my good friend Terry Glavin join the Tyee on a regular basis and try to stir things up - which he has already succeeded at.

I agree with a lot of Terry's criticisms but cannot agree that Canada should continue its military counter-insurgency role in Afghanistan.

Canada and other countries have provided 5 years of military and development assistance to Afghanistan since overthrowing the disgusting Taliban government.

The sad result? Afghanistan is more violent, more out of control and more dangerous to our brave Canadian troops than ever before.

Canadians have to ask the kind of hard questions Terry likes to ask of the left - why does a government that has had huge assistance, that replaced the hated Taliban, that is allegedly making progressive change have so little public support?

Why is a large part of Afghanistan under the control of the Taliban if the people support the government?

Why is the Afghan army unable to do its job?

Why has opium poppy production skyrocketed to record levels, to the point that Afghanistan is selling 92% of the world market for heroin?

Once upon a time Winston Churchill told the world "Give us the tools and we'll do the job" in defeating Hitler and fascism.

Why can't Afghanistan, after 5 years of massive aid and military support, "do the job?"

Why should Canadian troops give their lives to do a job that Afghans should be doing right now?

Canada should withdraw its troops in a timely and coordinated fashion and continue to offer development aid.

It is overwhelmingly clear that our military role is a costly failure.

It is up to the Afghan people to decide their destiny and try as we might, we cannot do it for them.

I look forward to more from Terry on this and other important issues.

Regards - Bill Tieleman

PS for more on my view on Afghanistan, see:

http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/Columnists/NewsViewsAttitude/2006/09/12/1828963-sun.html

Good point gaulois. However, in the present circumstances I can't avoid casting my mind back to those early days after 9/11 when anyone - Bill Maher, Susan Sarandon or Deborah Sontag - among others – who said or wrote anything which disagreed with the orthodoxy being pumped out by the right wing was demonized by the power elites and the mainstream media. Remember?

Whenever anyone questioned what had happened, what and who had caused it and how it fit into the current world situation (globalization, global warming, lack of labour rights and decent practices and the over use of oil and other resources by the west – not to avoid mentioning the kind of partners the US – and Canada - chose to do business with both internationally and domestically) they were immediately accused of being moral relativists. Remember?

I find it more than a little funny that today, as virtually everything that the neocon right has said and done since has been proved to be a lie, an obfuscation, an exaggeration and a complete distortion of reality that people like Glavin and Beers are still carping about the 'failures' of the LEFT. Remember?

Moral relativism my ass. There is no morality on the neocon right - only greed, selfishness, over consumption and power. They will lie, cheat and dissemble until every last one of them has been swept from power and facile apologists like Glavin can find no self-respecting journal that will publish their utter nonsense.

It's time for a little truth about who is actually selling the big lie.

Don’t forget the reality of what’s actually happened during the last 5 years. Things are not, and were not, what our ‘leaders’ and our journalists told us. Don’t be fooled by attempts to shift the blame now.

The supply and demand for these actions will continue as long as there is a gas guzzler in the drive way, an electric can opener on the Italian granite counter top next to the micro wave, blender and food processor all idle for 99% of there short life span. As long as the west continues it's disproportionate theft of natural resources expect more of the same. Go ahead use more big words to distract everyone from reducing their consumption... Bunch of carbon addicts, can't see reality anymore....

Should'a let it be - I thought you were just being witty. Too generous.

I should'a known yoo ain't so smart since yoo poo-poo'd battlestar galactica! Yoo ain't never make it into Menso...!

;-)

Nay, Alcibiades. You have that backwards, methinks. You are the gadfly in the larger scheme of things. Nightbloom writes policy; Alcibiades reads about it.

But we're all equal here, so why quibble about such things. Fora like these are about the free trade of ideas. You've only read Glavin's maiden contribution here, so why not reserve judgment until you have a better idea of what's to come.

sex Ron Erwin

Conservatives certainly are creative liars!

From nuclear nightmares to weapons of mass destruction wet dreams to vast leftist conspiracies to control the media the right wing has no equal in its powers of creative fiction: And no bigger cheerleader than you Ron.

Well done. Nice to see you place yourself in such august company. With Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh you should also include your favourite gals (?) Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter don't you think? If the best you have available to defend the total moral and factual bankruptcy of the neocon right are those four and Bill O'Reilly the right really is in trouble. Bring on Nov 7.

Glavin is nothing more than a flash in the pan.

should be sez, sorry Ron!

Is that really you, Tieleman, claiming to agree with much of Glavin's criticisms?

Which ones do you agree with?

Policy, nightbloom?

Like what? Just when is your pal Andrew Leslie going to arrive and clean up the mess that Hillier's left in the stables of late?

I don't think so. You're nothing but a hired gun and one that almost never shoots straight...pretty much the equal of Shannon Rupp's ad hominem example.

Too bad, you actually had potential.

At this stage I'll chuckle mildly as you and Ron Erwin walk off, hand in hand, into the sunset together. I'm glad you and he and pee wee have found each other.

One thing is already certain:
Terry Glavin's columns will not shed a lot of light , but will generate a lot of heat.

There is nothing wrong with criticizing the left - I have spent most of my life doing so. But it has to be genuine criticism, challenging the left to become more imaginative, challenging it to shed any fabian and leninist assumptions, challenging it to become truly radical in the sense of "getting to the root of." Trying to push the left ever further to the right, ever further to compromise with this system, ever closer to a neocon-lite mirror image is not real criticism but an attempt to destroy what remains of an opposition. The left is ultimately about ethics and these ethics must not be cast aside, which is what Glavin is really suggesting behind all his rhetoric and unsupported, Limbaughesque accusations. The left must stand rock solid in opposition to war, empire and the corporate state's pseudo-globalization. It must stand rock solid for democracy and decentralization, for self-management and a cooperative economy, for local ownership-control of resources, for fair trade and voluntary associations at the global level. The left must support people in struggle everywhere against the corporate state, as for example groups like the Zapatistas and the present Oaxacan parallel government. Since Glavin does not write along these lines, I can only conclude that he is not really interested in building the left, but destroying it.

This is a beautifully written piece, Terry, full of passion and angst, and the syntax really rocks. I think I agree with all of it. But it's pretty depressing. I have a lot of trouble even thinking about this stuff anymore -- recycling my wet garbage and teaching my children to be critical thinkers seems a pretty lame response.

I agree they are creative. Limbaugh realised relatively early that it has to be simple and it has to "them" who are screwing the good hardworking god fearing radio listening American public. Somebody on the right read their Ellul:

Limbaugh et al aid the Republicans in getting out the far right vote, they don't try to change minds but they try to excite the voters. The Democrat equivalent is a huge failure because they insist on trying to change minds. I have listened to a shameful amount of US talk radio, a residual trace of some time in the US. I can't recall hearing a right wing radio host talk as though his/her audience included anything except true believers, aka "dittoheads." In the case of the US they have managed to convince a huge swath of people that their interests are with the corporations that support the Republicans and represent the "traditional" conception of America, rather than with whatever interests they want to claim the Democrats represent. The interests aren't really that different, but 40+ years of serious thought and analysis by people friendly to the Republicans have managed to draw some very strong lines that they choose depending upon the current of the day.

The Republicans are facing a serious problem with the upcoming elections, barring an October/November surprise. They have lost the morals issues with Foley and others; they have blown security and foreign policy; they are hammering judicial independence in some states but that doesn't seem to have legs; and the Abramoff scandal keeps getting bigger. Attacking Iran would be too much, and they probably know that, but getting the Iranians to fire on US ships in the Persian Gulf could invite a big enough retaliation to get some flags waving.

I thought Dissent meant against the prevailing orthodoxy? Then again this is the first time I think I've ever read anything by this author, his name doesn't ring a bell for me.

That the Left is responsible for Islamo-facsism, global warming, a depleted environment and of course poverty is something I can read in Can-West or on the Bill Good show but its good to read it everywhere. Its so damn obvious. Like my old friend Ron you usually have to tune in to Rush or Hannity for this kind of brilliant analysis ignored by Socialist Weekly and the rest of the left-wing media like that community paper in Argentina.

That the leader of Venezuela is the biggest threat to world peace because he bought some planes and rifles is pretty much the orthodoxy spouted by Canada's newspapers and talk radio. Damn straight. Just a few thousand more purchases like that one and Chavez will be blowing the hell out of us peace loving folk in North America. We have to call a spade a spade, its not how many planes you have that makes you a threat, its how many you don't have. Thank you Mr Glavin for pointing out this fact!

Now "Dissent" has come to mean agreement with the establishment. Cool. About time people started falling in line.

Well, I gotta get in my V8 SUV, drive over to YVR to pick up my new live-in Bolivian "maid" and then this afternoon head out on the water and shoot some salmon-eating seals and maybe 2 or 3 dolphins.

All part of my "dissent" against the ignored wisdom of the Left. Go Tyee! Feisty shouldn't mean you can't agree with everyone else!

Geez,you actually think you can tell who the left really is and PIGEONHOLE them and then question if the left is too smug...

WOW,YOU MUST BE A REAL GENIUS !

That is like saying all religious people are RIGHT WINGERS.

Or every one who makes a good wage is a workaholic.

Yes...I know neither statement makes sense.That was what i wanted to point out.Short and succint,not drawn out and REX MURPHYED,like Glavin's article.

More BS,to keep the pages full.

You can meet more articulate/intelligent people on the corner of Main & Hastings.The only real problem there is the lack of interest in the truth,especially on sites like this.

FREE SPEECH...WHAT A CONCEPT !

Now breathe, everyone.

Glavin's opening salvo is simply provocative marketing for his column. He's turning your collective crank in a way that guarantees his column will receive the most hits on The Tyee site henceforward...if the pace with which this thread has moved along is any indication.

I still say: wait and read. Reserve judgment. And don't be afraid of constructive criticism of a movement you happen to personally identify with. The are no untouchables here. All idols are liable to be smashed.

Finally an article that doesn't simply cater to radical leftist prejudice!

I was a good NDP-supporting liberal leftie six years ago, but feel alienated from the scene due to its nasty, doctrinaire and rather ineffective approach.

I think it is important to underscore that holding a moderate political position doesn't mean that you care about the position less than those who are more extreme and insulate themselves from criticism. A centrist position leaves one able to be more open to information that doesn't easily slot into one's world-view -- our maps are not the territory!

It is this kind of unwillingness to understand the opinions of others that makes genuine civic debate so difficult.

What's wrong with stating that you disagree with conservative moral positions? Why the need to say that they are amoral? This is the same prejudicial nonsense spouted by the religious right -- i.e. those without their flavour of religious faith are not immoral, but amoral.

But I haven't finished making it yet nightbloom.

In fact I don't think I can afford the whole body anyway, maybe just a giant head sitting near Tofino staring out to sea?

And I'll name him Che and string beads around his neck and pray toward him every solstice.

Then next column can be Mr Glavin pointing out that my giant head-god Che has never solved anything and in fact may have been responsible for strip-mining and Mormons?

Hey don't get me wrong, I think its great there's a place with jobs for people to attack non-existent idols. I've always called it the National Post up to now but when supply outstrips demand you have to be creative. And people who like to embrace orthodoxy and call it dissent are in my mind very creative.

Now admit it nightbloom, what you're really happy about is that the Tyee are gonna start a column on robot philosophers and how it relates to playboy bunnies and humanity's lost tribe, right? Now THAT would generate hits!!! ('specially if there were pics) :-)

Steve P

Yep, because god knows the Province and the Sun and CKNW churn out nothing but NDP-fluff pieces.

Finally there's a webzine willing to tell it like it is, be hip and attack the powers that be that reside to the left of the NDP and who dominate the political landscape.

Terry Glavin is the modern-day equivalent of a Swift or a Wilde. His courage in identifying the elephant in the room that is the Left's attack on the environment is so refreshing. If it wasn't for the Left there would be more cod, more fresh water, more clean air and it took a man like Glavin to stand up and name names.

I feel a patriotic tear coming on.

Reserve Judgment. For what?

This column and this writer is a prescription for which there was no illness. Progressive politics attracts more than enough criticism, most of it of the same facile, know-nothing variety Glavin is selling in the mainstream media now. As Frank satirically demonstrates, we need a dose of it here on Tyee - already liberally seeded by the avatars of the know nothing care less crew - for what?

As I pointed out above, you've been doing the job better nightbloom - and a damn sight cheaper too - for months.

This is an obvious, in my view, feint to the Right in search of contributors of a financial, not a critical nature.

And it's really too bad it is happening here too.

When I see constructive criticism, as I have occasionally from the likes of you nightbloom, I'm not adverse to any lessons it may contain. The fact it doesn't happen often notwithstanding.

With this start and Glavin's reputation, I won't be holding my breath. As for ‘smashing idols’, your record of accepting critical comments about the record of the Roman Church ain’t exactly sterling.

I have a Glavinesque theory (if its not a word it should be by God!). Last night's loss to the Oilers should be attributed to the lack of production from the Canuck left-wingers. Alain won't come out and say it because he's locked in his politically correct cocoon but every real fan knows that if we dumped our left-wingers and instead played with two right-wingers we could have beaten the Oil.

After agreeing that Canada was right not to join in the invasion of Iraq, Glavin manages to blame the left, anyway:

"But no honest appraisal of everything that has gone wrong in Iraq will absolve the Anti-American anti-war left for its utter abandonment of the Iraqi people following the invasion."

What exactly does this mean?

Latest figures are that the invasion and occupation of Iraq has resulted in the deaths of up to 655,000 people who would otherwise be alive. Even if this number's too extreme by 50% imagine the suffering. And imagine the numbers of injured, displaced and homeless.

So exactly how has the anti-war left abandoned the Iraqi people following the invasion?

Could it be because we imagined that Clinton's policy of the containment of Saddam was better than all of this wanton murder and the jihadization of Iraq and Afghanistan?

I'd really appreciate an explanation of exactly how the anti-war movement has "utterly abandoned the Iraqi people" after the invasion, Glavin.

Baloney Steve P.
Who made all those statements about moral relativism?

It sure as hell wasn't the LEFT.

It was the lying cheating profit-taking right wing. And they're still doing it. George Bush and his band of merry men and women can't open their mouths without lying. Ever. I don't think they planned 9/11 but I'm convinced that everything they've done since then has created a situation that's every bit as bad as if they had.

At this stage of the game to take a holier-than thou attitude about a left that had absolutely nothing to do with the mess that's been created since 9/11 is worse than nonsense - it is a symptom not of moral relativism but of moral bankruptcy and you and every other apologist for the right ought to know it.

Yesterday there was someone posting on another thread on this site who said it was perfectly fine to do anything the military wanted to do to the Taliban because they were “sub-human”. Sadly, an awful lot of Canadians happy to wear red flags and sing the praises of the Canadian forces seem to think the same thing.

Don’t you remember how we got to this pass? It’s time to wake up.

I've noticed an unwarranted proprietary attitude among a core-group of liberal-Left and hard-Left posters here for a while now. Like squatters on someone else's land who grow resentful when they're asked to make room for invited guests, or when are asked occasionally to pick up after themselves. Perhaps the oversensitivity here is just a reflexive response to this perceived incursion on their unjustified sense of entitlement. Ideological territoriality and partisan tribalism within the 'new media' sphere is a peculiarly atavistic response to the freedom created by the internet and its spinoffs like the blogosphere. There's been a core-group of posters on this site who have grown a little too comfortable here for a little too long. They're happy that the Tyee seeks to find alternate viewpoints...so long as it's not alternate to their own. Time to let some air into the echochamber this core-group has constructed for itself.

Nightbloom writes:

"Glavin's opening salvo is simply provocative marketing for his column."

So nightbloom, does this mean that you'd actually have RESPECT for a writer who'd do such a thing?

We all know this, but I thought that's why we're sick of him already.

Do we really need more fake journalism?

Well said Grumpy. The same thing, really.

I was too, actually. Mao-tse Glenn and his policies, along with Bob Rae, cured me for good.

In their world view there is, just like in your world view you are always correct about everything.

Have a look at a few of Harper's NSC speeches and you will see his true colours. The only reason he is relatively "moderate" at the moment is his weak minority government. Give him real power and he will use it in his right wing nut job manner that he used in his previous career as head of the NSC.

Let the swearing an name calling begin!

I'm really starting to think the Cylons got to you nightbloom. I'll leave the porch light on the starflyer thingy for ya buddy.

LOL - that's cute, Frank.

My all time favorite Author next to the great William Shakespear is the FANTASTIC...JONATHAN SWIFT .

This dude doesnt even come close.

Glavin ,rides the same train as REX THE MURPHY.Overburdened vocabulary and simple thought wrapped in ideological thesis never proved but always DEBATED.

Next book should be the BULLSHIT CHRONICLES...could possibly get CAROLE TAYLOR to edit it with her great knowledge of EVERYTHING.

And as a CENTRIST,I find people here really should read closer,because this venue is open to all.

and finding the EMPEROR WEARS NO CLOTHES is something any one can call out.

