Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Aaron Glantz, Russ Feingold, Law & Disorder

Tuesday! :D Man, I didn't think I was going to make it last night. As soon as I blogged, I powered down and crawled into bed.

DC was a blast but there was so much to do. Fun stuff and serious stuff. And I was wiped out when it was over. Ava and C.I. went straight from DC to speaking on campuses. I think Jess was going with them but I don't remember and forgot to ask when I was on the phone with C.I. earlier.

Law and Disorder was what I was calling C.I. about. One of the guests was irritating me and I also didn't understand what he was talking about. I called C.I. and go, "His name is Stanley something?" And C.I. goes, "Stanley Aronowitz" and gives me the Cliff's Notes version of Aronowitz and adds, "I really don't know him but I have met him and he's a nice person. Is he getting a word in because he does get nervous when he's trying to make a point and gets stepped on?" I think that was what it was.

I rewound the tape and went back to listening (it's this week's episode) and he really didn't get that many words in. I could understand him after the Cliff's Notes version and he really seemed like a nice guy but he did a little different when he was being interrupted. I thought he was kind of rude and bossy when I was listening before I called C.I. to find out who the guy was. When I listened again, he really did get cut off.

That's not normal but Dalia Hashad wasn't on and they had a guest from another segment sit in and I think they wanted to be sure he knew he could weigh in. So it just seemed to me like Stanley (and I'm just calling him that, I had to get C.I. to spell the last name over the phone) got the short end of the stick. I'm going to assume it was good natured kidding but if Stanley didn't take it that way, I would understand it.

He had several really good points but the one I enjoyed the most and agreed with the strongest was about a newspaper. He was talking about how in previous movements there was something to turn to. And he used historical examples. But today, what do we have?

And that's right but I am so glad I called C.I. because I was going to give up on the episode and I would've missed this point. Stanley goes we have The Nation "and vanden Heuvel" and that crowd just want to shore up the Democratic Party. They don't want to push for change and stuff. Is that not what we've been seeing over and over?

So Stanley is a genius in my book and I've popped out the tabs on this recording so I can keep the tape. I'm going to try to listen to it again after I read his book. I'm sure I'll understand what he's talking about better when I do.

I didn't get the newspaper stuff, really, until C.I. gave me the Cliff's Notes on what Stanley's usually interested in. Stanley was using an example of the Communist Party and how they used their newspaper. And it is true that if you don't know what's going on, everyone's kind of off in the dark. That was one of his points.

I felt bad for him, to be honest. I'm not talking about the first guest. Because after I listened again, I could see that question C.I. asked about was he nervous? The other guy wrote a book too and he got to discuss it and just go on and on. Stanley had Heidi and both Michaels to talk to and also the other guy piping in and, if he and the other guy are friends, that's fine. But if they aren't friends, that guy was kind of rude and that last comment about something like "Well, I'll read your book Stanley" was kind of smarmy.

So Stanley thinks we need to have a newspaper and I agree with that but it broke up, the conversation, into a lot of questions and other things. Heidi's question was on the point, she was asking about . . . resources are small, whether with organizations or attention, and she was wondering about funding?

He said he didn't really see funders like fundraising and more like everyone gave $10, $20, $100 or whatever. And then he got cut off. I'm not griping at the Michaels because Wally and I are like that sometimes and it's a lot of fun. But I'm beginning to wonder if others think it is?

I was listening the first time before I stopped the tape and I was thinking, "Stanley's an asshole." Then when I call C.I. and start talking about how Stanley is an asshole, C.I.'s like, no, but if he's nervous . . . And it was weird because I went back to the tape and started over with when he came in and I could see how he might be nervous. He starts off confident and ready to talk about his book. And then it becomes the guest and the Michaels laughing. And I could hear Stanley's voice rise and picture his back straightening and he really did seem nervous. If it was me, I think I'd be like, "What's going on here?" Although, honestly, I probably would've just joked back because I'm always up for silly.

But I know some people aren't and it just seemed to me like Stanley could have seen that as, "Are they making fun of me? Why did they invite me on?" He really did have some strong points to make and I hope they have him back on.

I liked the roundtable idea until I talked to C.I. It was funny and the stuff kept me interested but I really did not like Stanley. Then when I listened again, I had a different take on it and felt like all the good natured stuff (which is how I saw the first time) could go a different way if you were Stanley and taken off balance by what was going on. This is Stanley's book, Left Turn: Forging a New Political Future.

And I want to be clear that I'm always up for funnin'. I love to laugh and all. But it did feel like there was fun going on and then there was Stanley. One of the Michaels (I think it was Michael Smith) cut him off on the newspaper to ask a question and then when Stanley's going to respond says he was talking to the other author. It seemed like it was a lot of fun for the Michaels and the other guy but I didn't think so for Stanley.

I'm not ragging on the Michaels. Listening really made me wonder if I do that? I don't mean to but I will get silly and the more guys in the mix, the sillier I'll get. But I also noticed that it was Heidi ("pulling a C.I." -- that's what Elaine calls it when something's happened and it needs to be smooothed over) saying that the work Stanley was talking about was work that they'd be trying for at the National Lawyer's Guild.

It's weird to hear something that you're like 99% sure you've done over and over and get that while you and others found it funny, the person you were talking with didn't. That's fine if that's what you're going for but I'm talking about when you're not intending to do that.

It just kind of blew my mind to go back to the tape and suddenly see something else might be going on there because I really did think Stanley was a pain in the ass and then when I went back and listened all the way through, I had a completely different reaction.

And I was listening and thinking about the roundtables we do and wondering if I'd hurt someone's feelings during it while I was just playing around? I hope not but I'll ask when we're all working together this weekend. I don't think the Michaels or even the other guy were trying to be mean but I could see how someone could be thrown by that sort of thing.

The newspaper idea would be about bridging the gaps, between younger and older, and between various issues. To show the connections between issues and to get all of us, who should be in agreement, on the same page.

I really wish we did have a newspaper like that. I know a magazine seems like it would be good but I really do wish we had a newspaper. Something national that could take on the likes of the New York Times. You could look at it online or in print (Stanely made that point) and, I mean, if it's not in print you can pretty much forget about my grandfather looking at it. He'll look at the community sites because he knows all of us and stuff. But he's not surfing the net. So if you were really trying to bring everyone together to let them know what all was going on, you would have to include print. It's also true that print, if you carry it around, people will ask you about it.

Okay, I just went online to the libarary and his book is checked out but I've requested The Death and Rebirth of American Radicalism and I'll start with that one. And he has a website.

This is from Aaron Glantz' "What I Told Congress:"

Congresswoman Waters, and fellow members, a year ago I published a book called How America Lost Iraq. The book, based on my experiences as an unembedded journalist, documented how the US military went from being seen as liberators to the situation we have now -- where the vast majority of ordinary Iraqis support attacks on American soldiers in an effort to get them to leave their country.
There are four main reasons for this:
** NUMBER ONE: All the things that were broken during the initial invasion are still broken. There is no security, no ability to send children to school without fear of kidnapping. There is almost no clean water, and almost no electricity. Imagine trying to sleep without a fan during when its 120 degrees in the Summer in Baghdad. Imagine four years without reliable refrigeration. You would get grouchy.
**NUMBER TWO: The Abu Ghraib prison scandal, but not the one you saw on TV. The Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq is that so many people imprisoned in Abu Ghraib prison. When the scandal broke two years ago, there were more than 10,000 "security detainees" in Iraq. These are people who were not charged with any crime and had no access to a lawyer or to visits from their family. In 2004, the International Committee for the Red Cross, which has access to the prisons, estimated up to 90 percent of inmates were arrested by mistake. Even now, the US military holds an estimated 13,000 people without trial in Iraq. This is not a good way to make friends.
**NUMBER THREE: The attack on the movement of Muqtada al-Sadr. Many here may not like his anti-American rhetoric and fundamentalist ideology, but he is a man with a lot of street credibility in Iraq – his followers provide food and security to the poor. His father and uncle were both killed by Saddam Hussien. When the US military attacks a major social movement with millions of members, it inflicts many civilian casualties --- causing many people who had never picked up arms before to start to fight against our soldiers. It also causes Iraqis of all political stripes to believe the United States has no commitment to democracy -- that we only want to control their country.
**NUMBER FOUR The attack on Fallujah. The first siege in the Spring of 2004, which came after four military contractors were killed and their burning corpses hung from a bridge over the Euphrates River in the center of town. The US military didn't just take revenge on the killers, but against all the people of Fallujah. So many people were killed in the US bombardment of Fallujah that the municipal stadium had to be turned into a graveyard for the dead. And I’ve been to that stadium and I've seen the mourners and the headstones and I can tell you that many of the people buried there are innocent women, children, and the elderly.
Imagine if so many Americans were killed in Washington that RFK Stadium had to be turned into a graveyard. People here would get angry. Some would get violent.
Four things, the lack of basic services, the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, the attack on Muqtada al-Sadr and the attack on Fallujah.
By the middle of 2004, almost every Iraq I talked to wanted the United States military to leave their country.
Since then, the situation on the ground in Iraq has steadily gotten worse -- with Iraqis killing each other in larger numbers every year the occupation drags on.

