Tuesday, August 21, 2007

Wally, Cedric; David Bacon; Walter C. Uhler

Tuesday! :D Always a better day than Monday! Okay, you need to read Cedric's "New York Times lies again!" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! NEW YORK TIMES LIES ABOUT PEACE MOVEMENT!" and Cedric called me while Wally was on the phone with C.I. and said, "C.I. really should have credit on this. Wally is trying to argue that right now." Then Wally called a little while later and goes, "If you note it, note the credit goes to Cedric, C.I. and me."

Here's what happened, according to them. They were looking for what to write (Cedric and Wally) and found some stuff on Obama's speech to the VFW. Then Jeff Zeleny's story at the New York Times goes up and Obama's insulting the peace movement with a lie. They ripped him apart and it was funny. Wally then calls C.I. because he always tests his post out on C.I. to see if they have any humor in them (he's been doing that forever, long before he and Cedric started doing their joint-posts) and C.I. asks, "Did anyone mention this besides that paper?" Nope. Not AP, not anybody. C.I. goes, "Hold on. Let me call a friend with the campaign." C.I. calls Wally back and says, "Zeleny's wrong according to the campaign. Obama's prepared remarks are online in full and he stuck to the script."

So Wally and Cedric have to do a quick re-write.

They say (I agree), C.I. deserves credit because not only is what's up a result of C.I., if it weren't for C.I. they would have ripped into Obama and looked like idiots.

It was a funny post. But if Obama had said that, it would have been the mistake that killed his run. It would have been like Dan Quale trying to spell potato or something. Of course Jeff Zeleny and his editor at the paper will get in no big trouble for their lie. It will be "We regret that an editing error . . ." and that will be it.

But it tells you a lot about Jeff Zeleny that Obama was talking about Fred Phelps' hate group and Zeleny can just visualize the peace movement. What an idiot.

By the way, C.I. cross-posted it here.

Beau's been reading his snapshots. :D He e-mailed tonight asking me to highlight this from David Bacon's "Child Dockworkers Break a Union in Mindanao" and said he saw Bacon in the snapshot today:

DAPITAN, PHILIPPINES (1/15/98) -- How do you break a dockworkers union in the Philippines?
With children.
At least, that's how it was done last year in Dapitan, a port city on the southern island of Mindanao.
Six years ago, the Philippine Integrated Industrial Labor Union (PIILU) won an election to represent the 80 longshoremen working for the Dipolog and Dapitan Stevedoring and Warehousing Services Company, a company owned by Joaquin Macias. The union, affiliated to the conservative Trade Union Congress of the Philippines, signed a collective bargaining agreement for five years. The contract pegged longshore wages to the minimum wage in Mindanao for dock workers - about 96 pesos a day (at the writing of this article, the peso was in free fall, going from 33 to over 46 pesos per dollar in one month.)
In late 1995, a year before the agreement was due to expire, the capataz, or dock foreman, worked behind the scenes to organize a company union. It challenged the right of the PIILU to represent the employees. But that wasn't the biggest threat to the established union.
Children started showing up on the docks. At first there were just a handful, working fulltime on the Dapitan wharf. But the number quickly grew. Flor Amistoso, an organizer for PIILU, by now has interviewed 71 children working there.
The Philippine government estimates that it takes over 370 pesos a day to support a family of six, so the wages of adults on the waterfront were never sufficient by themselves to support a family. Once in a while, dockworkers in Dapitan themselves would bring their kids to work with them. But children only did light jobs.
When the company union got started, the new wave of child workers began doing the work of adults.
Their main job is unloading sacks of concrete, each weighing over 100 pounds. When a freighter carrying cement docks at the wharf, children troop up the gangway, and down into the ship's hold. Each child hoists a sack onto his shoulders, and carries it up out of the boat and onto the pier. There two adults take it and stack it onto a pallet or truck. The children work until the hold is empty.
They are all boys, from 10 to 17 years old. For this heavy labor, they receive 80 centavos a sack. In a week, each earns between 70 and 200 pesos.
The capataz says he hires children because adults won't do the work. But Flor Amistoso points out that "slowly but surely, they are replacing adults by hiring children. If we allow children to do the work," she warns, "the whole union is weakened."

We supposedly don't have child labor in this country (we do have child labor, check any place that employs migrant workers and you'll likely find some) and so a Wal-Mart has to deal with a union by laying off all their butchers after they win the right to unionize. Or a Starbucks or whatever closes their shop when a store gets to unionzie.

In the Phillipines, in 1998 at least, they'd just start giving the work to children.

Walter C. Uhler has a really good article called "Blaming All Americans for Bush’s Debacle in Iraq?" that you should read but one thing to add to it is the magazine he's talking about is the magazine put out by the Council for Foreign Relations. That's Koo Koo Katrina's organization and they were cheerleading the illegal war before it began. So just one thing to keep in mind when you read his article which is a really strong one. This is from it:

But, Dobbins' constructive recommendations go astray when he concludes: "Above all, Americans should accept that the entire nation has, to one degree or another, failed in Iraq." This astonishing recommendation is based upon two seemingly indisputable facts: (1) “the United States went into Iraq with a higher level of domestic support for war than at almost anytime in its history and (2) Congress authorized the invasion by an overwhelming bipartisan majority.”
Yet, to refuse to acknowledge the efforts of experts, politicians (mostly liberal) and the millions of Americans who either argued against the war or protested the invasion before it occurred is to engage in a whitewash of the evil committed by the scoundrels and dupes who wanted war.
Granted, in addition to the scoundrels calling themselves neoconservatives and the criminals occupying the White House, many feckless congressmen -- Democrats and Republicans -- merit blame for fostering Bush's war. Democrats merit blame, because many ducked their responsibility to challenge the warmongers. Thus, they violated a norm of American political life: "Regardless of which party holds a majority of seats in Congresses, it is almost always the opposition party that creates the most trouble for a president intent on waging war." (William G. Howell and Jon C. Pevehouse, "When Congress Stops Wars," Foreign Affairs, Sept/Oct. 2007)

What is this Dobbins pushings, some "Blame Americans first!" theory? :D Seriously, I didn't declare war on anyone. I was still in high school when this war started.

I'm not taking the blame for Bully Boy's illegal war. Not gonna do it! It's an illegal war. You can push it off on the Congress (then and now) but the people were against this war and have only gotten more so. So, no, I don't accept the blame.