I say, Garth (G West), isn't that a wee bit over the top old man. Watch the old pressure laddie. What? Actually, this tirade reminded me of an oratory from a small religious chapel by a preacher with a long coat, his steel tipped shoes striking loudly on the wooden floor. Talk about, "in-coming!", a veritable barrage hath let forth. Seems that rather than coaxing the debates away from fringes and towards a more inclusive centre this thread is positively centrifugal for the gauchists. They're going spare.

It sure as hell wasn't the LEFT.

Maybe you are correct -- the statement was made on this post by G West =^)

My point is that it is deliberate non-understanding of another position to say that it is amoral, rather than immoral. Immorality is a moral position you disagree with, amorality is no morality at all. It is stupid when far-lefties and far-righties do it.

Brilliant and apt caricature, realisticman. Fundamentalisms are legion today, and they abound on the Left no less than on the Right.

Great paragraph.

Probably the best article ever published by the tyee.

The responses have been rather typical adding further validity to his arguments.

I've noticed...

Well said.

While the left shouldn't be held responsible for all things evil, I wish there would be some acknowledgement that we are, in fact, in this mess together and that we all share a portion of the responsibility for the current political impasse -- that is, extreme groups who do not talk to each other. I think Glavin was quite correct to point out what responsibility the left does share for our current mess.

Parliamentary democracy requires good, realistic opposition to be effective. Had opposition to the powers-that-be been more effective and less utopian and, frankly, less hateful, over the last decade, we would be in a different position today.

Remember when CKNW entertained the idea of putting Glen Clark on the radio? The overreaction made it into every nook and cranny of the province. People called, wrote and protested that "THEIR" radio station would forevermore be banned from their dial. (I realize that based on their online polls something like 90% of the CKNW audience spans the political spectrum from "conservative on many issues" to full blown "Clinton is a murderer" nutjobs).

Somehow I don't think the Right should be giving lessons to the Left on how to deal with criticism from media :-)

Steve P,

Could you be a wee bit more forthcoming? Glavin was a little reticient in pointing out exactly how the Left is responsible for poverty and environmental degradation. I don't question the fact he blamed us, I just had trouble reading between the lines as to why that was the case.

I've noticed...

Hmmm, interesting

Cut! Lunch everyone....

Perfect, Frank. Well done.

Because growing opium no longer gets you a bullet to the back of your head.

Execution without trial is a fairly big deterrent for most farmers.

Is Bill suggesting that we use Taliban justice techniques to help fight the opium trade in Afghanistan?

So poverty and environmental problems are caused by ineffective opposition? Wow, that clears a lot up for me.

So actually Stalin's crimes are actually the fault of the western powers that intervened in the Russian Civil War because their opposition to change was ineffective and hateful to the point that they actually created Stalin and made him kill people. Cool. Usually one has to stay up until 3am to hear that kind of thing.

15 minutes ago JIm said

Thirteen minutes later he disagreed with the greatest article ever written.

Now you either didn't read the entire article before you posted the first time or it only took you 13 minutes to decide it wasn't the greatest article ever written on the Tyee. Or perhaps "they" got to you in the meantime, eh?

I agree with Truman, damn fine retort above, James Burns. Seems Glavin's assumptions are based on sorting everything into convenient little thought-boxes made of ticky-tacky ...trying to sell you the idea that something new and thought-provoking is being said here when it the typical MSM-lite stuff...as the song goes... "little boxes made of ticky tacky....and they all look just the same."

... yeah, just what the critical times in which we live call out for - more superficial analysis....and more "nouveau dissent".

Great paragraph.

Probably the best article ever published by the tyee.

The responses have been rather typical adding further validity to his arguments.

Just when I thought JIm's body had gone to join his brain wherever it has been he appears to post the above.

Well I'm speechless and think the above speaks for itself.

I've just been watching some of the Defense Committee of Parliament discussing the Afghan mission and I feel better about everything now because I watched and heard General "Kick Afghani Butt" Hillier say there were only about a thousand Taliban - so I figure the Canadians will be able to wipe them out in no time and come home.

By the way the fact that Defense Minister O'Conner who I thought was just a recycled defense industry lobbyist used to be a general, proves to me how far the nasty Liberals allowed the Canadian Military to degenerate.

I'm trying FDL style nested comments here, don't know how it will work until I see it posted. At the Lake they do it for you, great blogging software they use. A couple great gals run the place too!

Steve P
Are you being deliberately obtuse or is there some other excuse for what you've posted above? Moral relativism is the charge which had been leveled at the left by Bush and his New America Century (or whatever other lame name they call themselves) colleagues whenever anyone questioned their version of orthodoxy. Surely you can't have forgotten unless you're less than 12 years old.

As for how badly the current batch of neocon wingnuts have botched things, I suggest you read a few 'conservative' publications to find out just how comprehensive the mess this bunch of incompetents have created is. America is now so in hock to China that the only way it can find to deal with another whackjob wingnut in North Korea is to go cap in hand to them to assist them in solving another problem that is, largely, their own (the US’s) creation.

Irony is apparently lost on you.

Stevie P says

Agee with first half of this statement stevie boy - but there's no damn way you can hang the second half on the left.

This is a 'made by wingnuts' problem and wingnuts are only going to make it worse.

Calling down the people who've consistently pointed out the characteristics and depth of the compromises with the truth that have been made by the administrations in Canada, Great Britain and the United States is not only dishonest, it's dangerous.

Time to get a real grip on yourself.

Thank you Terry and Tyee:
Speaking as one who has been fighting for environmental causes for many years, the constant rhetoric from the far left was as draining as the battle against the government and industry. It was often embarrassing to be associated with.

The oft-repeated mantra that the far left has never held power because of a giant conspiracy against it is so much easier to believe than the truth. Their ideas are repugnant to most people, and being a moderate does not mean you are ignorant, uncaring, or in need of reeducation.

I look forward to further columns.

Not sure what you're trying to say here Frank. If you were refering to the comment by nightbloom, I can't see how you can consider the clearly incontrivertible observation to be a lesson. Perhaps you're talking about something else.

Actually its the Greens that have wrecked the environment, not the Left. Their Glavinesque unwillingness to agree to the least itty-bitty bit of truthiness pretty much forced the Right to run roughshod over everything.

Clearly if we want a better environment we have to start shooting Green party members.

Actually the truth is that the Left has never held power period so don't blame us for your inability to save the environment. In fact, in a Glavinesque way, that makes you the problem cabsavvy.

I would like to put forward the idea that the Tyee is responsible for bad journalism.

Terry Glavin has shown me the way. Bad journalism exists at Can-West and through the Black chain and in a multitude of other places because the Tyee does not have a bigger audience. If it had, bad journalism could have been prevented and Canada would be a happier, more prosperous place.

I expect David Beers to report to Self-Criticism 115 tomorrow morning so as to better understand why Fazil Mihlar is his fault.

Terry G. said:

anarcho said:

Hi Terry,

Not only does the "Left" care about humanity, but we also care about ALL life. It is in the ability to express love and compassion towards, not only our own, but as well other species which exist. This imo, may even define, but is a good measure of what it is to be fully human.

As anarcho said, the left is all about ethics.

Peace,

-Bear

Go too far realisticman?

I don't think so - the people who are actually over the top are the folks who've been swallowing the Bush/Blair/pee wee lies since 9/11.

What has been obvious to people of a critical mindset for years is now gradually dawning on the rest of the world - including a significant majority of the population of the United States. Despite the generally co-opted nature of the mainstream media you can't have missed it. Surely.

I can understand why conservatives would want to blame someone other than themselves for the mess they've managed to create for the rest of us - but I'd much sooner see them turn on themselves than get away with trying to slough this disaster off on the left.

That's why Beers' facile attempt to promote 'dissent' is so phony. Not that it won’t be dealt with – despite nightbloom’s usual dogma about the left.

As to the volume of the response: that's what's actually known as free speech - remember?

The last time you and I tangled you ended up making snide and racist comments about First Nations people - remember? I'd be a little careful about suggesting that calling obvious liars on their actual behavior is inappropriate. Like working man, I think your bona fides as an honest critic are a little threadbare and suspect.

As to actual evidence of how badly pear-shaped the current US administration has left things in the United States, you might just want to look at this website, it's quite interesting:

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/charts_S/s3.cfm

And that's from the Heritage Foundation, another notable 'left-wing' souce.

Or maybe you'd prefer this by Irwin Stelzer in the Weekly Standard - another blatantly left-wing publication:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/829wydga.asp

But no, it's all the left's fault, isn't it?

So Glavin's the new face of dissent, eh.

I have no idea what this is all about.

Oh well, back to CanWest for me. At least there's some kind of logic in Coyne's writing.

I think everybody posting here today needs to take a time out and spend some dictionary time. Too many words are being used with no apparent meaning, like conservative, amoral, and syntax, to mention just three. Once words lose their meaning discourse becomes impossible and the only form of discussion becomes flying bits of metal.

cabsavy wrote:"The oft-repeated mantra that the far left has never held power because of a giant conspiracy against it is so much easier to believe than the truth. "

What a load of rubbish that is. This is known as a straw man argument. The real reason why we have not had a social revolution is exceedingly complex, far to complex to go into here. The one explanation that no historian or revolutionary would propose is that it was the result of some conspiracy. If you actually did your homework instead of spouting this sort of nonsense you would realize that this very question of failed revolution occupied some of the greatest thinkers on the left for an entire generation. Ever hear of Gramsci, Reich, Adorno, Horkheimer, Bookchin - for a start - not to mention the 1960's New Left? Hit the books and quit babbling nonsense!

Terry Glavin has shown me the way. Bad journalism exists at Can-West and through the Black chain and in a multitude of other places because the Tyee does not have a bigger audience. If it had, bad journalism could have been prevented and Canada would be a happier, more prosperous place.

I expect David Beers to report to Self-Criticism 115 tomorrow morning so as to better understand why Fazil Mihlar is his fault.

A home run, Frank. The "logic" truly Glavin-inspired. ;-)

Truman said:

Hi Truman,

How are things friend?

Yeah,seems to be the case bro. Maybe we can finally get him to answer the question we asked him months ago, on the whale\seal hunt eh?

Peace,

-Bear

Agee with first half of this statement stevie boy - but there's no damn way you can hang the second half on the left.

This is a 'made by wingnuts' problem and wingnuts are only going to make it worse.

I'm not hanging it all on the left, I'm asking the left to get a grip and bear their portion of responsibility. The left is partly responsible too for not providing a realistic alternative and being content to only win rhetorical, moral victories, rather than engage the imperfect world we have and win some victories on the ground.

The right thinks the problems are created by leftie wingnuts, the left thinks the problems have been created by rightie wingnuts. So I agree with your "made by wingnuts" statement, but perhaps not in the way you intended. It is the height of fallacy to assert that the left is wingnut and bs-free.

BS stinks, no matter which side of the fence spews it. I wish this would be better recognized on the left and right. Like it or not, the left has its share of bs that undermines their own support.

Hello Mr. P,

Are you advocating arming ourselves?

Who is Fazil Mihlar , I must have missed something somewhere.

Didn't take long for the reeducation theme to pop up once again.

Frank.
I'm certainly not blaming the left. Blame must lay with the polluters and regulators, left or right being irrelevant. What I am saying is the far left has certainly not been any help.

No GWest it was you who said you like to drive through Native Reserves to see the poverty and I said I was suprised that you like to do such cruising for enlightenment. It was also you that recently made snide comments about a possible French woman in my past, assuming that I had a grudge, unaware that my family is mostly Francophone. Perhaps you came from a Secondary Modern and have chip and that's why you threw in the, again incorrectm Public School guess. I permitted your ignorance and allowed you the rudeness since heated debates can elicit unintended slights. And, I haven't missed the internationally expressed opinions regarding the policies of the present administration in the White House. Never have I said that I support them either. What I do support though is diverse discourse and I therefore disagree with you when you say that you hope for the day when no self-respecting journal will print what Glavin writes.

Where's the beef?
Although I found the headline and topic quite intrigueing what follows is almost totally and painfully nonsensical... talk about a "wet noodle"...oh well I look forward to something with some real legs next time from Mr Glavine .

Peace

Hello Bear. Yeah, so Mr. Glavin, remember Bear and I trying to get you to explain why you respected the seal hunters so much and appreciated the Macah's blowing that whale out of the water with their big new gun.

Can you fill us in on your perspective on that now, seeing as how you promised you'd explain yourself if Bear promised to remain civil?

Or should we just assume that you blame the left for destroying the Macah's manhood so they were forced to reclaim it by blowing up a gray whale.

For armed insurrection, no. But as a country, I do. I generally agree with Glavin's statement:

I think war is regrettable and we should look to alternatives, but we should also understand that warfare has been part of the human condition for millennia and is unlikely to simply cease because we have decided that we do not want to fight. I don't have issue with left-leaning realists who recognize this, but I do differ from utopians who think that violence will stop if we choose not to participate.

I am also amazed when I hear some-but-not-all on the left are so eager to critique our own culture that they would defend theocratic fascism. We are far from perfect, to be sure, and there is a vital role for critique in our culture in order to improve our policy. But let's not throw out the liberal freedoms with the bathwater =^)

to Mr. Beers and whatever passes for a tech crew:

I'm tired of relogging in everytime I look out the window. This is getting ridiculous. If you were trying to get me to leave, it worked.

You could tell your tech guys to look into some issues such as session id and non-intrusive uses of cookies. This is really starting to suck, especially coming from a site that won't even answer an email!

Steve P. "no morality on the Neo Con Right" is an acurate description because they are Straussians. Harper is a Straussian. They advocate lying to us because they are smart and we are stupid. It calls itself a Philisophy yet!
http://www.alternet.org/story/15935/
Leo Strauss' Philosophy of Deception

Re: accusations of moral relativism

It is true that in the MSM it is often the religious right who characterizes the liberal-left as indulging in moral relativism. But in the context of this post, another writer suggested that it was the right that completely without morality. My point is that depicting those who disagree as being completely without morality is dehumanizing and doesn't seek to understand why they see things that way. It leaves both camps unable to communicate with the other: although fundamental disagreements occur in politics and philosophy, I think trying to understand the other side's position shrinks the opportunities for these Big Disagreements to occur.

(For those who care, I'm indirectly citing post-Marxist communications theorist Jurgen Habermas, who argues that clear communication goes a long way to create legitimacy in democratic processes)

the left isn't entirely to blame, try hanging a little on the media who have nothing but contempt for the left.

I feel the same way about them btw, media whores, on the day before the last federal election the trash paper known as the edmonton sun had a picture of Layton all puckered up giving his wife a kiss on the cheek.

It was disgusting and I have no doubt cost Layton a lot of votes as was intended by the media sluts.

Sorry realisticman, that's just not the case. Never said a word about you and French men or women - Certainly did criticize the way you and others implied that the French were racists though…in conjunction with a piece about the Muslim riots outside Paris as I recall.

As to whether or not your remark about 'enlightenment' and the dire conditions around the homes of our First Nations brothers and sisters reflects badly on you or me - well, I don't have any doubt about that either.

In addition, the start of our exchange, if I remember correctly, pertained to your comments about the tax system.

As for rudeness and ignorance, you take the cake - whether you're from a public school or not is entirely immaterial…the upper-class tone of your discourse certainly indicated something. Not being from the old country, I’m tone deaf to such class distinctions. Suffice to say I don’t think you’re an Arthur Scargill fan.

I'd suggest your remarks have as much credibility as another remark you made earlier about not being an apparent conservative when you dine with friends.

Glavin's first column is nonsense, full of misstatements and half-truths. If you don't see that, it's pretty obvious what your usual reading material comprises. I'm sure he could find a place in the Province any time. I’ve heard from another, whose opinion I respect, that Glavin’s not such a bad sort. I have a notion that the tone of the preamble to his current bit of yellow journalism may well have doomed his initial effort to the frosty reception it received here.

In conclusion, as I tried to put it the last time we crossed swords - no hard feelings.

Apparently you've forgotten that too.

Nana,

I believe Strauss' writings on the Noble Lie are often misrepresented or misinterpreted.

Strauss bases much of his theories on an interpretation of Machiavelli and Plato.

Plato argues that there are two levels of knowledge, public and elite. Having studied Strauss (gasp!), I don't think he celebrates this so-called truth -- I interpret Strauss to mean that it is a sad reality that needs to be understood in order to make good policy.

Machiavelli has a bad rep because he opposed the Catholic Church's division of Italy between the French crown and the Vatican, and wanted to see an independent, united Italian republic. Machiavelli believed that if good people were unwilling to use force and deception for moral ends, then the immoral would win and control the earth. I don't totally buy this, but this is how Machiavelli sees his recommendations as inherently moral, and utopian theories as immoral.

What I find ironic is that conservatives feel that the mainstream media has a huge liberal-left bias
(http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/blog/
is full of such accusations, for example).

