A car bomb exploded on Saturday in Khaldiyah, a town west of Baghdad, killing three American soldiers and injuring six soldiers and several Iraqi civilians, the military said.

Two other American soldiers were killed earlier Saturday in a roadside bombing near Fallujah. The latest deaths raised to 512 the number of American service members who have died since the United States and its allies launched the Iraq war March 20. Most of the deaths have occurred since President Bush declared an end to major combat May 1.

Khaldiyah and Fallujah are part of the Sunni Triangle, the area in central Iraq where most of the anti-U.S. attacks by die-hard Saddam Hussein loyalists have taken place. The U.S. military says the attacks have reduced in number since Saddam's arrest on Dec. 13.

... Earlier Saturday, two American soldiers and four Iraqis were killed in separate bomb attacks, a day after two U.N. security experts arrived in the capital to study the possible return of the world body's international staff.

A second "blitz" inspection by federal drug and customs officials of medicines imported from Canada has found that nearly all of the almost 2,000 packages opened contained foreign versions of American pharmaceuticals that officials said might not be safe.

... The inspections, whose results are to be formally announced next week, form part of a coordinated push by the Bush administration to stop drug imports and defuse a budding confrontation between Washington and the states.

The city governments of Springfield, Mass., and Montgomery, Ala., are already helping buy drugs from Canada to save money for themselves and their employees. And officials in more than a dozen states and scores of towns, cities and counties have said that they may do the same.

The F.D.A. commissioner, Mark McClellan, said in an interview that the results of the inspections, which took place in November, demonstrate that drugs ordered from Canada are often manufactured in distant corners of the world. After an earlier survey, the agency announced in September that most of the imported drugs it inspected were counterfeit knockoffs. Neither round of inspections included any chemical tests on the drugs.

Asked if the pills reviewed in the latest survey were unsafe, Dr. McClellan answered, "We just don't know, because it's so hard to tell."

Governors and mayors leading the charge for Canadian drugs flatly dismiss Dr. McClellan's safety concerns. Many point out that even though the value of drug imports from Canada probably topped $700 million last year, the F.D.A. has yet to identify a single patient harmed by the trade. And they say that Health Canada, which regulates drugs in Canada, is just as rigorous as the F.D.A.

"This has little to do with health and safety and everything to do with the pharmaceutical industry," said Peter A. Clavelle, mayor of Burlington, Vt., who said he intended to have a Canadian drug purchase program up and running for city employees and their families by March 1.

Some state officials say a showdown is inevitable.

"This is all going to come to a head in 2004," said Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, a Republican. "Either the F.D.A. will sue somebody or throw someone in jail over this, or the pharmaceutical companies choke off supply, or the F.D.A. comes to their senses."

What will it mean in practice?

Arrest for smoking cannabis will be discouraged and most people caught in possession of the drug will face no legal action - although there will be possibility of a custodial sentence of up to two years if the police choose to proceed through the courts and obtain a summons. The maximum penalty will be reduced from five years in jail to two.

Is this decriminalisation?

No, cannabis use will still be a criminal offence. The penalty for possession with intent to supply - dealing - is to be cut from 14 years in jail to five, but - unlike straightforward possession - police will still make arrests.

Arrest is also likely for those who smoke the drug in "public view" or near playgrounds, schools, youth clubs and other places where children are likely to be.

As a junior German economics minister noted earlier this week, an exchange rate of $1.25 is cause for concern, anything above $1.30 means real problems. France's trade minister, François Loos, is already complaining that French firms are having to slash their margins to offset the impact of the greenback's fall from grace. "It is obvious this situation cannot last forever."

... So where does that leave the G7? The Americans will favour doing nothing, the Japanese are already doing all they can, while the eurozone has a problem whatever it does. Meanwhile, a key player, China, is not even a member. The upshot is that whatever the G7 does will be wrong. So it should take the least damaging option and do nothing. That would disappoint the markets and depress the dollar. Better that, however, than raising expectations which cannot be fulfilled.

Last year Japan's central bank shelled out $187bn propping up the sagging dollar. The pace is quickening. Earlier this month it spent $38bn in one week alone.

... Just to add a little icing to the cake, all those dollars that Japan is buying on the foreign exchange market are being spent on US government bonds - keeping US interest rates down and helping to finance Mr Bush's spending plans. America's Democrats could be forgiven for wondering if the BoJ is staffed by Republicans.

For the Japanese, America's laissez-faire approach to the dollar must be worrying. Already there are those within the Japanese economic establishment who think the BoJ's policy of buying time for Japan's exporters by buying dollars may have to be reconsidered later this year.

The snag, as analysts at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein noted yesterday, is that such comments "may suggest that Japan has not thought hard about plan B so far (ie, they intervene and hope it will get better at some point)".

The unfolding story of mad cow disease follows an all-too-familiar and damning pattern. A threat to public health is discovered, the affected industries and their allies in government respond with a public relations campaign, the evidence mounts and some reforms are implemented. This is followed by more evidence and more reforms. Yet nowhere in this scenario have the federal agencies charged with protecting public health—the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—taken proactive steps to remedy the situation. Rather, they have operated in the interests of huge agriculture and food lobbies.

