Provocations

Chris Hedges interview: Trying to restore democracy in the USA

The law he's seeking to overturn is similar to those used by the Apartheid South African government: detention without trial. Somehow it's become OK in the USA.

HEDGES: On December 31, President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act, which included Section 1021. Section 1021 permits the U.S. government to overturn 200 years of domestic law and empower the military to carry out policing duties, to detain American citizens, hold them in military facilities, and strip them of due process until, in the language of that section, the end of hostilities, which, of course, is indefinite detention.

In January, the lawyers Carl Mayer and Bruce Afran approached me about suing the president along with the defense secretary over Section 1021 of the NDAA. We brought that case before Judge Katherine Forrest in the Southern District Court of New York. I was eventually joined in that lawsuit by six other activists, including Noam Chomsky and Daniel Ellsberg. The last hearing on the case was in August. And in September, Judge Forrest ruled that Section 1021 was in fact unconstitutional, and she issued a permanent injunction.

Full transcript of interview

See also:

Chris Hedges, the CBC and a recent interview with the Straight.

Obama? Romney? How about neither?

When I was a child care worker and I wanted to give a frustrated child a little space, a sense of some autonomy in what was often a very restricted setting, I'd seek to give them a couple of acceptable (to me) options. It often eased the frustration. Are voters in the upcoming US election - and many others - essentially limited to choices that sustain the corporate status quo? If you want to give this some serious thought, try this recent column by Chris Hedges.

How Do You Take Your Poison?

By Chris Hedges — Posted on Sep 24, 2012

We can take it from nurse Romney or we can take it from nurse Obama, but one way or another the corporate hemlock will be shoved down our throats.

Read more

Chris Hedges, the CBC and a recent interview with the Straight.

If you haven't seen this video, it's worth a watch - for Hedges' example of handling a shallow and insulting interviewer, while still getting his point across. Below is a more recent interview by The Straight, which includes his current perspective on his experience at the CBC.

 

From a July 14th  interview on the Straight.

GS: Last year you were ambushed by the CBC. Were you aware of Kevin O’Leary’s reputation before you went on?

CH: I never heard of the guy. And it was really depressing because it was the CBC, and if it was the CBC that it used to be—the CBC or the BBC—and they wanted me, I would go, because I thought they were a first-class news organizations. And the next thing you know, I’m on with an idiot who should be on Fox News. And I was furious because I was in the middle of a huge Occupy demonstration in Washington, and I walked to the CBC studios from it, and it was a waste of my time. And unfortunately I think it’s just emblematic of Harper’s assault against journalism that somebody like this would ever be on a current-affairs program.

GS: We interviewed him here shortly after. He doesn’t think he did anything wrong.

CH: Well, these guys are idiots. They’re really idiots, and because they can’t compete with you on ideas they descend to insults and character assassination, because that’s the only level of discourse they can engage in. That’s why I don’t go on Fox News. I don’t put myself in those positions, because it doesn’t contribute to public discourse in any way.

Tucson shootings and trashtalk - who wants real change?

If you're having difficulty seeing any clarity in the fog of political duelling exacerbated by the Arizona shooting, here is what I consider a voice of sanity and reason - and even a sense of direction. I think what Paul Jay says relates to all of us, even in countries like Canada where public debate isn't nearly as extreme or rancorous.

US Government going after Wikileaks supporters

You won't read many articles like this as the (US) government intention appears to be to silence willingness to speak up because of fear of retribution. In his Salon.com article, Glenn Greenwald says:

Most of those expressing these concerns were perfectly rational, smart, well-informed American citizens.  And yet they were petrified that merely donating money to a non-violent political and journalistic group whose goals they supported would subject them to invasive government scrutiny or, worse, turn them into criminals.  A government can guarantee all the political liberties in the world on paper (free speech, free assembly, freedom of association), but if it succeeds in frightening the citizenry out of exercising those rights, they become meaningless.

Read on

Are Canadians suffering from battered electorate syndrome?

The evidence is clear. Even though you may dismiss some of it, the dictatorial and dismissive way in which Stephen Harper regards those he is supposedly serving is unprecedented in modern Canadian democracy. Along with this go many decisions and practices that treat people, the legal system and the parliamentary system with disdain and even contempt.

Kathleen Ohara in Rabble.ca gives us Ten reasons to oppose the Harper candidate in your riding

Here are a few of her examples:

• To raise funds, the Tories promoted the HST, which moves the tax burden from corporations to consumers, increasing the cost of essentials like food and heat. The Ontario government has admitted that this will cost citizens at least $500 a year per family.

• Harper and Company earned a reputation for heavy-handed stonewalling during the UN Climate Change negotiations in Copenhagen. In Cancun, they lobbied against an extension of the Kyoto Accord - which they have continued to ignore in spite of the 2010 weather horrors, estimated to cost $220 billion globally.

• More stonewalling and what some saw as "contempt of Parliament" led to an extraordinary ruling by Speaker Peter Milliken, condemning the government for a breach of parliamentary privilege because it refused to release uncensored documents. Thanks to Harper's manoeuvres, however, the torture issue is now lost in the complexities of an ad hoc parliamentary committee.

• Crime rates are down and the population is ageing, but the Harper government claims it must introduce tougher laws, incarcerate more Canadians, and spend $9 billion for more prisons - some of them American-style super-prisons - because of an increase in "unreported" crime.