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

Tuesday, August 21, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, Camilo Mejia chairs a board, the puppet of the occupation isn't feeling the love, Matthew Rothschild explains the need for impeachment, and more.
Starting with war resisters. Camilo Mejia served in Iraq, served in Iraq well after his contract ran out and, as a non-US citizen, the military couldn't extend his contract but they chose to pretend like they could. They also denied him CO status. He tells his story Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia in which was released in May. One story not in the book, because it just happened, is that he's just been elected the chair of Iraq Veterans Against the War board of directors.
Aaron Glantz (One World) reports that IVAW held their elections during the St. Louis Veterans for Peace conference and elected Mejia with Garrett Reppenhagen explaining that IVAW "decided to make support of war resisters a major part of what we do." Glantz reports on IVAW's big success in Fort Drum where the local chapter is up and running and now claims 20 members and, of course, has the first GI coffeehouse in the nation (for this illegal war) with Different Drummer as well as that September 17th IVAW will kick off Truth in Recruiting.
Mejia will be at Different Drummer this Thursday for a reading (starts at 6:30 pm) from Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia and the GI Coffee House is located in Watertown, NY (12 Paddock Arcade, 1 Public Square, 13601).
Mejia tells Glanz, "There's a sort of revolution taking place in the streets. It's not being reported by the mainstream media, but we in the antiwar movement know what's going on. There is a rebellion going on in the ranks of the military that is not being reported."
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.
John Stauber (CounterPunch) notes: "IVAW was founded in 2004 and today it is a rapidly growing grassroots, independent anti-war group with members active in 43 states and deployed on bases in Iraq. These rank and file soldiers are not partisans; they are Americans who have seen first hand the greatest political betrayal of our lifetime, the US attack on Iraq and the long occupation. Iraq Veterans Against the War are not the concoction of a liberal think tank or PR firm; they have very little funding; they are not avoiding criticism of Democrats; and they are not playing political games trying to bank-shot Democratic candidates into the White House and Congress in 2008. They are in open non-violent revolt against US foreign policy, criticizing politicians of all stripes who would exploit the war for political gain." If only the media -- big and small -- could do the same.
Yesterday, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted the Project for Excellence in Journalism "study shows corporate news coverage of the Iraq war has dropped sharply in the last four months. According to the Project for Excellence in Journalism, the Iraq war accounted for just fifteen percent of news coverage, down from twenty-two percent earlier this year. Network evening news coverage of the war went from forty-percent to nineteen percent. The Democratic and Republican presidential campaign emerged as the most-covered issue over the same period."

The report, entitled "Campaign For President Takes Center Stage In Coverage," notes that during "the period from April through June of 2007 was that press coverage of the war in Iraq declined markedly. Together the three major storylines of the war -- the policy debate, events on the ground, and the impact on the U.S. homefront -- filled 15% of the total newshole in the quarter, a drop of roughly a third from the first three months of the year, when it filled 22%." And the report zooms in one period: "Attention to the Iraq war fell across all five media sectors in the second quarter. The bulk of the decline occurred after May 24, when Congress approved funding without including troop withdrawal timetables, a move widely viewed as a White House victory." So when the Democrats in Congress caved, the media followed the lead?

The report doesn't cover independent or public broadcast media (and focuses on TV) but to focus on that period (April through June), a few broadcasts deserve noting. Bill Moyers Journal (PBS) utilized the May 25th hour to examine Maxine Hong-Kingston and veterans efforts to explore war and peace (click here to watch/listen, here to read) and on May 11th, Moyers spent the third segment with Marilyn D. Young, editor with Lloyd C. Gardner of Iraq and the Lessons of Vietnam (audio/video and transcript) with Young addressing the lies that the illegal war was built upon. May 28th, Free Speech Radio News presented a a special Memorial Day look at the some of the costs of the war in US anchored by Aaron Glantz where he spoke with veterans and their families (and drew on the knowledge and experience he has as a result of devoting so much time to covering all aspects of the illegal war). June 11th WBAI's Law and Disorder (Dalia Hashad, Michael Ratner, Michael Smith and Heidi Boghosian -- though I don't believe Boghosian was part of that discussion) explored the topic of resistance within the US military with Tod Ensign. Democracy Now! featured many segments during that period but we'll note three: June 6th Goodman discussed the efforts to steal/privatize Iraqi oil, the 'benchmarks' and the Democratically controlled Congress with Antonia Juhasz; the May 14 discussion with Yanar Mohammed about the realities of life for women in the 'liberated' Iraq; and the June 12 interview of Iraq Veterans Against the War Adam Kokesh discussing how the US military had targeted him for speaking out against the illegal war.

A few of the print media stories during this time worth noting would include Bay Fang's "The Talibanization of Iraq" (Ms. magazine, spring 2007 issue)and certainly CounterPunch and Matthew Rothschild (The Progressive) have seriously and repeatedly covered the illegal war during this period. And The Nation? They spent the first six months of this year offering more feature articles on the election than on the illegal war. They also were first out of the gate with the non-stop horse race gas bagging on the 2008 elections. In fact, their first article on the 2008 election appeard online November 3rd ("The Off-Year Primary" -- ran in the November 20th print edition) -- four days before the 2006 elections had taken place. Do we want to talk about the American Idol column that got disappeared? No? Didn't think so. (Though officially 'disappeared,' you can seeMike's "The Third Estate Sunday Review " and then Elaine's "Monday" and then Rebecca's "cynthia mckinney" -- each excerpted a section of the column after it had been 'disappeared' but before it was also gone from Google cache.)

At Truthdig (audio and transcript) James Harris and Josh Scheer speak with Matthew Rothschild about his new book You Have No Rights and Harris brings up the executive order the Bully Boy issued last month noting "it said, basically, that if you protest or threaten what he calls 'stabilization efforts in Iraq,' your property can be seized and you can be detained. Were you are aware of that?" Rothschild: "I have the order in my hand. I was just writing something on the computer to update our website with something on that. Yeah. If you are -- in the mind of the secretary of the Treasury -- posing a significant risk of committing an act of violence -- you don't have to have committed an act of violence. If he thinks you are at risk of committing an act of violence in order to protest the policies of the Iraqi government or the Bush administration's policies to promote what it calls 'economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq,' then the secretary of the Treasury can put a freeze on all your assets. This is unbelievable. What Bush is trying to achieve her, by executive order, are things that he can't achieve legislatively. Someone's got to put a stop to this. Congress has got to put a stop to it because he is seizing all sorts of authoritarian powers right now by executive decree."