... To all indications, and contrary to recent news reports, an American strain of BSE has long been circulating through the food chain. In 1985, a Stentsonville, Wisconsin, mink ranch was wiped out by transmissible mink encephalopathy. The diet of the mink consisted of 5 percent horsemeat and 95 percent “downer cows”—cows so lame they fall down and are unable to get up.

A 1989 Yale University study reported similar findings. Postmortem examination of 46 patients diagnosed with Alzheimer’s revealed that six (13 percent) actually had CJD. The Pittsburgh and Yale studies point to the possibility that some of the 4 million people in the United States suffering form Alzheimer’s may actually be infected with the agent that causes CJD. And that raises this question: Has an unrecognized from of BSE infected U.S. cattle and entered the human food chain?

What's more, there seems to be no shortage of domestic, as well as investment, capital. China has a remarkable savings rate of about 40% of household income, one of the highest in the world. Total household savings now amount to around 100% of GDP -- three times as much as the country's total annual import bill. Foreign direct investment –- though vast –- is dwarfed by domestic investment. More than 90% of capital formation comes from within China, as Chinese companies increasingly focus on their home market.

Still, most delegates in Davos believe the Chinese are getting a handle on these problems. The banking system is being recapitalized. Government officials are more aware of the problems caused by intellectual-property theft. The country is moving irrevocably toward a free-market economy. And although inflation moved up to 3.2% in December, Paliwal insists it isn't causing investors great concern.

"China may be different, and it may be complicated," says Chu. "But it's improving every day -- and the opportunities are too huge to overlook."

Back in the mid-70's, she earned $6 an hour in a Vermont factory that made plastic cigarette lighters and cases for Gillette razors. A quarter century later, she earned $6.80 an hour stocking shelves and working cash registers at a vast Wal-Mart superstore.

''And that's sad,'' she declared. ''I'm only making 80 cents more than I did more than 20 years ago.'' Or less, taking into account the rise in the cost of living.

Look at her. That's a proud American face, like lots of faces I've seen across the country. I know too many people who look down on people like her, who think they understand everything, but don't understand anything, about them. I know too many people who think their jobs and educational backgrounds and political views make them superior to everyone who isn't one of them. Who care in the abstract, but who wouldn't spend a single minute to find out what's going on with this one particular woman.

In my experience, people usually think their success is the result of their own hard work; unconsciously they extrapolate that poverty must result from laziness. But look around: the people whose work is hardest often make the lowest wage.

The euro climbed to a peak of $1.2775 on Friday from a low of $1.2335 on Monday, before profit-taking took it back to $1.2610.

... "The main debate appears to be whether we make new euro-dollar highs before or after these two events," said Paul Bednarczyk at 4Cast economic consultancy.

... The pound reached $1.8522 before easing to $1.821.

The dollar's slide against the yen was pronounced after a mid-week rally faded rapidly. A surprise easing of monetary policy by the Bank of Japan on Tuesday had helped the dollar to Y107.87 - a five-week high. But yen bulls took support from data showing very strong portfolio inflows into Japan in spite of suspected intervention by the BoJ, and the dollar slid to Y105.76 on Friday.

A leading Hong Kong businessman with extensive interests in China on Thursday suggested that Beijing might decide to allow the renminbi to appreciate before the end of the year.

Victor Chu, chairman of First Eastern Investment Group, said the country's currency was set for long-term appreciation and that there was a "nine-month window" in which to invest in Chinese assets.

"The time to go into China is now," he said, adding that in 2004 - the year of the monkey in the Chinese calendar - "Chinese assets will be good monkey business."

Mr Chu said the timing of a change in currency policy was still an open question, but that once China made up its mind, it did it "very quickly."

He believed the change would be achieved by pegging the renminbi against a "basket" of several currencies or by widening the bands within which the Chinese currency fluctuates.

When millions of families are suffering in the midst of what is billed as a robust recovery, we should start looking closely at the possibility that the system itself is breaking down.

This goes far beyond the issue of employment. The Times ran a front-page article on Wednesday about Gov. George Pataki's proposed state budget. The ominous subheadline read: "Plan Relies on Gambling to Aid Poorest Schools."

I wrote a story last week about the tens of thousands of low-income youngsters in Florida who are eligible for a children's health insurance program but are being put on waiting lists. State officials say they can't afford to insure the kids now. In California, an estimated 300,000 eligible children are being shunted to similar waiting lists. No one knows when they might get coverage.

President Bush got at least one thing right on Tuesday night, when he said, "Americans are proving once again to be the hardest-working people in the world." Those who are fortunate enough to be employed often have to work long hours, or string together two and three jobs to make ends meet. They are working harder and harder just to keep from falling behind.

In his "Two Americas" speech, Senator Edwards says there is: "One America that does the work, another America that reaps the reward. One America that pays the taxes, another America that gets the tax breaks. . . . One America — middle-class America — whose needs Washington has long forgotten. Another America — narrow-interest America — whose every wish is Washington's command."

