I wonder what caused this?

"Canada FM regrets 'torture list'
The Canadian foreign minister has apologised for including the US and Israel on a list of states where prisoners are at risk of torture."

What's he sorry for? Prisoners in the U.S. and Israel are at risk of being tortured, even killed. He's apologizing for being too truthful I guess?

"Maxime Bernier said the list, which formed part of a manual on torture awareness given to diplomats, "wrongly includes some of our closest allies".

Wrongly?

"Mr Bernier insisted the manual was not a policy document and did not convey the official views of his government."

Could be that the Canadian government is composed of a bunch of gutless wonders like ours, no?

"The listing was criticised by the US and Israel, who demanded it be changed."

I'll bet they demanded it. I didn't expect them to like it. Liars don't like being called liars either.

"We find it to be offensive for us to be on the same list with countries like Iran and China. Quite frankly it's absurd," said the US ambassador to Canada, David Wilkins.

A spokesman for the Israeli embassy in Ottawa, Michael Mendel, said the Israeli Supreme Court was "on record as expressly prohibiting any type of torture".

The record is one thing, though, and what actually happens is another, isn't it?

"If Israel is included in the list in question, the ambassador of Israel would expect its removal," he added.

Or?

'Reviewed and rewritten'

In a statement on Saturday, Mr Bernier said he regretted the embarrassment caused by the public disclosure of the list and promised it would be changed to reflect the Canadian government's official position.

"It contains a list that wrongly includes some of our closest allies. I have directed that the manual be reviewed and rewritten," he said.

"The manual is neither a policy document nor a statement of policy. As such, it does not convey the government's views or positions."

The manual lists US interrogation techniques such as forced nudity, isolation, sleep deprivation and the blindfolding of prisoners under its "definition of torture".

It also refers to the US detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, where a Canadian man, Omar Khadr, is being held. Critics say it ridicules Ottawa's claims that he is not being mistreated.

Other countries on the watch list include Afghanistan, China, Iran, Israel, Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Syria.

The document was mistakenly provided to the human rights group, Amnesty International, as part of a court case it is bringing against the Canadian government over the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan.

The torture awareness course was introduced after Ottawa was strongly criticised for its handling of the case of a Canadian who was deported from the US to Syria in 2002.

Syrian-born Maher Arar, who was accused of being an al-Qaeda member, has said he was tortured during the 10 months he was detained in a prison in Damascus. An inquiry exonerated him of any links to terrorist groups in 2006.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/7198435.stm

Published: 2008/01/19 22:24:02 GMT

© BBC MMVIII

Pathetic. Thanks George Bush!

Or, for whom am I voting?, if you want correct grammar.

Here's what I'd like to see happen during the next administration:

1) Tax Reform I actually like Huckabee's willingness to champion the "fair tax" and would favor something like that.

2) The reformation of the "Health Care Industry". I am in favor of removing the "profits must come first" mindset by whatever means. Even "Giant Medicare".

3) A very big change in our foreign policy philosophy. Not isolationist by any means but I would favor standing down the military on a large scale. Explain to me, if you would like, anyone, why we still "must" have a military presence in Korea. Or Germany. As to Iraq, I refer you to previous posts.

4) Reestablishment of the accountability of the Executive branch to Congress, the Courts and, especially, the people (me anyway).

5) An end to crime, poverty, human suffering in all forms and I want there to be peace on Earth.

6) OK, 5) was facetious.

Anyway, for whom do I vote?

Dennis Paul Huckabee Obama?

Well, the people (of Iowa) have spoken:

Huckabee and Obama take Iowa wins
Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama have won the Iowa caucuses - the first nominating contest of the 2008 US presidential election.
Mr Huckabee won for the Republicans, defeating Mitt Romney.

At the Democratic caucuses, Mr Obama won by clear margin, defeating John Edwards, who edged Hillary Clinton into third place.

The Iowa caucuses can give big boosts to candidates' campaigns. The next contest is on Tuesday in New Hampshire.

IOWA RESULTS
DEMOCRATS (official)
Barack Obama - 37.58%
John Edwards - 29.75%
Hillary Clinton - 29.47%
Bill Richardson - 2.11%
REPUBLICANS (85% complete)
Mike Huckabee - 34%
Mitt Romney - 26%
Fred Thomson and John McCain - both 13%

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/7170954.stm

Published: 2008/01/04 05:11:34 GMT

© BBC MMVIII

Just from the "horse race" aspect this would be a very interesting race. Of course it's way too early to come to any conclusions other than Chris Dodd won't be our next President, nor will Joe Biden. Haven't heard of any Republicans dropping out yet.

If I can't have Kucinich then I can accept Obama. And if Huckabee is the only other possibility, well, it could be worse. Hell, it is worse right now.

Let's get it on!

Criminal inquiry over CIA tapes
The US justice department is to launch a criminal investigation into the CIA's erasing of videotapes of interrogations of two al-Qaeda suspects.
It follows last month's preliminary joint inquiry with the CIA into whether a full investigation was necessary.

Critics have accused the CIA of a cover-up to hide evidence of possible torture and abuse of detainees.

The CIA says it destroyed the tapes as they no longer had "intelligence value" and were a security risk to its agents.

The CIA will of course cooperate fully with this investigation as it has with the others into this matter
CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield

US Attorney General Michael Mukasey announced the move, appointing federal prosecutor John Durham to oversee the case.

In a statement he said: "The department's national security division has recommended, and I have concluded, that there is a basis for initiating a criminal investigation of this matter."

CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield said the agency would "co-operate fully with this investigation as it has with the others into this matter".

