Arab-Israeli Conflict Can Be Resolved
If Equality Prevails, Says Abdullah

DAVOS, Jan 25 (Bernama) – Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said that although it has been said that the Arab conflict with Israel and its supporters is a complex problem and is difficult to resolve, he believes otherwise.

"The conflict remains unresolved because the powerful are not prepared to do the necessary to enforce, and apply equally on all sides, the relevant resolutions of the United Nations," he said at the World Economic Forum (WEF) here Thursday.

Describing the conflict as the single most important factor fuelling Muslim anger towards Israel and the West, Abdullah stressed that Israel must abide by the UN resolutions and withdraw to its pre-1967 borders.

"A Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital, can then be established.

Five million Palestinian refugees are waiting for a solution to their "right of return," he said on the topic of "rules for a global neighbourhood in a multicultural world."

The prime minister said Muslims were acutely sensitive to the fact that millions of their brethren had been dispossessed, their lands occupied, their resources usurped, and their dignity trampled.

"If we measure the amount of violence and count the number of lives lost in the centres of conflict, we will begin to understand why Muslim anger and anguish are now at their zenith. The application, by the powerful, of double standards has made things worse," he said.

Abdullah reiterated that the roots of the Arab-Israel conflict did not lie in culture or religion, but in "politics and the projection of power."

He said his statement was by no means the prejudiced view of a partisan Muslim.

These views, he stressed, had been affirmed in the UN Report of the High Level Group on the Alliance of Civilisations as the root cause of the present polarisation between the West and the Muslim world.

The report was released in November 2006.

Abdullah said it was most unfortunate that an extremist fringe among the Muslims has chosen to respond to the injustices and humiliation by resorting to mindless acts of terror.

These actions, he said, must be condemned for they violated the fundamental principles of Islam.

Abdullah said that terrorism could not be eliminated by military action alone and that the conditions that had given rise to terrorism needed to be addressed.

Turning his attention to Iraq, the prime minister said it was another place and issue which epitomised the polarisation between the West in general and the Muslim world.

"There can be no solution unless there is an end to foreign military occupation.

"There must also be an end, no doubt, to the armed resistance and the sectarian violence ignited by the occupation.

"All these cannot be achieved without the cooperation of Iraq's Muslim neighbours.

"The Organisation of the Islamic Conference can also play a part," said Abdullah, who is currently the OIC chairman.

He said the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the crisis in Iraq would do much to heal the rift between the West and the Muslim world.

There must also be scrupulous observance of international law which would help stabilise the area as well as other parts of the Muslim world, he added.

Abdullah also reminded his audience that Afghanistan and Lebanon must not be forgotten.

"There will be no real peace in the Islamic world unless they (international community) include enduring solutions for the situations in Afghanistan and in Lebanon."

Abdullah also said that there must be more than just a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and return to normalcy in Iraq as those alone would not guarantee global peace and justice.

"Certain other fundamental disparities must also be removed," he said.

The international community needed to do more, much more, to reduce the huge disparities in wealth, power and knowledge among the people of the world.

Money spent on arms, for instance, should be channelled into activities that benefit that half of humanity living on less than US$2 a day, he said.

Abdullah started his speech by saying that the human race, now numbering six billion, had inhabited this planet for a million years.

"We live in a multicultural neighbourhood. Yet there is very little neighbourliness in our relations. Once in a while, we do reach out to one another, for example, when some natural calamity strikes. But most of the time we do not really care for one another. Indeed in many parts of this global neighbourhood, death and destruction abound," he said.

He said that the human race was deeply divided in a global order that favoured the strong with the weak being vulnerable.

He said that in a world abound with injustices and inequities, "huge disparities of wealth and power separate us. Negative feelings overwhelm positive sentiments. Distrust and suspicion prevail as hatred and prejudice grow.

"Both the rich and the poor live in fear and insecurity. Both the strong and the weak have resorted to violence and terror to find solution to problems.

"International law does exist to provide the rules for maintaining peace. But some states and groups of people violate the law. They do not respect the legitimate rights of others.

"They are guilty of aggression, invasion or occupation. They are not averse to using force. Innocent civilians get killed or maimed."

Abdullah said the weak could be disciplined through sanctions and other means but when the powerful committed the same crimes, there was little that could be done.

"Some even behave as if they are above the law," he said.

In this respect, Abdullah said, this distressing situation was most evident today in the relations between Israel and its supporters in the West on the one hand and a lot of Muslims on the other.

Stressing that the human race needed to focus on developing understanding and empathy within "our multicultural neighbourhood," he said all religions and cultures "enjoin us to reach out to the other, to share their joy as well as their pain."

"Our philosophical traditions are profoundly aware of our common humanity. It is this dimension of religion that we should emphasise in our increasingly globalised neighbourhood," he added.

Abdullah said that for Muslims, "to know the other" was almost a religious injunction.

He quoted chapter 49, verse 13 (Surah Al-Hujurat) from the Holy Quran which says "O Mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other).
"Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of God is (He who is) the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).

Referring to Malaysia, one of the most multi-religious and multicultural societies in the world, he said the appreciation of these universal principles for harmonious living blended well with Islam Hadhari or civilisational Islam -- which he had introduced to Malaysians as an approach for a proper appreciation of the Islamic religion as a way of life in modern times.

Saying that Islam Hadhari was also for believers everywhere, he said it would enable Muslims to be innovative, creative and relevant in this modern age of science and technology, and allow non-Muslims to better appreciate the true nature of Islam.

