A Taste of Torture

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Thoroughly Modern Marx

The economic crisis has spawned a resurgence of interest in Karl Marx. Worldwide sales of Das Kapital have shot up (one lone German publisher sold thousands of copies in 2008, compared with 100 the year before), a measure of a crisis so broad in scope and devastation that it has global capitalism—and its high priests—in an ideological tailspin.

Yet even as faith in neoliberal orthodoxies has imploded, why resurrect Marx? To start, Marx was far ahead of his time in predicting the successful capitalist globalization of recent decades. He accurately foresaw many of the fateful factors that would give rise to today’s global economic crisis: what he called the “contradictions” inherent in a world comprised of competitive markets, commodity production, and financial speculation.

Penning his most famous works in an era when the French and American revolutions were less than a hundred years old, Marx had premonitions of AIG and Bear Stearns trembling a century and a half later. He was singularly cognizant of what he called the “most revolutionary part” played in human history by the bourgeoisie—those forerunners of today’s Wall Street bankers and corporate executives. As Marx put it in The Communist Manifesto, “The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. . . . In one word, it creates a world after its own image.”

But Marx was no booster of capitalist globalization in his time or ours. Instead, he understood that “the need for a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe,” foreseeing that the development of capitalism would inevitably be “paving the way for more extensive and exhaustive crises.” Marx identified how disastrous speculation could trigger and exacerbate crises in the whole economy. And he saw through the political illusions of those who would argue that such crises could be permanently prevented through incremental reform.

Like every revolutionary, Marx wanted to see the old order overthrown in his lifetime. But capitalism had plenty of life left in it, and he could only glimpse, however perceptively, the mistakes and wrong turns that future generations would commit. Those of us now cracking open Marx will find he had much to say that is relevant today, at least for those looking to “recover the spirit of the revolution,” not merely to “set its ghost walking again.”

By: By Leo Panitch

see the rest here: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4856

I guess we still have something to learn from Marx. Unabashed speculation and no regulation is doomed to collapse, and it what's more, it may well lead to the rise of the global proleteriat and the end of the bourgeoise...We can only hope. Long live the revolution!

Cheney enters 'torture' memos row

Former US Vice-President Dick Cheney has urged the CIA to release memos which he says show harsh interrogation techniques such as water-boarding work.

His comments follow the publication of memos written by Bush administration lawyers which justified the techniques.

Mr Cheney said that the decision to publish the memos was a mistake.

And it was misleading, he said, because the documents did not include those demonstrating that harsh interrogation delivered intelligence "success".

"One of the things that I find a little bit disturbing about this recent disclosure is that they put out the legal memos... but they didn't put out the memos that show the success of the effort," Mr Cheney told Fox News.

JUSTIN WEBB'S BLOG
Justin Webb
The real question - of course - is whether waterboarding is justified under any circumstances

Read Justin's thoughts in full

"There are reports that show specifically what we gained as a result of this activity. They have not been declassified. I formally ask that they be declassified now."

The American people should have a chance to weigh the intelligence obtained alongside the legal debate, he said.

Mr Cheney made his comments as US President Barack Obama visited the CIA headquarters just outside Washington.

In a move seen as an attempt to boost morale, Mr Obama told employees that the CIA remained key to protecting the country.

Don't be discouraged that we have to acknowledge that potentially we've made some mistakes
Barack Obama

Interrogation 'morass' for Obama
Q&A: Water-boarding

Staff had faced a "difficult" few days, he acknowledged, but they had his full support and were key to tackling threats from groups such as al-Qaeda.

Mr Obama said he had had no choice but to release the Bush administration's legal justification for interrogation techniques, which he considers to be torture - and has banned.

"Don't be discouraged that we have to acknowledge that potentially we've made some mistakes.

"That's how we learn. But the fact that we are willing to acknowledge them and then move forward, that is precisely why I am proud to be president of the United States and that's why you should be proud to be members of the CIA," he said.

The memos, detailing the range of techniques the CIA was allowed to use during the Bush administration, were released on 16 April.

Quoting one of the memos, The New York Times said water-boarding - or mock drowning - was used on two al-Qaeda terror suspects on up to 266 occasions.

Other methods mentioned in the memos include week-long sleep deprivation, forced nudity and the use of painful positions.

Mr Obama on Thursday said he would not prosecute under anti-torture laws CIA personnel who relied in good faith on Bush administration legal opinions issued after the 11 September attacks.

But he has been criticised by human rights organisations and UN officials, who say charges are necessary to prevent future abuses and to hold people accountable.

Nice Cheney, nice. Torture works...The memo release was a mistake, but at least the administration could have shown the memos that suggest it works? You are a dark and scary man...

UN Rapporteur On Torture: Obama’s Pledge Not To Pursue Torture Prosecutions Of CIA Agents Is Not Legal

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/19/obama-violated-int-law/

When President Obama released the four of the Office of Legal Counsel’s (OLC) Bush-era torture memos last week, he issued a statement promising not to pursue torture prosecutions against CIA agents who relied on the memos to justify their use of torture tactics on terrorist suspects in U.S. custody. (Notably, Obama left open the possibility of prosecuting the torture architects.) “[I]t is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution,” Obama said.

But in an interview with the Austrian newspaper Der Standard, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Professor Manfred Nowak, explained that Obama’s grant of immunity is likely a violation of international law. As a party to the UN Convention Against Torture, the U.S. is obligated to investigate and prosecute U.S. citizens that are believed to have engaged in torture:

STANDARD: CIA torturers are according to U.S. President Obama not to be prosecuted. Is that decision supportable?

NOWAK: Absolutely not. The United States has, like all other Contracting Parties to the UN Convention Against Torture, committed itself to investigate instances of torture and to prosecute all cases in which credible evidence of torture is found.

Indeed, Article 2 of the convention on torture explains that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever” can be used to legally justify torture. Further, the convention states that an “order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.”

Nowak explained that by invoking the OLC’s memos as justification for the actions of CIA agents against terrorist suspects in U.S. custody, Obama is acting contrary to U.S. obligations under the treaty:

STANDARD: In other words, by making this announcement, Obama has violated international law?

NOWAK: Correct. It is a violation of binding international treaty law in this case, because this is an international law convention — and it provides unequivocally that states are not merely obligated to make torture a crime, but also to prosecute any incidents of which credible evidence can be found.

In announcing his decision to release the OLC memos, Obama also suggested that he is not inclined to conduct a full investigation into the government’s use of torture. Nowak, however, said the he believes that such an investigation ought to be Obama’s highest priority. “Most importantly, there should be a comprehensive investigation undertaken by an independent body. Whether by a special investigatory commission created by Congress or by a special investigator — there are different approaches,” Nowak expalined.