So, if you think about it, the same non-justice policy that holds prisoners at Guantamo also held them at Abu Ghraib (and continues to hold them throughout Iraq). This is what Katha Pollitt can't get (maybe because she's too busy doing book reviews and lists?) about Iraq -- there is no "save" there -- not from the US. Now maybe if she'd focused on reality instead of worrying what CODEPINK was doing to Hillary (who deserves it and more), Pollitt could have offered something of use and value. Instead, she was just lame with her laughable "Be Honest" point. People are honest, people who pay attention. But people who pay attention know "Abeer" -- they hear the name and they know what you're talking about. People who don't, even if they're supposed to be the biggest feminist in the nation and at The Nation, doesn't think the gang rape of a 14 year old Iraqi girl by US soldiers who stalked her is worth writing about. As C.I. has pointed out, maybe the thing to do is to worry less about CODEPINK and more about the fact that women aren't getting published in the magazine you write for. (C.I. brings up the low representation of women in the snapshot.)

Wally and Cedric are trying to be sure that everyone knows about what Russ Feingold did today so they're asking all of us to post it if we post today. They only had to ask. And I like Russ Feingold, I wish that he would run for president. So this is his "Opening Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing Exercising Congress's Constitutional Power to End a War:"

January 30, 2007
Listen to Senator Feingold's Opening Statement
Good morning, and welcome to this hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee entitled "Exercising Congress's Constitutional Power to End a War." We are honored to have with us this morning a distinguished panel of legal scholars to share their views on this very important and timely issue.
I thank Chairman Leahy for allowing me to chair this hearing. Let me start by making a few opening remarks, then I will recognize Senator Specter for an opening statement, and then we will turn to our witnesses.
It is often said in this era of ubiquitous public opinion polls that the only poll that really matters is the one held on election day. On November 7, 2006, we had such a poll, and all across this country, the American people expressed their opinion on the war in Iraq in the most significant and meaningful way possible -- they voted. And with those votes, they sent a clear message that they disagree with this war and they want our involvement in it to stop.
The President has chosen to ignore that message. So it is up to Congress to act.
The Constitution gives Congress the explicit power "[to] declare War," "[t]o raise and support Armies," "[t]o provide and maintain a Navy," and "[t]o make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces." In addition, under Article I, "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." These are direct quotes from the Constitution of the United States. Yet to hear some in the Administration talk, it is as if these provisions were written in invisible ink. They were not. These powers are a clear and direct statement from the founders of our republic that Congress has authority to declare, to define, and ultimately, to end a war.
Our founders wisely kept the power to fund a war separate from the power to conduct a war. In their brilliant design of our system of government, Congress got the power of the purse, and the President got the power of the sword. As James Madison wrote, "Those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper or safe judges, whether a war ought to be commenced, continued or concluded."
The President has made the wrong judgment about Iraq time and again, first by taking us into war on a fraudulent basis, then by keeping our brave troops in Iraq for nearly four years, and now by proceeding despite the opposition of the Congress and the American people to put 21,500 more American troops into harm's way.
If and when Congress acts on the will of the American people by ending our involvement in the Iraq war, Congress will be performing the role assigned it by the founding fathers -- defining the nature of our military commitments and acting as a check on a President whose policies are weakening our nation.
There is little doubt that decisive action from the Congress is needed. Despite the results of the election, and two months of study and supposed consultation -- during which experts and members of Congress from across the political spectrum argued for a new policy -- the President has decided to escalate the war. When asked whether he would persist in this policy despite congressional opposition, he replied: "Frankly, that's not their responsibility."
Last week Vice President Cheney was asked whether the non-binding resolution passed by the Foreign Relations Committee that will soon be considered by the full Senate would deter the President from escalating the war. He replied: "It's not going to stop us."
In the United States of America, the people are sovereign, not the President. It is Congress' responsibility to challenge an administration that persists in a war that is misguided and that the country opposes. We cannot simply wring our hands and complain about the Administration's policy. We cannot just pass resolutions saying "your policy is mistaken." And we can't stand idly by and tell ourselves that it's the President's job to fix the mess he made. It's our job to fix the mess, and if we don't do so we are abdicating our responsibilities.
Tomorrow, I will introduce legislation that will prohibit the use of funds to continue the deployment of U.S. forces in Iraq six months after enactment. By prohibiting funds after a specific deadline, Congress can force the President to bring our forces out of Iraq and out of harm's way.
This legislation will allow the President adequate time to redeploy our troops safely from Iraq, and it will make specific exceptions for a limited number of U.S. troops who must remain in Iraq to conduct targeted counter-terrorism and training missions and protect U.S. personnel. It will not hurt our troops in any way -- they will continue receiving their equipment, training and salaries. It will simply prevent the President from continuing to deploy them to Iraq. By passing this bill, we can finally focus on repairing our military and countering the full range of threats that we face around the world.
There is plenty of precedent for Congress exercising its constitutional authority to stop U.S. involvement in armed conflict.
In late December 1970, Congress prohibited the use of funds to finance the introduction of United States ground combat troops into Cambodia or to provide U.S. advisors to or for Cambodian military forces in Cambodia.
In late June 1973, Congress set a date to cut off funds for combat activities in South East Asia. The provision read, and I quote:
"None of the funds herein appropriated under this act may be expended to support directly or indirectly combat activities in or over Cambodia, Laos, North Vietnam, and South Vietnam by United States forces, and after August 15, 1973, no other funds heretofore appropriated under any other act may be expended for such purpose."
More recently, President Clinton signed into law language that prohibited funding after March 31, 1994, for military operations in Somalia, with certain limited exceptions. And in 1998, Congress passed legislation including a provision that prohibited funding for Bosnia after June 30, 1998, unless the President made certain assurances.
Our witnesses today are well aware of this history, and I look forward to hearing their analysis of it as they discuss Congress's power in this area. They are legal scholars, not military or foreign policy experts. We are here to find out from them not what Congress should do, but what Congress can do. Ultimately, it rests with Congress to decide whether to use its constitutional powers to end the war.
The answer should be clear. Since the President is adamant about pursuing his failed policies in Iraq, Congress has the duty to stand up and use its power to stop him. If Congress doesn't stop this war, it's not because it doesn't have the power. It's because it doesn't have the will.


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

January 30, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, Bully Boy's spin on Najaf comes loose, Ehren Watada's court-martial is still scheduled for Feb. 5th but there is a new development,
and US Senator Russ Feingold maintains he is not running for president in 2008 but delivers something sharper, more focused and harder hitting than any of the declared candidates has yet to offer: "In the United Sates of America, the people are sovereign, not the Presidents. It is Congress' responsibility to challenge an administration that persists in a war that is misquided and that the country opposes. We cannot simply wring our hands and complain about the Administration's policy. We cannot just pass resolutions saying 'your policy is mistaken.' And we can't stand idly by and tell ourselves that it's the President's job to fix the mess he made. It's our job to fix the mess, and if we don't do so we are abdicating our responsibilities."


Last week, Ehren Watada, the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq appeared on NPR's Fresh Air with his attorney Eric Seitz where they were interviewed by NO HELP TO ANYONE Terry Gross. Gross cited the laughable Seattle Times editorial and Watada's response was:


When we join the military we don't swear an oath to a person or, especially officers, in our oath we do not swear an oath of loyalty to any one person or any group of people or even an institution. We swear an oath to protect the Constitution and also the American people as a whole and we have to follow the rule of law as it says in the Constitution and when we have . . . When I joined the military in March 2003, I believed the administration when they said there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, there were ties with Sadam to al Qaeda and 9-11. We all know those lies were false now and there have been many reports coming out of retired CIA analysts and officers saying that the intelligence was not bad it was intentionally falsified to fit the policy. When we have as I said a group of people in our government who mislead the public who mislead the other branch of government in order to justify their war that is a violation of the Constitution. And, um, I just have to say that regardless of what they convict me on, if they convict me or sentence me, I am doing what I swore an oath to do when I joined the military 3 years ago and as I said I did not realize the extent of the deception that was waged upon us that I do now.


That was the first segment of the January 25 show. The second is where she got into real trouble and there's a reason for that: Terry Gross can find a man anywhere. Her next book might need to be entitled Manhunt. It's women she can't find. And she's far from alone on that -- as of the February 5, 2007 issue of The Nation, for the magazine to offer women in equal number (equal, not more) there February 12, 2007 issue would have needed to print 37 pieces written or co-written by women and none by men. The Nation ratio by gender is basically 1 female for every 4 males. Gross specializes in her nerdy dominitrix pose on air -- full of tension and archness -- and it's a laughable bit but she's made it profitable. What she has not done (appalling when you consider that NPR broke down barriers for women -- including Gross) is do her part to offer women an equal platform. Appalling considering the history of NPR, more appalling considering the information she was seeking in the second segment of the show when she interviewed Eugene Fidell asking him questions about issues that he frequently hems and haws on. If you're asking about the Law of Land Warfare, Gross, you can go to a woman. Retired colonel Ann Wright taught that.

