Friday, May 25, 2007

Law and Disorder: Mumia, Cuban Five

Michael Ratner gave the intro for the show. I'm not remembering that happening before but maybe I didn't pay attention before? He sketched out what the segments were going to cover and then it was time for the theme and usual introductions.

I want to note Dalia Hashad first off. She and Ratner were speaking at the beginning. He explained that she's now in DC (Amnesty International). They were discussing the Democrats selling out on the Constitution and habeas corpus and how the most Dems would offer was if Ratner could get support on the Armed Service Committee, they might vote for it. They goe the votes but the Dems at large didn't re was no support for it. Dems sold out. That could be a headline but what would be the point in running the same headline day after day?

June 26th day of action sponsored by Amnesty. This will be in DC but if you can't be there, it will kick off a week of action across the country.

Dalia said, "People don't have the sense in this country really where we're heading. What this means is that the administration is really trying to reign in the ability to pick up anybody off the street, detain them, never let them see a court, disappear forever from your family, your friends, I mean this particularly targets people who are non-citizens but they've really tried to extend this power to citizens, to all people -- they want the power to put everyone in jail without ever letting them have a day in court just based on the president's say so which is an extremely frightening thing." Then she and Michael began talking about Jose Padilla and everything that's been done to him, all the laws broken, remember, he is a citizen. He could be you, could be me, could be 'we.' (Dad's CDs were in the car and C.I. put on the Beatles. Hence "could be you, could be me, could be we." My nod to John Lennon. :D)

Now here's my gripe. This event/action needs to be promoted but go to Amnesty's homepage and you're instead taken to their report. It's an important report but I think you can do a link on the main page. If you're trying to get people aware of this week of action and it's next month (and May's almost over), you need to see that right away. You need to see it period. I've just surfed their website and can't find it. I called Ava and she said, "It's not up?" She looked herself and then told me to go to the ACLU where she could find information on it.

I'm posting it in full (thanks to Ava for finding something on it) including links:

Day of Action to Restore Law and Justice - June 26, 2007
This summer, the ACLU is calling on all its members and concerned citizens from across the country, to storm Washington, D.C. in a Day of Action, to tell Congress to restore habeas corpus and all our constitutional rights.
The Bush administration has trampled the Constitution and abandoned American values and the rule of law -- and so far Congress has failed to act. We're at a turning point, and Americans must take action to restore habeas, end government-sponsored torture, and uphold the fairness and freedom that define us.
On June 26, 2007 you can join thousands of activists for a rally, a public demonstration and an opportunity to meet face-to-face with lawmakers. With your help, we will send our message directly to Congress: We demand that they restore all the rights and freedoms lost over the last six years, particularly the due process rights stripped by the Military Commissions Act 2006.
In the words of ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero, "We have always been proud that America stands for the values of due process and fairness, but those values were severely damaged when President Bush signed the Military Commissions Act. Habeas must be restored and the ACLU will keep the pressure on Congress to remedy this injustice. Our nation's reputation and principles are on the line."
The ACLU is joining with Amnesty International, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the National Religious Campaign Against Torture and other groups in this historic Day of Action. Please add your presence and your voice to the effort, and urge friends, family and colleagues to do the same.
Find out how to get involved at www.juneaction.org. See you in D.C. this summer!
JOIN US IN D.C. Sign up to be part of the event in D.C. >>
ADD YOUR VOICE Sign the petition to Restore Our Constitutional Rights >>
TELL FRIENDS Ask friends to join us on June 26th and sign the petition >>
LEARN MORE The Military Commissions Act and the Threat to Habeas Corpus >>

Okay, C.I. had included Dalia's comments about the war czar in the snapshot but that's lost (I'll explain in a bit) but she was talking about how the war czar told the Finanical Times, before he was war czar, that he didn't think the 'surge' was a good idea. And she and Michael talked about how empirial the title sounded and how clueless the administration was. Dalia then noted that it's now war "coordinator. Makes it sound like an after school job." :D

There were nonstop problems with the snapshot today. An early attempt wouldn't hit The Common Ills when it was e-mailed. Repeatedly e-mailed. C.I. finally, after multiple problems, began doing it on the laptop while I was driving C.I. to the airport. If any (or all) of the 20 plus early snapshots hit the site (today, tomorrow or Sunday), you'll see Dalia's quote. If not, C.I. will probably note it in the next snapshot (which may be Monday or may be Tuesday). C.I. was finishing the snapshot in the airport and it was way late and C.I. kept getting kicked out of Blogger/Blogspot (or the browser would shut down). So that's one of the things that didn't make it back into the snapshot.

The next segment of was a rally against the release of Terrorist Louis Posada who took part in the bombing of a plane in the 70s and snuck into this country and the government looked the other way until there was an outcry. Then he was arrested and he just got released by a judge (a really dumb judge). So Ramsey Clark was speaking about that and about accountablity and how we needed to be accountable as a people and we needed to demand that Posada is tried ("you can't give sancturary to mass murderers") and how we needed to be accountable and deal with the biggest problem in the US by impeaching the Bully Boy. This was a rally and Heidi Boghosian also spoke.

"The National Lawyers Guild wants to thank the A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition," she opened for bringing the Posada issue to the country's attention. If you've missed it at The Third Estate Sunday Review in various roundtables, there's a tendency of some people to slam A.N.S.W.E.R. and to try to draw a line between themselves and the org to prove how 'respectable' they are. So, even though I always liked Heidi before, I really admire her for opening with that. She's a real fighter and a real truth teller which I would have said before but I really want to stress now. Good for Heidi. She pointed out that "Bush shuts his eyes when it comes to US sponsored terrorism" and how Posada is being given a pass even under the US' own terrorism laws, even under our extradition treaties. By doing this "we are telling the Cubans that your lives have no value." She also spoke of the Cuban Five. They're being held in prison. They came to this country to spy and monitor terrorist activity, they turned over their information to the FBI, and then they ended up arrested. These people were not terrorists. But they're held in prison and lied about. "Mr. President, who is against terrorism and who is for it?"

Heidi then reported from outside the Philadelphia courtroom where Mumia's appeal was held. She interviewed Zachary Wolf (National Lawyers Guild) who I liked a lot better than the guest Amy Goodman had on about this. (Ego tripping. And Mumia can't really afford that in spokespersons who should be getting the word out.) Wolf agreed that the three judge panel seemed sympathetic to Mumia. Obviously, Mumia didn't receive a fair trial. I think he's innocent and you may disagree but I don't think anyone can argue that he got a fair trial. The judge in that trial was heard using the n-word and talking about frying him. Wolf talked about the efforts to exclude African-American jurors. She then interviewed Judith Ritter who was another attorney for Mumia. They talked about how they have to wait for a decision and it might be months or it might be sooner. "They were very, very well prepared and they knew the record very well," Ritter said of the three judge panel.

Clark Kissinger echoed the comments about the judge's preperation. And he said he felt "relatively hopeful" that Mumia would "win on this." Heidi asked him to explain the jury form issue. That's where the judge threw it out and gave another one that led jurors to believe that "to list a mitigating circumstance you had to be in universal agreement" when you didn't have to be. Heidi spoke to others including Lynne Stewart who wasn't identified but I recognized her voice. She said, "The most it would mean was it would be sent back for a new trial." Stewart cited a lot of legal principles and seemed really on the ball so she may end up being the one who's estimate turns out being right.

