A cosmic perspective

I’m all in favor of a cosmic perspective.

On the occasions I’ve been lucky enough to sleep under the stars, far from civilization, I’ve found that a small but radical realignment in perception can enhance that perspective.

Instead of looking up, look out — out into the Milky Way and deep space.

In other words, instead of assuming the position that one is lying on top of the globe — space above, earth below — imagine ones back stuck to the side of the globe, looking outwards.

This shift from up to out, breaks the geocentric perspective and puts the Earth in space, rather than making space outside the Earth.

As Neil deGrasse Tyson says, to consider the vastness of the universe is indeed inspiring — but it’s also terrifying, and not simply because it threatens an inflated ego.

However abundant life might be in the universe, the places that support life are miniscule in relationship to everything else.

To see the universe as intrinsically hostile to life is terrifying, realistic, and above all, should enhance our appreciation for this tiny planet. Inside the wafer-thin bubble of the Earth’s atmosphere percolates a complex, fragile, and vital energy — a force by which we are possessed and yet have the conceit to challenge.

Facebooktwittermail

Turks rally against Erdogan rule

Tulin Daloglu writes: Just like that iconic picture in 1989 known as the “Tank Man of Tiananmen,” Reuters’ top photo on Tuesday [May 28] showing a young woman wearing a short-sleeve burgundy dress, carrying a white tote bag over her shoulder while a police officer wearing a gas mask spraying pepper into her face will be equally remembered as a historic picture down the road.

Something changed for the decade-long rule of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) on Friday [May 31], as the police crackdown took a turn for the worse. Pepper was sprayed and pressured water canons were used on the peaceful protesters in downtown Istanbul; protesters who have been unable to stop the government’s plan to demolish one of the city’s few remaining parks, cutting down 70-year-old trees to rebuild the Ottoman Artillery Barracks that were originally built in 1740 and destroyed in 1940.

Addressing the General Convention of Turkey Exporters Assembly (TIM) on Saturday [June 1], Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, however, stressed over and over again in his speech, “We will build that Ottoman Artillery Barrack there.” The prime minister insists that this protest “is not an issue about those 5 or 6 trees [in the park]. This has now become an ideological struggle. They say that we will build a shopping mall there, but there is no concrete decision. Whoever is my counterpart here [on the side of the protesters] should sincerely say what they want, but we will build that Ottoman Artillery Barracks there because it was once there.”

Erdogan does not seem to be getting the message. While this protest may now turn ideological, it all started as a small gathering of about 500 people on Monday [May 27]. The reason it got out of control with massive protests in 10 other cities around the country — Adana, Konya, Tunceli, Mersin, Mugla, Marmaris, Izmit, Adana, Izmir, Van and Sivas — is that Erdogan has shown no culture of consensus building with those who disagree with him. Instead, he painted the protesters as “anti-democratic” and engaging in “illegal” activities. [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail

More than 1,000 killed in Iraq violence in May

Reuters reports: More than 1,000 people were killed in violence in Iraq in May, making it the deadliest month since the sectarian slaughter of 2006-07, the United Nations said on Saturday, as fears mounted of a return to civil war.

Nearly 2,000 people have been killed in the last two months as al Qaeda and Sunni Islamist insurgents, invigorated by the Sunni-led revolt in Syria and by Sunni discontent at home, seek to revive the kind of all-out inter-communal conflict that killed tens of thousands five years ago.

“That is a sad record,” Martin Kobler, the U.N. envoy in Baghdad, said in a statement. “Iraqi political leaders must act immediately to stop this intolerable bloodshed.”

The renewed bloodletting reflects worsening tensions between Iraq’s Shi’ite-led government and the Sunni minority, seething with resentment at their treatment since Saddam Hussein was overthrown by the U.S.-led invasion of 2003 and later hanged.

Facebooktwittermail

Syria, not too worried about killing its citizens, advises them to avoid getting pepper-sprayed in Turkey

AFP reports: War-torn Syria on Sunday advised its citizens to avoid travel to neighbouring Turkey, where massive protests have rocked several cities, because of “a deterioration in the security situation.”

The warning issued by the foreign ministry comes as a civil war that has killed tens of thousands ravages Syria, pitting rebels backed by Turkey and other countries against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

“The foreign ministry advises Syrian citizens to avoid travel to Turkey for their own safety because of a deterioration in the security situation in a number of Turkish cities,” it said in a statement carried on Syrian state television.

Facebooktwittermail

Losing the Syrian revolution

Edward Dark is the pseudonym for a Syrian currently residing in Aleppo. He writes: So what went wrong? Or to be more accurate, where did we go wrong? How did a once inspirational and noble popular uprising calling for freedom and basic human rights degenerate into an orgy of bloodthirsty sectarian violence, with depravity unfit for even animals? Was it inevitable and wholly unavoidable, or did it not have to be this way?

