Lessons from Mumbai ?

This is vintage terror, classic asymetric warfare, and certainly nothing new under the Indian sun. Maybe more mediatic exposure because big networks don't have much fish to fry in this lame duck season - nobody cares for Congo and the audience is fed up with financial news.

There is no way to prevent 100% of such attacks from happening, but there is a way to make them look irrelevant, to undermine the undermining effect of terror.

The message from the Mumbai terrorists is : we want people to hate each other because we fundamentalists need war and hatred to survive, we want Hindis to go at Muslims, we want Jews to go at Muslims, and most of all we want moderate Muslims to be silenced and overwhelmed by fundamentalists. The masses will follow us because we will accurately claim that Muslims are once again the actual victims of the attacks.

The main target in the Mumbai attacks was Pakistan, the weaker link, and the democracy the most likely to fall for fundamentalism if the international community fails to help it help itself. Manmohan Singh must not finish the mission of the terrorists and blame Pakistan, but help fellow victim Asif Ali Zardari win over enemies from within, and together they must expose the fundamentalists' agenda which as always is only about politics, not religion.

The best way and the only way to tackle terror is to go at its roots : to recognize the existence of unfairness and to start doing something about poverty, to denounce fundamentalism as foul politics masquerading as religion, and to let the moderates speak.

The opinion should be prepared for that, and the community bracing itself through positive and sound values, and neither through fear, nor nationalism. Let's not make the same mistakes as after 9/11, please.

The terrorist attack on Mumbai clearly echoes Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" because both are proposing the same imposture : this clash of civilizations, these religious wars are artificial, man-made, and deliberately fueled by people who want them to happen. No wonder Huntington's book is a bible for the neocons and theocons who sold the invasion of Iraq and dream of provoking a war between Israel and Iran. Fundamentalist in Chief George W. Bush offered the worst answer to the 9/11 attacks, but the best ones from the terrorists' point of view.

The worst answer to the Mumbai would be for India to retaliate against Pakistan.

Afghanistan was not guilty for 9/11 : the World let it fall into the wrong hands. Pakistan is not guilty for the Mumbai attacks : the World must prevent it from falling into the wrong hands.

The World, united, must declare its independence from fundamentalism.

The Stolen Election

I'm not fully pleased by the way Obama's historic victory is being celebrated.

Don't get me wrong : I've been wishing for his election ever since I listened to his 2004 DNC speech and Tuesday night, I've welcomed my own tears of joy, relief, hope and respect... Heck, I even felt like hugging America altogether !

Yes, the ultimate race barrier has been blown away by a tidal wave embracing the US of A as a whole and as they are at their best, strong of an incredible diversity. At last, die hard outspoken racists will be silenced... and even better : unconscious racism may decrease significantly (without even noticing it, many unintentional aggressors will change their body languages - but their common and uncommon victims will more than probably notice... and hopefully feel a lighter weight on their chests).

Yet. If America electing the first African-American President is in itself History and a giant leap for mankind, this election cannot and shouldn't be summed up by this one formidable accomplishment.
The stakes went even higher.

And no, it's not the economy, stupid. I know that was the top issue for 62% of voters as well as I know that Obama will do a much better job than McCain in that field. But the situation would have improved after a while anyway and as far as History is concerned, even this titanic mess is a minor factor compared to the key issue of the 2008 Presidential Elections : the very survival of America as a democracy, and the world struggle against fundamentalism.

Everybody is celebrating the first African-American president, and of course everybody should, but it wasn't the aim of these elections, and certainly not the reason why the dangerous Bush-McCain-Palin squad failed (even if they want you to believe it)... only the most exquisite bonus to the main prize.

The aim was to elect a strong but sound leader who would not only prevent the nation's moral and political collapse but also durably put the country and the world back on the tracks of democracy and mutual respect.

When Barack Obama says "America is a place where all things are possible", he knows that this is not a one-side coin : if all things are possible, even the worst is possible. When Barack Obama says "the dream of our founders is alive", he doesn't forget that the great George Washington himself used to own slaves. And when Barack Obama finishes with "the power of our democracy", he's not only making his strongest focus on the massive turnout of this glorious day.

When Barack Obama uses the words "power", "democracy", "patriotism" and "liberty", they don't have the same deviant flavor as in the mouth of George W. Bush ; they claim their true meaning back, as the ultimate condemnation of the wrong path taken after 9/11...

"The true strength of our nation comes not from our the might of our arms
or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals:
democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope".

... "because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America".

This change happens to be carried by an African-American, but what really matters is that it is a change in the good direction, not the irreversible change George W. Bush was only one Supreme Justice shy of triggering**.



* see "The Maverick is free again"
** see (I hope for the last time) "Change is coming" and Mac "will fight", but for whom and for what ?"


PS : All right. I just wrote yesterday* that Barack Obama's speech was not "a truly Historic one", and I didn't mention the unease I felt when John McCain (like Bush the following day) focused too much on the African-American dimension of That One's victory. But I did mention the special quality of those two parts of his speech.

The McCainistan War

"I know how to win wars".

Don't bother checking the facts. John McCain never won any war.

Actually, he is losing one.

This is a civil war opposing a respected soldier and fundamentalists of the worst kind (the Christian equivalent to Talibans - they don't stone women but carpet bomb their own people with Weapons of Mass Disinformation*).

This war is staged in Maccainistan, an old country which survived violent attacks (torture from VCs, smear campaign from GWB / KR...) and is now fighting for its own survival.

Fundamentalists seem to be winning this war : they killed the maverick who could have defeated them 8 years ago, and the old man who replaced him is doing everything he can to please them.