Role-playing games pioneer dies

Dave Arneson, one of the co-creators of the Dungeons & Dragons fantasy role-play game, has died of cancer at 61 in a hospice in St Paul, Minnesota.

His two-year battle with the disease ended on Tuesday when he passed away peacefully, his daughter said.

Arneson created the game famous for its oddly shaped dice in 1974 along with the late Gary Gygax.

"The biggest thing about my dad's world is he wanted people to have fun in life," said his daughter Malia.

Arneson and Gygax developed D&D using medieval characters and mythical creatures and it was a worldwide hit, particularly among teenage boys.

It eventually was turned into video games, books and films.

Pioneer

"I think we get distracted by the everyday things you have to do in life and we forget to enjoy life and have fun," Malia Weinhagen told the Associated Press.

"But my dad never did. He just wanted people to have fun."

D&D, described by AP as "the quintessential geek pastime", spawned copycat games and later inspired a whole genre of computer games that is still growing in popularity.

"[Arneson] developed many of the fundamental ideas of role-playing: that each player controls just one hero, that heroes gain power through adventures and that personality is as important as combat prowess," said a statement from Wizards of the Coast, which produces D&D.

The company noted that Blackmoor, a game Arneson had been developing before D&D, was the "first-ever role-playing campaign and the prototype for all [role-playing game] campaigns since".

Arneson met Gygax, who died in March of last year, at a games convention in 1969.

He is survived by his daughter and two grandchildren.

from: BBC.co.uk

Dealt a critical hit too early. Thanks for the fantastic fun.

Indian in record chilli attempt

An Indian mother is set for an entry into the Guinness World Records after eating 51 of the world's hottest chilli in two minutes.

Anandita Dutta Tamuly, 26, gobbled up the "ghost chillis" in front of visiting British chef Gordon Ramsay in the north-eastern state of Assam.

Ms Tamuly told Associated Press she "felt terrible" - because she had managed 60 in an earlier local event.

Mr Ramsay tried a chilli but said "it's too much" and pleaded for water.

He is in Assam for a television shoot of a global food series.

'Awestruck'

Guinness World Records accepted in 2007 that the ghost chilli was the world's spiciest at more than one million Scoville units, the measure of spiciness, twice the heat of its closest rival.

A standard green chilli has about 1,500 units.

The chilli record took place on Thursday in Jorhat, 300km (200 miles) north-east of state capital, Guwahati.

Ms Tamuly told AP she used to eat the chilli as a child "while children of my age roamed the village to look for berries".

Atul Lahkar, a local chef, told the Times of India that Ms Tamuly also "smeared seeds of 25 chillies in her eyes in one minute with the crowd simply awestruck".

The previous record for eating was held by a South African with eight jalapenos in a minute.

Guinness World Records has not yet formally confirmed the record.

Ok, wow. I mean wow. That chili is about 2-3 times hotter than habanero or scotch bonnet peppers (and about a quarter of law enforcement pepper spray!). That is fucking hot! I am in awe.

Now, what surprises me is that the previous record was only 8 jalapenos in 1 minute. Please, I could do that...and have. That can't be right. I guess I should have made my stab at Guinness early. I am not likely to beat the new winner. Ms. Tamuly, I salute you and your teflon-coated gut.

Are reactionary conservatives literally this fucking Nuts

I think so...

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Baracknophobia - Obey
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

Raul Castro Meets With Visiting U.S. Lawmakers

All Things Considered, April 7, 2009 · Congressman Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri is one of six lawmakers who met Monday with Cuban President Raul Castro. Cleaver says that Castro indicated he wants to begin talking with the U.S. government about normalizing relations between the two nations.

by The Associated Press

NPR.org, April 6, 2009 · President Raul Castro met Monday with seven visiting members of the Congressional Black Caucus, his first face-to-face discussions with U.S. leaders since he became Cuba's president last year.

State television showed images of Castro, who holds the rank of four-star army general, wearing a business suit instead of his trademark olive-green fatigues and sitting down with Rep. Barbara Lee, a California Democrat, and other members of the American delegation behind closed doors.

An official communique read on the air noted that the U.S. representatives had held meetings in recent days with the head of the Cuban parliament and the country's foreign minister, but provided no details of what was said when they met with Castro, or how long the meeting lasted.

The lawmakers are in Havana to talk about improving U.S.-Cuba relations amid speculation that Washington is ready to loosen some facets of its 47-year-old trade embargo against the island.

The meeting came as Fidel Castro said Cuba is not afraid to talk directly to the United States and that the communist government does not thrive on confrontation as its detractors have long claimed.

In a column published in state-controlled newspapers earlier Monday, the 82-year-old former president also praised U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar, saying the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee "is walking on solid ground" with a proposal to appoint a special envoy to reshape U.S.-Cuba relations.

Fidel Castro wrote that "those capable of serenely analyzing the events, as is the case of the senator from Indiana, use an irrefutable argument: The measures of the United States against Cuba, over almost half a century, are a total failure."

Though they share a strong and mutual distrust of Washington, both Castro brothers have said for decades that they would be willing to talk personally with U.S. leaders. Fidel repeated Cuba's desire for dialogue in the column, saying direct negotiation "is the only way to secure friendship and peace among peoples." Currently, the countries do not have formal diplomatic relations.

"There is no need to emphasize what Cuba has always said: We do not fear dialogue with the United States," he wrote. "Nor do we need confrontation to exist, as some foolish people think. We exist precisely because we believe in our ideas and we have never feared dialogue with the adversary."

Suffering from an undisclosed illness in a secret location, Fidel Castro was succeeded by the 77-year-old Raul as president in February 2008.

Lawmakers in both houses of the U.S. Congress have proposed a measure that would prohibit the president from barring Americans from traveling to Cuba except in extreme cases, effectively lifting a travel ban that is a key component of the embargo.

Lee has said many of the representatives, who arrived in Cuba on Friday and are scheduled to leave Tuesday, support the travel legislation.

Democratic Rep. Mel Watt of North Carolina said Monday that Fidel Castro's column made it "clear that both countries can exist without either dialogue or adversity to each other."

"But wouldn't it be so wonderful," he added, "if we struck a dialogue and found the things that were mutually advantageous and mutually of interest to our two countries and stopped the historical divisions that have separated us [though we are] so close geographically?"

Check the audio from NPR here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102851833

Whoohoo! Let's move. End that dumbass embargo. Jesus, you would think after 50 years of no positive effect it would be time to drop the sanctions and open up travel. We are the only country that keeps such a stupid and pointless set of restrictions on the country. And for fuck's sake, we have cordial relations with way, way more repressive countries--Egypt, China, god Israel is about 1000 times more brutal (at least to the Palestinians) and these countries receive the VAST majority of US foreign aid every year. So...that repression seems like it's not the reason.

