Monday, August 27, 2007

Marjorie Cohn, Third

Monday, Monday, ba-dah, ba-da-da-dah. :D I'm not as tired as I usually am on Mondays which is rather amazing because this weekend's writing session went longer than any in recent memory. But before that . . .

Okay, this is from National Lawyers Guild president Marjorie Cohn's "Turning Iraq into Vietnam:"

Congress has no more will to end the Iraq War than it did the Vietnam War. It was one year after our troops came home that Congress finally cut the funding for all support of the South Vietnamese government; Nixon didn't veto the bill because he needed insurance against impeachment. There is no substantial support in Congress or among the leading presidential candidates to bring all the troops home and disband the mega-bases Bush has built in Iraq.
Resistance to the Iraq War will continue to grow within the military. Like the Vietnamese, the Iraqis will be instrumental in ending Bush's war. The soldiers pegged it in their op-ed: Iraqis "will soon realize that the best way to regain their dignity is to call us what we are--an army of occupation--and force our withdrawal."


The Democratically controlled Congress is not ending the illegal war. They aren't doing a damn thing but making empty speeches. John Conyers was back at an impeachment rally over the weekend (I believe other topics were addressed as well). I'm really sick of them all and their empty words.

By the way, Marjorie Cohn's piece was written prior to Max Cleland's Democratic address. I mention that because, as C.I. noted, the Democratic response on Saturday means that all the little cowards who couldn't call out Bully Boy's lies about the illegal war last week (when it really mattered) can now slither out from under the rocks and weigh in. Cohn didn't wait for permission from the Democratic Party, just to be clear on that.

It's too bad so many did and do.

Let's turn to The Third Estate Sunday Review's latest edition:

Truest statement of the week -- Camilo Mejia speaking on Democracy Now! easily the truest statement of the week . . .

Truest statement of the week II -- except for Camilo Mejia speaking on Wakeupcall Radio! We had so many choices this week and nearly everyone of them was Mejia. Figuring that the potential nominees for this were stacked high, Ava and C.I. grabbed one of the 'truests' and used it in their TV commentary.

A Note to Our Readers -- Jim breaks down the edition and what happened. As he noted, Dona was on board with two truest statements because she wanted short features and she wanted the never ending edition done and over. :D

Editorial: IVAW supports war resisters, do you? -- This was the last thing we wrote. Ruth worked on this too. I'll note the pieces Ruth worked on because Jim was tired during the note and couldn't remember if Ruth worked on two or three pieces? She worked on three. This is a really good editorial and if I hadn't thought so already, I would have when I checked my voice mail on my cell. Everyone I knew called to say they liked this one.

TV: Fox tried to tell news 'jokes', no one laughed... -- Ava and C.I.'s commentary. I love this one. And Dona's long pointed out that no matter what anyone thinks of anything else up at the site, they cannot deny that Ava and C.I. do reporting. C.I. always says, "I'm not a reporter." But at The Third Estate Sunday Review, Ava and C.I. are reporting. They're calling friends at the networks, friends working on TV shows, agents, managers, you name it. All before they write a word. Generally, they do this during the week while chatting with friends anyway. This time? They had talked to a number of people about the show during the week but weren't planning on writing about it. Then came the never ending writing session and Jim and Dona both asked if Ava and C.I. would set aside The George Lopez Show this week because they felt the edition needed a hard hitting piece by Ava and C.I. Listening on the phone, we all started laughing as Ava and C.I.'s response which I couldn't put up here. They have been repeatedly trying to do the Lopez piece and keep getting asked to put it on hold. There is also the issue of pressure being put on them. So they said (finally) that they'd do it but it would be done late because what they'd heard was people in the news business in Texas were especially offended and they wanted to call some journalists in Texas they knew before writing one word. They spent two hours on the phone hunting down the story. Writing it took much less. This is journalism. But don't say that to them or they'll get mad. :D

Thoughts on GreenStone Media and the real lesson -- This was the longest piece in terms of writing. Ruth came into work on the edition because she was going to write about GreenStone Media for her report and when she found out Third was as well, she wanted to work with everyone (and everyone wanted to work with her). This took 6 hours and 27 minutes of writing. Dona and Jim and Jess spent at least 2 hours editing this after the writing (they edited while Ava and C.I. were doing their research for the TV commentary). There were plans for a roundtable or a mailbag. C.I. said, when we started working on this (at 10:00 pm EST) that there wouldn't be time for half of the planned feature. We should all have listened. :D Dona was especially concerned about the wording during the writing. She was a big fan of GreenStone Media. At one point, she was so tired and frustrated and couldn't find her Diet Pepsi. This wasn't a tiny bottle. Each writing session, Dona goes through at least one pack of smokes and two 2 liter bottles of Diet Pepsi. When I've been present for the writing editions, I've seen where she keeps it, right next to her. She has her glass on a table in front of her (a long with the ashtray) and the Diet Pepsi is right next to her chair. She puts it in the fridge Saturday morning. When she takes the first one out, she puts the second one in. Jim and Jess are drinking coffee mainly. Ava usually drinks water (as does C.I.) but if the pressure is especially tense on her and C.I., they will break out the tequila. I'm not joking. They will do shots. But the main thing is they both get really intense about their hair when things aren't working out on the writing. (The group writing.) Two hours and 42 minutes in, I heard C.I. ask Dona if she had a hair clip? Ava and C.I. both cannot stand for their hair to touch their forehead when they're exhausted. When I've been there (and not over the phone helping out), I've noticed you can tell when they're getting frustrated by how they play with their hair. First up, they'll use a pen and twist it around in their hair to pull the hair back. (Ava and C.I. tend to sit on the floor. They have about 20 pens with them and multiple pads because they're the ones who take the bulk of the notes. We're writing things as a group and Ava and C.I. are the ones taking all the notes.) At some point, one of them will grab the sun glasses. This is inside and at night. They'll put on their sunglasses and then, at the next level of frustration, take out the pen holding their hair away from their faces and push the sunglasses up on top of their heads to keep the hair away. So when the cry came for a hair clip, I knew we were on dangerous frustration ground. :D They, Jim or Dona, will usually be the ones in long pieces that will say, "We're missing the point." Jim and Dona will cut everyone off (even each other), Ava and C.I. will wait until everyone's done speaking. I heard Kat ask Dona if she could snag a cigarette at one point, another sign of frustration because Kat doesn't smoke. But this really was a hard one to nail. We probably overwrote on this big time. But at one point Betty fell asleep. She woke up and said she was sorry, she'd fallen asleep and asked what she'd missed. Jess told her nothing we were still debating whether "failure" would be used in the piece or not? That was a 29 minute sticking point. After we got past that, we really got into writing the piece and that aspect of it is probably the bulk of what made it up. I know what parts Ava and C.I. were asked to polish. (Jim, Jess and Dona asked Ava and C.I. to polish a few lines in the piece after Jim, Dona and Jess finished editing.) Jim says in the note it was two lines. It's more like seven. I could tell which ones because I worked on it. (The polish was jazzing up the lines to give them a little more life. They also contributed lines like that during the writing of the piece.) I asked my bud Tony to print it up today and see if he could mark with a highlighter what was obviously from Ava and C.I. He marked up all the lines they wrote during the writing edition as well as the ones they jazzed up after and it's seven that they jazzed up after. Oh, Dona's Diet Pespi freakout. I kept expecting someone to call me today (Ty, Jess or Jim) and say, "I'm the one who swiped her Pepsi as a joke!" No one did. But apparently her Diet Pepsi disappeared. She was asking about it during the writing of this edition and could never find it. One minute it was next to her then it was gone. :D (I can put in a smiley face because I was on a completely different coast so no way I swiped it.) At one point, Rebecca reminded her she tosses them after they're empty and suggested that might have happened. Dona didn't remember that but did go to look (through the recycle bin) and couldn't find it. At the end of the writing edition for this piece Dona asked, "Are we done now?" And we were. Then she asked, "Who the hell swiped my Diet Pepsi?" :D It was after this was written, before it was edited, that Ava and C.I. were asked by Dona and Jim to put aside the Lopez thing. I looked at Elaine and Rebecca (we're always together on our end) and we were all open mouthed. Both because they were being asked to put it aside again (this is like the third or fourth time) and because we had heard the hair clip remarks and knew that both Ava and C.I. were at the breaking point frustration wise. We weren't surprised by their unprintable remarks. Jess said, "Let's take a break." C.I. went off to take a shower. Ava walked away from the speaker phone so I don't know where she went. While we were discussing what else we could do (we had to replan the edition because so much time went into this piece), C.I. was back and Jim asked, "Well?" And C.I. said, "I'm not saying a word until Ava's back." Ava came back in about five minutes after and they agreed to put off the Lopez thing (with Ava noting they may not do it for Third and may toss it over to Maria, Francisco and Miguel's newsletter).

Bully Boy lies about Vietnam -- who calls him out?... -- Ty edited this piece, by the way. He did a great job on it. And Ava and C.I. deserve credit here too for getting stuff down because we were all talking a mile a minute because this was a topic we all had thoughts on and because we were trying to catch up on time. Also credit to Ty and Kat for saying the terms from Vietnam had to be included. (They both argued "had" and they were right.)

FAIR late to the party and a little lost -- Ruth worked on this piece. Ava and C.I. did not. They were writing their TV piece and we were going with this piece instead of another. The rest of us (Rebecca, Betty, Cedric, Wally, Elaine, Kat, Ruth and me got a three hour nap while the core six regrouped and figured out what could be part of the edition since we'd run behind time throughout. They also discussed illustrations.) I like this one a lot.

Obama sucks up again -- Before the break we worked on this. I think Ty was the editor on this piece too. So we did the GreenStone piece and the Vietnam piece and this and that took (in writing, not editing) about nine hours. We got hung up on this piece and realized half-way in we were addressing some stuff that wouldn't be important to the piece.

Highlights -- Betty, Wally, Elaine, Rebecca, Kat and me wrote this one.