Maccainistan is already broken in at least two parts : one one side, dry lands where only memories of glory can grow - on the other, vast puppy fields, ready to make America even more dependent on fantasies of peace, democracy, and freedom, while pushing it deeper in war, theocracy, and submission.


* as usual, see "Universal Declaration of Independence from fundamentalism"

J Street - at last

With the benediction (!) of their Christian-and-Muslim-fundamentalist counterparts, warmonging hardliners managed to kill Rabin and redirect Israel towards the path of theocracy.

But being "pro Israel and pro peace" is becoming politically correct again. Even in the US, where the AIPAC is no longer the only lobby defending the interests of Israel.

Actually, AIPAC is acting against the interests of Israel and only defending the interests of hardliners. AIPAC is part of the mob deliberately fueling anger against Israel across the Muslim world and beyond : they paradoxically need to spread antisemitism everywhere, just because it helps their beloved dieharders to keep alive.

These guys have definitely been ruling the show for too long, and caused too much damage (even if the worst may still be to come - see "Iran : who wants war and why" - 20070925).

This world does need diversity, especially as radical theories and overheated fake debates are overwhelming the media. No, this ain't no clash of civilizations. No, fundamentalists have no right to act as if they had already destroyed democracy. And yes, the public needs to know that Israel is no more a monolith than Iran, France or the US, that peace will happen in spite of what they're told.

But now there is hope for the vast majority of the moderates (Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists, whatevers...) : a new a lobbying and advocacy organization really working for the good of Israel and its neighbors, and in favor of sounder international policies from the US of A.

I sincerely hope J Street are as good as they pretend to be, that they will be heard, and that they will reach out for their Muslim and Christian counterparts, taking part in the much awaited war of independence against fundamentalism (see "Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism" - 20070809).

J Street members are likely to receive quite a few blows from the AIPAC, but I hope they can take it. Make that double for Robert Malley, also an advisor to Obama (and thus familiar with hope, yesyoucanness, and undergoing nasty attacks from people supposed to defend the same values).

---
You too, take the time to read from J Street :

"Support a new vision for American policy in the Middle East

For too long, uncompromising right-wing leaders have imposed their narrow definition of what it means to be "pro-Israel" on American policy, undermining long-term Israeli and American security interests while squashing real debate about America's foreign policy in the Middle East. It is high time that mainstream Americans fought back.

Fight back today with J Street, a new pro-peace, pro-Israel political movement dedicated to a new direction for American foreign policy in the Middle East:http://www.jstreet.org/signup

Together, we will fight for the best interests of Americans, Israelis, and all residents of the Middle East by forcefully advocating for a truly pro-Israel policy. We will make our case both on Capitol Hill and in the media by seeking (1) a real American commitment to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and (2) an American policy towards the Middle East based on working with allies and resolving conflicts through diplomacy.

Sign up today:http://www.jstreet.org/signup

Sincerely,

Jeremy, Carinne, Joel, and Isaac
The J Street Team

P.S. If you're on Facebook, join our Facebook group here:http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14133986845 "

Iraq - 5 years of success for fundamentalists

"Mission Accomplished" : five years later, Iraq is dead. Around one million Iraqis are dead. Around four million Iraqis have been displaced by the war. Collateral damage : moderates from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, USA, and the rest of the World are, more or less literally, either already dead or on their way.

Five years later and as expected and announced in these virtual pages*, fundamentalism is blooming because from the start this war was meant by fundamentalists in favor of fundamentalisms (of all shapes and sizes - Islamists, Christian, Jewish... you name it).

The war in Iraq ? Five years of total success for George W. Bush.

I'm talking about the fundamentalist, not the POTUS. His Mission is Accomplished indeed : he served a second term and further destroyed the US democracy from the inside, he boosted the influence of Christian fundamentalism across the US and made possible its revival across Europe, he put creationism and theocracy back on the national and international maps... His one last task to perform ? The most important and beautiful to his own eyes : to ignite the mother of all wars between Israel and Iran in order to provoque the return of the Christ**.

Just to remind you things can go even worse than the combination of a military defeat, a moral collapse, and a massive recession.

If you happen to be a US citizen, you have the power to stop this. Unite and lobby your representatives, and vote wisely.

And remember this : of the 3 remaining major candidates for Bush's job (as a POTUS), only one had from day one a sound vision of what's happening in Iraq and the World beyond. And still now, only Barack Obama condemns this war as a wrong answer to terror and as a gift to the ennemies of democracy.


* and beyond, thanks to wonderful readers from America, France, Iran, Israel, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and so many other wonderful places where such blogules as the "Universal Declaration of Independence from Fundamentalism" (20070809) have been quite popular.
** see "Iran : who wants war and why" (20070925)

GOP : Time to Split

I warned Republican voters four years ago* : if Bush wins these elections, your party loses.
The divide seems everyday more obvious now, but the main decision remains to be taken : to separate US politics from religion.

As expected**, all 2008 candidates are compelled to prove how strong their belief is, and this sick competition turns into a caricature : Romney, faithful to his Mormon religion as well as to his wife, is criticized by a womanizer (Giuliani) and two more or less outspoken promoters of Intelligent Design (Huckabee and McCain - the latter even gave conferences at the infamous Liberty University and Discovery Institute***). It sounds almost normal to most Americans but this is not a political debate - at least not in a country supposed to be a model democracy.

It is time to make things clear to the audience at the National as well as at the International levels and to officialize the creation of The Theocratic Party. All candidates would then decide : do they put democracy and the republic first, or they believe politics should be ruled by religion ?

True democrats and true republicans will chose not to mix religion with politics. Those who want America to turn into a theocracy and away from its core values must be clear about it. They can keep competing on theological issues, but never more in the name of a Republican or a Democratic Party.