I guess nobody is happy with the MSM these days, which is why places like the Tyee are so interesting =^)

My point, and the point of others here I think, is that people whose only moral value is greed and the need to justify why they have most of the stuff and want the rest of it have no moral leg to stand on.

Thus they have to talk about things like "hard work" "exploiting opportunities" never admitting that their heroes (or themselves) were born with silver coke spoons up their nose. In other words I'm living good because I did the right stuff, in too many cases means I had no moral values or was born with the right genetic makeup. I'm getting old, but I'm afraid it's going to get really ugly before my grandchildren's kids even have a shot. There are too many people across the world living in poverty while too few have more than they can even appreciate. It will be different next time around, but ugly just the same. If countries could harness the anger old guys like me have, they would win every war they got involved in, as long as it was for the right reasons.

Stevie P
The right, and the avatars of the right in the United States, Great Britain and Canada, in their desperation to make more of the tragedy of 9/11 than the generally-held sympathy and common feeling the whole world was willing to extend them at the time have, as I wrote above, abandoned all sense of fair play, truth-telling and conventional morality.

In place of these essential qualities, they have substituted illegality, profligacy, torture, licensed murder and kidnapping and mountains of lies and subterfuge. What else would they have to do to indicate to you that they still had any sense of ethics and morality?

As to clear communication, how much more direct could I be. Bush and his henchmen are liars and un-charged war criminals – support them if you like but for God’s sake don’t try to blame this unholy mess on the left.

The US military is now sunk as low in its own estimation (surely you’ve read the testimony of an unending line of testifiers from the general staff) as it was during the Vietnam era – on top of which it has now accepted the task of applying extra-judicial remedies and the result of coerced testimony (qua torture) to non-citizen suspects in a further attempt to make America ‘safe’. I guess you’ll feel a lot better if pee wee Rambo and Peter the Prostrate manage to get an exemption from these extra-judicial measures for yourself and your fellow Canadians.

I won’t. I’m just embarrassed that we should actually demean ourselves to ask. At this point only the US Supreme Court can save the moral integrity of that once-great republic to the south. That and a thorough spanking in the mid-term elections.

It may well be safe, but as long as these criminals are in power it is no place for decent truthful human beings.

The thing that Glavin and others like him fail to realize is that the left is ultimately about freedom and democracy. Where the orthodox left falls down, and I would be praising Glavin to the skies had he pointed this out, is that it has largely forgotten this. This is the radical core that must be brought front and center if the left is to succeed. Pandering to the system is a loser strategy as you can see with Tony B-liar in the UK. Democracy, which is something beyond this or that ideology, is still that which is truly radical. It is the powerlessness of the ordinary person up against the state and the corporations that is the root of human suffering, as well as the destruction of of the environment. A left that would re-orient itself to this basic problem would be a left that would build momentum. You only have to look at Latin America. The populist movements there are based upon the empowerment of the ordinary person. To hell with ideology, Power to the people!

Steve P Please don't attempt to validate what is essentially narcissism and psycopathy taken far too seriously. I didn't like the ubermenchiness of the Nazis and I loath it from people who might have been and were its victims.

Somebody finally out the Bushites on their real feelings about Christian Fundamentals.

Rkewan
Fazil Mihlar is a Fraser Institute clone who was, for a while at least, editorial page editor of the Vancouver Sun.

I haven't checked their masthead for a while so don't know exactly what he's up to these days.

The Tyee did a piece on him a while back, you can find it here:
http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2005/04/08/FazilMihlarsMondaySermons/

rkewen:

Your assertion that neocons' only moral value is greed could be used as part of an important critique by stating that many of the neocon's moral virtues appear to be a justification of their greed and the status quo (or something like that). But to suggest that they are without morality does not address morality as experienced by neocons.

Neocon moral vision is often couched in faith-based language and includes virtues like honesty, chastity, loyalty, thrift, family values, etc. They often lose sleep wondering about moral issues. By deliberately overlooking the moral content of neocons and suggesting that they are without morality doesn't help us use what moral feelings they do have to induce them to do what we think is the correct course of action.

For one side to deliberately misunderstand another side by rejecting the validity of all of their moral reasoning only makes the divide worse, risking our civil discourse and democracy in the process. It is unjustifiable when the far right does this, and it is unjustifiable when the far left does this.

Actually, you will find that right wing nut jobs rail as continously about media bias as left wing nut jobs. Why? Because anything that does not fit preconceived notions of either party is considered a "bias."

Terry,

Once again, can you please answer my question which asks for the reason\s why you supported the killing of a young Grey Whale killed by the Makah people a few years ago, was necessary? Would you do it today?

Do you believe the Canadian seal hunt is justified?? If so, why??

This time, I will leave you with that for a bit Terry...

Peace,

-Bear

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15228489/
Sorry, meant to include this above (that should read outed)

Geez, and now you are making up for your sad excuse for an argument by invoking the Nazis and proving Godwin's law =^)

You brought up Strauss. If you can't argue about his work on its merits, don't bring it up.

Hierarchy is not the same doctrine as fascism, Nana. Hierarchy is a necessary component of humans working together -- we have equal rights, but we have unequal abilities, desires and needs. So stop implying those who disagree with you are fascists without some proof -- it is as stupid as suggesting that left-leaning people are Stalinists.

In short, I'll validate Strauss, Machiavelli and Plato if I want to! It is called liberty, Nana, and your attempt to smear me by comparison to the Nazis is not appreciated. My family shed too much blood fighting fascism in Europe to read that disrespectful crap.

hey working dude are you calling the disgusting photo on the front cover of the sun a preconceived notion???

Steve P wrote "I am also amazed when I hear some-but-not-all on the left are so eager to critique our own culture that they would defend theocratic fascism."

Gosh, the straw men are sure marching today! No one on the left "defends theocratic fascism" anymore than they were "Saddam lovers" as the 2003 version neocon slander. How about a straight, honest argument? Is that too much to ask for?
This is for cabsavy, Why is it too much to expect people to have a little knowledge about the things they discuss? Why, when you spout drivel and I suggest you actually learn something about what you are talking about you smear me with this "reeducation" Bull Shit? Grow up!

Steve P wrote, "
Plato argues that there are two levels of knowledge, public and elite. Having studied Strauss (gasp!), I don't think he celebrates this so-called truth -- I interpret Strauss to mean that it is a sad reality that needs to be understood in order to make good policy."

Which is a delicate way of saying it is all right to lie

Actually, I never buy either the Sun or the Province. Both are rags not worthy of paying for, let alone reading.

We do get the Globe and Mail in my office, though.

sez stevie p,
Well doesn't that just rot your socks. I guess that's pretty much the same thing that the prisoners at Gitmo and AbuGhraib and a dozen other sites where the CIA was holding prisoners is doing - losing sleep! I know they have a newspeak term for those poor bastards but I've forgotten it.

You have to be kidding!

The "Neocon moral vision ... couched in faith-based language and includ(ing) virtues like honesty, chastity, loyalty, thrift, family values..." doesn't actually mean very much because of what's going on in the torture chamber in the basement.

Torquemada and the Auto Da Fe anyone?

Hi GW,

I certainly am no supporter of the excesses of the Bush administration.

BUT I do believe that most of them genuinely believe that they have moral justification for their actions -- that is, they justify their nastier practices within the context of a greater good. I'm not defending their greater good, I'm just pointing out that they believe it is there, and to characterize them as completely devoid of moral reasoning is to misunderstand what they are about. Misunderstanding political opponents is a dangerous mistake.

And perhaps, in a more naive and optimistic vein, the key to changing their mind on policy could be to use their moral framework to make arguments against what they are doing.

Has the Bush admin done immoral things? Certainly! I very much agree. Does that mean that they lack morality entirely? No.

So tell me, Steve P was it all right for the Neo Cons to lie to get into the war in Iraq?

Steve P wrote "Hierarchy is not the same doctrine as fascism, Nana. Hierarchy is a necessary component of humans working together -- we have equal rights, but we have unequal abilities, desires and needs."

Authoritarian hierarchy - ie, one that is power based and not talent-based - is however, one of the roots of fascism. The difference between a power bassed (authoritarian) hierarchy and one that is talent based is best explained using Pavarotti as an example. He is wealthy, at the top of his profession and admired world-wide. Yet he has no coercive power. Even the pettiest bureacrat has more power. George Bush is dispised world-wide, is a world class mediocrity, yet he has the power to blow up the world. He is a member of an authoritarian hierachy - one based upon coercive power. We should seek to minimize the authoritarian hierachies and allow the natural, talent-based ones to flourish.

Steve P wrote " that is, they justify their nastier practices within the context of a greater good. "

I ses. This is the old "ends justifies the means" argument put forth by great moralists like Mussolini and Lenin.

You're joking again.

The one thing, the only thing these people understand is power. That's why they are so dangerous and why you can't fight them by being nice to them. They are masters of the end justifies the means in a way that wouldn't have been out of place in Stalinist Russia. Just listen to their speeches. Read their triumphalist literature. How can you possibly dissemble on such a clear example of immortal criminality? These guys are the administrative and governmental equivalent of the mafia - selling drugs and murdering their enemies during the week and saying the Rosary at Mass on Sunday.

Wake up man! You can’t change these guys minds. If that were possible Bush would have taken Andrew Card’s advice two years ago, fired Rumsfeld and tried to start again.

Part of the problem is that nice normal well meaning people who have never met a psychopath can't begin to understand how they are being manipulated by being told things they want to hear.

The lid was slightly lifted by both the Abrahamoff and Foley scandals. Washington is a vice den and corruption on both sides is the reason why Bush and Co have been allowed to get away with what they have. Senators and Congressmen don't even bother to read the draconian legislation they pass.

The philosophy is the fig leaf the more educated of the power elite need to justify the crimes they commit.

Obviously the concensus is that the article is bollocks.

No Frank -- a majority is not the same as consensus =^)

I ses. This is the old "ends justifies the means" argument put forth by great moralists like Mussolini and Lenin.

Whether the ends justify means is a legitimate moral discussion. Many of you here believe that the means the Bush administration uses, such as torture, is not justifiable -- and in this case, I agree.

But why is it so difficult to distinguish between moral disagreements and allegations of a complete lack of morality?

Not at all. There are sections of the article I agree with and sections I don't. What I really don't agree with is the concept of everybody having to agree all the time. It is very useful to listen to arguments that you do not necessarily support to learn from them.

Yes it is :-) Even you said you wouldn't go as far as the author did and blame the Left for everything. cabsavvy said he wouldn't either.

Nightbloom would, god love his half-android self, but he left early so I think that means a consensus has been reached.

I'm looking forwad to Glavin's next article in two weeks where his article name will be changed from the laughable "Dissent" to "Glavin's War Against Reality!"

I disagree

Anybody who doesn't comprehend that the so called "globalization" is nothing more, or less, than the killing of locally based economies and decision making powers, in short, that it is neofascist, neocolonization, is out of touch with the real world.

I couldn't be bothered to read any more.

And I don't want to hear that I don't understand fascism, because I was born and educated in a fascist system and have been fighting against any trace of it for 60 years.

Globalization is the rehashment of Hitler's 1000 Year Reich, Stalin's Internationale, Mao's Cultural Revolution and all collectivization schemes, in a milder, sugar coated and gilded chained form.

All the big business clubs, like the Trilaterals, Bilderbergers, the WEF, APEC and all so called "free trade treaties", negotiated and forced on by them, etc. etc. openly admit and show this. But it would take some effort to read up on what they say and then start talking about it.

Ed Deak.

Speaking of off the shelf rhetoic....

Let the name calling come forth!

steve p
You can't have a 'moral' disagreement about tactics like torture, out and out lying, bad faith, murder and kidnapping.

It's like trying to 'understand' a pedophile. And the excuse that such things just 'happen' in war is bogus when the war itself was founded on an elaborate construction of lies and controverted evidence.

When a nation succumbs to the self-same behavior they've criticized in their opponent we have left the realm of morality and entered the field of amoral power politics – perhaps we have entered the realm of fascism. In addition, it is an Orwellian world, no matter how you parse it. You might wish it weren't so but wishing is as far as that will get you.

Blaming this surrender of all that is decent and just upon the folks who questioned and criticized the effort as it was winding its convoluted way to the point we have now reached is as immoral as the actions of the guilty party. It's like saying that the quality of life in Baghdad is Al Gore’s fault or - as Glavin puts it - that the left have abandoned the Iraqi people.

Utterly absurd. After a groaner like that what more can one say.

That's why Glavin's half-truths initiate such a thoroughgoing riposte and, in my view, why apologists for the current administration (in Canada, Britain and the US) are so reluctant to see themselves indicted for their own part in enabling this disaster.

Shame, plain and simple, at the realization of what they have allowed to happen in their name. So, find some way to blame it on someone else. No?

Steve P wrote "But why is it so difficult to distinguish between moral disagreements and allegations of a complete lack of morality?"

Obviously there is a difference between the two, Steve. But I am sure that you are aware that few people, especially politicians and corporate ceos, are willing to honestly admit their crimes. Immorality is always couched in moral terms. This goes for Hitler, Stalin, Pinochet, as but 3 examples. For most of us here, based upon the evidence we have, we would include the Neocons within that group who hide their immorality with moralistic terms. I think your argument lies not so much with the question of morality but with the evidence against the neocons.

Well, tg, you've got them buzzing. Welcome. I look forward to reading your column. Hope you'll talk fish (the Sakinaw sockeye are really in trouble!)and literature and keep things lively!

Right on Ed! You have said very succinctly what most of us feel - as you usually do

Tom Rankin and I are going to be on co-op radio (CFRO) from 7:00 till 9:00 tonight – Wednesday, October 18. Please call in (604-684-7561). What's important is that people around the province who are concerned about the corporate take-over and exploitation of our primary resource know you are on. And if there's anyone else in the area you know or in B.C. you know who will call in, ask them to.

Courage & Regards,

- Robin Mathews
-------------------------

Info on Coop Radio:

LISTENER-SPONSORED CO-OP RADIO is broadcast across Canada on the Star Choice satellite system on channel 845. Co-op radio, CFRO fm is located in Vancouver, B.C., Canada. Its frequency in the Vancouver area is 102.7 MHz and we are also found on various cable frequencies in most major cities throughout British Columbia.

RealAudio and Program information for radio station CFRO can be found on the internet at http://www.coopradio.org

Listener phone-in: Call Coop Radio on-air with your questions and comments at (604) 684-7561.

How can we tell it's almost election day in the Excited Snakes?

I almost forgot about these, but then it has been awhile since an election. I guess the Repugnant Party is pulling out all the stops now, not confident just counting the votes is enough?

I hope the repugnants are so desperate they actually have to go out and do it!

are in the last sentence should be aren't. I mean who has access to more nuclear material than anyone else in the world?

commentor: G West
posted: 2 Hours Ago
Sorry realisticman, that's just not the case. Never said a word about you and French men or women -

Now Quebec's a 'Nation'?

QED

Pax

Back to Jim Lehrer now.

QED my ass. You have no sense of humour. Further, if you didn't notice, I was talking about you, not to you. I got a little sick of the kind of things you were saying behind my back. I bet you won't copy and paste them though.

Remember that? Sure you want to get into this?

Maybe you should stick to Jim Lehrer.

I don't have much time at the moment, however would like to reply to the following; "This is especially disturbing in light of the threat posed by the rise of Islamist barbarism, which presents a very real threat..."
Mr Glavin is living in a dreamworld. Lets add the numbers 200,000 dead in Iraq war number one, one million dead including 500,000 children from sanctions on Iraq, 650,000 estimated dead Iraqis in war #2. Plus 25,000 US dead and injured in war #2, and something like 160,000 US soldiers on LTD from Guld War syndrome. Now add in the skyrocketing cancer rates in Iraq from about 300Tons of depleted Uranium. So Terry Glavin, who are the barbarians?
"The things that pass for knowledge, I don't understand" Steely Dan

Worrywart, I was just getting up a similar list, so thanks.

I guess these people are those to whom Glavin refers when he says, "...every once in a while you're going to have to shoot some fascists."

After which he claims: "But what I do miss is the left's great tradition of dissent."

'Dissent'... can you imagine...the name of the column's even a fake.

Well, it may be a celebrity circus surrounding Cindy Sheehan but she has never professed to be one...more grit than glitz on her part. She is a mother who lost her young soldier son and had the guts at surely the cruelest point of her life to investigate the war in which her son died. Instead of trying to lesson the pain by convincing herself that her son died for something meaningful, instead of justifying the war, (and who would have blamed her if she did)...she chose the much harder road which was to question and to find out the truth about that unjust war...and then to act upon her new knowledge. Think of the difficulty involved in traversing that very public road when she was in so much private pain.

So to smugly diss her like that is frankly cowardly from the very safe and comfortable seat from which you write.

(Yeah, the left ain't perfect...it's hard to rally people when the corporate system's main gear is oiled by media spin and advertising that is designed to co-opt the masses.)

