Another Remembrence Day

In a week when our complicity in evil in Afghanistan is finally coming to light, it is well to recall the twenty year anniversary of another crime against humanity: the murder of six Salvadoran priests and two of their helpers on November 16, 1989 by U.S. backed Salvadoran death squads.

Catholic Anarchy offered the following quote from one of the murdered priests, Ignacio Ellacuria, SJ:

The developed world is not at all the desired utopia, even as a way to overcome poverty, much less to overcome injustice.

Indeed, it is a sign of what should not be and of what should not be done. We must turn this sinful history upside down, and out of poverty. We must build a civilization in which all can have life and dignity.

It is particularly tragic that governments that provide the strongest support for measures such as torture and murder are usually supported by a particular segment of the church. WWJD indeed.

Rick Hillier -- War Criminal?

CBC News is reporting this morning that Foreign Affairs official Richard Colvin is reporting that among others he warned of what was happening to prisoners turned over by Canadians to Afghan authorities in 2006-07 was then CDS Rick Hillier.

Readers may recall Hillier's and Army Commander Andrew Leslie's startlingly bellicose statements at the start of the Afghan mission. It would appear that there might have been more than just words here.

We should perhaps be more humble in our finger pointing at the U.S. and particularly the hapless Bush administration. We should also never forget that abetting torture is a war crime.

What Did They Know and When Did They Know It?

It has always seemed unlikely to me that the financial sector and government regulators had no idea that credit default swaps being sold by AIG on mortgage debt were inadequately backed. Now comes news from Floyd Norris of the New York Times that not only was this known, but that Goldman Sachs and Merril Lynch among others was insuring themselves against an AIG default. As Norris describes it,

At least two banks — Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch — had purchased protection against an A.I.G. default. It is possible that others had as well, but the inspector general did not ask.

Goldman, the report states, had spent more than $100 million to buy $1.2 billion in protection against an A.I.G. default. That enabled Goldman to argue that it really did not stand to lose if A.I.G. went under.

Merrill said it had spent $40 million in such fees, but the report does not say how much protection Merrill had purchased.

AIG of course was also insuring Canadian mortgages in competition with CMHC, and it was no doubt many of these mortgages that the Harper government purchased on such generous terms over the past year. Surely if the banking sector on Wall Street knew of AIG's shortcomings, so to did Bay Street and hence given their close relationship, the Harper government.

The Ugly Truth

Richard Colvin, a Canadian civilian official who was head of the Kandahar reconstruction team in 2006-07, testified to a special committee of the House of Commons today that Canadian troops in Afghanistan routinely turned over prisoners to Afghan authorities who they knew would be tortured. As the Globe & Mail is noting tonight,

All of the prisoners Canada handed over to Afghanistan's notorious intelligence service in 2006-07 were tortured and many of them were likely innocent, a federal official has testified.

Intelligence officer Richard Colvin, a former diplomat in Afghanistan, testified before a special House of Commons committee Wednesday.

He told MPs that captives taken by Canadian troops and handed over to the Afghans were subjected to beatings and electric shocks in 2006 and early 2007.

“According to our information, the likelihood is that all the Afghans we handed over were tortured,” he said in his opening statement.

“For interrogators in Kandahar, it was standard operating procedure.”

Mr. Colvin was careful not to blame Canadian soldiers for carrying out the transfer orders, rather accusing the civilian and military leadership of creating the legal framework and policies that created the danger.

In a blistering indictment of Ottawa's handling of the situation, he said the Red Cross tried for three months in 2006 to warn the Canadian army in Kandahar about what was happening to prisoners, but no one would “even take their phone calls.”

Canada took a staggering amount of prisoners, roughly six times more than British forces and 20 times more than the Dutch, he told the committee.

The vast majority of them were not “high-value targets” such as Taliban commanders, Al-Qaeda operatives or bomb-makers, but rather ordinary Afghans, many with no connection to the insurgency.