* see "Red Blogule to the Bush system - Prevent a New War of Secession" (20041101)
** see "Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism" (20070809)
*** if you didn't get the scoop from my French blogules ("Bonne année 2009" - 20080102) : both are casting Bruce K. Chapman as their VP

Faith, lies and videotapes

Mitt Romney may lose the primaries because he's a Mormon supporting religious diversity and mutual respect*. Mike Huckabee may win the primaries because he's a moron supporting creationism and ID.

Guess what : the case for Iran was forged, intel cooked** - and the CIA even destroyed evidencies of Amerika's other wrongdoings : videotapes of torture sessions that could have revealed the faces of CIA agents. Because in Amerika, denouncing torture is a crime... unlike giving names of such weaselish peacemongers as Valerie Plame.

After signing so many pacts with the Devil, George W. Bush decides to write a letter to Kim Jong-il. It starts with "Dear Mr. Chairman", as if North Korea's dictator were a member of his base of "the Haves and the Have-mores". Dubya is just buying time : let me have a cleaner sheet with this atheist "pigmy" - I don't care if I lose face in Asia, all I want is you to let me finish this little crusade of mine in the Middle East before my mandate is over.

This is Amerika all right : this country has lost its values to the point it cannot even consider impeaching its most dangerous criminal.

* this absurd witch hunt is still on, and the reverse burden of proof remains to be implemented. As I pleaded before (see "Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism " - 20070809) : "The aim is not to please atheists and condemn believers but to expose fundamentalists, especially among those who are supposed to defend justice, education or democracy. You don’t want to ignite a witch hunt the McCarthy way (are you or have you ever been a fundamentalist ?), but rather to promote transparency over the hypocrisy and confusion fundamentalists are feeding upon. I’m asking for a much needed reverse burden of proof : nowadays, lawmakers are terrorized by fundamentalists and it should be the other way round. Instead of harassing the bulk of the candidates with questions regarding their private life, we should be forcing fundamentalists to come out in the open, give democracy the lead over the theocratic agenda. Lawmakers shouldn’t be compelled to demonstrate confusingly why they are good believers, they just should clearly tell that they don’t support fundamentalism and that, whatever they believe in, religion should not mix with politics in this country. Ultimately, if some people want religion to rule politics, let them found their own party like they do in other countries."
** nothing new under the sun (see "Iran : who wants war and why" - 20070925)

From Sim City to Sin City

I haven't been precisely kind to Dubai lately*, but things keep turning uglier in this tiny Emirate where - I hate to say this - everything tends to take biblical proportions.

Building the tallest Babel Towers (Burj Dubai) is one thing, competing with Sodom and Gomorrah quite another. The rape of 15 year old Alexandre Robert by 3 Emirati (2 former convicts including one H.I.V. positive) recently made the international headlines only because he was a Westerner and because his family decided to fight ; to overcome the humiliation ; to help all the silent victims, and to prevent more crimes from happening in the future.

This tragedy could become a turning point for Dubai's rulers. This time, it's too late for your usual cover up, you can't hide the dark sides of your wonderful mirage anymore. You can make a few bucks out of a Disneyland Resort, not out of a Mickael Jackson's Neverland. Either you stick to denial or you decide to take measures.

This Emirate is led by people who do have a strategic vision, people who should understand that firing a few people won't be considered as measures, that scaring away a few potential customers is much less serious than building a social bomb at home, or alienating the global Muslim community. Dubai could thrive as a neutral heaven in the middle of the Middle East, where sailors meet pirates, raiders traders, fundamentalists infidels. Dubai will collapse if it doesn't come to its senses.

This is no more about luxurious condos but about that most valuable ressource : human beings. This is no more about concrete but about the cement of a nation.


* to mention a few :
- blogules in English : "Red blogule to the DP World - P&O deal's Architects and winners"(20060224), "Halliburton and the 40 thieves (continued) - Dubai, we have a problem" (20070312)
- blogule in French "Dubai - de Sim City à Sin City" (20071101), later published on Agoravox.
- one letter published in Newsweek (20070810 - following their Dubai Rising article last summer) : "I wonder if your writer went behind the scenes in Dubai. The bulk of its population is poor Muslim foreigners from the East living in ghettos, workers building a dream world they cannot afford and which is denied to them anyway because even longtime residents cannot become citizens. I saw Dubai rising, all right. But I also saw the seeds of unfairness, injustice and anger being sown ; these are the kind of things that breed fundamentalism. And I saw wealthy Westerners all over the place, enjoying this Middle Eastern Vegas. Let's keep a watch on what may rise from that."

Benedict XVI's "coming out"

To those who doubted, the Pope gave the ultimate proof.

I'm not talking about the existence of God but about the nature of John Paul II's successor : a Christian fundamentalist who after attacking science and education* decided to bulldoze democracy and justice.

Benedict XVI wants "natural law" to rule where "civil law" does : about abortion, euthanasia, ethics, moral, and other issues that have no clear frontiers and can ultimately claim all human activities. Actually, the aim is to leave no room for civil law. Or else, the whole society collapses - call it Judgment Day, Armageddon or moneytime, you get the general idea. "No man-made law can subvert the norms written by the creator in human hearts without society itself being dramatically attacked in what constitutes its necessary basis". Some can translate "in human hearts" by "in the Bible" or in whatever opus they want.

Trim off the "feel good" verbiage and what do you get ? This man is once again talking about the substitution of the law of man by the law of God. This man is once again trying to put religion at the core of the society and at the core of politics. This man is once again crossing the line and opening the gates to fundamentalism.


* see "Red blogule to Benedict XVI - fundamentally wrong" (20060921) and other blogules related to Benito the 16th.

