Please take a moment and look at these pictures. Really look at them. Not just a cursory glance or a rushed and distracted glance.

Isn’t it heartbreaking looking at them? Isn’t it revolting and outrageous? 

Next, please read, process, and think about the following few lines. I mean, really take them in and truly process their meaning and implications.

The severely injured and crippled children in these pictures are innocent victims of ‘our’ bombings in Afghanistan.

We, you and I, paid for every miniscule molecule of the bombs that brought this horror upon these innocent children. We financed the entire assault with our tax money, so are rightfully considered the financiers of what fell upon these innocent children.

Our representatives, the ones we elected and gave power to, decided upon and sanctioned these atrocities on our behalf, and in our name. We, you and I, likewise sanctioned them, and consented to become the financiers of their implementation.

We, you and I, are directly responsible for what you see in these pictures, and much worse and more, and implicating many more.

We, you and I, did ‘this’, and we are still doing it.

Now please tell me, should it matter whether you are pro-choice or pro-life when it comes to ‘this’ and your reaction to ‘this’?

Because if you are prochoice I doubt you’d make ‘this’ a choice of yours; as a decent human being. Or, if you are prolife I seriously doubt you’d sanction and finance ‘this,’ – do ‘this’ to other fellow human beings. After all, isn’t ‘a life a life…’?

Please tell me, should it matter whether you are a conservative or a liberal when it comes to ‘this’ and your reaction to ‘this’?

Because if you are a true conservative I believe you would be pro-defense not pro-offense, and offenses such as ‘this’ would offend you a great deal. And if you consider yourself a liberal, then I assume you hold high a human’s right to live and exist with dignity, no matter who or where they are.

Please tell me, should it matter whether you are a Christian, Jew, Muslim, or Buddhist when it comes to ‘this’ and your reaction to ‘this’?

Because if you truly have faith in the teachings of either Jesus, Moses, Mohammad, or Buddha, you go by their universal teaching and common proclamation that ‘Thou Shall Not Kill,’ not ‘thou shall sanction and condone violence like ‘this’ on ‘innocent lives’ in the name of false security and under the excuse of terror.’

Should it matter whether the children above are Afghans, Mexicans, or Americans? Are these lives worth less than others; less than ours? Wouldn’t have we been livid, fuming with rage and determination to seek justice, even if only one of these innocent children was on our soil attacked by foreign mighty powers, intentionally or not?

So please tell me, why do we stand divided when it comes to ‘this’?

Why is it that we go on sanctioning and financing ‘this,’ these outrageous and revolting offenses that are being brought upon real lives; innocent human lives?

Why can’t we unite on ‘this,’ a truly significant issue that deals with life and death?

Why don’t we put aside other differences, and jointly take a stand, as pro-choice, pro-life, conservative, liberal, Christian, Jew, Muslim, and Buddhist, who should all consider ‘this’ a significant violation of what we believe in?

Isn’t it time? Looking at these pictures, I say it is way past time. Don’t you?

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

In response to questions at the hearing that he was too close to Azerbaijani Government officials with highly questionable ties, Matt Bryza remained evasive and provided half-answer responses while denying any special ties or conflicts of interest due to his controversial and scandalous Neocon wife, Zeyno Baran. After the hearing Bryza submitted even more evasive and incomplete answers to a series of questions submitted separately by Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA). Particularly on one significant issue related to his questionable ties and conflict of interest related to his wife’s intimate relationship and position, Bryza may have actually perjured himself.

During his confirmation hearings Bryza tried very hard to assure Congress that there were no reasons whatsoever to worry about conflict of interest(s) based on his marriage to Zeyno Baran, and that she had given up all positions and involvements related to Azerbaijan. At the hearing, he said that his marriage would present no conflict of interest, and that a thorough State Department vetting of his finances found nothing untoward. He said Baran would not influence his positions as ambassador, and that any common positions they held were the result of kindred spirits.

