Friday, December 07, 2007

Robert Parry, Barry Bonds, students

Friday at last! First up, Dad wanted me to say, if you like rock music, check out Ann Wilson's Hope & Glory CD. I'll second that. It's an amazing CD. Okay, I've got students and sports for the block, but first TV. Tonight on PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio:


How does a democracy decide to wage war?

Next time on NOW

At 8:30 pm (check local listings) on Friday, December 7 - the very dayPearl Harbor was attacked by Japanese warplanes 66 years ago - David Brancaccio interviews filmmakers Ken Burns and Lynn Novick and the Rev. James Forbes Jr. about Burns and Novick's epic World War II documentary "The War".

Looking to the past as a mirror to the present, the four discuss how the waging of war intersects with our notion of democracy.

"It's incumbent upon a democratic society to evaluate what the arithmetic is -- the cost of war," Burns tells the group.

Sharp insight about the year's must-see documentary, and the modern lessons contained therein.

A Web-Exclusive NOW on the News: Did Romney Win Over Skeptics?

In a NOW web-exclusive interview, BeliefNet politics editor Dan Gilgoff shares his insight into the effect of Mitt Romney's speech on religion, the role of faith in the 2008 presidential race, and how America's faithful are reacting. http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/349/romney-religion.html


So that's TV. Moving on. Robert Gates has proven what a tool he is all week (in fact, longer, especially if you've been paying attention to C.I.'s comments about the college and chamber of commerce tour Gates did before going to Iraq). He's proving himself to be a Bully Boy loyalist and that's only suprising if you believed Seymour Hersh vouching for Gates on Democracy Now! (maybe Gates gave him some sex dirt on JFK for that bad book?). Robert Parry called him out and C.I. mentioned that in today's snapshot. This is from "The Secret World of Robert Gates" and that's what C.I.'s linking to in the snapshot: o

Robert Gates, George W. Bush's choice to replace Donald Rumsfeld as Defense Secretary, is a trusted figure within the Bush Family’s inner circle, but there are lingering questions about whether Gates is a trustworthy public official.
The 63-year-old Gates has long faced accusations of collaborating with Islamic extremists in Iran, arming Saddam Hussein's dictatorship in Iraq, and politicizing U.S. intelligence to conform with the desires of policymakers -- three key areas that relate to his future job.
Gates skated past some of these controversies during his 1991 confirmation hearings to be CIA director -- and the current Bush administration is seeking to slip Gates through the congressional approval process again, this time by pressing for a quick confirmation by the end of the year, before the new Democratic-controlled Senate is seated.
If Bush's timetable is met, there will be no time for a serious investigation into Gates's past.
Fifteen years ago, Gates got a similar pass when leading Democrats agreed to put "bipartisanship" ahead of careful oversight when Gates was nominated for the CIA job by President George H.W. Bush.
In 1991, despite doubts about Gates's honesty over Iran-Contra and other scandals, the career intelligence officer brushed aside accusations that he played secret roles in arming both sides of the Iran-Iraq War. Since then, however, documents have surfaced that raise new questions about Gates's sweeping denials.
For instance, the Russian government sent an intelligence report to a House investigative task force in early 1993 stating that Gates participated in secret contacts with Iranian officials in 1980 to delay release of 52 U.S. hostages then held in Iran, a move to benefit the presidential campaign of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.




That's just the opening. You can read it in full using the link and this wasn't the only time Parry sounded the alarms about Gates. If more people had listened to him (and not been lulled into idiocy by Hersh), it might not have made much a difference. Dems in Congress haven't stood up for much of anything, have they? But we all would have been aware that Gates is hardly above the fray and just another loyalist who will betray democracy.




Students are active today. College students, high school students. And there's a group in the state of Washington really busting their butts. This is from Youth Against War & Racism's press release entitled "Foster High Students Hold Press Conference to Protest Administration's Constitutional Violations After Police Break Up Student Gathering:"

TUKWILA, WA - December 7 - Students and teachers from Foster High School in Tukwila are holding a press conference tomorrow, Friday, December 7 to protest the school administration’s flagrant violations of students’ constitutional rights to free speech and freedom of assembly. On November 28, school administrators brought in 8 policemen to break up and disperse a peaceful student gathering. Students were gathering after school to discuss efforts to pressure the administration to drop investigative hearings against six teachers after over 125 students participated in the November 16th antiwar national student walkout.
Larry Hildes, the attorney who is representing the teachers under investigation, will speak at the press conference, as well as students, parents, and a teacher’s spouse who is a veteran of the Iraq war.
Students and parents are absolutely furious about the blatant violation of students’ constitutional rights to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. They have already gathered 200 signatures on a petition to demand that the investigative hearings against the teachers be dropped and that teachers under investigation get to keep their jobs -- not only next semester, but also next school year. Students and parents are organizing for another massive turnout at Tukwila School Board meeting to ask administrators to agree to their petition’s demands on Tuesday, December 11th at 6:30 PM at the Tukwila School District headquarters.
Student Angie Jobe Cuba said, "Our teachers should not be punished for supporting the students who walked out of classes as a statement against an unjust war."
And Student Irene Muller explained: "It's funny how they tell us we shouldn't have a say. Are we not the ones spending 6-10 hours a day at school? Aren't I the one here to get an education, to be prepared for the world we all must live in? Students have the right to an equal say in the things that affect us. The school should be about the students, not the administrators. Someone needs to remind the educational hierarchy of that, and that's why we are here."
The controversy began when over 125 students from Foster High joined over 1,000 students from Washington State in the November 16th national student walkout against the war and military recruitment in schools sponsored by Youth Against War and Racism. However, none of the teachers imposed their political views on the students or promoted the student walkout. Teachers simply organized lesson plans and homework assignments to let students educate themselves about the war and make up their own decisions about whether to participate in the walkout or not.
Students and teachers have received an incredible outpouring of community support and media coverage for their defense campaign. 100 students and parents packed the last Tukwila School Board meeting, which won the reinstatement of popular teacher Brett Rogers, and now the investigation of one teacher has already been dropped. The administration has also been flooded with over 1,000 protest emails and calls.
RECENT MAJOR NEWS REPORTS:
Seattle Times: "Protesting teacher back at Tukwila school" November 29th
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education/2004041566_tukwila29m.html
KIRO 7: http://www.kirotv.com/education/14714796/detail.html(Click where it says "video")
Northwest Cable News:
http://www.nwcn.com/video/news-index.html?nvid=196453
Seattle Post-Intelligencer Nov. 16th Walkout Article:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/340003_peace17.html
Student-made Walkout Film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGSDzDF7xoY%20
Youth Against War and Racism article about the walkout: http://yawr.org/nov16/seattle.html
Free Speech Radio News: here.

Students are doing their part. It's only at The crap ass Nation magazine that they don't realize that. Because they don't want to. And because they're too busy trying to defeat Hillary

Clinton. That really does appear to be the only reason they exist today and this post was lost so I had to use "recover post." It's screwed up everything including line breaks. Sorry about that.
I did check to see if Dave Zirin had anything to say about the sports news today but didn't see anything on it. This is from AP:




Barry Bonds let one of his six lawyers say the words: "Not guilty." No courtroom drama, no surprises. Flanked by an entourage of lawyers and family members, baseball's home run king smiled, waved and made eye contact with fans Friday as he made his first court appearance since being charged with lying under oath about using steroids.
Bonds' new lawyer entered a not guilty plea in U.S. District Court to the four counts of perjury and one count of obstruction of justice contained in the Nov. 15 indictment.
Afterward, defense attorney Allen Ruby didn't waste any time, saying he would soon ask a judge to toss out the case because of "defects" in the indictment. He declined to elaborate. If convicted, legal experts say Bonds could spend up to 2 1/2 years in prison.



Here's Barry Bonds' statement from his website:



December 6, 2007
I want to thank my family, friends and fans for their unwavering support. It means everything to me. Despite the charges that have been filed against me, I still have confidence in the judicial system and especially in the judgment of the citizens who will decide this case. And I know that when all of this is over, I will be vindicated because I am innocent.


Barry Bonds

I believe him. He's been targeted because he wouldn't play the smiling, grateful African-American and if you won't do that, you get the pile on. I really enjoyed reading about the way he handled himself in court. He didn't beg or go in with his hat in hand. That probably pissed a lot of people off. They're dying for the day when they can see something like that.

I had a lot more (mainly about Bonds) but I lost the post. I had to go back and rewrite most of it. So that's going to be it for me. Happy weekend and do something this weekend to end the illegal war! Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, December 7, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the Canadian parlaiment's December 11th hearings on war resisters approach, IVAW's Justin Cliburn speaks in Dallas Sunday, Buzzy and Cookie remain brothers but one is now unemployed (don't cry, Blackwater will probably officially hire him now), bombings in Iraq get some media attention and more.