David Attenborough attacked by Fundamentalist apes

EO broadcasted Sir David's "Life of Mammals" series in the Netherlands, respecting the 5 mn of edition allowed by the BBC.

But Evangelische Omroep / the Evangelical Broadcasting Organisation is a Christian fundamentalist channel, the parts edited were key to explain evolution (ie "our closest relatives" becoming "the apes"), and one whole episode was censored. Flemmish radicals tend to upset me these days : when they don't fuel hatred and racism, they promote ID and creationism. Both sides of what's left of the Belgian border.

David Attenborough is not dead yet*, he is quite angry, and so should we all. This battle is worth fighting for the great white Dave.


* see "David Attenborough, one life on Earth" (20070716)
** see "Red blogule to Luc van den Brande" (20070627)

Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism

1 - What is fundamentalism ?

At the beginning, the word used to designate a deviant Protestant movement but now, it can be applied to trends found in all major religions.

Fundamentalism means the total submission of a people to a strict set of principles.

Fundamentalism is not about religion (the pretext behind the means), but about politics (the actual aim of the game) ; ultimately, fundamentalism is about the total control of society in a caricature of theocracy.

Fundamentalists are humans who build the set of strict rules and define what is true and what isn't, generally developing a simplistic doctrine based on their own biased interpretation of ancient religious scriptures that can be interpreted in as many ways as there are human beings. Since fundamentalists consider their doctrine as absolute, perfect, good and unfailable, anything growing out of it is necessarily wrong, corrupt and evil, and thus has to be eradicated in order to purify the world. Beyond what people do or say, fundamentalists intend to control and judge what people think.

Fundamentalism is totalitarian because all human activities should abid to the rules, starting with the pilars of democracy : political debate, science, education, justice, information... any field where intelligence can bloom and expose the limits of a basic propaganda.

The same logic can be found in the Discovery Institute’s Wedge strategy : the ultimate goal of Intelligent Design is to undermine science and education, key entry points for fundamentalists. ID has nothing to do with science but everything to do with politics, starting with the artificial legitimation of religion at the root of the social system, and ultimately the restoration of theocracy.

The worst enemy of a fundamentalist is a person from the same religion who preaches tolerance, reason, and respect of the differences between individuals and cultures. Charismatic pro-peace leaders who happen to be people of faith, sometimes even former respected warriors : Yitzhak Rabin, Ahmad Shah Massoud…

The most embarrassing enemy of a fundamentalist is a "competing" fundamentalist from the same religion. The sales pitches are basically similar, but it brings the notion that there is not only one good answer to the question. At least one is necessarily wrong, it is more difficult to claim the true version. The best way is to either destroy this enemy or find a way to merge both franchises into a more powerful band.

The best ally of a fundamentalist is a fundamentalist from a "competing" religion. Each one becomes the "evil" of the other one, feeding him with new arguments. The more radical the opponent, the better : fear makes propaganda sound more credible and moderates less audible.


2 - Why did fundamentalisms gain momentum recently ?

Fundamentalist movements have always existed in most religions, but were traditionally limited to small circles around isolated radical doomsayers. They tend to blossom in periods of materialist decadence and crises because they leverage on basic fears : fear for one's own life and future, fear for the loss of identity and values of a whole society... In times of uncertainties, fundamentalists offer simple answers, clear visions of a brighter afterlife… and order. With a full set of golden rules.
Like fascism, fundamentalism feeds from the failures of democracy, from the intolerable gaps between peoples kept in poverty and underdevelopment on one hand, and rich corrupt regimes on the other. "Ideally", people must be fed up with their rulers, and not believe anymore in the rules supposed to hold the society altogether. An ailing dictatorship will provide a perfect background, but the fundamentalists' best moments come when self-proclaimed model democracies give the worst examples to the world. Most islamist fundamentalisms find their roots in the abuses of colonization, the failures of decolonization (not to mention the disastrous management of the creation of Israel or India / Pakistan), and many were infuriated by the aberrations of the Cold War. They usually reach power when Western democracies start sending the wrong signals at the wrong moment.

For fundamentalists from all religions, George W. Bush turned out to be the best person at the best place at the best moment.

His strategy should look like a total failure to whoever considers the Iraq quagmire, the Palestinian fiasco, or the worldwide surge in terror. But to the contrary, Bush's strategy proved a complete success.

Because George W. Bush didn't act as a President of The United States of America in the interest of his country.
And George W. Bush didn't even act as a Republican in the interest of his party.
George W. Bush acted as a fundamentalist in the interest of fundamentalism.

Right after 9/11, the whole world was behind him and the USA, but this man refused to lead the world towards peace and mutual respect. Instead, he decided to send the worst signals to the worst people, deliberately triggering a sick race between fundamentalisms. Bush's first speech after 9/11 was meant to clarify the framework for his fellow fundamentalists thanks to one single word : "crusade". In other words : let's go back to the good old times when people fought for religion, we fundamentalists are ruling the show, and I will play on the very ground Bin Laden hoped I would.

Because "the Sheik" new perfectly what kind of leader he was facing : a (stub)born again Christian fan of fundamentalist Billy Graham, a man who set from the start his mandate in a theocratic frame by saying some Higher Being was in charge and driving his decisions. Dubya not only made Bin Laden the official "evil" figure of his crusade, but he happily obliged by becoming the official "evil" figure for Islamists. Everything he did was meant to fuel hatred, sideline the moderates (ie those coward weasels in the West, promoters of the Israeli-Palestinian peace agenda in the Middle East...), and sabotage all attempts of peace or reconciliation. Where multilateralism and pragmatism was the answer, he avoided all forms of debates and sticked to his radical black vs white, us vs them, good vs evil rhetoric.