In all this, Bryza conveniently forgot to report or even mention his wife’s official position as a member of the editorial board of an Azerbaijani government institution, the journal Azerbaijan Focus: Journal of International Affairs. And guess what, according to its website, Azerbaijan Focus “is a publication of the Center for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan.�

Now, how could Bryza forget this mammoth conflict of interest, and do so despite being put under the direct spotlight with even more direct questions on this specific topic regarding his controversial bride?! Guess who happen to be Zeyno Baran’s colleagues at this position?

Ms. Baran serves on the editorial board along with several Azerbaijani government officials including Elmar Mammadyarov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Chairman of the Editorial Board Ramiz Mehdiyev, Head of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, and Hafiz Pashayev, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

In July I wrote a rather long article on Bryza’s background, the issues surrounding his Neocon wife, and their scandalous and lavish wedding in Turkey. Considering Zeyno Baran’s position at this journal owned and operated by the Azerbaijani government, no wonder the two investigative Azerbaijani journalists who uncovered and reported Bryza Wedding’s Azerbaijani guests and financiers were beaten up, arrested, and jailed for their exposé!!!! The reporters brought the needed attention to Bryza’s certain special guests, who happened to be political figureheads from Azerbaijan, and the special gifts and financial contributions by them to Bryza’s bride and her nearly quarter million dollar wedding expenses.

But wait, there is more! In addition to serving on a board of an Azerbaijani government institution, there is this not so insignificant question on funding of Mrs. Bryza’s employer, the Center for Eurasian Policy at the Hudson Institute. Mr. Bryza has stated, many times, on the record, that his bride has been on leave without pay from the Hudson Institute since June 1, 2009. However, there are numerous instances where Ms.Baran has been listed as an active employee of the Hudson Institute since that date, including as recently as August 2010.

As for funding of Mrs. Bryza’s employer? Well, no one seems to know, and those who really want to know have been blocked from finding out. The infamous Hudson Institute is pretty well-known for its tight-lipped policies on the sources of its funding. To this date, despite inquiries, they have not responded to questions regarding funding from Azerbaijani businesses or foundations or corporations with an interest in Azerbaijan. However we know this much:

-In 2007, the Hudson Institution’s Center for Eurasian Policy, hosted a conference, titled “The Azerbaijan- Turkey- US Relationship and its Importance for Eurasia.â€�

-According to their own published “Event Summary and Conclusions,” this event was financed by a foreign entity, the “Azerbaijan-Turkey Business Association,” with direct financial interests in Turkey and Azerbaijan.

-The majority of speakers at this conference, held at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, were officials from the Azerbaijani and Turkish governments.

Now how is that our Mr. Bryza fails to report and account for these crucial facts? Further, shouldn’t his official responses to the specific questions asked on these issues be considered perjury? Because being evasive and wishy-washy go only so far in explaining the absence of these facts. At some point, someone in Congress will hopefully look into the real meaning and implications of Bryza’s foolish attempts to dodge questions meant to determine his suitability for this job. Evasive? Or just plain perjury?

Update: Here is a recent analysis of possible outcomes on the Bryza vs. Azerbaijan Ambassadorship by Harut Sassounian, who had earlier written this piece on major issues surrounding Bryza’s Senate confirmation.

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

Here are a few updates for those of you who may have been wondering about the continuity of my interest in our nation’s police state status. I may be too busy to write my usual ten-page plus editorials on this topic, but never too busy to monitor the issue; never! It is about me, my daughter, you, your friends, basically, this is about all of us.

I am going to start this update with something positive. The following ‘something’ shows that we indeed can take a stand, however little, and challenge what’s being forced upon us in the game of fear-mongering and in the name of security. Here is a group of ‘true’ Americans who have enough patriotism and real backbone to stand up for our liberties and dignities. I am going to post their entire letter instead of a couple of paragraphs. It deserves to be published and shown in its entirety, so I hope I won’t be frowned upon or penalized for violating the quote limitation…

Letter: Indignities at the Airports

As professional pilots, some colleagues and I recently issued a statement to our airline. We voiced our rejection of the policy changes being enacted by the Transportation Security Administration at airport security checkpoints across the country, including Memphis International (Sept. 18 article, “Virtual strip search / Random full-body scans launched at Memphis airport”).