Harris: But Matthew, let's be real for a second. Here we are, year four of this war. Given what you've seen so far from Congress, can they really make a change in this war? Can they really change the mind of George Bush?
Rothschild: They're going to have to step up to the plate sometime, or we can kiss our Constitution goodbye, because Bush is trampling all over it. Cheney's trampling all over it. What we need to happen, in my mind, is impeachment proceedings of the House Judiciary Committee against Bush and against Cheney, to make them know that they are going to be held accountable or at least there's going to be a process to try to hold them accountable, that they can't get away scot-free with all this stuff, and to tell the next president or the one after that that they can't get away with this stuff.

They will keep getting away with it as long as the media refuses to inform the public. Perfect example . . .

On August 17th when Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno spoke with reporters via a video-link, he did not simply state that there would be likely be a decrease in the number of US troops in Iraq next year (as many MSM outlets reported). He sold this as a testing 'strategy': "By conducting a deliberate reduction of our forces is what's necessary in the future whenever we determine to do that. By conducting a deliberate reduction, phased with the increase in the capabilities of Iraqi security forces, I think it significantly reduces the risk of us then losing the areas that we've been able to secure so far. That's why a deliberate plan over time I think will be most successful. " He then went on to avoid "specifics on numbers, because I think I need to leave that to General Petraues" but made clear that the escalation will most likely be ending next year. His 'strategy' is to use that as a 'test'. Which would mean the numbers could just as easily go right back up. Was he spinning? Most likely. But that is what he stated in the press briefing, that it was a means of testing (and also gave the impression that he'd always understood that the escalation would end in April of 2008).

And of course he pushed the myth (still no evidence provided, just charges) that Iran is doing this, that and everything but helping the sun rise each morning. So the news, reported by KUNA today, that a Syrian, not an Iranian, was arrested in Mosul must have led to some sobbing at Centcom.
As the British prepare to withdraw from southern Iraq, the BBC interviewed Mike Colbourne ("UK's chief police adviser") who stated of the Basra police, "The corruption that we are talking about does range from financial corruption through to serious offences such as murder, kidnap. There are a number of Iraqi police service officers who are clearly aligned to militias. I think it is fair to say that there is sectarian violence that is being committed by both police officers and other Iraqi security forces officers. That is just the truth of the situation as it is at the moment."

Staying on the topic of departures, AFP reports that US Senators Carl Levin and John Warner have released a joint statment calling for Nouri al-Maliki's government to be given one last chance: "We believe that the recent high-level meetings among Iraqi political leaders could be the last chance for this government to solve the Iraqi political crisis. And should it fail, we believe, the Iraqi Council of Representatives and the Iraqi people need to judge the government of Iraq's record and determine what actions should be taken - consistent with the Iraqi constitution - to form a true unity government to meet those responsibilities." Jonathan Weisman (Washington Post) quotes Levin declaring, "I hope the parliament will vote the Maliki government out of office and will have the wisdom to replace it with a less sectarian and more unifying prime minister and government." Megan Greenwell (Washington Post) notes that prior to leaving for Syria, al-Maliki had another 'alliance' meeting but the Iraqi Parliament doesn't return from their vacation until September 4th (the same day the US Congress returns from their vacation) and, "That timeline leaves a narrow window for the politicians to solve major issues before the Sept. 15 report.

The report . . . Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) reports US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker has termed Iraq's 'progress' with regards to national reconciliation "extremely disappointing" (a more truthful term would be "non-existent") and that he repeated the lie about civilian deaths being down (apparently the Los Angeles Times doesn't read McClatchy Newspapers because that comment goes unchecked). Crocker and Gen. David Petraeus are supposed to report to the US Congress Sept. 15th on the 'progress' in Iraq (in what many assume will be words written for them by the White House). AP notes Crocker's stated "Washington's blueprint for reconciliation was insufficient to win back control of the country" but then he attempted to explain "Congressional benchmarks do not tell the whole story". First, they are White House 'benchmarks' -- pushed by the White House, adopted by Congress. Second, "insufficient to win back control of the country" pretty much says it all.

In some of today's violence . . .
Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad explosion that "targeted a US convoy" claimed the lives of 2 Iraqis and left four wounded. Reuters notes that the number wounded rose to fourteen and that a bomber in vest killed themselves and left eight people wounded in Falluja
Shootings?
Reuters notes 7 family members were shot dead in a Latifiya home invasion ("included three women and a baby girl").
Corpses?
Reuters notes 12 corpses were discovered in Baghdad today.

Though the bombings in northern Iraq were only last week (last Tuesday in fact), many in the media have lost interest. Lelia Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that the confirmed death toll now stands at 354 with "80 more are known to be missing" and the wounded toll is 600 while "[t]he pungent smell of the dead hangs low in this village, and not even the colorful headdresses the men have wrapped across their faces can keep it out."

The violence has created refugees -- externally and internally -- and today Jen Utz (Democracy Now!) filed a report from Damascus on refugees in Syria where she spoke with one Iraqi family and noted that "Iraqi refugees are forbidden from working in Syria, and the family's savings are running out. Plus, they tell me that life in exile is emotionally criplling, and they have no hope they'll go home anytime soon" while Omar explains to her the problem: "What's happening in Iraq is because of your president. He's the main reason. Most of the Iraqis have been forced to leave their homes and their families. They have had family members kidnapped or killed. There is no house in Iraq that doesn't have a problem like this. There must be a solution for the Iraqi people. Why don't they find a solution?"

Okay, we're doing a transition here -- external refugees are immigrants. Labor reporter David Bacon regularly covers the stories that usually don't get covered which includes immigration and he also addresses child labor such as children from the ages of 11-years-old to 17-years-old working the banana groves in the Philippines.














Posted by at

Monday, August 20, 2007

James Carroll, Third

Monday, Monday, don't you hate that day, Monday, Monday, just go away.