I really liked Heidi's speeches and her reporting. Dalia's done reporting before too and that was fun to hear as well.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, May 25, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, 63% of Americans favor withdrawal from Iraq in the latest poll (even if the New York Times buries that fact), in Shreveport a self-check out is arrested (the fourth for the year), the US military announces more deaths of US service members with May already being the second highest month for American troops deaths, and more.Yesterday, both houses of the US Congress demonstrated how quickly they can act . . . when anything stands in the way of their own vacation. Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) notes today, "Congress has approved nearly $100 billion dollars in war spending through September without a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq." Goodman notes the final House vote was 280 for and 142 against and the final Senate vote was 80 in favor and 14 against. In addition, Democracy Now! provided clips of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi -- who demonstrated that sneering at science and academics isn't solely a GOP thing as she used the ridiculously low figure of "over 100,000 Iraqis" dead when the study conducted by the British medical journal The Lancet placed the figure, last year, at over 655,000 -- and House Minority Leader John Boehner -- who demonstrated he could stay "on message" ("terrorists!") even while sobbing like a guest on the daytime TV circuit speaking of their 'personal' battle with an addiction -- Boehner apparently being addicted to illegal war, mass killing, and fantasy. Evelyn Pringle (CounterPunch) observes, "Congress has demonstrated its unconditional love for the Bush administration by handing the war profiteers another $100 billion worth of good reasons to keep the war in Iraq rolling along at full-throttle. [. . . ] And the statements in speeches made by members of Congress while debating the bills don't mean anything because 95% of Americans never hear those speeches. Honest politicians should be out screaming to any reporter who will listen to educate Americans about where the hundreds of billions of tax dollars have ended up. This war is 100 times worse than Viet Nam. At least with Viet Nam, the war profits were not being funneled over the backs of our dead soldiers in plain sight directly into the bank accounts of current and former members of the administrations in power at the time. Nor were they being funneled to the family bank accounts of the Presidents who were in office during the Viet Nam war." The BBC notes that, following the grandstanding of Congress and the Bully Boy, "Hours later, the US military reported the deaths of five soldiers in Iraq." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid laughably announced of the bill that fully funds the illegal war and makes the Democrats equal partners in Bully Boy's illegal war, "The days of blank cheques and green lights for his failed policy are over." By which Reid appears to mean that the US Congress has instead handed Bully Boy a debit card and asked kindly that he please not visit the ATMs too often.The Democrats full bodied, naked embrace of the illegal war comes at a time when the American people turn ever more against the illegal war. The public began turning against the war in 2005 and, since then, the opinion has only hardened. A CBS poll this week found that 76% of Americans polled felt "the war is going badly" -- an increase of ten percent -- and 61% maintain that the US "should have stayed out" of Iraq. A CBS poll? Well the New York Times has finally agreed to allow their names back on the joint polling and somehow managed to avoid all the media critics who must have been sleeping while CBS issued one poll after another on Iraq the last few months while the paper of little record appeared to suddenly be poll shy. Though they weren't called out on that, they should have been. The poll is, indeed, a joint-poll by CBS and the New York Times -- as were the recent polls billed just as CBS polls because the paper really didn't want to cover the American public's ever growing opposition to the illegal war. But they've put their names back on the poll. And gladly run it . . . under the headline "Poll Shows View of Iraq War Is Most Negative Since Start" . . . on page A16 of today's paper. To no one's surprise at the paper, Janet Elder avoids it like a plague so it's left for Dalia Sussman to write it up. The paper hasn't been in the news business for over a century, it's in the management business and Sussman's happy to do her part. Which is how her ridiculous write up can avoid the issue of withdrawal which the poll found [PDF format warning for the link] 63% of Americans favor (32% wanted no timetable for withdrawal -- Bully Boy's approval rating was 30%). 63% of Americans favorite withdrawal from Iraq? Sounds like a front page headline. (Sussman doesn't even note it in her laughable write up until paragraph nine where it's noted for two sentences and then never built upon or mentioned again.)Not only isn't it a headline, the Times (again) buries the poll deep inside the paper. When they refused to run with the joint-polling over the previous months, questions should have been asked but possibly people don't actually read the Times anymore, they just visit links? Though this poll doesn't make the front page, another does, on immigration. (The Times is working overtime to sell the Congressional efforts to strip immigrants of their rights -- including immigrants that are American citizens because they were born in the United States.) 63% of Americans say a timetable needs to be set for Iraq withdrawal and the Times publishes that on the same day that the Congress votes to continue funding the illegal war and drops any mention of withdrawal. The poll's not news? 76% saying the illegal war is "going badly" and 61% say the US never should have invaded Iraq and Congress elects to do nothing but it's not news?Well why not? 3 American soldiers went missing two Saturdays ago -- in an attack that killed 4 others and 1 Iraqi translator, and the paper didn't front page that until seven days after it happened. One of the 3 has now been declared dead and the paper's not interested in front paging that either. (The search continues for the 2 still missing.) However, Michael Gordon's unsourced speculation that Moqtada al-Sadr was in Iran is front page news -- despite the fact that it has no named "American official" source to it, despite the fact that it doesn't include the news that al-Sadr spoke in Kufa today (calling for US troops to leave Iraq). Our Rona Barrett of the Grey Lady leaps to the front page with a story proclaiming al-Sadr has been in Iran despite the fact that, as the BBC noted today, "This was never confirmed."Exactly whom is Gordo working for because, for a reporter, he appears to miss a great deal? Last week, one of the world's oldest think tanks, Chatham House, issued another report. As expected, the same mainstream media that ignored the previous report (taking Tony Blair to task for getting in bed with the United States and becoming nothing but a lackey to the Bully Boy) foamed over the mouth on this one (including Gordo's own paper -- maybe he can't read?)
The PDF format report "Accepting Realities in Iraq" included a heading entitled "Muqtada al-Sadr cannot be ignored" -- a position Gordo appears to share. However, Chatham House argued that due to his base, popularity and influence, al-Sadr cannot be ignored and strong efforts should be made to bring him into the political process. (Yesterday's news that puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki was replacing the six ministers from al-Sadr's camp who had resigned would indicate that al-Maliki also hasn't read the report.) This at a time when Gareth Porter (IPS) reports that al-Sadr (a Shi'ite cleric) appears to have strong support from the Sunni resistance with the binding factor being their joint demand for US forces out of Iraq. Porter is offering an analysis and building on (and crediting) work done by Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) at the start of this week. Also at the start of the week, Patrick Cockburn (Independent of London via CounterPunch) broke the news that in 2004, the US military attempted to assassinate al-Sadr in Najaf which, surprisingly?, never made it into the New York Times.But then, so much of the violence doesn't -- the real 'hidden violence' despite the Times' laughable claims last Saturday.Bombings?While the US military attempts to divide Baghdad by 'walls' (over the objections of the puppet of the occupation), some Iraqis attempt to divide the capital by bombing bridges. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) notes the latest bombing -- "the bridge linking Al Adil and Al Khadraa neighborhoods in west Baghad" -- as well Baghdad mortar attacks that killed 4 people (15 wounded), and a Baghdad explosion that killed 1 person, a car bombing in Muqdadiyah that killed 4 police officers (6 civilians wounded).


Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that three farmers were shot dead in "the orchards of Um Al Romman village". Reuters notes that a tribal sheik was shot dead in Falluja.



Corpses?


Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 20 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes two corpses were discovered in Latifiya.
Reuters also notes the following announced deaths of US service members in Iraq (all announced today): 2 US soldiers killed by a roadside bomb in Baghdad (Thursday), 1 US soldier killed in Nineveh Province by a roadside bomb (Thursday), 1 US soldier killed by a Baghdad roadside bomb (Tuesday), 1 US soldier killed by in Salahaddin Province by a roadside bomb (Thursday), and 1 US Soldier killed by gunfire (Thursday) in Diyala Province. The six deaths add to a mounting count for the month which ICCC calculates to currently be 93 for the month thus far. Only April has had more US military fatalities with 104 and, of course, May still has six days left in it. ICCC's count for the total number of US service members who have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war stands at 3444.
Among the victims of violence are women though they remain the true hidden victims. Kasia Anderson (TruthDig) interviews Yanar Mohammed (Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq) and asks early on the obvious (though usually unasked) question, "How did the onset of the Iraq war change things for Iraqi women, specifically?" Mohammed replies, "Well, although people on this part of the world think that Iraqi women are liberated, actually, we have lost all of the achievements or all the status that we used to have. It is no longer safe to leave your house and get groceries. We're not speaking here about a young woman trying to reach the university, because that is beginning to get too difficult. We're not speaking here about women who are trying to go back and forth to work and even those of my friends who do that already because they have to--many of the police at work are being killed for sectarian reasons. So, you have to witness all sorts of atrocities just going back and forth to work, and if there is this new [policy] of Sunni and Shiite, checking all the IDs of people, you leave the house and you do not guarantee that you come back safe. [. . .] Well, the myth of democracy has killed already half a million Iraqis, and if it were giving us real democracy, where people are represented according to their political affiliations or their economic understanding or their social justice affiliations, that would have been understood. But the way Iraqis are represented is according to their religion and their ethnicities. It is as if the U.S. administration is trying to tell the whole world that Iraqis are not entitled to political understanding or political activity. The political formula that was forwarded to us is a total insult for a part of the world where the politics are very much thriving and all kinds of politics--with the dawn of the war, thousands of political parties have registered. And they all wanted to be competing, or let's say running into democracy, but who was empowered, who was supported? It's mostly the religious and mostly the ethnic groups, and the women's groups? The U.S. administration wasn't really interested to speak to, let's say, free women's groups. They preferred to bring decorative factors to the parliament, where they look like women, but they all voted for a constitution that is against women. And the constitution at this moment has imposed Shariah law upon us, when in the times before the war we had more of a secular constitution that respected women’s rights. So, it's one more thing lost for this war."
Yanar Mohammed mentioned university students. On Tuesday, the Ibn Al Haitham college faced a mortar attack in Baghdad that left at least 4 students dead and at least 25 wounded while, same day, an attack, in Baghdad, on a mini-bus claimed the lives of 9 students (including two female students). On Wednesday, Baghdad's National Theater was attacked with mortarts leaving at least one person wounded. The theater is where college students and recent college graduates have mounted a new play, The Intensive Care Unit, which castmember Rita Casber described to Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) as "Our play is a miniature of our reality. It conveys the reality the people in Iraq are subjected to." Londono noted that Casber is the sole woman in the cast and late to the cast -- she joined only after death threats (over the 'crime' of wearing a tank top on stage) forced the original actress to leave the production.On the subject of schools, Alive in Baghdad intervews students at the girls' school in Baghdad, Safina Middle School. The link is not currently working, we'll quote the students next week. Last month, Alive in Baghdad interviewed Hameeda al-Bassam who works a private library in Baghdad and spoke of the difficulties she encounters traveling, in her wheelchair, through checkpoints and scenes of violence to arrive at work. She spoke of inside the library as one of the few places where the chaos and violence has yet to emerge and noted, with regret, that due to the violence she has had to curtail her work week. Please note that the videos have audio and an English translation at the bottom which can serve as closed captioning.Also on the subject of women in Iraq, the AP reported yesterday that Clenard M. Simmons was given a 30 year sentence after pleading guilty (April 5th) "to four counts of abusive sexual contact and one count of aggravated sexual abuse for five attacks from February 2004 to May 2005" which took place at Fort Hood as well as while he was stationed in Iraq and the victims were five female US service members. The AP noted that "Simmons attacked the soldiers in their barracks, groping and threatening them."Though frequently ignored and swept under the rug, women serving in Iraq are under very real attack from those serving with them. For more on this, see Jane Hoppen's "Women in the Military: Who's Got Your Back?," Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff's "The Rape of the 'Hadji Girl'," andAllison Tobey's "Serving in the Rape Zone" (Off Our Backs); Traci Hukill's "A Peculiar Version of Friendly Fire: Female Troops Face Double Danger" (The Progressive); and "Women and the military" (The Third Estate Sunday Review). And always look to what happened to Suzanne Swift. Swift went to Iraq wanting to serve her country (US) and quickly discovered that those above her expected her to serve them. Repeated attempts to stop the abuse and harassment resulted in no action (unless a course in how Swift could learn not to 'invite' harassment is considered 'action' -- anyone thinking it is should have their head examined). Swift self-checked out. As Sara Rich, Swift's mother, has noted, Swift wasn't against the illegal war. Swift wasn't saying, "I will not go back because I'm against the war." She checked out because when the military refuses to discipline their own, you have to take the situation into your own hands. To not do so would be 'inviting' harassment. There's not a (rational) woman alive who should be able to question Swift's decision to self-check out. She was abused, she was harassed, she was the victim of command rape, and the military did nothing. She went through channels and rather than disciplining the ones breaking the code of conduct (and exhibiting criminal behaviors) the military's 'answer' was to 'teach' Swift how not to 'invite' criminal acts upon her person. (Which is similar to the US military's refusal to punish those enlisted males who regularly attack women serving when the women go to take a shower. Instead of coming down hard and sending a strong message that the crime of rape is not tolerated in the US military, the military elects to caution women to 'buddy up' and never visit the latrines alone.) So Swift self-checked out, the smartest thing she could have done and no (rational) woman would say otherwise.Swift is now against the war and the treatment she experienced (laughably known as military 'justice') went a long way towards opening her eyes. In a climate that regularly rails against the military banning YouTube and blog postings, you might think the gag order imposed upon Swift would raise some righteous indignation but websites have largely been silent. Swift's mother, Sara Rich, is not gagged and Melissa Sanders (Socialst Alternative) interviews her -- Rich explains that her daughter's been extended in the military through January 2009 and, in response to a question about the "sexualized violence against female soldiers," rightly notes,"We're teaching guys about 18 to kill, and that killing's ok, before they are even allowed to legally drink. If you do that, I mean, who's going to tell them that raping isn't ok?"Along with Sanders' article, more information can be found at Suzanne Swift's website. (Which her mother runs and the military has no control over Sara Rich.)

Turning to the issue of war resisters, The Shreveport Times reports that Jackie Leroy Moore was arrested in Shreveport today for self-checking out and that he is the fourth self-check out to be arrested in Shreveport this year. Though the military continues to undercount the number of enlisted choosing to self-check out (undercounts for the press, they know the privately held number), this is part of the growing resistance within the military to the illegal war. "It now appears that if this war in Iraq is to end, it will be our soldiers who will have to bring it about," observes Albert Petraca (JuneauEmpire). "Nowadays, our soldiers also know this war is lost. Thankfully, soldiers have begun to take matters into their own hands. From U.S. Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada's refusing deployment to Iraq, to the appeal for redress now circulating among active-duty personnel, to Iraq Veterans Against the War's recent decision to support resisters, we are seeing the initial stirrings of what will likely grow into a movement of soldiers in revolt. The Defense Department recently admitted that at least 3,196 troops deserted in 2006, with an 8 percent increase already in the first quarter of 2007. Plummeting enlistment standards are unlikely to fill this void. The life-altering decisions made by these brave men and women are, in many ways, even more difficult than those made by former resisters. Today's volunteer soldier, unlike Vietnam-era draftees, is too often callously scolded by the mostly comfortable for having freely signed a recruitment contract and, therefore, must suffer the consequences. This judgmental attitude reveals a profound disrespect for service men and women who answered their country's call based on a belief that their government spoke truthfully about weapons of mass destruction and Iraqi links to 9/11. We now know that the pretense used to play on their genuine feelings of duty was little more than a pack of lies."
Watada is part of growing movement of resistance within the US military that also includes Joshua Key, Terri Johnson, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Augstin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder , Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.



Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.


Heads up, the latest Bill Moyers Journal begins airing in some markets tonight (PBS -- each station can determine when they air an episode) and features Maxine Hong-Kingston. (Transcripts and video will go up at Bill Moyers Journal.)



Finally, independent journalist John Pilger is on a speaking tour with his new book Freedom Next Time and his documentary Breaking the Silence: Truth and Lies in the War on Terror (which looks at DC, Afghanistan and Iraq). June 7th, he will discuss his book with Amy Goodman at The New School, Tishman Auditorium, 66 West 12th Street, beginning at 7:00 pm (doors open at 6:15). Admission is $5 per person and students (with ID) can attend for free. Pilger will sign copies of his book afterwards and Amy Goodman will sign copies of her latest book (written with her brother David Goodman) Static. "For ticket information, contact (212) 229-5488 or boxoffice@newschool.edu. For media inquiries, contact (212) 209-5407 or ruth@nationbooks.org For more information, click here or e-mail pilgerny@gmail.com."
June 11th, Pilger will be in Los Angeles at the Japanese American Cultural and Community Center (244 S. San Pedro St.) and will discuss his book and show his documentary beginning at 7:00 pm (doors open at 6:00 pm). The price of admission to the even is five dollars. "Directions, maps, and parking info at: http://www.jaccc.org/directions.htmPresented by The Center for Economic Research and Social Change, and The Nation Institute, with support from the Wallace Global Fund. For ticket information, call or visit the JACCC. Box office: 213-680-3700 (Box Office Hours: Monday - Saturday: Noon - 5 pm)For media inquiries, contact (212) 209-5407 or ruth@nationbooks.org For more information, email pilger.la@gmail.com."


June 13th finds him in San Francisco showing his film and discussing his book at Yerba Beuna Center for Arts (beginning at 7:00 pm, doors open at 6:00 pm) and the price of admission is $15 general and $5 for students. "Presented by The Center for Economic Research and Social Change, The Nation Institute, and KPFA, with support from the Wallace Global Fund. For ticket information, call 415-978-2787 or order online at http://www.ybca.org/. In person tickets at YBCA Box office located inside the Galleries and Forum Building, 701 Mission Street at Third. (Hours: Tue, Wed, Fri, Sat & Sun: noon - 5 pm; Thu: noon - 8 pm.) For media inquiries, contact (212) 209-5407 or ruth@nationbooks.org For more information, email pilgersf@gmail.com."


From San Francisco, he moves on to Chicago for the 2007 Socialism conference. At 11:30 am Saturday June 16th, he and Anthony Arnove will participate in a conversation, audience dialogue and book signing (Arnove is the author most recently of IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal) and that evening (still June 16th) at 7:30 Pilger will be at Chicago Crowne Plaza O'Hare (5440 North River Road, Rosemont, IL 60018) as part of a panel of international activists. To attend the conference, the fee is $85. For Saturday and Sunday only, the price is $70. To attend only one session, the cost is ten dollars. "Presented by The Center for Economic Research and Social Change, The Nation Institute, with support from the Wallace Global Fund. Co-sponsors: Obrera Socialista, Socialist Worker, International Socialist Review, and Haymarket Books. For ticket information, call 773-583-8665 or e-mail info@socialismconference.org For media inquiries, contact (212) 209-5407 or ruth@nationbooks.org. For more information, email info@socialismconference.org."