NPR audiences were cheated out of a full discussion about Ehren Watada because Queen Bee Gross can have countless males on her show each week (several guests each day) but somehow more than two or three women send Gross into a panic. It's harmful to all women and, in the case of Ehren Watada, it prevented Gross from being able to find the answers to her questions.

Had Ann Wright been invited into the second segment (instead of one male 'expert') she could have stated, "As part of our overal military training there is a history of service personnel being told that you do not have to follow an illegal order. It comes from the commissions that we take that we are to uphold the lawful orders of our superios. Implicit in that is that if there is an illegal order you are under no obligation to follow it." Wright served in the military, served in the US State Department and the quote is from what she testified to in the August Article 32 hearing.

Ehren Watada faces a court-martial on February 5th (and got the Diane Sawyer "Aren't you ashamed!" treatment from Gross last week). Though it never would have been the court-martial of Sarah Olson (despite where independent media put their emphasis in what passed for 'coverage'), she and Gregg Kakesako will not appear in court. All the hand wringing was for nothing. All the, "Phil, you've got to write about this! We need you!" phone calls were a waste of time. Already today Amy Goodman's interviewed Olson and no one ever needs to do so again. Goodman made the mistake of asking a very basic question -- Now that she's not going to be asked to testify, will she be covering the court-martial? It was too much for Olson -- she sputtered, she stammered, she had no answer. The parody "Run, Olson! Run!"
never looked so true.

Ehren Watada was always the defendant in his court-martial -- even if that basic point couldn't be grasped by indy pundits. The charges reduce the maxiumum number of years Watada could serve if he is punished in the court-martial -- from six years, it has now dropped to a maximum of four years in prison. Eric Seitz, Watada's civilian attorney, told AP, of the kangaro court awaiting his client: "This is not a justice proceeding but a disciplinary proceeding. Really, the only thing the Army is interested in here is what kind of punishment to mete, not whether Lieutenant Watada is guilty or innocent of the charges."


Watada is a part of a movement of resistance with the military that includes others such as Agustin Aguayo (whose court-martial is currently set to begin on March
6th), Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ivan Brobeck, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

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

On the topic of going to Canada, Patrick Malone (Canada's The London Free Press) reports
on Matt Lowell who was attempting to receive refugee status in Canada and has heard back from the Immigration and Refugee Board: "Eight pages long, it can be summed up in one word: No." The article also notes a meeting this Thursday at 7:00 pm at the Tolpuddle housing co-op, common room, 380 Adelaide St. at King Street in London (Ottawa, not England) where you can meet with Iraq war resisters and those "offering support to military resisters."

In Iraq, the big (press) issue is still what happened in Najaf.

Bombings?


Sam Knight (Times of London) reports an "explosion, in the town of Mandali, 60km north east of Baghdad and near the border with Iran, claimed the lives of 23 worshippers at a Shi mosque, doctors said. A further 60 people were injured when a suicide bomber detonated a belt of explosives in the midst of a crowd of around 150 people entering the Ali al-Akbar mosque". Michael Howard (Guardian of London) reports a mortar attack in Baghdad that killed "at least 17 people and injuring 72." Kim Gamel (AP) notes "a bomb in a garage can exploded as scores of Shiites - most them Kurds -- were performing rituals in Khanaqin, a majority Kurdish city also near the Iranian border. At least 13 people were killed and 39 were wounded, police Maj. Idriss Mohammed said." Reuters notes a car bomb in Mosul that killed two police officers (wounded two more) and a secon mortar attack in Baghdad left nine people wounded.



Shootings?

Al Jazeera reports that "four Ashura pilgrmins" were shot ded with an addition six injured in Baghdad today.



Also today the US military announced: "One Marine assigned to Multi-National Forces-West died Monday from wounds sustained due to enemy action while operating in Al Anbar Province" and they announced: "LSA Anaconda, Iraq– A 13th Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) Soldier was killed in an accident when a M-1114 HMMWV rolled over northwest of An Nasiriah Jan 29."

Meanwhile Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) further discredits Bully Boy's false assertion that the February 22nd bombing in Samarra of a Shi'ite mosque began the sectarian violence -- Fadel notes that the claim is already disputed by "U.S. diplomats, Iraqi politicians, U.S. intelligence analysts and journalists [who] had reported throughout 2005 that attacks on Sunnis by Shiite militias were rising and that the militias had infiltraded the security forces"; however, Fadel reports that Ibrahim al Jaafari (former prime minister of Iraq0 states "he told U.S. officials nearly two years ago that Shiite Muslim militas were infiltrating the country's secuirty services".

In latest lies the Bully Boy told the world, CBS and AP report that Bully Boy continues to cite the recent events in Najaf as proof of yet another turned corner: "My first reaction on this report from the battlefield is that the Iraqis are beginning to show me something." Marc Santora (New York Times) reported today that, contrary to the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk: "Iraqi forces were surprised and nearly overwhelmed . . . and needed far more help from American forces than previously disclosed".

In other news, does US Senator Arlen Specter watch Democracy Now!? If so he may have seen the speech US Rep Maxine Waters delivered at the rally in DC Saturday -- where she made the point that Bully Boy was not the decider. AP reports that Arlen Specter said something similar, in milder terms, today: "I would suggest respectfully to the president that is not the sole decider. The decider is a shared and joint responsiblity." Then, Specter saw his shadow and won't be spotted again until spring.

Staying on the topic of the US Congress, Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report) notes US Rep Maxine Waters recent appearance on CNN where she outlined the plans by the Out of Iraq Congressional Caucus to visit "early Democratic primary states" in order to make some Democratic presidential candidates demonstrate a spine. When asked by Wolf Blitzer if this were a reference to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, "they both have to prove themselves," was Waters' response.

Also addressing the issue of spine and justice, Anthony Arnove (author of IRAQ: The logic of Withdrawal) observes (at CounterPunch): "The other night, on 60 Minutes, President Bush said 'Everybody was wrong on weapons of mass destruction.' Yet millions of us who protested this war before it started were right, and were ignored. We did not have access to any special intelligence. We simply used our intelligence. And today we have the intelligence to know that each day we continue the occupation of Iraq, the situation gets worse. Every time we have been told 'we are turning the corner,' the situation gets worse. And we have the intelligence to know that you cannot oppose the war, as some Democrats have proclaimed, and yet fund this war. To those who say we cannot withdraw 'precipitously,' there is nothing precipitous about pulling out after four years of occuyping another country against its will. And to those who say we are abandoing the troops, the best way to support the troops is to bring them home."

Today, US Senator Russ Feingold held a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on "Excercising Congress's Constitutional Power to End a War" to explore the issue of what powers Congress has in ending Bully Boy's illegal war. From Feingold's opening statement:
"It is often said . . . that the only poll that really matters is the one held on election day. On November 7, 2006 we had such a poll, and all across this country, the American people expressed their opinion on the war in Iraq in the most significant and meaningful way possible -- they voted. And with those votes, they sent a clear message that they disagree with this war and they want our involvement in it to stop. The President has chosen to ignore that message. So it is up to Congress to act." Noting the words written into the US Constitution (Congress has the power to declare war, the power of the purse, etc.), Feingold then stated, "The President has made the wrong judgment about Iraq time and again, first by taking us into war on a fraudulent basis, then by keeping our brave troops in Iraq for nearly four years, and now by proceeding despite the opposition of the Congress and the American people to put 21,500 more American troops into harm's way. If and when Congress acts on the will of the American people by ending our involvement in the Iraq war, Congress will be performing the role assigned it by the founding fathers -- defining the nature of our military commitments and acting as a check on a President whose policies are weakening our nation. . . . There is little doubt that decisive action from the Congress is needed. Despite the results of the election, and two months of study and supposed consultation -- during which experts and members of Congress from across the political spectrum argued for a new policy -- the President has decided to escalate the war. When asked whether he would persist in this policy despite congressional opposition, he replied: 'Frankly, that's not their responsibility.' [. . .] It's our job to fix the mess, and if we don't do so we are abdicating our responsibilities. Tomorrow, I will introduce legislation that will prohibit the use of funds to continue the deployment of U.S. forces in Iraq six months after enactment. By prohibiting funds after a specific deadline, Congress can force the President to bring our forces out of Iraq and out of harm's way."