The Harper government has been trying to avert this testimony for several months and both Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Defence Minister Peter MacKay have denied that the government was warned about the treatment of prisoners Canadians were handing over.

It is more than ironic that former journalist Peter Kent led the Conservative attack on Colvin today. It would appear to signal a government desperate to derail an issue that could (and should) undo most of the gains they have made recently.

Extremism and the IDF

While the world focuses on the vulnerability of a nuclear state to religious extremism in Pakistan, Haaretz today reports that members of an IDF battalion are publicly threatening not to remove settlers if ordered to do so, noting that

[a] number of Israel Defense Forces from the Nachshon Battalion on Monday hung a sign at their basis proclaiming that their unit would refuse to evacuate Israelis from West Bank settlements.

The move comes nearly a month after soldiers from the Shimshon Battalion waved banners with the same message during their graduation ceremony in Jerusalem. Two soldiers were expelled from their brigade and given 20 days in military prison following that incident.

Given that this is essentially mutinous behavior, it deserves to be taken extremely seriously. No one is suggesting that the Netanyahu government will not immediately curb such behavior. But as the influence of religious extremism grows within the IDF, there should be concern the the military of the regions only superpower harbors such extreme views.

Sullivan and Palin -- What Gives?

Until now I have not been sure what to make of Andrew Sullivan's seeming obsession with Sarah Palin. While he seems to become remarkably focused on a single topic from time to time, this focus or obsession usually proves to be defensible in the end.

Today's decision to stop all other work on his Daily Dish blog to focus on the Palin (non?) issue takes this to a new level. Yes, the former Alaska governor's trailer park populism has captured the imagination of the loonie right in the U.S.. And yes this element is, shockingly, not yet a spent force. But it is three years to the next presidential election and it seems difficult to conceive that by that time Palin will not look pathetic instead of powerful. Her fifteen minutes will have expired long ago.

Yes Palin and her ilk are frightening. And Sullivan would serve us well in turning a public spotlight on this seemingly delusional woman. But while her constituency is capable of making a lot of making a lot of noise, it is difficult to believe that in the end they will not prove impotent.

The End of Fatah/PA

In a move rejected by Hamas, former Israeli defence Minister Shaul Mofez made headlines yesterday calling for negotiations with the radical Palestinian organization following the immediate creation of a Palestinian state on 60% of west bank territory with negotiations to follow on the rest. An initiative like this is supported by a large majority of Israelis.

Whatever the outcome, this and the resignation of PA President Mahmoud Abbas signal that the PA and the Fatah movement it evolved from are a spent force. It is arguable that it never was a legitimate force in Palestinian politics but rather a creation of an Oslo peace process conceived in dishonesty and doomed to failure. And the legendary corruption of Arafat and his cronies certainly sealed its fate.

One can only be hopeful that negotiations with a Palestinian entity, no matter how distasteful, that has legitimacy with those it claims to represent will at last bear fruit.

Still Waiting for a Tune from the Fat Lady

Unemployment numbers released today in Canada and the U.S. indicate a worsening labour market. In one sense this is not surprising -- employment is always a lagging indicator. But this, combined with unprecedented productivity growth and worsening prospects for manufacturing are causes for concern in what otherwise appears to be a robust recovery.

More than anything, this would seem to indicate that it is not time to put on the fiscal or monetary brakes. As so many have noted, for all the noise about public sector debt, interest on government bonds shows little real concern; there is much more smoke than fire here. This remains an opportune time for public investment in crumbling infrastructure.

The Bank of Canada and the U.S. Fed have shown little interest in tightening monetary policy though the giveaways to the banks are being curtailed on both sides of the border. In short, main street is still in trouble and the role for government remains significant.