The Socialism 2007 conference will take place in Chicago from June 14-17. Along with Pilger and Arnove, others participating will include Dahr Jamail, Laura Flanders, Kelly Dougherty, Joshua Frank, Amy Goodman, Sharon Smith, Dave Zirin, Camilo Mejia, Jeremy Scahill, Jeffrey St. Clair and many others.




























Posted by at

Thursday, May 24, 2007

The faux who are our foes

Thursday and what a day. For the record, WalkOn.org (formerly MoveOn.org) is as much responsible for this crap as are the Democrats. They refused to push for Barbara Lee's proposal. They rushed to support the weakest measure. And right now they're getting a lot of press as an "anti-war" group which they are not. They are a Democrat front group and in a matter of weeks they will be telling their 500 or so members, who sign up repeatedly with different e-mail accounts giving the impression that they have millions of members, how great Steny or some other sell out Dem is because they are a sell out organization.

That's why the 'press' like the laughable dirtbags at Politico (who apparently weren't liked before they split from the Washington Post) prop WalkOn up as an anti-war group. They hold no one accountable. They do nothing but candle light vigils where the war cannot be questioned. They are useless and having been stabbed in the back by Congress today, it's time for the peace movement to refuse to play the game and hail WalkOn as "anti-war."

They would not distribute Danny Schechter's WMD documentary. They were all for a weak ass movie on Iraq that really didn't do anything but blather, blather and make no strong points at all. But Danny Schechter directs a real documentary -- as opposed to a voting ad -- and they run from it. This was after the 2004 elections when WalkOn decided to walk on, if not run, from the illegal war. WalkOn exists to elect Democrats and to get America to walk on away from real issues. They are not a peace group.

They are a group of dumb asses and they have done enough damage to the peace movement.

This is from Norman Solomon's "Deadly Illusions, Rest in Peace:"

Unfortunately -- and unnecessarily -- for years now the Internet powerhouse MoveOn.org has often functioned as a virtual appendage of the national Democratic Party. That close relationship has largely squandered MoveOn's opportunities to help build strong deep independent activism for the long haul. And, on crucial issues of the Iraq war, MoveOn has failed to back the positions of such gutsy progressive visionaries as Reps. Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters.

Now you can read Solomon, you can read John Stauber, you can read Joshua Frank or John Walsh or whomever you want or all (I recommend read all) but the reality is that WalkOn has failed intentionally because they are not against the war and it's past time that peace activists stop propping that weak ass group up. I listened to a radio program this week for the first time (most readers know the one I mean, and no C.I. will not be highlighting that guest) because I was interested in what some of the guests had to say. Camilo? Great speaking. There was another guest who did a good job. Jeff Paterson, I think. But the jerk? He even disagreed with the host who had called out WalkOn. The jerk started offering all these lame excuses about how they were 'strategic' and 'pragmatic' and the reality is that they are bullshit. And if you want to make excuses for WalkOn all these years later than you are bullshit too.

If you want to end the illegal war, stop supporting the front groups for a party that refuses to find a spine. They are prolonging the illegal war and when you take part in the myth that they are an "anti-war" group, you prolong the illegal war as well.

Wise up, as Aimee Mann sings.

And while we're at it, let's quit supporting the Peace Resister as well. On the day of the vote in the House, the dumb ass, peace resisting Katrina vanden Heuvel chooses to write about . . . American Idol. She confesses that she's an addict to reality shows. (Yes, C.I. told us that awhile back in a blind item.) Not being a whore to reality shows, I've never watched what Ava and C.I. have dubbed the high school talent show. But I do know that most who do watch that crap (there was an article on it the other day -- in the Arts section!) consider this to be the worst season of the show ever. So Katrina vanden Heuvel's not even smart enough to write about fluff that is hot. She's just a dumb ass, peace resisting, war prolonging idiot who has destroyed The Nation. On the day that the House goes on record as ignoring the will of the people, vanden Heuvel, writing for a political magazine, as its editor and its publisher, thinks the thing to write about is American Idol. It's called "distraction." And that's all she's offered while helming The Nation. She comes off like a dumb, little girl who lacked a brain to make it so she decided to sleep with her professors to get through college and once that was taken care of used her family money to buy herself a job as a 'journalist' so she could run really bad centrist writing by her friends and destroy the country's oldest political journal of the left. She is a huge embarrassment.

The illegal war has gone on long enough and it is past time that we stop shoring up the useless who will not do anything to end the illegal war. It is past time that those more comfortable hob-knobing with the Council of Foreign Relations were told "ENOUGH!" and we stopped treating them as if they were independent voices or, in some instances, even capable of deep thoughts. Maybe their spouses forgot to program them? Who knows but they're unable to think on their own and the result is crap like The Nation which, while an illegal war wages for over four years now, thinks the thing to do, as a political left magazine, is run pieces by Katrina's friends at the centrist Council for Foreign Relations on a variety of other subjects. Look there's Cuba! Look there's food! Look there's Hurrican Katrina (for the 4th time)! Look there's education! Look there's book! Look it's the Mommy Manifesto (which my mother gave the best slap down to). It's always something but even when the topic is serious, the writing isn't possibly because little girls who have to buy their way in or put out with their professors to get a grade aren't capable of thinking too deeply?

I know C.I. personally likes Katrina but if you missed Elaine's "Katrina vanden Heuvel stabs her mag in the back" -- go read it. I think the entire community has had enough with a little girl who wanted to buy her way onto the playing field but never wanted to work hard so she surrounds herself with men (who can't write but can repeat just what she wants to hear) who will echo her shallow thoughts. It's one reason why that dopey cruise (elitist and ridiculous at a time of war) couldn't get most of the name columnists to agree to sign up.

Beau sent me her dopey piece on American Idol and he wondered, "Is she trying to poach on Ava and C.I.'s territory?" If so, bring it on, lazy minded. She lacks the critical and analytical abilities of either Ava or C.I. as well as their humor. (And Elaine was just pointing out last night that C.I. scored in the top 10 percent -- I don't remember how high up in the 10 -- on analytical for whatever test you have to take to get into grad school. So bring it on, dumb ass Katrina, bring it on.) She's a pedestrian writer. I don't claim to be brilliant. But even I can do a better job than Katrina vanden Heuvel -- mainly because I'm not trying to pretend to be something I'm not.

When I read Beau's e-mail, I called Elaine and said I was going to rip into vanden Heuvel and she told me C.I. wouldn't be mad. I hope that's true. I know C.I.'s never been mad at me before even when we've disagreed. But this is what I think of the useless Katrina vanden Heuvel who spent how many years as the country was falling apart writing that dumb ass Friday column "Sweet Victory" with her Alexander Cockburn-hating assistant? That must have been real cute, the way they'd bond over his little jokes about Cockburn who actually does have a following and is an actual journalist.

I've had it with her and my favorite moment of Law and Disorder, a show I always enjoy, remains when Stanley Abramwotiz called out the "vanden Heuvel" crowd. Go Stanley! I'll write about Law and Disorder tomorrow but tonight I just wanted to get all of this off my chest and say, "We are prolonging the war when we act like enemies are friends." The Peace Resister is our enemy. She is in charge of a magazine that will not print one article on war resisters (Ehren Watada was a sidebar to the article that called him a coward). A magazine that ignored Abeer until Alexander Cockburn got the 14-year-old's name into the magazine.

I'm sick of it, I'm sick of its refusal to stand up for what's right, to call out the illegal war, to cover the illegal war. I'm sick of it and all the others who make a point to allow the war to drag on by their apathy and silence. I'm sick of those who drop Iraq for months at a time and then when polling shows how big of an issue it is, rush in to tell us what we need to do or to tell us how students are apathetic or whatever other crap they want to shove off on us.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, May 24, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the 3 US soldiers missing for nearly 2 weeks drops down to 2 missing, the US military announces the deaths of more service members, the military attempts to punish soldiers who speak out, and the craven and cowardly Democrats get another round of headlines.


One day shy of two weeks since 3 US soldiers went missing in Iraq, Garrett Therolf and Louis Sahagun (Los Angeles Times) report that the U.S. military confirmed the corpse discovered in the Euphrates yesterday was one of the 3 missing soliders, Joseph J. Anzack Jr. Jeremiah Marquez (AP) notes that Byron Fouty and Alex Jimenez remain missing and, "According to a U.S. military official, a second body was found in the area near where Anzack's body was discovered. The official, who requested anonymity because the information has not yet been released, said there was no indication yet whether the body was another of the missing soldiers." Therolf and Sahagun reported "that there were two other bodies in the river, also clad in U.S. military uniforms" according to an unnamed Iraqi officer.