We do not consent to the indignity of virtual strip searches as a matter of course in performing the duties of our profession. Neither can we conscientiously accept being physically frisked by federal agents every day as a reasonable alternative.

Obviously, our work places us inside the flight deck door by necessity. We wouldn’t have to smuggle a weapon into the airport to take control of an aircraft. After running the gantlet of required background checks, security training and screening procedures, it’s just plain silly to confiscate pilots’ pocket knives and corkscrews before we enter the cockpit. In short, here’s hoping the crew for your next flight is on the home team.

But that’s not even the point.

We are appalled that any citizen who is not under arrest, has made no threats, nor raised any suspicion of terrorism or other malice should be made to submit to either of these “options” in order to move about within his or her own national borders.

Federal airport security guards are often unskilled, entry-level responders to help-wanted ads affixed to pizza boxes. Perhaps novice agents lack the perspective to grasp the full implications of their work. Forgive them, for they know not what they do. But please don’t show them your naked body. Don’t let these strangers put their hands on you or your children. Their abuse protects no one. No, the good citizens of a free society must resist such authoritarian overtures at least as much as any foreign threat.

I offer my condolences if your flight should be delayed or canceled because the TSA won’t let us in the door. But I suggest that your freedom is more important. At any rate, ours certainly is.

Michael Roberts

Memphis

Mr. Roberts, kudos to you and your colleagues. You have my respect and support.

…………………………………………………………………

Now here are three related articles showing how our guys at the bureau aren’t able to find real criminal or terrorism related cases to chase and investigate. They are bored, and as we all know boredom can lead to all sorts of nefarious deeds and activities. On one hand we are constantly reminded of Al-Qaeda and related boogieman’s plans to destroy us here in the States, thus the urgency to give up all our rights, liberties and dignities. Yet, on the other hand, here is our nation’s federal police agency bored out of its mind going around and harassing American citizens for exercising their rights guaranteed under the Constitution. I guess they are contradicting their bosses! Hmmm…or maybe they are keeping J. Edgar Hoover’s spirit alive?!

FBI Files on Investigations of Iowa City Peace Activists Made Public

David Goodner, a former member of the University of Iowa’s Antiwar Committee, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for files associated with an FBI surveillance of groups in Iowa City prior to the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn. What he discovered was the investigation was far more extensive than previously known. Now, Goodner has turned over the files he received from the FBI exclusively to The Iowa Independent for publication.

As the documents show, the investigation into activities of peace groups in Iowa City involved staking out homes, secretly photographing and video taping members, digging through garbage and even planting a mole to spy on the peace activists up close.  Known as the Wild Rose Rebellion, the protesters were described by the FBI as an “anarchist collective.� In an interview with The Des Moines Register, the FBI defended its actions.

Weysan Dun, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Omaha field office, which oversees Iowa and Nebraska, said in a statement that every investigative technique that was employed was authorized under guidelines established by the U.S. attorney general “and was deemed necessary to resolve the allegations.� …

Dun said the Iowa City investigation was warranted because of allegations that certain people were possibly going to engage in criminal activities to disrupt the national conventions of one or both major political parties.

The group’s plans were to help organize nonviolent acts of civil disobedience, such as street blockades, at the 2008 RNC convention. In an interview Monday with progressive radio host Ed Fallon, Goodner said the FBI investigation didn’t make sense.

…

And here is the second related article:

Midlands FBI spying under scrutiny

In August 2003, two FBI agents watched over an Omaha rally organized by peace activist Frank Cordaro, a former Catholic priest.The agents observed no criminal activity at the rally but still sent notes on those in attendance to local military and law enforcement officials so they could plan security measures for a conference on U.S. nuclear policy at Offutt Air Force Base, according to a Justice Department report.

Also, FBI files reveal that agents, working under the direction of the bureau’s Omaha field office, secretly monitored the activities of Iowa City protest groups before the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn.