Supermarket check out? -- This was just supposed to be a note but so much time had elasped (and Ty checked the e-mail account and readers were complaining about the huge delay) that Dona said (Jim backed her up) that we couldn't just put up a note. Jess said maybe the highlights could go up? (We hadn't written the editorial yet. Those of us who napped for 3 hours were back on the line -- or back up for Kat, she's out there with the core six). Ty said, "People are pretty angry." So Ava and C.I. said, "Here's a story" and gave us the lowdown on a grocery chain. They said use some stuff from that to open the 'we're running late' note and it should tide people over. So that's what we did. And it did tide them over.

Here's who worked on the edition:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
and Ruth of Ruth's Report

Be sure to check out Ma's "Black Bean Dip in the Kitchen" by the way. Now here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Monday, August 27, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces more deaths, the puppet goes into extreme paranoid mode, the number of internal refugees in Iraq increases, Allawi tries to stage a comeback, the US government funds those fighting against the US in Iraq, and more.

Starting with war resisters. In most PBS markets, the latest episode of
NOW with David Branccachio began airing Friday and the first segment was an examination of how
Agustin Aguayo and James Burmeister became war resisters. Both served in Iraq and checked out from the military in Germany.

Aguayo, who holds both US and Mexican citizenship checked out to demonstrate how serious he was about being recognized as a CO (as a medic serving in Iraq, he'd refused to load his weapon). He left Germany and returned to the US via Mexico. Aguayo has fought for over three years to be recognizaed as a CO, through both the military channels and civilian courts. The second check out lasted less than thirty days before Aguayo turned himself in; however, the US military elected to court-martial him as a deserter. Throughout the pre-trial imprisonment and the court-martial Helga Aguayo, Agustin's wife, refused to be silenced and repeatedly raised attention to what was happening to her husband.
She explained to Gillian Russom (CounterPunch) that what changed her opinion of the war "was seeing what it does to military families. I'm a mother [of twin daughtters], and seeing how it affects the children and the people really got to me. That made me ask questions and do research. And this war is just completely unnecessary." March 6th Agustin Aguayo was convicted in his court-martial and then sentenced. Amnesty International issued this statement: "It is evident from the statements made by Agustin Augyo, and members of his family that he is a legitimate conscintious objector whose opposition to war developed over the course of time and evolved further in response to his experiences in Iraq. Amnesty International believes that he took reasonable steps to secure relase from the army through applying for conscientious objector status. Amnesty International is of the view that the right to refuse to perform military service for reasons of conscience is protected under international human rights law. As such we consider Agustin Aguayo to be a prisoner of conscience and call for his immediate and unconditional release." Aguayo was credit for the time he was imprisoned before his court-martial (the end of September through the start of March) and was released after seven months. Earlier this month, Aguayo spoke in NYC (August 15th) at the Brecht Forum where he noted how medics in Iraq were told to treat the wounded US service members who might be able to recover to fight first. He is a member of
Iraq Veterans Against the War.

James Burmeister was a new face for American TV (he's been profiled by Canada's CBC before). Burmeister was in Germany following wounds received in Iraq after he experienced his third bombing. He had joined up when the talk was 'reconstruction' and 'rebuilding' and he believed the hype that humanitarian work was going to be done and the recruiter who told him he'd be doing just that. Instead, he found himself setting up traps for Iraqis -- leaving US property out in the open so that when Iraqis touched them that had 'violated US soveriegnty' and could be attacked. Burmeister, his wife and their young daughter set their sights on Canada where they now live in Ottawa and he attempts to be granted asylum by the Canadian government -- one that has refused to grant asylum to any war resisters (though they did during Vietnam).
Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey are expected to hear in the next few weeks whether or not Canada's Supreme Court will hear their cases for refugee status. Hinzman and Hugey were the first to go public about going to Canada and they have worked their way through the 'system' (such as it is). The Supreme Court refusing to hear their cases would mean that the lower court's verdict stands and no refugee status will be granted; however, that does not mean deportation from Canada and, should they be deported from Canada, there is no law that says they must be sent back to the US.



There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, 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, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, 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, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one 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, 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.

Though Ronald R. Roach Jr. has not declared he's a war resister, his story does go to the way the US military attempts to track those who self-check out while denying to the press that they do. On Saturday,
Mark Boshnack (The Daily Star) reported on Ronald R. Roach Jr. Friday morning arrest in New York and it contained an element common to many of the arrest stories (for those paying attention, "State police were looking for Roach for two days after receiving a request from the Army to locate him, [BCI Inv. Kevin] More said. . . . .More said he received assistance from troopers and Otsego deputies in searching the house, finding Roach hiding on a shelf near the ceiling. Roach's wife was home at the time, but she has not been charged, More said. Army spokeswoman Gini Sinclair said that Roach was with the 2nd Battalion, 8th Calvary, out of Fort Hood, Texas. He went AWOL on July 25, she said." The US military continues to pursue those who check out despite the lies that continue to tell the press and despite the fact that the press continues to repeat these lies.

Turning to Iraq, today
Hannah Allem (McClatchy Newspapers) breaks the news that the US government is funding what they alternately call 'terrorists' and 'insurgents' in Al Anbar Province -- huge sums of reconstruction money have been handed over to those the US has labeled as enemies by Iraqi contractors in what amounts to little more than a security shakedown -- one that US and Iraqi officials have been aware of for some time. This has been going on since 2003 yet, surprisingly?, the US hasn't included that detail in their hype of the "Al Anbar model." Nor did Rear Adm. Mark Fox include it as he attempted to spin 'success' in yesterday's laughable press briefing (which avoided all mentions of deaths, FYI). The capital of the province is Ramadi and the city most well known to Westerners may be Falluja. So far this month, the US military has announced at least 10 deaths in Al Anbar Province, at least 17 last month. Allem notes: "Iraq's deadly insurgent groups have financed their war against U.S. troops in part with hundreds of thousands of dollars in U.S. rebuilding funds that they've extorted from Iraqi contractors in Anbar province."

If Fox was laughable on Sunday, Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch was bizarre in his Friday press briefing via video-link from Iraq. Lynch insisted that he's 'out and about' which would make him the only high ranking officer that is. He used "we" a lot when speaking of what he passes off as his interaction with Iraqi locals in Baghdad and said that they are asking him "How can we help?" If true, they would be the only ones doing so judging by polls which find a majority of Iraqis want US forces out of Iraq and a majority 'supports' attacks on US forces. So the question becomes what sort of drugs are they giving the generals?

They're giving them pretty much everything else. Sunday,
Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Damien Cave (New York Times) reported that Gen. David Petraeus serves US Congressional members in the Green Zone on a junket asparagus soup and lobster tortellini. Who knew Patterson's Restaurant in London catered to the Green Zone?

While Patraeus and visiting members of the US Congress live it high on the hog, the US service members exist on MRIs or really bad fast food while that malnutrition rate among Iraqi children continues to rise. Maybe Patreause will send them a doggy bag?
Stolberg and Cave describe the trips as good p.r. for Congress members who can stand up in the US Congress and declare "When I was in Iraq . . ." and the equivalent of "how I spent my sumer vacation".

Malnutrition isn't the only thing rising in Iraq. Noting an AP study,
Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) explained that "the death for Iraqi civilians is double what it was a year ago. Estimates show Iraq is suffering an average sixty-two deaths per day, up from thirty-three last year. Meanwhile the Iraqi Red Crescent reports the number of internally displaced Iraqis has also doubled over the course of the so-called U.S. troop surge. More than 1.1 million Iraqis are now internally-displaced, up from under four-hundred fifty thousand earlier this year." This is contrary what Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch spun to the press via video-link on Friday where he also declared no one serving under him could leave by Christmas (a question he was asked several times).

As things get worse in Iraq, the US installed puppet, Nouri al-Maliki, loses it. Yesterday, he held a press conference where he attacked . . . well everyone but his parents. He was, as
Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed (Reuters) note, supposed to be talking up the fact that he had pushed his government's plan (written by foreign oil companies) for the theft of Iraqi oil onto the legislature (Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi has already stated that it's not a sure thing and more talk is required) but instead he had yet another paranoid public episode where he attacked US Senators Carl Levin and Hillary Clinton by name. Chris Collins (McClatchy Newspapers) reminds that al-Maliki has lashed out others in the past, including the administration and former US Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad; however, he added a new target for his rage: the US military which he declared was making "big mistakes." This took place, Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) informs, at "a hastily called news conference" where al-Maliki also attacked France's Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner. Kouchner visited Iraq last week in attempt to create some form of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Petter Allen (Telegraph of London) cites a Newsweek interview with Kouchner, which had just gone online, in which Kouchner explains he was on the phone with US Secretary of State and Anger Condi Rice and told her, "Listen, he's got to be replaced" and that Kouchner believes this should happen but "Bush is attached to Mr Maliki. But the government is not functioning."CNN reports the puppet issued a host of demands including that Levin and Clinton must come to their senses. He wasn't done, however. James Glanz (New York Times) observes
it's "a new level of stridency" for al-Maliki who had "previously reacted with anger to President Bush's criticism of the Iraqi government's lack of political process" al-Maliki also lashed out at the US military but not for the deaths of civilians outside Baghdad due to the ongoing airwar.
Megan Greenwell (Washington Post) explains the puppet "denounced U.S. military raids in Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad". Defending al-Sadr until his final days in office, no doubt. Greenwell also notes a second point that was supposed to be underscored by the press conference (before al-Maliki's outbursts dominated everything else) that a meeting on Sunday determined that the Iraqi government should "release an estimated 1,700 prisoners who are being detained without specific charges." On the issue of prisoners, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted today, "The number of prisoners in U.S.-run jails in Iraq has also increased by fifty-percent under the so-called surge. The U.S. military is now holding some twenty-four thousand, five-hundred prisoners --- up from sixteen thousand earlier this year. Less than three hundred are from countries other than Iraq. Military spokesperson Captain John Fleming says the primary motivator for imprisoned insurgents is economic because they don't have jobs." For those late to the party, in October of 2006, IRIN estimated the unemployment rate in Iraq had risen to 60% and that's a result of the illegal war's continued chaos and violence. With the unemployment has come inflation and Reuters studied a 12 month period (June 2005 to July 2006) and found "a 70% rate of inflation."