New and worse secrecy and immunity claims from the Obama DOJ

The Obama DOJ channels Cheney/Addington in seeking to have a new lawsuit against Bush officials dismissed.

Glenn Greenwald

Apr. 06, 2009 |

When Congress immunized telecoms last August for their illegal participation in Bush's warrantless eavesdropping program, Senate Democratic apologists for telecom immunity repeatedly justified that action by pointing out that Bush officials who broke the law were not immunized -- only the telecoms. Here, for instance, is how Sen. Jay Rockefeller justified telecom immunity in a Washington Post Op-Ed:

Second, lawsuits against the government can go forward. There is little doubt that the government was operating in, at best, a legal gray area. If administration officials abused their power or improperly violated the privacy of innocent people, they must be held accountable. That is exactly why we rejected the White House's year-long push for blanket immunity covering government officials.

Taking them at their word, EFF -- which was the lead counsel in the lawsuits against the telecoms -- thereafter filed suit, in October, 2008, against the Bush administration and various Bush officials for illegally spying on the communications of Americans. They were seeking to make good on the promise made by Congressional Democrats: namely, that even though lawsuits against telecoms for illegal spying will not be allowed any longer, government officials who broke the law can still be held accountable.

But late Friday afternoon, the Obama DOJ filed the government's first response to EFF's lawsuit (.pdf), the first of its kind to seek damages against government officials under FISA, the Wiretap Act and other statutes, arising out of Bush's NSA program. But the Obama DOJ demanded dismissal of the entire lawsuit based on (1) its Bush-mimicking claim that the "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the Bush administration for illegal spying, and (2) a brand new "sovereign immunity" claim of breathtaking scope -- never before advanced even by the Bush administration -- that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance unless there is "willful disclosure" of the illegally intercepted communications.

In other words, beyond even the outrageously broad "state secrets" privilege invented by the Bush administration and now embraced fully by the Obama administration, the Obama DOJ has now invented a brand new claim of government immunity, one which literally asserts that the U.S. Government is free to intercept all of your communications (calls, emails and the like) and -- even if what they're doing is blatantly illegal and they know it's illegal -- you are barred from suing them unless they "willfully disclose" to the public what they have learned.

There are several notable aspects to what happened here with this new court filing from Obama:

(1) Unlike in the prior cases where the Obama DOJ embraced the Bush theory of state secrets -- in which the Obama DOJ was simply maintaining already-asserted arguments in those lawsuits by the Bush DOJ -- the motion filed on Friday was the first response of any kind to this lawsuit by the Government. Indeed, EFF filed the lawsuit in October but purposely agreed with Bush lawyers to an extension of the time to respond until April, in the hope that by making this Obama's case, and giving his DOJ officials months to consider what to do when first responding, they would receive a different response than the one they would have gotten from the Bush DOJ.

That didn't happen. This brief and this case are exclusively the Obama DOJ's, and the ample time that elapsed -- almost three full months -- makes clear that it was fully considered by Obama officials. Yet they responded exactly as the Bush DOJ would have. This demonstrates that the Obama DOJ plans to invoke the exact radical doctrines of executive secrecy which Bush used -- not only when the Obama DOJ is taking over a case from the Bush DOJ, but even when they are deciding what response should be made in the first instance. Everything for which Bush critics excoriated the Bush DOJ -- using an absurdly broad rendition of "state secrets" to block entire lawsuits from proceeding even where they allege radical lawbreaking by the President and inventing new claims of absolute legal immunity -- are now things the Obama DOJ has left no doubt it intends to embrace itself.

(2) It is hard to overstate how extremist is the "soverign immunity" argument which the Obama DOJ invented here in order to get rid of this lawsuit. I confirmed with both ACLU and EFF lawyers involved in numerous prior surveillance cases with the Bush administration that the Bush DOJ had never previously argued in any context that the Patriot Act bars all causes of action for any illegal surveillance in the absence of "willful disclosure." This is a brand new, extraordinarily broad claim of government immunity made for the first time ever by the Obama DOJ -- all in service of blocking EFF's lawsuit against Bush officials for illegal spying. As EFF's Kevin Bankston put it:

This is the first time [the DOJ] claimed sovereign immunity against Wiretap Act and Stored Communications Act claims. In other words, the administration is arguing that the U.S. can never be sued for spying that violates federal surveillance statutes, whether FISA, the Wiretap Act or the SCA.

Since EFF's lawsuit is the first to sue for actual damages under FISA and the Wiretap Act, it's arguable whether this immunity argument applied to any of the previous lawsuits. What is clear, though, is that the Bush DOJ, in any context, never articulated this bizarre view that all claims of illegal government surveillance are immunized in the absence of "willful disclosure" to the public of the intercepted communications. This is a brand new Obama DOJ invention to blanket themselves (and Bush officials) with extraordinary immunity even when they knowingly break our country's surveillance laws.

(3) Equally difficult to overstate is how identical the Obama DOJ now is to the Bush DOJ when it comes to its claims of executive secrecy -- not merely in substance but also tone and rhetoric (at least in the area of secrecy; there are still important differences -- no sweeping Article II lawbreaking powers and the like -- which shouldn't be overlooked). I defy anyone to read the Obama DOJ's brief here and identify even a single difference between what it says and what the Bush DOJ routinely said in the era of Cheney/Addington (other than the fact that Bush used to rely on secret claims of national security harm from Michael McConnell whereas Obama relies on secret claims filed by Dennis Blair). Even for those most cynical about what Obama was likely to do or not do in the civil liberties realm, reading this brief from the Obama DOJ is so striking -- and more than a little depressing -- given how indistinguishable it is from everything that poured out of the Bush DOJ regarding secrecy powers in order to evade all legal accountability.

Don't take my word for that. I mean: really, don't. Instead, I'm going to excerpt just a few of the key passages from the Obama DOJ's brief to convey a sense of how absolute is the Obama administration's claims of executive power and secrecy rights -- remember: all advanced in order to demand that courts not consider any claims that the Bush administration broke the law in how it spied on Americans (click on images to enlarge):

Obama DOJ Brief - Page 2:

Obama DOJ Brief - Page 12:

Obama DOJ Brief - Page 13:

Obama DOJ Brief - Page 15:

Obama DOJ Brief - Page 16:

Obama DOJ Brief - Page 18:

Every defining attribute of Bush's radical secrecy powers -- every one -- is found here, and in exactly the same tone and with the exact same mindset. Thus: how the U.S. government eavesdrops on its citizens is too secret to allow a court to determine its legality. We must just blindly accept the claims from the President's DNI that we will all be endangered if we allow courts to determine the legality of the President's actions. Even confirming or denying already publicly known facts -- such as the involvement of the telecoms and the massive data-mining programs -- would be too damaging to national security. Why? Because the DNI says so. It is not merely specific documents, but entire lawsuits, that must be dismissed in advance as soon as the privilege is asserted because "its very subject matter would inherently risk or require the disclosure of state secrets."