Abdullah said Islam Hadhari "also burns in every other great religion, culture, and philosophy," for it was a spirit that "promotes tolerance and understanding, moderation and peace, as well as freedom and justice for all."

He said it was a spirit that abhorred inequities, oppression, extremism and violence.

"What better spirit to inspire the rules for a global neighbourhood in a multicultural world?" he said.

- BERNAMA
January 25, 2007
http://www.bernama.com

Unite For Global Peace

Dear Editor

“ Give me the money that has been spent in war and I will clothe every man, woman, and child in an attire of which kings and queens will be proud. I will build a schoolhouse in every valley over the whole earth. I will crown every hillside with a place of worship consecrated to peace.” - Charles Summer.

Saddam’s execution is an example of the intolerance of the U.S. for the Muslims. This is due to the inappropriate date of the execution which fell on Hari Raya Aidil Adha. Just imagine what Saddam's family felt? Put yourself in their shoes. What would you feel if your loved one is executed on Hari Raya? It is also an insult to all Muslims since it is the holy month during which Muslims perform Haj in Mecca.

I would also like to inform your readers about the Perdana Global Peace Conference and Exhibition which will be held from 5th till the 7th of February 2007 at the Putra World Trade Centre in Kuala Lumpur. All peace loving Malaysians should attend it to show support in ending war and violence which only brings havoc and suffering to the people in war torn countries. Civilised nations are being more barbaric even in the 21st century.

They will use modern weapons such as nuclear arms or even chemical weapons to kill innocent people. What is the U.N. action against the U.S. after discovering that there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as claimed by the U.S.? And what is the OIC doing to resolve conflicts in the Middle East or any other Islamic countries? Some pro-active action must be taken to stop all these.

“ Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.” - Ernest Hemingway.

Therefore, I would like to urge Malaysians to be more vocal in condemning (U.S. President George) Bush and (British Prime Minister Tony) Blair as war criminals and for any lawyer to file a summon against them in the International Court for the violations of human rights.

From: Nadura Kamarulzaman
Subang Jaya, Selangor
MALAYSIA

- BERNAMA http://www.bernama.com

As Bush's War Strategy Shifts To Iran
Christian Zionists Gear Up For The Apocalypse
By Sarah Posner
www.alternet.org
January 18, 2007

Christian Zionists are dancing the hora in San Antonio. Armageddon appears to be at hand.

As George W. Bush sets his sights on Iran, even Republicans are wondering how to constitutionally contain the trigger-happy king. But for an influential group of Christian fundamentalists - White House allies that garner not only feel-good meetings with the President's liaisons to the "faith-based" community but also serious discussions with Bush's national security staff - an attack on Iran is just what God ordered.

Biblical literalists, convened together through San Antonio megapastor John Hagee's Christians United for Israel (CUFI), are now seeing the fruits of their yearlong campaign to convince the Bush administration to attack Iran.

Hagee came to Washington last summer on the warpath, and many Republicans - and even a few Democrats - welcomed him as an alleged supporter of Israel. More than 3,500 CUFI members fanned out across the Capitol to meet with their congressional delegations. Televangelist power brokers, like rising star Rod Parsley of Ohio, who serve as directors of CUFI, now proudly display photographs of their meetings with senators, brows furrowed over the seriousness of the task at hand. But probably Hagee's most important meeting was smaller and not public, at the White House with deputy national security adviser and Iran Contra player Elliott Abrams.

Did the two men talk dispensationalism or diplomacy? That the president's top national security advisor on Middle East policy met with the popular author of a best-selling book that claims that God requires a war with Iran demonstrates just how intensely politics trumps policy (and human lives) for this unhinged administration. Emboldened, Hagee returned to San Antonio fretting that "most Americans are simply not aware that the battle for Western Civilization is engaged" and "don't want to believe that Iran would use nuclear weapons against mighty America. They will!" As the bloody fighting between Israel and Hezbollah raged last August, Hagee organized a grassroots lobbying campaign to blitz the White House switchboard with callers opposed to a cease-fire. Members were urged to call the White House to "congratulate" Bush on using the term "Islamofascists" and on his "moral clarity."

Armed with blood-red rhetoric and the hubris of the politically connected, Hagee filled his 5,000-seat church for a weekend-long event culminating in his Night to Honor Israel in October. To an eager audience preparing for the end times, analogies to Hitler and denouncement of "appeasement" were flying. Anti-Muslim rhetoric was at a fevered pitch. All of it was dressed up as love and benevolence for God's chosen people. But what masqueraded as Biblically mandated generosity toward the Jews was nothing more than a political rally for a war not just against Iran, but against Islam, and for the dominance of Christianity (Hagee's brand, of course).

By the end of the year, Hagee was warning his followers that Iran was "reloading for the next war," claiming that he had "reason to believe that Iran will face a military preemptive strike from Israel to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons," and denouncing the Iraq Study Group as "anti-Israel." Although he had spent nearly a year claiming that Iran intended to destroy Israel, Hagee, in rejecting the ISG's recommendation to diplomatically engage Iran, fumed, "America's problems with Iran have nothing to do with Israel. Iran's president has said he intends to use nuclear weapons against the United States of America. My father's generation would have considered this statement a declaration of war and bombed Iran by this time."

Bush knows Hagee's minions are locked and loaded for a war to end not only all wars, but the world. He might have already signed a secret executive order authorizing military action against Iran. But last week Bush nonetheless lamely tried to bring the rest of the country on board with his tried (but by no means true) device of uttering the words "Iran," "nuclear weapons" and "9/11" in the same breath.