During the 2004 US presidential campaign, I raised a few eyebrows a couple of years ago by dubbing Bush a fascist, pointing out the disturbingly accurate echoes of Benito Mussolini’s definition of fascism in BC00’s Amerika. The propaganda reacted with a karlrovishy counterattack on the weak point : all of a sudden, Bush was facing “Islamofascists”. The actual fascists were at the other end of the spectrum… but that other end is a mirror, and fundamentalism fueling fundamentalism, propaganda feeding counter-propaganda, extremists ideas became mainstream. Beyond fundamentalism, other forms of radicalism could gain momentum across the world. In Far-East Asia, ultra-nationalists took over Japan, and state revisionism became common in the Archipelago as well as in China.

Bush did not wage a war on terror but in favor of it : instead of focusing on terrorist networks and reducing their ground (ie by fighting injustice and poverty, promoting peace in the region and especially between Israel and Palestine), he deliberately infuriated the muslim world and helped fundamentalists recruit new flocks of followers. And he targeted a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but everything to do with peace in the region. A new playground for international terrorism, the end of Iraq as a united country, civil war here, the rise of a new form of fundamentalism in Iran when reformers were "threatening" the Khomeini generation, the failure of Fatah and the victory of Hamas... all this was not collateral damage but the very aim of his sick game.

The war in Iraq has been misunderstood as a war for oil led by neocons. The fact is theocons used neocons because they could sell the war to SIGs and thus to Congress. The hidden agenda was not about securing energy sources but about spreading fundamentalism, and if hardcore neocons truly believed in the democracy spreading agenda, theocons knew perfectly the outcome of this madness.

Paleocons followed because money flew from the budget surplus to the hands of greedy SIGs, with significant crumbs ending up on their own laps. Paleocons followed because the official propaganda combined with Karl Rove’s witchcraft made sure 2004 elections would be a landslide victory for Bush. Paleocons were fooled because they thought it would be a victory for the GOP.

I warned Republican voters before November 2004 : if Bush wins, the Republican party loses its soul and is bound to implode. Letting this man invade Iraq was criminal negligence, (re)electing him a strict liability crime by the American people against American values.

The 2004 elections celebrated the rise of Christian fundamentalism across the US at a level never reached before. If not mainstream at this stage, it gained significant social and political power in areas where demographic tides are changing the very shape of the country. Whatever the outcome of the 2008 elections, the USA are shifting towards more internal and self-centered dynamics, and theocons are more likely to bloom in such an environment.

Bush has been isolating the US from external influences, refusing any kind of accountability for his acts but for the dialogs he pretends to hold permanently with The Lord Almighty. At home, he shunted the Congress and his not so fellow Republicans. Away, he switched off the Kyoto protocol, unplugged the Geneva Convention (with the benediction of his Chief Torture Officer Alberto Gonzales), and tried to destroy the UN from the inside (with the help of Bolton the UN bomber). He even bypassed the WTO with series of bilateral FTAs or rather unilateral PTAs (Protectionist Trade Agreements).

A dedicated fundamentalist, Bush has been methodically destroying America from the inside, corrupting justice, science and education with a caricature of religion and paving the way for theocracy. This man is a total fake : a New England brat pretending to be a Texas hunk, a coward pretending to be a soldier, an amoral fundamentalist pretending to be a compassionate saint, a theocrat pretending to spread democracy, a weak wannabe who should never have been the most powerful man on Earth.

If you think the worst happened in Iraq, consider this : this man is planning an even craziest sequel in Iran.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote to George W. Bush he shared the same approach of religion. The fact is both are fanatics who expect important visits in a near future ; respectively the return of the Mahdi and the second coming of the Christ. And along with by a bunch of fundamentalists from all confessions (Christian, Muslim and Jewish), they share a more than weird doomsday scenario: the final clash between Iran and Israel will lead to those much awaited visits.

This Commander in Thief only has a few months before giving up power. He is working on peace all right, but rather of the eternal kind.

Compared to such madhatters, Islamist fundamentalists who kicked the Shah out of Iran back in 1979 look like moderates. No wonder Bush does his best to help Ahmadinejad stay in power.



3 - What can be done to undermine fundamentalism ?

Like fascism, fundamentalism needs a permanent state of fear, war and propaganda to survive, and is defeated by democracy at its best : exemplary, fair, just and respectful.

America cannot be respected if it doesn’t respect its own values ; those of a model democracy.

The war on terror should be waged at its roots : helping Afghanistan out of despair and out of the reach of Talibans, converging towards a fair resolution of the Israel / Palestine crisis, focusing on poverty and injustice across the World.

The only way out of Iraq is to fire those who deliberately misfired. Bush and Cheney should be prevented from spreading more chaos and impeached… Easier said than done, but removing Gonzales would be a significant first step forward.

Moderates should speak up across the political spectrum : Dems or Reps, we share certain values and think our leaders betrayed them. We may not overpower them as quickly as we’d like to, but we want to tell the world that we want America back on track, we are not going to let that happen again, and we will do our best to get rid of fundamentalists among us.

Humility will make America stronger : it takes courage to give up arrogance. Besides, there is no other way to get out of what is basically a moral collapse (not to mention to claim any kind of leadership back in the future).

The aim is not to please atheists and condemn believers but to expose fundamentalists, especially among those who are supposed to defend justice, education or democracy. You don’t want to ignite a witch hunt the McCarthy way (are you or have you ever been a fundamentalist ?), but rather to promote transparency over the hypocrisy and confusion fundamentalists are feeding upon.