Fall out continues for the Democratic leadership in the US Congress' decision to cave and give Bully Boy everything he asked for in the war supplemental. Laura Flanders (Common Dreams) tells of spending time yesterday with the mother whose son is in the National Guard and told her, "I was counting on the Democrats to stop this war". [Reminder, RadioNation with Laura Flanders moves to a Sunday broadcast this Sunday, 1:00 pm EST.] Corporate Crime Reporter (CounterPunch) announces, "Behold the spineless Democratic Party. On Iraq, no deadlines. On trade, no enforceable worker protections. In the face of withering pressure from the oil industry, the Democrats in the House, led by Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Michigan), have reportedly castrated their own legislation." BuzzFlash editorializes, "Since the 2006 elections, the Dem honchos have been speaking loudly and carrying a little stick. They claim that they don't have the votes to override a veto. But they do have the votes to keep passing a bill that Bush will veto, effectively bringing the war in Iraq to a close because funding will run out. They can end the war in Iraq, but are scared of being labeled with 'losing the war.' And this is a scarlet letter that they fear cannot be worn in a superpower nation that sees itself as the entitled righteous victor in any war that it starts, no matter how faulty the premise or counterproductive to our real national security that war may be. So the death continues, of young men and women -- many who are patroitic enough to believe that the lies told to them by the Bush Administration are true." United for Peace & Justice notes that "instead of standing up for what's right, the Democratic leadership has caved in to Bush. They are giving him a check for $100 billion to continue and futher EXPAND the war. That surge they all claimed they don't like? The money for it is in this bill." John Nichols (via Common Dreams) argues that "the willingness of Pelosi and Reid to advance a measure that does not include a withdrawal timeline allows Bush to conduct the war as he chooses for much if not all of the remainder of his presidency. This failure to abide by the will of the people who elected Democrats to end the war will haunt Pelosi, Reid and their party -- not to mention the United States and the battered shell that is Iraq." Recalling the Democratic leadership remarks leading up to Bully Boy's veto, Robert Parry (Consortium News) reminds, "The Democrats didn't help themselves when they started their 'negotiations' with the White House by announcing that they would eventually give Bush a bill that was acceptable to him. That's a bit like going into a car dealership, declaring that you intend to pay the full sticker price and then trying to bargain. Knowing that the Democrats planned to fold . . . Bush could confidently veto the first war spending bill". Matthew Rothschild (The Progressive) addresses the nonsense noting, "There is not even a timetable for withdrawal, just 18 benchmarks that the President himself can waive. What an abdication! What a capitulation! Even as U.S. soldiers are increasingly bogged down in Baghdad, even as the death tool of our troops zoomed past the 3,400 mark, the Democratic compromisers in Congress could not find enough spinal fluid to stand tall against Bush and the inevitable you-don't-support-the-troops ads that they fear so much." Dave Lindorff (CounterPunch) declares, "The Iraq War is now fully a Democratic War. The hand-off is complete, just as the handoff of the Democratic Vietnam War was handed off to Richard Nixon and the Republicans in 1968. . . . Voters remember: It's not what candidates say; it's what they actually do, or don't do." Jeff Cohen (Common Dreams) observed, "The shared pretense of the White House and Democratic leaders is that funding the Iraq occupation is somehow a program on behalf of the troops. Like a subsidy for family farmers. . . . As Military Families Speak Out says: 'Funding the war is not supporting our troops. The way to support our troops is to bring them home now and take care of them when they get here'."

US House Rep and 2008 presidential contender Dennis Kucinich explained to Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) this morning, "We shouldn't be offering any legislation at all. We should just simply tell the president we're not going to fund the war. And this idea about funding the war to 'help the troops' is absurd. Want to help the troops? Bring them home." US House Rep Lynn Woolsey states, "The American public voted Democrats into power for one simple reason -- the trusted us to act boldly to hold this President accountable and to bring our troops home. So far we are failing the very trust that they have placed in us. But more importantly, every day that we allow this occupation to continue we are failing our brave young men and women who are serving honorably and professionally in Iraq. And we are failing their families here at home, who, while struggling to keep their lives and families together, are forced to worry whether their loved ones will come home alive, and if so in what condition." Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) make it clear, "There are only a couple [of] ways Congress can end this bloody, unwinnable occupation in Iraq. These do NOT include the approach of the Democratic leaders. That's been a failure -- as they now stand ready to give Bush $95 billion more war funding through an Iraq Supplemental bill that no longer has any timelines for troop withdrawal."

The deadlines and 'benchmarks' were never enforceable. They were never binding. The Bully Boy could waive them, he could reclassify ever US service member in Iraq "military police" and thereby keep them in Iraq without missing the 'deadlines' of the Pelosi-Reid measure that was sent up to the White House and vetoed. If you think real hard, you'll remember a Party Hack that told Dems in Congress (in the House) opposed to the weak Pelosi-Reid measure that they had to "accept the congressional world as it is right now".
But those trying to call reality out on the nonsense bill were told (a) they were wrong and (b) the Dems would stick by this measure no matter what (one Party Hack swore the answer to a veto lay in the "conference report" that "we" would take care of). A few did call the nonsense out, Laura Flanders, Howard Zinn, Black Agenda Report, Alexander Cockburn, Matthew Rothschild, Robert Knight (of Flashpoints Radio -- and include Dennis Bernstein, host of the same show, as well) . . . But it's a really small list. The rest either went along with the lie, stuck their head in the sand or, in the case of The Nation, attempted to write an editorial -- a p.o.v. piece -- from various perspectives to avoid calling the nonsense out.

But everyone was supposed to hold their tongues because this was the best, this was the only way that everyone could be on board and something could be done, hold your nose and accept it. Too many did. And now too many learn that when you act like a cheerleader instead of demanding real action, the Democratic compromise (and it's always a Democratic compromise) will be even weaker. Instead of cooing, "You can do it, Democrats, you can do it," the people would have been better served rejecting the weak measures. That might have forced the Dems to do more with their first proposal and, when it was compromise time, we might have seen them put forward the bill they went with last time. The Democrats will always compromise -- partly because they like to see themselves as "adults" (or, in the age of Oprah, "healers") and partly because they still can't quite believe that triangulation isn't a winning strategy.

Bill Van Auken (WSWS) reports, "Behind the media reports of a showdown between Democrats and Republicans over the Iraq war, what in reality appears to be emerging in Washington is a bipartisan consensus on a strategy that would continue the US occupation of the oil-rich country for many years to come." But not everyone's displeased. AP reports Bully Boy's practically panting over the gift the Democrats have handed him, saying that it "reflects a consensus" -- to which the reporters should have shot back, "Spell it."

Norman Solomon (CounterPunch) notes that there is a very long struggle ahead to end the illegal war and cautions: "When considering what to demand now, it's helpful to put the current moment in historical perspective. The same basic arguments for keeping U.S. forces in Iraq have long been presented by reigning politicians and key media outlets as self-evident wisdom. A cover story in Time magazine laid down the prevailing line: 'Foreing policy luminaries from both parties say a precipitous U.S. withdrawal would cripple American credibility, doom reform in the Arab world and turn Iraq into a playground for terrorists and the armies of neighboring states like Iran and Syria.' That was in April -- 2004."

Speaking with Kris Welch on KPFA's Living Room today, Medea Benjamin (CODEPINK) stated, "We haven't bought the Democrats line from day one that they were trying to stop the war and we've been trying to hold them accountable" and reminded of US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, "The first policy that she put out on the first 100 hours didn't even include the word 'Iraq' in it." (Also appearing to discuss Congress' capitulation on Iraq were Tina Richards and David Swanson.)


War resisters continue trying to end the illegal war. On Monday, Carol Brouillet interviewed Camilo Mejia for Questioning War-Organizing Resistance on WeThePeopleRadioNetwork.com. They addressed his newly published book, Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia (The New Press), the abuse he saw in Iraq and his own court-martial. Camilo Mejia: "The judge basically agreed with the prosection that it is not there job to second guess the commander in chief. And they did not want to hear about the war crimes or the violations of Geneva on the ground in Iraq. So they basically brought down the entire case to the question of whether I got back on the plane or not but they didn't look at the reasoning behind it. They did not examine the claims of war crimes or anything. And this is something that's happening more and more, Carol. Like for instance in the case of Lt. Watada that's precisely what happened. You know the prosecution wanted to prosecute Lt. Watada for saying that he did not want to participate in an illegal war but they did not want to put the war on trial so that's why they declared a mistrail because they could not go to court and look at all these issues without looking at the legality of the war. They could not examine his statements without actually verifying the veracity or without somehow one way or another putting the war on trial."