On last weekends protests, rallies and marches, Danny Schechter writes at BuzzFlash to remind everyone that the numbers reported do matter as do media coverage: "Do the anti-war organizaers see this as a problem? Don't they think they should try to do something about it as a problem and protest this ritualistic treatement? Shouldn't they make the media coverage a issue? Are they only listening to themselves? I was on Air America in LA on Saturday afternoon and feisty host Bree Walker, a former TV anchor, agreed. But the anti-war movement continues to pay lipservice to this problem, perhaps for fear of 'alienating' the press." To be clear, Danny's writing of the mainstream press. I would expand that to include independent media as well (and no community member would disagree with that assertion).

Also addressing the issue of big media at BuzzFlash, Cindy Sheehan writes: "In the United States today, we have a media controlled b corporations that are, for the most part, controlled by other entities that profit off of war. NBC is owned by General Electric, a major war profiteer (which used to be a crime punishable by hanging). The corporate media has a lot at stake by keeping the wag-the-dog occupation of Iraq aloat on BushCo's failed ship of state.


Attempting to get the word out on her son Ehren Watada, Carolyn Ho is rallying for one more speaking tour. Some of her dates this week include:

Wednesday January 31 3:00 to 5:00pm
The Center for Race, Politics & Religion University of Chicago Chicago, IL
7:00-9:00pm
St. Xavier University 3700 West 103rd St. (103rd & Pulaski) McGuire Hall Professor Peter N. Kirstein (773) 298-3283 Kirstein@sxu.edu
Indiana
Thursday February 1 10:00 to 12:00am
Emerson High School 716 East 7th Avenue Gary, Indiana Carolyn McCrady (219) 938-1302 Jim Spicer (219) 938-9615
12:30 to 2:30pm
Purdue Calumet University 2200 169th St. Hammond, Indiana Professor Kathy Tobin (219) 989-3192 tobin@calumet.purdue.edu Classroom Office Building CLO 110
7:00-9:00 pm
Valparaiso University U.S. Hwy 30 & Sturdy Rd Room 234 Neils Science Center Valparaiso, Indiana Libby A Hearn Partners for Peace (student group) (309) 834-2199 Libby.AHearn@valpo.edu Lorri Cornett Northwest Indiana Coalition Against the Iraq War (219) 916-0449 la_cornett@yahoo.com

Friday February 2
Noon Purdue University Wesley Foundation 435 West State St. West Lafayette, Indiana Sheila Rosenthal (765) 404-5489Lafayette Area Peace Coalition


Finally, the lies that led to war include the false claim of 'yellowcake' in Bully Boy's 2003 State of the Union address. When it imploded on him, they attempted to attack and silence Joseph Wilson by destroying his wife Valerie Plame -- a CIA agent until those at the White House decided to blow her cover. Rory O'Connor is blogging about Scooter Libby's trial and Judith Miller was supposed to appear today.


mikey likes it








cindy sheehanbuzzflash


Posted by at

Monday, January 29, 2007

Dave Lindorff, more

Tired and just trying to figure out what to write. :-

Let me start with The Third Estate Sunday Review's new stuff:

A Note to Our Readers -- Jim breaks down the edition. I was long, long, long into snooze time by then.

Editorial: Whose War Is It Anyway? -- Great illustration, check that out. (They did that last week. I didn't work on it.) Strong editorial.

TV: No Class in The Class -- I have seen this show and I couldn't figure out what I didn't like about it. Ava and C.I. make it clear.

Show Me What Democracy Looks Like (1-27-07) -- our report from September 27th's DC protest. It was incredible. Best protest I've been too yet. Hope you were there. If not, be sure to read the report.

Run, Olson! Run! -- Aren't we all sick of Sarah Olson by now? Yep. Tired of her. Tired of her me-me-me. Tired of all her friends being rounded up to say "POOR SARAH!" Hey, you're a journalist or supposed to be one -- suck it, suck it up and act like one. What a whiny ass cry baby. "Me-me-me might have to testify. I-I-I want people to rescue me." Shut your belly aching you dumb ass. Grow a spine. And quit acting like Ehren's court-martial is all about you. God, what vanity. What insanity. What a bunch of useless pricks. Reporters really do suck. It's all about them. Testify, don't testify, but shut the hell up already. Jesus, she's going to drive these 2 minutes of non-fame into the ground and then some. She's is so pathetic, so spineless and such a dumb ass. Oh, I helped with this illustration.

Dear Darrell -- This is my second favorite thing we did this weekend. Darrell Anderson is a war resister and if he's wondering who gets attention in place of war resisters, the answer is: Sarah Olson. Dumb, dopey, whiney, snot nosed, sniveling Sarah Olson.

Now The Nation wants to reach the country? Now? -- The Nation has a new book coming out. Read it and laugh at one of the worst magazines in the world.

"Occupation" or "war" -- which word do you use?

A message from Sanford Levinson (humor) -- Love this one! It's so funny. Read it.

Sanford Levinson is another dumb ass. So you know The Nation can find a place for his huge, dumb ass. He's saying impeachment can't happen. What a dumb ass. We'll get back to this.

The Nation Stats -- The dumbest magazine in the world is also dumb because, despite being headed by a woman, won't publish women, it's now like 1 woman every time they run 4 men. Wow. Katrina vaden Heuvel sure is a woman who supports other women, isn't she.

Highlights -- Kat, Cedric, Betty, Rebecca, Wally, Elaine and me wrote this. We did a pretty cool job.

Back to dumb ass Sanford Levinson. He says no to impeachment. I think fat ass is worried who's going to pay for all his snacks if he shows a spine. He's a big old pooh-paher dumping his big old pooh on people who have actually done work on the issue. Like Dave Lindorff. And here's my highlight, Dave Lindorff's "The Missing Word at the Anti-War Demo:"

There is really only one way to stop the madness: impeachment.
Investigations into administration wrongdoing won't do it.
Demonstrations won't do it.
Even cutting funding for the war--while it would be a more powerful statement of opposition from Congress--would not end the conflict or bring the troops home. Bush would simply move money around in the giant Pentagon budget and call it something else.
Critics of impeachment, especially among the Democratic leadership, say it is too soon. They say the first step should be investigations.
This is a misunderstanding, or a deliberate distortion, of what the impeachment process is.
The impeachment process itself begins with investigations. To argue that first a case for impeachment has to be proved before a bill of impeachment should be submitted in the House is akin to saying that a case of murder must be proved before an indictment can be brought.
In fact, the proper procedure, laid out by the Founding Fathers, is for a member of Congress to submit a bill of impeachment claiming that the president has violated his oath of office, or has engaged in actions that threaten the Constitution or the rule of law. That bill goes to the House Judiciary Committee which must decide whether the bill makes a serious enough charge to warrant going to the full House to request the establishment of an Impeachment Committee, armed with subpoena power, to investigate. (Alternatively, of course, a state's legislature can submit a joint resolution calling for impeachment, which may happen soon.)
Should a majority of the House vote to impanel the Judiciary Committeee as an Impeachment Committee, that is when the investigation would begin in ernest-a process we saw in action twice in recent memory, first in the case of Richard Nixon, and second with Bill Clinton.
In Bush's case, there is ample evidence already in the public record to justify multiple bills of impeachment.

That's it, I'm really tired. Elaine is too but I bet she's got something worse saying, so check it out. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" and it's got it all:

Monday, January 29th. Chaos and violence continue in Iraq, massive demonstrations took place in the United States over the weekend, another US helicopter is shot down, and Carolyn Ho hits the road again to raise awareness of her son, Ehren Watada.

Starting with news of Ehren Watada, Iraq war resister, the first commissioned officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq who now faces a February 5th court-martial in Fort Lewis, Washington. Speaking with Tina Chau (KGMB), Watada explained why he took his stand against the Iraq war: "I believed the justifications. I believed they were true and factual and as we know now, they were grossly negligent and wrong. . . . Just being part of that [war] would be adding more fuel to the fire instead of putting it out." Saturday, columnist Joe Copeland (Seattle Post-Intelligencer) covered Watada and the reasons why he took his stand against the illegal and immoral war: "His views changed as he read up on Iraq in preparation, as he put it, to be a better leader of troops under his command. Instead, the growing knowledge led him to become the only commissioned officer known to refuse Iraq duty, acknowleding from the start that he might have to carry the imprisonment that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and other practitioners of civil disobedience felt was their responsibility to accept in calling attention to wrongful government policy. In Watada's case, the prison time could be as much as six years."