Staring with war resistance. November 15th, Iraq War resisters
Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey learned that the nation's Supreme Court would not hear their appeals. As a result, the focus is now on getting the Canadian Parliament to address the situation. On December 11th, the parliament will hear testimony from war resisters. Dustin Langley (Workers World) notes Hinzman's statements on the illegal war, "They said there were weapons of mass destruction. They haven't found any. They said Iraq was linked to international terrorist organizations. There haven't been any links. This was a criminal war. Any act of violence in an unjustified conflict is an atrocity." Cindy Sheehan (OpEdNews) urges people to utilize Courage to Resist's easy to mail or e-mail resources to allow the Canadian government to know you are watching and to support organizations supporting war resisters as well as supporting war resisters:


Support actual war resisters in Canada by sending them expense money. From my friend Ryan (I gave him and his wife money to get to Canada over two years ago):

In light of the recent Supreme Court denial in Canada, I (Ryan Johnson), My wife (Jen Johnson) and Brandon Hughey need help raising funds to travel to Ottawa to attend hearings before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, where War Resisters will be giving Testimony to the committee. At these hearings the committee will be deciding on whether or not to make a provision to allow war resisters to stay in Canada. This is one of our last chances to be able to continue living in Canada. We will be leaving December 7th because the hearings are December 11th, 2007 so we need to act fast. They may try to send guys back soon and we need to have a strong War Resister Presence. We appreciate all of the support and Want to thank all of you who can help.

Checks/money orders can be sent for Ryan, Jen and Brandon to:312 Tower Rd Nelson, BC V1L3K6

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb,
Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at
Culture Project -- that's ten more days -- and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $41.. The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

IVAW's South Central Region Coordinator
Justin Cliburn will be speaking this Sunday in Dallas, Texas at the First Unitarian Church of Dallas, Raible Chapel (4015 Normandy Avenue, Dallas, TX 75205) at 10:30 am. Cliburn served in Iraq (2005-2006) and this event is free and open to the public.

In yet another sign of the failures of the puppet government,
Eric Westervelt (NPR's Morning Edition) reports that the health ministry does not have a program to care for the wounded civilians or even to track how many there are. The illegal war hits the five-year mark in March. Puppet of the occupation Nouri-al Maliki and his initial cabinet were all in place by May of 2006. And there is no system in place to track the wounded let alone to treat them. Westervelt tells of 36-year-old, father of five Majid Hameed -- a victim of a bombing targeting his work place in March 2004 that left him burned and then, lack of treatment, left him with gangrene in both hands which spread and his arms were amputated to "just above the elbow" who must now attempt to provide for his family by hawking "trinkets" on the streets of Baghdad. He had been a blacksmith and a security guard prior to the bombing. The failed system really depends on international aid. Westervelt doesn't make that point but that is what's going on. Just as, in the US, Wal-Mart doesn't provide for their employees and expects government services to subsidize them, the Iraqi government leaves it to the NGOs to 'handle' the situation. Hammed got the run around at the various government ministries, a private organization told him they would need both medical and police reports to treat him and the police station refused to assist him with those forms while the local council "laughed at me saying, 'We don't give letters to disabled people confirming they were hit by a car bomb. We know nothing about it. This is not our business'." It's no one's business because the failed puppet government of Nouri al-Maliki is not one that serves Iraqis. Why should the puppets show interest in the Iraqi people when the US government never has?

Big Oil's enable Iraq Development Program is announcing "positive signs" in Iraq's economy and sourcing it to Bayan Jubur al-Zubaydi (Iraq's Minister of Finance). It's silly nonsense from a silly 'organization' that quotes the minister stating "the new budget allocated $10 billion dollars to subsidise ration card items and the salaries of government employees and pensioners." Yes, we are back to the subsidies. Note the amount. How much of that alleged ten billion goes to saleries? It's worth pondering because Reuters reports Abdul Falah al-Sudany (Iraq's Trade Minister) asserts that the massive reduction in subsidies that will kick in next month stem from a request for "$7 billion in next year's budget to distribute 10 basic items but received only $3 billion." If both officials are telling the truth that would mean seven billion dollars was required to pay the puppet government. That's a big payroll (especially when government workers make so little that IDP is trumpeting the fact that they've been granted income tax waivers) especially when you consider that "more than 60 percent of Iraq's population rely on the rations." Actually, that's the candied number, United Nation's agencies were estimating it was 80 percent and that was before the vast refugee (internal and external) began. Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) explains, "The system under which all Iraqis are issued ration cards allowing them to buy 10 items -- sugar, flour, rice, powdered milk, cooking oil, tea, beans, baby milk, soap and detergent -- for a nominal fee". The issue isn't money, the issue is the White House's lust for privatization that led to a tag sale in Iraq. It's nothing but the (PDF format warning) same crap the US has been pushing for some time in the name of "economic rehabilitation and reform for Iraq." This despite the fact that Steven Mann, Paul Bremer's boy, was more interested (November, 2003) in "Building the market structure that promotes private business." In September 2003, the United Nations' World Food Programme was sounding alarms over the crisis in Iraq and noting, "Any significant disruption of the public distribution system would have a severe negative impact on food access." That was 2003. Things have not gotten better and anyone who has trouble grasping that can just focus on the numbers then for external refugees (100,000) and internal ones (200,000). Both categories are now in the millions (and combined account for over 4 million people). The food program is not 'less needed' today, it's more needed.

But the tag sale on Iraq is more important to the puppet government which works for the US government which -- apparently -- works for big business. Hence,
Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) notes today, "UPI is reporting Iraq's Oil Ministry is preparing to sign deals for the country's largest oil fields even though the Iraqi government has failed to pass an Iraq oil law. BP, Shell, ExxonMobil, Conoco Phillips and other oil companies are all attempting to win contracts in Iraq. Executives from BP and Shell are expected to be meeting soon with Iraq's Oil Minister. Under Iraqi law, the Oil Ministry can sign service contract deals on its own. But any production-sharing contracts would need parliamentary approval." This follows Selina Williams reporting (for MarketWatch) earlier this week that BP PLC and Royal Duth Shell PLC were to meet Wednesday with Hussein al-Shahristanti (Iraqi oil minister) for oil discussions. UPI's Ben Landon offers "Big Oil's big dreams are close to coming true as Iraq's Oil Ministry prepares deals for the country's largest oil fields with terms that aren't necessarily what companies were hoping for but considered a foot in the door of the world's most promising oil sector." Now who could have added additional strong-arming on that? Has any US official recently visited Iraq?


Robert Gates holds the title of US Secretary of Defense. Spinning the illegal war apparently comes under his job description (and comes naturally but who other than
Robert Parry stepped up to call the nomination out when it mattered?). Gates has left Iraq after his photo-op. Thom Shanker (New York Times) quotes Gates declaring he was "encouraged" and that he was "feeling very good abou tthe direction of things in the security arena". Gates was greeted with bombings and bombings continued through his brief stay. Of course, bombings followed his exit. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "A suicide woman wearing an explosive belt detonated herself among the civilians near the center of the local committees in Al Mu'alimeen nieghborhood in Muqdadiyah town east of Baquba city around 9,30 am. 16 civilians were killed in the explosion (8 men, 5 women and 3 children) and 27 others were wounded (19 men, 4 children, 2 Sahwa members and 2 women)." CNN, citing the police, identifies the bomber as Suhaila Ali and notes the bombing "took place outside a building that hosts meetings for local members of a so-called awakening council, whose members are opposed to al Qaeda and have formed an alliance with U.S. and Iraqi forces. . . . More than half of the dead and wounded in Friday's bombing were members of the awakening council, the Interior Ministry said." CBS and AP note that two of Suhaila Ali's sons "were killed by Iraqi security forces" and quotes Ibrahim Bajalan ("head of Diyala provincial council") stating, "She wanted to avenge the killing of her two sons." Alaa Shahine (Reuters) pieces together the immediate lead up to the bombing, "Witnesses said a woman walked up to the building, in a street full of shops, and began asking questions. She detonated the vest she was wearing when people out shopping before Friday prayers began gathering around her." UK's In The News notes, "In April the town was hit by another female suicide bomber who killed over 12 people at a police recruitment centre." The Belfast Telegraph observes it was "the second [attack] in the space of 10 days carried out by female suicide bombers." That refers to a November attack summarized then by M-NF as: "A female suicide bomber detonated an explosive laden suicide-vest, wounding seven U.S. soldiers and five Iraqi citizens in Baqubah, Nov. 27." That was only one of the bombings in the Diyala Province. AFP informs, "Hours later, a suicide car bomber rammed his vehicle into an army checkpoint at the nearby town of Al-Mansuriyah, killing 10 people and wounding eight, among them soldiers and members of another Awakening group, security officials said." Alaa Shahine (Reuters) places the death toll at 10 ("seven Iraqi troops and three members of a local neighbourhood patrol") and eight injured. New York Times' Cara Buckley (at the company's International Herald Tribune) notes that the "three volunteers . . . had been working with the U.S. forces." CBS and AP note that two bombings were "about 10 miles apart". Cami McCormick (CBS News) interviews the newly returned to Fort Hood Army 3rd Brigade Combat Team who had been stationed in Diyala for fifteen months.

McCormick: Many say they were stunned by how dangerous their deployment became.


Spc. Cory Barton: I'd always heard from the guys that had been previous deployed and, you know, family members and friends that had been deployed before, they'd always tell me about the major hot spots -- like Falluja, Najaf, Baghdad, Mosul and places like that -- I've never heard anything about Baquba and then when we touched down, we touched ground in there and it was like an epiphany.

McCormick: It was scary?

Barton: Oh, it was a bad dream.

It's not 'safer' in Iraq. In other violence . . .