Ehren Watada was the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to the Iraq war. An attempted court-martial in February ended -- over defense objection -- in a mistrial. Last Friday, the defense learned that an appeals court, Army Court of Appeals, granted a stay.

Watada and Mejia are part of growing movement of resistance within the US military that also includes Joshua Key, Terri Johnson, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Augstin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder , Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. And of course, there's
Iraq Veterans Against the War.

Yesterday, we noted the case of Adam Kokesh who was honorably discharged in 2006 but whose actions to end the illegal war now has the military threatening him with a change in discharge status. (More information can be found at kokesh.blogspot.com.) Iraq Veterans Against the War's Kelly Dougherty has a letter posted at Veterans for Peace:

I am writing to let you know about an urgent issue that is affecting several of our IVAW members. Adam Kokesh and Liam Madden are both very active members and former Marines. Because of their outspoken opposition to the war, the Marine Corps is threatening to revoke their honorable discharges and change them to other than honorable. We cannot allow this suppression of free speech to occur! Adam and Liam need our help to pay for legal defense and travel to their hearings. Adam just found out his hearing is in Kansas City on June 4th, less than two weeks away! Attached below is a letter from Adam, describing his situation and asking for your help. Besides financial contributions, we also need people who are in the Kansas City area to gather support for Adam before his June 4th hearing. Please contact me at Kelly@ivaw.org if you are in the area and would like to find out how you can help. I will keep you updated on both Adam and Liam's cases as they unfold.
Thank you so much for your time and support, it really means everything to our veterans who dare to speak the truth.
In Peace,
Kelly Dougherty
Former Sergeant Army National Guard
Executive Director
Iraq Veterans Against the War


The US Congress wasn't the only political body in the news today. BBC reports that puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki has announced six new nominations for "cabinet ministers to replace supporters of the radical Shia cleric, Moqtada al-Sadr, who resigned last month." Those paying attention this time last year may remember that al-Malilki missed the Constitutionally mandated deadline to put together a cabinet -- which should have kicked the puppt out of 'leadership' right then. Whether his latest six will be approved or not will be determined in a parliamentary vote Sunday. Meanwhile, the violence continued.

Bombings?

Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack killed 1 person and left three more wounded, 6 Iraqis were wounded by an IED while driving in their car in Ad Dawr, while a bombing in Al-Sharkhat killed a "man and woman" and left an additional woman wounded. AFP reports a bombing at a Falluja funeral that killed at least 25: "Fallujah residents told AFP by telephone that the bomb there targeted mourners paying their respects to Ali Ahmed Zuwail, the nephew of tribal leader Abdel Razeq al-Issawi, who was shot dead on Wednesday." Garrett Theolf (Los Angeles Times) spells the nephew's name Alawi Ahmed Zuwaid and notes he was shot "in front of his house" and was "suspected of cooperating with American forces in reconstruction projects, family and friends said." Reuters reports the Falluja death toll climbed to 27 and that there are at least 30 wounded, a Baghdad car bombing killed 1 Iraqi solilder and left two more njured, a Baghdad bomber ("wearing an explosive vest") killed himslef and one passenger on a mini-bus (5 wounded). a Baghdad bombing that killed 2 people and left 15 more wounded and a roadside bombing in Sulaiman Bek that claimed the lives of 6 police officers and wounded six more.

Shootings?

Reuters reports an attack on a mini-bus in Baghdad in which 11 passengers were shot dead and an attack in Khan Bani Saad where 6 people were shot dead. Jenan Hussein (McClatachy Newspapers) reports an attack in Kirkuk left 6 Iraqis shot dead, and, in Baghdad, one Iraqi civilian was shot dead by US forces and another was wounded.

Corpses?

Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 22 corpses discovered in Baghdad.
Reuters reports 3 corpses discovered in Baquba.

Today the US military announced: "Two Soldiers assigned to Multi National Force-West were killed May 23 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar Province." AFP's count for the total number of US service members killed in the illegal war is 3,436. ICCC's count is currently 3434.

Finally, independent journalist John Pilger is on a speaking tour with his new book Freedom Next Time and his documentary Breaking the Silence: Truth and Lies in the War on Terror (which looks at DC, Afghanistan and Iraq). June 7th, he will discuss his book with Amy Goodman at The New School, Tishman Auditorium, 66 West 12th Street, beginning at 7:00 pm (doors open at 6:15). Admission is $5 per person and students (with ID) can attend for free. Pilger will sign copies of his book afterwards and Amy Goodman will sign copies of her latest book (written with her brother David Goodman) Static. "For ticket information, contact (212) 229-5488 or boxoffice@newschool.edu. For media inquiries, contact (212) 209-5407 or ruth@nationbooks.org For more information, click here or e-mail pilgerny@gmail.com."

June 11th, Pilger will be in Los Angeles at the Japanese American Cultural and Community Center (244 S. San Pedro St.) and will discuss his book and show his documentary beginning at 7:00 pm (doors open at 6:00 pm). The price of admission to the even is five dollars. "Directions, maps, and parking info at: http://www.jaccc.org/directions.htmPresented by The Center for Economic Research and Social Change, and The Nation Institute, with support from the Wallace Global Fund. For ticket information, call or visit the JACCC. Box office: 213-680-3700 (Box Office Hours: Monday - Saturday: Noon - 5 pm)For media inquiries, contact (212) 209-5407 or ruth@nationbooks.org For more information, email pilger.la@gmail.com."

June 13th finds him in San Francisco showing his film and discussing his book at Yerba Beuna Center for Arts (beginning at 7:00 pm, doors open at 6:00 pm) and the price of admission is $15 general and $5 for students. "Presented by The Center for Economic Research and Social Change, The Nation Institute, and KPFA, with support from the Wallace Global Fund. For ticket information, call 415-978-2787 or order online at http://www.ybca.org/. In person tickets at YBCA Box office located inside the Galleries and Forum Building, 701 Mission Street at Third. (Hours: Tue, Wed, Fri, Sat & Sun: noon - 5 pm; Thu: noon - 8 pm.) For media inquiries, contact (212) 209-5407 or ruth@nationbooks.org For more information, email pilgersf@gmail.com."

From San Francisco, he moves on to Chicago for the 2007 Socialism conference. At 11:30 am Saturday June 16th, he and Anthony Arnove will participate in a conversation, audience dialogue and book signing (Arnove is the author most recently of IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal) and that evening (still June 16th) at 7:30 Pilger will be at Chicago Crowne Plaza O'Hare (5440 North River Road, Rosemont, IL 60018) as part of a panel of international activists. To attend the conference, the fee is $85. For Saturday and Sunday only, the price is $70. To attend only one session, the cost is ten dollars. "Presented by The Center for Economic Research and Social Change, The Nation Institute, with support from the Wallace Global Fund. Co-sponsors: Obrera Socialista, Socialist Worker, International Socialist Review, and Haymarket Books. For ticket information, call 773-583-8665 or e-mail info@socialismconference.org For media inquiries, contact (212) 209-5407 or ruth@nationbooks.org. For more information, email info@socialismconference.org."

The Socialism 2007 conference will take place in Chicago from June 14-17. Along with Pilger and Arnove, others participating will include Dahr Jamail, Laura Flanders, Kelly Dougherty, Joshua Frank, Amy Goodman, Sharon Smith, Dave Zirin, Camilo Mejia, Jeremy Scahill, Jeffrey St. Clair and many others.























Posted by at

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Jeff Cohen & a little more

Wednesday again. (I posted early, early this morning.) I had no idea C.I. was coming to the area. C.I. showed up (from speaking at three places) just as my class with my favorite prof (I can take him at least three more times and am trying to space it out) was wrapping up. We (prof and me) both bombarded C.I. with outrage over an article at CounterPunch (which is a good website but we hate that article). This is the prof who brings in things from the web to discuss in class at the start and the whole class just erupted when we were hearing from the CounterPunch piece. I mean, no matter what the subject, for the rest of class, we kept coming back to that piece. So prof and I were all over C.I. saying, "You've got to address it."

C.I. did and I feel bad because in the middle of doing the snapshot (typing it, parts were dictated) most of it was wiped out. C.I. had to spend forever (and switch to a different computer) to get it back together. But it's in the snapshot and speaking for my class, "thank you!"