Carolyn Jones (San Francisco Chronicle) reports that Sunday Ehren Watada's mother, Carolyn Ho, spoke in Chinatown to at least 200 people urging them to to support her son: "You celebrate the American dream. You live it. And that is what my son is fighting for now." Megan notes that Carolyn Ho was interviewed Saturday by Kris Welch on KPFA's Saturday Morning Talkies. and that Carolyn Ho noted she is starting another speaking tour to raise awareness of her son that will run right up to the February 5th court-martial. In addition actions are being planned around the country for February 5th -- click here for a list of demonstrations. Carolyn Ho's announced speaking dates:

Chicago, IL,
Tuesday January 30,
5:30pm
Tentative Operation Push Chicago event
7:30pm
Japanese American Citizens League5415 N. Clark, Chicago

Wednesday January 313:00 to 5:00pm
The Center for Race, Politics & ReligionUniversity of ChicagoChicago, IL

7:00-9:00pm
St. Xavier University3700 West 103rd St. (103rd & Pulaski)McGuire HallProfessor Peter N. Kirstein (773) 298-3283Kirstein@sxu.edu
Indiana

Thursday February 110:00 to 12:00am
Emerson High School716 East 7th AvenueGary, IndianaCarolyn McCrady (219) 938-1302Jim Spicer (219) 938-9615
12:30 to 2:30pm
Purdue Calumet University2200 169th St.Hammond, IndianaProfessor Kathy Tobin(219) 989-3192tobin@calumet.purdue.eduClassroom Office Building CLO 110

7:00-9:00 pm
Valparaiso UniversityU.S. Hwy 30 & Sturdy RdRoom 234Neils Science CenterValparaiso, IndianaLibby A Hearn Partners for Peace (student group)(309) 834-2199Libby.AHearn@valpo.eduLorri CornettNorthwest Indiana Coalition Against the Iraq War(219) 916-0449la_cornett@yahoo.com

Friday February 2
Noon Purdue UniversityWesley Foundation435 West State St.West Lafayette, IndianaSheila Rosenthal (765) 404-5489Lafayette Area Peace Coalition

Watada is a part of a movement of resistance with the military that includes others such as Agustin Aguayo (whose court-martial is currently set to begin on March
6th), Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ivan Brobeck, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

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

On CBS' Sunday Morning, Rita Braver examined the issue of war resisters who go to Canada ("Estimates say there are between 200 and 250 of them") and interviewed Justin Colby and Dean Walcott as well as Vietnam war resister. Colby explained how he signed up after 9--11 only to see his support for the war vanish after a serving a tour in Iraq: "When I realized these people we were killing -- 'cause we killed a lot, I saw a lot of dead people -- when I realized the people we were killing had nothing to do with 9/11, that's when I was, like, 'Okay, this is not for me! This, ya know, I was wrong." Dean Walcott spoke of how he felt there was nothing else he could do but self-check out after serving two tours of duty in Iraq and now focusing on "talking about it, raising the issue, getting it out there for people to debate about it." After his first tour and before his second, Walcott was stationed at a hospital in Germany: "A lot of guys who skin was melted off. A lot of guys who you couldn't recognize literally from their face to their feet. Missing arms, missing legs, couldn't breate on their own, couldn't feed themselves. These kids, literally kids -- 17, 18, 19, 20. And this look in their eyes that -- Oh, I'm never gonna forget it. The look in their eyes when they finally came to understand that they're never gonna walk again. They're never gonna hold their wife and their children again. And having them ask me, 'Why?' Ya know -- a 'big-picture why.' And I couldn't tell them."

Calling for an end to the illegal war, at least 500,000 people demonstrated in DC on Saturday. Speakers included Iraq vets (such as Iraq Veterans Against the War's Garrett Repperhagen), activists (Feminist Majority Foundation's Eleanor Smeal, Kim Gandy. president of NOW, Leslie Cagan of United for Peace and Justice, Jesse Jackson, Noura Erakat, Gold Star Families for Peace's Carlos Arredondo and others), and artists such as Jane Fonda, Eve Ensler, Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins and Sean Penn. The link goes to today's Democracy Now! which covers the protest -- all but Ensler are included in the segment which can be read (transcript), listened to or watched. The demonstration also included a message from US Senator Russ Feingold -- the closest anyone in the US Senate got to the rally. US House members Maxine Waters, Lynn Woolsey and John Conyers spoke and US Rep and presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich spoke noting that "We are the peacemakers." And it included Bob Watada (click here for Democracy Now!'s report feature Bob Watada, Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Lynn Woolsey and Jonathan Hutto). Bob Watada is Ehren Watada's father and while he and his wife Rosa Sakanishi spoke in DC, Ehren spoke in Seattle and his mother Carolyn Ho spoke in the Bay Area.

The most cited speech by participants we spoke to at the demonstration was Bob Watada. As he declared, "We are a civilized nation, we need to bring an end to a war for blood oil" the crowd erupted in chants of "Say it! Say it!" He spoke of the importance of speaking out (and quoted Abraham Lincoln: "To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men..") and he spoke of his son: "The military commanders want to punish him -- and punish him for saying the emperor has no clothes . . . The truth is a danger to the Bush empire."


Ehren's step-mother Rosa told the massive crowd: "And you know, you and I know, that we have to live for peace and justice and that is what Ehren's doing . . . Bring the troops back home now!"

The Honolulu Advertiser reported that Rosa collapsed at the DC demonstrations (and was caught by Ann Wright) due to what doctors at George Washington University Hospital have diagnosed as "a mild stroke."

The second most cited speech by participants we spoke with was Jane Fonda's -- "I haven't spoken at an anti-war rally in 34 years because of lies about me that were used to hurt the anti-war movement. But silence is no longer an option. . . . Thank you so much for the courage to stand up to this mean-spirited and vengeful administration." Fonda was joined by her daughter Vanessa Vadim and Vanessa's two children. During Vietnam, as Fonda noted in her speech, Vanessa was often accompanying her on the road (and got used to sleeping in dresser drawers converted into makeshift cribs). She noted her pride that her family was participating but her sadness that once again the citizens of the US have to protest an illegal war and lobby their elected representatives to take action to end it.

Protest took place elsewhere in the United States and Adam Schreck, Ashraf Khalil and David Streitfeld (Los Angels Times) put the number demonstrating at 3,000. Vietnam vet Ron Kovic and Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan were among those making their voices heard. Kovic stated, "I'm seeing soldiers and veterans like myself who trusted and believed at first and who are realizing they've been lied to." Cindy Sheehan observed, "There's definitely a groundswell growing. I just wish it was growing faster. If half the people of Los Angeles who disagree with this war were here, then we would have miles of people." Laurie Phillips (Tri-Valley Herald) reports that the police estimate "3,000 to 4,000 people" participated in the Bay Area demonstration and that Carolyn Ho spoke to the crowd: "What is going on here, in Washington, D.C., and in this country cannot stop. There is a momentum that is growing" and that her son, Ehren Watada, enlisted because of a desire to do what was right only to learn that the Iraq war is based "on a lie." Aaron Glantz (IPS) corrects the low balled police estimate and notes that the crowd numbered 5,000

In Seattle, Ehren Watada spoke as part of a discussion on the war. Lori Hurlebaus (Indybay IMC) reports that, in addition to the rally, the march took on a military recruiting center led by Iraq vets Darrell Anderson and Chanan Suarez-Diaz (both of Iraq Veterans Against the War) "were attempting to present the recruiters with a book of photos of all U.S. service members who have died in Iraq, but the center was closed as the demonstrators arrived and the recruiters would not accept the book" and that participants chanted "Occupation is a crime, Ehren Watada should do no time!" and "You gotta resist, don't enlist!"

And actions continued today in DC. AP reports that nine people arrested while gathered "around a courtyard pool inside the Rayburn House office building, throwing yellow roses onto the ice as they recited the names of Iraq War victims" and their crime, according to the police was unlawful assembly. Unlawful assemble in the Congress? The First Amendment to the US Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abriding the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assmeble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Learn it, memorize it, it will put you one up on the Capitol police.

AP also notes that at least 100 people took to the Hart Senate office building "waving children's shoes to represent Iraqi children killed in the war" and quotes CODEPINK's Medea Benjamin stating, "We feel the American people don't know how many Iraqis have been killed because of the American invasion."

And in the Winter 2007 edition of Ms. magazine (now on sale), Patricia McFadden reports on the recent "Feminism and War" conference at Syracuse University noting participants (Cindy Sheehan, Cynthia Enloe, Patrice N. Delvante, Zillah Eisenstein and others): "The three-day conference gave feminist voice to the most urgent political matters of the day. We debated, for example, the ways in which war and religion oppress and exclude women, and how issues of identity are easily conflated into belief systems. At the 'Rally Against Iraqi War and Occupation,' justice activist Angela Davis spoke in a local park about the necessity of resisting the seduction of right-wing propaganda associated with 'homeland security' and 'terrorism.' She discussed ways in which feminism could better engage with notions of security and community."

And in Iraq?

Bombings?

CBS and AP report two car bombings in Kirkuk which resulted in 11 dead and 34 wounded, while, in Baghdad, a car bomb claimed at least 4 lives and left another 6 wounded and a construction worker was killed and two more wounded by the explosion from "[a] bomb hidden under a concrete barrier". Reuters notes five people killed in a rocket attack on a Shi'ite mosque in Tuz Khurmato and eleven people killed (28 injured) in Zaafaraniya.