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that today two police officers wounded in a Baghdad gun battle and Jabbar Khalaf ("chief of Rabi'aa police station") was shot dead in Mosul along with 4 other police officers and that yesterday a farmer was shot dead outside Kirkuk, 1 Beshmarga Kurdish force intel officer was wounded (by "a pistol with a silencer) while 1 person was shot dead in Kirkuk and another wounded.

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

If you missed it, it was time for the laughable Nation magazine to do another editorial on the illegal war. Why they bothered is anyone's guess. They accepted (without question) the bulk of the spin regarding the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk. By contrast, the US
Socialist Worker demonstrates needed common sense in their "Editorial: 'Mission Accomplished' again?" noting: "A new U.S. war lie -- concocted by the Bush administration, endorsed by the Democrats, embraced by the mainstream media -- has been deployed to justify continuing the occupation in Iraq. The claim is that the Bush 'surge' of 30,000 U.S. troops to Iraq worked -- and is, at long last, bringing 'peace' and 'stability.' . . . . But lurking behind the hype is a different reality -- one that reporters working in Iraq readily admit. A Pew Research Center poll of U.S. reporters working in Iraq found that '[n]early 90 percent of U.S. journalists in Iraq say much of Baghdad is still too dangerous to visit' -- and that many believe U.S. media 'coverage has painted too rosy a picture of the conflict'." As the editorial notes, imperialism is a bi-partisan goal with Republicans and Democrats embracing one another from across the aisle. Which is why CBS and AP's bulletin should come as no surprise: "Democrats controlling Congress sent the most explicit signals yet on Thursday that they are resigned to providing additional funding for the war in Iraq before Congress adjourns for the year." They're preparing to cave again. And as CBS reports that $1 billion in equipment is missing in Iraq. There for-show stunt that found US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claiming they woulnd't budge has collapsed. As the Socialist Worker concludes, "The bipartisan Washington establishment is rallying around the consensus that the surge worked because it provides the excuses for continued occupation. Opponents of the war need to expose this new war lie -- and insist that life in Iraq will only really improve when the U.S. gets out."

And those enlisting to assist don't just include The Nation but also NPR. As
Ruth noted yesterday, the public radio network "did 'investigative journalism' . . . They discovered that the American people have lost interest in ending the illegal war. How did they unearth this questionable claim? They spoke to Congressional staffers. They spoke to staffers of Congress members, the same Congress that has refused to end the illegal war. It is truly a shock, at least to NPR, that said staffers might lie to take the heat off the people who sign their pay checks." NPR's Day to Day wants you to believe that "Iraq has become less of an issue in the presidential campaign." They need you to believe it having offered a two-hour Democratic presidential hopefuls 'debate' this week where, despite the US being engaged in a war, the 'moderators' never asked about the Iraq War. As noted in Wednesday's snapshot, that 'reality' is far from reality: "In fact the latest poll found it the issue most noted by respondents -- you could take the second and third most cited issues (economy and healthcare), add them together and Iraq would still outrank them. But the media has lost interest. Add another poll to the mix. Faye Fiore (Los Angeles Times) reports on the Los Angeles Times - Bloomberg News poll which found, "Nearly six of every 10 military families disapprove of Bush's job performance and the way he has run the war, rating him only slightly better than the general population does." Was the illegal war "worth it"? All poll respondents state no by 60%, respondents from homes "with active military/vets" said no by 57% and homes "with military in Iraq/vets" said no by 60%. Translation: America says the illegal war was not worth it. To anser the Clash's musical question -- "Should I Stay or Should I Go" -- 23% polled said bring them home "right away" (21% for homes with active military/vets and 27% for homes with military in Iraq/vets) while 41% say bring them home "within next year" (37% and 42% in the previous breakdown). Bring the troops home? 64% say YES! It's only in the lame media that wants to pretend the issue is no longer an issue. And of course the media includes some on the 'left' because you can't pimp the war supporter Barack Obama so hard and still call for an end to the illegal war. (LAT piece is also at Common Dreams.)

Turning from the mercenaries in Congress to the mercenaries of Blackwater. When last we checked in on Buzzy and Cookie (
November 19th snapshot), Howard Cookie Krongard was remaining the US State Dept's inspector general but stated he was going to remove himself from pretending to provide oversight of Blackwater due to the fact that his brother A. B. Buzzy Krongard serves on the advisory board of Blackwater. Previously, Cookie had tried to deny that Buzzy was working with Blackwater, deny in a Congressional hearing, but admitted it was true after requesting a break. Despite Cookie's claims, Buzzy told Scott Shane (New York Times) that he had told his brother he was on the advisory board "a few weeks ago." In an update, Reuters reports today that Cookie has announced he will resign from the State Department. Jeremy Scahill (Common Dreams) provides an update on the latest to do with Blackwater and he will be back on Democracy Now! next week to discuss the latest regarding the mercenaries (I believe Monday). Scahill concludes in his latest piece: "In short, Blackwater is moving ahead at full steam. Individual scandals clearly aren't enough to slow it down. The company's critics in the Democratic-controlled Congress must confront the root of the problem: the government is in the midst of its most radical privatization in history, and companies like Blackwater are becoming ever more deeply embedded in the war apparatus. Until this system is brought down, the world's the limit for Blackwater Worldwide--and as its rebranding campaign shows, Blackwater knows it."






jeremy hinzmanbrandon hughey




democracy nowamy goodman
blackwater usa





Thursday, December 06, 2007

Law and Disorder, Dennis Kucinich

Thursday. One day until the weekend and it's one of those weeks where you feel like the weekend is never going to come. Hopefully, you're week's been easier than mine.

Let's talk WBAI's Law and Disorder. The show opened with Heidi Boghosian, Michael Ratner and Michael Smith discussing "The Violent Radicalization Homegrown Terrorism Act of 2007." That included noting that Jane Harman is a "Blue Dog Democrat" which really means she'd sell her own soul to the White House if she hadn't already sold it years ago to Satan. Heidi noted that only six members of the House voted against it. Kucinich was one. Republican Jeff Flake voted against it. Republican Dan Rohrabacher voted against it. Democrat Neil Abercrombie voted against it. Democrat Jerry Costello voted against it. And Republican John Duncan voted against it. So more Republicans than Democrats but the number was really pathetic regardless. I was curious about Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters. Lee and Waters voted for it. Woolsey has "no vote" on the rollcall. This is criminalizing speech and especially political speech. Michael Smith talked about McCarthy and Michael Ratner talked about the Smith Act. They expect that it will be passed in the Senate as well. Susan Collins has already introduced it and Norm Coleman is her co-sponsor.

This is the act I was saying Kat wrote about recently:

So what we're seeing is an attack on free speech. That's all that this laughable and insulting proposed legislation is (passed by the House already). To no surprise, Jane Harmon is overly involved in the process. Big surprise. Jane Harmon would give away every right we have if she had the power to. She betrays the Constitution in a different way every day.
And writing that might be considered the sort of speech that would get me tossed away somewhere. We need to realize that and grasp that there's no need for this law. If there's a suspected 'terrorist,' you better believe they're already being watched. In fact, most of us are. This legislation helps no one but it does cut away at the Constitution. You have to wonder how long they can keep chipping away before there's nothing left to it?

Kat called me back late and I told her I wanted to link to her thing on the act and she had no idea when she wrote it. I go, "Is C.I. with you?" Yes. C.I. said it was before Thanksgiving and try November 20th and that's what it was. :D By the way, in case anyone wonders, it's "Harman." That's not nah-nah-nah, Kat! Kat won't give a damn, she hates Harman. If she didn't mispell it on purpose, she'd laugh and say, "Well I should have." :D

So the Michaels and Heidi discussed tasers (and noted Dalia Hashad's reporting for the program on the subject). Then they brought on the first guest, attorney Michael Deutsch. I think he's been on before. It's hard for me to know though. The reason I think he's been on before is because he doesn't care for Patrick Fitzgerald. But, despite the center-left hype, a lot of people on the left don't care for Patrick Fitzgerald. I think Heidi was the one who asked Deutsch to explain who Fitzgerald was. I'll explain here, his t-shirt reads: "The administration outed an undercover CIA agent and all I did was nail Scooter Libby for perjury." He's a joke. He's actually worse than that and you'd know if it you listened to the show. Deutsch was explaining his client's case. Abdelhaleem Ashqar is his client and the basic stories there are that he refused to testify and the judge refused to listen. Deutsch made the point that once you're in US custody, the courts really don't explore a lot of issues these days.

I'm not familiar with the case and I don't want to screw it up so I'll just note that. The last segment was Michael Smith speaking at the Brecht Forum about Che Guevara. Okay, i'm about to quote myself from "What's being read?" (The Third Estate Sunday Review, July 23, 2006):

Mike: Che Guevara and the FBI which is edited by Michael Ratner and Michael Steven Smith. Ruth and C.I. both recommended it to me for the subject and because they know I like the Michaels, who host Law and Disorder on WBAI each Monday with Dalia Hashad and Heidi Boghosian. This is a collection of some of the US government documents produced while spying on Che Guervara. That's the CIA and the State Department and more. I just started the book and am up to a memo from the State Department in 1962 where they just obsess over an interview Guervara gave with London's Daily Woker. You start to wonder, "Don't these people have real jobs?" Pretty cool book.