His saber rattling won't work for the majority of Americans outraged by his conduct of the Iraq war and opposed to its escalation. But for his listeners gearing up for the end times -- a segment of American evangelicals increasingly united around this issue -- Bush fired up the grandiose rhetoric of a final showdown: "The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time."

Sarah Posner has covered the religious right for the American Prospect, the Gadflyer, and AlterNet. She is at work on a book about televangelists in politics.

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/46753/

The War In Iraq
& American Democracy
www.wsws.org.

The Bush administration’s decision to press ahead with the escalation of the war in Iraq, despite overwhelming public opposition and increasing criticism in Congress, demonstrates the extent to which the executive branch of the US government now functions as an unaccountable force, disregarding the checks and balances of the traditional constitutional structure and ignoring public opinion.

Bush’s claims to be fighting a war to establish democracy in Iraq are belied by the fact that his administration is shredding what remains of democratic institutions in the United States and arrogating to itself unprecedented powers to intercept telephone and email communications, authorize torture, spy on political opponents of the war, and arrest and imprison US residents without trial.

The comments of Vice President Cheney on January 14 sum up the anti-democratic posture of this government. He dismissed the significance of the mass antiwar vote in the November congressional elections, telling his interviewer, “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace, “I don’t think any president worth his salt can afford to make decisions of this magnitude according to the polls.”

In all previous wars waged by American imperialism over past 100-plus years, US administrations have found it necessary to mobilize public opinion behind their military efforts. An elaborate system of political provocations and media scare tactics was developed to generate support for war among the American people.

In the Spanish-American War of 1898, a press campaign against atrocities by the Spanish colonial authorities in Cuba reached its crescendo with the explosion of the battleship USS Maine in Havana harbor, portrayed as an act of war, although it was likely due to mechanical causes.

The Wilson administration paved the way to US entry into World War I with a years-long campaign over German submarine warfare in the Atlantic Ocean, using such events as the sinking of the Lusitania, an American passenger ship carrying ammunition to Great Britain.

Franklin Roosevelt required many months of political maneuvering even to obtain support for US military aid to Britain, in the form of the Lend-Lease program, in the early stages of World War II. Only the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor created the political conditions for overcoming the deep-seated popular opposition to entering the conflagration.

US entry into the Korean War was made possible by a media campaign portraying the outbreak of civil war as an invasion of South Korea by North Korea. In Vietnam, the notorious “Gulf of Tonkin incident” was manufactured by the Johnson administration as the justification for escalating the US intervention from 15,000 to over 500,000 troops.

Before the Persian Gulf War of 1991, the first Bush administration tacitly encouraged Saddam Hussein’s invasion and annexation of Kuwait, then utilized it as a casus belli.

The second Bush administration falsely linked Iraq to the 9/11 terror attacks, and combined this with bogus claims that Iraq had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction that it would hand over to terrorists to use against the American people.

Now, however, the Bush administration has embarked on a major escalation of the war, one which seems intended not so much to win a military victory on the ground in Iraq as to lay the basis for expansion of the war to Iran and Syria, under conditions in which all of its previous and shifting rationales are discredited.

It does so after three-and-a-half years of war and after the American people have expressed in unmistakable terms their desire for an end to the war and the withdrawal of US troops. Ordinary Americans have taken the measure of the official lies and propaganda and rejected all the old pretexts. They know that the claims of a 9/11 connection and weapons of mass destruction were false.

According to a recent poll, fully 50 percent believe that Bush deliberately lied to the American people in order to justify the war. In other words, they believe that Bush is responsible for what under international law is a war crime—waging a war of aggression.

The conclusions drawn by the American people were expressed at the ballot box last November. In the only forum where the official political structure permits them to express their opinions, millions of people voted for Democratic congressional candidates, not because they had great confidence in the Democratic Party, but because they wanted to voice their opposition to the Bush administration and the war in Iraq.

The response of Bush, Cheney & Co. has been to abandon any serious effort to manipulate or sway public opinion and to declare, as Cheney did last Sunday, that the job of the president is to ignore public opinion and wage war in defiance of it.

It is worth considering once again the exact language used by Cheney in his interview.

WALLACE: Iraq was a big issue in the November election. I want you to take a look at some numbers from the election. According to the National Exit Poll, 67 percent said the war was either very or extremely important to their vote, and only 17 percent supported sending in more troops. By taking the policy you have, haven’t you, Mr. Vice President, ignored the express will of the American people in the November election?

CHENEY: Well, Chris, this president, and I don’t think any president worth his salt, can afford to make decisions of this magnitude according to the polls. The polls change day by day . . .

WALLACE: Well, this was an election, sir.

CHENEY: Polls change day by day, week by week. I think the vast majority of Americans want the right outcome in Iraq. The challenge for us is to be able to provide that. But you cannot simply stick your finger up in the wind and say, “Gee, public opinion’s against; we’d better quit.”

Cheney dismisses the outcome of the election as irrelevant to the policies of the government. Contained here is a view of government that is antithetical to any conception of democracy.

Cheney went on to explain the considerations of imperialist strategy that require ignoring the election result. This is what he told Wallace:

“That is part and parcel of the underlying fundamental strategy that our adversaries believe afflicts the United States. They are convinced that the current debate in the Congress, that the election campaign last fall, all of that, is evidence that they’re right when they say the United States doesn’t have the stomach for the fight in this long war against terror. They believe it.