Oh, I hate Mondays. I really, really hate Mondays. And I really, really hate fakes. This is from
James Carroll's "Questions for Hillary Clinton:"

The largest surprise in Senator Hillary Clinton's campaign for president, so far, is her success in establishing herself as a viable commander-in-chief.
As the Globe reported last week, polls suggest that Clinton is widely regarded as "tough enough" to protect national security. Her work on the Senate Armed Services Committee; her early vote in support of the war in Iraq, and her ongoing refusal to renounce that vote; the aggressiveness of her rhetoric after Sept. 11, 2001, including her embrace of the "war on terrorism"; her support, however ambivalent, for missile defense, and her proposals to expand the Army; even her somewhat prickly personality -- all of this combines, apparently, to create an image that nervous voters find reassuring. Given the depth of anti-female stereotyping, this is a remarkable political achievement.
As a first-time candidate for president, Bill Clinton had a toughness problem, too. Fighting off his image as a peacenik, he ran a campaign in 1992 that emphasized what he called "a new covenant for American security."
But after the victorious Gulf War and the Soviet collapse, the nation had turned its attention inward, and Clinton could aim his laser at the economy. Yet he slyly portrayed himself as more militant than George H.W. Bush. "Saddam Hussein still has his job," ran one Clinton ad, "Do you?"
The final meaning of "It's the economy, stupid" is that it was stupid to think that economic questions were more important than national security issues in the pivotal eight years of the Clinton presidency. The national security decisions that Clinton made have turned out to be more epoch-shaping than anyone imagined at the time. One needn't look back on those decisions from a moral high horse to realize how flawed they were.
Coming into power as the world’s relationship to military force was being fundamentally altered by such figures as Anwar Sadat, Yitzhak Rabin, Óscar Arias, Lech Walesa, Mikhail Gorbachev, Václav Havel, Nelson Mandela, John Hume, Corazon Aquino, and Pope John Paul II, Clinton was unable to claim what should have been his natural place among them.
Instead, he squandered a golden opportunity to reshape his nation's relationship to war and peace, preserving a Cold War military ethos -- and budget -- and handing it on to George W. Bush, fully intact. Whether or not Clinton was tough enough to take on America's enemies, he turned out not to be tough enough to take on America’s defenders. The great contest given him by history was with the Pentagon -- a contest for which he did not show up.

You know Bill Clinton, not all that great. He was a better Republican than the Bully Boy, but he wasn't really a Democrat. He cut aid programs for the people. He pushed through NAFTA. He didn't just sell out the left, he sold out the center-left. He pushed for attacks on civil liberties. He turned Guantanamo into a prison for 'detainees' (Haitans). He couldn't keep his zipper up and the country had to pay for it year after year. Did he rape this woman? No? We could all breathe. But he let his White House assistant go down on him. Creepy. And always with the women coming forward saying they had sex with him.

This is a hero?

Somebody screws you over and they go away, you think you can put it behind you. But they have to go away. Bill won't go away and neither will Hillary.

We watched the debate and what a load of crap.

Hillary doesn't want to end the illegal war. If elected she'd probably be talking in 2012 about the need to think about ending the illegal war.

What a War Hawk.

And John Edwards was just embarrassing.

I've said here before that I was leaning towards him.

Then Sunday he just made an ass out himself over and over.

He said that any of the candidates (though he didn't list them all) would end the illegal war. John Edwards, if you're the same as the rest, you aren't topping my list.

If he's not passionate about ending the illegal war he needs to take his crappy ass off the stage because I don't need to hear it.

Either find your voice on Iraq or say, "I'm a War Hawk!"

I was so disappointed in John Edwards.

That was the worst performance I've ever seen him give.

He was so awful.

He thought he was funny.

He lost all of his passion and acted like a dumb ass Game Show Host.

Did they really hire Rosie for The Price Is Right? If so, too bad. No offense to her but John Edwards seems perfect the job from Sunday's debate.

I felt like I was watching a coward.

It was the worst. One more debate performance like that and I cross Edwards off the list.

I didn't lean towards him because he was playing nice and making jokes, he caught my attention because he seemed passionate and like he wanted to end the illegal war.

He came off unfocused, too toothy and just really, really stupid.

Bill Richardson moved up a notch. He did a good job and I liked how he handled himself when they all tried to gang up on him (Biden, Edwards, Obama and Clinton).

He really did seem like he wanted to end the illegal war. So he moved up on my list and John Edwards gives another performance like that and he's off my list. He was so bad.

Let's turn to The Third Estate Sunday Review:

Truest statement of the week -- The choices were one thing by Michael Ratner and four things by Naomi Klein. I was really surprised she won. Not upset, but surprised. I figured when we voted, the fact that she had four different things from the same speech would split the vote. Instead everyone got behind the statement that ended up getting this spot.

A Note to Our Readers -- Jim explains the edition. He explains why it was an awful edition and why we started late. I really don't think I'll be replying to e-mails anymore. May not even read them if I don't know the sender. I am so damn sick of that crazy that keeps threatening C.I. and Jess told me on the phone tonight that the crazy is now threatening the website. He's realized he can't intimidate C.I. personally so today he's writing about his 'friends at Google' and how he is going to have them destroy The Common Ills. I'm sick of that creep. Jim's right, the guy is a stalker.

Editorial: The death toll from the illegal war mou... -- This covers a lot of stuff and we were all tired. I haven't gone back to read it because I know how tired we were and really don't want to. If it weren't for Ava and C.I., this edition would have either fallen apart or it would have been really weak. They responded to the threats and abuse from the stalker like fighters. The rest of us were either angry (like me) or frustrated or whatever. It was very hard to focus. Ava and C.I. focused. Their attitude was if the edition was soft, the stalker would think he won.

TV: Another cesspool trying to pass for news -- Ava and C.I. being amazing as always. This is incredible even if you didn't know C.I.'s gets threats from a psycho. There were like 7 threats from the same guy in just the last few days. These two are tough. They don't scare.

Getting to know . . . Pelosi -- This was one of the things they suggested to get us focused when we were tossing out things like, The Simpsons movie. Read this piece and ask yourself, "Just how against the illegal war has Nancy Pelosi ever been?"

17 US service members announced dead last week -- Dona wanted short features. C.I. mentioned this in terms of two things, one that's already been used in today's snapshot.

The boom goes bust -- Danny Schechter is way smarter than me -- in case you didn't know. To write this we had a tutorial. C.I. called two friends and got them to come over (the rest of us just heard it on the phone) and go over this stuff with us point by point.

Once up a time . . . A scary tale -- The stalker. The stalker. The stalker. Jim and Jess pushed this saying if we're really going to do a hard edition to let them dumb ass know that threats against C.I. aren't going to scare us off, let's do a fictional or 'fictional' piece that will hit home.