What's being asserted here by the Obama DOJ is the virtually absolute power of presidential secrecy, the right to break the law with no consequences, and immunity from surveillance lawsuits so sweeping that one can hardly believe that it's being claimed with a straight face. It is simply inexcusable for those who spent the last several years screaming when the Bush administration did exactly this to remain silent now or, worse, to search for excuses to justify this behavior. As EFF's Bankston put it:

President Obama promised the American people a new era of transparency, accountability, and respect for civil liberties. But with the Obama Justice Department continuing the Bush administration's cover-up of the National Security Agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans, and insisting that the much-publicized warrantless wiretapping program is still a "secret" that cannot be reviewed by the courts, it feels like deja vu all over again.

This is the Obama DOJ's work and only its work, and it is equal to, and in some senses surpasses, the radical secrecy and immunity claims of the Bush administration.

-- Glenn Greenwald

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/06/obama/

Happy Cheese Weasel Day!

Unknown to most, April 3rd is Cheese Weasel Day, the holiday where the Cheese Weasel brings dairy goodness to all the good boys and girls in the tech industry. While the origins are murky, it seems to have started around 1992 when a weasel was spotted carrying a Kraft Single. This, they assumed, must be the Cheese Weasel, and therefore, that it must be Cheese Weasel Day. What was the weasel going to do with the cheese? He must be off to put it under the keyboards of good tech workers everywhere.

The practice of the holiday seems to spread through word of mouth. I first heard of it when I showed up to work on April 3rd many years ago and a fantastic spread of exotic cheeses was laid out in the middle of the office. It wasn’t until a few hours later, after the food coma had started to wear down, that I started to think about the legend, “The Cheese Weasel leaves cheese under the keyboards of good tech workers… cheese under the keyboards… keyboards.” I looked, and there was a cheese single, still wrapped. I wonder how long it would have lasted had I not found it.

The holiday does seem to be growing. Each year, more and more sites show up with a reference to the holiday or the song (yes, there is a song). One site even offers Cheese Weasel Day (CWD) ecards. The methods of celebration vary. Some prefer to celebrate with the best cheeses and freshest baguettes, while others eschew that practice and insist on keeping with the tradition of cheese food singles.

(from: http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/04/03/happy-cheese-weasel-day-2/)

I'm Still looking for my cheese, it has to be here somewhere.

Livni condemns new Israel leaders

Israel's former chief peace negotiator says the way the new government is talking shows it will not be a partner for peace with the Palestinians.

Tzipi Livni's criticism follows the rejection by her successor as foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, of recent US-backed efforts towards a peace deal.

"What happened is that the government announced that Israel is not relevant, is not a partner," she said.

New PM Benjamin Netanyahu has pledged to seek peace but has not detailed how.

Ms Livni's centrist Kadima party came narrowly ahead of Mr Netanyahu's right-wing Likud in the February election, but he was asked to form a coalition as right-leaning parties predominated.

From today, Israel has announced that it is not a partner Tzipi Livni

In his speech on Wednesday, at a foreign ministry handover attended by Ms Livni, the ultra-nationalist Mr Lieberman said Israel was not bound by the Annapolis accords agreed with the Palestinians and the Bush administration in November 2007.

He said the only legitimate document was another US-sponsored deal, the Road Map peace plan of 2003, because he said it was ratified by the Israeli government and the UN Security Council.

First test

In an interview with Israeli army radio, Ms Livni said hardliners had avoided peace efforts in the past with the "pathetic excuse" that there had been no partner on the Palestinian side.

COALITION MEMBERS Likud: 27 seats, 15 ministers Yisrael Beiteinu 15 : 5 ministers Labour: 13 seats, 5 ministers Shas: 11 seats, 4 ministers Jewish Home: 3 seats, 1 minister United Torah Judaism: 5 seats Analysis: Israel's unwieldy government

"From today, Israel has announced that it is not a partner," she said.

"The remarks do not represent Israel, the remarks hurt Israel," she added, and urged Mr Netanyahu to disavow them.

Correspondents say Mr Netanyahu has softened his opposition towards the Palestinians since his last premiership in the 1990s.

However, they add, the appointment of Mr Lieberman has angered Palestinians and raised international concerns because of his hard-line positions on the peace process and his manifesto which was widely seen as racist against Arabs.

Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said Mr Lieberman's remarks were the first test for US President Barack Obama in the Middle East.

"He has slammed the door in the face of the US and the international community," he said.

No land for peace

US state department spokesman Gordon Duguid would not be drawn into commenting on Mr Lieberman's views when he briefed reporters in Washington.

Instead, he stressed Mr Netanyahu's stated commitment to achieving peace and said the administration would work closely to advance that cause.

Analysts say the Road Map never got off the ground because both sides accused each other of failing to meet their obligations.

Israel said the Palestinian Authority had not clamped down on militants, while Palestinians said Israel ignored a freeze on settlement activity on occupied territory.

Annapolis was designed to get over that hump by jumping directly to final status talks on Palestinian independence.

However, Annapolis too got stuck and had made little apparent progress by its initial deadline of the end of 2008.

After his speech, Mr Lieberman went further in a TV interview, saying he also opposed withdrawal from the occupied Golan Heights as part of peace negotiations with Syria.

He said he was "very much in favour of peace with Syria - but only on one basis - peace in return for peace" and not, by implication, a land-for-peace deal.

Syria says the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel in 1967, must be returned in full if there is to be peace between the two countries.

Alas...

Battlestar Galactica stars advise UN

The creators and stars of the science fiction TV series, Battlestar Galactica, have taken part in a public discussion with UN officials in New York.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7956325.stm

Israeli Soldiers Admit Gaza Abuse

An Israeli military college has printed damning soldiers' accounts of the killing of civilians and vandalism during recent operations in Gaza.

One account tells of a sniper killing a mother and children at close range whom troops had told to leave their home.

Another speaker at the seminar described what he saw as the "cold blooded murder" of a Palestinian woman.

The army has defended its conduct during the Gaza offensive but said it would investigate the testimonies.

The Israeli army has said it will investigate the soldiers' accounts.

The testimonies were published by the military academy at Oranim College. Graduates of the academy, who had served in Gaza, were speaking to new recruits at a seminar.

The climate in general [was that] lives of Palestinians are much, much less important than the lives of our soldiers Soldier testimony Analysis: Operation Miscast Lead? Gaza war crimes probes

"[The testimonies] conveyed an atmosphere in which one feels entitled to use unrestricted force against Palestinians," academy director Dany Zamir told public radio.

Heavy civilian casualties during the three-week operation which ended in the blockaded coastal strip on 18 January provoked an international outcry.