Damien Cave (New York Times) reports that "at least five girls" died in Baghdad on Sunday in a mortar attack on a girl's school. Cave quotes a teacher on one of the girls who died, "She hugged and kissed me, then went outside and the bomb hit. After a few minutes, she was dead." The BBC quotes a 15-year-old, "I couldn't see much but what I saw was my friend Maha, who was lying beside me on the ground. The shrapnel hit her in th eyes and there was blood all over her face. . . . She was dead."


Shootings?

Mohammed Al Awsy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "this noon a sniper in karada area shot a policeman who was guarding HAY AL WIHDA bank" and "According to a security and medical source from baqouba city today, a group of terrorists attacked a residential complex for AL BAYAT tribes in KARA TABA village which led to the killing of 8 civilians." Al Awsy also notes: "According to the police chief of diyala province general GHANEM AL QURAISHI, 1,500 police staff and officers have been dismissed, and 950 volunteers were accepted."


Corpses?

CNN reports that 22 corpses were discovered in Baghdad today.

In Najaf, a fight began on Sunday (or Saturday depending on the report) and may or may not be over. There is reality, there are reports and then there's what the US military is saying. Their chief talking point, the US military's, is that the fighting of resistance forces was carried out by the Iraqi military and US troops only came in afterwards -- rah, rah, the Iraqi military is leading -- that sort of thing. CBS' Lara Logan lets the hot air out of that ballon by noting that "the heavy American involvement shows how reliant the Iraqis still are on U.S. Military backup." The US military claims do not hold water but some outlets are reporting that US troops didn't even move in to assist until early Monday. The reality is, and this is from Centcom, a US helicopter left the sky in Najaf and two US soldiers were killed. Left the sky? It crashed. It was brought down. But we're not ever supposed to note that. Now for those outlets reporting that US troops didn't join in the battle until Monday or that US troops weren't there until late Sunday, please note that the Sunday crash is identified by Centcom as "earlier today." You can all loosen your belts, relax a little, it's okay to tell the truth, Centcom's waived you through on it. The Iraqi military had US support from the beginning and when the Iraqi military wasn't effective, the US military had to come in. It's the same story, day after day.

Richard Mauer and Qassim Zein (McClatchy Newspapers) report that the helicopter was shot down"by what appeared to be a ground-fired rocket" -- and they're quoting unnamed generals from the US military. Borzou Daragahi (Los Angeles Times) reported Sunday that US military had announced the death of seven troops on Saturday. Today, Daragahi noted that in addition to the two deaths from the helicopter, the US military also reported three more deaths of US troops. AFP reports: "Sunday was one of the deadliest days in recent months, with at least 115 people killed or found dead across the country from a wave of bombings and shootings.

On the speculation (reported as fact) that the Najaf battle was over a "cult" and the numbers being fed to the press, The BBC notes: "BBC's Mike Wooldridge in Baghdad says there is no independent confirmation of the scale of casualties and there is still uncertainty about the group." Stephen Farrell and Hassan al-Jarrah (Times of London) also note that events are unconfirmed and in dispute.


Drew Brown (McClatchy Newspapers) reports on the Pentagon's latest effort to persuade people to become cannon fodder as part of $1.2 billion a year they waste on recruitment --they're going after "parents and other role models to encourage youth." Maybe they'll start offering parents' signing bonuses next, "Sign up Bobby or Bonnie and we'll give you fifty dollars!" In addition, Brown reports, the Pentagon is also considering granting citizenship to non-citizens residing in other countries if they will sign up to fight.


Meanwhile, CNN reports that Major General Richard Zilmer admitted today that Al-Anbar Province is not dominated by foreigners fighting for the resistance. He did, however, link them with al Qaeda -- score: one lie cleared up, another continues to be advanced. As Dahr Jamail (among others) has repeteadly reported (for longer than we can count), the resistance in Al-Anbar Province is homegrown. It was created by the US. It was fueled by the US. Ramadi doesn't want to be the new Falluja (and after the slaughter and desctruction there, who can blame them?). Zilmer tells CNN that the US military is working with tribal leaders in the region -- some tribal leaders. Left unstated are two obvious facts: 1) that 'plan' proved to be a real solution in Afghanistan, didn't it?, (2) the US military has put tribal leaders on the payroll. As this becomes more and more apparent to Iraqis in Al-Anbar Province, any sway the mini-leaders had (they don't even have any major tribal leaders on their side) is lost. It also needs to be noted that those put on the payroll have gotten a little flashy with the bling-bling further alienating Iraqis in the region.

The general is all a ga-ga-goo-goo over Bully Boy's planned escalation and is ready to spin (who allows themselves to be spun since they don't point out the obvious) with how much the addition troops (4,000) that would be sent to Al Anbar Province will do. Left unstated is that the number still leaves foreign fighters (US, British) in a strong minority. Left unstated is that, as Blair's cabinet faces the deadline of the timeline they've tossed to appeas British citizens, the number will only be replacement numbers for the soon to leave British.


Finally, Levi Pulkkinen (Seattle Post-Intelligencer) reports on the January 11th death of Dale Noyd who served in the Air Force, achieved the rank of captain and then said "NO" to deploying to Vietnam and was court-martialed in 1967 -- Pulkkinen notes Ehren Watada spoke of Dale Noyd Thursday at the Blaine Memorial United Methodist Church in Seattle:
"Nothing has changed (since Vietnam) except the names and the faces. We are here today because we did not learn our lesson." Also today, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reported on journalist, columnist and author Molly Ivins whose cancer has re-emerged and was recently hospitalized. Editor & Publisher noted that in her second to last column (In the Jan. 11th column) she "wrote that she would dedicate every single one of her syndicated columns from now on to the issue of stopping the war in Iraq, until it ended." She may still -- she's beat cancer before.


mikey likes it



damien cave
kpfa

Posted by at

Friday, January 26, 2007

Friday

Friday! Barely! :D Almost Saturday. C.I. read my post and said, "Mike . . ." and I was already to go, "People know I'm joking about you hitting me with the laptop." But that wasn't it. C.I. just called Rebecca to pass it on to her as well. We can use Explorer to blog in. But first! When we all took Windows Explorer 7 off, we thought that was the end of it. C.I. goes what I wrote in my post seems to be a security issue. So we pulled up the tools thing and sure enough I was on "custom level." Custom level? I've never had a custom level. But when we you uninstall Exp 7, you get put on that. So Elaine's fixed, I'm fixed and Rebecca's fixed.

I go, "THANK YOU! YOU ARE A GENUIS!" And I wasn't being sarcastic. C.I. always acts like, "Oh, I don't know anything technical" and blah, blah, blah. But Jim and I were talking and C.I. will figure out stuff that is very technical sometimes. (Jim goes even the UK Computer Gurus were surprised when C.I. figured out the problem with Flickr Sunday night. They were on the phone trying to walk C.I. through and they were all working on that and couldn't figure it out and C.I. did it.)

Now let's get to the heart of the matter (humming Don Henley), Ehren Watada. This is from Robert Fantina's "Military Justice: A World unto its Own:"

Military circuit judge Lt. Col. John M. Head, in his ruling, said the following:
"A hearing on the 'Nuremberg defense' would consist of witnesses who would testify that the war in Iraq was a crime against peace, a war of aggression, and a violation of the United Nations Charter, other international law, and U.S. law. The accused would testify that his refusal to go to Iraq was based upon the belief that he would be committing war crimes because the United States was involved in a war of aggression and a crime against peace."
The issue, Lt. Col. Head further stated, is not Lt. Watada's motivation, but his action.
It is difficult to imagine a civil trial being considered valid if the motivation for the alleged crime were not considered. If a man kills another man, and the issue of motive is not allowed, the superficial facts may be clear. However, on closer scrutiny, if it is determined that the motive for the killing was that the victim first attacked the alleged killer, and in the ensuing fight in which the alleged killer struggled to defend himself, the victim fell to the ground, hit his head and died, a verdict of 'not guilty' would likely be rendered.

That's what Watada's facing, no justice. And I really don't care about all the big names weighing in about poor, pitiful Sarah Olson's free speech ("THEY'RE FORCING HER TO TESTIFY . . . THAT HER REPORT IS ACCURATE!") when the big names have ignored Watada and are still ignoring his right to free speech. They have embarrassed themselves.

There is a great documentary called Sir! No Sir! that chronicles military resistance during Vietnam. I mean, it is incredible, Sir! No Sir! See it if you haven't already. And when I watched it (I got to see it on the big screen), I was just on the edge of my seat. This isn't a boring movie. Don't see "documentary" and think, "Boring." It just amazed me and made me feel so alive, you know that rush you get right after you see a really good movie? So we're seeing resistance, in the film, during Vietnam and seeing that it was chronicled in real time but that got forgotten.