Steven R. Hurst (AP) reported on the AP study over the weekend and noted, "Baghdad, however, still accounts for slightly more than half of all war-related killings -- the same percentage as a year ago, according to figures compiled by The Associated Press. The tallies and trends offer a sobering snapshot after an additional 30,000 U.S. troops began campaigns in February to regain control of the Baghdad area. It also highlights one of the major themes expected in next month's Iraq progress report to Congress: some military headway, but extremist factions are far from broken. In street-level terms, it means life for average Iraqis appears to be even more perilous and unpredictable." This is underscored by Leila Fadel (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) reporting last week on a new word in the Iraqi vocabulary "Enaalso": "Two days ago an entire Sunni family was killed. The next day the Mahdi Army came back to kill a Shiite witness, he said. His family was spared, they live outside Iraq. 'Enaalso,' he said in Iraqi slang. It's a new Iraqi word, a phrase used to explain being turned in by an informant to a militia and then being killed. Literally it means he was 'chewed up.' It's what Iraqis now repeatedly say to explain the killings of families by militias that control their neighborhoods with fear and weapons; a word to explain the corpses that show up in the streets."

The US supported puppet is most likely on his final legs. At some point, the question may be asked why the US stood behind him so long? They believed he would push through the theft of Iraqi oil but maybe their first clue to what he could really accomplish occurred in May of 2006 when he missed the Iraq Constitional deadline to form a cabinet and gave himself an extra-constitutional extension . . . only to miss that deadline as well. CIA asset Iyad Allawi is auditioning heavily for the role of "strong man" in this illegal war production. Already three of his ministers have walked out of al-Maliki's cabinet (last Friday) and, as
Democracy Now! noted Thursday, Allawyi is working with "Republican lobbying firm Barbour, Griffith, and Rogers" in an effort to become the new prime minister of Iraq. Allawi was previously interim prime minister. Walter Pincus (Washington Post) reports Allawi boasted on CNN yesterday of the hiring of the firm and that $300,000 was being spent on the effort (whose putting up the money, Allawyi refused to say). Pincus also notes that Robert D. Blackwill, who had been the Bully Boy's special envoy to Iraq, was reported to have been behind Allawi's appointment as interim prime minister and that, following the appointment, "Blackwill left the government to join Barbour Griffith" which also has Philip D. Zelikow (former "counserlor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice") as "[a] senior adviser". Along with reportedly having executed unarmed prisoners at a Baghdad police station in 2004, Allawi also used his tenure as interim prime minister to endorse death squads. In January 2005, when the US administration was publicly floating the idea of sending death squads into Iraq and surrounding countries to kill at will (and illegally), Roland Watson (Times of London) reported
Allawi to be among "the most vigorous supporters of the plan".

Staying on violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing resulted in 1 death (three wounded). Reuters notes a man blew himself up in a Falluja mosque and wounded eleven people.

Reuters reported on Sunday that US forces dropped bombs on a home and the result were the deaths of 5 children and 2 women; and that a female sheepherder was killed by a bombing in Kirkuk. Also on Sunday, Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reported: "The spokesman of Kurdistan's forces guards and the deputy of the Peshmerga minister, Jabbar Yaour, said that 'two American helicopters and two plane fighters bombed early Sunday morning two locations of emergency police of Kurdistan region of about 500 meters of Qara Taba village (70 kilometers north of Baquba, which is the capital of Diyala province) killing four policemen and injuring eight others . Also two police cars were destroyed. Also, Yaour said that 'Kurdish police are in north Diyala to keep peace and fight terrorism in the area with the knowledge and approval of the collation troops and central government and the bombing was by mistake'."


Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the Iraqi army shot thirteen Iraqis making a pilgrimage as they traveled to Karbala. Reuters notes that 3 were killed in the shooting, and that "Reuters photographer said he saw one pilgrim shot dead outside his hotel". CBS and AP report: "A sniper killed a Shiite pilgrim on a Baghdad bridge Monday".

On Sunday,
Reuters reported that pilgrims, one woman and six people (three children included in the wounded), were shot dead in Baghdad while another woman ("female shepherd") was killed in Kirkuk by a roadside bombing. Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reported "an American patrol opened fire (a machine gun)" in Baghdad and at least one person died while six more were wounded".

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 12 corpses discovered in Baghdad.



Today, the
US military announced: "A Marine assigned to Multi National Force-West died Aug. 25 and in a separate incident, another Marine died Aug. 26, while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar Province." And they announced: "Two Task Force Lightning Soldiers were killed by enemy gunfire in Salah ad Din Province, Sunday." The deaths bring the ICCC total number of US service members killed in Iraq so far this month to 74 and the total number killed in the illegal war to 3732.

On Saturday,
Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) reported on the mood in one mess hall in Iraq, "In the dining hall of a U.S. Army post south of Baghdad, President Bush was on the wide-screen TV, giving a speech about the war in Iraq. The soldiers didn't look up from their chicken and mashed potatoes. As military and political leaders prepare to deliver a progress report on the conflict to Congress next month, many soldiers are increasingly disdainful of the happy talk that they say commanders on the ground and White House officials are using in their discussions about the war." On a similar note, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) shared today, "In Puerto Rico, a call for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq earned a standing ovation Saturday at a conference of more than four thousand National Guard. Speaking at the opening of the National Guard Association general conference, Puerto Rico Governor Anibal Acevedo Vila said the war in Iraq is needlessly risking the lives of U.S. troops and damaging the U.S. abroad. He said: ''The daily death toll of Americans and their allies has caused irreparable anguish here in Puerto Rico, and throughout the country. The same could be said for the people of Iraq'."

Yesterday, 2008 Democratic presidential nominee hopeful
John Edwards appeared on CBS' Face The Nation where he declared of the US Congress, "I think they should not submit a single funding bill to the president for the war that doesn't have a timetable for withdrawal. And I think they should use whatever legislative tool is available to them, including filibuster."

This is similar to what 2008 Democratic presidential nominee
Mike Gravel has advocated. On August 8th, he explained it on the first hour (the only guest) on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show as follows: "The Constitution's very clear: the Congress makes the laws, the Executive has to enforce and obey the laws. But you now have to set it up so that he'll veto and how do you get this passed, this law passed? Real simple. You see, they do a cloture vote. Oh one cloture vote, two, can't do it. Stop. Or an override veto. Can't do it? Stop. That's ridiculous. The rules permit to have a vote on cloture every single day, seven days a week, and all the way through this August recess which they're all taking -- and then when the bill comes back vetoed they can repeat it every single day and, I promise you, Diane, that in twenty, forty days we will have a law on the books to withdraw the troops from Iraq. Now time is fleeting. This could have been done by Labor Day and all, I mean all the troops, would come home by Christmas." Both Gravel and Edwards are former US Senators. Whether the current Congress will take the advice or not remains to be seen.

Addressing Congress' refusal to lead,
Ron Jacobs (CounterPunch) observes that Congress has served to tap down on the outrage over the illegal war by becoming partners with the White House in the continuation of the illegal war just as they did when they "provided Bush and Cheney with the legitmacy for the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the subsequent occupation of that country" and that the fiery speeches (which never have action behind them) serve to "provide the prowar forces with the cover of democratic legitmacy because all of the bills even mentioning a withdrawal of forces have either been defeate or water down" which may indicate "Democratic leadership wanted all along -- a pretend antiwar opposition to the war in Congress that would take the wind out of the movement in the streets of the United States and insure the continuation of the war in the streets of Baghdad." No doubt fearing (rightly) a repeat of 2004, Jacobs cautions against the peace movement allowing themselves to become a Democratic electoral movement and notes how candidates against the illegal war are being marginalized likely to leave only pro-war Dem candidates standing:
"For those of us with a sense of history, this scenario played itself out in 1968 and left many antiwar Democrats with the choice of voting for the prowar Humphrey or not voting at all. So what is to be done? Plain and simple, the antiwar movement must be wrested back from those who would sell it to the Democratic Party. This means, plain and simple, that antiwar actions must not champion presidential candidates at the expense of the stated goal of immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all US forces from Iraq."
Jacobs also notes some coming events including the the Stpember 15th rallies in DC, Los Angeles (and elsewhere), the "encampment and march the week of September 22 - 29" in DC "and a number of regional protests around the date of October 27th . . . being called by a number of national organizations, including UFPJ, Troops Out Now, and ANSWER."

Events took place over the weekend.
Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) notes at least 4,000 turned out in Kennebunkport, Maine for the "march to the Bush family estate" and that Cindy Sheehan and Dennis Kucinich were among those participating. Sheehan is running for the US Congress in California's eighth district and Kucinich is running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008. Kucinich declared, "The democratic leaders can end this war now. They can go to president Bush and say Mr. Bush, we appropriated 97 billion dollars at the beginning of the summer for the war. That money can be used to bring the troops home and to set in motion the international security and peacekeeping force to stabilize Iraq. It does not take another vote. I want you to know that. The Democratic leaders have the responsiblity to end the war now." Goodman also noted "more than a thousand people marched in Newark this weekend in one of the largest demonstrations there in decades. The demonstrators were protesting the war in Iraq and violence at home."
















Friday, August 24, 2007

When the government spies

Friday! At last! :D

This'll probably be a short post because I've got stuff to do. This is from Democracy Now!:

Bush Administration Admits Telecoms Aided Gov't Spying
The Bush administration has acknowledged for the first time that telecommunications companies collaborated with the government's warrantless domestic surveillance program. The Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell made the admission in an interview with the El Paso Times. The Washington Post reports McConnell's statement could help plaintiffs in lawsuits against AT&T, Verizon, MCI and other telecoms. Until now the government has argued that the cases should be thrown out on the grounds that the subject matter is a state secret. During the same the interview McConnell urged Congress to retroactively provide immunity to telecom companies that participated in the surveillance program.

They knew what they were doing. They broke the law. They broke the consumers' trust and they broke the law. Just because you're asked to do something by the government doesn't make it legal. If it's against the law, it's against the law.