In January 2003 thousands of us from across the world gathered in Porto Alegre in Brazil and declared--reiterated--that "Another World Is Possible." A few thousand miles north, in Washington, George W. Bush and his aides were thinking the same thing.

Our project was the World Social Forum. Theirs--to further what many call the Project for the New American Century.

In the great cities of Europe and America, where a few years ago these things would only have been whispered, now people are openly talking about the good side of imperialism and the need for a strong empire to police an unruly world. The new missionaries want order at the cost of justice. Discipline at the cost of dignity. And ascendancy at any price. Occasionally some of us are invited to "debate" the issue on "neutral" platforms provided by the corporate media. Debating imperialism is a bit like debating the pros and cons of rape. What can we say? That we really miss it?

In any case, New Imperialism is already upon us. It's a remodeled, streamlined version of what we once knew. For the first time in history, a single empire with an arsenal of weapons that could obliterate the world in an afternoon has complete, unipolar, economic and military hegemony. It uses different weapons to break open different markets. There isn't a country on God's earth that is not caught in the cross-hairs of the American cruise missile and the IMF checkbook. Argentina's the model if you want to be the poster boy of neoliberal capitalism, Iraq if you're the black sheep. Poor countries that are geopolitically of strategic value to Empire, or have a "market" of any size, or infrastructure that can be privatized, or, God forbid, natural resources of value--oil, gold, diamonds, cobalt, coal--must do as they're told or become military targets. Those with the greatest reserves of natural wealth are most at risk. Unless they surrender their resources willingly to the corporate machine, civil unrest will be fomented or war will be waged.

In this new age of empire, when nothing is as it appears to be, executives of concerned companies are allowed to influence foreign policy decisions. The Center for Public Integrity in Washington found that at least nine out of the thirty members of the Bush Administration's Defense Policy Board were connected to companies that were awarded military contracts for $76 billion between 2001 and 2002. George Shultz, former Secretary of State, was chairman of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. He is also on the board of directors of the Bechtel Group. When asked about a conflict of interest in the case of war in Iraq he said, "I don't know that Bechtel would particularly benefit from it. But if there's work to be done, Bechtel is the type of company that could do it. But nobody looks at it as something you benefit from." In April 2003, Bechtel signed a $680 million contract for reconstruction.

This brutal blueprint has been used over and over again across Latin America, in Africa and in Central and Southeast Asia. It has cost millions of lives. It goes without saying that every war Empire wages becomes a Just War. This, in large part, is due to the role of the corporate media. It's important to understand that the corporate media don't just support the neoliberal project. They are the neoliberal project. This is not a moral position they have chosen to take; it's structural. It's intrinsic to the economics of how the mass media work.

No individual nation can stand up to the project of corporate globalization on its own. Time and again we have seen that when it comes to the neoliberal project, the heroes of our times are suddenly diminished. Extraordinary, charismatic men, giants in the opposition, when they seize power and become heads of state, are rendered powerless on the global stage. I'm thinking here of President Lula of Brazil. Lula was the hero of the World Social Forum last year. This year he's busy implementing IMF guidelines, reducing pension benefits and purging radicals from the Workers' Party. I'm thinking also of the former president of South Africa, Nelson Mandela. Within two years of taking office in 1994, his government genuflected with hardly a caveat to the Market God. It instituted a massive program of privatization and structural adjustment that has left millions of people homeless, jobless and without water and electricity.

Why does this happen? There's little point in beating our breasts and feeling betrayed. Lula and Mandela are, by any reckoning, magnificent men. But the moment they cross the floor from the opposition into government they become hostage to a spectrum of threats--most malevolent among them the threat of capital flight, which can destroy any government overnight. To imagine that a leader's personal charisma and a c.v. of struggle will dent the corporate cartel is to have no understanding of how capitalism works or, for that matter, how power works. Radical change cannot be negotiated by governments; it can only be enforced by people.

So if we are against imperialism, shall we agree that we are against the US occupation and that we believe the United States must withdraw from Iraq and pay reparations to the Iraqi people for the damage that the war has inflicted?

How do we begin to mount our resistance? Let's start with something really small. The issue is not about supporting the resistance in Iraq against the occupation or discussing who exactly constitutes the resistance. (Are they old killer Baathists, are they Islamic fundamentalists?)

We have to become the global resistance to the occupation.

Our resistance has to begin with a refusal to accept the legitimacy of the US occupation of Iraq. It means acting to make it materially impossible for Empire to achieve its aims. It means soldiers should refuse to fight, reservists should refuse to serve, workers should refuse to load ships and aircraft with weapons. It certainly means that in countries like India and Pakistan we must block the US government's plans to have Indian and Pakistani soldiers sent to Iraq to clean up after them.

I suggest we choose by some means two of the major corporations that are profiting from the destruction of Iraq. We could then list every project they are involved in. We could locate their offices in every city and every country across the world. We could go after them. We could shut them down. It's a question of bringing our collective wisdom and experience of past struggles to bear on a single target. It's a question of the desire to win.