“They look at past evidence of it: in Lebanon in ’83 and Somalia in ’93, Vietnam before that. They’re convinced that the United States will, in fact, pack it in and go home if they just kill enough of us. They can’t beat us in a stand-up fight, but they think they can break our will.

“And if we have a president who looks at the polls and sees the polls are going south and concludes, ‘Oh, my goodness, we have to quit,’ all it will do is validate the Al Qaeda view of the world. It’s exactly the wrong thing to do. This president does not make policy based on public opinion polls; he should not. It’s absolutely essential here that we get it right.”

The American people, Cheney maintains, cannot be trusted to have “the stomach” for the measures required to secure continued US control over Iraq and its vast oil resources. The president, therefore, must substitute himself for the people. Or as Brecht remarked, when the people turn against the regime, the regime must elect a new people.

Nor is the Democratic Party any alternative to this flat rejection of popular sovereignty.

The Democratic “alternative” as voiced by Hillary Clinton and set down in the Senate resolution disapproving US military escalation is anything but an authentic expression of the mass opposition to the war.

The text of the resolution embraces the strategic orientation of the Bush administration, declaring that “maximizing chances of success in Iraq should be our goal,” while quarreling with the tactics. As for Clinton, she declared herself in favor of sending more troops to Afghanistan rather than Iraq, and opposed to any cutoff of funds either for the escalation or the existing occupation.

“I’m not going to cut American troops’ funding right now—they’re in harm’s way,” Clinton told the press, words that were repeated by virtually every Democratic spokesperson, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a television interview Friday morning.

The Democrats define their goal in Iraq as achieving “success,” a term of convenient vagueness. What it really means is maintaining US control over the oil resources of the Middle East.

In order to continue and escalate the fight for this goal, which is supported by both of its parties, the US ruling elite must move against popular sentiment and rule undemocratically. Conversely, the antiwar majority must move to build an independent political party of the working class, rejecting both the Democrats and Republicans and striving to unite working people internationally against imperialist war and the capitalist system that produces it. – www.wsws.org. 20 January 2007
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jan2007/iraq-j20.shtml

Letter From An American Citizen
“Addressed To The World”
Al-Jazeera

15 January 2007

First let me speak to the people in Iran.

There is a large majority of Americans who are terrified by our governments inability to hear our voices. We do not want war. Not with you, not with anyone. We admire your ancient culture and respect your religious beliefs. While our government takes steps toward instigating another illegal war, this time on your great nation, we, the majority of United States citizens, are trying everything that is in our power to prevent this.

We have recently elected new officials in Congress, which we believe and hope will stand up with us in our desires to put an end to our current administration's designs of global occupation. However, we seem to have very little say in these matters anymore. While we may scream at the top of our lungs about how we feel, write letters to our officials, protest in the streets, demand accountability for our leaders' actions, our president ignores us and continues his one-man circus act.

I wish to apologize to the people of Iran now, and assure you that we will do everything in our power to prevent our government leaders from another grave mistake in foreign policy.

Now, the people of Iraq hear me out.

Please understand our sorrow in what our leaders have done to your nation. While most of us believe that Saddam Hussein was a terrible dictator, we also understand that for many years, our country supported him and only deposed him as the president of Iraq when it was beneficial to our government. Our leaders lied to us about the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Most of our citizens at the time were quite fearful over what was happening in the world due to the attacks on September 11, 2001, and our president used that fear to further his personal agenda. It was WRONG. It was not our place to overthrow a dictator; it was yours if you so choose.

However, now your country is in ruins and many people die every day. Our president has just said that this is "unacceptable" to him. As usual, it seems that his words are woefully inadequate. Unacceptable is not a word to use when tens of thousands of people have died, and many more will in the time to come.

We cannot fix this mess. We can only make it worse. The majority of American people want our troops to be drawn down in your country to allow the Iraqi people a chance to help themselves. Please understand that we do not want to just abandon you. We wish to support you with our finances, our expertise in technology, our moral support, anything except more lives.

I know that you have suffered beyond anything that the US has ever suffered. But now is the time to send a message to the world that you do not need the United States to continue to occupy your sovereign nation. On behalf of most American citizens, we are eternally sorry for what we have allowed to be done to you.

To the people of Israel...

I'd like to say we understand.

We recognize your struggles in the world. We understand that for many years you were persecuted. However, that does not give you the right to do to others what has been done to you. I'm not suggesting that you bare all of the responsibility for the struggles in the West Asia, but you're not helping to solve it either.

Your fight is for property. Your fight is for recognition. Your fight is for peace. May I suggest to you that if after 60 years nothing has changed, maybe you're going about it the wrong way? I know that you will illicit images of bombings and terror to reinforce your actions. But please consider, violence in response to violence, only leads to more violence.

There must be a better solution. There is plenty of space to allow two separate and sovereign nations to exist. Israel and Palestine. I understand that there are more issues to discuss here, however, we have to start somewhere.

Do we really want to blame all the ills of life on "the other guys"? This sort of thinking is shortsighted and full of its own bigotry. And please, before dismissing me as just another anti-Semite, look at my name and understand that we share the same heritage.

To the people of the United States...

Are you afraid?