In case anyone's new to the issue, this is CCR's news release this month on the topic, "CCR IN COURT TODAY TO CHALLENGE NSA DOMESTIC SPYING PROGRAM AND NEW FISA LAW:"

Center for Constitutional Rights Believes Privileged Attorney-Client Communications Were Intercepted by NSA Without Warrants San Francisco, August 9, 2007 - The Center for Constitutional Rights appears today before Federal District Judge Vaughn R. Walker to argue that the NSA's program of warrantless surveillance is unconstitutional and should be struck down. The argument in CCR v. Bush comes days after Congress and the Bush administration passed the Protect America Act of 2007 which broadly expands the government's power to spy on Americans without getting court approval.
According to attorneys, there are substantial questions about whether the new law, which is temporary and due to expire in six months, is constitutional, and they will seek permission to file additional legal papers to that effect today. The law effectively removes oversight for spying from the FISA court and leaves it up to the Executive Branch to monitor itself, with Attorney General Gonzales having the primary responsibility for oversight. For that reason, CCR attorneys will argue in court today that the new law violates the Fourth Amendment's requirement that judges approve warrants for surveillance and do so only on evidence of probable cause.
The administration has continued to claim that the NSA program was always legal and that they have the inherent right to resume such surveillance at any time regardless of what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) says. CCR attorneys therefore argue that their case has not been rendered moot by the new law, which in any event will expire in six months.
According to CCR attorney Shayana Kadidal, "Congress has ceded further power to an administration that has done nothing but abuse its power and betray the trust of the American people. Congress has given the President and Attorney General virtually unchecked power to spy on international calls of Americans without any oversight or accountability from the courts." CCR v. Bush was originally filed in federal court in New York but was subsequently transferred to San Francisco where other challenges related to the program, including cases against several large telecommunications companies for their role in the NSA Program, are being litigated.

CCR's case challenges the NSA's surveillance of people within the United States without judicial approval or statutory authorization. CCR filed the suit on its own behalf and on behalf of CCR attorneys and legal staff representing clients who fit the criteria described by the Attorney General for targeting under the NSA Surveillance Program. CCR has been one of the most active opponents of the illegal detention, torture and intelligence gathering practices this administration instituted in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 9/11. As part of its mission to fight violations of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, the Center for Constitutional Rights represents hundreds of men detained indefinitely without charge as "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo Bay; Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen falsely accused of ties to terrorism and rendered from the United States to Syria for the purpose of being tortured; and Muslim immigrants unreasonably and wrongfully detained in the U.S. for months without probable cause or criminal charges in the wake of 9/11.
In the course of representing these clients, CCR's lawyers have engaged in thousands of telephone calls and e-mails with people outside the United States, including their clients, their clients' families and outside lawyers, potential witnesses, and others. Given that the government has accused many of CCR's overseas clients of being associated with Al Qaeda or of being of interest to the 9/11 investigation, there is little question that these attorneys fall within the likely range of victims of the NSA Surveillance Program.
CCR Executive Director Vincent Warren said, "It is virtually certain that the NSA spied on our confidential communications with our clients as well as conversations with other American attorneys outside of the U.S. The president violated his oath of office to faithfully execute the laws of this nation and instead secretly broke the law for years to spy on Americans. He has taken an axe to the Constitution."
The Center for Constitutional Rights is represented in the suit by CCR attorneys Shayana Kadidal and Michael Ratner, and CCR cooperating attorney David Cole, and Professor Michael Avery of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG).
For more information on the case, visit
www.ccr-ny.org/NSAspying. This release is posted at www.ccr-ny.org/NSAspying/release.

Dad's got Lily Tomlin's comedy recordings on vinyl. On one of them, I think This Is a Recording, she does this routine as Ernestine on the phone with J. Edgar Hoover who used to run/ruin the FBI. And Ernestine's telling him he doesn't need to wiretap illegally, he can just recruit the operators at the phone company.

I'm reading a book of essays by Gore Videal called The Last Empire and in one of the essays, he talks about Cary Grant and how when Grant was on the phone operators would listen in. My point here is that people know right from wrong and the phone companies knew it was illegal for them to cooperate with the government. Or the executive branch of the government. They weren't cooperating with the legislative branch because they weren't obeying the laws.

They need to be held accountable and so does the administration. And people who make excuses for the White House aren't just saying "Listen to me! Listen to me!" -- they are doing a disservice to the Constitution and to every other citizen.

Now this is a new release from the National Lawyers Guild and the only thing I've done here is take out the e-mail addresses. If you want to write them, you can get the addresses by using the link but after the crazy loon that has spent how many weeks threatening C.I.? the last thing I want to do is put up someone's e-mail address and have them get a lot of e-mails like that. If you seriously have a question or want to share a comment, you can use the link to what I'm about to post and get the e-mail addresses there. This is from "National Lawyers Guild Calls on Congress to Repeal Warrantless Domestic Surveillance" which came out this month after our Democratically controlled Congress handed away the people's rights:


Marjorie Cohn, NLG president,
Heidi Boghosian, NLG Executive Director,
NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS ON CONGRESS TO REPEAL WARRANTLESS DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE
Congress put its stamp of approval on the unconstitutional wiretapping of Americans by amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in the "Protect America Act of 2007."
The new law takes the power to authorize electronic surveillance out of the hands of a judge and places it in the hands of the attorney general (AG) and the director of national intelligence (DNI). FISA had required the government to convince a judge there was probable cause to believe the target of the surveillance was a foreign power or the agent of a foreign power. The law didn't apply to wiretaps of foreign nationals abroad. Its restrictions were triggered only when the surveillance targeted a U.S. citizen or permanent resident or when the surveillance was obtained from a wiretap physically located in the United States.
The attorney general was required to certify that the communications to be monitored would be exclusively between foreign powers and there was no substantial likelihood a U.S. person would be overheard.Under the new law, the AG and the DNI can authorize "surveillance directed at a person reasonably believed to be located outside of the United States." The surveillance can take place inside the United States, and there is no requirement of any connection with al-Qaeda, terrorism or criminal behavior. The mandate that the AG certify there is no substantial likelihood a U.S. person will be overheard has been eliminated.
The new law violates the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court has held that government wiretapping must be supported by a search warrant based on probable cause and issued by a judge. The Court has struck down warrantless domestic surveillance. Finally, the new law requires telephone companies to collect data and turn it over to the federal government. It also grants immunity against lawsuits to these companies, many of which are currently defendants in civil cases.
The rush to push this legislation through last week was likely a preemptive strike by Bush to head off adverse rulings in lawsuits challenging the legality of his Terrorist Surveillance Program.
On August 9, a federal district court in San Francisco was to hear oral arguments by lawyers from the Center for Constitutional Rights and the National Lawyers Guild in CCR v. Bush. And on August 15, Guild lawyers and others will argue Al-Haramain v. Bush in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
By its terms, the new law will sunset in 180 days. But this is a specious limitation. The AG and DNI can authorize surveillance for up to one year. Just before the statute is set to expire around February 1, 2008, they could approve surveillance that will last until after Bush leaves office.The National Lawyers Guild calls on Congress to repeal the "Protect America Act of 2007."

And that's going to be it for me. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, August 24, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the US military reports another death, a US helicopter attack leaves many Iraqis dead, war resistance gets covered on PBS, activist, author, feminist, peace advocate Grace Paley passed away Wednesday, and more.

Starting with war resistance. This week's
NOW with David Brancaccio (PBS, begins airing in most markets Friday nights) takes a look at war resistance:Choosing to go to war is both a government's decision and one made by individual enlistees. But changing your mind once you're in the army is a risky decision with serious consequences. On Friday, August 24 (checkyour local listings), we talk to two soldiers who went AWOL and eventually left the Army, but who took very different paths. NOW captures the moment when one man turns himself in, and when another applies for refugee status in Canada, becoming one of the 20,000 soldiers who have deserted the army since the War in Iraq began. Each describes what drove him to follow his conscience over his call to duty, and what penalties and criticism were endured as a result. "I see things differently having lived through the experience," former army medic Agustin Aguayo tells NOW. "When I returned from Iraq, after much reflection I knew deep within me I could never go back."The NOW website at www.pbs.org/now will offer more insight into the case made by conscientious objectors, as well as more stories of desertion in the ranks.In addition to the broadcast, a preview of the show is posted at YouTube. And the show will be available in various forms (audio, video, text -- though maybe not in full) at the NOW with David Brancaccio site.

Camilo Mejia is the new chair of
Iraq Veterans Against the War. The decision of the new board members of IVAW were made last weekend. Tony Pecinovsky (People's Weekly World) reports on the Veterans for Peace conference and quotes Mejia explaining, "There is no greater argument against war than the experience of war itself. In the military you're not free to decide for yourself what is right and wrong. The fog of war is very real. Your main concern is staying alive" and explaining his decision to self-checkout, "I couldn't return knowing that we are committing war crimes. This war is criminal. But I'm no longer a prisoner of fear. I have hope that we can end this war." IVAW is gearing up for their big Truth in Recruting campaign. Adam Kokesh, who is co-chair of IVAW, is currently doing workshops (tonight at St. Bede's at the corner of St. Francis and San Mateo 7-9 pm PST). And Camilo Mejia tells his story in his own story of resistance in his new book Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, 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, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, 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, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one 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, 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.