The Project for the New American Century seeks to perpetuate inequity and establish American hegemony at any price, even if it's apocalyptic. The World Social Forum demands justice and survival.

For these reasons, we must consider ourselves at war.

"I'm going to submit a budget to Congress next month which will include spending of $30 billion for homeland security, that's more than $30 billion — almost three times the amount that we were spending prior to Sept. 11, 2001," Mr. Bush told an audience at the New Mexico Military Institute in Roswell.

Specifics of Mr. Bush's proposals were not immediately available, and it is possible that they are still being worked on in the White House. But he said he envisioned an increase of almost 10 percent on homeland security throughout the government.

"We understand our obligation in Washington," Mr. Bush said. "Our obligation is never to forget what happened on September the 11th. And our obligation is to support the homeland security people, those on the front lines, to prepare for a potential threat."

The president used those remarks to call for Congressional renewal of legislation, passed soon after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that broadens law enforcement's surveillance powers and makes it easier for the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency to share information.

Critics of the legislation, called the Patriot Act by its supporters, have expressed fears that it could erode civil liberties, and that information-sharing by the C.I.A. and F.B.I.

CLN (www.clnnlc.org) is a new interfaith movement of moderate and progressive clergy who are pursuing greater political participation as an expression of an inclusive faith and a religious social conscience.

"Just as the prophet Jeremiah spoke truth to power in ancient Judah, we find ourselves compelled, out of a sense of faith and patriotism, to give voice to our concerns about the integrity and well-being of our country.

"It comes as no surprise to us that George Bush should find the state of the union so healthy. For himself and those he associates with, times have surely never been better. That is because, in spiritual terms, his Administration has been one that has coddled the wealthy and catered to the powerful at the expense of desperate and even destitute people. While this Administration seeks to aggrandize the corporation and the profiteer, millions of God's children are plagued by unmet needs: the struggle to find jobs, to shelter their families, to educate their children, and to heal their illnesses.

"We reject domestic economic policies that favor the advantaged and pander to greed. The pursuit of such policies is irreconcilable with spiritual commitments and biblical convictions. But worse, to wrap these policies in a false cloak of 'compassion' moves into the arena of cynicism and public hypocrisy.

"Tonight, President Bush also defended - and even celebrated - his violent and unnecessary war in Iraq, which has brought so much human suffering to Americans and Iraqis alike. We share the President's goal of security for all our people. But faith teaches that security realized through conquest is no security at all. Only policies that affirm human dignity, provide for basic human needs, and create global partnerships can lay fair claim to having enhanced security for us and for all nations.

"Furthermore, it is unconscionable that public resources can be found to tear down and rebuild an entire society abroad, but when it comes to pressing human priorities here in our own communities, the nation's coffers have mysteriously run dry."

Go ahead, George, and lie to me. Lie to my dog. Lie to my sister. But don't you ever lie to my kids.

Deep into your State of the Siege lecture tonight, long after sensible adults had turned off the tube or kicked in the screen, you came after our children. "By passing the No Child Left Behind Act," you said, "We are regularly testing every child ... and making sure they have better options when schools are not performing."

You said it ... and then that little tongue came out; that weird way you stick your tongue out between your lips like the little kid who knows he's fibbing. Like a snake licking a rat. I saw that snakey tongue dart out and I thought, "He knows."

And what you know, Mr. Bush, is this: you've ordered this testing to hunt down, identify and target for destruction the hopes of millions of children you find too expensive, too heavy a burden, to educate.

Here's how No Child Left Behind and your tests work in the classrooms of Houston and Chicago. Millions of 8 year olds are given lists of words and phrases. They are graded, like USDA beef: some prime, some OK, many failed.

Once the kids are stamped and sorted, the parents of the marked children ask for you to fill your tantalizing promise, to "make sure they have better options when schools are not performing."

But there is no "better option," is there, Mr. Bush? Where's the money for the better schools to take in the kids getting crushed in cash-poor districts? Where's the open door to the suburban campuses with the big green lawns for the dark kids with the test-score mark of Cain.

And if I bring up the race of the kids with the low score, don't get all snippy with me, telling me your program is color blind. We know the color of the kids left behind; and it's not the color of the kids you went to school with at Philips Andover Academy.

You know and I know that the testing is a con. There is no "better option" at the other end. The cash went to the end the inheritance tax, that special program to give every millionaire's son another million.

But you'll tell me, you took tests as a youth. I know you did. And you scored on the Air Guard flight test 25 out of 100, one point above too dumb to fly. But you zoomed past the other would-be flyboys. They were stamped, "Ready for 'Nam." And you took a test to get into Yale. And though your pet rock scored a wee bit higher than you, your grandpa on the Yale board provided the "better option" which got you in.

Here in New York City, your educational Taliban, led by Republican Mayor Bloomberg, had issued an edict to test the third-graders. Winnow out the chaff and throw them back, exactly where they started, to repeat the same failed program another year. In other words, the core edict of No Child Left Behind is that failing children will be left behind another year. And another year and another year.