I’m asking for a much needed reverse burden of proof : nowadays, lawmakers are terrorized by fundamentalists and it should be the other way round. Instead of harassing the bulk of the candidates with questions regarding their private life, we should be forcing fundamentalists to come out in the open, give democracy the lead over the theocratic agenda. Lawmakers shouldn’t be compelled to demonstrate confusingly why they are good believers, they just should clearly tell that they don’t support fundamentalism and that, whatever they believe in, religion should not mix with politics in this country. Ultimately, if some people want religion to rule politics, let them found their own party like they do in other countries.

Once again, I’m not promoting atheism, but defending democracy. And in the US, a cultural change is needed. The fact is America has always allowed too much confusion between the religious and political spheres ; been too tolerant with sects and fanatics that are not compatible with democracy (partly because it was built by people who sometimes fled Europe for religious reasons - ie the Mayflower pilgrims). For a European such as me, it can be upsetting to hear the leader of a supposedly model democracy finish his acceptance speech with “so help me God”. And it is upsetting to see secular democracies under the pervasive threat of fundamentalists in the EU as well (lobbying for the mention of the Christian heritage in the Constitution, for the promotion of creationism and ID… with the benediction of a rather ambiguous Pope ; Benedict XVI).

Beyond the US and EU political microcosms, all moderates should voice their hope for a sounder and more transparent system. This new “we the people” should reach across the world, wherever moderates are threatened by fundamentalists, and not only in the usual hot spots : the race for juicy market shares is raging all over Asia.

Why not A Universal Declaration of Independence from fundamentalism, that perennial enemy of peace, freedom and democracy ?

blogules 2007

---

ADDENDUM 20090117

"What is required is a new declaration of independence, not just in our nation, but in our own lives -- from ideology and small thinking, prejudice and bigotry" - Barack Hussein Obama (Baltimore, January 17, 2009).

Change has come to America.

---

digg this

Back to square one, back to Ground Zero

Bin Laden determined to strike in US.

It took six years to say it out loud, the creation of a Department of Homeland Security, the death of thousands of US civilians in the 9/11 attacks, of thousands of US soldiers in Iraq, of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who lost their country along with their dictator.

The war on terror is a total failure : the US helped islamists draft millions of new sympathizers and thousands of new terrorists, and even provided them with a new real size training ground. Whether US troops leave Iraq or not, these apt pupils will put into practice their cultural learnings for make benefit glorious nation of Amerika as well as of all other nations.

Furthermore, instead of fighting the right battle at the root of terror, the US have fueled anger, despair and unfairness, deliberately slaughtering what was left of the peace process in the Middle East and especially between Israel, Palestine and Lebanon.

The man in charge proposes peace talks the way he has always been talking about peace : are you with us or against us ? are you good or evil ? will you help us remove from power this Saddam / Hamas we empowered all by ourselves ?

Palestine : the Pakistan-Bangladesh scenario

Ehud Olmert and his fellow hawks eventually succeeded in putting the Gaza Ghetto in the hands of the most radical elements of Hamas. All they needed was to inflict years of humiliation, to illegally abduct key moderate leaders, and to carpet bomb any attempt of conciliation.

Back in January 2006*, I envisioned a Pakistan - Bangladesh scenario for the Gaza Strip - West Bank couple, with radical islamists ruling over the former and unharmful people struggling to survive in the latter. Among the key differences : the Bengali suffer from abundance of water.

The time has almost come.

Israeli hardliners can measure the success of their strategy, and the crucial** help of a fellow fundamentalist named George W. Bush. They didn't need Dubya to get rid of Yitzhak Rabin, but they badly needed his support to crush the peace process initiated with Bill Clinton.

As usual, Shimon Peres keeps the glam (Nobel Prize, presidence) and avoids direct combat in favor of peace. Ehud Barak joins the government with the label of a member of opposition, but the new Defense Minister is a renowned expert in camouflage as a cross dresser who paved the way for Sharon by sabotaging the 2000 Summit in Camp David, putting the first nails on Arafat's coffin.

Now I don't see how moderates can win elections in Israel, how violence can be prevented from spreading. Fundamentalists have won in Palestine, in Israel, in the USA and in the Muslim world. Warmongers are gaining momentum and the only way to stop this madness would be to give a strong signal against the Commander in Thief.

Impeach Bush-Cheney.

PS : don't bet on strong critics on Israel by US prez candidates before November 2008




* see "Red blogule to Ehud Olmert - the Bangladesh scenario" (20060125)
** no pun intended, Mel

The Vladubyan summit : who gives a Heiligendamm ?

Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush are great democrats.
Vlad will have a puppet elected next year, change the constitution, and keep His seat warm till He returns as a perennial czar. Pharaoh may then rename the planets after Himself, ressuscite Gandhi to have a serious discussion with Himself, and shoot some journalists.
Dubya managed to get a nod from the Congress for his errands in Baghdad. Now pumped up to the max, Our Dear Compassionate Leader feels like spreading democracy in Iran (flame throwers, napalm, torture, pick your weapon).
God forbid, Persians won't have to wait for another earthquake to have Bam and other national treasures flattened to the ground. Fundamentalists are great and Bush is their prophet.
Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush are great environmentalists.
This G8 was supposed to tackle such issues as global warming or hedge funds ? Both leaders decided to change the agenda thanks to a clear and immediate threat of nuclear war. Ennemies come in handy when you are cornered by tricky questions...
Both XXth Century superpowers act as if nothing happened after the Cold War. The problem is they are not dictating the world's agenda anymore. Both Vlad and Dubya are mere dictators over their own countries, period.