Turning to the jibber-jabber. The NIE was released yesterday. It is a much kinder and less explicit version of Peter W. Galbraith's "
Iraq: The Way to Go" (The New York Review of Books, August 16, 2007). In the essay, Galbraith writes, "The Iraq war is lost. Of course, neither the President nor the war's intellectual architects are prepared to admit this. Nonetheless, the specter of defeat shapes their thinking in telling ways. The case for the war is no longer defined by the benefits of winning -- a stable Iraq, democracy on the march in the Middle East, the collapse of the evil Iranian and Syrian regimes -- but by the consequences of defeat." If that stance is still not clear, Alex Spillius (Telegraph of London) reports: "Frontline generals in Iraq spoke openly yesterday of the need to have a government that could function and guarantee security above all else, including democratic legitimacy. Brig Gen John Bednarek, who commands forces in Diyala province, told CNN that 'democratic institutions are not necessarily the way ahead in the long-term future'." As all the lies are dropped, the reality of the crimes being committed may be grasped. Maybe not.
Michael Ware and Thomas Evans (CNN) report that "officials now say they are willing to settle for a government that functions and can bring security." Yesterday, White House flack Gordon Johndroe declared (in Crawford, TX) that "we know that there are significant challenges ahead, especially in the political area. I would say that the strategy laid out by the President on January 10th was a strategy that provided for security first, so that there would be space for political reconciliation. The surge did not get fully operational until mid-summer. It is not surprising -- it is frustrating, but it's not surprising that the political reconciliation is lagging behind the security improvements. I think that is the way the strategy was laid out." The 'improved' security is a lie. Repeating, Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reporting earlier this month that the US military claims of 'progress' were based on numbers they would not release and that McClatchy Newspapers' figures do not track with the findings the US military has trumpeted: "U.S. officials say the number of civilian casualties in the Iraqi capital is down 50 percent. But U.S. officials declined to provide specific numbers, and statistics gathered by McClatchy Newspapers don't support the claim." But clearly the generals, the officials and the White House are all on the same page regarding the 'problems' with democracy -- pure chance, of course.

Greg Miller (Los Angeles Times) summarizes the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE): "Despite some military progress, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki is unable to govern his country effecitvely and the political situation is likely to become even more precarious in the next six to 12 months, the nation's intelligence agencies concluded in a new assessment released Thursday. The document, an update of a National Intelligence Estimate delivered in January, represents the view of all 16 U.S. spy agencies."

'Democracy' on hold or out the window . . . what to do, what to do? Bring in a 'strong man' dictator?
Reuters reports that 3 "secularist ministers . . . will formally quit" the cabinet of Nour al-Maliki today and that three are from Iyad Allawi's party. Yesterday Democracy Now! noted Allawyi is working with "Republican lobbying firm Barbour, Griffith, and Rogers" in an effort to become the new prime minister of Iraq (Allawi was previously interim prime minister). CIA asset Allawi was still working with the CIA in 2003, as Jim Lobe (Foreign Policy in Focus) noted, in attempted "Iraqification" which was a popular thing in late 2003 as the White House and hand maidens of the press attempted to treat "Iraqification" as a process which would put Iraqis in control. The policy was at odds with much of the White House's aims and never got off the ground. Had it, it still wouldn't have allowed for Iraqi control. Allawi was interim Prime Minister following the start of the illegal war and, during that time, he made his 'mark' early on. Paul McGeough (Sydney Morning Herald via Common Dreams, July 2004) reported in July 2004: "Iyad Allawi, the new Prime Minister of Iraq, pulled a pistol and executed as many as six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station, just days before Washington handed control of the country to his interim government, according to two people who allege they witnessed the killings. They say the prisoners - handcuffed and blindfolded - were lined up against a wall in a courtyard adjacent to the maximum-security cell block in which they were held at the Al-Amariyah security center, in the city's south-western suburbs."

Never having been handed democracy, Iraqis now face the very likely prospect that the puppet (al-Maliki) will be replaced with a dictator/strong man. It's not about what the Iraqis want or desire on the US government's end, it's just more of the same. A point driven home by
the announcement that Abdel-Salam Aref has died in Jordan. In 2004, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) explained, "The US-installed regime in Iraq said last night it would pay a monthly pension to a former president overthrown more than 35 years ago in a coup that brought Saddam Hussein's Baath party to power. The Iraqi Governing Council says it will pay Abdel-Rahman Aref $1,000 a month and allocate $5,000 to cover his medical bills in Jordan. Aref rose to prominence in 1963 when he was appointed army chief of staff by his elder brother, then President Abdel-Salam Aref. He was overthrown in July of 1968 in a coup that was aided by the Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA also gave the Baath Party the names of some 5,000 Iraqi Communists who were then hunted down and killed or imprisoned. Following the coup, Baath party leader Ahmed Hasan al-Bakr became president, with Saddam as his right hand man."

As
Peter W. Galbraith explains, there was no democracy following the start of the illegal war, not in what was imposed by the US (and the US shut out the UN). What exists is a system where the Shi'ites and Sunnis are two major groups (Sunnis the smaller of the two) and the system imposed has left one group shut out (elections would change that only to a small degree -- but they aren't happening) and the third most populous segment, the Kurds, are ready for their own country (Kurdistan). The system imposed on Iraq by the US was fatally flawed from the beginning so, it can be argued, ignorance wasn't the issue. Considering past history, a failed system that could be tossed aside quickly. Warren P. Strobel (McClatchy Newspapers) observes the the NIE's "best-case scenario" would be "Iraq's security will improve modestly over the next six to 12 months, but violence across the country will remain high. The U.S.-backed central government will grow more fragile and remain unable to govern. Shiite and Sunni Muslims will continue their bitter feuding. All sides will position themselves for an eventual American departure. In Iraq, best-case scenarios have rarely, if ever, come to pass."


Andrew Stephen (New Statesman) wonders if the Bully Boy is imploding and notes, "The conundrum, of course, is that it was precisely that dark art which got Bush into the White House in the first place. The poisonous divisiveness that gradually festered around him as a result now allows the state department, to take just one example reported in the Washington Post, to think nothing of simply ignoring an order from the president. Yet I suspect that the extent to which the Bush administration has become so shambolic will not come home to many Americans until the country returns to work on 4 September. Bush is now a truly rudderless president, with no realistic agenda left for the next 513 or so days, other than to tread water and hope for the best."

Is Bully Boy imploding? His laughable attempting to rewrite history this week indicates something strange.
Robert Parry (Consortium News) evaluates the latest lunacy, "It is often said that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. But a much worse fate may await countries whose leaders distort and falsify history. Such countries are doomed to experience even bloodier miscalculations. That was the case with Germany after World War I when Adolf Hitler's Nazis built a political movement based in part on the myth that weak politicians in Berlin had stabbed brave German troops in the back when they were on the verge of victory. And it appears to be the case again today as President George W. Bush presents the history of the Vietnam War as a Rambo movie with the heroic narrative that if only the U.S. military had stuck it out, the war would have been won. Or, more likely, the black wall of the Vietnam War Veterans Memorial would stretch most of the way to the U.S. Capitol." And Rosa Brooks (Los Angeles Times), who has gotten nothing but hisses in these snapshots, tackles the Bully Boy's nonsense, "Some might quibble with Bush's understanding of historical causation. Yes, many innocent civilians suffered in the aftermath of the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam -- but it's more accurate to attribute their suffering to the prolongation of the war itself, rather than to the U.S. withdrawal as such. It's hard to be precise (as is the case in Iraq today, no one kept careful count of Vietnamese civilian casualties, and all sides in the conflict had an incentive to fudge the true figures), but somewhere between 1 million and 4 million civilians died as the war needlessly dragged on, many killed by U.S. weapons. Millions more were displaced. But those are details.
Bush went on to assert that 'another price to our withdrawal from Vietnam' was the rise of 'the enemy we face in today's struggle, those who came to our soil and killed thousands of citizens' on 9/11. Yup -- it's so obvious! The U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam caused the rise of Al Qaeda -- and, by extension, 'our withdrawal from Vietnam' ultimately turned Iraq into 'the central front' in 'the war on terror'." At a time when many left voices played dumb, stayed silent, Rosa Brooks addressed Bully Boy's nonsense, challenged it and put into perspective.
More willing to do that would go along way towards ending the illegal war.

The NIE is not the only report making the news. Another report, this time from an aid agency, also gives a grim picture.
James Glanz and Stephen Farrell (New York Times) report that the Bully Boy's escalation has led to an escalation in the amount of Iraqi refugees. Citing figures by the Iraqi Red Crescent, the reporters declare "the total number of internally displaced Iraqis has more than doubled, to 1.1 million from 499,000, since the buildup [of troops -- the escalation] started in February."

Turning to some of today's violence,
Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) reports a US helicopter attack on Iraqis in western Baghdad that resulted in the deaths of "at least 18" Iraqis, that the US is claiming the helicopter attack was prompted by an attack from 'insurgents' but eye witnesses note it's the same thing as usual -- due to the heat some people sleep on their roofs and that's what was going on during the "predawn" attack by the US -- and that between 2 and 4 women were killed in the attack. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "The U.S. military said in a press release that after ground troops came under attack helicopters were brought and 18 'enemy combatants were killed'. The military later amended the release putting the death toll at only 8. The military said armed men on rooftops were spotted. A military spokesman said no civilians were killed."

Bombings?


Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing that claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier (two more injured).

Shootings?

Reuters reports "two construction workers" were shot dead in Diwaniya, a barber was shot dead in in Hawija and 1 police officer was shot dead in Numaniya. CBS and AP report, "Sixty suspected al Qaeda in Iraq fighters hit national police facilities in a coordinated attack in Samarra, sparking two hours of fighting that saw three people killed and more than a dozen insurgents captured, Iraqi police said Friday. One policeman, a woman and an 11-year-old girl were killed in the fighting in the city 60 miles north of Baghdad, and nine others were injured. There were no details on insurgent casualties, but police arrested 14 suspects, the spokesman said on condition of anonymity."

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 9 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 1 corpse discovered in Hawija. Reuters notes a corpse discovered in Diwaniya..

Today the
US military announced: "One Task Force Lightning Soldier died Aug. 24 as a result of injuries sustained from an explosion earlier in the day while conducting operations in Salah ad Din Province. Four Soldiers were also wounded and transported to a Coalition medical facility for treatment." The current numbers at ICCC are 3725 US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war with 67 for the month thus far. Reuters' count is also 3725 and they note "Britain 168 [and] Other nations 129".


Finally, author and activist Grace Paley died Wednesday. In Sisterhood is Forever: The Women's Anthology for a New Millennium (ed.
Robin Morgan, 2003), Paley contributed "Why Peace is (More Than Ever) A Feminist Issue":

Today's wars are about oil. But alternate energies exist now -- solar, wind -- for every important energy-using activity in our lives. The only human work that cannot be done without oil is war.
So men lead us to war for enough oil to continue to go to war for oil.
I'm now sure that these men can't stop themselves anymore -- even those who say they want to. There are too many interesting weapons. Besides, theirs is a habit of centuries, eons. They will not break that habit themselves.
For ourselves, for our girl and boy children, women will have to organize as we have done before -- and also as we have never done before -- to break that habit for them, once and for all.