You know and I know that this is not an educational opportunity program - because you offer no opportunities, no hope, no plan, no funding. Rather, it is the new Republican social Darwinism, educational eugenics: Identify the nation's loser-class early on. Trap them, then train them cheap. The system will provide the new worker drones that will clean the toilets at the Yale alumni club, to punch the McDonald's cash registers color-coded for illiterates, to pamper the winner-class on the higher floors of the new service economy order.

So far, observation of a few dozen people in their work environments has revealed a hodgepodge of approaches to organizing pages, and bookmarking them is not at the top of the list.

Instead, some people try to keep track of Web sites by sending themselves an e-mail message with the link and a note of why it might be useful. Others print pages or use sticky notes. Some people, the researchers found, make no attempt to save a page, counting on being able to find it again with a search engine.

When the researchers looked at how people returned to sites they had visited before, they discovered that context made all the difference. When subjects in their study had the chance to describe a site in their own words and were given the description six months later, they had little trouble finding the site again. Yet in today's typical bookmark applications, users cannot annotate sites they save.

Standard & Poor's, the US rating agency, yesterday became the latest international financial institution to receive a visit from Italian police as Parmalat prosecutors cast wider for evidence into who knew what about the true state of the food giant's finances before its spectacular collapse.

S&P stressed that magistrates had told the ratings agency that it was not under official investigation, adding that the company "obviously welcomed" the chance to co-operate with magistrates. A London-based spokeswoman reiterated that S&P had been the victim of an "apparently massive fraud" by Parmalat's former managers, based on "detailed, false information" she claimed they had supplied the agency.

S&P kept an investment grade rating for the bankrupt food multinational's debt until December, when the apparent fraud at Parmalat exploded into the open. "The information on which we based the ratings was totally untrue," the spokeswoman said.

The police search of S&P's Milan offices came a day after magistrates also seized documents from Morgan Stanley, the US investment bank, and Nextra, the fund management arm of Banca Intesa, Italy's biggest bank.

The euro continued its upward march against the dollar on Thursday after recent comments from European officials eased the market's concerns about the possitbility of direct intervention from the European Central Bank.

Following last week's sharp correction, which took the dollar to a one-month high against the euro amid growing concerns that the ECB might intervene, the language used by European finance ministers and central bank members was more defensive this week.

The monthly ECB bulletin, published on Thursday morning, the bank again expressed concern about about "excessive" exchange rate moves, but the central bank said it would "continue to monitor carefully all developments" in the market.

The absence of any mentioning of direct action left traders with the view that the ECB was not about to intervene in the market.

Meanwhile, in Davos, Jean-Philippe Cotis, the chief economist of the OECD, said a further rise in the euro could force the ECB to cut interest rates. The comments took the euro off its intraday highs, but it remained firmly above Wednesday's levels.

After rising to $1.2752 in European morning trade the single currency stood at $1.2723 in early afternoon, up from $1.262 in New York on Wednesday. The euro has risen four cents since Monday.

A day after President Bush vowed to submit an austere budget and halve the deficit in five years, conservatives in his own party said on Wednesday that they were not satisfied and stepped up their campaign to force the White House and Republican leaders on Capitol Hill to do more to hold down the growth of government spending.

Forty Republican House members gathered to hash out how to press Mr. Bush and the Congressional leadership to deal with spending increases that they say are running out of control and a deficit that is reaching alarming proportions.

Their discomfort has been echoed in recent weeks by conservative researchers and commentators who support Mr. Bush on most issues. Among them are the Heritage Foundation, the Club for Growth, a political action committee, and The Wall Street Journal's editorial page.

... "The Republican party has long been the party of small government," an aide to a senior Republican senator said, "but the era of small government has ended for the Republican Party."

Referring to Mr. Bush's call on Tuesday night for athletes to stop using performance-enhancing drugs, the aide said, "Unfortunately, the president's ban on steroids doesn't apply to the appropriators."

But an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll this month found that Democrats had nearly caught up with Republicans on the question of which party does a better job of controlling government spending. The poll found that 33 percent of respondents said Republicans did a better job, with Democrats at 31 percent.

Scottish business entered the new year on a roll and the trend looks set to continue, with optimism and orders improving, Scottish Chambers of Commerce said yesterday.

SCC director Bob Leitch made the upbeat prognosis as he unveiled the latest quarterly study of the Scottish economy. It showed a sharp upturn in orders and optimism in manufacturing, where a deep recession has dragged down the economy since 2001.

The report showed that tourism, retail, wholesale and construction had also performed well.

Leitch acknowledged that the financial services sector is enduring a difficult start to 2004. But he added:

"We’ve seen some major company announcements in the past few months [such as Abbey’s shift of jobs to Glasgow] that five to ten years ago would have caused a crisis. Nowadays, Scottish business has learned to live with these changes as a way of life.