Timothy J. Learn arrested for being AWOL in Ithaca... -- Another person who went AWOL ends up arrested but, strangely, the press won't tell you how he was arrested.

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

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,
and Wally of The Daily Jot

Ma's "Radish Hot & Sour Soup in the Kitchen" went up Saturday and it's pretty strong so check it out. And don't miss "Kat's Korner: Cowboy Junkies kick it up another notch" and "Ruth's Report." And that's it for me tonight. Okay, here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Monday, August 20, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces the death of another soldier, the Dems don't debate and the moderator doesn't care, another governor is assassinated in Iraq, UK and US troops are "stretched," and more.
Starting with war resisters. This year has seen three war resisters publish their stories in book form. First up was Joshua Key's The Deserter's Tale which was followed in May by Camilo Mejia's Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia and then, this month, Aidan Delgado's The Sutras Of Abu Ghraib: Notes From A Conscientious Objector In Iraq. Susan L. Rife (Sarasota Herald-Tribune) reports on Delgado who will "speak at various book-related events in Florida in September and October". Delgado explains, "As a child, I always thought of myself as a writer, always wanted to be a writer. . . . I encountered a lot of writer's block. So I would write whatever section seemed the most immediate to me, then once I had a bunch of little modules or sections, I'd write them together." Delgado is a reader (which always helps when writing a book). In a book discussion at The Third Estate Sunday Review, Mike noted that Delgado's "descriptions really make it come alive and he's a really strong writer," with Rebecca offering, "I think the book is a more 'You are there' approach than a reflection," while Cedric focused on the way Delgado captured his religious awakening in Iraq and Elaine comparing his writing style favorably to Lillian Hellman's noting, "He has a very good eye for physical detail but he also is very strong in zooming in on the telling incident." Rife writes, "The son of an American diplomat who had spent his childhood in Thailand, Senegal and Egypt, the former New College of Florida student was deployed to Iraq as a mechanic with the 320th Military Police in Nasiriyah and at the prison in Abu Ghraib. Outraged by treatment of Iraqi prisoners and prejudice against civilians, he filed for conscientious objector status." According to the Taguba Report, the US Army Criminal Investigation Command into the crimes at Abu Ghraib began in May 2003. As Delgado recounts on page 184-185, as late as January 2004, a commander was telling people to destroy evidence:

The first sergeant calls us to attention and then turns the formation over to the commander. The captain dispenses with the military formality and begins to rant at us immediately.
"I just came back from Brigade Headquarters with all the other company commanders, where General Karpinski chewed our asses about all these g**damn rumors going around! You all need to stamp this talk out! Immediately. Apparently there's word going around that some MPs were doing some things they weren't supposed to be doing and somebody took pictures of it all. You don't need to be writing about this to your families, you don't need to be telling them on the phone, and you don't need to be talking about it to each other. You better stop spreading these g**damn rumors!"
The commander pauses for a moment and then switches tactics, becoming suddenly congenial and chummy, "Look, we're all a family here. We don't air our dirty laundry in public. If we have a problem within the military, then we'll handle it internally. We don't need to let the media and the civilians into our business. If you have photos that you're not supposed to have, get rid of them. Don't talk about this to anyone, don't write about it to anyone back home. We're a family and we're going to handle this like a family. I don't want to hear any more of this kind of talk in my unit. You all just focus on going home in March, hoo-ah!"
Hoo-ah, we responded. The commander rambles on for a bit and then dismisses us. As I leave, I wonder what could have possibly gotten the entire base so worked up. There's no doubt now that everything we've heard about is true, and it must be even worse than we thought, for the commander himself to get on our backs about it. All a family? I laugh. We're only a family when the captain wants us to do his bidding or conceal some wrongdoing. The Army has tried that rhetoric before, talking about family and Army pride and everything else to try to get you to buy into what they do. When the Army talks about "handling something internally," it's only because they've done something so obviously wrong, they can't allow the rest of the country to see it. This doesn't surprise me. After all, if Americans back home saw Iraqi prisoners shot dead for throwing stones, saw the wretched conditions inside Abu, or saw the way the MPs dealt with the prisoners, what would they think of our glorious and righteous invasion? The truth about Abu Ghraib has to be concealed, has to be "kept in the family," because if the average citizen saw what we're doing to the people here, they would know in their guts that it's un-American.

Again, Delgado's The Sutras Of Abu Ghraib: Notes From A Conscientious Objector In Iraq came out this month.

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.

Veterans for Peace concluded their conference in St. Louis Sunday (it ran from August 15 through the 19th). It was their 22nd annual conference. They note that the "temperature was hot (100 degrees), the worshops were hot, the speakers were hot, and IVAW was hot!" Tim Townsend (St. Louis Post-Dispatch) reported on Dennis Kucinich's strong reception Friday noting that Kucinich declared "the U.S. Congress should force the Bush administration to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq. But he also brought the crowd to its feet multiple times with a passionate delivery of his positions." AFP notes that Kucinich declared, "The Democratic leadership of the House and the Senate must finally live up to their responsibility and the promise they made to voters last year to end this war." This was followed with, "It doesn't take legislation, it simply requires a refusal to approve any additional funds and to use the $97 billion recently appropriated to bring our troops home as quickly as possible."

Earlier in the conference (Wednesday), Bud Deraps, WWII vet, spoke about Depleted Uranium: "We have learned that DU was first used in our 1991 Gulf War and that inhalation is the major cause of DU contamination. It has long been believed that it takes ten years or more for lung cancer to form from smoking. The NY Sun reported in an Aug. 6, 2007 article that there are increasing cancer cases being found in US troops that have served in the Gulf for as few as 2 to 3 years. For example, 40 year old Army chaplain Fran Sturart served in Iraq for a year after Mar. 2003. In Mar. 2006, she had a rare form of ovary germ cell cancer seen only before in teenage girls. Army Sgt. Lauderdale went to Kuwait in Jan. 2005. By the end of Mar. they found he had Stage 2 cell cancer of the mouth and tongue. Taken to Walter Reed on April 1, a doctor there said he had seen a 21 year old just back from Iraq with a similar cancer. Lauderdale, 59, died at Reed on July 14, 2006, a year and a half after arriving in Kuwait. Currently, the State Dept. Web says the US military cites four separate studies by NATO, the Rand Corp., the European Commission and the World Health Org - that found NO evidence of adverse health effects from Depleted Uranium! It is reported that we used over 320 tons of DU weapons in the brief Gulf War and over 2000 tons in the years 2003 and 04 alone. Massive bombings continue to this day. The Iraq environment minister confirms 350 sites DU contaminated by heavy bombing, saturating much of that destroyed nation. Frequent sand storms, helicopter take-offs and landings carry the deadly dust size ceramic particles aloft where they are being spread far and wide. Counting the Gulf and our present wars, we have had well over a million troops, contract and government workers cycle in and out of the region, many on their 4th tour, all possibly DU contaminated."