The simple answer to the above question is the miscalculation (or was it planned?) of Syrians taking up arms against their regime, a ruthless military dictatorship held together by nepotism and clan and sectarian loyalties for 40 years of absolute power. Former US ambassador to Syria Robert Ford specifically warned about this in his infamous visit to Hama in the summer of 2011 just as the city was in the grip of massive anti-regime protests and before it was stormed by the Syrian army. That warning fell on deaf ears, whether by design or accident, and we have only ourselves to blame. Western and global inaction or not, we are solely responsible for our broken nation at the end of the day.

Nietzsche once said, “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.” That has proved to be very prophetic in the Syrian scenario. Away from all the agendas, whitewashing, propaganda, and outright lies of the global media stations, what we saw on the ground when the rebel fighters entered Aleppo was a far different reality. It hit home hard. It was a shock, especially to those of us who had supported and believed in the uprising all along. It was the ultimate betrayal.

To us, a rebel fighting against tyranny doesn’t commit the same sort of crimes as the regime he’s supposed to be fighting against. He doesn’t loot the homes, businesses and communities of the people he’s supposed to be fighting for. Yet, as the weeks went by in Aleppo, it became increasingly clear that this was exactly what was happening.

Rebels would systematically loot the neighborhoods they entered. They had very little regard for the lives and property of the people, and would even kidnap for ransom and execute anyone they pleased with little recourse to any form of judicial process. They would deliberately vandalize and destroy ancient and historical landmarks and icons of the city. They would strip factories and industrial zones bare, even down to the electrical wiring, hauling their loot of expensive industrial machinery and infrastructure off across the border to Turkey to be sold at a fraction of its price. Shopping malls were emptied, warehouses, too. They stole the grain in storage silos, creating a crisis and a sharp rise in staple food costs. They would incessantly shell residential civilian neighborhoods under regime control with mortars, rocket fire and car bombs, causing death and injury to countless innocent people, their snipers routinely killing in cold blood unsuspecting passersby. As a consequence, tens of thousands became destitute and homeless in this once bustling, thriving and rich commercial metropolis. [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail

Syrian stalemate fuelled by opposition’s bitter infighting

Hassan Hassan writes: The Syrian political opposition, in its current form, is a hopeless case. Members of the opposition have been holding intensive talks to expand the National Coalition for nearly a week, with little progress.

The meetings in Istanbul are meant to discuss the inclusion of more members, mostly moderates, in the coalition to make it a more representative and balanced political body. As it stands now, the political body is controlled by one group that has a tenacious monopoly over the decision-making process.

On Monday, the coalition’s general assembly announced that eight new members have been added, after they won 42 votes from existing members. But the coalition has deep structural issues that render the inclusion of new members almost meaningless.

The principle sticking point involves voting. Existing members of the coalition insist that the inclusion of new members must be based on balloting by existing members only. But this would change little in a monopoly that was made possible by interference from regional countries to begin with, rather than based on consensus among Syrian opposition. The existing members were not chosen by the people to decide whether certain opposition figures should be members or not. [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail

Arming Syria’s rebellion: How Libyan weapons and know-how reach anti-Assad fighters

Time reports: The beefy Libyan revolutionary field commander turned politician rose from the beige couch to greet his new Syrian guest, who pulled up a chair to join the two other Syrian men seated in a semicircle around the couch in the café of a hotel in the southern Turkish city of Antakya, near the Syrian border.

The Libyan had traveled from Zintan, in northwest Libya, while a fellow countryman, a former militia commander from Benghazi, had traveled from that port city to hold court in this Turkish hotel and meet some of the rebels trying to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad. (Both Libyans requested anonymity, because of the nature of their mission.)

The Syrians seated around the Libyans on this warm night in mid-May were all from Islamist military units that operate outside the umbrella of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which claims to represent most of Syria’s rebels. The night before, the Libyans said, had been the turn of the FSA, which is generally less Islamist than the rebels now seated at the hotel: the Libyans had met a colonel in the FSA who had sat on the same beige couch. He had defected relatively early in the now more than two-year conflict, and had nominally held a senior position in the coterie of exiled FSA officers in southern Turkey who at one point claimed to speak for the armed opposition but who have since been sidelined by other, newer defectors.