• A new report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives think-tank says that harsher prison conditions, longer sentences, and more crowded prisons will increase the chance that criminals will re-offend. Already, prisoners have to wait too long for rehabilitation programs and are being crowded into cells, contrary to United Nations standards.

• Harper has helped stop the UN from declaring asbestos a dangerous substance, and still promotes exports to poorer countries.

• Harper abandoned our internationally praised development partnership with eight of the poorest countries in Africa. Instead, he is focussing on Colombia - a militarized, right-wing country with government death squads.

• Prime Minister Harper campaigned on accountability and transparency. The Information Commissioner has found the Harper government the most secretive ever when it comes to Access to Information requests; one senior government aide was caught interfering with the process.

• There is an atmosphere of "trench warfare" and "disdain" as the government refuses to co-operate with parliamentary committees. Staff members, who should be accountable to the public, are no longer allowed to testify before them.

• Contrary to his position as an opponent of the unelected Senate, Harper used his new majority to recently stop a climate change bill passed by the elected majority in the House of Commons.

• Elections Canada is battling with a few former Tory candidates; police have raided their offices, over what are considered systematic attempts to hide national campaign expenses during the 2006 election.

How long will we voters take this "beating"? Will enough of us break the spell and leave this abusive leader? Or will we continue to rationalize his behaviour and put up with the abuse? 

Watch his behaviour through this perspective and you will see how much of his "leadership" is based on fear, including inciting fear of the alternatives to his rule.

The opportunity is getting closer: an election and the ballot box could be the opportunity to elect a party with social vision and respect for our democracy.

A graphic dose of fossil fuel reality

Bad news and good: the cavalry ain't coming - but this is not a job for the cavalry.

Richard Heinberg's been putting this stuff out for a very long time. I know this in more detail than most because I ran his web site for a few years. Sad to say, while his message is updated, it's not that different from what he was saying ten years and more ago. Scientists have known for a lot longer that we are heading for a fuel crisis that is threatening the foundation of most developed economies and cultures as well as the viability of our planet as we know it. But, what do scientists know? Just find one doubter with a degree in something and we can dismiss the seriousness of the situation and continue heading in the same direction.

Solutions are around but, for now, here's a little tool that may help us face the facts. Gotta do that first. My names Jeffrey and I'm a fossil-fuel-aholic. A 12-step process for governments? Maybe. My country's Canada and it's a fossil-fuel-aholic.

Questioning the assumptions of war and the lies on which they are built

Sometimes I am aware that a post does not meet the title of this blog because of the negligible amount of provocation involved. I think that this interview does qualify, by challenging much that many of us assume is OK. Importantly, it is filled with reason and a few questions - about an aspect of US conduct which is common to many other countries: the lies used to justify war.

David Swanson is the co-founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition, and has worked as a newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign. David is the author of "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union", and his latest book is called "War is a Lie", published in November 2010

G20: Toronto Police terms for a "public inquiry".

Citizens want justice and those accountable are taking small steps back as slowly as they can. It seems that the wronged demonstrators won't let them get away with it. The police reason for arrests was protection of the public yet they acknowledge there was not a single recorded incidence of violence against the public. Virtually all of it was police assault on civilians, most of whom were doing nothing illegal.

"On Tuesday, the civilian oversight board for the Toronto police force agreed to the parameters for the public inquiry. Victims of the police actions aren't enthused about any of the official paths ahead of them, and are finding their own forms of accountability."

More on the G20 at:

1. Inside a G20 cell: Video image shows conditions in detention centre
2. Evidence of police legal goofs and extreme behaviour continues to mount.
3. G20: British Columbia Library Association letter to Harper and McGuinty
4. VIDEO: Who gave the G20 Commander his Commands?
5. "THE POLICE NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE"
6. "It was dehumanizing ... completely"
7. CBC News - British Columbia - G20 police actions prompt call for inquiry
8. Toronto police stand by and watch rampage
9. Real News journalist attacked at G20

Canadaville - Did Stronach's generosity foster independence or dependence?

When, with little fanfare,  Canadaville (officially "Magnaville") was launched, I wrote about it, impressed with the simple practicality and generosity involved.

As Amber Hildebrandt describes in her CBC article:

Tucked in bucolic central Louisiana, a small group of Katrina victims is getting ready for another possible uprooting. The 63 former New Orleanians are citizens of a temporary community dubbed Canadaville, which Canadian auto magnate Frank Stronach, the Magna International founder, set up about 230 kilometres northwest of New Orleans.

A successful experiment? Even the five years didn't turn out as planned.

But dreams of farm profitability were not realized. Farm equipment tangled with grass sits alongside fallow fields. Cinder blocks once used to delineate each household's garden plot are now piled neatly on the edge of a field. Goats purchased in Magnaville's early stages have become pets, with no revenue-generating purpose.

Now is when we find out to what extent the vision of a hand-up was realized. Frank Stronach provided some real and realistic help at a time of desperation for many displaced residents of New Orleans. From the beginning, though, it was temporary - an opportunity for individuals and families to get back on their feet. Did it foster independence or dependence?

Another take on the Canadaville experience: Welcome to Canadaville USA

Canadaville officials will tell you they’ve seen as many triumphs among residents as times when some have fallen short. In fact, they believe the world should be proud that those who’ve had so little, have been able to come so far.