Correspondents say the testimonies, if proved credible, undermine Israel's claims that troops took care to protect non-combatants and accusations that Hamas militants were responsible for putting civilians into harm's way.

'Less important'

The Palestinian woman and two of her children were allegedly shot after they misunderstood instructions about which way to walk having been ordered out of their home by troops.

"The climate in general... I don't know how to describe it.... the lives of Palestinians, let's say, are much, much less important than the lives of our soldiers," an infantry squad leader is quoted saying.

Palestinian civilians paid a heavy price during the three-week Israeli operation

In another cited case, a commander ordered troops to kill an elderly woman walking on a road, even though she was easily identifiable and clearly not a threat.

Testimonies, which were given by combat pilots and infantry soldiers, also included allegations of unnecessary destruction of Palestinian property.

"We would throw everything out of the windows to make room and order. Everything... Refrigerators, plates, furniture. The order was to throw all of the house's contents outside," a soldier said.

One non-commissioned officer related at the seminar that an old woman crossing a main road was shot by soldiers.

"I don't know whether she was suspicious, not suspicious, I don't know her story… I do know that my officer sent people to the roof in order to take her out… It was cold-blooded murder," he said.

The transcript of the session for the college's Yitzhak Rabin pre-military course, which was held last month, appeared in a newsletter published by the academy.

Israeli human rights groups have criticised the military for failing to properly investigate violations of the laws of war in Gaza despite plenty of evidence of possible war crimes.

'Moral army'

The soldiers' testimonies also reportedly told of an unusually high intervention by military and non-military rabbis, who circulated pamphlets describing the war in religious terminology.

"All the articles had one clear message," one soldier said. "We are the people of Israel, we arrived in the country almost by miracle, now we need to fight to uproot the gentiles who interfere with re-conquering the Holy Land."

"Many soldiers' feelings were that this was a war of religion," he added.

Defence Minister Ehud Barak told Israel Radio that the findings would be examined seriously.

"I still say we have the most moral army in the world. Of course there may be exceptions but I have absolutely no doubt this will be inspected on a case-by-case basis," he said.

Medical authorities say more than 1,300 Palestinians were killed during Israel's 22-day operation, including some 440 children, 110 women, and dozens of elderly people.

The stated aim was to curb rocket and mortar fire by militants from Gaza. Thirteen Israelis, including three civilians were killed.

from:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7952603.stm

Not surprising.

Obama will try to block executive bonuses at AIG

By TOM RAUM
Associated Press Write

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama declared Monday that insurance giant American International Group is in financial straits because of "recklessness and greed" and said he intends to stop it from paying out millions in executive bonuses.

"It's hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165 million in extra pay," Obama said at the outset of an appearance to announce help for small businesses hurt by the deep recession.

"How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat," the president said.

Obama spoke out in the wake of reports that surfaced over the weekend saying that financially strapped American International Group Inc. was paying substantial bonuses to executives.

Noting that AIG has "received substantial sums" of federal aid from the federal government, Obama said he has asked Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner "to use that leverage and pursue every legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayers whole."

Said Obama: "All across the country, there are people who work hard and meet their responsibilities every day, without the benefit of government bailouts or multimillion-dollar bonuses. And all they ask is that everyone, from Main Street to Wall Street to Washington, play by the same rules."

"This isn't just a matter of dollars and cents," he added. "It's about our fundamental values."

The $165 million was payable to executives by Sunday and was part of a larger total payout reportedly valued at $450 million. The company has benefited from more than $170 billion in a federal rescue.

AIG reported this month that it had lost $61.7 billion for the fourth quarter of last year, the largest corporate loss in history. The bulk of the payments at issue cover AIG Financial Products, the unit of the company that sold credit default swaps, the risky contracts that caused massive losses for the insurer.

Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, earlier Monday charged that the move to pay bonuses amounted to "rewarding incompetence."

"These people may have a right to their bonuses. They don't have a right to their jobs forever," said Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat.

Frank noted that the Federal Reserve Board, using a Depression-era statute, was the institution that gave AIG its initial government bailout, before Congress passed legislation providing for additional assistance and said that not enough safeguards were built into the deal.

It also was revealed over the weekend that American International Group Inc. used more than $90 billion in federal aid to pay out foreign and domestic banks, some of whom had received their own multibillion-dollar U.S. government bailouts.

Some of the biggest recipients of the AIG money were Goldman Sachs at $12.9 billion, and three European banks - France's Societe Generale at $11.9 billion, Germany's Deutsche Bank at $11.8 billion, and Britain's Barclays PLC at $8.5 billion. Merrill Lynch, which also is undergoing federal scrutiny of its bonus plans, received $6.8 billion as of Dec. 31.

The money went to banks to cover their losses on complex mortgage investments, as well as for collateral needed for other transactions.

"We ought to explore everything that we can through the government to make sure that this money is not wasted," said Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala. "These people brought this on themselves. Now you're rewarding failure. A lot of these people should be fired, not awarded bonuses. This is horrible. It's outrageous."

Frank said he was disgusted, asserting that "these bonuses are going to people who screwed this thing up enormously."

"Maybe it's time to fire some people," he said. "We can't keep them from getting bonuses but we can keep them from having their jobs. ... In high school, they wouldn't have gotten retention (bonuses), they would have gotten detention."

AIG has agreed to Obama administration requests to restrain future payments. Geithner had pressed the president's case with AIG's chairman, Edward Liddy, last week.

"He stepped in and berated them, got them to reduce the bonuses following every legal means he has to do this," said Austan Goolsbee, staff director of President Barack Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board.

Obama did note in his remarks Monday that Liddy "came on board after the contracts that led to these bonuses were agreed to last year."

In an interview that aired Sunday on CBS' "60 Minutes," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke did not address the bonuses but expressed his frustration with the AIG intervention.

"It makes me angry. I slammed the phone more than a few times on discussing AIG," Bernanke said. "It's - it's just absolutely - I understand why the American people are angry."

In a letter to Geithner dated Saturday, Liddy said outside lawyers had informed the company that AIG had contractual obligations to make the bonus payments and could face lawsuits if it did not do so.

Frank appeared on NBC's "Today" show and Shelby was interviewed on ABC's "Good Morning America."

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

What a bunch of horrid douchebags! I understand why everyone is pissed too; I am pissed! But by all means, keep doing shit like this you jerks. All of this greedy, self-motivated, vile and deceitful crap helps to undermine the "faith in the market" argument that conservatives have been using for years. The market might work in an ideal situation (BTW so does communism), but greedy bastards always find a way to use it to screw everyone else over (also true in communism). This is why regulation is so critical. Much more of this sort of action and Americans will clamor for nationalization of banking and insurance. The government may be slow and inefficient, but it is hardly as greedy as Wall Street. I'll take ineptitude and inefficiency over slimy souless bastards who can't see beyond their own wallets any day.