“I learned early in my peace and justice career to assume the government knows what’s going on,â€� said Cordaro, who has spent a total of about five years in jail for trespassing on Offutt property. When the FBI was monitoring him, Cordaro was planning a protest against nuclear weapons at the Offutt conference.

Now the FBI, including its Omaha office, is under intense scrutiny for investigations that revive memories of the bureau’s Vietnam-era intrigue.

Unsealed agency documents and a report from the Justice Department detail the FBI’s broad investigations of protest groups in Nebraska, Iowa and other parts of the country based on its authority to look into allegations and threats of domestic and international terrorism.

“In several cases there was little indication of any possible federal crimes,â€� Inspector General Glenn A. Fine said in his report, which detailed similar investigations the agency conducted around the country. “In some cases, the FBI classified some investigations relating to nonviolent civil disobedience under its ‘Acts of Terrorism’ classification.â€�

A domestic terrorism designation can have a large impact, the inspector general said, because people who are subjects of such probes are normally placed on watch lists and their travels and interactions with law enforcement may be tracked.

The FBI investigated whether the Iowa activists were part of a national network of radicals who wanted to disrupt the GOP convention in Minnesota and the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver. The records show that the investigation lasted from roughly March to December in 2008.

During that time, authorities went through activists’ garbage and their cell phone and motor vehicle records.

…

Okay, you can read the rest here.

And finally, here is a hard-hitting recent news article for those who don’t consider the two above alarm-worthy:

FBI Raids: An End to ‘Covert’ Spying on Antiwar Groups?

Earlier this week the Justice Department revealed that the FBI had been using false claims of “counter-terror� operations to justify covert spying operations against antiwar groups in Pittsburgh and elsewhere across the country. As officials downplayed the report the matter seemed to be just another in a growing list of Bush era abuses of power, about which little is ever said.

Then this morning FBI agents and SWAT teams started kicking doors in across Minneapolis, across Chicago, across the rest of America. The target: antiwar activists of various stripes, but particularly those likely to be involved in antiwar protests at the next Democratic National Convention.

It seems the era of “covertâ€� FBI spying has come to an end, and not in the good way like you’d hope. Rather it seems to have moved with surprising alacrity from behind the shadows and become an overt program of intimidation and surveillance of what is left of America’s antiwar movement. Read more È

According to news reports, the Obama administration is once again reevaluating how to deal with Afghanistan’s Hamid Karzai out of fear that it may now be holding him to unrealistic standards of U.S. law enforcement. This comes after a summer of news that Karzai continues to find new ways of resisting Washington’s efforts to rein in rampant corruption in his government.  Now we hear from legendary Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward that the U.S. has intelligence showing Hamid Karzai is under medication for manic depression and that Obama’s national security team doubts that “his strategy in Afghanistanâ€� (whatever that may be at the moment) can work. The tug of war between Kabul and Washington has become so desperate, former CIA Near East, South Asia Chief Dr. Charles Cogan recently opined that the situation was fast approaching a “Diem Moment.â€� Cogan even suggested that while Diem’s removal had been “horribly botched,â€� “a removal of Mr. Karzai might turn out to be more straightforward.â€� Given the similarities to America’s quagmire in Vietnam, invoking Diem raises more than a few dark memories. Yet despite vast differences in the two wars another even more deeply unsettling similarity is emerging. Hamid Karzai is in a political fight for his life like South Vietnam’s Ngo Dinh Diem. But (strange as it might seem) his contradictory behavior and the chaos and corruption surrounding it may be no accident. In fact it could be exactly the consequence that his main neoconservative backer, former RAND director, U.S. Ambassador and Special Presidential Envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad, had long intended.