The reason is because that book is mentioned in Michael Smith's talk. The big news here was the discussion about the CIA agent who was spying up close. I don't know about you but I have no doubts about Che's death, the US either killed him or ordered his killing. And, like Kat and C.I., I will use the term "assassination." It was a political assassination. It wasn't just murder. And if you doubt that, you should listen to Smith's speech because he lays it out on what Che was doing and why he was important. (I'm going to assume everyone knows who Che is. He may be the best known radical to students my age.) Michael Smith's speech was probably my favorite part of the show. It's a really good speech.

I'm still deciding who to vote for in the Democratic primary. My mother's supporting Dennis Kucinich and I'm noting a press release from his campaign:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, December 6, 2007
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A post-debate analysis following the NPR Presidential forum rightly observed that, "on issue after issue....Dennis Kucinich's views have gone from fringe to mainstream" and that the other Democratic Presidential candidates' positions on various issues have been moving in Kucinich's direction.
But, the Ohio Congressman's campaign said today, "We strongly disagree with the conclusion by Richard Wolffe of Newsweek that 'this Democratic field has essentially moved to the Kucinich position on trade, on Iraq, on a whole range of things where people thought he was a real outlier'."
Despite the acknowledgment that Kucinich’s positions have been setting the agenda for the debates, "to say that all the other candidates are 'all pretty much in agreement now when it comes to some of these big issues like trade, like diplomacy and war. And they are where Dennis Kucinich is’ is more disinformational than it is even remotely accurate," the campaign said in a statement today.
"No other major candidate has called for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq or voted 100 percent of the time to cut off funds to force the President to bring our troops home. Other candidates refuse to relent in their 'all options are on the table' with respect to Iran, despite the revelations in the National Intelligence Estimate that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program four years ago. No other candidate is willing to challenge the for-profit health insurance and pharmaceutical companies by agreeing to establish a national, single-payer, not-for profit health system. No other major candidate has proposed canceling NAFTA and withdrawing from the WTO. No other major candidate has called for the repeal of the USA Patriot Act.
"It is true that candidates who voted pro-war have become somewhat less bellicose in their rhetoric, but they still have voted to continue funding the war. It is true that they have finally recognized the need for health care reform, but their 'reforms' would preserve the role of for-profit insurers to the detriment of the public. They have recently found it politically expedient to critical of trade agreements, some of which they originally voted for or supported, but they refuse to say they will cancel those agreements. They have even suggested modest changes to the Patriot Act that they fully supported in the first place -- some without even reading it -- but fail to acknowledge that it’s a bad law that continues to violate the Constitutional rights and protections of Americans. And they adamantly refuse to utilize the Constitutional recourse of impeachment for the Constitutional violations and abuses committed by this Administration.
"Are they moving in the right direction as they attempt to apologize for, rationalize, and back away from their voting records? Yes. Are their polls and focus groups telling them where the voters stand on these various issues so they can appear to be in sync with the American people? Yes.
"But, they were wrong when it was crucial that they be right, and their votes and speeches attest to that. They may be moving in the right direction, but they still fall far short of being right. Only one candidate was right on all of those issues from the very beginning: Congressman Dennis Kucinich. If they had listened to him in the first place, this nation would not be embroiled in a never-ending war. It would not be beating the drums for a war with Iran. It would not have lost millions of jobs to out-sourcing facilitated by bad trade agreements. Forty-seven million uninsured Americans would have coverage. And the rights, freedoms, and protections under the U.S. Constitution would not have been trashed by an easily misled Congress.
"Playing follow the leader does not establish a candidate's credentials to be President of the United States of America. Being the leader does."


Before someone e-mails to say, "Elaine's for him too," yeah, but Ma's getting really ticked off by how little attention Kucinich is getting. I heard about it at dinner and told myself, "I'll make a point to note him tonight." (Ma was talking about the media, not websites.) She's also ticked off at NPR's nonsense yesterday (C.I. pointed it out in yesterday's snapshot -- how Steve Inskeep acted like he was on Fox 'News' and basically went ballistic on Kucinich and only on Kucinich). Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, December 6, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the 'great return' isn't but more details refuting the myth emerge, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Nathan Burden is a soldier who self-checked out after joining the military following high school.
Courage to Resist interviews Burden and he explains how a problem was ignored. His recruiter made passes at Burden's mother. When Burden learned of it, he complained and was told it would be taken care of. He would later learn that 'taken care of' meant promoting the recruiter to station commander. He explained other signs of the military was not listening and, on going AWOL, noted that "soldiers were doing this because they were being ignored when they applied for conscientious objector so I realized I wasn't the only soldier this had happened to and I wasn't going to judge the army on just one guy that made the pass on my mom" but the problem continued to be ignored.
On CO's, Burden shares, ""There was a guy who applied for cons objector because he didn't want to do it and he got ignored" so he ended up checking out. The man had deployed to Iraq and Burden says, "he told me that him and his buddies had applied for conscientious objector before and been ignored." Last month, a traffic violation led to his being stopped and then place in jail for two weeks while MPs were supposed to be coming to the jail to pick him up. They weren't able to. After two weeks, the military's position was, "Allright we're going to let you out and you've got two days to get to Fort Campbell." Burden left jail and did not go to Fort Campbell. He shared that he had "twins on the way" and that his family supports his decision.

A body that has not been supportive of Iraq War resisters who refuse to fight in an illegal war based on lies is the Canadian government. November 15th,
Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey learned that the nation's Supreme Court would not hear their appeals. As a result, the focus is now on getting the Canadian Parliament to address the situation. On December 11th, the parliament will hear testimony from war resisters. Cindy Sheehan (OpEdNews) urges people to utilize Courage to Resist's easy to mail or e-mail resources to allow the Canadian government to know you are watching and to support organizations supporting war resisters as well as supporting war resisters:


Support actual war resisters in Canada by sending them expense money. From my friend Ryan (I gave him and his wife money to get to Canada over two years ago):

In light of the recent Supreme Court denial in Canada, I (Ryan Johnson), My wife (Jen Johnson) and Brandon Hughey need help raising funds to travel to Ottawa to attend hearings before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, where War Resisters will be giving Testimony to the committee. At these hearings the committee will be deciding on whether or not to make a provision to allow war resisters to stay in Canada. This is one of our last chances to be able to continue living in Canada. We will be leaving December 7th because the hearings are December 11th, 2007 so we need to act fast. They may try to send guys back soon and we need to have a strong War Resister Presence. We appreciate all of the support and Want to thank all of you who can help.

Checks/money orders can be sent for Ryan, Jen and Brandon to:312 Tower Rd Nelson, BC V1L3K6

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb,
Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at
Culture Project -- that's ten more days -- and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $41.. The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

IVAW's South Central Region Coordinator
Justin Cliburn will be speaking this Sunday in Dallas, Texas at the First Unitarian Church of Dallas, Raible Chapel (4015 Normandy Avenue, Dallas, TX 75205) at 10:30 am. Cliburn served in Iraq (2005-2006) and this event is free and open to the public. In September of this year, Cliburn shared some of his post-Iraq drill experiences at Courage to Resist and noted:

Someone who had not deployed before asked if we would go again. "In a heartbeat!" one soldier replied. Others assured him that they would have no problem going back. Now, the eyes were on me.
"No, I am not going back to participate in that war."
The look of shock and awe on their faces quickly gave way to a flurry of questions about how I would get out, what I would do, how I could do that to my comrades, why I felt the way I did, what I thought I was proving, and why I thought I could make a difference. The question that got me on a roll, however, was none of the above.
"What are you going to do . . . become a conscientious objector?" one soldier and friend said with a smirk and a chuckle.
"In fact, I just may do that. That's what I am, essentially, isn't it?"
You could have heard a pin drop as the smirks fell from their faces; this appeared to be the worst thing I could have said. It amazes me how they had just gotten done talking about taking pleasure in bullying Iraqis and I was somehow demonized for stating that I had a moral objection to the occupation and subjugation of a third world nation. I have a conscience, and that upset them more than anything I could have said for some reason.

Staying with the illegal war but turning to the failure of the esclation which Bully Boy dubbed the 'surge.' The escalation was never going to produce lasting results. The escalation was never going to, in fact, accomplish much of anything. And the unspoken reality is that a current GOP candidate for his party's 2008 presidential nomination knew that though he chose and continues to choose to lie about that. But before we get to that,
yesterday on NPR's All Things Considered, Melissa Block explained, "Today US military officers told Defense Secretary Robert Gates they need help in northern Iraq. They said they don't have enough troops because so many have been called to Baghdad to take part in the surge there. US Army Col. Tony Thomas said the north has suffered, there's been an increase in violence and Thomas called for more American soldiers and the return of 1400 Iraqi troops who were sent to the center of the country. Meantime there were four significant bombings in Iraq today including one in a shopping district of Baghdad . . ." [This was the set-up to Iraqi voices which Ruth covered yesterday.] In this morning's New York Times, Michael Gordon writes of the increase in violence in northern Iraq where resistance fighters are thought to "have relocated" and "migrated" specifically to Mosul. What's going on is what has been going on and what was always known would take place. But it was too important for some to re-sell the illegal war so truth got left out. The escalation is a failure in every way and that is not just political, it also in terms of the military aims. It was always going to be a military failure.