And no doubt Cindy Sheehan isn't perfect either but in the grand tradition of dissent....I think she's done rather well.

I hear pee wee and the conmen have just dumped Garth Turner from their caucus.

Anyone here know why?

so, Tyee actually invited this crank to write? and they pay him for it?

Right on, Truman.

The clue was in the disclaimer around 'dissent' ... seems like a lousy trick, really. I mean, are we at war with one another, more than with the awesome issues afoot?

Steve P tell me again about the morality of the Neo Cons...I think I missed something.

http://www.infowars.net/articles/October2006/181006Iraq.htm
Former British Ambassador Suspects Government Stoking Iraqi Civil War

cont'd next post

Stephen Zunes, professor of Politics and chair of the Peace & Justice Studies Program at the University of San Francisco, recently wrote,

"Top analysts in the CIA and State Department, as well as large numbers of Middle East experts, warned that a U.S. invasion of Iraq could result in a violent ethnic and sectarian conflict. Even some of the war's intellectual architects acknowledged as much: In a 1997 paper, prior to becoming major figures in the Bush foreign policy team, David Wurmser, Richard Perle, and Douglas Feith predicted that a post-Saddam Iraq would likely be "ripped apart" by sectarianism and other cleavages but called on the United States to "expedite" such a collapse anyway."

"One of the long-standing goals of such neoconservative intellectuals has been to see the Middle East broken up into smaller ethnic or sectarian mini-states, which would include not only large stateless nationalities like the Kurds, but Maronite Christians, Druze, Arab Shi'ites, and others. Such a policy comes not out of respect for the right of self-determination – indeed, the neocons have been steadfast opponents of the Palestinians' desire for statehood, even alongside a secure Israel – but out of an imperial quest for divide-and-rule. The division of the Middle East has long been seen as a means of countering the threat of pan-Arab nationalism and, more recently, pan-Islamist movements."

The machinations of the Machiavellian's are unfolding according to plan. Let Iraq cascade into chaos and dilute the insurgency by manipulating it to become fractious and watch in-fighting ensue. Blame Iran and Syria for the anarchy (a sentiment echoed by Rice during the cartoon riots) and then move the troops in to decapitate two more rogue nations.

The crowning touch is Glavin accusing the Left of abandoning Iraq.

Crank n, itdef: A person who does not spout the leftie party line.

Crank: 6. An eccentric person; esp. a person subject to a whimsical enthusiasm. Origin US 19 c
L. T. C. Rolt "Amateurs and cranks aired their theories."

OED.

Dear Mr. Glavin

You may not be aware of this, but there is a real left for you to argue against.

http://dippers.myblahg.com

Check them out so you'll no longer have to wrestle with the caricaturized leftwing voices in your head.

Thanks for dropping in Robert. Is this what you're doing with your spare time while Antonia is on furlough?

hey working dude you keep calling everyone a leftie, you a self confessed liberal, guess you are proving the point that the liberals campaign to the left and govern to the right.

Governing which includes selling us out to the highest bidder.

And now for a true look at Glavin's beloved neocons hanging around Pennsylvania Ave:

http://tomflocco.com/fs/AbramoffSexSpyRing.htm

Indeed. A truly Glavinesque view of globalization. What I like to call glowballization.

Had a call at home today. Seems Matercard want to send me a platinum card, with a low introductory rate of interest for the first four months. The woman who called was barely intelligible. I asked her where she was calling from. At first she hedged, saying she represented Mastercard. When pressed, she admitted phoning from India. Ain't glowballization wunnerful Terry? You turd.

Speaking of "glowballization", I was just talking to a friend from Mexico who said that it has become much more dangerous to be on the streets there as the country is experiencing an economic and potitical crisis.
In addition, the USA is effectively bankrupt, being held up by smoke and mirrors as the manufacturing moves offshore. Plus, Bush just elimated habeas corpus the 800 year old legal tradition.
Now, our government, and the corporations that lead them by the hand, want Canada to enter into deep integration (security and prosperity partnership)with these two suffering countries.
So, I think the idea of "Nafta on steroids" is nuts, given the problems of our two trading partners.
Question: Does this make me left wing? What say you Terry Glavin?

Well, at least they govern, something your party has not done yet, nor ever will. They are also the only alternative we have to Herr Harper.

Life sucks, doesn't it?

You will find Bush actually did that quite a while ago with the so called "Patriot Act." The concept of habeas corpus is actually quite a lot older than 800 years, too.

Sorry working man, not quite right.

The Habeas Corpus Act passed by the English Parliament in 1679 guaranteed this right in law, although its origins go back to Anglo-Saxon times.

William Blackstone, in his Commentaries on the Laws of England recorded the first use of habeas corpus in 1305. But other writs with the same effect were used in the 12th Century, so it appears to have preceded Magna Carta in 1215.

Its original use was simply - a writ to bring a prisoner into court to testify in a pending trial. But what was a weapon for the king and the courts became the fundamental protection for the individual against arbitrary detention by the state.

It is thought to have been common law by the time of Magna Carta, which says in Article 39: "No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned or disseised or exiled or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor will we send upon him except upon the lawful judgement of his peers or the law of the land."

Over the next few hundred years, concern grew that kings would whimsically intervene on matters of detention, so it was enshrined in law in 1679.

In 1772, there was case in which it was invoked. James Somersett, a black slave brought back to the UK from Jamaica, was freed after a debate sparked by his demand for habeas corpus. Lord Mansfield successfully argued for his release.

It has greater effect in the US, where its most common use is by prisoners after conviction.

It has occasionally been suspended before, in times of national crisis and insurrection. I think you'll find the courts rejected Bush's suspension of habeas corpus in the Patriot Act - in fact, I believe that's the reason behind the new act - as well as the ruse of extra-judicial military tribunals - as a method of off-setting the inevitable court challenges.

Time will tell if it works. The founding fathers must be spinning in their graves.

As I warned a few weeks back, this is the Tyee taking a nice slow tack towards the centre, carefully spotting out the "soft left" crowd. I figure it started with the Alternet jerk's article telling the "Left" to shut the hell up about Iraq.

I thought this funny:

An interesting point. I'm curious as to what cannot be classified in any respect as "personality cult ". Were we to utilize groups, say the "Federation of whatever" would this not classify as a "class war"? How about business or corporate entities? Probably classifiable as the same.

Terry, my dear naive little fellow, the way one approaches the indoctrination of ideologies nowadays is to create "Foundations" or "Institutes" (always non-profit you silly goose), since their underlying raison d'etre can typically be neutered publically by "rigourous application of the scientific method". The science being a typically beatific application of "free market" principles (that includes human rights too, you silly willy!) and standardized Chicago school economics. (See: Fraser Institute, Heritage Foundation, Tides Foundation, etc ...)

I trust you've learned a little something you apparently didn't know before.

Nice jab at Sheehan by the way.
When do we get your potshots at Rumsfeld for shaking Mr Husseins hand? You and your crazy tin foil hat brigade and its "selective oversight"!

You can tell an original thinker from a flakey bigmouth by their ability to posit solutions. I count 0 solutions offered in this piece. Hence, Glavin is a flakey, big mouthed hack.
At least the cheques clear, huh Terry?

Finally Jeffrey J. handed Mr. Glavin his shallow, decrepit ass back to him in his comment and as such, I'd rather read another Jeffrey J post then more "opinionated" dreck by this fantastically incompetent writer any day.

Finally, I'd like to suggest to all Tyee readers (and especially posters) that the Tyee, like any publication, relies on extensive data to determine what to publish and what not to publish. The Tyee can determine how long you're taking to read a page, where you are geographically, how you traverse the site, etc etc etc. This is very relevant for both you and the publisher of the Tyee.

As should be obvious to anyone, DISSENT can and is used to create a feedback mechanism to the publisher. In essence, "opposition" provides a target. This article has garnered a large number of comments "for" and "against", neither of which matters as much as the total. You might think a large number of "opposing" comments would cause the publisher to reconsider, but of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Without opposition, nothing can be done and more especially, nothing can be planned to counter the lack of opposition. It's rather an Eastern idea, but quite relevant here, for...

**** IF TYEE READERS SIMPLY IGNORE (ie: DON'T READ THEM OR EVEN CLICK ON LINKS TO HIS ARTICLES) AND ESPECIALLY DO NOT COMMENT ON MR. GLAVINS ARTICLES, MR. GLAVIN WILL GO AWAY, SINCE MR GLAVIN WILL BE "BOUNCING HIS IDEAS" OFF OF NO ONE. ****

You can call it a boycott. You can call it whatever you like; but I for one will no longer click on a link to or read another article by Mr. Glavin on the Tyee.
Why?
Because Mr. Glavin offers nothing in the way of solutions in his "opposition" and I'm confident he will continue to ridicule and deride the "Left" without providing tangible, practical alternatives. He's basically a softer fuzzier version of Rush and O'Reilly. Mr. Glavin is BAIT and nothing else.

When and if Mr. Glavin finds another media outlet to offer a genuinely considered, well constructed piece, maybe I'll give him a gander.
Until then - he's persona non-grata.
Won't you join me?

Thanks. Or not.

Months ago Terry Galvin said to Bear:

Ok Terry, times up...!!

The interesting thing about apathy Terry, is you do not have to do anything to prove your sincere. The only feedback Truman and I got back from you was that of sarcasm, and also something about excusing you while you go out and run over a few fawns. Pathetic. As you said to do, I bought and read your book “Waiting for the Macaws” about the age of extinction. It made me think, what about the extinction of our ocean animals? I will start with this; you supported the Makah whale hunt in 1999. You said:

Yeah, why? Was the whale killed for food? Why was this young unfortunately curious whale killed? She succumbed after for 4 hours of stabbing and goring her…

Back when this treaty was made, whales were a food source. Not now Terry. I said a few months ago and I will say it again.

If a tradition no longer makes sense, then people need to let it go... In this case it was sad for the life of the whale, and a bruise on the Makah peoples relationship towards Mother Earth...”

You said in the same book Terry:

So is it all about unnecessary tradition, entitlement, and kill ‘em, there is plenty, attitude eh. Have you ever considered the word “ethics”?? Do we, or do we not, have the right to kill when we do not need to kill for our survival?? Correct me if you wish, god knows I am waiting...

So Terry, what did they do with the carcass of this dead young whale?? The couldn’t eat it, as it would (as all whales are) be considered Toxic waste. What did you think they would do with her? Mount her and put her on the wall in their cabins? If so, is this o.k. to you? I mean, if it was all about celebration of rights, there is other ways of celebrating rights without causing the death of this rare and beautiful sea mammal. So no reason that I can think of fits the mold of “justifiable”. But yet you supported it. Do you still??

That concludes my impression of you Terry Galvin, unless of course you have changed your mind on these issues. If you haven’t, then the title of your “Macaws” book should have had the fine print say “Waiting for the Macaws and other stories from the age of extinctions that I have encouraged”….

(cont.)

Terry, one other point I will bring up, and why not eh…is from the article in the Tyee. Terry said:

It's about crop failure, desertification, disease, drought and famine, all now looming over much of sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. It's about massive disruption in the way billions of people find their sustenance.

Again, all about humans. Have you considered Terry we are interconnected with all life here on the Earth and indeed YES it is about “starving polar bears” IMO.
Have a good day,

Peace,

-Bear

ps

Truman, thanks for the exchange bud…!!

Peace bro,

-Bear

Reading Glavin's puerile effort to generate dissent here, the blatant red-flags in his piece, - "...Islamist Extremism...Islamist barbarism...Islamist extremism...Islamist extremism...Blah blah blah..give it all away. This is all one needs to read to understand Terry Glavins twisted perspective. Oh where's the mention of the barbaric subhuman American and Israeli atrocity currently being visited upon the world, -this fabulous contribution to humanity which has brought us closer to that brink of total annihilation ever before? Well, looking at Glavin's blog, we see that he's a signatory to "The Euston Manifesto" -an utterly insipid Zionist plot to frame the progressive agenda, -one that brooks no tolerance of criticism of the USA, -referred to as "anti-Americanism" and one that equates any criticism of Israel, or Zionism as "anti-semitism." Amongst the American signitories to the "Euston Manifesto" we see that Michael Ledeen himself, the most sinister arch-neocon ever has endorsed the document. With Glavin now dictating "dissent" here on Tyee, it's abundantly clear just how deeply the Israel Lobby has infiltrated every aspect of our media.

Garth, notice the word concept.

It wasn't 'concept' I was quibbling with.

Thanks for pointing this out, ingkhai. Euston Manifesto = neocon lite. This explains everything about the article. These people don't wish to make over the left, they want to destroy it.

Is this what's now know as a 'shotgun blog'?

I don't watch the National on CBC all that often, but was happy I did last night.

They had coverage of Garth Turner's ouster from the party I could never understand why he joined.

They also had a brief but well presented piece about the embarrassing position a judge in Texas is putting Chimporus Dictatorus in regarding the CIA trained Cuban terrorist Luis Posada Carriles. They don't know what to do with him, nobody but Venezuela (or maybe Cuba, but the US won't even talk to them) wants him and the Bush that should be for dogs to lift their leg by won't send him there because he might be tortured or executed. Mehar, he's got something going that you lack apparently.

The documentary by Bryan Stewart about the background of the Canadian involvement in Afghanistan against the advice of the general staff should be watched by all Canadians, how ever many times it takes for them to understand it. It cut through all the oversimplication of the issue we see currently in the media. No one is served by the current Con sound byte "but the Libs started it" and the chickenhawk Harpoon's macho posturing. The exploitation of Canada's honor and failure to even intend to live up to promises by the Bush Crime Family was clear. Unfortunately when a lot of the important stuff was happening we were convieniently distracted by Belinda breaking the heart of "Gumboots and Tears" as she crossed the floor to a party that didn't think every woman should be at home barefoot and pregnant enjoying her hundred dollars a month allowance per produced unit from Daddy Stephen.

The defining moment for me though was Jean Chretien's chief something or other describing walking into a meeting with the Idiot In Chief, a couple months into the original Afghan deployment, to be greeted by something like

A retarded 14 year old bully trapped in the body of a sixty year old dry drunk is trying to rule the world. What a blot on the USA, the human race and the planet.

Just peeked again at this thread, and it looks like it has generated a healthy and wide-rangeing debate over this issue. From that perspective, Glavin has accomplished his aim as a writer/journalist.

The "left" too smug!

What? We control the media, the economy, the major levers of ruling class power in current capitalism?

This guy is a joke, right?

If the "left" is smug, I'd sure as hell like to know what the friggin' right is. Sorry, even given nightblooms fawning opinion here, which I slavishly normally bend over for, I just can't take this guy seriously.

And that Tyee feels his opinion is important enough to give a column here says more about the direction of Tyee's development than it does anything about the "left", liberal or otherwise.

And as for the right always crying about left wing opinion predominance-, the rich are always crying poverty as well. Doesn't make it so.

We know who owns and controls, and it sure as hell ain't "the left". (Though what generally passes for "left" here and in the US is really more accurately "liberal capitalism". Take Beers for example. And this guy.)

There's more to the left than the "liberal capitalist" viewpoint, fer friggin' sure. That's just good cop/bad cop playing with peoples' heads stuff.

And both "liberal" and "neocon" capitalism are really more concerned with and have the physical resources means of controlling, when they are not trying to physically eliminate the socially transformative or often characterized revolutionary left.

Like I say, this guy is just not credible, except to Tyee management, and the neocon right of the likes as nightbloom and working man et al.

The capitalist state is allowed to arm itself with nukes and all other manner of weapons of mass destruction, and invade anywhere it chooses, but let a small state like Venezuala, or even North Korea for that matter, arm itself to defend itself from this same rampaging power, and they are suddenly peace hypocrites!

There are much better and more astute "columnist" material out there than this guy.

Instead of all these "liberal capitalism" viewpoint types Tyee, reflective more of CNN and the "new" CBC, when you're not being People Magazine, and go out and find us somebody really different and challenging of the social status. This guy is entirely predictable and conventional. Just another "liberal capitalism" viewpoint.

This is a joke right, Beers? Another one, like Ruff, Rupp, Ripp or Rudd? You know... I'll never forget What's Her Name?

nightbloom
You might want to take some time and consult Glavin's little blog. I think you're a far better gadfly than he is.

I know that may be damning with faint praise but the idea that that left is in league with Islamic movements the world over is so bizarre as to be laughable.

Check it out!

rkewen:
Interesting observations that pretty much mirror my own thoughts of last night. There are actually some interesting observations on the subject on the Canada/Afghanistan thread from last night if you haven't seen them.

Godschild gets it.

Tyee management at least is opting to become yet another member of the Mushy Middle Club.

No one should really be surprised-, though we do now need to be building clearer left, progressive, and environmentalist activist alternative media and online community, prepared to more critically challenge these status quo assumptions that Tyee increasingly wants to plump for and get into bed with.