"People are prepared to upskill, train, adapt and move on. It’s an amazing achievement in such a short space of time."

Of the survey generally, Leitch said: "It’s good news across the board. All too often in the past couple of years, this report has been disappointing. Now we’re very upbeat, and I think with good reason."

If believed, statistics cited in "Manic-Depressive Illness and Creativity," an article from the January, 1995 issue of Scientific American, establish that the incidence of clinical depression among writers and artists may be as much as ten times greater than it is in the general population.

Blair is now left crossing his fingers or praying for a US president who is against Kyoto, who has been bad on trade issues, who remains a "big oil" hawk, who despises the EU, who has implemented massive tax cuts for the rich and who has channelled spending into another huge military build-up. For all the fine words, his impact on the Middle East peace process has been zero. With the possible exception of a programme to fight Aids in Africa, there is no progressive issue in the world where he isn't on the wrong side.

And if Blair tries to turn to European allies to mitigate this, where can he now look? To the plucky Poles? To Berlusconi? As the French and Germans wonder how best to deepen the EU after the collapse of the constitutional talks, they are hardly thinking about the future of the third way. When it comes to the great question of Europe's future, they are not on the same side as Tony Blair, with his pound sterling and his closeness to Bush.

Blair himself, of course, has plenty of good personal relationships with a host of other leaders - Putin and Chirac among them. He is now a survivor in the international power game, who has outlasted every obvious rival. He has become an adept negotiator and player in summits and is respected by other leaders even when they don't agree with much that he says.

That doesn't alter the fact that after six years of trying to be at the centre of world politics, New Labour looks isolated. Blair may have wanted to be a bridge between the US and Europe, but the American superpower has gone its own way, and Europe has recoiled. Instead of being at the cutting edge, surrounded by friends and allies, Blair's third way suddenly looks like a fusty anomaly. And he would be lonelier still if the Democrats returned to power in Washington. It is more than odd, it is extraordinary, that the Democrats' dream has become Blair's nightmare.

"Mr Bush was not the only politician on Capitol Hill Tuesday night who made his views clear. As the president began his speech, a camera focused on Senator Ted Kennedy, quite distinctly rolling his eyes in contempt of the president's words. Whatever their political differences, a lawmaker of Mr Kennedy's stature owes to the president - any president - a respectful hearing free of juvenile eye-rolling.

On Monday, January 19, the finalists were announced and voting is open again to choose the winners. Voting will close at 10:00 PM EST on Saturday, January 31. The winners will be posted on Monday, March 15.

The Weblog Awards™ ceremony will be held at the South by Southwest Interactive Festival for the second time in Austin, Texas, USA on Monday, March 15 at 12:30 PM. Webloggers including previous winners and prize donators will present the certificates and prizes to those present.

Those who aren't attending may join the excitement on IRC, in #BlogIRC on irc.turlyming.com:6667. Winners will be announced live and a play-by-play of the ceremony will be given.

"Murder, though it hath no tongue, will speak with most miraculous organ." -- Shakespeare, "Hamlet"

It's all out in the open now. The fact that the president of the United States and his top advisers deliberately concocted a false case for an illegal and unnecessary war -- in plain terms, that they committed cold-blooded, premeditated mass murder -- was confirmed last week by the most impeccable mainstream sources: George W. Bush's own Cabinet officials, speaking for the record in America's major media.

Remarkably, the "extremist views" and "paranoia" of the "lunatic fringe" -- those "Bush-bashers" who for months proclaimed that the Regime's lust to conquer Iraq was part of a long-planned scheme of looting and dominance that had nothing to do with September 11, 2001 or defending America from terror -- are now issuing from the mouths of the Regime's inner circle.

Secretary of State Colin Powell led the way. Powell, a pathetic bagman who began his career with a botched job of whitewashing war crimes in Vietnam (the My Lai massacre) and is ending it with a botched job of whitewashing war crimes in Iraq, admitted that there was no evidence of any past collusion between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, The New York Times reports. Although the "very real" threat of Saddam passing on his vast arsenal of technodeath to Osama bin Laden was the most effective tool in the Regime's "sales program" for war, resonating viscerally with an American public still reeling from September 11, the genial general -- who loudly trumpeted this "threat" at the UN -- now says it was never anything more than a worrisome "possibility" without any basis in fact.

As well he might. For even had the mythical alliance of Bush bogeymen actually existed, that "vast arsenal of technodeath" did not. There were no Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to pass on; there were not even any active programs to develop WMD. This has long been obvious from reading between the lines of the reports of Bush's own weapon-hunters, but it was finally made manifest in an extraordinary report last week in The Washington Post.

There, leaders of Bush's CIA-directed weapons search team admitted publicly that Iraq's WMD program was shattered in the first Gulf War -- 13 years ago -- and its remnants completely dismantled in 1995. This was, of course, long-known (and oft-reported by "Bush-bashers") before the latest war -- indeed, it was even reported in the mainstream media years ago, which is where the paranoiacs on the lunatic fringe found it, in easily accessible archives and Congressional reports. But it was conveniently forgotten in the profitable, corporate-driven war fever before the invasion. Now, after the murder of thousands of innocent people, including almost 500 American soldiers, the truth re-emerges -- again from the mouths of Bush's own hirelings.