Vegeterian and Fish Diets Lower Cancer Risk

A vegetarian diet may help to protect against cancer, a UK study suggests.

Analysis of data from 52,700 men and women shows that those who did not eat meat had significantly fewer cancers overall than those who did.

But surprisingly, the researchers also found a higher rate of colorectal cancer - a disease linked with eating red meat - among the vegetarians.

Writing in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition the team said the findings were worth looking into.

Although it is widely recommended that people eat five portions of fruit and vegetables a day to reduce their risk of cancer and other diseases, there is very little evidence looking specifically at a vegetarian diet.

It suggests there might be some reduction in cancers in vegetarians and fish-eaters and we need to look carefully at that Professor Tim Key, study leader

In the latest study, researchers looked at men and women aged 20 to 89 recruited in the UK in the 1990s.

They divided participants into meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans.

During follow-up there were fewer cancers than would be expected in the general population - probably because they were a healthier than average group of people.

But there was a significantly lower incidence of all cancers among the fish-eaters and vegetarians compared with the meat eaters.

'Confusion'

For colorectal cancer, however that trend was reversed with vegetarians having a significantly higher incidence of the condition than the other groups.

The researchers were surprised at the finding, which contradicts previous evidence linking eating lots of red meat with the disease.

Study leader Professor Tim Key, a Cancer Research UK epidemiologist at the University of Oxford, said no previous study had looked at diet in this way and there had been a lot of confusion about the issue.

"It's interesting - it suggests there might be some reduction in cancers in vegetarians and fish-eaters and we need to look carefully at that."

He added: "It doesn't support the idea that vegetarians would have lower rates of colorectal cancer and I think it means we need to think more carefully about how meat fits into it."

More work is needed to unpick the links between diet and cancer but such studies are incredibly hard to do, he said.

Dr Joanne Lunn, a senior nutrition scientist at the British Nutrition Foundation, said the findings highlight the fact that cancer is a complex disease and many different lifestyle factors play a part in determining a person's risk.

"An interesting observation was that the vegetarians had a higher rate of colorectal cancer than the meat-eaters.

"When you look at the detail of their diets, the meat-eaters, to which the vegetarians in this group were compared, are eating only moderate amounts of meat each day - well within the recommendations.

"Both groups are also just about meeting the recommendation to eat at least 5 portions of fruits and vegetables a day."

from bbc.uk.co

Salvadoran ex-rebels win presidency for first time

By ALEXANDRA OLSON
Associated Press Writer

A leftist television journalist has won El Salvador's presidential election, bringing a party of former guerrillas to power for the first time since a bloody civil war and ending two decades of conservative rule.

Mauricio Funes, a moderate plucked from outside the ranks of the rebel-group-turned-political-party Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front, became the latest leftist to rise to power in Latin America at a time of uncertainty over how President Barack Obama will approach the region.

With 90 percent of the vote counted late Sunday, Funes had 51 percent compared to 49 percent for Rodrigo Avila of the ruling conservative Arena party, said Walter Araujo, president of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal.

Avila, accompanied by current President Tony Saca, conceded defeat and wished Funes luck.

Funes reported on the 12-year war that ended 17 years ago with 75,000 people dead, and he later hosted a popular interview show. He promised to unite the country after one of the most polarizing campaigns since the conflict.

"This is the happiest night of my life, and I want it to be the night of El Salvador's greatest hope," Funes said. "I want to thank all the people who voted for me and chose that path of hope and change."

Jubilant, red-clad Funes supporters poured into the streets of San Salvador, whooping, clapping, blowing whistles and waving large party flags. Colorful fireworks shot up into the night sky.

Funes, 49, rode a wave of discontent with two decades of Arena party rule that have brought economic growth but done little to redress social inequalities. Fuel and food prices have soared, while powerful gangs extort businesses and fight for drug-dealing turf, resulting in one of Latin America's highest homicides rates.

Funes promised to crack down on big businesses which he says exploit government complacency to evade taxes.

"The time has come for the excluded, the opportunity has arrived for genuine democrats, for men and women who believe in social justice and solidarity," he told a rally of roaring supporters early Monday.

Avila, 44, a former police chief, had warned that an FMLN victory would send El Salvador down a communist path and threaten the country's warm relations with the United States. He vowed Sunday to lead "a vigilant opposition that would ensure that the country does not lose its liberties."

Close U.S. ties saw El Salvador keep troops in Iraq longer than any other Latin American country and become a hub of regional cooperation with Washington against drug trafficking. The country's economy depends on billions of dollars sent home by 2.5 million Salvadorans who live in the U.S.

The Obama government has assured Salvadorans it would work with any leader elected — a marked departure from the Bush administration, which in 2004 suggested that an FMLN victory would hurt ties.

But U.S relations with some leftist leaders remain tense, including Venezuela's fiery Hugo Chavez and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, who lashed out last week at the United States for holding back aid over an election dispute.

Funes hopes to start off relations fresh with the Obama administration and promises to respect a free trade agreement with the United States and keep the dollar as El Salvador's currency.

"Integration with Central America and strengthening relations with the United States will be the priority of our foreign policy," Funes said.

During the campaign, television broadcasts were flooded with campaign ads warning that a Funes victory would turn El Salvador into a Venezuelan satellite and emphasizing long-standing ties between the FMLN and Chavez. That stoked fears among many Salvadorans with bitter memories of the 1980-1992 leftist insurgency.

"We don't want communists in this country," said Jose Daniel Avila, a 65-year-old retired pilot of no relation to the candidate. "Look what has happened in Nicaragua and Venezuela. Those are not examples to follow."

Chavez said earlier Sunday that his government was not taking sides in the election, adding that Venezuela wants to broaden its relations with whoever won.

___

Associated Press writer Christopher Toothaker in Caracas, Venezuela, contributed to this report.

Congratulations FMLN!

In El Salvador election, old battle lines have been erased

Former soldiers align with former FMLN rebels, and for the first time in the nation's history, a candidate from the left could become president.
By Tracy Wilkinson

March 14, 2009

Reporting from San Salvador — For nearly three decades, Nestor Bonilla was a loyal soldier in the Salvadoran army. Trained by U.S. military advisors, he rose to the rank of colonel. He fought in the civil war as a commander of El Salvador's elite and feared special forces.

Today he is stomping the campaign trail in behalf of the guerrilla movement he once battled. "It is time for a change," he says in what can only be called an understatement.

El Salvador elects a new president Sunday, and for the first time in the nation's history, the left has a real chance of victory. The vote is a test of whether El Salvador has changed significantly in the 17 years since the war ended and can open up beyond the single-party system that has governed it since, or whether the stubborn, locked-in-the-past elements on both the right and left will once again prevail and seal the status quo.