This was one of the things that got wiped out from the snapshot (wasn't time to put it back in when C.I. had to reconstruct) so I'll include it here. It's from Jeff Cohen's "Don’t Think of a U.S. Soldier, Unarmed, Abandoned in Iraq's Civil War!:"

As Democratic leaders in Congress moved to hoist the white flag of surrender this week -- giving Bush/Cheney billions more for Iraq without any timeline for withdrawal -- we heard Speaker Nancy Pelosi repeatedly assuring the media that before Memorial Day, "We will have legislation to fund the troops!"
The shared pretense of the White House and Democratic leaders is that funding the Iraq occupation is somehow a program on behalf of the troops. Like a subsidy for family farmers.
Instead of challenging this misleading rhetoric by saying "The only way to support the troops is by ending an unwinnable occupation and fully funding a safe withdrawal," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid proclaims, "We will never abandon our troops in a time of war." Along with the utterly confused: "No one wants us to succeed in Iraq more than the Democrats."
What Democrats need to be saying, repeatedly, is that it's Bush/Cheney who abandoned several thousand U.S. troops to avoidable deaths in a disastrous occupation, and tens of thousands to horrible injuries. And that they're willing to abandon still more troops to unnecessary death and injury. Democrats also need to talk about polls that consistently show most U.S. troops in Iraq support withdrawal, as do most Iraqis.

What else ended up lost? A thing from the Green Party (I don't know where C.I. found that) and a bit more. I'm forgetting. Oh, Dalia Hashad. There was a long quote from this week's
Law and Disorder that I haven't heard yet. I'm guessing C.I. will include that tomorrow but there wasn't time today when most of the snapshot got wiped out and had to be reconstructed. And John Pilger's appearances next month were lost. I'm sure C.I. will put that in tomorrow or Friday as well. Oh, think this was left out too. "What's worse than toothless?" and "THIS JUST IN! DEMS ALL GUMS!" That's Cedric and Wally and C.I. was trying to work them into the snapshot.

Okay, C.I., Elaine and me are going out and they're ready now so here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday, May 23, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, on the 12th day that 3 US soldiers have been missing it appears 1 of the 3 may have been discovered, Democrats scramble in Congress, the US military announces the deaths of more service members, and a German professor feels the need to tell the American people how stupid they are when it appears the professor is the one with comprehension issues.

Today is day twelve since 3 US soldiers went missing following an attack that killed 4 US soldiers and 1 Iraqi translator. The US military has issued many statements that said very little (but what is there to say when it appears the attack took place as a result of where command stationed the soldiers and the time duration the soldiers were left in place). Though the search for the 3 continues today, one may have been discovered. Steven R. Hurst (AP) reports that Iraqi police believe they have found one of the missing soldiers, that he is a corpse they found in the Euphrates River today. Paul Tait (Reuters) reports: "The half-naked body had bullet wounds and bore signs of torture. Captain Muthanna al-Maamouri, a police spokesman in the provincial capital Hilla, said there were wounds to the torso and shaved head of the body, which was wearing U.S. Army-issue pants and boots and had a tattoo on the left arm. 'This is one of the missing soldiers,' he said." The US military has yet to confirm that. Howard Schneider and Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) note that the body is now being examined by the US military.

Meanwhile, in the United States, Congressional Democrats attempt to deal with the fact that leadership has caved. US News and World Reports observes that "their concession to the White House has angered anti-war activists and lawmakers, who are now expected to oppose the legislation." This is the legislation that, despite some denials from leadership, leadership crafted. It removes the non-binding, toothless calls for withdrawal and even the appearance of substance while giving Bully Boy everything he asked for and stacking up pork such as relief for those suffering from Hurricane Katrina, a slight spike in the minimum wage and funding children's health care. Nancy Pelosi is the US Speaker of the House so it's a bit hard to swallow many of her statements. Carl Hulse (New York Times) quotes her stating of the new legislation, "I would never vote for such a thing." Shailagh Murray (Washington Post) quotes Pelosi declaring, "I'm not likely to vote for something that doesn't have a timetable." Two questions here. First, how does a party push through legislation without the Speaker's approval? Second, why did she allow Steny Hoyer (House majority leader -- whom she outranks) to take to the airwaves yesterday declaring the sell out to be "an agreement"? US Senator Russ Feingold issued a statement yesterday and we'll note this from it, "I cannot support a bill that contains nothing more than toothless benchmarks and that allows the President to continue what may be the greatest foreign policy blunder in our nation's history. There has been a lot of tough talk from members of Congress about wanting to end this war, but it looks like the desire for political comfort won out over real action. Congress should have stood strong, acknowledged the will of the American people, and insisted on a bill requiring a real change of course in Iraq." As did Dennis Kucinich, US House Rep and 2008 presidential candidate, "If this is true, and I hope it is not, it tells American workers that the only way they will get an increase in wages is to continue to support funding the war which is taking the lives of their sons and daughters. First blood for oil. Now a minimum wage for maximum blood. Aren't the American people giving enough blood for this war without having to give more to have a wage increase? What's happened to our country? We are losing our moral compass. We're losing our sense of justice. We're losing touch with the difference between right and wrong. We do not have to fund this war. We must leave Iraq now. Support our troops and bring them home. HR 1234 is a plan to end the war and stabilize Iraq and give Iraqis control of their oil. We must take a new path. We must take a path of truth and justice." Kucinich will hold a press conference tomorrow (Thursday) on this topic at the Cannon Terrace and be joined by Antonia Juhasz and Denice Lombar (US Labor Against the War). Today, he spoke on the House floor about the privatization of Iraqi oil (from AfterDowningStreet.org): "This war is about oil. We must not be party to the Administration's blatant attempt to set the stage for multinational oil companies to take over Iraq's oil resources. The Administration set several benchmarks for the Iraqi government, including passage of the 'Hydrocarbon Law' by the Iraqi Parliament. And many inside the beltway are contemplating linking funding for the war in Iraq to the completion of these benchmarks, including passage of the 'Hydrocarbon Law' by the Iraqi Parliament. The Administration has once again misled Congress by mislabeling the draft law as an oil revenues distribution law, just as the Administration misled Congress about the Iraq war. The war in Iraq is a stain on American history. Let us not further besmirch our nation by participating in the outrageous exploitation of a nation which is in shambles due to U.S. intervention."

US House Rep Lynn Woolsey predicts much less support for this bill and believes leadership will have to count on cross-over votes from Republicans for it to pass. She tells Mike Soraghan (The Hill), "The anti-war Democrats have reached their tipping point. It's going to take Republican votes to pass it."

As Democrats cave, those who stand up find themselves punished. From "Legal Defense Fund for Adam Kokesh:"

Dear Friend of Iraq Veterans Against the War,
My name is Adam Kokesh and I need your help. Because of my involvement in IVAW, I have been singled out and called for a military hearing to be made an example of for those of us who have spoken out against the war. I have been an active member of IVAW for a mere four months, but have already garnered enough attention to be perceived as a threat by those using our military to maintain political support for the occupation of Iraq.
I was honorably discharged after serving over six years, and two tours in Iraq, last November. I am part of the Inactive Ready Reserve until June 18, 2007, less than a month away. After my discharge, I moved to Washington, DC to get a Masters in Political Management at GWU, and joined IVAW. I have since appeared on behalf of IVAW speaking at concerts, universities, and high schools. I have written about my views on the occupation and my military experience for the IVAW website and on my blog.
Most notably, I participated in Operation First Casualty on March 19th. This was a mock combat patrol through Washington, DC in order to bring home the truth of the occupation of Iraq, because the first casualty of war is the truth. I appeared in my uniform, without my name, without rank, and without the patch that says US MARINES. I received an email of warning about possible violations of the UCMJ for appearing in uniform at a political event. Instead of ignoring it like everyone I know who has received similar emails, I wrote a strongly worded reply admonishing the Major who was "investigating" me for wasting time on such trivial matters. The text of that email is posted here.
I soon received a package from the Marine Corps informing me of a separation hearing to re-separate me with an Other Than Honorable Discharge. A scan of the complete package can be seen here. I have sought private counsel for this hearing, as is my right. I intend to bring as many witnesses as possible to testify to both the character of my service and the nature of my involvement with IVAW. The Marine Corps only made it known to us today that the hearing will be held on June 4, in a mere 13 days. They have also decided to activate me for the hearing and hold it in Kansas City, home of the Marine Corps Mobilization Command.
This case is important because the intimidation of servicemen and women who speak out will suppress the truth about the Iraq occupation. With the help of IVAW, I intend to fight this to the end and stand up for the rights of all members of our armed forces. Please support this effort by mailing a check made out to IVAW with "Adam Kokesh Legal Defense Fund" in the memo to PO Box 8296, Philadelphia, PA 19101 or by going here, clicking on "Donate Now" and including "Adam Kokesh Legal Defense Fund" in the Special Project Support window. Please feel free to email me with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Adam Kokesh adam@ivaw.org kokesh.blogspot.com

Unlike Congress, Iraq Veterans Against the War are working to end the illegal war. And they continue to show support for resisters within the military such as Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Augstin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder , Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.

On a day when at least 104 Iraqis were killed or found dead, ending the illegal war is more important then Congressional leadership appears to grasp.