Larry Ingram (Collinsville Herald) reported last week on Roland James and Lane Anderson who made the decision to travel to the conference via bicycles and to do some from the Vietnam Veterans Against the war convention in Chicago because they trace the illegal war to the US "dependence on Persian Gulf oil". Zhanda Malone (Edwardsville Intelligencer) notes Anderson "handed out index cards" throughout the journey of "Things we can all do to prevent wars for oil" which "included drink needed liquid from the tap, not bottled water, drive and accelerate slower, walk and bike whenever possible; carpool to school and work; resist impulse buying; share, repair and care for power equipment; use manual tools; and grow food at home."

On September 15th (see ANSWER for more information) a mass protest will be taking place in DC and IVAW will lead a "die-in". This will be part of a several days of action lasting from the 15th through the 18th. September 17th IVAW will kick off Truth in Recruiting. CODEPINK will be conducting a Peoples March Inside Congress (along with other groups and individuals) on September 17th. United for Peace & Justice (along with others) will begin Iraq Moratorium on September 21st and follow it every third Friday of the month as people across the country are encouraged to wear and distribute black ribbons and armbands, purchase no gas on those Fridays, conduct vigils, pickets, teach-ins and rallies, etc. And those are only some of the upcoming actions.

On Saturday, Julian E. Barnes and Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) reported that Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno declared that Bully Boy will need to change strategy or "the elevated U.S. troop levels in Iraq will continue until this time next year". That would mean, if Odierno is correct, any departures would come in August 2008, just in time for the GOP national convention. The numbers being tossed around for drawbacks (not withdrawal) would leave approximately 140,000 US forces in Iraq which is higher than the pre-escalation total present at the start of this year. Also on Saturday, Steven Lee Myers and Thom Shanker (New York Times) reported on the White House's intentions regarding the September 15th reports to Congress (Petraeus and Crocker) which is to use the reports to resell the illegal war all over again and cited unnamed White House officials including one who "made it clear that the goal of the planned annoucement was to counter public pressure for a more rpaid reduction and to try to win support for a plan that could keep American involvement in Iraq on 'a sustainable footing' at least through the end of the Bush presidency." On Sunday, the BBC reported UK General Richard Dannatt declaring that "the government has overstretched our armed forces" but, for some reason. Sarah Baxter and Michael Smith (Sunday Times of London) explained that Stephen Biddle, "military advisor to President George W Bush," that the British departure from Iraq will lead to "a number of British casualties" and the reporters note this is in keeping "with British military estimates that withdrawal could cost the lives of 10 to 15 soldiers." Tim Shipman (Telegraph of London) reported that British officers are listened to far less now by "America's top commanders" and quoted one "senior US officer familiar with Gen Petraues's thinking" summarizing it: "The short version is that the Brits have lost Basra, if indeed they ever had it. Britain is in a difficult spot because of the lack of political support at home, but for a long time -- more than a year -- they have not been engaged in Basra and have tried to avoid casualties. They did not have enough troops there even before they started cutting back. The situation is beyond their control." And, along with British troops being stretched, Lolita C. Baldor (AP) reported that "the [US] Army has nearly exhausted its fighting force and its options if the Bush administration decided to extend the Iraq buildup beyond next spring."

On Sunday, the New York Times ran a piece written by seven active duty service members entitled "Iraq As We See It" (click here for Common Dreams, click here for International Herald Tribune -- available in full at both without registration) which noted "Two million Iraqis are in refugee camps in bordering countries. Close to two million more are internally displaced and now fill many urban slums. Cities lack regular electricty, telephone services and sanitation. 'Lucky' Iraqis live in communities barricaded with concrete walls that provide them with a sense of communal claustrophobia rather than any sense of security we would consider normal. In an environment where men with guns rule the streets, engaging in the banalities of life has become a death-defying act. Four years into our occupation, we have failed on every promise, while we have substituted Baath Party tyranny with a tyranny of Islamist, militia and criminal violence. . . . In the end, we need to recognize that our presence may have released Iraqis from the grip of a tyrant, but that it has also robbed them of their self-respect. They will soon realize that the best way to regain dignity is to call us what we are -- an army of occupation -- and force our withdrawal." The piece is signed by US Army specialist Buddhika Jayamaha, Sgt. Wesley D. Smith, Sgt. Jeremy Roebuck, Sgt. Omar Mora, Sgt. Edward Sandmeier, Staff Sgt. Yance T. Gray, Staff Sgt. and Jeremy A. Murphy.

Of course the Iraqis have been clear, in poll after poll, about wanting ALL foreign troops out of their country. The puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki, is among the roadblocks. At Inside Iraq (McClatchy Newspapers), an Iraqi correspondent notes the puppet's claims that Iraq is now sovereign by describing Sadoon Street in Baghdad "Anyway whoever controls Sadoon Street, its not the Iraqi government which means that our Prime Minister doesn't tell the truth which means that we are not really sovereign country. When a government can't control a street, its not a government, its only a group of puppets. When a government can't provide the minimum level of security, its just a shadow, when a government take the instruction from other places than its country, its just a shadow. Its time to get rid of all the Iraqi puppets in the Green Zone and start searching for real Iraqi" leadership.