Peace is a feminist issue, still and always, even if one women's group chose to walk away from that reality in order to justify an endorsement of Hillary Clinton. As
Juan Gonzales (Democracy Now!) noted today, "Since the 1960s, Paley was very active in the antiwar, feminist, and anti-nuclear movements. She helped found the Greenwich Village Peace Center in 1961. Eight years later she went on a peace mission to Hanoi. In 1974, she attended the World Peace Conference in Moscow. In 1980, she helped organize the Women's Pentagon Action. And in 1985, Paley visited Nicaragua and El Salvador, after having campaigned against the US government's policies towards those countries. She was also one of the 'White House Eleven,' who were arrested in 1978 for unfurling an anti-nuclear banner on the White House lawn." Feminist Wire Daily writes that "Paley was known as much for her political activism on behalf of peace and women's rights as her literary accomplishments. Paley was jailed several times for her opposition to the Vietnam War, and traveled to Hanoi on a peace mission to negotiate for the release of American prisoners in 1969. She helped found the Women's Pentagon Action and the Greenwich Village Peace Center. . . . Most recently, she actively opposed the war in Iraq." When Paley went to NYC for the "Women on War" event in April 2003, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) interviewed her and the program aired some of that interview today:

AMY GOODMAN: Well, you were recently named the poet laureate of Vermont. It's very interesting. You're named by the governor, who is a Republican governor. Can you talk about how you relate to him in your meeting with him?
GRACE PALEY: Well, first of all, he really -- he didn't -- well, he had to sign the paper, but I was chosen by a group of other poets, a couple of whom had been laureates, like Galway Kinnell and Ellen Voigt, and a couple of other people who had to make a choice. I don't even think I was the best one, but that's beside the point. Still, there -- you know, there's time for others. And then I had to meet with him. He wanted to meet with me and talk to me, but before he really signed on. And I -- he knew a lot about me, and I said, well, I wasn't going to change very much, you know? I'd probably be the same person I was, no matter what. And we talked awhile about this fact. And he really -- and then he signed it. That's all.
AMY GOODMAN: Governor James Douglas?
GRACE PALEY: Yes. He's a Republican. He has a very mild manner, and I don't know whether that's the part of the Republicans of Vermont or what, but he's a Republican. I mean, there's no question about it.
AMY GOODMAN: But in terms of your poetry, more significantly, here he is naming you poet laureate, whether he chose you or not --
GRACE PALEY: Right.
AMY GOODMAN: -- he is for the war, and you're opposed.
GRACE PALEY: Yeah, right. Yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: And you have been using your poetry a lot in the last few months to express that view.
GRACE PALEY: Well, I would do that, no matter what. I mean, this is what I'm about, and this is how I live my life. It's -- I don't even -- I wouldn't understand how to do otherwise.

Interviewed by Phyllis Exkhaus and Judith Mahoney Pasternak (War Resister League) at the start of this century, Paley reflected on what the peace movement accomplished: "Well, I think it did two things. It acted as an education in resistance and nonviolence. And probably the education in nonviolent direct action couldn't have been learned without a war. It had to take a war for people to learn that things could be defied and resisted. I think that was an important legacy of the peace movement."

Elaine Woo (Los Angeles Times) reports on Paley's work on the issue of draft resistance and notes "she also was an inveterate street-corner leafleteer and protest marcher who supported or helped found the Greenwich Village Peace Center, the War Resisters League, Women's Pentagon Action and the Feminist Press." The Feminist Press published Here And Somewhere Else (Two By Two) in March of this year which paired Paley's work with Robert Nichols (her second and surviving husband).

In the December 1998 issue of
The Progressive, Anne-Marie Cusac noted a passage by Paely that stood out: "One of the things that art is about, for me, is justice. Now, that isn't a matter of opinion, really. That isn't to say, 'I'm going to show these people right or wrong' or whatever. But what art is about -- and this is what justice is about, although you'll have your own interpretations -- is the illumination of what isn't known, the lighting up of what is under a rock, of what has been hidden."

In 2002, she was among those signing "
Not In Our Name: A Statement Of Conscience Against War And Repression." Meredith Tax remembers Paley at Women's WORLD: "Grace and I became close during the PEN Congress of 1986, during which we organized a meeting to protest the inadequate number of women speakers, which took over the ballroom of the Essex House Hotel and led to the formation of a Women's Committee in PEN American Center. Grace and I were co chairs of that committee until she moved to Vermont, and she became founding Chair of Women's World in 1994. Grace was the kindest and most generous person I have ever known. This is unusual in a writer, especially one of her quality, because writers tend to husband their inner resources for their work, but Grace had so many inner resources that she could afford to be generous. She gave unstining love to her family and friends, took speaking engagements at any whistlestop, often without pay, organized antiwar and antinuclear and women's demonstrations, worked endlessly against nuclear armaments, did draft counseling, protested on behalf of the environment, free expression, and a just peace betwen Israel and Palestine."

In addition,
Matthew Rothschild interviewed Paley for Progressive Radio and Neda Ulaby (NPR) provides an audio overview of Paley's life and work. In terms of writing, "My Father Addresses Me On The Facts Of Old Age" (June 17, 2002) is available online at The New Yorker.









Thursday, August 23, 2007

Vanishing 'coalition'

One day until Friday! :D We just got done doing a killer roundtable so be sure to check out the gina & krista round-robin tomorrow if you're a community member who gets it. That is an amazing roundtable. Kat's at Rebecca's, I've got C.I., Ava, Jess and Dona here with Jim and Ty en route. (Jim and Ty did not participate in the roundtable because they were in flight. Ty and Jim spent the week on the East coast. Jim hanging with his family, Ty going back for the week with his boyfriend.) Kat was so funny in the roundtable, by the way. She's got to take a thing she says, about a paragraph long, and turn it into a review. There's a CD that really disappointed her and . . . I'll leave it at that because she called a second ago and I said, "You need to do a review on that." I hope she will. One thing she loves is something everyone's listening to here (C.I. got it for my Dad knowing he would love it, we all do): Stephen Stills' Just Roll Tape. This is a . . . What is this? :D Stills went with Judy Collins to the recording studio (they were a couple then) for a recording session she was doing and ended up laying down some tracks after her session was over. Dad's got it blasting. Ma goes, "Only while your granddaughter is up!" :D That must be real weird. To come into the world last month. It's so hot. But she's probably like, 'Hmm. I guess it's hot on this earth all the time." That's all it's been since she was born. When winter comes, she's in for a surprise! :D

I forget, not everybody has a dad like mine. So if you weren't schooled by a father or mother in classic rock, Stephen Stills is a singer-songwriter and he's part of the super group Crosby, Stills & Nash and part of the super group Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young. Before that, he was a part of Buffalo Springfield which is still known for "For What It's Worth" which Stills' wrote.

Speaking of music, Kat's "Kat's Korner: Cowboy Junkies kick it up another notch" went up Sunday and it's a review of Cowboy Junkies' At The End of Paths Taken which is probably one of my favorite CDs of the summer.

Okay, now if you've been paying attention, you know the administration is angry/frustrated/miffed with al-Maliki and, if you've been paying attention, you know that it's pretty much the same way they feel about the British. This is from Leonard Doyle and Kim Sengupta's "Iraq: The Vanishing Coalition:"

The American exasperation, however, is compounded by the perception that British troops are "disengaging" while the US is losing lives daily in the "surge". The crash of the UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter in northern Iraq is thought to have been due to mechanical failure rather than hostile fire. Meanwhile, east of Baghdad another American soldier was killed in a roadside attack.
General Keane, who is recently retired but is considered to be influential within the Pentagon, said there was "frustration" among US commanders that they may have to send troops to the south while continuing to fight the insurgency in central and northern Iraq. He said: "That situation could arise if the situation gets worse in Basra if and when the British leave. Now the situation has changed in the south, it is considerably worse, certainly with the kind of gangland warfare that is preying on the people in the south."
General Keane accused the British of being guilty of "general disengagement from the key issues around Basra". He continued: "The Brits have never had enough troops to truly protect the population." UK troop numbers are, in fact, due to be further reduced, by 500, to fewer than 5,000 at the end of the year.
Basra Palace, the last British base inside Basra City, was due to be handed over to Iraqi forces at the beginning of August. This has been delayed at the Americans' request, but UK officials insist this will take place, along with the passing of control of the city to the Iraqi government, by the end of the year. British troops will then withdraw to the air bridgehead at Basra airport, where a reserve force of about 3,000 will remain when the official withdrawal from Iraq takes place next year.
The dangers in southern Iraq were also illustrated by the assassinations of the governors of two provinces, and the police chief of one.
Mohammed Ali al-Hassani, the governor of Muthanna, was killed along with his driver and bodyguard by a roadside bomb as he left his home for his office in the provincial capital Samawah. It followed the killing of Khalil Jalil Hanza, the governor of Qadisiyah province, along with the police chief, Major General Khalid Hassan, in another roadside attack.
With no end in sight to the bloodletting, Mr Maliki reacted angrily yesterday to what he called the "discourteous" remarks from his US allies. "Those who make such statements are bothered by our visit to Syria," said Mr Maliki. "We will pay no attention. We care for our people and our constitution and can find friends elsewhere."


So the only real partner the US had in the laughable 'coalition' is going and it's getting ugly. John Howard would love to be a 'player' but the people of Australia won't let him send more troops in. And at a little over a thousand troops, Australia's a laughable 'partner'. The administration and the British government are having a nasty break up. But, kids, it's not you. They're not splitting up because of you. :D You know Bully Boy's nonsense speech can also be seen as a slam against the United Kingdom.

In other crazy news, Koo Koo Katrian and her awful magazine The Crap Nation. Ask why she's publishing Michael Lind? Former neocon who went to the center.

I thought Crap Nation was "the leading magazine of the left". Koo Koo can't find any left writers? Was she zonked out in front of her reality TV shows again?