And here's the depressing point about the last few months, what's media doing today? What's independent media doing today? Say forty years from now someone wants to make a movie about war resistance during this illegal war. Where are they going to go? They may as well skip leafing through pages of The Nation magazine. What is the point of having an independent media when they can't even cover Watada, Ricky Clousing, Kyle Snyder, Ivan Brobeck, Darrell Anderson, Agustin Aguayo, Mark Wilkerson, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Brandon Hughey . . .

I mean, do we have to count on, forty years from now, a documentary to tell their stories? Seems to me like we should be able to count on independent media in real time. But we can't, can we? You can pick up The Nation or The Progressive and search in vain for articles. If you want to know why people are getting sick of independent media, that's why. AP isn't independent media. So how come they can cover war resisters and the peace movement and The Nation can't? How come Ryan Lenz (an AP writer) can cover Abeer and The Nation can't?

So here's some advice for you. If you think you might end up with a son or daughter someday who'll make documentaries (or have a son or daughter already you think might), print this up and put it in a time capsule for them. Now I'll speak to that son or daughter: "When you start researching for your film on the resistance within the military to the illegal Iraq war, skip the independent media archives. You can go to Democracy Now! because Amy Goodman interviewed most of them. And there are a few other programs that air on Pacifica Radio that you can check out. But don't even bother with the 'leading' magazines of that time period because they didn't give a damn. They didn't think it was worth covering or important enough to cover. You'll find plenty on Sarah Olson. And you can include this statement in your documentary: "Mike McKinnon, a blogger during that period, wrote: 'Sarah Olson is not the story. Independent media stays silent on Watada but can't shut up about Sarah Olson. Independent media has screwed up priorities when a reporter who covered the story is more important than the subject of her story. Watada faces six years in prison, Olson faces six months. But independent media would rather blather on about Olson than write about Watada.'" You can include that and you can note that people were calling it out on real time. Get a really old Katrina vanden Heuvel on camera for an interview. And when she claims that the magazine she edits and publishes (The Nation) covered it, correct her. When she then claims, "Oh it was an oversight and no one noticed," correct her. It's been pointed out to the magazine repeatedly. A decision has been made to ignore the war resisters. So ask her about that. Hammer away on that. Don't feel sorry because she's an old woman. She had power, she could have tossed any war resister on the cover. She didn't. She even had a blog, Editor's Cut, and if she thought war resisters mattered, she could have done posts on them there. She didn't. Ask her why she thought iPods in Iraq were more important, more in need of coverage than war resisters? Ask her: "Do you think your cowardly silence prolonged the war?"

So print that up, put it in a time capsule and it will give your son or daughter a good starting point for their documentary. And let me say it again, they have been called out for their silence. All of them. They've been called out by their own staff, they've been called out by readers, they've been called out online at websites. At this point, it's obvious that The Nation has no interest in covering war resisters. So hammer home on old lady vanden Heuvel in the year 2047. Don't give her a break because she didn't give war resisters a break. Don't feel sorry for her. She made her decision and she should have to answer for it.

If you want another tip for your son or daughter, you could advise them to look for Isaiah's comic. It'll go up Sunday at The Common Ills. Katrina vanden Heuvel's the topic. You can use that when she claims no one noticed that the magazine wasn't covering war resisters and, if anyone had pointed it out, they would have covered them.

Someone who isn't a coward is Medea Benjamin. And you know with the rally, she's got something to say and that it is worth hearing. From her "The Peace Movement to Congress on Eve of Mobilization:"

The January 27 anti-war rally in Washington DC could have become yet another symbolic peace march in the freezing cold through a city where no one was listening. But then two things happened: On November 7, the voters gave Congress an unmistakable mandate to end the war. And George Bush, ignoring the will of the voters, the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, and the advice of his own generals, announced an escalation of the war.
People who had planned to watch this protest on C-Span from the comfort of their homes are now cramming onto buses, planes and trains to converge on the nation's capitol. Thanks to George Bush's latest blunder, we're now expecting the biggest march in Washington DC since the war began.
It was easy for politicians to ignore us when we represented a small, but all-too-prescient minority trying to stop this war before it started. Now that we represent the majority of Americans, politicians of all stripes best take heed. Here's our message to Congress:
To the Democrats, remember who put you into office on November 7. It's thanks to growing anti-war sentiment among voters that you now control the House and the Senate. We’re delighted you're introducing resolutions to oppose President Bush's call to send more troops to Iraq. Certainly this repudiation of the Bush administration's "surge" will send a strong message to the administration. But those resolutions are mostly symbolic and would still leave us back at square one with 132,000 of our sons and daughters fighting a senseless war.
Opposing Bush's escalation of the war is a good first step, but it's not enough. We want you to bring our troops home.
We know--and you know--that the only real power Congress has to end war is the power of the purse. George Bush will soon be requesting another $100 billion of our tax dollars for this disastrous war. Democratic Party leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have said that ending the war is a priority, but cutting money for the war is "off the table" because they don't want to endanger the troops. But what could endanger the troops more than keeping them in Iraq? The money that has already been appropriated is more than enough to provide for the safe and orderly withdrawal of our troops. More money will be funding the continuing occupation and carnage.


That's it for me. Jess was working the public account while Ava and C.I. were hitting the private ones (e-mail accounts for The Common Ills) and there six e-mails from whiners in independent media. I ended up stopping to listen and then we got into a long discussion about the whiners. (I should note that I also laughed at the whiners' e-mails.) (C.I. reminded, "E-mails to The Common Ills are private unless the e-mailer says otherwise so I don't want to see any hints of who wrote at any sites.")

Now it's time for C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, January 26, 2007. Chaos and violence continue in Iraq, ten days to go until Ehren Watada's February 5th court-martial begins, groups mobolize to end the war in the United States, Bully Boy issues death threats to Iranians in Iraq and a death threat to American democracy, the privatization of Iraq's assets is boldly expressed but we're all supposed to look the other way and the US military gets caught in a lie.


Starting with Ehren Watada, he, his father (Bob Watada) and his mother (Carolyn Ho) will be out in full force tomorrow. Susan Paynter (Seattle Post-Intelligencer) reports will be taking part in Seattle's events to end the war: "1 p.m. at the Center for Social Justice, 2111 E. Union St., moving to the Military Recruitment Center at 2301 S. Jackson St., then to the Langston Hughes Center at 104 17th Ave. S. at 3, where speakers will include Lt. Ehren Watada." Watada, who will be part of a panel discussion, is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq and he is facing a Februarty 5th court-martial in which he will not be able to present any real defense because 'Judge' Head has a really sick sense of what "justice" is.
Michael E. Ruane (Washington Post) reports that Bob Watada will be speaking at the DC rally tomorrow and Bob Watada tells Ruane: "There is no doubt in my mind that the invasion and occupation of Iraq is wholly unwarranted. The Iraqi people have done absolutely nothing to the United States. They've done nothing to deserve the massacre and the pummeling they're getting . . . the plunder, the torture, the rape, the murder of innocent people. It's got to stop." Meredith May (San Francisco Chronicle) reports that, in San Francisco, things kick off with "a noon rally at Powell and Market streets. Carolyn Ho, the mother of Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada of Hawaii, who is refusing orders to deploy to Iraq, will speak to the crowd."

Three different cities tomorrow where they will be attempting to get the message that the illegal war needs to end and that what will take place in the February 5th court-martial won't be justice because the 'judge' has refused to allow Ehren Watada to present his reasons for refusing to deploy, the studies he did as part of his command that led him to the conclusion that the war was illegal and immoral. Marilyn Bechtel (People's Weekly World) spoke with Marti Hiken (National Lawyers Guild) who noted that "people do not surrender all their constional rights when they enter the military" and that "Regardless of whether the military wins this court martial, they lose for silencing an individual who has so much integrity that is evident to people across the country."


Saying "no" to an illegal war is hard. It takes courage. (Note the Cowards Silence plauging the left if you doubt that, but I'm actually talking about those in the military who have said "no.") Watada is a part of a movement of resistance with the military that includes others such as Agustin Aguayo (whose court-martial is currently set to begin on March
6th), Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ivan Brobeck, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

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

In the United States, tomorrow sees protests, rallies and marches around the country. As CODEPINK notes: "Join us on January 27 to say No More Funding for War! Bring Our Troops Home Now! We will use our feet and our lungs and our signs and our outrage to let Bush and our new Congress know that we are serious about ending this war.If you can't make it to DC, see if there is a solidarity event being planned in your area. If not, create your own, even if that means standing alone on a street corner with a sign! In lieu of lobbying, you can call your Congressperson to demand they cut the funding for George Bush's War. Our voices are powerful, wherever we may be geographically. We know peace is the only real path to hope and opportunity for this country. Together we will make it happen."