The campaign has revived frightening wartime rhetoric but also offered startling, unheard-of political alliances -- such as Bonilla and his new best friend, Gerson Martinez, a former commander of the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front, or FMLN. Bonilla and Martinez have become a fixture on the FMLN campaign circuit, rallying mostly rural crowds in behalf of Mauricio Funes, the politically moderate presidential candidate heading the FMLN ticket.

When the two compactly built men in their 50s take the stage before a sea of red FMLN flags, they like to tell a somewhat symbolic story.

"We used to be in these hills around here, shooting at each other, me on one side, him on the other," the former military man will say.

"I'd duck, he'd duck. The important thing is we survived to be here today."

"I tell my brothers in the FMLN that we both came from the pueblo," Martinez adds.

The story isn't literal; Bonilla and Martinez fought in different regions of the Salvadoran battlefield, though their comrades were certainly killing one another. But the political message is clear: If two staunch enemies can reconcile for what they believe to be the good of the country, then so can voters.

Does it work?

It's a real crowd pleaser among the FMLN sympathizers, who are apparently surprised at the sight of the two men allied, and they eventually erupt into applause and laughter.

But not everyone.

Marina Morales de la Cruz, a shopkeeper, believes what she has heard about the FMLN -- that it's made up of violence-prone atheists who wouldn't know how to govern.

"They are not God-fearing and would harm the country," she said at her tiny tin-roofed food store, with firewood stacked high on the floor and an enormous flag for the ruling Arena party fluttering overhead in the hot breeze.

Leaders of the right-wing Arena, some of whose founders were associated with the death squads that once stalked El Salvador, have been elected to the presidential palace every five years since 1989. This year the party is running a former police commander, Rodrigo Avila. He's behind in the polls, but polls here are unreliable.

Funes, the FMLN candidate, is a former journalist who was never a combatant in the war. Still, Arena warns that he would not be able to rein in the hard-line militants who still populate upper echelons of the FMLN leadership.

"Our historic fear of the Front cannot change because of the existence of the Communist Party," Armando Calderon Sol, a former president and Arena member, told The Times on Friday, referring to a faction of the FMLN.

But Bonilla, who retired from the army last year, believes the FMLN has changed and, more than that, that Arena must be dumped. He is one of about 110 former military officers who have joined the Funes campaign, along with other surprising bedfellows, such as the son of the late Jose Napoleon Duarte. The older Duarte was the U.S.-backed centrist president in the early years of the war.

"We want to leave the war behind," the younger Duarte said at another FMLN rally. He shared the stage with Funes and the party's vice presidential candidate, former guerrilla commander Salvador Sanchez Ceren, known by his nom de guerre, Leonel.

For Bonilla, the war is in the past but the country has only undergone superficial change. There is greater freedom of expression, but homicides have soared along with the cost of living. Government institutions are seen as corrupt shells acting on partisan interests and unable to mete out justice.

"We can sit here and talk about this and not get killed," said Bonilla, 52, who has the close-cropped hair of the soldier he was and the salt-and-pepper beard and wire-rimmed glasses of the activist he has become. "But there is no social mobility, no opportunity. Graduate, and you have no job. Don't graduate, and you have to go to work [illegally] in the U.S."

The realigning of political affinities is part of a maturing process but also a matter of clear-eyed, practical realism, analysts here say.

"They have understood Arena is not the solution, and in Funes they see a hope," said Ernesto Rivas Gallont, former ambassador to the U.S. and now a political analyst. "This might have been unthinkable a few years ago. Is it political maturation? Maybe. More than that, it is pragmatism. I'm not sure in the end it will be more than symbolic."

The symbolism is nevertheless powerful. After his interview Friday with The Times, Bonilla was heading north to campaign in a village in Morazan province, a guerrilla stronghold during the war and site of some of the fiercest combat. He would be campaigning in a town called Segundo Montes, named in honor of one of the six Jesuit priests slain by the Salvadoran army in 1989.

In his campaign appear- ances, Bonilla realizes he is speaking to peasants whose families might have been killed by men under his command. Yet they still push their calloused palms toward his, wanting to shake his hand.

"I'm in a historic moment," Bonilla said, "and I don't want to think I missed it and didn't participate."

From LAtimes.com

VIVA EL Frente!

Seattle Police Chief Picked As Nation's Drug 'Czar'

by The Associated Press

Enlarge

Elaine Thompson

Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske at a July 2006 news conference. Kerlikowske is expected to be named Wednesday to head the Office of National Drug Control Policy. AP

NPR.org, March 11, 2009 · President Obama has chosen Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske to be the nation's drug czar and lead a stepped-up campaign against substance abuse, Vice President Joe Biden announced Wednesday.

Biden said the 36-year law enforcement veteran will bring to the task a lifetime of experience working on drug policy.

"There's no one more qualified to take on this job than the chief," Biden told a White House audience including other big-city police chiefs and advocates representing drug prevention and treatment organizations.

Biden said he was disappointed that during the Bush administration, the drug czar's office "hasn't gotten the attention that it should have." He added, "Substance abuse is one of our nation's most pervasive problems."

Kerlikowske, 59, said he looked forward to his new role and noted his professional and personal experience with the effects of drug abuse on young people and families. His stepson, Jeffrey, has an arrest record on drug charges.

Kerlikowske's nomination as director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy requires Senate approval. If confirmed, he would take over for John Walters, who held the job under President George W. Bush.

Kerlikowske has been Seattle's top cop for nearly nine years and has been credited with reducing crime rates to record lows.

The agency will no longer have Cabinet-level status, a White House official said, but Kerlikowske "will have a seat at the table when important decisions are being made ... and full access and a direct line to the president and vice president."

Kerlikowske served a stint during the Clinton administration as deputy director in the Justice Department's COPS program, which promotes community policing. He has also held top police positions in Florida and Buffalo, N.Y.

Kerlikowske is viewed as a workmanlike, circumspect choice who has street perspective and the policy smarts to navigate the bureaucracy. As president of the Major Cities Police Chiefs Association, he is known as a progressive and a proponent of community-oriented policing.

Colleagues expect him to ramp up efforts to stem demand for illegal narcotics by emphasizing prevention and treatment.

"I would expect Gil to say there's absolutely a role that enforcement plays, but what other things do we need to do at the community and the state and federal level on prevention and intervention in order to be successful?" asked San Jose, Calif., Police Chief Rob Davis, a friend of Kerlikowske's and vice president of the Major Cities Police Chiefs, in a recent interview with The Associated Press. "If all we do is arrest people for drugs, we're missing the opportunity to get involved in the beginning and take people out of drugs. Gil gets that concept."

In the Clinton administration, Kerlikowske worked on ways to monitor grants the agency gave to local police efforts, and he frequently emphasized analysis and data, looking for "ways to prevent crime rather than reacting to it," said Tim Quinn, the COPS program's acting director.