Then came the revelations of Paul O'Neill, Bush's treasury secretary until December 2002. In a nationally televised interview, O'Neill confirmed that Bush and his minions were planning the invasion of Iraq from the moment they took office -- months before 9-11. "[It was] the president saying, 'Go find me a way to do this,'" said O'Neill, whose eye-openers are featured in a new book by Ron Suskind of the archconservative Wall Street Journal.

Although the Regime's hatchet men are now desperately downplaying O'Neill's importance, questioning his sanity, even threatening to prosecute him, he was very much in the leadership loop: a member of the powerful National Security Council, privy to top-secret intelligence. He says he never saw "anything in the intelligence that I would characterize as real evidence" of an Iraqi threat -- just a muddy stream of "assertions and illusions." Suskind also unearthed early Bushist memos detailing the predators' postwar designs for Iraq, including extensive military occupation and -- in March 2001 -- plans for parceling out Iraq's oil wealth to favored corporations and foreign allies, CBSNews.com reports.

Again, this is old news for lunatic fringers. As often reported here, the Cheney-Rumsfeld pressure group, Project for the New American Century, long ago outlined its program for America's "full spectrum dominance" over the globe, with the planting of a "military footprint" throughout oil-rich Central Asia and the Middle East. Indeed, conquering Iraq was an imperative that "transcended the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein," said PNAC; whether he was there or not, whether the Iraqi people needed "liberating" or not, the invasion would go forward. PNAC, whose members now fill the Regime's upper ranks, also yearned openly for a "new Pearl Harbor," a devastating sneak attack that would "catalyze" public support for the group's "revolutionary transformation" of American society into a militarized aggressor state.

This is no "conspiracy theory." PNAC's maniacal manifesto was published in broad daylight in September 2000 -- but was ignored by that same corporatized American media that later proved so helpfully amnesiac after the "new Pearl Harbor" was launched by the CIA's old allies from the Afghan jihad, led by a scion of the Bush family's business partners, the bin Ladens. (This long-documented family connection was detailed by Republican strategist and former Nixon aide Kevin Phillips in the Los Angeles Times last week -- yet another belated mainstreaming of the "lunatic fringe.")

Thus the Regime's shifting rationales for war -- terror threats, WMD, concern for the Iraqi people -- have now been publicly exposed, by the Bushists themselves as nothing more than lies, flimsy excuses to commit murder for power and gain. Where, then, is the "fringe," that blighted place beyond the pale of reason and human decency?

Who, then, are the lunatics?

Annotations:

"Dead Cities: And Other Tales," -- Mike Davis, New Press Paperback, October 2003.

"Iraq's Arsenal Was Only on Paper," -- Washington Post, Jan. 6, 2004.

"Powell Admits No Hard Proof Linking Iraq to al Qaeda," -- New York Times, Jan. 9, 2004.

"Saddam Ouster Planned in Early 2001," -- CBSNews.com, Jan. 9, 2004.

"The Barreling Bushes," -- Los Angeles Times, Jan. 11, 2004.

"The Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush," -- Kevin Phillips interview, Buzzflash.com, Jan. 4, 2004.

"Rebuilding America's Defenses," -- Project for the New American Century, September 2000.

"Behind Colin Powell's Legend: Vietnam Lessons," -- Consortiumnews.com, Dec. 17, 2000.

"Behind Colin Powell's Legend: Saving Ronald Reagan," -- Consortiumnews.com, Dec. 20, 2000.

"Bush Decided to Remove Saddam 'On Day One,' -- The Guardian, Jan. 12, 2004.

"Bush Was Demanding Excuse to Invade Iraq in January 2001," -- The Independent, Jan. 12, 2004.

"White House Distorted Iraq Threat," -- Financial Times, Jan. 7, 2004.

"US Withdraws a Team of Weapons Hunters From Iraq," -- New York Times, Jan. 8, 2004.

"Mounting Evidence Shows Iraq Didn't Have WMD," -- Boston Globe, Jan. 9, 2004.

"Bush and Democracy Hypocrisy," -- Consortiumnews.com, Jan. 5, 2004.

"US to Saddam: WMD A-OK," -- The Nation, Dec. 30, 2003.

"Study by Army War College Criticizes Terror War's Scope," -- Washington Post, Jan. 11, 2004.

On Wednesday our darling Iraqi Puppet Council decided that secular Iraqi family law would no longer be secular- it is now going to be according to Islamic Shari'a. Shari'a is Islamic law, whether from the Quran or quotes of the Prophet or interpretations of modern Islamic law by clerics and people who have dedicated their lives to studying Islam.

The news has barely been covered by Western or even Arab media and Iraqi media certainly aren't covering it. It is too much to ask of Al-Iraqiya to debate or cover a topic like this one- it would obviously conflict with the Egyptian soap operas and songs. This latest decision is going to be catastrophic for females- we're going backwards.