It’s a common sight to see clumps of Arab men, mainly Syrian but sometimes speaking in other Arabic dialects or accents, huddled in meetings or milling about in certain Turkish hotels not only in Antakya but also in other border cities adjacent to crossings into Syria. The meetings usually don’t start until at least the late afternoon, or more commonly in the evening, and can continue well into the early hours of the morning. Some of the men are making deals to buy or sell weapons and ammunition, or are trying to secure financing to do so by meeting with wealthy financial patrons — either Syrian or foreign — who want to contribute to the war without joining the front lines. And then there are the foreign fighters, the men with the long beards and the short pants worn above the ankle in the manner of the Prophet Muhammad, who are waiting for Syrian rebels to take them into Syria. [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail

U.S. drone attacks are further radicalising Pakistan

Imran Awan writes: The US airstrike last week, which killed the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) second in command Wali ur Rehman has again raised the contentious issue about the legality of US drone strikes in Pakistan. The United States, like many of its allies across the international community were quick to hail this operation a success. Yet underneath this bravado lays a very serious question and that is” despite killing high profile figures such as Wali ur Rehman and Baitullah Mehsud in 2009, the methods used to target the Taliban may in actual fact be acting as a recruitment tool for extremist organisations in Pakistan who have an apathy towards the Taliban.

The latest airstrike came as the dust was settling from the recent Pakistani elections. At a crucial time when the TPP were willing to hold “peace talks” with the new Pakistani Nawaz Sharif administration, this US airstrike seems to again have reignited anti-US/Pak relations. The drone strikes are mainly used in the federally administered tribal areas, and whilst accurate statistics about the number of drone strikes and casualties are difficult to ascertain because of the nature of access, the Bureau of Investigative Journalists has argued that at least 2,541 to 3,540 people have been killed in drone attacks and almost 411 to 884 of those are civilians.

When Imran Khan, the cricketer turned politician and leader of the Pakistani Tehreek-e-Insaf party famously said he would shoot down a drone if elected as Pakistan’s next prime minister, many commentators viewed it as light satire appealing to the middle class vote. Yet his statement does appear to represent the majority of Pakistani’s views on drone attacks. A 2011 Pew poll of drone attacks, for example, showed that 89% of Pakistani citizens argue that drones kill innocent people. Moreover, a report published by Stanford and New York Universities in 2011 showed the scale of the psychological impact drone attacks had on Pakistani civilians who felt “terrorised” by them. [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail

Experts unearth concerns over ‘peak soil’

IPS reports: Soil is becoming endangered, and this reality needs to be part of our collective awareness in order to feed nine billion people by 2050, say experts meeting in Reykjavík.

And a big part of reversing soil decline is the use of carbon, the same element that is helping to overheat the planet.

“Keeping and putting carbon in its rightful place,” needs to be the mantra for humanity if we want to continue to eat, drink and combat global warming, concluded 200 researchers from more than 30 countries.

“There is no life without soil,” said Anne Glover, chief scientific adviser to the European Commission.

“While soil is invisible to most people it provides an estimated $1.5tn to $13tn dollars in ecosystem services annually,” Glover said at the Soil Carbon Sequestration conference that ended this week.

The dirt beneath our feet is a nearly magical world filled with tiny, wondrous creatures. A mere handful of soil might contain a half million different species including ants, earthworms, fungi, bacteria and other microorganisms. Soil provides nearly all of our food – only one percent of our calories come from the oceans, she said.

Soil also gives life to all of the world’s plants that supply us with much of our oxygen, another important ecosystem service. Soil cleans water, keeps contaminants out of streams and lakes, and prevents flooding. Soil can also absorb huge amounts of carbon, second only to the oceans.

“It takes half a millennia to build two centimetres of living soil and only seconds to destroy it,” Glover said. [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail

Al Jazeera America has the odour of disaster

Tony Burman writes: American TV journalism loves to reduce the most complicated, nuanced issues into simple, often absurd choices. So, in this spirit of inquiry, let me try this question on you.

Although its debut has already been delayed a few times, the new Al Jazeera America news channel is supposed to launch on U.S. cable and satellite systems in a few months, creating considerable buzz in the American media industry and much anxiety within Al Jazeera, given its immense price tag.

This week, a widely circulated report suggested Al Jazeera intends to ditch its award-winning emphasis on international news and instead try to be “American through and through” to curry public and political favour. According to the story, drawn from interviews with my former colleagues at Al Jazeera: “It will, in other words, operate much like CNN (though the employees say they won’t be as sensational) and Fox News (though they say they won’t be as opinion-driven).” [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail

BNP and EDL supporters chased through London by women dressed as badgers

International Business Times reports: A rally by extremists from the British National Party and the English Defence League was dwarfed by opposition campaigners staging rival protests in London on Saturday 1 June.

Shortly after lunch, a die-hard core of around 50 BNP and EDL supporters was confronted outside parliament by hundreds of activists from anti-extremist groups including Unite Against Fascism and Hope Not Hate.