Interrogation methods

The hundreds of hours of footage, recorded in 2002, reportedly contained images of interrogation techniques including water-boarding, which simulates drowning.

President George W Bush has said that the US does not use torture but has not been specific about interrogation methods.

Congress are also examining exactly how and why the tapes came to be destroyed in 2005.

The House Intelligence Committee has called on Jose Rodriguez, the former CIA official who ordered the tapes destroyed, to appear at a hearing on 16 January.

The Bush administration has so far refused to co-operate with the congressional investigation.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/7168869.stm

Published: 2008/01/02 20:36:51 GMT

© BBC MMVIII

The good ol' US of A. Democracy in action. Open government, of, by and for the people.

This is from the A.P. story:

"The Justice Department went out and got somebody with complete independence and integrity," said former Connecticut U.S. Attorney Stanley Twardy, who worked with Durham. "No politics whatsoever. It's going to be completely by the book and he's going to let the chips fall where they may."

This is what we need to hear; we also need for this to be true. I guess we'll see how good a job Bush and Cheney did of creating deniability for themselves. Or do you believe them when they say that this was all done without their knowledge? And if so, what of that? Aren't they supposed to know what the hell goes on in their administration? (The answer is yes. And they are accountable for whatever happens whether they will take responsibility or not.)

Like I said, Happy Fuck'n New Year!

So, 2008. The promise of a new year. What is this one promising? Well, let's see, what's in the news?

Benazir Bhutto assassinated in Pakistan. Much turmoil in Pakistan. International reaction of outrage. Set-up? Negligence? An act of "terror"?

How about this, from Kenya:

Kenyans burned to death in church
Thirty Kenyans including many children have been burned to death in a church, after seeking refuge from the mounting violence over last week's elections.
A mob set fire to the church in Eldoret where many people from President Mwai Kibaki's Kikuyu tribe were sheltering.

The Kenyan government has accused supporters of opposition leader Raila Odinga of carrying out "ethnic cleansing" against the Kikuyu.

Both President Kibaki and Mr Odinga have called for the killing to stop.

An estimated 250 people have died in the violence that erupted following the controversial re-election of President Kibaki, according to police and journalists across the country.

President Kibaki, who was swiftly sworn in on Sunday amid opponents' accusations that the poll was rigged, said political parties should meet immediately and publicly called for calm.

But Mr Odinga said he would only hold talks once the re-installed president "publicly owns up that he was not elected".

EU observers said the poll "fell short of international standards", and four Kenyan election commissioners have joined calls for an independent judicial body to re-examine the process.

The government has denied any irregularities."

What of this? Where to start? Primarily, it's a story about mass murder by a mob. The kind of story that seems like it's part of an alternate reality. Not in our world, surely this didn't happen in our world? In what kind of society is this even possible?

That's the rest of the story. Setting up the backdrop against which something like this can occur: A government with serious legitimacy issues and an opposition party that is blamed for this atrocity.

Anybody want to pick a side in this one? GW?


"Fresh killings

About 400 people were said to be taking refuge in the Kenya Assemblies of God church when the attack took place at about 1000 (0700 GMT).

A pastor from the church, Jackson Nyanga, told the BBC that many of the people were beaten before the building was set on fire.

"After torching the church, children died - around 25 in number - four elderly people. And our men and our people who tried to confront them were injured," he said.

Eldoret, in the Rift Valley, has witnessed some of the worst violence since last Sunday's controversial poll and has a history of inter-ethnic tension.

Correspondents say that over the past few days hundreds of Kikuyus in the Eldoret area have been taking shelter in churches and around the town's police station.

Eldoret resident Bernard Magamu told the BBC News website that many houses and businesses have been torched, and that roads in and around the town are closed.

OFFICIAL RESULTS
Mwai Kibaki (pictured): 4,584,721 votes
Raila Odinga: 4,352,993
Kalonzo Musyoka: 879,903


"People are still fearful. It's hard. People are really scared," said Mr Magamu, adding that local hospitals were struggling to cope with the high number of casualties.

The Kenyan Red Cross said that at least 70,000 people have been displaced in the Rift Valley area as a result of the unrest, describing it as "a national disaster".

Alfred Mutua, spokesman for the Kenyan government, accused Mr Odinga's supporters of a systematic campaign of ethnic violence.

"Raila Odinga's supporters... are engaging in ethnic cleansing and they are not doing it in a haphazard manner, they're doing it in a very well organised, calculated manner... attacking in military precision," he told the BBC World Service.

UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown has again urged Kenya's political leaders to talk, and said: "The violence must be brought to an end."

Doubts expressed

EU observers said the country's election was flawed.

"They were marred by a lack of transparency in the processing and tallying of presidential results, which raises concerns about the accuracy of the final results," the EU team said in a statement.

According to the EU, in at least two constituencies - Molo and Kieni - the results that were announced did not reflect the number of votes cast.

EU observers say they heard the voting figures being announced in Molo itself, but when the same results were announced again in Nairobi, the number of votes for Mr Kibaki was significantly higher - by 25,000.

Four of the 22 Kenyan election commissioners have also expressed doubts about the veracity of the figures giving President Kibaki victory by 200,000 votes.

But Finance Minister Amos Kimunya denied his party, the ruling PNU, or the government had been involved in rigging the poll.

He told the BBC: "I have no evidence that they were rigged. Anyone who has any information that they were rigged in one constituency or the other, or overall, let them subject it through the legal process."

Mr Kibaki was declared the winner on Sunday after a controversial three-day counting process.

His challenger, Mr Odinga, said he was robbed of victory by alleged fraud.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/7166932.stm

Published: 2008/01/01 21:52:23 GMT

© BBC MMVIII

Want more? Soon