Tyee has a "business plan" it is working to. Ehhh, which is Beers & Cos right. We, however, outside "the left" of Gavin's and Tyee's narrow definitions, need quite another "socially responsible activist plan".

Just in case you are interested in talking about it.

This either has nothing at all to do with what Terry Glavin wrote about here, or maybe it has a lot to do with it: don't you think that the USA is headed toward a theocratic facist-style state? Current legislation, such as the one authorizing detention and trial without the right to habeus corpus, without right to legal representation, and which seems to authorize most forms of torture to gain information; or the one announced the other day, called WARN, which will have the feds announcing via everyone's cell phone of new "terrorist" threats; or--well, you know what I'm saying. It's all about keeping the populace under a tight lid called National Security but is really, whether they want to admit it to themselves or not, about fear mongering and control of dissent and perpetuating a state of war, has me thinking, a nice, high fence along the 49th parallel might not be such a bad idea.

As frightening as the country to the south of us is, perhaps we also need to look at where our New Conservative government is taking us, and how wrong-headed their recent clean air act is (too little, and way too late: 2050?! are you serious!)...oh, I could rant all day.

I especially like the idea of admitting hearsay and 'coerced' evidence in the extra-judicial military tribunals planned under the new law. Lovely stuff. But of course, these aren't US citizens we're talking about.

And it's the left that's let down the side!

Orwell would have had a field day with these characters. The best we have today in the media is Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert; but then of course there is the Tyee.

Sigh!

Truly a sad day for truth. The Tyee is now in a pen, being fed pellets..

wrote mjscox.

In a word mjscox, "Yes". I agree. And you "rant" on the subject all you want. I for one would be interested to hear it. :-)

Thank you Terry! At long last a critical look at eh "left". I was raised in a left of centre activist family but since the left has been hijacked by the head in the sand crowd and adopted policies such anti-Israel (no matter what), pro Palestinian/Arab/Jihadists (no matter what) and the self-blaming rhetoric crap like "Western foreign policy and globalization has created Jihad terrorism" I have no where to go anymore. Even the "peace" groups like "stopwar.ca" are not peace activists but anti-Israel cheerleaders and The ISM is a terrorist support group. When you read the far right wacko web sites and compare them with the far leftists.....guess what? They are saying the same things! Keep it up Terry!

bizarre, illogical, and bizarre. sad. how does someone start out complaining about (probably rightly) how non-radical the left is (and I don't identify myself with that idiomatic silliness, but anyway...), and then work their way back to supporting NATO doing search and destroy missions in Afghanistan?? That's an exemplar solution from a more progressive liberalism??

And how ironic, indeed Orwellian, that Glavin would quote Orwell to try to support throwing bombs to defeat fascism and create a Safer, Better World. Hasn't Glavin ever read Homage to Catalonia? Or, for that matter, Nineteen Eighty-Four?

Sure, we're going to "defeat" extremism by invading countries and shooting places like Afghanistan up until gradually more and more people there love us, even though the Soviets, with 5 times as many troops, got their asses kicked for ten years running trying the same thing. Yeah man, and Perpetual War is Peace.

Nobody is saying "run away" from Afghanistan, as Glavin claims to try to frame his argument. But there are ways to help, aside from killing, and despite his Keith Martin-esque naive claims, evidently Glavin couldn't care less about the suggestions of the Afghan people themselves -- say RAWA: http://www.rawa.org/

And then next week maybe we can get Mulroney to write a Dissent column and he can tell us where the Left went wrong for him too.

In fact, it'll be fun to have a bunch of right-wingers like Glavin explaining to us what the Left is all about.

Then Ron Erwin can write one too. How the Left became irrelevant for him when groups like anti-poverty activists spent more time attacking capitalism than they did the Palestinians.

It'll be fun, I'll make popcorn.

naddude,

yes you do naddude. Its called the Conservative Party. They believe in all the things you dislike about the Left. There's parties for everyone, if you don't like the one you're in, you don't have to change it, you can join a different one. Isn't democracy wonderful?

[It is the powerlessness of the ordinary person up against the state and the corporations that is the root of human suffering, as well as the destruction of of the environment. A left that would re-orient itself to this basic problem would be a left that would build momentum. You only have to look at Latin America. The populist movements there are based upon the empowerment of the ordinary person. To hell with ideology, Power to the people!]

This is about the best thought I have read on this column so far, I just wish we could get that started on a mass scale.

Altho, I have to say rkewen's comparison of Bush to 'a retarded 14 year old bully trapped in the body of a 60 year old dry drunk that is trying to rule the world' is not only one of the the funniest comments I've read but hits the nail on the head. Finally I can look at Bush and add a snicker to my angst and disgust.

Here's how democracy works. If you find that you don't agree with the party you're in, you leave it. You don't decide you're a "dissenting" member of it and try to change it by saying its everyone else's fault that you disagree with them all. What's the point? What's your end-game???

So nightbloom, Steve P, Working Man, Capitalism etc agree with Glavin that the Left is wrong. That's great. That's why there's other political parties for you to vote for. Yet for some reason you guys seem concerned about us on the Left.

I find that kind of touching. Because I hate to say it but when an article comes up where some Liberal says other Libs don't believe in what he believes in, I don't care. When Garth Turner decides Conservatives are wrong, again, I don't care. Sorry about that but I really don't.

You don't see me heading over to right-wing websites today and asking them what they think of Turner's criticisms and will this mean they are finally willing to adopt policies that will appeal to people like me. I won't vote for their party so why should they care what I have to say?

Just as you won't vote for our party regardlss of whether its run by Layton, Broadbent, Douglas or Jesus Christ. So we don't care if you agree with Glavin, the fact you do just confirms what we think of Glavin already.

The new "Clean Air Act" is a joke. Not sure who what's her name thinks they're foolin'! We already have the EPA , how about some enforcement on what's already in place? Now that would be 'action'. Apparently for Harper action means 'let's see what Bush is doing and then follow his act'.

When the fire alarm went off in parliment this morning I actually felt twinges of hope...but...alas...false alarm.

just found this little gem from Derrick O'Keefe - relative to Beers' new little friend.

Worth a sardonic chuckle I'd say:

It was responding to the Hot Air! Or maybe it was the lie detector, no, not that, it would be going off pretty much steady.

They would have to yell over the lie detector all the time! I was going to say except when they address the Member representing the People of , but no MPs actually do that, do they?

Godschild has a damn good suggestion in her call for a boycott of Glavin's pieces. He lost all respect (and credibility) when he said the Left had abandoned Iraq. Consider him boycotted, along with (and for much the same reasons) neo-con organizations like Walmart.
Never think you're powerless. Your power truly frightens the right.

"Frank"

You are living proof of "everything" Glavin is critical of the left for : although "you" stand up for free speech, it's only allowed as long as it's politically correct. "Progressive" for you is a mantra not individual freedom of thought.

I suppose posting something from the Israeli 'left' wouldn't be that convincing to those who are only interested in facile 'dissent' and not real fundamental criticism.

In the following from the 'Forward' - please note which side of the ledger has been protesting the fact that an Israeli charity has been 'helping' Arabs.

This will have to be two posts, it’s quite long:

Charity Hits Back in Feud Over Arab Aid
Ripped by Right for Postwar Help To Non-Jews, Ruskay Cites Values

Rebecca Spence | Fri. Oct 20, 2006
The head of the largest Jewish charitable federation in the country is taking right-wing groups to task for arguing that philanthropic dollars raised for Israel during the recent war with Hezbollah should not have been used to aid Arab citizens of the Jewish state.

Controversy surrounding the issue erupted in recent weeks when the hawkish group, Americans for a Safe Israel, claimed in a widely distributed press release that one-third of emergency campaign funds collected by the federation system’s central charity, United Jewish Communities, were earmarked for Arabs. UJC, the national arm of the federations, has staunchly refuted the one-third figure, putting the percentage of relief funds allocated to non-Jews at a mere 3%.

Irrespective of the exact numbers, the executive vice president and CEO of the UJA-Federation of New York, John Ruskay, penned a stinging rebuke to UJC’s critics, unapologetically stating that support for Israel cannot be limited to Jews.
“This democracy counts Arabs, Druze, and Christians among its citizens, some of whom serve in the Israeli Defense Forces and, yes, have even died to protect Israel,” Ruskay wrote in an e-mail message sent to a wide swath of volunteer and professional leaders of Jewish organizations. “Supporting Israel also means supporting a state that affords its minority populations the freedoms and opportunities that were for centuries denied us.”

The flare-up between the federation system on the one hand and right-wing and Orthodox Jewish organizations on the other picked up steam when The New York Jewish Week, a newspaper that the New York federation distributes to its donors, published a front-page October 13 article airing the complaints of Helen Freedman, the former director of AFSI. When asked by The Jewish Week about Freedman’s concerns, leaders of the Zionist Organization of America, the Orthodox Union and the National Council of Young Israel all reportedly objected to the distribution of UJC emergency funds to Israeli Arabs.

At issue is how and where American Jewish charitable dollars should be spent in the Jewish state as it begins the arduous process of rebuilding northern Israel in the wake of the war in Lebanon. While nearly a third of the more than $330 million raised to date by UJC has already been disbursed, more than $100 million remains to be distributed on the ground in Israel. Those funds will be used to finance a broad range of revitalization efforts, including providing loans to small businesses, offering trauma counseling and repairing the schools and houses destroyed by Hezbollah rockets during the month-long conflict.

The balance will follow

As war raged this summer in the north of Israel — where Arabs represent a large share of the population, including about half the residents of the Galilee — relief efforts organized by the Jewish Agency for Israel and heavily funded by an influx of cash from UJC, included the evacuation of local children to summer camps in the south. In the case of the camps, the Jewish Agency did not discriminate against non-Jewish children, and in many instances, brought Muslim, Christian and Druze kids to safety along with their Jewish counterparts.

Ruskay cited the camps to drive home his point, when he asked in his strongly-worded statement: “When the rockets started falling in Haifa, a city as renowned for its magnificent landscapes as for the harmony in which Arabs and Jews have lived side by side for generations, could we — as Jews — have evacuated the Jewish children to the safety of summer camps in the south and left the Arab children to cower in the night?”

A spokesman for the Jewish Agency defended his organization’s non-discriminatory practices, saying that it was the agency’s policy to care for all of Israel’s citizens, regardless of their ethnicity, both during the war and throughout the process of rebuilding. “The Jewish Agency is very proud of the fact that it gives money to all of Israel’s citizens,” the spokesman said.

AFSI’s Freedman is not backing down from her assertion that Jewish charity dollars should only go to Jews.

“Israel may be a democracy, so the government has to do what governments do, which is take care of all their citizens, but the UJC is not the government,” Freedman said in an interview. “It’s a private organization of philanthropic groups, so they don’t have any obligation to be ‘democratic.’”

Freedman’s comments come at a time when both Israeli government officials and Jewish philanthropic leaders have raised an outcry, saying that the Israeli government did an abysmal job of coordinating relief efforts in the north, leaving it to nonprofit organizations and charities to do the job of the state. Critics contend that the lines between the role of the government and the role of philanthropies have become dangerously blurred.

Freedman also disputed UJC’s assertion that only 3% of their emergency funds went to non-Jews, saying that the umbrella organization had manipulated the numbers. She claimed that most Israeli Arabs showed disloyalty to Israel during the war and should therefore be denied assistance.

A leading figure on the Israeli right, Moshe Arens, a former defense minister, said that in principle, using Jewish money to aid Arab communities was acceptable, but he argued that funds could easily end up in the hands of Arabs who are disloyal to the state if the divvying of dollars is not properly supervised. Arens noted that some of the mayors of Israeli-Arab villages are members of the Islamic Movement, which he described as a “subversive organization.”

While northern cities such as Haifa have long been hailed as models of peaceful coexistence between Jews and Arabs, relations between the two groups were subject to increasing strain during the recent conflict. In one prominent example, the Arab deputy mayor of Haifa, Walid Hamis, was ousted from his post after he vociferously protested the Jewish state’s heavy military response to the Hezbollah kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, calling the ensuing war “Israeli aggression.”

At least one major donor to Jewish charitable causes, Gary Erlbaum, who chairs the Israel Emergency Campaign of the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia, said that he had no problem with “a certain percentage” of funds needed for repair work in the north winding up paying for repairs in Arab villages.

“This is very different from conveying money to the Palestinian Authority or Palestinian government,” he said.

In an interview with the Forward, Stephen Savitsky, president of the Orthodox Union, which folded its own emergency campaign into UJC’s, seemed to back away from previous statements he had made to The Jewish Week. Savitsky was quoted by The Jewish Week as saying that he planned to ask UJC to “segment the money” raised by the O.U. “to make sure it goes to the places we want.” When asked if he still planned to do that, Savitsky said only that he was comfortable with the 3% figure that Howard Rieger, UJC’s president and CEO, had offered as a corrective to Freedman’s contention that one third of funds were going to Arabs. Savitsky said that giving some small portion of the funds to Israeli Arabs was not in itself problematic.

“If someone gives money to the Rambam Hospital in Haifa,” he said, “it’s understood that it also services Arabs, and I don’t think anyone would have a problem with that.”

I expect Terry Glavin's next 'dissent' will be aimed at the other end of the political spectrum!

An example please? I can't recall ever saying someone should not be allowed to voice an opinion. I simply question whether their voice criticising the Left should be called leftist when its the same opinion as those who say they aren't on the Left.

If Glavin's article was entitled "A view of the Left from the Right" and dropped the silly "is the Left too smug?" do you think the article would have been criticised half as much? Nope.

Everything??? In other words, like Glavin says, I'm the cause of environmental catastrophe, foreign wars and poverty because I'm a Leftee?? Wow. I didn't know I had such power. If I knew that I might have been smug.

But since you agree we on the Left are the cause of all these terrible things then why would you care about whether or not you can be a Lefty? You really want to be part of a movement that's to blame for all these terrible things? Why?

I do not wish to be a "member" of any movement that restricts it's thinking to a template. The left today is guilty of thinking inside the box.Period. I consider myself a free thinker.What you call "leftist" today means ideologue. When I grew up "leftie" meant freedom to protest, freedom to think. The more the left boxes itself in and aligns itself with the loonies simply because they are anti US or anti Israel the less and less it will have any credibility.

An example please? I can't recall ever saying someone should not be allowed to voice an opinion. I simply question whether their voice criticising the Left should be called leftist when its the same opinion as those who say they aren't on the Left.

Far too many but for starters the silencing of speakers at Concordia was a great one. Again you are living proof with your statement above; i.e NO ONE can criticize the left, or they will be labelled the right? Right? Sad. If your logic is correct then the same loonie opinions equally found on far right and far left web sites would mean that some (extreme) lefties are what: fascists and Nazis?

(sorry quotes in the wrong place)

I do not wish to be a "member" of any movement that restricts it's thinking to a template. The left today is guilty of thinking inside the box.Period. I consider myself a free thinker.What you call "leftist" today means ideologue. When I grew up "leftie" meant freedom to protest, freedom to think. The more the left boxes itself in and aligns itself with the loonies simply because they are anti US or anti Israel the less and less it will have any credibility.

Examples of the censoring by the left: silencing of speakers at Concordia was a great one. Again you are living proof with your statement above; i.e NO ONE can criticize the left, or they will be labelled the right? Right? Sad. If your logic is correct then the same loonie opinions equally found on far right and far left web sites would mean that some (extreme) lefties are what: fascists and Nazis?

Terry Glavin:

Short report in the Globe today: Unexploded cluster bombs in Lebanon are now killing 3 or 4 civilians every day. So on the one hand, there is the threat, on the other hand, there is the act. On the one hand there is barbarism, on the other hand there is .....? Darn, this is confusing!

naddude
Criticize away.

It's the right wing sites like 'proud' to be Canadian or whatever they're calling it these days who don't like the criticism. They hang out a few cheesy Canadian flags and think that's all there is to being a patriot. But say something mildly critical and you're out the door.

Personally, I'm with those who say that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, but anyway: Try posting something remotely like the slander Glavin heaps on his imaginary conception of the doctrinaire left on that site - or Ezra Levant's Western Standard (with alterations for the different slant of course) and see what happens.

You just don't read very well.

You posted a statement which decried the state of the 'left' from the phony position of a 'pretend' leftist. Frank just suggested you're not a leftist at all and you'd be happier somewhere else.

If you want to hang around here and catch flak - so be it. The only people who do any redacting around here are the editors and I'll tell you right now that they're far less likely to clip your wings than they are those of the real leftists.

If you had actually been here much you'd know that.

In fact, EVERYONE criticizes the left - that's the point.

I wasn't there. So you're against protesting? I think its a waste of time myself but I support people having the right to do it.

Depends on the criticism. Do you read the other threads? If someone says I'm a Lefty but I don't believe in a social safety net, medicare, limits on torture, or regulation of business you would say that my saying they're not Left-wing would be "labelling" them? Fine, guilty. But I'm still correct.

I've never met anyone who didn't.