White, red and pink blogules to the World in 2020

The CER (Centre for European Reform ) and Accenture recently waged a debate about the World in 2020, partly fueled by Mark Leonard's essay "Divided world: The struggle for supremacy". The democracy vs autocracy divide sounds a little bit white vs black to me, and I may add a few other key structural changes within :
- America enjoying good demography dynamics but becoming more monolithic, more focused on itself, welcoming fewer influences from abroad. Growing old a different way.
- At the opposite of this Mainland Amerika, China is embracing its own diversity. Chinese imperialism is no more about spreading a unique monolithic model but about a much smarter pervasiveness, leveraging on all minorities instead of crushing cultural diversity (ie China intends to build the core of Koreanhood on its very soil, claims the Koguryo cultural heritage, and position the Korean peninsula as a motherland's satellite).
- What I call "Asianitude" keeps growing. Asian countries developping intra-asian relationships beyond the traditional bilateral relationships with Western countries, students and executives moving from places to places, a common ground and cultural identity, a sense of belonging to the same community at the individuals level...
- The Korean moment. Surrounded by ambitious giants (and a Japan dangerously returning to ultra nationalism and Showa-style fascism), seen as the herald of cultural diversity for other Asian nations, Korea has to cope with the collapse of North Korea. In what I call the Albania scenario, the people who used to live in a quasi sect are totally unprepared for a market economy : con men and gurus get the bulk of the values they received as a kick start in a new world.
- The turn of the millenium rise of fundamentalism (Christian in the US and Eastern Europe, Jewish in Eretz Israel and Islamist everywhere) may last if democracies keep electing leaders who put religion at the top of their not so hidden agendas (the collapse of Iraq, the rise of Iran as the regional threat, and the boost to fundamentalists across the globe were not collateral damage but the very aim of Bush's game). And while terrorists trained in Iraq blossom on new urban and suburban playgrounds, al Qaeda survivors and wannabes focus on rural Asia, Africa and South America.

"Kurdistan, the other Iraq"... or "Kurdistan, the other other Vietnam" ?

Iraq's Kurdistan region opened, through the Kurdistan Development Corporation, a lobbying office in Washington, DC*. Headed by Qubad al-Talabani, son of Jalal Talabani, the President of Iraq as a whole (a black hole some may say), this unit officially promotes investments and tourism in the region. Autonomy and independance could be part of the discussions.

I do feel some sympathy for Kurds in general and I do wish them a peaceful future. Yet, I'm not so sure this is the way everybody wants it and even if Talabani were honest, other players would join the lobbying frenzy.

I remember the intense Iraqi lobbying between the two wars. Who could forget Ahmed Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress ? Among the different approaches for the liberation of Iraq, US theocons deliberately favored the factions that were bound to cause maximum damage. The parting of Iraq and the strengthening of fundamentalists across the region (especially and Iran and Israel) was not only expected but planned from the start.

If I were a US fundamentalist, I surely wouldn't want a democratic and peaceful Kurdistan to emerge in the dead middle of my playground.

A failed proof of concept Kurdistan could not only strengthen radicals in Iran but also infuriate and exacerbate fundamentalists in Turkey. To the contrary, I would seize the opportunity to bring chaos in this relatively protected part of the country, and to exacerbate radicalism everywhere. I would especially infuriate Turkish nationalists and fundamentalists, because as anybody can see these days, the radicalization of Turkey is key to the revival of Christian fundamentalism in Europe.

Don't mistake this initiative as an attempt to put a lock on Kirkuk oil fields : the aim of the game is to get rid of secularism in Turkey.


* see CMD's "The "Other Iraq" Opens a DC Lobbying Office" (20070302)

George Pontius Pilate Bush lets Gonzales face justice - Red blogule to Our Dear Compassionate Leader

"Al has got work to do up there".
Ecce homo. I give you Alberto Gonzales, and it's up to the people to judge, it's up to him to explain why he dismissed some nosy attorneys, it's up to my fuse to explain why he short circuited the Congress.
George W. Bush washes his hands and I see mud on them : his justice promotes scientific revisionism and medieval fundamentalism, attacks the moderates and pacifists, protects Special Interest Groups.
George W. Bush washes his hands and I see blood on them : his justice promotes torture and protects the gunslingers.
George W. Bush pretends to be compassionate and to stand for values ? He should be remembered as the immoral coward who betrayed America.
Go get Alberto Gonzales, the mastermind of this deviant justice, but don't forget to get the man who ordered this kind of plans*.
Go get Alberto Gonzales, the mastermind of Abu Ghraib, but don't forget to impeach his master.


* "plans", "intelligent design", "The Architect"... building a fundamentalist utopia looks demanding on the gray cells side for the promoters, but the aim of the game remains the negation of intelligence for all others.