 

According to Thomas Ruttig, a United Nations official present at the mid-2002 Kabul Loya Jirga that installed Karzai, “Khalilzad was the driving force behind THE mistake committed in the post-Taleban period that basically and fundamentally undermined the – possible! – emergence of a stable Afghanistan by bringing in the warlords again and allowing them unrestricted access to the new institutions…  Re-empowered militarily and politically, the warlords expanded the realms of their power into the economy. With their [U.S. Special Forces] Alpha Team seed capital they took over that part of the economy that matters in Afghanistan, the poppy and heroin business. With the profits from this they expanded into what remains of the licit economy: import of luxury goods, cars, spare parts, fuel and cooking gas [and] real estate often by occupying government-owned land…�

 

When asked in the spring of 2010 whether Khalilzad should be invited back to assist the Obama administration, former Special Assistant to President Reagan, Reagan-Doctrine Architect and honorary Afghan “Freedom Fighter,� California Congressman Dana Rohrabacher told Huffpost interviewer Michael Hughes, “He [Khalilzad] oversaw the establishment of a government that was unable to function in Afghan society. And on top of that he browbeat people into accepting Karzai. He even browbeat the ex-King of Afghanistan Zahir Shah into accepting him. Khalilzad was not in the anti-Taliban camp in the 1990’s, so why the hell would we bring him in now? By forcing Karzai into office, Khalilzad snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory because the Taliban were beaten at that point.�

 

To both Ruttig and Rohrabacher, Khalilzad’s ultimate crime – like the U.S. manipulation of the Ngo Dinh Diem regime in Vietnam – was that his corruption of the Karzai regime had created so much internal chaos that no amount of outside effort could undo it. Yet the idea that chaos, as a form of extreme social engineering, may have actually been the plan cannot be ignored.

 

If anyone embodies the Cold War neoconservative philosophy that came to dominate American foreign and military policy from Jimmy Carter to George W. Bush, it is Zalmay Khalilzad. Khalilzad first came to the United States as a high school exchange student.

 

He received his bachelor’s and master’s degrees from American University in Beirut and his doctorate degree from the University of Chicago where he met and studied along with Paul Wolfowitz under the RAND nuclear warfare theorist, former Trotskyite and father of neoconservatism, Albert J. Wohlstetter.  It was Wohlstetter’s early 1970s series of articles in the Wall Street Journal and Strategic Review that prompted the politicized CIA analysis known as the Team B experiment. It was the Team B’s adherents both inside and outside the Carter administration who set the stage for undermining détente and luring the Soviets into the Afghan trap and holding them there while Afghanistan disintegrated. And it was the same Team B brain-trust of Wohlstetter acolytes including Khalilzad that went on to provide the philosophical template for the politicized intelligence process that led to the strategic military disasters of Iraq and Afghanistan. 

 

In her 1972 book about Vietnam, Fire in the Lake, author Frances FitzGerald wrote of the perverse illogic of another of Wohlstetter’s onetime RAND protégés, Herman Kahn.

“Just before his departure for a two-week tour of Vietnam in 1967, the defense analyst, Herman Kahn, listened to an American businessman give a detailed account of the economic situation in South Vietnam. At the end of the talk – an argument for reducing the war – Kahn said, ‘I see what you mean. We have corrupted the cities. Now, perhaps we can corrupt the countryside as well.’ It was not a joke. Kahn was thinking in terms of a counterinsurgency program: the United States would win the war by making all Vietnamese economically dependent upon it. In 1967 his program was already becoming a reality, for the corruption reached even to the lowest levels of Vietnamese society.â€� Read more È

Glenn Walp discusses his recently published book, Implosion at Los Alamos: How Crime, Corruption, and Cover-Ups Jeopardize America’s Nuclear Weapons Secrets , and describes major lapses in security at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, where scientists developed the world’s first atomic bomb back in 1945. Through well-documented facts and first hand experiences, Mr. Walp provides us with an alarming exposé on America’s vulnerability to those who may now be in possession of our most sensitive nuclear weapons secrets.  He talks about several high profile security lapses and the corruption, thievery and cover-ups he uncovered during his investigations at Los Alamos Lab, the bungled investigation of the Wen Ho Lee case, his experience as a whistleblower, his motivation to write this book, and more.