The puppet is in Syria now after his 'alliance' proved to be such a bust. Megan Greenwell (Washington Post) reported Sunday that the country's "top five government leaders began a review of the country's de-Baathification law Saturday but appeared not to have reached an agreement on that topic or any of the other critical issues that have plunged the country into a political crisis. . . . . The lack of concrete results from meetings this week diminish hopes of creating a unified government by Sept. 15, when President Bush and Congress are to receive a report about condtiions in Iraq." AFP notes the Bully Boy has stopped mentioning 'benchmarks' when speaking of Iraq and that's because the situation is so grave and because the puppet trashed 'benchmarks' two and sixteen when he shut Sunnis out of his new 'alliance.' On Sunday, Damien Cave (New York Times) offered an analysis of the puppet noting "Some American officials privately describe him as a paranoid failure," describing US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker's observation about the "pretty striking" visible Iraqi frustration with the puppet but "noted that there was as much anger within the government as outside, on the streets," while Iraqis either search for an alternative or "complain that they are not able to replace Mr. Maliki until the Americans signal strong opposition and identify a replacement."

And yet the disaster that the US government has intentionally (and illegally) created in Iraq doesn't dissuade an itching for war with Iran. Today Stephen Farrell (New York Times) observed US Major General Rick Lynch claimed that "50 members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard Corps" training Shi'ite militias fell apart when the general "conceded that no Revolutionary guard members had been captured in his region . . . The accusations came days after United States officials said the White House might list the Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization."

Also this weekend came news of life in Iraqi prisons. Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted today, "In other Iraq news, new images have been released showing hundreds of Iraqi prisoners packed into cramped wire cages. The video was released after Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi visited the Rusafa prison camp in Baghdad. The prisoners are held by the dozens in wire mesh covered with plastic sheeting. On the tape, al-Hashemi is seen addressing the prisoners about their conditions. Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi: 'Those who are outside are no better than you, at least you have security. It is true that you do not have freedom , but you are better than many outside'." Saturday Waleed Ibrahim and Peter Graff (Reuters) reported on the "hundreds of inmates packed into tented wire-mesh cages" and the claim by Lt. Col. Christopher Garver that the US isn't responsible for the treatment or the conditions.

Turning to some of today's violence . . .

Bombings?

Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted "the governmor of the province of Muthanna has been killed in a roadside bombing. The assasination of Mohammed Ali al-Hassani is the second of provincial governor in Iraq in the last two weeks." Bushra Juhi (AP) reports that he was traveling in a SUV "en route to his office" with three bodyguards, an office manager and a driver -- along with al-Hassani, a bodyguard and the driver were killed. CBS and AP note that three people died besides the governor. On August 11th, Khalil Jalil Hamza was killed. He had been the governor of the Qadasiyah province. The Belfast Telegraph notes that both assasinated governors "were members of the Surpreme Islamic Iraqi Council, a Shi'ite group that has been fighting the Mahdi Army militia for control of oil-rich southern Iraq." As noted in Friday's snapshot, The assassinated Khalil Jalil Hamza was just replaced with Shiek Hamid al-Khudhan who is "secretary-general of the Badr Brigade".
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a motorcycle bombing in Baghdad that claimed 1 life (twelve wounded), a Baghdad car bombing that claimed 5 lives (twenty wounded), a Baghdad roadside bomb that left four wounded and a Kirkuk roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier.

Shootings?
Reuters reports two police officers (brothers) were shot dead in Baiji and "a civil servant" was shot dead in Hawijia.
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 12 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Reuters reports 2 corpses (police officers) were discovered in Mosul.
Today the US military announced: "An MNC-I Soldier died of non-battle related causes August 19 in Baghdad." The announcement brought the ICCC total to 49 US service members killed in Iraq this month so far and 3707 killed in the illegal war since it began." The cause of death? "Under investigation." Last week, the US military announced 17 deaths, 3 of which were Baghdad deaths that have "an investigation ongoing" (the 2 US service members who died August 16th in Baghdad and Shawn D. Henset who died August 14th in Baghdad).

Turning to politics in the United States, yesterday at Drake University, the candidates for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination . . . met. Couldn't really call it a debate, couldn't call it a discussion since George Stephanopoulos has no idea how to moderate. For instance, a knowledgeable moderator wouldn't wait to well after the third way mark to finally get to the topic of Iraq while, at the same time, noting "I want to move on to another issue we're hearing about a lot from the voters from Iowa in the poll. More voters wrote in questions for us on the issue of Iraq than any other single issue." Again, Steph got to that well after a third of the debate was over, close to the half-way mark. If the point's not clear, voters wanted to hear about Iraq but Steph wasted everyone's time wondering about Obama and what was said about Obama and blah blah blah useless blah. Does he have a secret crush on Obama? In the Iraq section, Bill Richardson had a question for Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and there's little Steph saying he wants "Obama on that question." Does Obama need that much hand holding just to make it through public appearances?

Bill Richardson declared: "Here's my plan: My plan is that, to end this war, we have to get all the troops out, all of them. Our kids are dying. Our troops have become targets. My plan has diplomacy, a tri-partite entity within Iraq, a reconciliation among the three groups. I would have a division of oil revenues. I'd have an all-Muslim peacekeeping force, headed by the United Nations, a donor conference. But none of this peace and peace building can begin until all of our troops are out. We have different positions here. I believe that if you leave any residual forces, then none of the peace that we are trying to bring can happen. And it's important. And it's critically important that we do this with an orderly timetable. But what is key is all of the troops out -- no residual forces. You leave residual forces behind, the peace cannot begin."

This was in opposition to Joe Biden and Richardson replied, "Well, Anthony Cordesman from ABC News, a distinguished military expert, many generals agree with me that we can complete this withdrawal within six to eight months."

Biden wants to partition Iraq into three regions. Apparently he's running for the role of God. Steph wanted to lunch time poll in the midst of a debate and the results were as stupid as his efforts. Hillary Clinton wanted to make something clear.

What? Who knows. Speaking of what needs to be done, by her plan, to get troops out of Iraq, she declared "this is going to be very dangerous and very difficult. A lot of people don't like to hear that." And since she thinks they don't want to hear it, she doesn't follow up on it changing the topic to equipment. Hillary Clinton stumbled around and the point is she's not for bringing all troops home -- not before the election, not if she's sworn in January 2009. The same is true of Barack Obama. A lot of people do NOT like to hear that. Not in the Democratic Party.

Chris Dodd was left out of the discussion -- apparently Steph has no crush on him. Edwards stated that he felt there was an "orderly way [to] bring our troops out over the next nine or 10 months." Instead of following that with an explanation, running with it to demonstrate a distinct reason why anyone should support him, he instead wasted the rest of his spot playing cheerleader for other candidates. Steph then all but served the question to Hillary's clone/twin Barack Obama who gave non-answers as well but -- as usual -- made a point of whining that in 2002 he was against the illegal war. In 2002, Obama was against the illegal war. In 2004, he was for continuing the illegal war and against bringing the troops home. Once sworn into the Senate in Januray 2005, he voted for every proposal to continue the illegal war until this past summer. But in 2002, America take note, in 2002 Barack Obama was against the war -- which appears to be all his campaign has to offer.