We're dropping back to the
August 4, 2006 snapshot noting a section of the August 3, 2006 US Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.

Senator John McCain: So, General Abizaid, we're moving 7,500 troops into Baghdad, is that correct?General John Abizaid: The number is closer to 3,500.[. . .]McCain: And where are these troops coming from?Abizaid: Uh, the troops, the Styker Brigade, is coming down from Mosul.McCain: From Mosul? Is the situation under control in Ramadi?Abizaid: Uh, the situation in Ramadi, is better than it was two months ago.McCain: Is the situation under control in Ramadi?Abizaid: I think the situation in Ramadi is workable.McCain: And the troops from Ramadi came from Falluja, isn't that correct?Abizaid: I can't say senator, I know that --McCain: Well that's my information. What I worry about is we're playing a game of
whack-a-mole here. We move troops from -- It flares up, we move troops there. Everybody knows we've got big problems in Ramadi and I said, "Where you gonna get the troops?" 'Well we're going to have to move them from Falluja.' Now we're going to have to move troops into Baghdad from someplace else. It's very disturbing.

Somehow, in all of his cheerleading, McCain forgot what might possibly the only moment of the Iraq War where he could claim to have been right. He was right. He spoke before the escalation proper (stop-loss orders had already been put into effect effecting Alaska troops; however, the 'surge' would be floated proper by the Bully Boy only after the November 2006 elections). What played out under the escalation was what? Troops pulled from other areas to go to Baghdad, to go to Al Anbar Province. The escalation has been what McCain dubbed (rightly) "whack-a-mole" and, as he noted, "It's very disturbing." Now, as Melissa Block noted, you have US military officers telling Robert Gates on his Baghdad stop-over that they need the troops sent to Baghdad back in northern Iraq. It is whack-a-mole. It is exactly what McCain predicted. It's a shame he's taken to selling the myth of 'success' because otherwise he could be pointing out not only that the escalation is a failure but that he was right back on August 3, 2006.

Despite the realities,
CBS and AP report that David Petraeus (General Betrayus) is bragging "that maintaining security is easier than establishing it and gives him more flexibility in deploying forces." CNN reminds that Gates had the same set of talking points but added: "security, stability and democracy in Iraq are 'within reach'." Ann Scott Tyson and Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) remind that this (overly) optimistic evaluation is in stark contrast to his confirmation hearings statements when he declared "that the United States was neither winning nor losing in Iraq". Jamie Gumbrecht and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) observe, "Just before U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters in the Green Zone Wednesday that safety and security for Iraq are within read, a car bomb rocked a nearby neighborhood in what appeared to be the deadliest blast in Baghdad since September." Paul von Zielbauer (New York Times) described the scene: "incinerated bodies of passengers were visible in the smoking shell of a public bus. The blast also killed several street vendors; human remains, including those of a motorcyclist ripped in half, were scattered over a wide area, witnesses daid. The blast also wounded 33 people, the authorities said." Yesterday, the death toll from that one bombing was thought to be 14. CNN notes that the number was actually 5 higher, the Interior Ministry announced today that the death toll was 19 and the wounded was 36.

Military officers saying troops pulled from northern Iraq need to be returned? Among the many other crimes in the region -- 'honor' killings.
IRIN quotes Youssif Mohamed Aziz ("regional minister of human rights") citing thsese figures: "Ten murdered women were from Arbil, 11 from Dahouk and six from Sulaimaniyah [the three provinces making up the Kurdish region], while 97 other women -- 60 in Arbil, 21 in Dahouk and 16 in Sulaimaniyah -- had tried to commit suicide by self-immolation during the four months." MADRE explains, "Human rights abuses committed against women -- most often by male relatives -- in the name of 'family honor' are called 'honor crimes.' These crimes, including murder, are intended to "protect the family honor" by preventing and punishing women's violations of accepted behavior, particularly sexual behavior. MADRE, along with the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), supports women in Iraq by creating a safe network of women's shelters, serving as an Underground Railroad to help these women escape honor killings." The 'honor' killings take place throughout Iraq. Earlier this week, Reuters reported on how over 40 women have been found in Basra as corpses after being murdered and quotes Basra's chief of police Maj. Gen. Abdul-Jalil Khalaf stating, "Some women were killed with their children. One was a six-year-old child, another with an 11-year-old."

At the end of October,
Riverbend (Baghdad Burning) shared what she and her family were facing in Syria, "Within a month of our being here, we began hearing talk about Syria requiring visas from Iraqis, like most other countries. Apparently, our esteemed puppets in power met with Syrian and Jordanian authorities and decided they wanted to take away the last two safe havens remaining for Iraqis -- Damascus and Amman. The talk began in late August and was only talk until recently -- early October. Iraqis entering Syrian now need a visa from the Syrian consulate or embassy in the country they are currently in. In the case of Iraqis still in Iraq, it is said that an approval from the Ministry of Interior is also required (which kind of makes it difficult for people running away from militias OF the Ministry of Interiror. Today, there's talk of a possible fifty dollar visa at the border. Iraqis who entered Syria before the visa was implemented were getting a one month visitation visa at the border. As soon as that month was over, you could take your passport and visit the local immigration bureau. If you were lucky, they would give you an additional month or two. When talk about visas from Syrian embassy began, they stopped giving an extension on the initial border visa. We, as a family, had a brilliant idea. Before the commotion of visas began, and before we started needing a renewal, we decided to go to one of the border crossing, cross into Iraq, and come back into Syria -- everyone was doing it. It would buy us some time -- at least 2 months." Riverbend is noting multiple realities in that excerpt (and in her entire post) but pay attention to why Iraqis might briefly cross the border, why all crossing the border are not 'returning' and the hassles put in place by the Syrian government for those visas. Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) visits Damascus to see what's really going and encounters Bahija Jawad (among others) who has Iraqi males shouting at her to get on the convoy (you have to wonder if the criminals driving these convoys get paid per head) and Allam notes, "Despite reports of more Iraqis returning to Baghdad in response to the drop in violence there, there's no flood of Iraqis leaving Syria to go home. Interviews with refugees and aid workers indicate that most Iraqis share Jawad's opinion -- that the current letup in violence is fleeting and that it's wiser to stay put than return to neighborhoods still controlled by the same unpredicatable militants who forced them to flee. The numbers bear that out. While estimates from aid groups indicate that 60,000 Iraqis have returned home from Syria, Jordan and other Arab countries, that number represents only 2.4 percent of the 2.5 million Iraqis who've fled their country." Ali al-Fadhily (IPS) provides an in-depth look at the realities for Iraq's external refugees noting that they are "faced with detention abroad, or a homecoming to death threats." al-Fadhily quotes Ali Jassim, who was deported from Lebanon to Baghdad, stating, "To deport an Iraqi refugee is to issue a death warrant. The Lebanese authorities are applying regular migration rules to Iraqis, meaning that most Iraqis in Lebanon will be deported." Citing reports from Human Rights Watch, the World Food Programme and interviews with Iraqis, al-Fadhily makes clear that, regardless of the country refugees end up in, asylum is temporary and always in danger. In yesterday's New York Times, Thanassis Cambanis reported on Jaffar Sadiq al-Lami, an Iraqi refugee in Lebanon arrested for being a refugee without a visa who was given the choice of staying in a Lebanon jail or returning to Iraq and managed to hold out for seven months of jail time before it became too much. Now he's back in Iraq and states that he believes "officials in Iraq were manipulating refugee numbers, ecnouraging returns to Iraq so they could claim that security had improved."

In other violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that left five people wounded and another one that left six wounded. Reuters notes a Falluja roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer and left three more injured.

Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an attack in Qarataba that left 8 Iraqi soldiers dead and five more wounded while 3 of the attackers were also killed. Reuters raises the death toll 1 for nine Iraqs killed but notes they are Kurdish troops and includes the qualifier that there are two reports that it appears "referred to the same incident." Reuters notes a police officer was shot dead in Dhuluiya with two more injured and the US military shot dead two 'suspected' people in Baghdad with two more injured.

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 5 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 1 in Al Saadiyah. Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered in Kirkuk.

Today,
CBS and AP report, a funeral with empty coffins was held "near Baghdad" due to the fact that it was too dangerous to hold the funeral in a village where 45 people have been killed "in recent months". In the Green Zone today, Reuters reports, the Iraqi Parliament was witness to a screaming match between members: represent al-Sadr's bloc, Bahaa al-Araji and representing the Sunni Accordance Front, Adnan al-Dulaimi (al-Dulaimi is the legislator who was under house arrest on Thursday, Friday and Saturday after a bomb was found near or on his compound -- accounts vary with al-Dulaimi's supporters saying "near" and not "on"). What was the point of the shouting? al-Araji screamed about some 'documents' that may or may not have been genuine and when al-Dulaimi said the documents had nothing to do with him, "Shut up! . . . Liar!" was the parliamentary response.