Not true. It will have less credibility with those who disagree with it but so what? If people disagree with a policy of a political party it doesn't mean that party has less credibility. Many on the Left think the Right has no credibility because they've agreed with the US on everything for decades. Does that mean the Right should change?

If for you Israel is such an important issue that the NDP's stand on it means you have to leave the party then I'm sorry. There's lots of things I disagree with Layton over too but I don't stop voting for them because I know I agree with the NDP more than I do other parties. If that were to change my solution would not be to attack the NDP, my solution would be to join a different party. I don't know why you find that offensive and nor do I see any other solution.

"What you call "leftist" today means ideologue."

This has been hurled at us since the left began 200 years ago. Nothin' new there dude. I suggest you get some new lines when you attack us.

There will be a meeting about BC Hydro and Bill 30 on Saturday 10/21 at the VPL Main Branch, Hamilton an Georgia at 7:30 PM.

Backgrounder:
http://www.commonground.ca/iss/0610183/stolen_rivers.pdf

"What you call "leftist" today means ideologue."

This has been hurled at us since the left began 200 years ago. Nothin' new there dude. I suggest you get some new lines when you attack us.

Suggest you come up with something new other than "us" vs them. Suggest you look up "ideologue" in dictionary then look in the mirror. (it's not a dirty word.)

Frank:
Points well taken. Thank you for that. But if however the NDP leader suggests that we must negotiate with the Taliban (and perhaps even Al Queda, and the party passes loony one-sided resolutions at the convention it's time to part company because he's lost touch with reality (as Bob Rae did years ago).

Lots of new faces here (at least to me). That's a good sign - the Tyee is attracting new blood into its readership, and new participants on the threads. It's a breath of fresh air.

naddude
I can remember the right wing, which is where you actually belong naddude, saying and writing exactly the same thing about the Vietnam war. Only instead of Taliban they were talking about the Viet Cong and the North vietnamese.

If you paid a little more attention to what's actually going on in the world you'd realize that it's not only Jack Layton who's saying we have to start 'talking' to our enemies. In fact, it's only compromised Generals like Rick Hillier and and the neocons in Stevie's closet (sorry cabinet) who talk about their enemies as scumbags.

The Bob Rae example will require a little more thought - I don't think he ever negotiated with any foreign governments so I have no idea what you're driving at.

As I recall, the people who were maddest at Rae as premier were public sector workers who didn't like the way he treated them. IS that the 'reality' you're talking about?

Interesting that this is your example since I just spent 3 weeks arguing on other threads with G West and others about the Afghan deployment. I agree with it and in fact want it expanded and lengthened. Which puts me at odds with the NDP and many of my friends here. So I understand your view. For me its not a deal breaker though. If for you it is AND you are still a leftist when it comes to social policy stuff then I can see your conundrum and sympathize.

For me Glavin however was way over the top with his view that we on the Left are basically allied with terrorists. I wouldn't accuse G West of that even if he did continue to threaten me with physical violence :-)

G West:

The Viet Cong had zero aspiration of taking over the world and imposing the new world order ( akin to that of the 6th century where women are slaves, we are all subject to public executions, and everyone other than Muslims are infidels who must be eradicated.) If you think that's a fair analogy then you are exactly what Glavin is warning us against, tired old (PC) and very dangerous rhetoric. Unlike you, I however, won't stoop to telling you exactly where you belong.

Frank:

I don't think he is saying the Left is allied with terrorists. Just that some elements (of the Left) are blinded by ideology.

This is a fine example:
http://www.straight.com/content.cfm?id=19420

Leftie Ltd: (Vs the non right -wing extremist M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y.

Self - fulfilling prophecy ....errr self foolfilling P-A-R-O-D-Y.

Nightbloom: My Compliments on your precis on the blog which commenced with ..."I've noticed an unwarranted proprietary attitude"...

Even Frank has shown his inner Rodney Dangerfield.

On that note...in the classic Monty Python movie " Life of Brian" there is a scene involving the stoning of a blasphemer. As they are about to commence...the "authoritative definitive expert" (John Cleese)lets the blasphemous word slip...and the stoning instead gets aimed at them. Of course they try to defend their error which simply has the lathered up and programmed crowd of stoners on auto -toss mode.

Many of these TYEE bloggers remind one of the same skit. Their continued non-mea culpa is that the Left Ltd. can't be blamed till given a chance...all the while not realizing they have had several chances in power ......and that's exactly WHY they serve long sentences in electoral purgatory till the oft popular historical choices (ie the NON left) may need to regroup after electoral probation and spend a term in opposition.

Yes..the 2006 Fall sitting cancelled???...as Gaulois duly and eloquently noted, the NDP when in power were as guilty of this if not moreso, but of course the Left has short term memory disorder aka "denial , delusion and dogma" as temporary insanity defences.

maestro,

Since the creation of the CCF the Left has been in power for 0 years federally.

Ontario? One term under Bob Rae.

Manitoba? Doer and Shreyer. Correct me if there was someone else.

BC? 3 terms

Saskatchewan, most of the time.

So you're saying perhaps that that record is somehow worse than what the Conservatives have delivered in their many many years in power both federally and especially across the provinces? Or that the Liberals have stellar records?

Oh please

Also, based on that very slim record Glavin is blaming us for problems in the Middle East, global warming and the failures of the 3rd world to no longer be the 3rd world?

Nonsense.

Obviously what's required is a few articles about the Right written by Right-wingers who can see through the crap although I've never met such a man.

But since the mainstream media and the alternative media like the Tyee both think its necessary to attack the Left it'll of course never happen.

naddude.
Glavin said,

I would ask, just what were we supposed to do? Besides, why would the onus even be on us? Our opinion wasn't asked for before the war nor do I see anyone on the Right asking for it now.

Glavin's piece in the Straight belongs in t Nat Pest. Some Nasrallah supporting Lebanese show up at a peace demo and the Coalition gets tarred with supporting Hezollah. I am sorry, dude, but this is an old, old, old trick. Back in my 1960's Ban the Bomb days the Communist Party would show up with its banners and us anti-communist pacifists would be slandered as communists. Dude, is too young to know this, Glavin isn't. That shows what a lying little prick he is...

naddude

You must be joking.

How old are you?

Never heard of domino theory? The analogy is entirely appropriate. The right wing has been operating on fear pills ever since the Enola Gay dropped the first atom bomb on Hiroshima.

maestro:
can't you get anything right? It was gerhardius who pointed out the fatuity of the comparison between the BC Libs and the NDP respecting the need (or not) for fall sessions.

Socialist international? Hmm isn't that the organization that Tony Blair belongs to?

What would Glavin suggest - a bun fight at the next convention? Uniquely positioned to throw up in disgust - but that's about all.

Frank:

I appreciate the non -taxable charitable donation your past blog generously provided to further my premise...

Consider the dare -I -say "competition" to be the governing party is sufficiently based on a convincing selling job to the electorate base, and further based ,of course, to some degree on a resume' or track record , not to mention past history.

3 NDP Gov'ts in BC in 34 years for a total of approx. 11 years was obviously enough for the great UNawashed BC voters.

The Green Party are perhaps either " NDP Lite" or perhaps "Industrial Strength NDP"...to be determined later as they evolve into a viable and again dare I say "competitive" option.

Re-tread Bob Rae's past ascension to infamy and oblivion gave Canada somewhat of an Eastern version - bookend example of what the consequences of the "protest vote " are....the devil you don't know versus the devil you do.

Sorry ....that's plenty without any more examples.

It appears that these Leftie Ltd . Gov'ts get caught in the headlights of power , press and public eye and now have these ideologues and dogmatists now have to "put up or shut up" after years of holier- than -thou opposition.

They then run up the Public Credit card to create their Utopia .....aka run the legislative vehicle like they are DUI.... pay back those they feel they owe....and we ultimately reciprocate the honour bestowed upon us by their governance via the double edged sword of the democratic process ....ie we seem to(i) see justice served by sending them back to the ranks of the opposition (ii) and then back to the "devils" we know...

I mean, really,... how "kinky" and UNsophisticated do the Lefties Ltd. feel the general UNwashed electorate is ?

Perhaps the poli-formula is simply " The term of office is directly proportional to the group that has sufficiently earned the UNwashed Public's vote and inversely proportional to the one that hasn't, all things being equal" +/- protest vote.

Again delusion, denial and dog-ma...bark bark and as usual barking up the wrong tree .

G West: aka eternal vigilance

Thanks...you are correct .... it was Gerhardius (Not Gaulois) to give credit where credit is due on the B.C Gov't legislative sittings stats.

P.S. I promise I won't mention your earlier "SEX Ron.E." faux pas blogged earlier...it was a classic hoot...we won't get into Freud et al on that "slip".

quoting RTB : "peace bro".

As I said in another place maestro, you are not making any sense. In order to actually construct a rational case for something or other you have to put down the microphone, climb down off that stage and forget that your dream job was stand up comedy.

You haven't contended with a single one of Frank's points and your jokes just aren't funny.

If you knew anything about the politics of Ontario and the circumstances of the economic meltdown that began just as Rae came, unexpectedly, to power, you wouldn't be so cavalier with your facile explanation of his downfall.

And that DUI line - that only works when you're talking about a felon called Gordon Campbell. The operative slag with the BC NDP is bingogate so you have to bring in Catholic church halls and Dave Stupich's swimming pool.

Who writes your stuff?

nothin freudian about it - damn 'x' key is right beside the damn 'z' key is all - I thought it was kind of funny though.

maestro, as usual, trying to follow what you write is quite the exercise.

Somewhere in your post I sensed you were trying to say that the NDP doesn't win elections because when they win elections they're really bad.

I disagree but that's also irrelevant. The point I made was that since the Left is rarely ever in power, which you seem to agree with, blaming us for the problems of the world is laughable in the extreme.

I understand that the idea that people you vote for might be to blame makes you uncomfortable. I get it. You and Glavin are victims of the big, bad (yet somehow harmless) NDP.

You and Glavin and the Tyee really don't have anything to worry about. There's not an NDP gov't anywhere near you, You're safe. Yet somehow, like the main stream media, you'd rather talk about what's wrong with the Left than address the policies of those who actually hold power.

Well if the Tyee is going for controversy in their articles then they picked the 'right' guy, Terry Glavin.

I think the 'problem' for the 'liberal-left' is that they don't have a long-range coherent and easily digestible vision for the world. They react to the 'Right' more often than articulating what it is they (i.e. I) want. Parties like the NDP sit too much on the fence and don't get into the meat of the hows and whys of economic inequality and injustice. They don't go after the root problem, so try to solve the symptoms without attacking the root causes, therby wasting their time, and creating easy targets for themselves vollied from the right.

I consider myself a socialist with anarchist tendencies, and think it is still important and useful to diagnose our current economic, ecological and social problems from a Marxian perspective.

I know as soon as I say Marxian some people are just going to throw up their hands in exasperation. However, at least I know where I'm coming from, whereas many of the previous posters here (i.e. Cappy) only see an object or social-economic problem from one perspective.

What vision does Glavin have for the Left? For it not to exist?

It's really too bad the Tyee couldn't find someone out there with some more original ideas and humor and vision, rather then Terry Glavin, who is yesterday's old and bitter man.

Crass,
Couldn't agree more. You have to watch using that 'Marxian' term with maestro though, because he thinks you're talking about aliens.

But yeah, I agree, the left needs to start pointing out the fundamental faults of the way the current set up works (mostly doesn't work really well for any but the top echelons in our culture) and what some real alternatives could be. We need to look more closely at places where western societies have actually created democratic socialist regimes that don't have the inherent inequalities that make the 'rule of law' in this country a joke.

But we also need to point out the need for more cooperative enterprise and the importance of leaving a lighter footprint on the land for our children.

The problem is that the closer a left-leaning party actually gets to power - and in BC if the greens last time had voted NDP then Campbell would be the leader of the opposition - its members and officials start playing games and forget why they want to form government. They become worry warts and their fear of screwing up paralyzes them.

Remember how wild Dave Barrett used to be as leader of the opposition, before 1972?

I know it's hard to get thrown out of the legislature if it's not in session - but it sure gets the public’s attention. Getting any coverage in the media these days is a Sisyphean task.

Glavin is a joke. The Tyee prints him because management is trying to make a point to someone who 'really' isn't a leftist and would just as soon we all shut up.

In my view.

Right on Crass! All Glavin does really is waste our time, sort of like a paid troll...

Oh, I thought he was talkin' about Harpo (not the pretend PM) or Groucho. Maestro ought to either go back to sleep or wake up his lonely brain cell.

This cant about the left and their tax and spend ways is so Goebbels technique produced by repeating a big lie over, and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and.....

The federal libs inherited a record (to date and likely still) sea of red ink from the Jaw that walked like a man and lied like a rug and I won't even consider that so much of the deficit the Lyin B rang up left Ottawa in the pockets of hisself and cronies for now.

Then they (the libs, not wild eyed Martians but left of fiscally responsible PC Lyin B (gag))established the novel habit of annual surpluses in defiance of most of the G8 countries, except that lefty to the south, Clinton down in the US doing the same.

Then in the Excited Snakes they went back to the Right, rock ribbed conservative family value type child molesting Bush Crime Family and they are having a repeat of Y2K, only this time it's the debt clock that has to be rebuilt from scratch to accomodate digits to the left of the decimal point that not even Stephen Hawking knew existed until the Chimp spent that much -while giving tax cuts to hard pressed billionaires. Hey it ain't cheap trying to run wars all over the world AND in space and then there are Condi's shoes and Darth Cheney's replacement hearts to budget for.

Then we come to Chairman Glen, who hands over a balanced set of books (according to auditors, no matter what Canwest wants to make up) to those fiscally rascally genuine DUI collector led BCLibs and in no time Gordo the Great turns BC into a have not province for the first time in its history so he can collect Welfare from Jean and Paul.

So basically cram it somewhere about the left spending irresponsibly - they're usually too busy cleaning up the financial mess from the Conservatives or Republicans or whatever right wing mongrel is pretending to provide responsible government to BC this year.

maestro
On your way to the bar to buy a drink for Frank and anarcho and me and the other guys at the table here could you hand the microphone you've been playing with to rkewen.

He's the guy with the funny standup routine.

LOL

G West:

Actually I am old eanough to have relatives who were real front line socialists not arm chair ones like..... ah hem,
Any way I don't hink anyone really worried about the Viet Cong coming over to America, taking over its democratic system and impsing an ancinet extreme theisitc one (not to mention flying airpalnes through buildings, bombing trains or some time soon detinating a nuke,) This was a far cry from the Domino theory, which BTW will actually come to fruition in the ME very very soon ( Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Sudan, Ethopia and then....????)

I didn't believe the domino theory either naddude so why would you expect me to be too concerned about the likelihood of finding an Islamofascist under my bed.
I posted a link for another credulous soul called Ron Erwin here a few days ago. He's a bit of a shrinking violet too and has had the vapours since 9/11.

I'll see if I can find it for you - I'll be back in just a minute.

Here it is. Pretty respectable establishment journal too. Surprised?

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060901facomment85501/john-mueller/is-there-still-a-terrorist-threat.html

Now if you're saying that the people of the middle east don't have the right to elect a government that might disagree with the way they've been bullied and pushed around in their own homes for scores of years and, if they bally well please, can send our free-booting corporations back to wherever they've come from – welllllll I guess that means you're not much of a democrat either.

Dude, "Actually I am old eanough to have relatives who were real front line socialists "

That means they must be about my age...

Like I say, you aren't old enough to realize when you are being bamboozled by those old, old tricks. Islamists under the bed in 2006, Commies under the bed in 1956. Either way propaganda to frighten the niave so the military industrial complex can milk the taxpayer. Be assured if the Islamists go the way of the Stalinists, and this shitty system still exists they will trump up a new threat. Say, how about Extra Terrestrials? No! theres one right now! Gosh, its crawling out from under my bed. Help! Terry, George,Steve Save me...

Glavin's right about Afghanistan.
Fascists are fascists.
Hope this link works:

http://www.e-ariana.com/ariana/eariana.nsf/allDocs/2E33F47B23134F6A8725720C006CBE7A?OpenDocument

kurt
What's your point. No one's saying they aren't. The question is, are they hiding under naddude's bed.

Terrorism is a tactic of the weak and powerless, always has been. Industrial capitalists prefer to deliver their knockout punches from 33,000 feet.

The link works, the point is irrelevant.

Perhaps you recall how the Iraq war started? Remember President Bush's little fireside chat about how he'd sent the bombers over to make an attempted surgical assassination attempt on Saddam's life?

Remember the prices on the heads of the 52 members of the Pentagon's famous 'deck of cards'? Remember the 'dead or alive' speeches? Was all that lost on you?

Not at all, Gwest. Just trying to widen the discussion. Try this one:

http://www.e-ariana.com/ariana/eariana.nsf/allArticles/A4D14226279FB43C872571EE0041BF80?OpenDocument

Oh, and by the way, those Americans who were pooh-poohing the estimates of lives lost in Iraq since this insanity started; I wonder what they'd have to say about this story from an Iraqi in Baghdad.