John Carnevale, an official in the drug office from its inception in 1989 until 2000, met Kerlikowske while working on ways to measure the agency's effectiveness. "He's big on accountability," said Carnevale. Kerlikowske's Washington and local policing background is a plus, particularly if other appointees bring a strong treatment and prevention background, he said.

Seattle activists who work on drug-reform issues called Kerlikowske smart and reasonable, and they noted that his police department has largely abided by a voter-approved initiative that made marijuana possession the city's lowest law enforcement priority.

Even at the city's annual Hempfest protest and festival, police arrested only a few people despite the open-air pot smoking, said Vivian McPeak, director of the event.

Douglas Hiatt, an attorney who defends medical marijuana patients, said the chief has tried "to do the right thing on medical marijuana. He's trying to get it across to his officers not to hassle patients."

Kerlikowske told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in December that if he joined the Obama administration, "At my age, at this point in my career, I'd want something where you feel like you could make a real impact."

From NPR.org

Interesting pick. Another indication that Obama's administration is interesting in changing the status quo. I would not expect to see legalized marijuana anytime soon, but at least the War on Drugs may be changing, or perhaps dropped all together. At least the approach may move to substance abuse treatment and away from criminal punishment.

It's Like a cloak of Elvenkind, but from Science!

March 6, 2009 -- Call it what you will -- the world's first 3D nanoantenna or an invisibility cloak -- but a new metamaterial created by Rice University scientists could hide objects from human sight.

By creating perfectly aligned dimples in a material, the scientists channeled specific wavelengths of light from many directions into one uniform direction.

"This falls into the broad class of metamaterials that have useful and unusual properties, like cloaking," said Naomi Halas, Rice University scientist and co-author of a paper describing the material in Nano Letters. "In a broader picture, you could do some very interesting things with this metamaterial."

The first "invisibility cloak," which hid objects from relatively long-wavelength radio waves, was created in 2006 by scientists from Duke University. Since then scientists have tried to create ever-smaller structures to manipulate ever-smaller wavelengths of light, with the goal of creating a true invisibility cloak that would hide objects in the visible spectrum of light.

According to Halas, this is the world's first truly 3D metamaterial -- a metamaterial being something that gets its trademark properties from its structure rather than its makeup.

Creating the first nanoantenna was relatively simple.

Scientists started with a layer of glass. Latex or plastic nanoparticles were sprayed over the glass at random. Gold particles were evaporated onto the nanoparticles at five different angles, creating 'nanocups.' A protective layer of acrylic was then poured over the top and cured for 36 hours to form a hard slab.

The nanocups are arranged in a repeating pattern, all angled in one direction. Any light that enters a nanocup is gathered and then emitted in the direction of that angle. Since no light is reflected back into an observer's eye, the nanoantenna-coated object is hidden.

"Think about the retro reflectors on stop signs," said Halas. "Those are basically microspheres that direct the light from your headlights back at you. This is the opposite. This would take the light and send it in another direction, hiding the stop sign from your sight."

Reflecting all the gathered light in one direction means that the nanoantenna acts kind of like a mirrored magnifying glass, concentrating the light at a particular point. Unlike a magnifying glass, however, it doesn't matter what angle the light enters; it all goes to the same point.

Practical uses for the nanoantenna go beyond hiding things.

Solar collectors reflect light on a single point, but to work at maximum efficiency they must be mechanically tilted to stay in line with the sun as it moves across the sky.

The new nanoantenna would concentrate light on a single point without having to mechanically tilt it, eliminating one of the biggest costs involved in solar panels.

"In a lot of solar cells, most of the light passes right though the material," said Halas. With the new 3D nanoantenna, "you could change the direction of the light so it propagates through the active regions of the solar cells to maximize [energy]."

Whatever the material is used for, scientists agree that this is the world's first truly 3D nanoantanna.

"Until now it has been difficult to build 3D shapes," said Gennady Shvets, a scientist at the University of Texas at Austin who studies metamaterials. "People used lithography to create essentially flat or planar structures, but those have their limitations."

from: http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/03/06/invisibility-cloak-02.html

Holy awesome!

A (belated) reply from Congressman Price

Here is a response I received from Rep. Price (D-NC) after sending him a letter back in January regarding the Israeli invasion of Gaza. While I would have liked him to take a little more critical stance towards Israel, I think he addressed the situation in a far less biased and real way than I have seen from most US politicians.

Dear Mr.****

Thank you for contacting me about the current conflict in Gaza. I share your concern about this situation and have vocally advocated several immediate steps to achieve a ceasefire and get Israeli-Palestinian long-term peace talks back on track.

The current conflict grows from a standoff between Israel and Hamas that was untenable for citizens on both sides of the dividing line. As you know, Hamas opposed the renewal of a ceasefire that had prevailed for the last several months and then resumed rocket fire against innocent civilians in southern Israel. These acts of terrorism created a situation for Israelis in the area that simply could not be tolerated. At the same time, after agreeing to loosen a months-long, crippling embargo on Gaza in connection with the ceasefire agreement, Israel had failed to live up to its promise, creating a humanitarian situation in Gaza that had become increasingly desperate.

The conflict has only exacerbated suffering for both sides. Certainly, it bears pointing out that Palestinians have borne the brunt of the violence, with a death toll approaching 1,000 and a humanitarian situation that is reportedly keeping nearly one million Gazans cut off from access to fuel and clean water. On the other side of the boundary, Israeli civilians continue to be terrorized by rocket attacks.

An immediate ceasefire is certainly part of the answer, and I have vocally urged the U.S. to advocate for a ceasefire. However, a ceasefire alone will not solve either the current crisis or the long-term Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I have argued for urgent steps to ensure that an end to the fighting addresses the root causes of conflict and paves the way for a sustainable resolution.

Specifically, I have noted that a ceasefire cannot last unless it remediates the underlying causes of the fighting, including by lifting the embargo on Gaza and by halting rocket attacks into Israel. Second, I have urged diplomatic efforts to put Israeli-Palestinian peace talks back on track, including greater involvement of Israel's Arab neighbors and inclusion of Hamas and its constituents in the peace process. Without these steps, a ceasefire will only be a band-aid.

I expressed many of these views in an op-ed I wrote for the Charlotte Observer and Miami Herald on January 6. In addition, Rep. Lois Capps and I led a group of colleagues in sending a letter to President Bush demanding several immediate steps to ease the humanitarian situation in Gaza. I have attached both documents for your review.

It is my deep hope that the incoming Administration will make a just and lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace built upon a two-state solution a top priority. Only through strong American engagement can such a goal be realized. You can be sure I will continue to advocate for U.S. leadership for peace in the Middle East.

Sincerely,

DAVID PRICE

Member of Congress