In US political news, Iraq has fallen off the Democratic presidential contenders's radar with few exceptions. One is Senator Hillary Clinton who can boast of
an endorsement from retired Gen. Wesley Clark (video available) who states, "I've known Hillary Clinton for twenty-four years. I know she has what it takes to end the war in Iraq, avert war in Iran, and restore our country's standing in the world." That went up online last night. John Edwards and Senator Barack Obama have multiple items on their home page but none even note Iraq. Third on Senator Joe Biden's home page is his November column entitled "End Iraq war." Senator Chris Dodd keeps his Iraq plan on the home page ("No Half Measures"). Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich are focused on Iran. Mike Gravel promotes a Rally For Freedom in LA at Pan Pacific Park Monday (December 10th) from one to four p.m. which does include "Bring Our Troops Home" as one of the issues. Gravel will be there speaking at the rally.

Finally,
today on Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman broadcast a new documentary from Big Noise Films (made for Al Jazeera) entitled The Battle for Basra & Iraq's Oil:

RICK ROWLEY: So who is fighting here? And what is the battle for Basra about? Basra is Iraq's economy. 80% of Iraq's proven oil reserves are in Basra. And last year, its exports brought $31 billion to Baghdad. That's 93% of the federal budget. What is at stake is control over massive oil revenues. Without Basra, the central government in Baghdad would collapse. A new oil law was drafted that would create a federal oil and gas council to manage the country's natural wealth. The council would be headed by the prime minister and largely under the control of the Shiite party that is America's closest ally in Iraq: the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council. But the law has been stalled in Parliament for two years.
PROF. JUAN COLE: Oil doesn't seem to be under control in Iraq. No one in the Iraqi government really could tell you where all the money goes.
RICK ROWLEY: Professor Juan Cole is one of America's leading experts on Shia factions in Iraq.
PROF. JUAN COLE: And it has been alleged in the press that as much as $2 billion a year is being embezzled and smuggled, and it's going straight into the coffers of the Shiite militias of the south.
RICK ROWLEY: Cole says that Governor al-Waili's Islamic Virtue Party has the upper hand in controlling Basra's oil.













jeremy hinzmanbrandon hughey




democracy nowamy goodman





Wednesday, December 05, 2007

National Lawyers Guild, CCR

Hump day, hump day, weekend's two days away.

This is ""NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD AND SOCIETY OF AMERICAN LAW TEACHERS STRONGLY OPPOSE HOMEGROWN TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT:"

On October 23, 2007, the House of Representatives passed the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 by a vote of 404-6. The bill will be referred out of committee this week and will then go to the Senate floor. The National Lawyers Guild and the Society of American Law Teachers strongly oppose this legislation because it will likely lead to the criminalization of beliefs, dissent and protest, and invite more draconian surveillance of Internet communications.
This bill would establish a Commission to study and report on "facts and causes" of "violent radicalism" and "extremist belief systems." It defines "violent radicalism" as "adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change." The term "extremist belief system" is not defined; it could refer to liberalism, nationalism, socialism, anarchism, communism, etc.
"Ideologically based violence" is defined in the bill as the "use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs." Thus, "force" and "violence" are used interchangeably. If a group of people blocked the doorway of a corporation that manufactured weapons, or blocked a sidewalk during an anti-war demonstration, it might constitute the use of "force" to promote "political beliefs."
The bill charges that the Internet "has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens." This provision could be used to conduct more intrusive surveillance of our Internet communications without warrants.
This legislation does not criminalize conduct, but may well lead to criminalizing ideas or beliefs in violation of the First Amendment. By targeting the Internet, it may result in increased surveillance of Internet communications in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The National Lawyers Guild and the Society of American Law Teachers strongly urge the Senate to refuse to pass the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.
Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association, which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.
The Society of American Law Teachers (SALT) is a community of progressive law teachers working for justice, diversity and academic excellence. SALT is the largest membership organization of law faculty and legal education professionals in the United States.


Elaine and I are both opening with that because it's important. Kat's written about it last month but I can't find it. I've got a call in to her and if she gets my message before I'm done typing and knows when she wrote about it, I'll include a link in this post. Otherwise I'll include it tomorrow.
Now if you click here you'll get to see the Center for Constitutional Rights TV advertisement with Danny Glover that Fox 'News' is refusing to air. If you can't stream, just FYI, there's text at the link as well. Or, if you're computer can stream but that doesn't help you any, there's text. Like Ruth, I want to go on record. We do have community members who are disabled and that includes ones who have hearing problems or are deaf. Ruth said something last week and I should have as well. Someone e-mailed a number of sites asking why it was necessary (for C.I.) to link to video of a PSA and provide a transcript. I didn't get the e-mail but I've read it. It was 'snooty' is the kindest word for it. And C.I. pointed out in the next snapshot how fortunate it is for you that you're able to hear, see, et al, but not everyone is so fortunate and that the community serves all members. That's true. And if you read Hilda's Mix yesterday, you got to hear from a veteran who is adjusting to life with disabilities now. I'm not a big crier but I did feel my eyes getting wet when I was reading that. Not because, "Oh, how sad." But because he was just so honest about what he had gone through and what he was going through. It's real easy for those of us who are fortunate to not ever get how things are for people who are different. And anyone of us could have an accident or be hurt tomorrow and we'd suddenly learn the world's not as welcoming as we think. So back to CCR. Michael Ratner is the president. He is also one of the hosts of the radio program Law and Disorder. I will be writing about it tomorrow and there's some stuff in the latest episode from the Brecht Forum. I haven't had time to listen yet but C.I. said it was Michael Smith talking about Che and the assassination of Che. Sticking with CCR, today the Supreme Court entertained arguments about the prisoners in Guantanamo. CCR put out this press release, "Guantanamo Attorneys to Justices: Restore the ConstitutionCombined Cases Will Determine Legal Fate of Men and Boys Held at Offshore Detention Center:"

WASHINGTON, DC -- December 5 -- In a landmark human rights case with significant implications for the separation of powers, the Supreme Court today heard a challenge brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and co-counsel to the legality of Guantánamo Bay detentions.This case will decide whether federal courts have any say in checking the power of the Executive Branch to hold men at Guantanamo indefinitely and outside of the law.
"All have been confined at Guantanamo for almost 6 years yet not one has had meaningful notice of the factual grounds of their detention," said former Solicitor General Seth Waxman in his oral arguments. Thirty-six of the 37 detainees involved in this suit have been in detention for more than five years without ever having faced formal charges or having a fair hearing before a civilian court.
Attorneys for the detainees--supported by dozens of former federal officials and legal experts--are asking the court to restore the right to habeas corpus--the basic right to challenge the legality of their detention--to the men and boys held at the offshore prison.
"We have been back and forth in the courts as the government has tried one maneuver after another to avoid the Supreme Court’s past rulings -- that the detainees are entitled to challenge their detention in U.S. courts," said Vincent Warren, executive director of CCR, which has organized legal representation for Guantánamo detainees since the prison opened in January 2002. "We hope the Supreme Court will end this travesty once and for all and provide full, fair and prompt hearings, which are the very foundation of a free society."
The Court ruled in favor of the detainees in Rasul v. Bush (2004) and in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006). Following the Hamdan decision, Congress passed the Military Commissions Act, which has kept Guantanamo prisoners in legal limbo.
"The precedent set in past Guantanamo Supreme Court cases--that every person detained has the right to a fair hearing, including those jailed at the detention center for almost six years--is a necessity for any country calling itself a nation under law," CCR President Michael Ratner said.
The Court received more than two dozen amicus curiae ("friend of the Court") briefs on behalf of the men and boys held at Guantánamo. Former military officials and diplomats, former Congressmen of both parties and a bipartisan group of non-government organizations showed their support of granting habeas rights.
More information:

CCR lawyers were the first civilian attorneys to visit clients at Guantánamo, in 2004, and have been petitioning on behalf of the men and boys there since the detention center opened six years ago. After winning the Rasul case in 2004, CCR coordinated the largest ever coalition of pro bono lawyers to defend the prisoners there, ensuring that nearly all have been represented.
CCR's legal team comprises leading experts on human rights and related legal issues. They have spoken at various prestigious law schools, been interviewed on numerous national and local radio programs and have recently penned an op-ed that ran in the Washington Post on being the first attorneys ever to visit a former CIA "ghost" detainee.CCR's "Beyond Guantánamo" campaign is working to bring national awareness to the issues surrounding this landmark case. Notably, television ads are running this week on CNN and MSNBC, as well as a print ad in the Wall Street Journal. CCR's ad was rejected, though, by the Fox News Channel. The "Beyond Guantánamo" campaign has also helped tens of thousands of people to send the President an early holiday present--a copy of the Constitution. Important note:CCR Executive Director Vincent Warren, CCR President Michael Ratner and leading CCR staff attorneys are available for both live and taped interviews on Dec. 5 and 6.Vincent Warren became executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights 2006. He spent seven years as national senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, where he led national constitutional and impact litigation to advance civil rights and civil liberties and coordinated the legal efforts to respond to the devastation of Hurricane Katrina.
Michael Ratner is president of the Center for Constitutional Rights and served as co-counsel in Rasul v. Bush. Ratner is a world-renowned legal advocate who has taught at both the Columbia and Yale law schools. For more than three decades, he has represented individuals who have suffered injustice the world over--from East Timor and the South Bronx to Haiti and Guatemala. Last year, the National Law Journal named Ratner one of the 100 most influential lawyers in the United States and is the winner of this year’s Nation/Puffin Award. Ratner is the author of several books, including Guantánamo: What the World Should Know and the forthcoming The Trial of Donald Rumsfeld. Gitanjali Gutierrez has been working on legal challenges to Guantanamo since 2003 and was a member of the legal team that argued the first Guantanamo case, Rasul v. Bush, before the Supreme Court in 2004. Following CCR's victory in Rasul, Gita was the first civilian attorney to meet with clients at the base and currently travels regularly to the detention center for client meetings. Last month, she became the first attorney to meet with a former CIA "ghost detainee."
Shayana Kadidal is senior managing attorney of the Guantanamo Global Justice Initiative at CCR. In addition to supervising the Guantanamo litigation, he also works on CCR's major case on the illegal NSA domestic spying program, CCR v. Bush, as well as the Center’s Patriot Act case, and has testified before Congress on the material witness statute. Wells Dixon works on the Guantánamo Global Justice Initiative at CCR. His clients include Uighur prisoners cleared for release in 2003, a U. N.-mandate refugee from Somalia and former Baltimore-area resident Majid Khan, who was imprisoned in secret CIA "black sites" for more than three years before he was transferred to Guantanamo in Sept. 2006. AL ODAH/BOUMEDIENE LEGAL ARGUMENT AND IMPLICATIONSWhat the Supreme Court will consider in Al Odah v. United States:
Did the D.C. Circuit err in relying again on Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950), to dismiss these petitions and to hold that Petitioners have no common law right to habeas protected by the Suspension Clause and no constitutional rights whatsoever, despite this Court’s ruling in Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004), that these Petitioners are in a fundamentally different position from those in Eisentrager, that their access to the writ is consistent with the historical reach of the writ at common law, and that they are confined within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States?
Given that the Court in Rasul concluded that the writ at common law would have extended to persons detained at Guantanamo, did the D.C. Circuit err in holding that Petitioners’ right to the writ was not protected by the Suspension Clause because they supposedly would not have been entitled to the writ at common law? Are Petitioners, who have been detained without charge or trial for more than five years in the exclusive custody of the United States at Guantanamo, a territory under the plenary and exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, entitled to the protection of the Fifth Amendment right not to be deprived of liberty without due process of law and of the Geneva Conventions?
Should section 7(b) of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which does not explicitly mention habeas corpus, be construed to eliminate the courts' jurisdiction over Petitioners’ pending habeas cases, thereby creating serious constitutional issues?
What the Supreme Court will consider in Boumediene v. Bush:
Whether the Military Commissions Act of 2006 validly stripped federal court jurisdiction over habeas corpus petitions filed by foreign citizens imprisoned indefinitely at the United States Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay.
Whether Petitioners' habeas corpus petitions, which establish that the United States government has imprisoned Petitioners for over five years, demonstrate unlawful confinement requiring the grant of habeas relief or, at least, a hearing on the merits.
Analysis on the Center for Constitutional Rights' ArgumentPetitioners in Al Odah argue that the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Rasul v. Bush in 2004 precludes the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals' conclusion that Guantanamo detainees have no common law right to habeas corpus protected by the Suspension Clause. The Suspension Clause, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, provides that habeas corpus, such as it existed at common law, may be suspended by Congress only in cases of "rebellion or invasion." Furthermore, Petitioners challenge the D.C. Circuit's reliance on Johnson v. Eisentrager to dismiss the detainee habeas corpus petitions, given that in Rasul, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Petitioners are differently situated to those in Eisentrager, and are confined within an area in the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Petitioners argue further that they are entitled to the writ of habeas corpus at common law, such as it existed historically, outside the definitions of the federal habeas statute, and thus are protected from any unlawful suspension of habeas by the Suspension Clause. In addition, Petitioners argue that they are entitled to Fifth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution to not be deprived of liberty without due process of law, and to the protections of the Geneva Conventions. The Petitioners have been detained without a judicial hearing for well over five years, within an area under the exclusive control and jurisdiction of the United States. Petitioners further argue that any substitute procedures -- and the review of those substitute procedures by the D.C. Circuit Court -- that have been created are so limited and narrowly defined, as well as fraught with error -- are no substitute for habeas corpus and due process. Thus, Petitioners argue, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 cannot have validly and Constitutionally stripped Petitioners of their right to the writ of habeas corpus at common law. In response, the Executive argues that "as aliens held outside the sovereign territory of the United States, [the detainees] enjoy no rights under the Suspension Clause. Second, even if they could invoke the Suspension Clause, it would not entitle them to relief because they seek an expansion of the writ well beyond its historic scope. And third, the [Detainee Treatment Act] in any event provides an adequate alternative to any habeas rights [these detainees] may have." In reality, Petitioners have been held for nearly six years at a U.S. Naval Base, in a territory under the exclusive control and jurisdiction of the United States, without any judicial process or hearing, despite the clear mandate of the Rasul court. They are not citizens of enemy nations, but citizens of our closest allies who maintain that they are innocent of any wrongdoing. Furthermore, they have been denied any meaningful process for a period that now stretches to six years -- and threatens to continue indefinitely. Two military officers who sat on Combatant Status Review Tribunals have stated in affidavits that the panels relied on shoddy evidence in order to reach preordained results -- no substitute for habeas corpus at law.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.


So here's some of Robert Verkaik's "Legal action by inmates could close Guantanamo:"

There has been growing concern about the mental health of many of the detainees, four of whom have committed suicide in the last 18 months. Yesterday it emerged that another detainee had slit his throat with a sharpened fingernail, causing substantial bleeding.
This is the third time since 2004 that the Supreme Court has been asked to review the legal status of the detainees being held at Guantanamo Bay. On both previous occassions the court ruled in favour of the government.
But lawyers for the foreign detainees argue that the courts have a constitutional responsibility to act as check on the government, which they claim has acted unlawfully in denying the detainees the right to a fair trial.
The US administration changed the law to keep the detainee cases out of US courts following earlier Supreme Court rulings. The most recent legislation, last year's Military Commissions Act, strips federal courts of their ability to hear detainee cases.
Before the start of the case, Mr Waxman said: "After six years of imprisonment without meaningful review, it is time for a court to decide the legality of their confinement."
The case could turn on whether the court decides that Guantanamo is on US soil, which would make the case for detainee rights stronger. In 2004, the judges found that existing law gave federal courts the right to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals held at Guantanamo Bay because of the unique control the US government had over the land leased from Cuba.


If there's any justice, the Supreme Court will do the right thing by the Guantanamo prisoners. But I'm not going to bet the farm on it. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday, December 5, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, Bobby Gates gets greeted with trumpets (well . . . car bombs) as he visits Iraq, realities continue to emerge about the myth of the 'great return' and more.


Starting with war resistance. December 11th the Canadian Parliament will hold public hearings on the issue of war resisters. A legislative remedy to allow war resisters to remain in Canada is necessary following the Supreme Court of Canada's November 15th announcement that they would not hear the appeals of US war resisters
Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Various war resisters hope to testify and Cindy Sheehan (OpEdNews) urges people to utilize Courage to Resist's easy to mail or e-mail resources to allow the Canadian government to know you are watching and to support organizations supporting war resisters as well as supporting war resisters:


Support actual war resisters in Canada by sending them expense money. From my friend Ryan (I gave him and his wife money to get to Canada over two years ago):

In light of the recent Supreme Court denial in Canada, I (Ryan Johnson), My wife (Jen Johnson) and Brandon Hughey need help raising funds to travel to Ottawa to attend hearings before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, where War Resisters will be giving Testimony to the committee. At these hearings the committee will be deciding on whether or not to make a provision to allow war resisters to stay in Canada. This is one of our last chances to be able to continue living in Canada. We will be leaving December 7th because the hearings are December 11th, 2007 so we need to act fast. They may try to send guys back soon and we need to have a strong War Resister Presence. We appreciate all of the support and Want to thank all of you who can help.

Checks/money orders can be sent for Ryan, Jen and Brandon to:312 Tower Rd Nelson, BC V1L3K6

One of the war resisters in Canada is
Kimberly Rivera who lives there now with her husband and two children. At her site, she reflects, "Its funny how Recruiters work, every year in high school they are allowed to set up a table in the lunch room and discuss your future as a Soldier or what have you and every school had a ROTC program. I was never in ROTC or have I ever thought of becoming a soldier, on several occassions I had the recruiters approach me and ask me what my plans where and I told them I am just 16 i don't need to disclosing info about my self to strangers, and because i was under age of 17 they didn't talk to me further that year. How ever in my junior and senior year they were calling my house with school rosters that they get from the schools. And each recruiter is assigned to a certain school." She recounts her experiences in Iraq, how her husband Mario found out information online, and how they made the decision to move to Canada and shares "we crossed the broader on Feb 18th 2007 i missed my cycle in febuary and in march and late april i started having sever pain and heavy clotting and was depressed because i know that i misscaried it last about 2 weeks." Now the Rivera family is trying to make a life for themselves and Canada's Parliament can do the right thing, they can step up and address the issue in a number of ways.