Don't get me wrong- pure Islamic law according to the Quran and the Prophet gives women certain unalterable, nonnegotiable rights. The problem arises when certain clerics decide to do their own interpretations of these laws (and just about *anyone* can make themselves a cleric these days). The bigger problem is that Shari'a may be drastically different from one cleric to another. There are actually fundamental differences in Shari'a between the different Islamic factions or 'methahib'. Even in the same methahib, there are dozens of different clerics who may have opposing opinions. This is going to mean more chaos than we already have to deal with. We've come to expect chaos in the streets… but chaos in the courts and judicial system too?!

This is completely unfair to women specifically. Under the Iraqi constitution, men and women are equal. Under our past secular family law (which has been in practice since the '50s) women had unalterable divorce, marriage, inheritance, custody, and alimony rights. All of this is going to change.

(read more)

... My head has been spinning these last few days with decision No. 173 on changing Family Law to Shari'a. I've been darkly mulling over the endless possibilities. I'm not the only one- everyone I talk to is shaking their head in dismay. How is this happening? How are we caving in to fundamentalism?

Talabani was saying that the decision wasn't taken or passed because it didn't get enough votes by the GC, but all the signs say that the decision was made and might be implemented as soon as they get Bremer's signature. Nisreen Barwari, the only female minister on the cabinet, was out demonstrating with several of the women's rights parties a few days ago against the decision. Christopher Allbritton over at Back to Iraq 3.0 has written something on the subject and so has the Washington Post.

The question is, even if the personal status laws aren't going to be subjected to change now- immediately- what about the future? What does that say about 6 months from now when Bremer's signature isn't necessary?

(read more)

Women are outraged… this is going to open new doors for repression in the most advanced country on women's rights in the Arab world! Men are also against this (although they certainly have the upper-hand in the situation) because it's going to mean more confusion and conflict all around.

What happens when all the clerics agree that a hijab isn't 'preferred' but necessary? According to this new change in the 'ahwal shakhsiya' laws or 'personal circumstances' laws, all women will have to cover their heads and according to Shari'a, if a woman's husband decides that she can't continue her education or work, she'll have to remain a house-wife.

Please don't misunderstand- any oppression to women isn't a reflection on Islam. It's a reflection on certain narrow minds, ignorance and the politicization of religion. Islam is a progressive religion and no religion is clearer on the rights of women- it came during a time when women had no rights at all. During the sanctions and all the instability, we used to hear fantastic stories about certain Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, and Qatar, to name a few. We heard about their luxurious lifestyles- the high monthly wages, the elegant cars, sprawling homes and malls… and while I always wanted to visit, I never once remember yearning to live there or even feeling envy. When I analyzed my feelings, it always led back to the fact that I cherished the rights I had as an Iraqi Muslim woman. During the hard times, it was always a comfort that I could drive, learn, work for equal pay, dress the way I wanted and practice Islam according to my values and beliefs, without worrying whether I was too devout or not devout enough.

I usually ignore the emails I receive telling me to 'embrace' my new-found freedom and be happy that the circumstances of all Iraqi women are going to 'improve drastically' from what we had before. They quote Bush (which in itself speaks volumes) saying things about how repressed the Iraqi women were and how, now, they are going to be able to live free lives.

The people who write those emails often lob Iraq together with Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan and I shake my head at their ignorance but think to myself, "Well, they really need to believe their country has the best of intentions- I won't burst their bubble." But I'm telling everyone now- if I get any more emails about how free and liberated the Iraqi women are *now* thanks to America, they can expect a very nasty answer.

The troubled dollar, stalled trade talks and the Iraq war are top of the agenda as world leaders arrive in Davos for the annual World Economic Forum.

... "Partnering for Prosperity and Security" is this year's theme for the World Economic Forum (WEF), and it is probably more an expression of hope than a description of fact.

The forum's five-day agenda is a reflection of all the world's troubles: the aftermath of the Iraq war; the war on terror; the shaky recovery in the global economy; transatlantic tensions over trade and security; global warming; corporate governance and many others.

Debating the issues will be company bosses like Michael Dell, Bill Gates, Cisco's John Chambers, Sony's Noguyuki Idei and Sir Martin Sorrell of advertising giant WPP.

UN secretary general Kofi Annan, US attorney general John Ashcroft, Iraq administrator Paul Bremer, presidents like Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf and Nigeria's Olusegun Obasanjo and former US president Bill Clinton are among the politicians coming to Davos.

Campaigners come from organisations as diverse as the World Wide Fund for Nature, poverty action group Oxfam and the African Women's Development Fund.

... US commerce secretary Donald Evans, European Central Bank president Jean-Claude Trichet, and Wolfgang Clement and Heizo Takenaka - the economy ministers of Germany and Japan respectively - are expected to discuss the sharp decline of the US dollar over the past year.

And one of the sessions in Davos will discuss "what if the dollar fell by an additional 20%", although none of the government officials is scheduled to speak at the event.