Pure corporate propaganda II, the return? I have 6 weeks to take an internal training program about compliance with US export laws, boycott laws, and anti-boycott laws. "The company and all foreign affiliates must comply with export control and economic sanctions laws of the United States. All employees are required to comply with these laws without exception."

As a canadian working for a company registered in Denmark with a Danish employment contract, how can I be legally obliged to follow U.S.-specific export restrictions and laws? Neither Canada, the EU nor Denmark have export restrictions with Cuba. On what legal ground US laws should have precedence? This is confirmed by the European Commission which effectively neutralizes such extraterritorial laws.

The US anti-boycott law is even more controversial: it prohibits U.S. companies and their foreign affiliates from complying with economic boycotts in which the United States does not participate (The principal target being the Arab boycott of Israel). How can you ask an employee to break the laws of his country of residence? The EU is clearly against such laws: "It (the anti-boycott law) establishes the unwelcome principle that one country can dictate the foreign policy of others".

Already published on 6 Billion Brains, and an interesting read: America went to war to .. safeguard the American economy by returning the second largest oil reserve (Iraq) to trading oil in US dollars. Keeping the dollar as the exclusive oil currency is the only way "to protect the American way of life" in the most debt-ridden nation on earth.. (Not Oil, But Dollars vs. Euros, Geoffrey Heard, GlobalPolicy.org)

40 years in Politics for Jean Chrétien, Canada's Prime Minister. He is behind Canada's refusal to participate in a war without UN approval. "A question of principle: engaging Canada in a conflict cannot be decided based on economical considerations or friendship with another country."

Liberating Iraq.. for people passively absorbing mainstream news, one could almost feel content with the current situation: an easy win by the world's strongest army against .. well not much really, just the "weakest kid that nobody likes anyway". If defending oneself in Iraq is suicide and in the US unpatriotic, this doesn't make the whole issue any more justifiable. End result? All official reasons to go to war proved shaky: weapons of mass destruction? Where? Danger to the world? Far from it. Democracy? Far far far from it, both inside and outside America, both inside Iraq and on a world scale. So what is left? A religious war for petrol? A need to boost army morale to justify further army industry spending and further profits for the Bush cartel? A family sweet revenge for Bush padre? A stint at reviving patriotism in a country in disarray economically and above all, psychologically? All of the above, surely. Shame and sadness is all I can feel as a westerner.. Can't wait for that first lifeless and superficial shopping mall to open in Baghdad, it will be super! Let's get that global warming going!
yann.

Late evening Turkish humour! President BUSH went for a check up. His British doctor said: "Mr. President, I am your doctor; I am sorry to inform you, that you have a problem in your BRAIN. Your brain has two parts, one Left and one Right. The Left Part has nothing RIGHT in it, and the Right Part has nothing LEFT in it." :-)

This week the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) bared the only independent broadcasting voice in the Arab world, the television station Al Jazeera, because 'insufficiently supportive of America and its war in Iraq'. Suprisingly, other countries to ban Al Jazeera are .. Lybia, Tunisia and Jordan, because the station gives too much time to opposition leaders and Israeli officials. Too objective? For the Arab world to enjoy a free, democratic life, shouldn't Al Jazeera be encouraged instead? (New York Times)