But in the event, both groups were upstaged by agitators of a different stripe. Decked out from head to toe in black and white, the group that won the day were campaigning neither for race war nor ethnic equality, but an end to the government’s cull on badgers.

And it was the pro-badger campaigners who appeared to steal a march on the political activists.

Young women dressed in fake fur were seen chasing doughty nationalist supporters down London’s Whitehall as a large number of security forces in iridescent jackets looked on from police lines.

Facebooktwittermail

Obama’s brutal pragmatism

There are many Americans — and I expect they include Barack Obama — who drew a lesson from the Bush-Cheney era that there is no greater danger than comes from being wedded inflexibly to a rigid ideology. The fall of the neoconservatives coincided with the revival of “the reality-based community.”

When Obama entered office, he appeared to be taking a principled stand when he signed an executive order calling for Guantánamo to be shut down and banning the use of torture, but beneath the principle was a much stronger allegiance to a brutal pragmatism.

Since the detention of terrorist suspects had resulted in the creation of a legal and political quagmire, the solution — transparent in its application, even while never honestly articulated as such — has been to kill rather than capture suspects. The administration professes its desire to capture suspects “whenever possible” but it turns out that it’s virtually never possible.

As for how the detainees that Obama inherited get treated, in spite of his pledge to end torture, many are now in fact being tortured. Whereas Bush authorized torture to extract intelligence, Obama authorizes forced feeding of hunger-striking prisoners — which is widely viewed as brutal enough to be described as torture — because this president is less concerned about the prisoners’ treatment than the consequences of their deaths under his watch.

In a nutshell, this then is Obama’s pragmatic approach: better to kill rather than capture; but if already captured, better to torture than allow to die.

Joe Nocera writes: Nearly four months into a hunger strike that has now spread to some two-thirds of the detainees at the prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, the question in this headline can no longer be avoided.

Fundamentally, hunger strikes are a form of speech for prisoners who have no other way to communicate their concerns. Hunger strikes give them the means to protest their confinement and to send a message about that confinement. During the “troubles” in Ireland, for instance, Irish Republican Army prisoners went on hunger strikes to protest their detention by the British — and some ended up being force-fed.

For decades, the international community, including the International Red Cross, the World Medical Association and the United Nations, have recognized the right of prisoners of sound mind to go on a hunger strike. Force-feeding has been labeled a violation on the ban of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. The World Medical Association holds that it is unethical for a doctor to participate in force-feeding. Put simply, force-feeding violates international law.

Whatever triggered the hunger strike at Guantánamo — the detainees say that the military had begun searching their Korans and instituted a series of harsh new measures, which the military denies — the underlying issue is that the detainees are in despair of ever getting out. Many of them, including 56 men from Yemen, have been cleared to leave the prison by a committee of top national security officials. But thanks to a combination of Congressional actions taken during the past few years, and the timidity of President Obama, they remain in Guantánamo with no end in sight. The hunger strike has been their way of reminding the world of their continued imprisonment, and it has worked brilliantly. One wonders whether President Obama would have even mentioned Guantánamo in his big national security speech last week if not for the hunger strikers.

The military claims that it is force-feeding the detainees in order to keep them safe and alive. According to The Miami Herald, about one-third of the detainees on strike — at least 35 men, though possibly more — are being force-fed. A handful are in the hospital.

But not long ago, Al Jazeera got ahold of a 30-page document that detailed the standard operating procedures used by the military to force-feed a detainee. The document makes for gruesome reading: the detainee shackled to a special chair (which looks like the electric chair); the head restraints if he resists; the tube pushed painfully down his nose; the half-hour or so of ingestion of nutritional supplements; the transfer of the detainee to a “dry cell,” where, if he vomits, he is strapped back into the chair until the food is digested. [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail

Guantánamo hunger strikers demand new doctors in letter of protest

The Guardian reports: Thirteen Guantánamo Bay detainees on hunger strike have written an open letter to their military doctors insisting they receive independent, non-military medical treatment – and appealing to the conscience of their physicians.

“I cannot trust your advice, because you are responsible to your superior military officers who require you to treat me by means unacceptable to me, and you put your duty to them above your duty to me as a doctor,” the detainees write in an open letter from the detention center obtained by the Guardian. “Your dual loyalties make trusting you impossible.”

The signatories, who include former UK resident Shaker Aamer, protest that the force-feedings administered by military physicians at Guantánamo are “extremely painful” and “in violation of the ethics of your profession.” The May 30 letter was co-ordinated by attorneys for the 13 detainees, nine of whom signed the statement directly. Four signed through their lawyers.

Another nine lawyers, some of whom represent Guantánamo detainees, added their names to the letter. [Continue reading…]

Facebooktwittermail