 

Glenn Walp worked as the Office Leader of the Office of Security Inquiries at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, where he denuded major crimes, mismanagement, corruption, and cover-up, as well as crucial security and safety breeches. His exposures helped result in 3 Congressional Hearings, the firings/reassignments of 19 lab officials, and that the contract to manage Los Alamos be put up for bid for the first time since the beginning of the Manhattan Project. Walp is a 35-year veteran law enforcement officer, working 29 years with the Pennsylvania State Police, retiring as Commissioner, and a member of the Governor’s Cabinet, and being the Chief of Police for 2 entities in Arizona. He has a BA in criminology, MA in criminal psychology and a PhD in criminal justice, and is a graduate of the FBI National Academy and Executive Institute. He is the author of recently published Implosion at Los Alamos.

Here is our guest Glenn Walp unplugged!

Interview with Glenn Walp [ 1:09:33 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

My Deepest Condolences,

To the family members and friends of those ‘sacrificed’ here,

To those who have lost their loved ones as a ‘result;’ the civilian casualties of our illegal wars over ‘there,’

…and, to every American, to all of us, for the loss of our liberties and integrities.

With that,

Let us remember the true winners of this tragedy,

Those who succeeded in replacing the Cold War with one without a ‘risk’ to end,

The handful whose survival depends on an un-ending war(s),

The ones in search of true & absolute power(s),

…the real winners and profiteers of this dark day.

 

A Boiling Frogs Post

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

Phony Commissioners & Phony Reports, Central Asia, Laos, Bryza Candidacy, Gulen…You Name it!

This post is similar to what I usually publish under my ‘Weekly Round Up’ series, only with a caveat: the time period covers more than a week, make that more than a month. I’ve been saving links and articles of interest, either those I’ve been coming across or ones sent by my loyal friends with good noses, and meaning to publish them as ‘weekly round ups.’ Then of course, due to ‘this or that,’ those ‘round up’ points ended up piling up week after week. Where did they get piled up? As ‘saved’ e-mails in my e-mail box and marked as ‘unread.’ Why that way? Because that’s one of my ‘supposed’ motivating strategies to prevent ‘delays & procrastination;’ seeing these piled up e-mails in my box every day, usually several times a day, bugs me big time…

Well, obviously, and for truly justifiable reason(s), that so-called strategy/method didn’t work, and I ended up with over one hundred e-mails of this particular category sitting in my mail box, glaring at me. Last night I decided I couldn’t take it any longer. After putting my daughter in bed for the evening, I sat behind my PC, scrolled down to the bottom of my e-mail box where the oldest e-mails sit, clicked and read. I eliminated (deleted) many due to the time-sensitive nature of those articles/analysis/editorials, and saved (technically ‘re-saved’) those timeless and or worthy-of-listing ones. And, at 10:30 p.m., began typing away!

I hope ‘some’ of you will find ‘some’ of this information worthy or useful; I did. Maybe we’ll get a chance to discuss these in the comments section… Oh, also, I am going to preempt a few finicky readers: I am mostly listing the links & the headlines/titles rather than adding my usual fairly long commentaries to each and every one of the links, because I don’t have the time; hope you understand. And finally, I am looking forward to tomorrow morning, when I’ll check my mail box and won’t see those glaring ‘months’ old e-mails;-) So here we go!

…………………………………………………………

Last year I did a piece on Vietnam & Agent Orange. The following is another awful footprint left by one of our many wars, reminding us once again of our established record as the number one nation in using WMD (and going for ‘preemptive wars’!)…Truly sad; truly sad.

New case for US reparations in Laos
Melody Kemp, Asia Times

Laos carries the tragic distinction of being the most heavily bombed country in the history of modern warfare. Thirty-five years after the United States wound up its so-called “secret war” against communist guerillas, the impact of its unexploded ordnance (UXO) continues to take a heavy human and economic toll.

A new report published jointly by UXO Lao and the Lao National Regulatory Authority (NRA) has shed more light on the damage caused by the US’s UXOs. The research surveyed 94% of Lao households and concluded that an estimated 20,000 people had died from UXOs since the conflict ended after the communist takeover in 1975.