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack near the Al Bishara hospital the took 3 lives and left fourteen wounded, a mortar attack on Baghdad's National Theater wounded one person, a Baghdad explosion killed 1 Iraq solider and left 3 more wounded, a bombing in Mandali that killed 8 people and left twenty-four wounded and a mortar attack in Kanan that left three wounded. Reuters raises the death toll of the Mandali bombing from 8 to 20 and notes a Samarra bombing that claimed the lives of 5 police officers, a Mosul mortar attack that wounded eight people, a Jbela car bombing that killed 3 and left fifteen wounded, a Khan Bani Saad mortar attack in which 3 children lost their lives.


Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a clash between unidentified assailants and Iraq and US forces in Baghdad's Sinak market led to the deaths of 5 innocent civilians with seventeen more wounded, while Col. Talal Kareem was shot dead elsewhere in Baghdad, 2 Iraqi soldiers were wounded from gunfire in south Baghdad, Salim Hassan Abbas was shot dead "near the ministry of the Labor and Social Affairs," and a police officer shot dead in Al Muqdadiyah. Reuters notes a Kurdistan Democratic Party member and a police officer both shot dead in Mosul (the officer's wife was wounded).

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 30 corpses were discoved in Baghdad and 1 in Al Khalis. Reuters notes the corpse of an iman discovered in Sunni Arab Buhriz, 3 corpses discovered in Baiji, and five corpses discovered in Ramadi.

Today the US military announced: "Two Marines assigned to Multi National Force-West were killed May 22 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar Province." And they announced: "Two Task Force Lightning Soldiers were killed in Baghdad Province, Tuesday when an explosion occurred near their vehicle." And they announced: "An MND-B Soldier was killed when his patrol was attacked with small arms fire in a western section of the Iraqi capital May 22." And they announced: "Three Multinational Division Center Soldiers were killed and two were wounded in action when their patrol was struck by multiple improvised explosive devices May 21. An interpreter was also wounded in the attack."


And why does the war drag on? Because of 'helpful' voices like Nivien Saleh who, writing at CounterPunch, lectures in a way that may make Arizona institutions proud but should make those opposed to the war shiver. "Let me elaborate on these two points," the professor offers even though no one asked, "starting with the idea, at home in numerous Internet blogs, that Iraqis are to blame for their fate." Unlike the professor, I don't have all the time in the world to surf blogs. I'm focused on trying to end the war. But I don't need to surf to know where that 'logic' came from -- the White House, Congress, the laughable but much applauded by the press Hamilton-Baker Study (aka The Iraq Circle Jerk). Blogers make for easy strawmen and strawwomen, they are not the ones who advanced this argument. But it's quite a bit easier to tear into (unnamed) bloggers than it is to go after the true architects of the Blame Iraqis push. Saleh then goes on to share, "Well the number of those whose lives have been lost is far greater than 3,200." Yes, it is. And the total count for US service members who have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war is 3431. That is greater than 3,200. But Saleh, who apparent doesn't feel too concerned about getting the number of US service members who have died correct, wants to lecture about the number of Iraqis who have died and the number she elects to go with is the laughable "more than 100,000 Iraqi civilians" when the reality is that The Lancet Study last year revealed that it was over 655,000. While that is "more than 100,000," the professor's lecture is marred by the fact that she has little grasp on reality or the facts. The US military and administration originally announced that they would not keep figures on the Iraqi dead. That's the biggest reason that Americans have no idea how many have died. Now, as Nancy Youseff revealed the last week that Knight-Ridder was still Knight-Ridder, the US military does in fact keep a tally. That tally, like their salaries, are paid for with US tax dollars and there should have been a huge outcry that the government reveal those numbers. Instead, nothing. So many Americans have no idea how many have died. Many outlets back away from The Lancet's figures (in fact, the professor refuses to use them as well) and what you're left with is one mainstream outlet says X number have died, another says Y, another says it's impossible to estimate and the American public, as a whole, is left confused which, indeed, was the intent of the administration when they made the decision not to keep a public record of the number of Iraqis who have died. The professor misses that point as well but possibly we should all be grateful she didn't pin that on (unnamed) bloggers as well? The professor writes as someone late to the party, who brought no gift and is keen on ignoring most guests while she attempts to discern the power circle and cozy up to that. A student turning in such a paper could (and should) expect to have it returned heavily marked up for the various elements that her sweeping generalizations overlook. We'll get back to that in a moment. But, for now, let's make the very important point that when you go to any country and start making claims about the people of that country, you are in danger of stereotyping. The American people are not as dumb or as uncaring as the professor needs for them to be in order for her points to be accurate. As she tears apart the American people, while avoiding calling out the organs of power (White House, Congress, the press, think tanks, et al) who sold the war, you grasp that the strongest indictment of American in her paper may be the fact that Northern Arizona University considers her work to sufficiently academic. That, and that alone, is the only (indirect) indictment made in her explosions of words which, for the record, demonstrate that even those opposed to the war can traffic in Nazi symbolism in an attempt to make a point as evidenced by her opening paragraph.

The professor spews, "Washington's pundits, politicians, and bureaucrats, point fingers at each other, deflecting responsibility for the invasion from themselves towards their counterparts. As they do so, the various mistakes that were committed prior to the war are coming to light. The government and its neoconservative allies were war hungry. The CIA did poor research. Journalists that supplied the Washington, DC, 'beltway bubble' with news swallowed information that came from the White House without checking alternative sources. Members of Congress forgot the lessons of the Gulf of Tonkin and yielded decisions over war and peace to the president. Citizens failed to demand of their leaders and their media that they provide good analysis." Why should the media provide good analysis when the professor can't?

Originally airing two Fridays ago, an episode of Bill Moyers Journal dealt with this when historian Marilyn Young (co-editor of Iraq and the Lessons of Vietnam) debunked the lies of the administration and explained how the lies still got traction, all this time later. From Ava and my "TV: The 'boys' are back in town" (The Third Estate Sunday Review):

A clip is shown of The Charlie Rose Show where Condi Rice lies through her teeth and sidesteps every question while Rose allows one lie after another to go unchallenged. Moyers thought it was great journalism, Young didn't and pointed out that Condi continues to get away with lying in public "because she remains a person of authority; because she is absolutely amazingly implacable in her re-statement, statement and re-statement of half-truths and outright lies. And that kind of certainty in one's own authority and the correctness of one's own position can look very persuasive, especially on TV, especially when you're not pressed." (Our emphasis.)Moyers attempted to rush to his protege's rescue insisting, "Charlie did keep coming back to her, trying to get her to talk about this" but Young cut him off with, "What he came back to over and over again was an exit strategy. And she said, as they've all been saying, there is no plan B. We're going to succeed with plan A."Who was right?Young.She brilliantly demolished every one of Condi's lies. The 'we were all wrong' myth sailed over Rose's head as Condi lied that "it wasn't just America's intelligence services, of course, that thought that he had weapons of mass destruction; this was a worldwide intelligence problem, because the UN thought he had weapons of mass destruction." Rose just sat there. Young noted (to Moyers), "The Germans looked into it and said, you know what? Your information is wrong, it's useless. So there were other intelligence services involved, but they disagreed with ours, which she didn't say. Then she said the U.N. thought there were WMD's. But that's for people with really bad short term memory loss. Because Hans Blix, who was in the U.N. as inspector, was quite persuaded that in fact, there were no weapons of mass destruction."Condi told Rose, "The United States is in Iraq because the Iraqi Government asked us to be there and they asked us (inaudible) a UN Security Council mandate." Rose didn't challenge it. Young offered reality (to Moyers), "The most extraordinary one, though, the really one that just takes my breath away, is where she says we're in Iraq because the Iraqi government invited us there. And we're there under a U.N. mandate. Saddam Hussein certainly didn't invite us in. And the UN mandate that she refers to, it's a resolution, it's not a mandate-- it says, after all, we're all agreed that everyone should help in the reconstruction of Iraq. That's all. It's not a mandate for occupation, at all."

That goes to the reality of how the war was sold and how it still is sold and there's no need to rush to blame (unnamed) bloggers or the American people -- which the professor does while letting those in power off with a pass. Strangely, while arguing that the US places too much importance upon Americans, the professor starts off her essay noting a lamp shade made from Jewish skin but instead of exploring the Holocaust, she's off wondering about the German government, her grandparents, etc. Possibly, one who wants to lecture Americans on the importance of acknowledging the victims of war (something that many Americans do although they might not make the professor's TV screen), the professor shows no interest in the victims of the Holocaust. The above was addressed at the request of Mike and his poli sci professor (thanks to both). And those wondering why this community does not rush to shore up the temporarily brave should refer to Rebecca's "we don't stand up for cowards."



iraq
antonia juhasz





Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)