I am. Not of Al-Qaeda, not of Sunni or Shia militias, not of insurgents, not of so-called "Islamofascist", not of dirty bombs, not of having to "fight them here", not of a nuclear Iran, not of planes blowing up, not of anthrax in the mail, not of Hamas, not of Hezbollah, not of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), or of terrorist cells in my backyard.

I am not afraid of any of the things that our government has worked so hard to scare me into believing is at my doorstep. Instead, I am afraid of our government. Can we forget about the lies that we were told over and over again by our leaders? Can we forget about the atrocities committed in our name? Can we forget the way the rest of the world sees this great nation now?
Never.

Can we stand by while legislation such as the Military Commissions Act dissolves our basic civil rights? Can we stand back and let our leaders listen to our phone calls, read our mail, investigate our library cards, or read our e-mails? I sincerely hope not.

Our president has given himself the authority to deem anyone at any place an enemy combatant. With this label, one can be arrested, detained indefinitely in Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay, Cuba) or some other military prison without charges being levied against them, and tortured.

Or, if they are lucky, they will be brought to trial.

Just not allowed to see or confront the evidence against them under the guise of national security.

It could be me for just writing this letter. It could be you for just reading it. Is this our country? Is this what the United States of America has turned into?

No more freedom of speech, lest we anger the president.

No more freedom of assembly, lest we anger the President.

No more right to a trial by a jury of our peers, no more protection against self-incrimination, unless you can withstand the torture.

We are at his mercy. We did the right thing during the November elections by taking steps to put an end to this lunacy. However, it can't stop there. We need to take a step back, Democrat and Republican alike, to examine the horrendous damage that has been done and continues to be done, to us, and in our name.

The Revolutionary War was fought by brave people for a noble cause. This country was founded by people who refused tyranny and oppression. The majority has spoken and now action is necessary.

Stand up for what is right by putting an end to the war in Iraq, the war on the American people, and the instigation of more wars on innocent people. Are we Americans or not?

To the American troops

Please understand that you have our unwavering support. We know that you have your duty and take it very seriously. Rest assured, we will get you home. The majority of your fellow Americans are trying everything they can to end this war. Please know that our hearts break each day when we hear the news of another fallen soldier. Most of us do not support this war, BUT WE WILL ALWAYS SUPPORT YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES.

Mr President, are you listening?

I know that you do not care about my feelings, or that of any other American. Sir, I voted for you the first time. I am deeply ashamed of it and will forever have the blood of hundreds of thousands of people on my hands because of it. Almost every person in the world knows you are wrong.

Almost every American citizen knows that you are wrong.

You surround yourself with only people who agree with you, until they agree no more. Don't you dare think that you stand for me or the vast majority of American people. You never have. We are not nearly as ignorant as you would like to believe we are.

So bide your time in office, Mr President. We are not going to allow you to destroy us anymore. Only a coward allows people to die instead of standing up like a man and admitting they were wrong. Know this sir, that legacy that you care for so much will forever be tainted with deception and death.

Brian Bloom

http://tasekpauh.blogspot.com/
16.01.2007 ( marhaen@gmail.com/ reformasi@gmail.com)
http://www.marhaen.ngepeng.com/mar_a_pelbagai643.html

Water Scarcity:
Major Crisis In The Making
By Melati Mohd Ariff

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 22 (Bernama) -- Talk to any environmental activist these days and you will surely hear a resounding "Yes, it's REAL, we're heading for a major water crisis!"

But just how many of us are fully aware of the nature and the magnitude of the problem looming before us and the fact that the world is simply running out of fresh water. For most of us, there is abundant water supply.

In 2003, the United Nations (UN) issued a warning saying that the world's water shortage was so severe that it could take almost 30 years to eradicate hunger.

The warning was based on a report prepared by the World Water Assessment Programme (WWAP) which combined the efforts of 23 UN agencies. It was a Unesco (UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) undertaking.

The report titled "Water for People, Water for Life" was meant for the Third World Water Forum, held in Kyoto, Japan the same year.

The report states that "by 2020, the average water supply per person worldwide is expected to shrink by one third compared to now" and that "25,000 people will die daily from hunger with an estimated 815 million people suffering from malnutrition".

MORE ALARMING STATISTICS

Realising the urgent need to address the global water crisis, the UN chose water as its theme for the 2003 World Environment Day " Water - Two Billion People are Dying for It!"

The world body in the same year also issued some key facts about water which by right should have raised alarm bells across all walks of life around the globe.

Some of the startling facts include, that within 25 years, half of the world's population could have problem finding enough freshwater for drinking and irrigation.

Currently, over 80 countries, representing 40 per cent of the world's population are subject to serious water shortages. According to the UN, conditions may get worse in the next 50 years as the population numbers grow and global warming disrupts rainfall patterns.

West Asia, the UN said faced the greatest threat whereby over 90 per cent of the region's population was experiencing severe water stress, with water consumption exceeding 10 per cent of renewable freshwater resources.

On the home turf, with severe floods hitting several states in Malaysia, especially Johor which was hit twice in less than a month, the water crisis may be far from anybody's mind right now.

SHRINKING RESOURCE

"Definitely water is a shrinking resource," Malaysian Nature Society (MNS) executive director Dr Loh Chi Leong told Bernama here recently.

He said people seemed to think that there was plenty of water around.

"Even though water covers 75 per cent of the earth's surface, 97.5 per cent of it is salt water, and only 2.5 per cent of the world's water is actually fresh water and even that most of is frozen and some underground.