…

COPE’s research shows that the US government, corporations and private foundations have given over $39.5 million for UXO clean-up since 1993 – a trifling sum compared with the billions it has allocated for its new generation of wars. A US Senate committee recently recommended committing $7 million for UXO clearance in Laos in 2011 and $3.5 for similar activities in Vietnam. The US Congress allocated about $5 million and the US State Department $1.9 million for UXO clearance in Laos this year.

The US war in Laos was shrouded in intrigue and disinformation. An Australian-made film entitled Bomb Harvest contains footage of a US government spokesperson saying that internationally accepted rules of engagement were suspended during the campaign in Laos. Legally, that means there are still unresolved questions over who should bear primary responsibility, the US government
or the private companies who produced the weapons, for UXO victims and other legacies of the war in Laos.

As warfare is increasingly outsourced to private companies, questions are emerging about the legal liability of private companies that supply and profit from war. From a common law perspective, US negligence and injury in Laos are easy to prove, say international lawyers. However, the tenets of war reparations have been generally designed so that the vanquished are economically punished for both their aggression and loss

…

Laos, which had an estimated one ton of ordnance per capita rained on it by US bombers, has more recently emerged as a global icon for the movement against cluster bombs. It is estimated by the US State Department’s Walk the Earth With Safety bureau that about 30% of those bombs did not explode on contact with the ground. Canisters dropped from US B-52s could have carried up to 600 cluster bomb units and distributed them over a wide terrain on impact.

A new research report entitled National Survey of UXO Victims and Accidents reveals that, apart from cluster munitions, land mines, artillery shells and other US ordnance also continue to cause significant casualties decades after the end of the war. Indeed, many areas of the country where injuries have recently occurred were not adjacent to known combat zones.

During the conflict, the largest numbers of bombing-related fatalities came among soldiers. Nowadays, it’s farmers, fisherfolk, foresters and women and children foraging for food in UXO-contaminated areas. That is, those being killed now by what is known to be US ordnance are civilians merely trying to make a living. Many of those killed and injured, such as the five children killed in southern Champassak province in February this year, were not even alive during the war.

…

Military adventurism for less ideological reasons, including access to and control over natural resources, has changed the face of modern warfare. However, some wonder whether reformed reparation laws that forced state aggressors and the private companies that supply them with weaponry to pay for all injuries and assistance to non-combatants would reduce the risk of future armed conflicts.

Vietnam tried for years to win US compensation for its victims of US chemical warfare, including the US’s use of the defoliant Agent Orange, but ultimately failed to secure a US court decision in its favor. Laos has not collected comprehensive data on the effects of Agent Orange and other chemical defoliants on its southern territories, but the recent $300 million deal Vietnamese stakeholders reached with the US panel could change that.

Meanwhile, signatories to the Convention on Cluster Munitions are scheduled to meet in Vientiane in early November. The US is notably not a signatory to the munitions-curbing treaty, but 107 other nations are, 40 of which have formally ratified the agreement. The convention took effect on August 1, 2010, and the meeting in Laos will be the first since its enactment.

…

I encourage you to read the rest here. And below are two clips I filmed while in Vietnam: First, Victims of Agent Orange, and the second, an interview I conducted (with Le Ly Heyslip) while in Vietnam on Agent Orange:

 

 

The Latest ‘Pitch & Tone’ on Central Asia

The following links are on one of the most important topics unknown to and or ignored by the majority here in the States: Central Asia & the Caucasus. I picked the following three since they reflect the latest ‘trend’ and the ‘advertised tone’ by the Obama-Hillary Clinton Administration. The first analysis/report was published by the Council on Foreign Relations, so it’s independence and purity should be pretty self explanatory. The following two pieces by the same author, published by Asia Times, are a bit hard to judge; as far as intentions & interests are concerned… Okay, take a look at them and you’ll see what I mean.