You can find the blog here:
http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2006_10_01_riverbendblog_archive.html#116120448528625171

The relevant paragraphs are as follows ( in two sections, it’s a bit long) :

The responses were typical- war supporters said the number was nonsense because, of course, who would want to admit that an action they so heartily supported led to the deaths of 600,000 people (even if they were just crazy Iraqis…)? Admitting a number like that would be the equivalent of admitting they had endorsed, say, a tsunami, or an earthquake with a magnitude of 9 on the Richter scale, or the occupation of a developing country by a ruthless superpower… oh wait- that one actually happened. Is the number really that preposterous? Thousands of Iraqis are dying every month- that is undeniable. And yes, they are dying as a direct result of the war and occupation (very few of them are actually dying of bliss, as war-supporters and Puppets would have you believe).

For American politicians and military personnel, playing dumb and talking about numbers of bodies in morgues and official statistics, etc, seems to be the latest tactic. But as any Iraqi knows, not every death is being reported. As for getting reliable numbers from the Ministry of Health or any other official Iraqi institution, that's about as probable as getting a coherent, grammatically correct sentence from George Bush- especially after the ministry was banned from giving out correct mortality numbers. So far, the only Iraqis I know pretending this number is outrageous are either out-of-touch Iraqis abroad who supported the war, or Iraqis inside of the country who are directly benefiting from the occupation ($) and likely living in the Green Zone.

The chaos and lack of proper facilities is resulting in people being buried without a trip to the morgue or the hospital. During American military attacks on cities like Samarra and Fallujah, victims were buried in their gardens or in mass graves in football fields. Or has that been forgotten already?

And, Mr Glavin's phony assertion that this is all the 'left's ' fault, notwithstanding, here's the rest of it:

There are Iraqi women who have not shed their black mourning robes since 2003 because each time the end of the proper mourning period comes around, some other relative dies and the countdown begins once again.

Let's pretend the 600,000+ number is all wrong and that the minimum is the correct number: nearly 400,000. Is that better? Prior to the war, the Bush administration kept claiming that Saddam killed 300,000 Iraqis over 24 years. After this latest report published in The Lancet, 300,000 is looking quite modest and tame. Congratulations Bush et al.

Everyone knows the 'official numbers' about Iraqi deaths as a direct result of the war and occupation are far less than reality (yes- even you war hawks know this, in your minuscule heart of hearts). This latest report is probably closer to the truth than anything that's been published yet. And what about American military deaths? When will someone do a study on the actual number of those? If the Bush administration is lying so vehemently about the number of dead Iraqis, one can only imagine the extent of lying about dead Americans…

Don't be too surprised if the bruised and battered Iraqi people are feeling a little nostalgic for the bad old days when their worst nightmare was Saddam Hussein.

kurt
If you've followed the debate on the other thread here, you'll know that I have no particular sympathy for the Taliban. Here’s my take on the situation:

It's clear to me that the opportunity for the west to make things 'better' in Afghanistan was squandered by the US at the time it decided to invade Iraq. In fact, American reconstruction aid amounted to only some 230 million dollars (the vast majority of which was spent on bombs and guns) or $10.00 for each man woman and child in the country and not the $1.8 billion that was promised. This is a country of 23,000,000 people that exists, outside of Kabul (which is pretty rough and ready itself), in a state of development that can only be described as pre-industrial revolution. Furthermore, since the 1970s much of its territory has been engulfed in a discontinuous state of war. To suggest that 230 million dollars would come even close to covering the reconstruction costs for a country whose biggest export is opium is just absurd. To further suggest that a 2000 member battle group without its own air support is going to be an effective military force anywhere is naïve.

Why our government has lied to the Canadian people about this while 38 young Canadians have given up their lives for such futility is the real question Mr. Glavin should be asking.

Canada tried to do its part - and is still trying to do so. Sadly, as the actions of Peter McKay today indicate, the government and the military brass have been lying to the Canadian people and the soldiers on the ground in country. We are in trouble!!

We haven't a hope of turning this around under the current circumstances - any more than the Americans have any hope of turning Iraq around. Even Bush is slowly coming to the realization that he's caught in a trap of his own making and that there are real similarities to the situation Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon found themselves in in Vietnam.

Of course the media are going to demonize the enemy and I have no doubt there's a lot of bloody nastiness going on; but, it is their country and the best thing we can hope for now is to find a way to deliver it back to them in such a way that they may be able to make the best of it.

As for Karzai's statements: what would you expect him to say?

From the insurgent's point of view he and his administration are the enemy - of course they're trying to kill them any way they can. My point was simply that the US and Canada have been doing exactly the same thing - just in a slightly more organized and disciplined way.

naddude:

This statement is a really clear example of how to say absolutely nothing. How old you are says nothing about the age of any given relative of yours. My grand daughter is old enough to be related to Charlemange, come to think of it, so am I. Jeez nad man, my grand daughter and I must be around the same age.

There's a word that is spelled T-A-U-T-O-L-O-G-Y, and that is different than a simile which is yet again different than an analogy. None of these words are necessarily related to any person living or dead, which includes most everybody.

Of course lots of folks waste a lot of space and words saying nothing sensible or logical while assuming the role as some kind of expert. Does that mean they are over 100 miles from home?

btw - I was amazed to note that Amerika the One-duh-ful-or-it was so taken by George the 1st Fool's willingness to concede that the current situation in Eye-wrack could be compared to the Tet Offensive. His little smirk (cuz he knows stuff vis-a-vis Diebold that we don't?) as he mentioned that there was also an election coming up was OFFENSIVE to the MAX.

How did he become such an expert on Vietnam? Oh yeah, he read about it in the paper, oops that can't be right, he saw it on TeeVee. He was in a bar in Alabama while he was busy being AWOL from the Texas Air National Guard because he was in a snit that they wouldn't let him fly them shiney jets cuz he wouldn't take a wee wee test cuz he didn't want to share any of the cocaine residue with the medical staff and his superior (as if such creatures actually existed) officers.

He was doing all of the above instead of being over in Vietnam "kicking gook butt." He wasn't as macho then as he is now that he can hide under the desk in the Oval Office or be surrounded by hundreds of bodyguards in a couple hundred armoured Hummers, just to drive down a previously evacuated street in the former East Germany.

Didja know you could get an action figure GI George full dressed (codpiece and all) for "Mission Accomplished" Day?

I think I'll limit my statements to just Sheeeeeez, from now on.

This is long and split in 2.

An interesting introduction with a valid, if simplistic, observation followed by dismissal of the author's point of view. Now things get a little hyperbolic:

What a unique term for those one opposes: "subhuman." What intrigues me about this is how it introduces another fear producing bugbear: "total annihilation." There seems to be a barrage of threats like never before, at least that is what folks from different regions of the circle of political thought try to tell us. On the one hand, Islam is the greatest threat to civilization since the Worldwide Communist Conspiracy to Sap and Impurify Our Precious Bodily Fluids; on the other hand the US & Israel have brought us closer to the brink than "ever before." What a stark choice we appear to have. It is interesting which people believe we are "closer than ever before" to "total annihilation:" bible thumping Neocons awaiting the 2nd coming and anti-US FoPers and anti-Zionists.

Fact hunting is something I truly respect. Now, signing something is often meaningless in this day and age, see Kyoto or myriad agreements, protocols and other issues governed by the aether like "International Law," but here the author has singles out the Euston Manifesto as

CLANG! Blessed excrement, what an original turn of phrase! If you have not already done so at some point in the last few months you can read it here http://eustonmanifesto.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=38 but be warned it has its own sud-basement of acrobatics and justifications. I do not agree with the Euston Manifesto, but for some reason the way it was portrayed made me re-read the entire platform.

Pretty straight forward, but far too absolutist when one actually reads the EM and not the many critiques of it. Their section "Opposing anti-Americanism" (6) is pretty tame and merely distinguishes between US FoP and the US body politic, hardly a zero tolerance policy on criticizing the US. They also advocate a 2 state solution in Palestine, hardly a mainstream Zionist position.

Part 2

Now Michael Ledeen is the "most sinister arch-neocon ever." Who is he? The riddler? He is just another Neocon hack, elevated to villain level by some quirk of fate. This is similar to that pathetic litany from the US about how Saddam was the meanest guy since Hitler, conveniently forgetting that Khadafi, Noriega, Khomeni, and so on had all played the role before. Rather than using "sinister arch-neocon" for Ledden I would argue that Ledeen, Kristol et al are merely henchmen for the "sinister arch-neocon" Strauss. I checked out the list of signatories for the EM and did not find Ledeen there (check it out for yourself), but I did find that name on a list one can join by simply adding one's name and email address here http://eustonmanifesto.org/joomla/content/view/84/49/ to a list of "signers or supporters in the United States of the Euston Manifesto" Apparently this process used to be automatic, but when I signed up as "Tyee Ingkhai" this message appeared:

Signatures are now being held for moderation due to some juvenile efforts at vandalism

Let's see if Mr. Ingkhai becomes a signatory of the Euston Manifesto. Signing the name of a Neocon from the American Enterprise Institute may have been a joke, are "arch-neocons" really known for advocating a big tent? It may also have been an effort to portray the EM as something it is not. Unfortunately it appears that, in their zeal for support, those at EM neglected to realise that some people have an agenda to discredit using any means necessary. Realistically, who gains from Ledeen's or any other Neocon buzzname appearing on a list such as this? Would Ledeen gain anything other than opprobrium from his ideological peers by signing? Would the folks from the EM gain from the support of a Neocon? There is no internal logic to Ledeen becoming a signatory of the Euston Manifesto except as a convenient icon of discontent for the opposition? Ledeen did mention the EM in not un-complimentary tones, but is that the same as signing? What is perhaps most striking is that a search reveals hardly a mention of Ledeen's supposed signing of the EM from a right wing perspective, but does reveal a number of anti-EM Ledeen related comments dating from shortly after his name appeared on that freely accessed sign up list. Mass hearsay at this point, but it has reached the level of Important Received Dogma: the Euston Manifesto is a Neocon plot!!!

Yes, the Tyee is truly becoming another voice for the Zionists. Apparently it was determined that the readers of the Tyee represent the last literate slice of the population that has not bowed down to the Sexagram.

Go and read the Euston Manifesto and make up your own mind. It isn't the alternative it claims to be, nor is it "neocon lite" as one commentator described based upon 2nd hand analysis. It is simply reviving generic European social democracy while trying to limit the "umbrella of concern" to a manageable level. Disagree in whole or in part, but do it for yourselves and try not to rely on the standard buzz words and catch phrases to justify the same light switch thinking you believe your opponents are guilty of. What I quoted could have very easily come from Der Sturmer or Pravda by simply changing a few nouns. It is the structure that matters and a structure like this should have the BS bells ringing like a Harper press conference.

Change one, I imagine an article in Pravda towards the end of Bukharin's last bout of acceptability to Stalin:

Change two, a response by Streicher to Walter Winchell and a mythical "Versailles Manifesto" that must have had something to do with the oppression of the Jews in Germany. It was before I was born and as it does not exist I have not read this hypothetical manifesto but it sure ticked off some Nazis:

Change three, Streicher is now the target of Winchell:

G West:

aka "the all -seeing god of cyber space"

Sorry ....just got a photo of some Marxians in my back yard when the spaceship landed....don't know why RKewen had to flip the indigent digit...F'n rude. Good news is the photo should be on the cover of the Socialist Inquirer/Inquisition soon...circulation ( 5)...and Stupich's cheques apparently bounced.

Too bad you had to try to convert the Marxians like a JW's with your truckload of hard copies of the "THE BEST OF G WEST TYEE BLOGS" aka ALL of them. The Marxians sensed this and took off, but left RKewen behind who is still frozen in the same aforementioned pose.

Can you use your super cyber powers to help guide the Marxian spaceship back and drop him off in West Van,ie near Frank's house?

"peace bro" (cc)

A bit like feminist 'social' theory I've always thought.

Nice piece Gerhardius!

Maestro:
As is often the case, you can't write because you can't read and you can do neither because you can't actually think!

I didn't flip you or anybody else any digits. I simply pointed out that you used a whole paragraph full of actual words that were even spelled correctly (for the most part) to say absolutely nothing. Not only that, but you said nothing so poorly that I find it difficult to even speculate about whatever in the hell you were even trying to say.

Of course, I may be giving you far too much credit. I'm obviously jumping to the conclusion that you have the slightest idea what you were trying to mean, either!

If you think that is flippin' a digit, maybe I should send you a .jpg. At least maybe you would comprehend that.

BTW:
Just because it's too good to be forgotten, I will re-post a pearl from James Burns a day or two ago.

priceless!

Rkewen is back !!

Yes !!!

And in fine pristine origi-anal form.

BTW comrade....re: your trials and tribulations to post on the TYEE ..many of us fellow comrades have duly noted similar tech problems.

However, while it is tempting to postulate a conspiracy and to " bribe" err..." fiscally encourage" the TYEE editor et al to only allow intelligent , objective, prevent the ad nauseum "agree with Leftie Ltd or dye a painful excommunication to the majority ", non -ranting debates and discusssion , many of us have decided that YOU, G West (???) and Swiss - neutral Frank...and a few UN-named others are legally, morally and ethically entitled to the same free speech with the democratic society we all (Further qualify that: MOST of us)ACTUALLY treasure.

Unless mistaken, I seem to recall the basic issue of this TYEE discusion is more along the lines of a Nader-esque quality control review of the Left...not a Nadir-esque hissy fit - slapping match which seems to be the Leftie Ltd.s' only means of defence /debate(?)

The "right wing" and the "right of center" and those often umbrella'd or associated with it are, relatively speaking, fairly quantifiable...most certainly in the Leftie Ltd. Oxford.

Perhaps try a version of the beer commercial "I am Canadian" (please ignore the Quebec parody "I am not Canadian" albeit hilarious)...so you Lefties can hold your sustainable bottled water and state " I am a CONSTRUCTIVE Leftie" , ie hint-hint (i) here's where I stand, (ii)what I stand for, (iii)why I stand for it..(iv) what I see as both the problem AND the solution...and actually quit playing these misdirection, King Kanute-ism, and other straw man games...I have seen way too many of those , and in person too.

....maybe try the Public Health System as a start.

PS. "I am simply a PROTESTING Leftie " need not apply.

G West:Terrorism is a tactic of the weak and powerless, always has been. Industrial capitalists prefer to deliver their knockout punches from 33,000 feet.

Bombs from 33,000 feet, anti-personnel land mines, guided missiles = murder.

You don't have a point, do you?

You don't have a point, do you?

Actually Glavin's point is that the left produces perverse points of view like......yours!

But since you mention murder and crimes:
http://tinyurl.com/y3q9eb

The point is that Glavin has no credibility in pretending the left is the party to this debate which ignores the disastrous effects of its own compromises with reality and truth. The exact opposite is true: The left is constantly in a process of changing, evolving and tearing itself apart. God if only the right wing were a little less sure that they are always on the side of the angels.

At the present moment in the unfurling history of the world the neocon right has the ascendancy. Those who sit around carping about the fact that the critics - who are NOT in power now and haven't been (in Canada anyway) ever, are more interested in trying to score facile debating points than actually coming to grips with positive change.
I only have one vote and one voice and I'm not conflicted at all by the penury of your reasoning, or Glavin's, about where the blame for the mess we're in lies.

You don't think the left is perfect, neither do I. The point is it's a hell of a lot more honest and self-critical than the self-serving monsters of the right.

Only in the last 6 weeks have I seen any indications at all that anyone from the right is making the slightest attempt to actually analyze and understand what a mess we're in. And, sadly, most of that criticism is part of a desperate attempt at whatever cost, to hang on to power.

If you don't like the truth, so be it. If you want to be part of the left try doing and writing something a little more sensible than posting nonsense about choosing which is the better way for murderers to practice their craft.

There's never anything perverse about the truth. Did you actually 'read' the material posted above? All of it.

We are pleased that Tyee has Terry Glavin writing for them. Left, right, or center is where folks are trying to place him. Met Terry probably twenty five years ago, and seen him around a few times since. In our view he does pretty good research and writes what he sees. Keep in coming Terry, we like your stuff. as for left wing, well I guess our family is left of center and don't intend to change. We should all read other points of view and then decide what we think is correct.

nadude The Amnesty International condemnation of Hebollah rocket attacks on Israeli civilians was preceded by a report dated July 26 in which Israel was severely condemned for the same targeting of civilians. Amnesty bowed to pressure and produced what you linked to.
http://www.amnesty.ca/amnestynews/upload/MDE1507006.pdf

Sorry, left out the most important part.
"Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects is a war crime (ICC Statute,
Article 8 (2) (b) (ii))."
Anyway, there are 14 pages of Israeli contraventions of the Geneva Accords.