"It is generally accepted that less than one per cent is readily available for human use. That is what we call potable water, easily accessible. Most of it would be in the form of surface water which are rivers, lakes and so forth and 50 per cent of that is polluted," added Loh.

In some countries, water is fast becoming a regional contention especially when countries share a river, raising the question who has the right to take the water first.

"There is no international agreement on how to deal with water supply when a river flows into different countries. There is possibility that when a crisis occurs, countries may well forget that they are neighbours. That is why the United Nations predict that there will be a war over water. Let's hope that things won't get to that extent but that itself should be a warning," said Loh.

GLOBAL WARMING

Climate change affects our life in many strange ways. Take the glaciers, for example. Many of the world's rivers such as in Asia, the Mekong and the Indus are fed by glaciers.

Normally, glaciers will receive a build-up of snow and ice during the winter months and this will melt slowly in the spring and summer, providing a steady flow of water in the rivers.

What is happening now is that winter snow and glacial ice are melting more rapidly with higher spring temperatures, causing higher spring water levels that can cause flooding and resulting in less water flow in the summer.

"This trend is already happening and it has been in the news in the last three years," said Loh.

As for Malaysia and the surrounding region, he said, some climatologists predicted as much as 20 per cent more rain based on a 1-3 degree increase in global temperature.

However, the extra rain will occur in the form of severe thunderstorms.

"More rain in the form of thunderstorms means there is more surface runoff into rivers, increasing the risk of flooding but less water retained in the soil and vegetation also means less drinking water available," said Loh.

At the same, he said, in combination with the El Nino effects, meteorologists had predicted that 2007 would see the highest global temperatures on record.

"I think this year people will begin to see a lot of weather-related spectacles around the world," he cautioned.

EL NINO IS BACK

Early this month, scientists predicted that 2007 "is likely to be the warmest year on record globally, beating the current record set in 1998".

According to a report in the Environment News Service (ENS) website, scientists at the British Meteorological Office in revealing the "startling forecast" said the potential for a record 2007 would arise from an El Nino warming pattern already established in the Pacific Ocean.

The scientists believe the El Nino will persist through the first few months of 2007.

Echoing the same concern, the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) was quoted as saying that the El Nino probably would be most pronounced in the first half of 2007.

El Nino is a weather phenomenon characterised by major temperature fluctuations in surface waters of the tropical Eastern Pacific Ocean. The phenomenon usually occurs around Christmas time in the Pacific Ocean and lasts for several months, but may persist into May and June.

The direct effects of El Nino include drier conditions that could translate into prolonged drought in parts of southeast Asia and Northern Australia, increasing bush fires and worsening haze and decreasing air quality.

El Nino is also blamed for a string of supertyphoons.

Global warming and El Nino in particular may well be at our doorstep, but the worst scenario of climatic change including the water crisis can be prevented if we ACT now! - BERNAMA

http://www.bernama.com

Escalating The War:
The Height Of Folly
By Dr Chandra Muzaffar

There is widespread opposition to President Georga W Bush's plan to escalate the war in Iraq. The majority of Iraqis are opposed to his plan.

The opposition of the Arab Sunni community aside, even advisers to Shiite leaders like Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri al- Maliki and the influential Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, have expressed misgivings about the injection of 21,000 additional American troops into Iraq.

It is only the leadership of the Kurdish Sunni community, which has worked hand-in-glove with the US government for more than 15 years, that appears to support the Bush plan.

It is equally significant that 66 percent of Americans, according to a recent poll, reject the plan. Media surveys conducted in Europe and various other parts of the world indicate that an even larger percentage of the people are against what Bush is preparing to do in order to "secure victory in Iraq."

In this regard, it is important to observe that the majority of Asian leaders are convinced that additional troops and the increased use of force will not bring peace to Iraq or the Middle East.

Sunnis

If there is so much opposition to the Bush plan, it is because sensible people everywhere realise that given the quagmire in Iraq the only sane thing to do is to end - not enhance - the occupation.

It is the occupation which has generated so much resistance among the majority of Sunnis and a big segment of the Shiite population that is responsible for the violence and bloodshed that have devastated Iraq in the last 37 months.

The occupation is also the root cause of the Sunni-Shiite conflict since many Arab Sunnis see some Shiite leaders and the police and military that serve them as American collaborators.

Even the kidnapping, looting and gangsterism that plague Baghdad today can be traced back to the breakdown in law and order that has followed in the heels of the occupation.

But Bush and the ruling elite in Washington will not end the occupation. The conquest of Iraq is the lynchpin of their diabolical plan to create a "new Middle East" where US and Israeli interests would reign supreme. This is why they are determined to cling on to Iraq whatever the cost and consequences.

Fears

In fact, the decision to increase troops may even be linked to their yet undisclosed fears about certain possible developments in Iraq in the near future.

Is the Washington elite afraid that with Saddam Hussein executed, Shiite opposition to US occupation will intensify -hence the need for more soldiers?

Is the US strengthening its military position in Iraq because it knows that Israel acting alone or Israel with the backing of the US will soon attempt to attack Iran's nuclear facilities and this could lead to a massive Shiite uprising against the US in Iraq?

In other words, is the Bush escalation plan a preemptive move to quell an imminent Shiite revolt which will spell doom for the US in Iraq?

Whatever the hidden motive behind escalation, the people of the world should continue to demand that the US and its allies withdraw from Iraq immediately.

They should also demand that the Bush Administration scrap any plan it may have for the building of permanent military bases in Iraq. Most of all, they should demand that US engineered legislation which allows Western oil corporations to reap mammoth profits from the large-scale exploitation of Iraqi oil --- the third largest reserves in the world --- be abrogated at once.