Why would anyone wanting to pay money for that piece of crap magazine that presents as left and as different from The New Republic(an) when Katrina prints so many of the same writers?

She's a stupid ass idiot. She's destroyed the magazine. The left needs to walk away from that train wreck.

Koo Koo's doing yet another issue on Hurricane Katrina in the new issue. People will look back and see all of her Koo Koo coverage of that and compare it to the tiny coverage of Iraq and wonder, "Did the dumb ass know a war was going on?" No. Because she's a dumb ass from the Council for Foreign Relations. Money bought her a seat at the table but she's got no brain and that shows issue after issue.

Really, what a dumb ass she is. She should do everyone a favor and just resign. She should let the magazine have a chance at survival but instead she wants to remain 'till the end so she can pull the plug on the life support.

Koo Koo Katrina is just a dumb ass. It's a good thing she lives off her grandfather's money because without it, she'd be nothing. She's an idiot stumbling around to make a point in that phoney voice of her's when she's on TV.

Four years from now, when the circulation for The Crap Nation is dipping to the 20,000s, I think she's going to see that there's not any support for it anymore and she doesn't have the kind of money to keep it afloat.

So her vanity will destroy the magazine.

And the way it is today, that won't be any great loss.

That's going to be it for me tonight. Jim and Ty just got here and I want to chill and have some fun. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, August 23, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, women and children taken in a mass kidnapping in Iraq, the US military announces another death, Bully Boy lies (again) and largely gets a pass (again), Bill Richardson speaks frankly, and more.

Starting with war resisters. Today
Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) spoke with Camilo Mejia:


AMY GOODMAN: Talk first about this decision of
Iraq Veterans Against the War, a group of, what, more than 500 people to actively encourage war resistance?

CAMILO MEJIA: Last count was 525 members, with new members joining every day, Amy. And the decision was made to, as an organization, support war resistance within the military as a way to undermine the war effort.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And in terms of the growth of that resistance movement over the last couple of years -- obviously since you were one of the first -- how do you see that developing?

CAMILO MEJIA: I think we've come a long way from the time when I resisted the war. Like Amy said, I was the first public combat veteran to refuse to redeploy to Iraq. Back then, when I went public with my refusal to go back to the war, we had approximately twenty-two cases of desertion in the military. And then, by the time I got out of jail, that number was 5,500. Today, it's over 10,000 people within the military who are refusing to go to the war in Iraq since the war started. And just to put it in perspective, that's almost like saying like the 101st Airborne Division was wiped out by desertion or AWOL, basically people not wanting to fight the war.

AMY GOODMAN: How many?

CAMILO MEJIA: Over 10,000 people. So that's the equivalent to an Army division.

Over the weekend,
Iraq Veterans Against the War held their board elections and Mejia was elected as the new chair. On the issue of those who self-check out, Mejia noted that despite claims that the military isn't going after them, it is happening and cited Suzanne Swift as one specific example noting she is among the "cases of people who have not yet gone public and yet have been seized in their home" and that Swift was "apprehended by police without even a search warrant at her mother's house, and she had not gone public at that time. And she had refused to go back to the war, because she had been subject to military sexual assault and command rape from her leadership and being forced to go back to the war with the same unit and with the same people who had attacked her." Swift received no justice. A military white wash investigation did find 'some' validity in her recount of the ordeal she endured but instead of doing the right thing and immediately discharge with full benefits and a honorable discharge, instead of stating publicly, "This never should have happened and we apologize to Suzanne Swift and promise we are addressing this systemic issue," they refused to discharge her, they punished her and there's been no Congressional oversight despite the fact that Swift's case is not an isolated one. In September 2006, US House Rep Peter DeFazio declared that Congress would investigate the case and that he would be the one leading that. Of course, September 2006 was before the 2006 elections and the Democratically controlled Congress hasn't shown much spine since they were swept into office claiming they would end the illegal war. As Sara Rich, Swift's mother, explained of DeFazio to Jennifer Zahn Spieler (Women's eNews) in December 2006, "His office gave us a lot of red tape. And he basically laughed at our petition. I walked away feeling rather humiliated by him."

AMY GOODMAN: Now you have become chair of Iraq Veterans Against the War, and you are
launching the organization Truth in Recruiting campaign in September. Can you explain what that is?

CAMILO MEJIA: Sure. Well, we are launching a number of actions that we had, and Truth in Recruiting is one of them. What we're basically going to do is we are going to continue doing what we have been doing, but we're going to up the tempo. We are going to increase the number of members who are going to go into high schools to inform young people about the reality of the military and about the reality of war. Far from telling them not to join the military, we are going to tell them, "You want to join the military, this is what could happen to you. This is what's happened to our members. This is what the contract means. This is what stop-loss is. This is what conscientious objection is," so to basically inform them and thus empower them to make an informed decision.
We are going to go into recruiters' offices, and we're going to talk to the recruiters. And this, in time, is going to -- in turn, is going to take up their time, so they're not, you know, out there basically lying to young people about, you know, the many wonderful benefits of the military, without talking about the realities of war.
And we're going to continue doing, you know, what we're doing. We're going to continue going out into recruiting events. And we just had one action, actually, at the St. Louis conference. Across the street, there was a convention, an African American expo, where they had the America's Army game, and they were basically targeting like, you know, kids as young as twelve years of age, you know, teaching them that the military is cool and the military is good for you. And, you know, about ninety of us went in there, and, you know, we had this very military-style formation. And, you know, we all sounded off, saying, you know, "War is not a game. War is not a game. War is not a game." And then we leafleted the families and the youth with our fliers, you know, that talk about the reality of being in the military, which talk about our position as veterans against the war. And this is basically what's behind this campaign and this effort, you know, to basically inform young people about the realities of the military.

In Aimme Allison and David Solnit's new book
Army of None -- from Seven Stories press, available at book stores, online, and via Courage to Resist -- one of the stories they recount is a high school counselor who was happy to invite the US military on campus and thrilled to steer students to them (especially to the Coast Guard) until he was given some information that included the military contract service members sign:

Reading the language of the military enlistment contract changed Brian's mind about promoting the military option to his students. Section 9b reads, "Laws and regulations that govern military personnel may change without notice to me. Such changes may change my status, pay, allowances, benefits, and responsibilities as a member of the Armed Forces REGARDLESS of the provisions of this enlistment/reenlistment document." section 10d2 reads, "I may be ordered to active duty for 24 months, and my enlistment may be extended." In other words, the military enlistment contract isn't a real contract. The military does not legally have to honor its promises to the enlistee. That was enough to change this counselor's opinion of the service" (pages 10 - 12).

It should be noted that Camilo Mejia's contract was 'extended' -- he was one of the many whom the military decided to 'stop loss' aka backdoor draft. The US military couldn't do that and US Senator Bill Nelson and elements within the military knew that (Mejia was a non-citizen, non-citizen's cannot be extended). Mejia tells his story in
Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia but we should note again that he had completed his service and should have been sent home. Those who attempt to argue "You signed a contract!" have no concerns over the fact that it's a one-sided document. In Allison and Solnit's book they explore the contracts and how to convey the actual realities.

Truth in Recruting is an attempt to get those and other realities out. Adam Kokesh (Sgt. Kokesh Goes to Washington) reports on last week's Truth in Recruitng workshop in Berkeley "a sort of trial run for the format that I have created. . . . The next one for me is this Friday in Santa Fe. The Santa Fe Chapter of Veterans For Peace (especially Ken Murray) has been a great help in setting this up and promoting it." Kokesh also notes the new board members of IVAW including Mejia as chair, Kokesh as co-chiar, Phil Aliff as secretary and Margaret Stevens as treasurer and encourages everyone to check out Meeting Resistance an "incredibly powerful" documentary.

Aimee Allison and David Solnit remind, in Army Of None, that if you're handing out information about the realities of recruitment, it's a good idea to have the information in more than one language based on the diversity of the community.
Juan Gonzales addressed with Mejia (on Democracy Now! today) the fact that enrollment for African-Americans in the military is declining while Latinos are now being heavily targeted. Meija noted, "Some people may have heard about the DREAM Act, through which the military hopes to recruit undocumented youth who are graduating from high school. The proposal is to serve two years in the military or go to college for two years and then get your green card, which 65,000 people who are undocumented and graduate from high school and are not eligible for financial aid from the federal government are not going to be able to go to college for two years. So, you know, this is one of the ways in which, you know, the military is targeting young immigratns, mostly Latinos, to join the military."

Tonight, Camilo Mejia had a reading from his book
Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia at Different Drummer at 6:30 pm. Friday he has events in Syracuse (click here and check out the sidebar).

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, 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, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, 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, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one 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, 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.

Turning to the Bully Boy.
Yesterday he made ridiculous claims regarding Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia and did so in an attempt to resell his tired but ongoing illegal war. As Jane Fonda notes in the incredible documentary Sir! No Sir!, "You know, people say, 'Well you keep going back, why are you going back to Vietnam?' We keep going back to Vietnam because I'll tell you what, the other side does. They're always going back. And they have to go back -- the Hawks, you know, the patriarchs. They have to go back because, and they have to revise the going back, because they can't allow us to know what the back there really was." Jim Rutenberg, Sheryl Gay Stolber, Mark Mazzetti, Damien Cave and Erich Schmitt (New York Times) observe: "With his comments Mr. Bush was doing something few major politicians of either party have done in a generation: rearguing a conflict that ended more than three decades ago but has remained an emotional touch point." As Ron Jacobs (CounterPunch) observes, "Beware, this is only the beginning of a new effort to sell these wars. The next salvo will take place on September 11, 2007, when General Petraeus, the latest general to run the war in Iraq, presents his commercial for an extended surge and an increased commitment to the ongoing occupation of that country. Of course, the date has 'absolutely nothing' to do with the anniversary of the attacks in New York and Virginia six years ago."