Red blogule to French oldcons, neocons and cons in general

The French are switching from a Left / Right to a Conservative / Progressive political rift. The defining moment was the vote for the European Constitution, with a significant collateral damage : the end of the Socialist Party (PS) as we've known it since Francois Mitterrand claimed it a couple of decades ago.
Reformers from the PS have more in common with reformers from the UMP than with their fellow party members stuck somewhere in the middle of the XIXth Century. Sarkozy and fellow reformers have successfuly sidelined traditional conservatives within their own ranks - a minority of harmless old farts snoring all day long at the Senate.
I'm sure the French economy would perform well with Nicolas Sarkozy, but I'm rather scared by his attacks on secular legislations and his ability to fuel radicalism and fundamentalism. I don't quite like the idea of this man enjoying the support of both US and Israeli fundamentalists and neocons, and even the presence of a Karl Rove wannabe on his side, Brice Hortefeux.
I'd rather see a more moderate kind of reformer rule the country. Francois Bayrou (UDF) has a clear opening since Dominique Strauss-Kahn lost the PS primaries vs Segolene Royal. Should he reach the second round of these elections, he would crush Royal and could even be a problem for Sarkozy (if socialist voters prefer barring Sarko to abstention).
Segolene Royal is not a moderate reformer. She is neither conservative nor reformist. She is an ambitious person used to follow charismatic leaders and has some trouble turning into a charismatic leader radiating with her own views. She keeps putting all opinions at the same level and refusing to take any clear position. As expected and despite a massive victory in the socialist primaries (60%), Royal proved unable to get full support from her own party. A couple of days ago, a group of VIMs from the left (Very Important Women) were considering a petition to call for her withdrawal from the presidential race - just to make sure this wouldn't be interpreted as yet another proof of France's reactionnary machismo (anytime Royal is under attack, she bites with the issue back).
Bayrou may be closing the gap, Royal is still far ahead of the centrist candidate and she still has a large and motivated core of supporters. But she flunked last week-end's exam, introducing a program that didn't really prove disruptive... but for the national budget. A copycat of Mitterrand's 1981 program, which led that man to the top job but the country to the bottom : a massive budget deficit, a big financial crisis and a total loss of international competitivity at a critical moment. Eric Besson, the man in charge of the financial side of Royal program, timely decided to quit after a clash with Francois Holland, secretary general of the PS and Sego's longtime compagnon.
Right now, Sarkozy enjoys a comfortable lead in the polls. But he has also been trapped into a lousy campaign where everybody promises everything to everyone. Even Bayrou, the apostle of budget orthodoxy, claims a 20 billion Euros program.
Ten years ago, France was ahead of Germany in its reforms. But the PM, Alain Juppe, went too far too quick, and Chirac (not so wisely advised by Villepin) decided to dissolve the assembly. The PS won the 1997 elections and Lionel Jospin surfed on the internet bubble years to post nice growth rates, but also to reform the country the wrong way (more spendings and the mother of all mistakes ; the 35-hour Week). Chirac won again in 2002 but limited new reforms to cautious steps when his neighbor Gerhard Schroeder would take all the risks. Schroeder lost to Merkel but Germany is now much fitter than France to face future challenges.
Here's the new deal for France : an economic breakdown with Segolene Royal, a political gamble with Nicolas Sarkozy. Should Francois Bayrou win next May, he would have the opportunity to form a new party with socialist and UMP moderate reformers. Instead of going down by turning right or left, France must try to go and grow up.

Red blogule to London calling... for trouble

Two days ago, 135 people were killed in a terror attack in Baghdad's Sadriya market. That one did make the headlines, unlike the other days, when terror claims only the equivalent of the 7/7 London bombings.
About the same day, many people were arrested in London in what appeared to be a plot to abduct and behead a muslim soldier. A great victory for counter terrorism being often followed by the revelation of a not so glorious news for the Government, I just sat and waited for it to pop up.
It didn't take long for UK's army to confess 15 minor soldiers had been sent to Iraq. Actually, underaged combattants happened to be one of the few disgraces lacking to Tony Blair's impressive collection. We'll have to scratch our heads to find the next one...

According to Saint Tony, 7/7 had nothing to do with Iraq and the invasion of Iraq had something to do with the war on terror.
According to me, Ruppert Murdoch had something to do with the election of Tony Blair and Fox News' broadcasting of the invasion of Iraq as "War On Terror".

Tony will leave power soon ; the next guy, either Gordon Brown or David Cameron, will also have to sign a pact with the Devil to get elected ; and the "Winner" will face a new kind of terror : a wave of youngsters trained in Iraq and ready to spread chaos across the United Kingdom and Europe.
They have the European citizenship and they are from all origins, not necessary "foreign". They won't need to strike with a bomb in a major touristic area to get their point. Any small IED (Improvised Explosing Device) or any single shot in any neighborhood will do. Random abductions and killings will make anyone feel insecure. Terror at its simplest, purest and scariest level.
Chirac and Blair gone, Merkel taking her marks, let's see what kind of leadership emerges in Europe. The fundamentalists may want to play a role in the coming elections : Europeans would be inspired not to put a Dubya look alike in front of them.

"Jesus vs Mahdi" Prophecy - Red blogule to Bush-Cheney's war on Iran

Lobby Dick has decided : the US must bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. W is almost ready, just making sure he doesn't need any agreement from the Congress, that ugly and totally unnecessary offspring of democracy.
Make no mistake : just like the invasion of Iraq, this attack has nothing to do with the official agenda. Preventing WMD proliferation, getting rid of a dictatorship, and even securing juicy contracts for big corporations... all these are mere alibis, the Bush Administration's usual sales pitch*.
The aim of the game is to accelerate the final showdown between Iran and Israel before the World's most important regime change : Lord Dubya's rule is bound to end by 2008, and this mad crusader has yet to fulfill his most important task ; the so called Bible Prophecy.
If you missed the previous episodes, here's the story : Bush believes Jesus Christ's Second Coming will be provoqued by the ultimate war between Israel and Iran. Crazy enough ? There's more : the Shiite sect to which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad belongs believes the Mahdi is coming this spring... which means Dubya's favorite philosopher will face another heavyweight messianic figure somewhere between the begining of the MLB season and the NBA finals. This definitely beats Rocky Balboa's return, Jason vs Freddy and even Alien vs Predator !
Both sides consider it The Clash between Good and Evil... without noticing they're talking about the same God. So make that "Good vs Good", or better : "dimwit vs dimwit".

It would be laughable if human lives and nuclear powers weren't involved.

If God does exist, I guess the time has actually come to pay us a visit and wipe all this crap out of the surface of the Earth.



* Don't get me wrong : Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a bad guy and potentially as dangerous as Saddam, and the Iranian theocracy is as dangerous for World peace as the US theocracy. I'm only warning you like I did four years ago : if you follow Bush on his crusade, you are doomed. And this time, we all could be doomed.