The rockets didn't start flying until after Israel started bombing in their "measured"
response. It was measured all right. There were 10 times the civilians killed in Lebanon as in Israel. Most of the Israeli victims were Arabs who by law were not allowed in the bomb shelters.

And they say Jimmy Carter is over the top referring to Israel as an "Apartheid State."

This is from the Bring it On blog, the whole post follows:

Robert Steele was the second-ranking civilian (GS-14) in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988-1992. Steele is a former clandestine services case officer Central Intelligence Agency. He is the founder and CEO of OSS.Net, Inc. as well as the Golden Candle Society.

One of the commenters (Ancient One)observes:

Hopefully this admission will come from his cell at Nome, Alaska - as the result of "interrogation with the gloves removed." Sorry Duhbya, this was all your idea, remember?

Finally, a writer with a brain in his head at the Tyee. Thanks Terry Glavin, keep takin the piss out of these "smug lefties".

bcneocon

'keep'???

when's this going to start?

certainly no sign of it yet.

Wow. This thread is still going.

The rockets didn't start flying until after Israel started bombing in their "measured"
response. It was measured all right. There were 10 times the civilians killed in Lebanon as in Israel. Most of the Israeli victims were Arabs who by law were not allowed in the bomb shelters.

Actually the rockets have been going on for years. Yet another example of Leftie revisionist history!

Nan:

BTW it was Hizballah that did in FACT actually INTENTIONALLY target civilians. That is defacto and de jure a war crime. Black and white.Responding in kind or even with greater force is a grey area. If a dog bites a lion should it respond like a house cat?????

But of course you wouldn't SEE that as you are blinded by ....yes....Leftie ideology....proof once again that Terry Glavin is necessary. Thank you Terry!

naddude
I notice you haven't yet commented on the material posted above here from the Jewish periodical 'Forward' - the one which points out the fact that many right wing Israeli groups are not amused when 'Jewish' charities actually spend some of their assets and donations on helping the non-Jewish citizens and residents of Israel.

Why not?

The idea that Israel is blameless in its attitude and dealings with the Lebanese, the Palestinians or its own non-Jewish citizens is hardly a non-issue. But you totally ignore it. Why?

In fact, that's the problem with most critics, they only see what they want to see and it's pretty evident from what you've been posting above (and studiously ignoring in other posts) that that truism is far more apt when applied to you than it is when it's applied to the left.

Furthermore, as noted numerous times above - the "left" is not in power and has, in consequence, a far more vital role as a critic since the right wing - and if you are a fair person you know this is absolutely true - absolutely fails to criticize itself. Your own posts being signal evidence of this phenomenon.

The examples, many already posted here and certainly not avoiding the Israeli-Palestine issue, of the neocon mentality's refusal to confront its compromises with truth and openness shouldn't require any further detail.

I'll pay some attention to what you have to say if and when you begin to sound like an honest interlocutor. The same goes for Glavin.

In fact, in terms of ideology, I'd say you are the one who fails to see the log in your own eye - to parse a biblical metaphor.

naddude, since the mainstream media already blames everything on the Left, why is Glavin necessary? He already has a column in the Strait too doesn't he?

Do you read any left-wing columnists? What's the ratio?

Since Glavin has already been written off by most of the lefties here I would imagine that the next Glavin column will be received by a chorus of people praising him for attacking the Left and there will be little in reply. Much like what goes on in the Sun, Province, Globe, Post etc.

Unless there's actually someone out there who thinks the Left just has to read something critical to be turned to the Right? If that were true wouldn't the MSM have already accomplished that?

If the prime goal of the Tyee is to make money, then I guess it may not be much different than any other for-profit business. Perhaps the need for publishing the truth and/or facillitating a little more balance/sanity in the world is not paying the bills. We know that the fascist rightwing major media has a stranglehold on almost anything that tells of corruption by big business and rightwing governments. Sure, there is the cursory odd mention (generally not page 1-5) that something is amiss, but bad news about the government is soon out of the headlines. After all, why did sea lice and net pens vanish from the mainstream after one day of mentioning it? If the Tyee is needing this sort of thing to boost readership and the purchase of products advertised herein, then it is a sad commentary on the province of BC.

I would like to see the Tyee publish articles that delineate for readers what they can do to stop the destruction of the environment, the destruction of the middle class, the war against organised labour, the selling off of the assets of the province, the increase of children living in poverty, and the passing of legislation that diminshes BC(and Canadian) citizens' ability to know what is happening with/because of their government. If I see these things being published, I will do what capitalists do, vote with my money, make a contribution to the TYEE.

The fascist/neoconservative governments of the world have entirely too much power, and we have given it to them. It's a Brave New 1984 kind of World out there. We read that it was coming, Huxley and Orwell told us it was coming, and we let it happen anyway. Let's save what we can, and convince the people who have somehow been given millions and billions that they were wrong; they must now share.

There is however, some hope that, even as Tyee begins to knuckle under, some other less nominally truth friendly organs of mass communiction are starting to see the light.

I noticed with interest the following article in the Times of London (a Rupert Murdock organ last time I checked).

It starts out, quite amusingly I think - and especially ironically in light of the fact that this post is going up on a thread that self-consciously bills itself as "Dissent" - like this:

HARK — CAN YOU hear it? Borne on the wind, can you hear the sounds of construction — of hammers hammering and woodsaws sawing? And do you detect a note of panic? I do. The good ship Neocon is going down. She has struck the Iraqi rocks, the engine room is awash, and on the deck in anxious pursuit of something to float them away is a curious assembly.

Her Majesty’s Brigade of Neocon Columnists and Leader Writers mingles with much of the elite of British politics. The new Labour Cabinet and its courtiers and most of the Opposition’s front bench rub shoulders with Fleet Street’s finest. Is that David Aaronovitch I see, hammer in hand? Jack Straw is handing him the nails. There’s Michael Gove scribbling notes while Danny Finkelstein rips a blank sheet from a discarded do-it-yourself regime change manual, and ponders a hastily sketched design. Willie Shawcross has the saw and Tim Hames and Margaret Beckett are ripping planks from the deck. Gordon Brown skulks behind the mast as those unlikely bedfellows, Matthew d’Ancona, of The Spectator, and Johann Hari, of The Independent, assemble what timber they can find.

They are building a lifeboat for their reputations. The task is urgent. It is no small thing to find oneself on the wrong side of an argument when the debate is about the biggest disaster in British foreign policy since Suez; no small thing to have handed Iran a final, undreamt-of victory in an Iran-Iraq war that we thought had ended in the 1980s; no small thing to have lost Britain her credit in half the world; no small thing — in the name of Atlanticism — to have shackled our own good name to a doomed US presidency and crazed foreign-policy adventure that the next political generation in America will remember only with an embarrassed shudder...

- it continues, much more lengthily than can be posted here at:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2414249,00.html

The fascist/neoconservative governments of the world have entirely too much power, and we have given it to them. It's a Brave New 1984 kind of World out there. We read that it was coming, Huxley and Orwell told us it was coming, and we let it happen anyway. Let's save what we can, and convince the people who have somehow been given millions and billions that they were wrong; they must now share.

they must now share ???

yo! did you hear george junior tell the world...OUTTER SPACE IS THE DOMAIN OF THE UNITED MISTAKES ???

Whadda ya smokin man ?

Do you read any left-wing columnists? What's the ratio?

Glavin is necessary to "take the mickey out" of the Holier than though (present day) Left. I read all spectrum of columnists because as this bog has proved no-one wants to budge from the scripted-mantra-president's choice club, politically correct party line. Quite frankly I am sick of this leftest (holier than thou) vs rightest (fascist, imperialist, Zionist....did I leave out any "ists"?) distinction. As I have earlier posted, read the rants posted on "Leftist" sites like say.....I duno, Greg Felton or Gwynebag Dyer and compare them to the far right....I duno, let's say Ernst Zundel...and guess what? They are identical!! So Glavin's point is be critical regardless of political stripe which many here have made it painfully clear...they cannot do!

Good points, Frank. There's plenty of space on Tyee to hold these discussions without logging on to Glavin's vicious fake commentary.

And I think it's important to keep your eye on the ball.

Glavin wrote this:

"Instead, we have the spectacle of the celebrity American peace mum, Cindy Sheehan, hugging Hugo Chavez at a World Social Forum photo opportunity in Venezuela, at precisely the moment chavez was concluding a deal with the Russians for 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles, 24 fighter jets, and an arms manufacturing plant in caracas. This is the kind of thing that makes it impossible to ignore what is perhaps the greatest betrayal of the historic mission of the left. It was the great British writer, George Orwell who observed among certain leftists of his generation, "whose real, though unacknowledged motive appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration for totalitarianism."

My claim is that this is not political commentary, but lies masquerading as dissent.

Glavin knows as well as anyone the history of the United States propping up dictators and tyrants in South America. I bet he can even remember those slaughtered American nuns in El Salvador, the reign of Somoza in Nicaragua, (who, along with Mobutu in Zaire, another CIA supported killer and thief, is said to have personally owned up to 50% of the entire economy of the country) the CIA displacing democratically elected Allende in Chile, the entire sordid backing of the United Fruit Company in Quatemala and throughout the region, a private company that ruled like Leopold 2 ruled in the Belgian Congo.

Glavin knows all of this. So when he claims that Chavez's buying a few guns and planes to try to defend himself and his country, and Sheehan's wishing him good luck, amounts to some kind of " historic betrayal" by the left, he's lying.

When he writes that among today's left there's a pack of haters of western democracy and lovers of totalitarianism, he's not doing political commentary.

He's lying! And he knows it.

This column is Glavin's self-launch into Coulterism.

The Glavins will always be with us. They're a part of the human mix.

But all they ever really do is work towards the realization of their own private goals.

When we pay attention we ensure their success.

There's no dissent in Glavin's column. Just a pack of lies!

naddude
I notice you still haven't taken the mote out of your own eye.

Good point about outer space Harald. That little pas des deux has gotten almost 'no' notice in the press. Touche.

Beers is setting Glavin up, but there is also another element I think, by which he is sending a signal to us-, especially someone else as myself who goes back a long ways, say with a knowledge of the founding and evolution of the Georgia Straight. for which Glavin has done, at least, much of his "professional" writing. (Forgive the sneer. It is unintentional.:-)

At this point, for starters, check out the spelling of Straight. (It is the Georgia Strait that we are using for a play on words here. :-)

For the Georgia Straight, as some of you others may remember :-), started out as a radical kind of Hippy rag, which owner eventually "sold out" , as Beers is now about to do to Tyee, and morphed into the
current "entertainment industry" throw away that it has become. There are still some lingering and distant echoes of the old satirical Georgia Straight of course, but echoes only. Largely it is thoroughly by now "system integrated" and compromised.

Which "experience" Beers is, to me, now about to repeat as his own template-, having used us like cheap tawdry fuks to get himself off, up to this point, and is now about in the morning to trash us, dump us, and throw us over for Hollywood. In this his morning after, he is about to lose all respect for us, in favour of the bright lights of journalistic "respectability".

Which is okay if you, the fuckee upon the morning, know how to turn his use of you to your favour. And we should not hesitate to do so. Which is how the fukee becomes the fuker. :-) LOL

My view.

Hi Coyote. All of that stuff passed through my mind, too when Glavin showed up as a columnist, including a sense of betrayal, but I'm waiting for time to sort it out, as they say in England. Tyee could still be great AND real. Too soon to tell!

nadude
Did you mean articles like this from Greg Felton?
http://www.mediamonitors.net/gregfelton2.htmln2.html

or this recent news by and about Ernst Zundel?

http://www.rense.com/general74/ttou.htm

naddude Care to discuss
http://www.namnewsnetwork.org/read.php?id=13076

and the hypocricy of Israel's insistance on Iran not being allowed to enrich uranium under UN inspection.

naddude, do you vote Left?

For that matter does Glavin vote Left? Serious question, since I haven't a clue who he endorses.

Prediction:

Someone who blogged above will get their F*#king wrists slapped by THE TYEE editor for swearing like a Non- union longshoremen.

P.S. Anybody found Spanky's cement weighted cyber - body yet ???

Truman, you win the prize for pegging Glavin the most succintly.

Coyote re: the Georgia Str8 transmorgrification template Beers may be following - I certainly have been noticing more and more and more and more entertainment and style oriented articles each week, it seems.

And regarding:

Did anybody hear the rumor the Mr. Glavin was once a really ugly girl named Teri, and then lots of hormones and surgery later...............I don't know if I believe it though!

haraldkann wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:

I trust you are being facetious. There are plenty of stories that don't get any play, but I have seen, read and heard about the US claim on space through a wide variety of sources worldwide. Even Canada.com had the story listed on their main page last Thursday for a while, and there were many more on the RSS feeds while CNN and Newsworld both had discussions about the issue. The only question is: who is going to be the first to test the US claim? Making claims on space is kind of silly and pretty much irrelevant unless one is actually capable of enforcing that claim in some way. I have had a long standing claim on Saturn, so just a heads up that things could get nasty if they try to do anything more than look at my planet.

I think the point was less about the validity of the claim and more about the hubris that engendered it. The actual announcement on Columbus Day weekend got very little press - as is usual in these cases - the wake follows a ways behind the boat.
I make a point of never watching CNN.
How's your knee by the way?

Truman Green,

I hope you are right and that I am wrong brother. :-)

Don't think so though.

Yet it is that great minds think alike, nicht wahr? :-D LOL.

http://coyote-thepeoplesvoice.blogspot.com/

You are a good man-, in my view.

Gerhardius:
I did enjoy your post here (on this thread) the other day. The one that took issue with M. Ingkhai

One tiny quibble - I expect there'd have been less 'anti-Semitism' in the Streicher document you invented (antisemitisch) and more of the anti-bolshevik allusions Hitler was always making about the connections between the Jews and the Communists.

Stuff like: "… if the Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevisation of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe."

The Nazis, as I recall, always saw Communism and Judaism as one and the same thing.

Still I was impressed.

Alcibiades said:

Thanks for asking. Pretty much back to normal, that means arthritic sounding like rice crispies in milk when I move it...like the last 25 years. The advances in surgery between my first circa 81 and my most recent are pretty mind boggling. They did clean it up a bit as well as repairing the most recent injury. I usually play hockey through the winter but have decided to take at least a year off so I can be ready for the next season of summer soccer.

I went years without missing any games or activities due to injury, but since January I have: damaged rib cartilage twice (hockey), broken a toe (soccer), seperated a shoulder(hockey when I did the ribs the first time), dislocated my right thumb twice (hockey) and damaged knee ligaments (soccer). My wife reminds me that she gave me a broken nose in March when we both jumped off the couch to keep the cat from throwing up on her chair.

May be nature's way of telling you something my friend.
This time last year I was running between 9 and 10 k five days a week - now, not so much. Time, dammit, passes. Damn knees.

As long as you can still play some footie next summer, eh!

Those unfamiliar with Der Sturmer can find out a bit about it here http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/faculty/streich3.htm
and there is a listing of some images from it here http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/sturmer.htm

What I have read of Der Sturmer the writing level is very very low, even worse than the Province. I have read translations in a course but a prof showed me some originals and most of it was understandable with a very basic working knowledge of German. I do seem to recall that anti-Bolshevism was perhaps too complex an issue for Der Sturmer readers to grasp beyond the basic associations. Many cartoons of Jews did feature the star of David, a dollar sign, a hammer and sickle and a fourth symbol (masonic?) that seems to be slightly different in each cartoon. The quality of the images is low, but the other three symbols are familiar enough to be easily recognized. The fourth symbol looks like a Christian cross with unconnected bands of light at the NW, NE, SW and SE in some images and like eight spokes without a wheel in another. Der Sturmer was more racial than political.

Anti-Bolshevism was a feature of the more "thoughtful" Nazi propaganda. Fascism was unique in that it was essentially doctrine free beyond the concept of acquiring power and holding on. The lack of a true direct unquestionable philosophical "prime mover" like Marx allowed the doctrine to be guided by amoral pragmatism with an improvised philosophical basis. Their original objective required propaganda designed to elicit action and foment discontent: political propaganda worked on the fear of the Bolsheviks and was designed to gain soft support of the educated who would see the NSDAP as a bulwark against the Socialist hordes. This worked very well, and with the hubris of the right wing figures that believed they could control Hitler, led the Nazis to power. Their other propaganda vein was "social" as the Jews became the root of all the problems, and this was the primary area Der Sturmer was intended to address. Der Sturmer was a means of reaching the semi-educated disenchanted mass of unemployed in depression era Germany and attempt to draw them to the Nazis in the seeming zero-sum game where votes went to the extremes. The combination of symbols really shows the lack of a cohesive ideology: "see this? we don't like any of these things! You must hate one of them at least so join us Kamerad!"

I am trying to find a book by one of my profs on Nazi Germany because it has a fantastic reference to a cohesive list of the content, target audience, role and effectiveness of Weimar and Nazi era publications.