Bully Boy made ridiculous comments about how US withdrawl from Vietnam led to a host of things when the realities are that the illegal war itself led to that. Bully Boy felt the need to speak of new vocabulary the withdrawal created (it didn't create it) and while it's nice to know he is attempting to increase his Word Power, let's explore some of the actual vocabulary that illegal war did create. "Double veteran" was someone who killed a woman after he'd had sex with her. "Expactants" was a 'cute' term for those who were 'expected' to die. "Glad bags" were body bags and "litters" were what the dead and wounded were carried on. "Willie Peter" which was white phosphorus added to napalm to prevent water from stopping the burning of skin. "Fragging" which was when those serving under an officer elected to kill him often with a grenade. "Dust offs" were when service members were medicially evacuated by helicopter. Those are only some of the words that illegal war added to the vocabularly.

Historian
Douglas Brinkley tells Michael Tackett (Chicago Tribune), "If we get into a Vietnam argument, the country is divided, but if you are going to try to sell this concept that the blood is on the American people's hands because we left and were weak-kneed in Asia, that is a very tenuous and inane historical argument." Political analyst Bruce Cain tells Carolyn Tyler (KGO News) that what Bully Boy is "trying to do is use a conservative argument to rally the conservative base because what he fears is not that Nancy Pelosi and the democrats are going to vote for withdrawal. What he fears is members of his own party are going to join in." On the rollout attempt to resell the illegal war, Massimo Calabresi (Time magazine) explains, "The speech marks the start of a weeks-long campaign in the run-up to the politically charged September report card to be delivered to Congress by General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker. Bush will give a second speech next week at the American Legion in Reno, Nevada, and another a week later on a trip to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit taking place this year in Sydney, Australia. The speeches will coincide with the launch of a $15 million ad campaign by a group called 'Freedom's Watch' -- which counts former Bush press secretary Air Fleischer as one of its founders -- aimed at bolstering flagging support for the war."

This is an atttempt massive rollout and that's why it needs to be called out in real time. Not a week later, not a few weeks later. Today,
Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) spoke with Inter Press Service (IPS) journalist and historian Garth Porter who said of Bully Boy's ridiculous speech:

Well, you know, it reminds me very much of the way in which, of course, Richard Nixon used the threat of a bloodbath in Vietnam as the primary argument for continuing that war for four more years after he came to power in 1969. And really, it seems to me, the lesson of the Vietnam War that should be now debated and discussed is really the way in which Nixon could have ended that war when he came to power, negotiated a settlement and avoided the extension of that war into Cambodia, which happened because Nixon did not do that.
Had Nixon listened to the antiwar movement and the American people by 1969 and ended that war, there would not have been the overthrow of Norodom Sihanouk in 1970. There would not have been the extension of the war into Cambodia. There would not have been the rise of the Khmer Rouge. When Sihanouk was overthrown, we tend to forget that the Khmer Rouge was really an insignificant movement. They were about 2,500 or 3,000 very poorly armed soldiers or guerillas. And it was really the extension of the Vietnam War into Cambodia which made the Khmer Rouge the powerful movement that they were.
So really, you know, the lesson of Vietnam that we should be hearing, which we should have heard for the last three decades, but we haven't, is that government officials in the White House simply do not pay attention to the real consequences of the wars that they wage. They seem to be totally unable to take account of the destabilizing ways that the wars that they wage affect not only the country in which the war is being waged, but then the neighboring countries, as well.

Meanwhile,
CBS and AP report the Bully Boy "touched a nerve among Vietnamese when he invoked the Vietnam War in a speech . . . People in Vietnam, where opposition to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq is strong, said Thursday that Mr. Bush drew the wrong conclusions from the long, bloody Southeast Asian conflict. 'Doesn't he realize that if the U.S. had stayed in Vietnam longer, they would have killed more people?' said Vu Huy Trieu of Hanoi, a veteran of the communist forces that fought American troops in Vietnam. 'Nobody regreats that the Vietnam War wasn't prolonged except Bush. . . Does he think the U.S. could have won if they had stayed longer? No way'."

Anne Zook (Peevish . . . I'm Just Saying) notes Bully Boy was "saying that we can't leave Iraq because then it would be like Vietnam. It's not like Vietnam now, you understand. We didn't charge in there uninvited and start slaughtering people right and left with no clear idea of what we were dealing with and no rational plan for how wholesale killing was going to make things better." Rebecca addressed the topic of Vietnam in "robert parry, vietnam," Mike in "Ron Fullwood, William S. Lind," Elaine in "Matthew Rothschild, John Nichols, Katha Pollitt," and Kat in "Glen Ford, Iraq, Vietnam" yesterday. Today Ira Chernus (Common Dreams) notes that the Dems are caving on Iraq and buying the myth of 'progress' so he suggests, "The alternative is to refuse to take the administration's new bait. The antiwar movement could refuse to use Iraq as a backdrop and Iraqis as extras in a drama about the trials and tribulations of America. Instead, we could insist that the issue is not about how well our soldiers are doing or what is happening here at home. It's about what is happening in Iraq, where ordinary people like us have been dying and suffering in horrifying numbers ever since we occupied their country. We have no magic button that we can push to end the tragedy now. But we can do our best to refocus the debate on the real terror: the terror endured by the Iraqi people who live under military occupation every day."


Turning to the violence in Iraq, yesterday
Damien Cave and James Glanz (New York Times) noted that the death toll from last week's bombings in northern Iraq (Tuesday) had passed 500 with over 1,500 injured. On yesterday's US helicopter crash in Iraq, Joshua Partlow (Washington Post) notes that US military flack Michael Donnelly maintains, "The helicopter was not shot down". Remember that if and when the investigation concludes differently. The Honolulu Advertiser notes: "Ten Hawai'i soldiers were among those killed when a Army Black Hawk helicopter crashed today in northern Iraq". Heather L. VanDyke (Muskegon Chronicle) notes 30-year-old Matthew Tallman was among the dead and AP notes that some of the dead "were based in Hawaii; others in Washington state" and that the 14's home states included California, Texas, Washington, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Missouri and Ohio.

Today in Iraq . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed 1 life (five wounded). Reuters notes a Baghdad mortar attack that claimed 2 lives (four injured), a mortar attack in Kut that claimed 2 lives (six wounded)

Shootings?

Reuters notes one person dead in Mosul from a drive-by shooting and "At least 25 people were killed in a battle between Sunni Arab militants and al Qaeda in villages near Baquba" in a battle involving mortars and gun fire.

Kidnappings?

Mariam Karouny (Reuters) reports that "15 women and children" were kidnapped following the battle outside Baquba.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 12 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 corpses discovered in Mosul.

Today the
US military announced: "A Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier was killed and four others wounded during combat operations in an area west of the Iraqi capital Aug. 22." Currently ICCC shows 3723 as the number of US service members killed in the illegal war since it started with 65 for the month thus far.

In political news,
Reuters reports US Senator John Warner has stated Bully Boy needs to use September 15th to make an announcements that he will begin withdrawing troops from Iraq. On Warner's request for a phased withdrawal to begin, AP quotes him stating, "We simply cannot as a nation stand and continue to put our troops at continuous risk of loss of life and limb without beginning to take some decisive action." Warner's statements come as the spin flies around the supposed 'progress' that's not happening. We'll again note Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reporting earlier this month that the US military claims of 'progress' were based on numbers they would not release and that McClatchy Newspapers' figures do not track with the findings the US military has trumpeted (and many, most recently the Los Angeles Times have swallowed and spat back at readers): "U.S. officials say the number of civilian casualties in the Iraqi capital is down 50 percent. But U.S. officials declined to provide specific numbers, and statistics gathered by McClatchy Newspapers don't support the claim."

Staying on the topic of politics and the lack of progress, US Democratic presidental hopeful
Bill Richardson released a statement noting the absurdity of Bully Boy's speech ("The correct conclusion to draw from our experience in Vietnam is that dragging out the process of withdrawal will be tragically worse in the terms of U.S. lives lost and worse for the Iraqi's themselves in terms of the ultimate instability we will create by staying longer") and addressed Hillary Clinton's some days 'up' attitude on the escalation, sometimes 'down':

I am pleased that Senator Clinton, today, recognizes that the surge has produced no progress of any long term significance to the Iraq debacle. That is different from what she said yesterday to the Veterans of Foreign Wars. But, it is that audience, who has sacrificed more than any of us, who deserves to hear a clear statement that our sons and daughters and mothers and fathers are not going to be sacrificed because of an irrational commitment to a failed strategy.The President is asking the country to wait for next month's progress report from General Petraeus. The chances are that report will be just another White House spin job and attempt to justify this war. This has been the bloodiest summer yet -- our troops have done an admirable job at trying to make a bad idea work, but the surge has failed, the war has failed, Bush has failed. It is time to end this war and bring all of our troops home as soon as possible. I'm glad Hillary Clinton has retracted her comments yesterday and has declared the surge a failure today -- but I still haven't gotten an answer to my question -- a peace in Iraq will fail as long as we leave troops behind -- how many would you leave behind? Every other major candidate would leave thousands of US troops in Iraq for an indefinite. I will leave no U.S. forces there. Zero.The only way out of the Iraq mess is to remove all U.S. troops, and to use that leverage to get the warring parties to resolve their differences, and surrounding Muslim nations to help stabilize the country. Any residual U.S. force reduces the chances for success, and exposes our troops as targets. Our brave troops, and the American people, deserve better.

John Walcott (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that that US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) finds that "to date, Iraq's political leaders remain unable to govern effectively." The NIE was released today [PDF format of the report can be read here]. CBS and AP quote from the report: "The strains of the security situation and absence of key leaders have stalled internal political debates, slowed national decision-making, and increased Maliki's vulnerability to alternative coalitions" and "CBS News correspondent Tara Mergener reports tension is growing between President Bush and the prime minister after Mr. Bush appeared to back away from al-Maliki earlier this week when he said: 'Clearly, the Iraqi government's got to do more'."

Finally,
Ali al-Fadhily (IPS) reports on the victims of those 'prescision' US airstrikes bringing 'liberation' to Iraqis and quotes Kassim Hussein, "This is not the first time that we have heard nice words about military operations that they say aim for our security and prosperity. Yet every time it was more killing, sieges and poverty. It is a war that we did not have to fight, but we are the biggest losers every time it is ignited by the Americans."