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar
President
International Movement for a Just World (JUST)
Malaysia

Malaysia Today: http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=2002

Imagine All The People
Living Life In Peace …

I am a fan of the Beatles. But, I can only sing one of its songs very well. It is called Imagine. The song was released in the United States on September 9, 1971 and in the United Kingdom on October 8, 1971.

I don’t really know why I enjoy singing Imagine by John Lenon, the great pop star, composer, songwriter, and recording artist. But I know, it is not because I want to “imagine there’s no heaven” or there is “no religion too.” As a Muslim, I believe in the existence of heaven and hell.

At the time John Lenon released Imagine, I was 24 years old. I was then an idealistic student leader. I hated war - the Vietnam War. I was very angry and sad to know that thousands and thousands of Vietnamese were killed by the U.S. soldiers.[i] More sorrowful and disgusting was when the U.S. soldiers used agent orange killing women and children too.[ii]

So, it was actually the Vietnam War and the deaths and sufferings of the Vietnamese during that war which make me love singing Imagine. I love the song because it has an anti-war message. And this message is still very relevant until today.

Therefore, let us read and digest the anti-war message contained in the lyrics below:

Imagine

John Lennon

Imagine there's no heaven

It's easy if you try

No hell below us

Above us only sky

Imagine all the people

Living for today...

Imagine there's no countries

It isn't hard to do

Nothing to kill or die for

And no religion too

Imagine all the people

Living life in peace...

You may say I'm a dreamer

But I'm not the only one

I hope someday you'll join us

And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions

I wonder if you can

No need for greed or hunger

A brotherhood of man

Imagine all the people

Sharing all the world...

You may say I'm a dreamer

But I'm not the only one

I hope someday you'll join us

And the world will live as one

Now, after we have just refreshed our memories of the above anti-war message, let us tell the U.S. President, George W Bush, to read and digest this anti-war message over and over again. Also ask him, is the war in Iraq today really about WMD?[iii] Is it really about the late President Saddam Hussein? Or is it really about Osama Bin Laden and the so-called Muslim terrorists? And, is the Iraq War going to be another Vietnam to the U.S.?

We know the very real motives behind the Iraq War. We also know the very real reasons for the Afghanistan War. We know how many tons of bombs containing depleted uranium (DU) [iv] were blatantly dropped from the air in both countries. We know what are the impact and effects of DU on human beings.

But, can we, the net-citizens of the world, stop the Iraq War? Can we stop the destructions, killings and sufferings in that country? Who can stop the US and its allies from escalating the war? Who is to be blamed for the further escalation of the war? The so-called Muslim terrorists or the sectarian leaders in Iraq?

I believe, we can contribute something to the restoration and maintenance of global peace if we are united. We must be able to firmly say no to war through diversified, but legal ways and means. We should consistently use the cyber media to campaign against war.

Let us unite. We are the world, we are the people… We must be able to decide on our own destiny and also the destiny of our future generations. Say no to war. And, please tell President Bush, no more Iraq, no more Afghanistan and no more war in the 21st century. We want no more killings and murders. We want all the people of the world “living life in peace!” – Ruhanie Ahmad.

Endnotes:

[i]... The Hanoi government revealed on April 4 that the true civilian casualties of the Vietnam War were 2,000,000 in the north, and 2,000,000 in the south. Military casualties were 1.1 million killed and 600,000 wounded in 21 years of war. These figures were deliberately falsified during the war by the North Vietnamese Communists to avoid demoralizing the population. - http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html#press.

[ii]… Agent Orange was the nickname given to a powerful herbicide and defoliant used by the U.S. military in its Herbicidal Warfare program during the Vietnam War. Agent Orange was used from 1961 to 1971, and was by far the most used of the so-called "rainbow herbicides" used during the program. Degradation of Agent Orange (as well as Agents Purple, Pink, and Green) released dioxins, which are alleged to have caused harm to the health of those exposed during the Vietnam War… Since the 1980s, several lawsuits have been filed against the companies who produced Agent Orange, among them being Dow Chemical and Monsanto. U.S. veterans obtained $180 million in compensation in 1984, while Australian, Canadian and New Zealand veterans also obtained compensation in an out-of-court settlement the same year. In 1999, 20,000 South Koreans filed a lawsuit in Korea; in January 2006, the Korean Appeal Court ordered Monsanto and Dow to pay $62 million in compensation to about 6,800 people. However, no Vietnamese have obtained compensation, and on March 10, 2005 Judge Jack Weinstein of Brooklyn Federal Court dismissed the lawsuit filed by the Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange against the chemical companies that produced the defoliants/herbicides. – Wikipedia.

[iii] … In early October 2003, David Kay, the Bush administration’s chief investigator, formally told Congress that after searching for nearly six months, and spending more than $300 million, US forces and CIA experts had found no chemical or biological weapons in Iraq, and had discovered that the nation’s nuclear program was only “the very most rudimentary” state. – Eric Alterman & Mark Green: The Book On Bush: Viking 2004: Page 257.