There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb,
Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at
Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

Meanwhile
IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

"I think you heard about Cholera infections in Iraq,"
writes an Iraqi correspondent at Inside Iraq (McClatchy Newspapers). "If you read the statistic you will be astonished that this wounded country is able to withstand in front of this outbreak disease in spite of all the probems that surround it. When this disease showed for the first time in north of Iraq I thought that this disease will spread in our country like the fire spread in dry stalks." The reporter goes on to share a story of a woman in Baghdad who ended up with cholera but her relatives feared the "shame on our family" if she was taken to the hospital and placed "under quarantine" so, instead, the woman ended up dying. Cholera was first detected back in August and in Kirkuk. By mid-September cholera was showing up in "twenty one districts of Northern Iraq" according to the World Health Organization. On Sunday, David Smith (UK Observer) provided an update noting that the factors were in place to "create an epidemic" with 101 cases in Baghdad. Yesterday, AAAS Science and Techonology Policy Fellow Mark D. Drapeau (at the New York Times) observed that cholera "doesn't respect borders" and that includes who is at risk in Iraq: anyone. Children, adults, foreign forces, anyone. Drapeau argues, "Cholera is a grave threat for the American project in Iraq, but also an opportunity to capture the hearts and minds of the population." No, not really. The ship sailed on that long ago. More importantly, a people under threat -- and that's what it is to live under an occupation -- usually includes a healthy number of people who will assume that outbreaks of whatever are launched upon them by the occupiers. Cesar Chelala (Qatar's Gulf Times) quotes Oxfam's Jeremy Hobbs declaring, "The terrible violence in Iraq has masked the ongoing humanitarian crisis. Malnutrition amongst children has dramatically increased and basic services, ruined by years of wars and sanctions, cannot meet the needs of the Iraqi people. Millions of Iraqis have been forced to flee the violence, either to another part of Iraq or abroad. Many of those are living in dire poverty."

Dire poverty. A characteristic of those Iraqi refugees being tricked into returning from Syria.
Hamza Hendai (AP) reports that Iraqi state television is broadcasting propaganda messages aimed at Iraqi refugees with tag lines such as "How sweet it is to return to Iraq". Yesterday on NPR's Morning Edition, Deborah Amos reported the reality revealed from refugees returning to Iraq: "many are going back because it is too difficult to stay in Syria. In October, Syria made it harder for Iraqis to enter the country. About 1,000 return to Iraq every day, but at least 500 cross into Syria daily -- running from kidnappings, bombings or personal threats. Falah Jaber, an Iraqi sociologist, says that those who have been personally targeted by violence will be the last ones to consider going home" and quoted Jaber stating, "What we have seen this far is just a trickle. We have one and a half million" external refugees so "the return of 30,000 is not yet a pro-return case." Jamie Tarabay (Morning Edition) broadcast the thoughts of Suad Moahmmed who explained, "We were kicked out of our home in Dora. They took my house and furniture" and, upon returning, discovered that a militia leader had sold the home. [The Red Crescent notes that the number of internal refugees has dipped from 2.3 million to 2.19 million.] Next month, as IRIN reported yesterday, Iraqis will discover that the items available to them will drop from ten to five and that the remaining five will be distributed in lower numbers. The food rations that Iraqis need just to struggle through are being cut because the (puppet) government wants to do the White House's bidding. Children's milk is not being reduced, it is being CUT OUT all together. This at a time when you have at least 28% of Iraqi children suffering from malnutrition and when over 11% of infants are underweight. This is criminal. The rations cards were something Paul Bremer tried to stamp out but couldn't. It took an allegedly independent puppet government to betray the already suffering children of Iraq. And these are the people that the White House says must be supported. Of course they say that, the White House wants to do away with the rations as well. But that's the sort of 'leadership' in the puppet government of Iraq: the already suffering children, living in a war zone, can suffer a lot more because the puppet government has other priorities (which we will no doubt learn, a year or so from now, included lining their own pockets).

And, in other bad news,
the US Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, went to Iraq. Iraq trumpets greeted him -- if car and roadside bombings can pass for trumpets.

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing wounded two police officers, a Baghdad car bombing claimed 14 lives with at least thirty-three more wounded, a Mosul car bombing claimed 1 life and left seven more injured, a Diyala car bombing at a Baquba bus station claimed 5 lives leaving twelve more wounded and Biji roadside bombing claimed 1 life. Reuters reports a car bombing targeting Brig. Gen Kakamen Hameed that left him and nine other people wounded in Kirkuk and also killed 2 people (inlcuding one of Hameed's bodyguards).

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "a Kurd security officer" was shot dead in Tuz Khurmatu. Reuters notes a sheikh was shot dead Kut.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses were discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes a corpse discovered in Dhuluiya.

Today the
US military announced: "Two Multi-National Division-North Soldiers were killed as a result of injuries sustained from a complex attack involving an improvised explosive device and small arms fire while conducting operations in Salah ad Din province, Dec. 4." And today they announced: "A Multi-National Division – North Soldier died Dec. 5 as a result of wounds sustained from an attack involving an improvised explosive device and small-arms fire while conducting operations in Salah ad Din province Dec. 4." And late yesterday, they announced: "A U.S. Soldier was killed as a result of injuries sustained from a vehicle explosion during a vehicle recovery operation in Al Anbar province Dec. 3. "

Turning to US politics, yesterday Democratic contenders for the 2008 presidential nomination (except Bill Richardson) took part in the NPR 'debate' that was pretty embarrassing.
Click here for audio (and transcript link) and here for just transcript. First thing you may have noticed is that Iraq fell off the radar. That's not the first debate this has happened but Barack Obama didn't even appear jazzed to use his "I was against the war before it started" (while refusing to note his change of position beginning in 2004). What's happening? The public hasn't lost interest in the illegal war. In fact the latest poll found it the issue most noted by respondents -- you could take the second and third most cited issues (economy and healthcare), add them together and Iraq would still outrank them. But the media has lost interest. Commenting on a new report by Media Lens, John Pilger (New Statesman) summarizes, "Like the reported 'success' of the US 'surge' in Iraq, the Soviet equivalent allowed 'poor peasants [to work] the land peacefully'. Like the Americans and British in Iraq and Afghanistan, Soviet troops were liberators who became peacekeepers and always acted in 'self-defence'. The BBC's Mark Urban's revelation of the "first real evidence that President Bush's grand design of toppling a dictator and forcing a democracy into the heart of the Middle East could work" (Newsnight, 12 April 2005) is almost word for word that of Soviet commentators claiming benign and noble intent behind Moscow's actions in Afghanistan. The BBC's Paul Wood, in thrall to the 101st Airborne, reported that the Americans 'must win here if they are to leave Iraq . . . There is much still to do.' That precisely was the Soviet line." That really does summarize the nonsense of the 'debate.' Mike Gravel, naming one specific answer he didn't have, stated, "I don't have an answer to be able to persuade the American people that they are the solution, not their leaders. I wish I had the answer to convince them of that." The worst moment -- a tough call -- probably involved when this was declared: "Oh, come on. You know what you want to do on that. You want to impeach people." That was aimed at Dennis Kucinich. Which candidate decided to freak out Kucinich? No candidate. That was Steve Inskeep of NPR. And, no, he didn't speak to other candidates like that. Exactly what did NPR think of that? If that's NPR 'tude, it certainly wasn't spread out to the other candidates. More importantly, Kucinich doesn't want to "impeach people." He's introduced a resolution to impeach Dick Cheney and he thinks the Bully Boy needs to be impeached. "People" certainly sounds 'wilder.' 'Oh, that crazy Dennis, he just wants to impeach us all!' Steve Inskeep embarrassed himself and so did Ruth Conniff for failing to note that in her commentary (at The Progressive) or to note that Iraq -- the most cited issue by voters -- wasn't addressed seriously in the debate which, again, lasted two hours. Two hours and they couldn't explore Iraq. NPR needs to take a look at themselves. Were the 'moderators' unaware the Iraq War was still going on? That is shameful even before you note that NPR is 'public radio.' The public ranks Iraq as the most important issue, it's a damn shame the fools at NPR don't.

Staying on politics, we'll close with the opening of
Sharon Smith's latest commentary at CounterPunch:

The December 17th issue of the liberal Nation magazine contains an article penned by former California Senator Tom Hayden, purporting to offer antiwar voters a glimpse of hope for mainstream relevance in the coming election year-which will certainly be a contest between two pro-war candidates from the two corporate political parties. Hayden's article, "How the Peace Movement Can Win: A Field Guide," exudes confidence that antiwar activists have a role to play in spreading a message of peace as the presidential primaries begin on January 3rd.
Hayden acknowledges that, even as a Congressional majority over the last year, Democrats have provided little more than an "echo" for the Bush administration. He also admits that leading Democratic presidential contenders refuse to guarantee troop withdrawal before 2013, arguing, "The platform of 'out by 2013' may be a sufficient difference from the Republicans for some, but it won't satisfy the most committed antiwar voters." He notes that all the leading candidates vaguely assert the need, as Hillary Clinton does, for "a smaller American force left behind dedicated to training Iraqis and counter-terrorism."
Nevertheless, Hayden's "Field Guide" exhorts antiwar activists to get out the vote for 2008-for whichever candidate becomes the anointed Democratic nominee. "Only in this way," Hayden argues without evidence, "will the peace movement succeed in expanding and intensifying antiwar feeling to a degree that will compel the politicians to abandon their six-year timetable for a far shorter one."











jeremy hinzmanbrandon hughey