CIA, Italy, Rendition (and Afghanistan and Drugs)

Something I posted on the White House Facebook Wall:

Italy Convicts 23 Americans for C.I.A. Renditions - NYTimes.com



Christine Beirne DeCamp
I just read about this.....interesting to see if obama decides to hang our CIA out to dry too.
Yesterday at 1:36pm

Todd Stark
the CIA has some of the dirtiest hands know to man....I doubt obama will change any of that
Yesterday at 1:50pm

Berd Whitlock
Unfortunately, I think the CIA poses one of the greatest threats to the health and well-being of the President. We only have to look at the events surrounding the assassination of JFK JR. to begin to ask the difficult questions that need to be asked about whom, and what, controls US foreign policy.

When the President speaks out, the President very well may be putting his own life in danger. I don't think anyone wants that. What we need to do is educate the public about the CIA.
Yesterday at 1:58pm

Berd Whitlock
Well, one important aspect to consider is that the Taliban had all but eradicated opium production. That was then, before the invasion. -Now, Afghanistan produces 93% of the world's opium supplies. I heard a statistic that opium production has increased 35-FOLD since the 2001 US/NATO invasion.

CIA and Drugs... There's a lot of information published about this connection - even a story about George HW Bush allegedly using an F-104 to run suspicious missions.
Yesterday at 2:17pm

Al Croke
Great video on the CIA Drug Trade
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbfuTv6ZJ8I&eurl
Yesterday at 2:21pm

Brian Willcock
Al that reminded me of this:http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/cu/cu44.htm
Yesterday at 2:28pm

Bill Halstead
I wish I could say I like this, but the grim fact is the CIA operatives are not the guilty ones - just like Lynddie England and others are not the guilty ones for the crimes they were convicted of. Yes, they were wrong, yes they should be punished, but ONLY if the investigations push on up the chains of command. It is unjust to punish the front line people and not the masterminds - Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Gonzales, Yoo, Bybee et al. These are the REAL criminals here...

Challenging the Dominant Paradigm

The following is a comment I made on facebook in response to a friend's status update: "capitalism: boom, bust, boom, bust." There was ensuing discussion about the comment. There was talk about taxing the "rich." One person said that if we were to increase taxes on the rich, then he would want to know how to define rich, because he makes a lot of money and wouldn't want to be taxed...

So the following are a few thoughts I shared, thoughts about harmful economic activities, about cultural change, and etc.. It's not thoroughly fleshed out here; it's not perfectly composed and it's far from complete. But it is important to challenge the dominant paradigm, so I wanted to share.

Everything is not okay. It's not "all good." Still, all the same, another world is possible -- a better world -- a truly richer and more prosperous world. A world that doesn't infringe on the health and well-being of so many (in the present and in the future.) So please, read on.

There are multiple ways to define rich. It's important to have common definitions from which to work, for the purpose of intelligent conversation. I won't attempt to define the exact perameters here, but for the purposes of this discussion, I suggest this definition for affluence: the ability to buy without regard to, or worry about price.

There is nothing wrong with making money, in and of itself -- so long as no one gets hurt in the process. The problem is that we're dealing with socio-economic harmfulness on a grand scale. There is a lot of harm being done, it's so prevalent that it's actually easy not to see it. It's easy to take for granted.

So, while many activities may not be illegal -- it doesn't mean that they aren't harmful.

It just so happens that many of the activities that generate great financial profit are also harmful. Currently, the tax rate is not high enough. Harmful economic activities should be taxed 100% -- because we will all be better off without harmful economic activities. All of us.

We have a culture that promotes aggressive and destructive competition. But we can change that.

Another world is possible. A world where people don't take without asking. A world where people don't beat each other up. A world where people don't seek to dominate each other. A world without oppression.

This other world is possible.

...a world without bullying...a world where people have power with each other, rather than over each other...

Another World is Possible

This is reposted from facebook, where I originally published it earlier today. It's about violence and militarism, and peace and justice. I believe that nonviolent solutions are the answer. Marvin Gaye said that "War is not the answer, because only love can conquer hate." I can't imagine stating it any better than that!

Here is the note. Peace be with you:

Violence and Militarism and Peace and Justice

Violence and militarism haven't brought peace to the world amongst human societies throughout thousands of years of human conflict. It is time to find a better way. Another world is possible.

Stop Bombing—Start Talking!

The means do not justify the ends. In fact, the way it works is that the means are the ends - that is to say that the character of the means, becomes the end. So if the use of violence, i.e. militarism, is used to resolve conflict, then the end product will be a society in which violence is acceptable. Violence is not acceptable. Violence is not acceptable in our homes or in our communities, so why should it be acceptable to export violence into the community of others? Why do we have a foreign policy establishment that engages in systematic violence and oppression?

The popular myth is that violence and militarism are used to make us safer, and to bring peace. But the truth is far from that. In fact—violence and militarism are used to oppress, and to enable exploitation of resources, materials and labor.

The additional truth is that this doesn't make us truly safer. Recent escalations (of the U.S. foreign policy of global dominance) under the Bush Administration have resulted in social division; upset; fearfulness; economic instability, stress and uncertainty; endangerment of civil liberties; and a plethora of other truly harmful and destructive side-effects.

It we want true security, then we will have to live in a way that is respectful and tolerant of socio-cultural differences, we will have to live in a way so that all people are treated equally, so that all people have equitable opportunity, justice and truth. True security will result from learning to share resources, rather than seeking to dominate and hoard them. True security will result from a general societal attitude of respect for land and for all beings. Aldo Leopold suggested that we move toward a relationship with land not as a commodity, but as a community of which we are very much part. I believe that is the path to true security.

What are the roots of conflict in our own society and in our own lives? How can we eradicate violence and all harmful interactions amongst beings?

Respectful dialogue, and the opportunity to work out legitimate disagreements and grievances in a respectful and compassionate manner, will enable the achievement of a true and lasting peaceful world.

There is a lot work to be done in progressing toward a world where all people are treated equally. Of course, it's going to take time and a lot of effort. But maybe, if we can learn to share amongst differing peoples, if we can learn to distribute resources equitably, if we can learn to use resources wisely—so that our actions and consumption are not abusive and destructive toward the planet, other peoples, or future generations—then maybe we will live to see a day of true security and true prosperity —for all people.