Of Anglicans and Agendas

I have been trying to puzzle out the recent decision by the Catholic Church to receive members of the Anglican confession (back?) into the Church. My initial impression was that this confirmed a Catholic agenda of homophobia and misogyny. And I still think this is the case. After centuries, it turns out that other issues just aren't all that important; if you oppose the ordination of women and support keeping gay men (and priests) firmly in the closet, welcome home.

Perhaps the one good to come out of this may be a large increase in the number of married priests. The question is will this finally undermine the requirement of a celibate priesthood? Along these lines, I found the following very touching story on Andrew Sullivan's blog this morning:

Now that the Catholic Church has decided married Anglican priests are welcome to join the fold so long as they're opposed to the ordination of women and gays, I find myself thinking about my sister's college friend in the early 1980s. He was a devoted Midwestern Catholic who very much wanted to become a parish priest, preferably in his native Indiana. He fell in love with my sister, who regarded him (in that deadly parlance of young women everywhere) as "just a friend."

The night before he was to be ordained, he called her. If there was even a hope she could one day see him as her husband, he would forgo his ordination. She told him the truth: no.

I've thought many times over the years about his painful position and the Church's ridiculous celibacy requirement (particularly given the history). How many young men could the Church recruit into the priesthood if it would acknowledge a simple truth: most human beings crave the sustaining and enriching bond of a partner? That question doesn't even touch on women and gay Catholics who feel the call to minister.

How does the Church in the 21st Century double down on "thanks but no thanks" to thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of Catholics who yearn to lead others in the Profession of Faith? What does the Anglican decision communicate to Catholics priests who sacrificed the the foundation of a loving, human companion for life?

Of course, what the Anglican offer communicates to female and gay Catholics who yearn to become clerics is clear.

My sister's friend never received his parish appointment. He was scholarly guy, so the Church sent him on to grad school, then law school, then to a PhD program. He has since the 90s been an ordained priest who serves as an attorney in the legal division of the Vatican. When my sister became engaged to marry nine years ago at age 40, he offered to fly back to the states to perform the ceremony. They were unable to coordinate their dates.

Over the past years, I have come to believe that fundamentalism of whatever stripe does not buttress faith, but corrodes it. It is almost always a profession of fear where faith is too weak to withstand challenges to it. It is not a sign of strength but of weakness.

Microsoft as IBM?

Daniel Lyons of Newsweek has an interesting article today on the performance of Microsoft over the past decade under Steve Ballmer. He refers to the period since 2000 as a lost decade. It is hard to disagree. Though Microsoft remains the giant of the tech world, it has become, Lyon notes

a bit of a joke. Yes, its Windows operating system still runs on more than 90 percent of PCs, and the Office application suite rules the desktop. But those are old markets. In new areas, Microsoft has stumbled. Apple created the iPod, and the iTunes store, and the iPhone. Google dominates Internet search, operates arguably the best e-mail system (Gmail) and represents a growing threat in mobile devices with Android. Amazon has grown to dominate online retail, then launched a thriving cloud-computing business (it rents out computer power and data storage), and capped it off with the Kindle e-reader. Microsoft's answers to these market leaders include the Zune music player, a dud; the Bing search engine, which is cool but won't kill Google; Windows Mobile, a smart-phone software platform that has been surpassed by others; and Azure, Microsoft's cloud-computing service, which arrives next year—four years behind Amazon.

For me, Vista was the end of the line. I understand the new Windows 7 is an excellent OS, but Microsoft was almost apologetic in its introduction; we screwed you with Vista and now we will sell you an expensive fix. But I left the office suite years ago. OpenOffice is a more than adequate substitute that is free.

Lyons is correct that MS will continue to dominate the OS and office suite markets (for those who insist on paying -- i.e. corporations). But this is not where the world is going. Apple will continue to capture the top end of Microsoft's market. But that market itself is shifting to other mobile devices (netbooks, smartphones etc.) where it has little presence. Like IBM, who ironically succumbed to new kid Microsoft a generation ago, it seems destined to control a market to no longer much matters.