[iv] … Two British journalists report the U. S. use of napalm, infamous from the Vietnam War, as well as depleted uranium-tipped weapons, which cause high rates of birth deformities, blood infctions, and cancer. According to a study by John Hopkin University researchers, an estimated 100000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the U.S. bombing and invasion. …Prof. Dough Rokke, ex-director of the Pentagon’s depleted uranium project and onetime U.S. army colonel who was tasked by the U.S. department of defense with the post-first Gulf War depleted uranium desert clean-up, said use of DU was a “war crime.” - Jeremy Brecher, Jill Cutler & Brendan Smith: In the Name Of Democracy American War Crimes In Iraq And Beyond: Metropolitan Book 2005: Page 37 & 43.

BLOGGERS UNITED CONDEMNS ACTION AGAINST ROCKY & JEFF & DEMANDS LEVEL PLAYING FIELD IN ALL ACTIONS AGAINST BLOGGERS

We, Malaysian bloggers, we, who believe in justice and right to free speech, we, who endorse the Bloggers United movement, unanimously condemn the action taken by media conglomerate NST against bloggers Rocky Bru and Jeff Ooi. The action by the newspaper against the duo is an action against all bloggers who believe in their right to free speech, freedom of expression and justice.

The recent event may seem like a grave development in the path of bloggers, but it can never and must never impede or stop us from defending our right to speak, to express, to write and to tell the truth, to be the watchdog, eyes and ears of the people, or simply to share our view, and give fair comment on any subject which involves and affects us as humans, as rightful citizens of this country.

The recent event may very well give the government owned media the opportunity to dictate the so-called ‘truth” but such actions only prove that bloggers must unite, continue to uphold the right to free speech and freedom of expression, fight for justice, even if it is not our own, be more alert, committed to the cause of free speech, relentless and persistence in the face of such persecution like the one which had befallen on the two of us.

What YOU do to any of US, is what YOU do to ALL.

As responsible bloggers, we demand and claim our space on the blogosphere for free and fair comment, where important national issues and prominent personalities are discussed.

Although it may seem as if the NSTP defamation suits will have a chilling effect on freedom of bloggers, as litigation can be expensive and may jeorpadise a blogger’s economic position, we will not be cowed or silenced by those who have no regard for free speech.

If you find our post offensive, you may refute us with correct facts and figures and fair comment, in the spirit of free speech.

The first two cases will have grave impact not only on the internet, but country as a whole as the country celebrates VMY2007. The healthy, mature and democratic growth for free speech and expression in our midst is at stake. The reputation of the nation as it strives to promote our multimedia supercorridor and love for IT will be a national joke for all the world to feast on.

We demand for a level playing field in all action meted out to bloggers and in particular in the defamation proceedings particularly in terms of financial resources and capabilities, and secondly, that the legal rights of bloggers et al are properly protected in keeping with the imperatives of an information society and knowledge economy which Malaysia aspires to become.

For further information, please contact blogger susan loone at susanloone@gmail.com and sheih at kickdefella@yahoo.com

The Case For Criminalising War
Will Gather Strength
Says Dr Mahathir

PUTRAJAYA, MALAYSIA, Jan 8 (Bernama) -- Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said that the movement championing efforts to criminalise war will eventually make presentations to international organisations like the United Nations once it gains enough strength and support worldwide.

"When you are not strong and people still subscribe to killing as a means of settling disputes, then our request will not be seriously considered," the former Prime Minister of Malaysia said.

He said this at a news conference to announce the convening of a conference-cum-exhibition in an attempt to promote the idea of criminalising war at the Putra World Trade Centre in Kuala Lumpur from Feb 5 to 7.

Dr Mahathir said people from places which had witnessed wars and cruelties like Hiroshima and Iraq, including a victim of the infamous torture at Abu Gharib prison, would be brought in to tell their stories of suffering and the futility of war.

"With many speakers this time around, we hope the conference will reveal in greater detail and dramatically the effects of war.

"We need to change the mindset of the people, make them believe that war is cruel, war is not an option in resolving disputes between nations," he said.

Dr Mahathir also spoke at length about the hanging of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein recently, describing it as an outcome of a sham trial which saw judges removed and lawyers killed.

"I maintain that a court set up by your enemy cannot possibly carry out a fair trial. Courts must always be impartial and unbias.

"But this is obviously a court of the enemy and their intention, I think, right from the word go was to find him guilty and hang him," he said, adding that it was a cruel punishment done in a hurry with no time given for people to appeal or do anything.

Instead of bringing stability to Iraq, Dr Mahathir said the execution would worsen the situation there.

On reports that United States President George W. Bush intended to send more troops to Iraq, he said the move would not improve things.

"What he wants to do is to show that he is not going to be influenced by whatever happens in Iraq, that he has his own way of dealing with things, and even if Iraqis don't like it he will do what he likes.

"He should resign straight away and be tried by the same kangaroo court made up of his enemies," said Dr Mahathir who is known for his straight-talking ways.

-- BERNAMA
January 08, 2007 17:18 PM

GLOBALPARTNER:
An Introduction

http://www.globalpartner.blogspot.com/ is about the world, its people, history, culture, economy and politics, in the regional and international arena. It is also concerned about geopolitical issues in the 21st century, in Asia and its sub-region, South East Asia.

It is dedicated to world peace - not wars, destructions, killings, bloodsheds, hunger and poverty. It is so because the world has had enough of Iraq and Afghanistan. The world also has had enough of bomb blasts in Lebanon, Palstine, southern Thailand, southern Philippines and Indonesia.

Last but not least, this blog despises neo-imperialism, it is against the existence of self-appointed global policemen and deputy sheriffs and abhors injustice, inequality, manipulation and deceit descended on the global brotherhood of mankind.