Reimagining Eurasia
Samuel Charap and Alexandros Petersen,  Foreign Affairs

As Kyrgyzstan descended into chaos after President Kurmanbek Bakiyev was ousted in April 2010, most observers were focused on the fate of the key U.S. airbase there. They feared that Moscow had orchestrated the unrest as revenge for Bakiyev reneging on his alleged promise to shut down the base and would now demand that the new government follow through on that pledge. But instead of indulging in geopolitical gamesmanship as usual, Russia and the United States actually worked together, pursuing back-channel talks that facilitated Bakiyev’s safe escape into exile. Periodic consultations since April have thus far managed to prevent conflict between the Cold War adversaries in the one country where both have military outposts. This marked a tectonic shift in the geopolitics of Eurasia. For the first time in over a decade, what Russia calls its “near abroad” was a locus of cooperation, not confrontation, between Russia and the United States.

…

This shift has opened a window of opportunity to fundamentally rethink U.S. foreign policy in Eurasia — a term used here to refer to the countries of the greater Black Sea region and Central Asia — a strategically situated area with massive natural resource wealth and great economic potential. Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has formulated its approach to countries as diverse as Azerbaijan and Ukraine through a Russia-centric lens; U.S. policy toward the region as a whole became a function of its plans for dealing with Moscow. Although Washington focused on ensuring Eurasian states’ independence in the 1990s, the past decade saw U.S. policy toward these countries devolve, becoming mired in outright U.S-Russia strategic competition. Although that competitive dynamic has diminished significantly over the past year and a half, its legacy still defines Washington’s engagement with the states of the region.U.S. policymakers must abandon the tired Russia-centric tack and develop new individualized approaches to the states of the greater Black Sea region and Central Asia. By treating each country based on its merits, as opposed to approaching the region as a set of contested territories, Washington can serve long-term U.S. interests and avoid re-creating a nineteenth-century-style Great Game.

…

You can read the rest here

Russia and US march in post-Soviet step
By M K Bhadrakumar, Asia Times

An unprecedented military parade in Red Square in Moscow on Sunday, when servicemen from the major North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries will march alongside Russian soldiers, will be a commemorative event marking the 65th anniversary of Victory Day in World War II. Arguably, it is not a parade of NATO troops but rather of Russia’s erstwhile allies in the coalition against Adolf Hitler.

…

You can read the rest of this fairly brief, and equally light-weight on the analysis-front, piece here.  I think Bhadrakumar misses on several extremely important points, what I call ‘reality check,’ but what do you think?

…

Here is another piece by the same author, Bhadrakumar. This one is a bit better, relatively speaking, that is

A Kosovo on the Central Asian steppes
By M K Bhadrakumar, Asia Times

A robust geopolitical thrust by the United States aimed at creating a role for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in resolving conflicts in Kyrgyzstan and Afghanistan promises to rewrite the great game rivalries in Central Asia in anticipation of an Afghan settlement. The US initiative poses political challenges to Russia, which is a member of the 56-member OSCE, and China, which is not. The security vehicles piloted by each the respective two regional powers – the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) – are being outmaneuvered by the US.

…

Paradoxically, Russia and China could seize the initiative if the OSCE plan to stabilize the situation in Kyrgyzstan somehow crash-lands and ethnic tensions, violence and anarchy ensue. But that would be a dubious blessing as Russia and China too are stakeholders in regional stability in their own ways.

‘B team’ for the Afghan war
The unkindest cut of all is that it is Kazakhstan, which both Moscow and Beijing counted to be their most sober and thoughtful regional partner, which is heading the OSCE chariot. As Kazakh President Nurusultan Nazarbayev firmly asserted, “There is no doubt a new OSCE strategy on Afghanistan is necessary.”

The US is delighted, and as a quid pro quo, Washington has accommodated the Kazakh leaderships’ desire to chair an OSCE summit meeting within the year in Astana and thereby claim a legacy on the world stage. The last time the OSCE held a summit meeting was in 1999. This is also the 35th anniversary of the Helsinki Final Act..

…

Again, I don’t consider the piece heavy-weight by any means, and in fact that’s exactly why I am listing it here…It may open up a few of our readers whom I know to be very savvy in this area;-) Now, the following piece seems to have somel dose of realism: Read more È