If you can't make it to DC, you can still be heard. If there's not an event in your area, start one. Avaaz.org (formely Ceasefire Campaign Team) is attempting to get the word out on a way you can be heard in DC if you're not able to attend:

Join Saturday's global peace march... without Leaving Your House!This Saturday, hundreds of thousands of Americans will march on Washington DC to demand peace and justice in Iraq and the Middle East. We can be there too, raising a global voice of solidarity -- through our own worldwide virtual march. Time is short, so add your voice and join the march today! http://www.avaaz.org/en/global_peace_march/Avaaz This could signal the rebirth of the US peace movement. We need to show them the world is on their side. Let's bring our call for peace to the streets of power in Washington. Join the global peace march and tell your friends today!

Events will be covered by some media. Known coverage will include: KPFA which will broadcast live from the DC demonstrations from 10:00 am to noon PST. (At which point it will begin covering demonstrations in the Bay Area.) and Laura Flanders who will cover the days demonstration Saturday night (7:00 to 10:00 pm EST) on her program RadioNation with Laura Flanders (heard on Air America Radio and other outlets). (Both KPFA and Air America Radio offer online streaming.) (KPFA also offers their achived broadcasts for free, so if you miss the live coverage and would like to hear it later, check out the KPFA Archives). Rachel notes that WBAI will broadcast live coverage of the demonstrations from
11:00 am to 1:00 pm EST. In addition, she notes that tonight (Friday) on WBAI, David Occhiuto will host a special which will feature anti-war films, interviews and will include coverage of Ehren Watada including sections of the speech he gave in Seattle that the the Article 32 hearing in August included and the court-martial next month plans to include in their prosecution of him. Tune in to hear the message that so frightened the military brass that 'Judge' Head has gagged Watada's defense from presenting. That's tonight, WBAI,
7:00 pm to 11:00 pm EST (over the airwaves in NYC and surrounding areas as well as online).

As people mobilize to get the truth out, the US military finds some cover-ups implode faster than others. New details emerge regarding Saturday's reported violence. Saturday, five US troops were killed in Karbala when resistance fighters reportedly wearing US uniforms were waived through checkpoints and made it to a meeting in Karbala. Five US troops were reported as dying during the attack that followed. The AP is reporting (based on US and Iraqi military sources) that four of the five were kidnapped and the four were then killed with bodies being discovered as far away as 25 miles. There was a lot of Happy Talk this week. There was the lie that corpses discovered in Baghdad were tapering off (42 discovered yesterday), there was the lie that what's happening on Haifa Street is normal and not an attack that's killing civilians, there were showy moments in the US Congress and there were the lies of Bully Boy's State of the Union address. When we're neck-deep in lies, it's really easy for the US military to lie (that is what happened) and misinform the public.

Without the lies, the escalation couldn't be sold and a lot of people are vested in selling the escalation. And note that when the AP asked about it, the US military played dumb. As Steven R. Hurst and Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reported later, the US military has now confirmed that four were kidnapped and killed later (1 of the 4 was apparently discovered "mortally wounded").


Bombings?

CBS and AP report a bombing of a pet market utilizing a bomb hidden among pigeons that has resulted in the death of at least 14 people in Baghdad. Stephen Farrell (Times of London) reports: "Police said insurgents concealed the explosives inside a cardboard box punched with holes to make it appear a container for pigeons, parrots or other birds which are prime attractions at the market. The blast, which also wounded 55, hit the Ghazel market on the eastern banks of the Tigris just before the weekly curfew intended to protect crowds attending mosques during noon prayers on the Islamic day of prayer." Farrell notes that the explosion allowed some caged pets to be let loose but many died. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports: "Two civilians were injured when an IED exploded in Milhaniya, a part of Amil neighborhood at 1 pm." Reuters notes: "On Friday, a suicide bomber blew himself up in a Shi'ite mosque on the outskirts of Mosul, killing seven and wounding 17 more after prayers, a police source said."

Shootings?

Reuters notes: "Gunmen opened fire on a crowd in Baghdad's Bayaa district, killing one person and wounding two, a police source said."

Corpses?

CBS and AP report: "Seven tortured bodies of people who had been blindfolded and had their hands and legs bound before they were shot in the head were found in the capital Friday, according to police." Reuters notes that number of corpses discovered in Baghdad today has risen to 27 while one corpse was discovered in Kirkuk and a headless corpse was discovered in Hawija. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports: "The body of the Iraqi boxer Hussein Hadi was found in Haifa street. Police said that Hadi was kidnapped three days ago and he found hanged today."

Also today, the US military announced: "One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 6 died today from wounds sustained due to enemy action while operating in Al Anbar Province."

Meanwhile, CNN reports that the Iranian government is calling "terrorism" on Bully Boy's recent order (backed up by US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) for US troops to kill (on the spot) Iranians they suspect of plotting terrorism. These execution orders by the Bully Boy come with no jury or defense, just an instant passing of judgement.

In financial news, AFP reports that one of Iraq's two vice presidents, Shi'ite Adel Abdul Mahdi, has called the illegal occupation of Iraq "idiotic" but is pushing the 'we will be safe if we have to raid and terrorize school children, residents of homes, etc' that was so popular with the puppet of the occupation yesterday. Those confused by the both-sides-talking Mahdi can refer to a commentary by Antonia Juhasz (Huffington Post) last May: "The re-appointment of Mahdi may yet provide the Bush Administration with its most important victory in the Iraq war since Saddam Hussein was pulled out of a rabbit hole in Tikrit. However, Mahdi's Vice Presidency may also ultimately generate at least as much hostility towards the United States as the invasion itself. Over the course of the war, Mahdi emerged as one of the most aggressive proponents of the Bush administration's economic agenda for Iraq, including the implementation of controversial corporate globalization rules and greater U.S. corporate access to Iraq's oil." Mahdi earlier served in the Bremer 'government' and will probably serve in a great many other puppet governments to follow.

MarketWatch reports: "Over the next several years, the minister [Mahdi] said Iraq would look to privatize all of state-owned industry, which number around 60 companies. He also said Asian companies were keen to enter discussions with the Iraqi government over industrial contracts. Hariri said Iraq was also in discussions with San Francisco-based Bechtel Corp over engineering contracts, without elaborating."

The privatization. Antonia Juhasz (author of The BU$H Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a Time) attempted to address the realities of the oil law on KPFA's Living Room
January 11th. But a (male) guest, of course, new better and felt that whatever laws were passed, Iraqis could undue the damage many years on down the line. That's confronting the problem! For those who didn't grasp the importance of what Juhasz was addressing, The San Jose Mercury News reports "Iraq is in negotiations with San Ramon-based Chevron Corp. and Exxon Mobil Corp. to build a new $3 billion petrochemical facility, and is in talks with several other Western companies over industrial projects. In an interview Thursday, Iraq's minister for industry and minerals Fowzi Hariri said the discussions with Chevron and Exxon began this week in Washington and are at an early stage." The New York Times fluffed their coverage of the law last Saturday. Apparently, we're all supposed to pretend it doesn't matter or take the attitude of, "Hey, they can fix in 20 years!"


For those who've forgotten, in polling where Iraqis side with the resistance on the topic of attacking foreign fighters (including American troops), they also note the belief that the continued war is nothing but an attempt for foreigners to get their hands on Iraqi assets. Prvatization laws and multi-billion dollar deals by outsiders tend to convey that impression.

In political news, CNN reports that that the Democratic leadership in the US Congress may push for a revamping of the 2002 act that the Bully Boy cited as his authorization for starting a pre-emptive, illegal war of agression on Iraq. Of course, with Democrat leadership, "maybe" means basically what "We'll see" means when said by a parent.

In news of dictators, CNN reports on Bully Boy of the United States latest string of I statements: "I am the decider . . . I've picked the plan . . . I know . . ." Though his love affair with self continues unabated, as the recent poll by CBS News found on Bully Boy's desired escalation: "More than 70 percent of Americans think he should have to get congressional approval before he commits those troops." (68% of poll respondents stated they were "uneasy" with Bully Boy's ability to make decisions regarding Iraq.) Though Bully Boy appears to have forgotten this basic fact, in a democracy, the people are "the deciders."


Reminder: Those in DC Saturday should check out Anthony Arnove, author most recently of IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal, who will be speaking at Busboys and Poets at 5:00 pm and those in the NYC area on Sunday should check out Joan Mellen speech at 7:30 p.m. at the 92nd Street Y (92nd Street and Lesington Avenue). Mellan, a professor at Temple University and the author of seventeen books, will be presenting a lecture on the JFK assasination . . . and beyond. Tickets are $25. Mellen's latest book is A Farewell to Justice which probes the assasination of JFK. She was a guest on Law and Disorder November 7, 2005. And the March 15, 2006 broadcast of KPFA's Guns and Butter featured her speech "How the Failure to Identify, Prosecute and Convict President Kennedy's Assassins Has Led to Today's Crisis of Democracy." You can also read a transcript of that speech here.


mikey likes it




ben hamamatoliving roomkpfa







mikey likes it
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)