After Steph tossed to to Obama, Dennis Kucinich declared, "We can talk about George Bush driving a bus into a ditch, but let's not forget there was a Democratic Senate in charge that OK'ed the war. And those senators who are up on this stage helped to authorize that war and they have to take responsibility for that. Likewise, they have to take responsibility for funding the war. You say you're opposed to it, but you keep funding it. I think the American people have to look at that and ask, What's going on? Now, I've had a plan on the table for four years to get out of Iraq, and Democrats in Congress have to stand up to the pledge they made in 2006 to take us out of that war. They have to tell the president now, 'Bring the troops home. We're not going to give you any more money for that war.' The American people have a right to expect that we're going to take a new direction. But, frankly, you cannot expect a new direction with the same kind of thinking that took us into war in the first place. We cannot leave more troops there. We cannot privatize Iraq's oil. We cannot partition that country and expect there's going to be peace. We need a president who understands that, one who's been right from the start, and one who has shown the judgment, the wisdom, and the maturity to take the right stand at the time that it counted most, when the American people needed someone to stand up. And I'm the one who did that."

And that was pretty much it. Less than a third of the debate was spent on the issue of Iraq. Steph declared, before Chris Dodd could even weigh in, "Let's move on now. We've got a question -- we've got an e-mail question from Seth Ford of South Jordan, Utah." Seth wanted to know about prayer. Apparently he thought ABC was seeking input on the 20/20 'news' special "A Presidential Confidant." And too much reality makes Steph's do drip so it was off to nonsense. But remember what Steph said at the start of the tiny Iraq section: "I want to move on to another issue we're hearing about a lot from the voters from Iowa in the poll. More voters wrote in questions for us on the issue of Iraq than any other single issue. They all wanted to know what your plans were to get out of Iraq, and to get out safely from Iraq."

The voters wanted to know about Iraq. Steph wanted to talk prayer. Mike Gravel was cut off during the Iraq section. John Donnelly (Boston Globe) notes Gravel asking, "Why do we think that we can rule that country? This is American imperialism you're hearing up here, and that hasn't worked and it will never work."Since Gravel wasn't allowed to speak freely (interruptions and crosstalk) and since he was shut out of the previous debate, we'll note that on August 8th, he was a guest for the first hour (the only guest) on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show.
Mike Gravel: It's important to be in these debates so that people can hear my voice and say that guy looks a little unusual, "I didn't know he was still alive" or "I never heard of him before." Keep in mind people who generally are over 40 who remember or are a little bit interested in politics 30, 25 years ago
Diane Rehm: You're 77.
Mike Gravel: That's right. They know who I am. I was very, very controversial. I was what they call a maverick. But also I took some very hard stands. And it's interesting, when you talk about ending the draft, when you talk about releasing the Pentagon Papers, stopping a nuclear testing on the North Pacific, starting the nuclear critique so that we wouldn't use it for, for a generation of electricity and then, at the time, I was looked at, I was marginalized by mainline media. And so now, when we look back 25 years, people say, "My God, you did a lot of courageous things." Well I did a lot of things that the media didn't buy into because I wasn't conventional wisdom then and I'm not now.
Diane Rehm: Considering the current situation in Iraq, do you believe it was a mistake to end the draft?
Mike Gravel: No, not in the slightest. In fact, I'm very proud of the fact that George Bush does not have the boots on the ground to invade Iran. They're going to have to do it with some other device. And thank God for Sy Hersh who blew the whistle on their possible use of nukes in that regard. And as you recall, in the first debate I challenged Hillary, Obama, Edwards, they all pledged that the nukes were still on the table with respect to Iran. Iran's done nothing to us. We're the -- they have have a beef with us. We destabilized. There were only two democracies in 1953 in the Middle East. One was Israel the other one was Iran. And what did we do? Our CIA and Kermit Roosevelt [Jr. -- known as "Kim"], the grandson of Teddy Roosevelt, was so proud, wrote a book [Countercoup] about how we destroyed their democracy and look what -- we put in a king, then a king got lost, now we got the ayatollahs. If we would just leave the Iranians alone, they have a real interesting record of moving to democracy.
On the topic of Iraq, he declared, "I see nobody in sight that's prepared to truly end the war. And what I see is politics as usual whether it's on the liberal side let's say with Dennis Kucinich or on the middle or the far . . . right with other Democrats. But there's no, I see no will to end the war because you end it right now in the Congress with the leadership, the Democrats have taken over, and this is a tragic failure. I submitted to the Congress a procedure, a law, I call it "The Withdrawal Act" that would make it a felony and would put Bush in jail or set up a prima facie case for impeachment if he did not follow the law. 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.

Of Sunday's debate, China's People Daily Online sums up the Iraq section with, "A few, including Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel, talked about an immediate withdrawal, while others warned that it would be difficult to mount a swift withdrawal." Anne E. Kornblut (Washington Post) analyzes the debate here. Javier C. Hernandez ( Boston Globe) profiled Dennis Kucinich over the weekend in solo face time for the hour (the candidate was meeting with the Boston Globe's editorial board) during which Kucinich likened his foreign policy to Jimmy Carter's and noted that the White House was guilty of "committing a 'monstrous crime' by going to war in Iraq, pointing to what he described as hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties and to questions about whether administration officials lied in making the case for war. Kucinich, who has called for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney, said US forces should immediately end their 'occupation' of Iraq and said a multinational peacekeeping force should be brought in to help stabilize the country."
In the Democratic forum held yesterday, the moderator repeatedly refused to ask, "WHAT IS YOUR PLAN?" Candidates went soft and fuzzy (with the few exceptions noted already). That's a waste of time. It's also much worse because Iraq is dropping off the media radar yet again. Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reported today, "In media news, a new study shows corporate news coverage of the Iraq war has dropped sharply in the last four months. According to the Project for Excellence in Journalism, the Iraq war accounted for just fifteen percent of news coverage, down from twenty-two percent earlier this year. Network evening news coverage of the war went from forty-percent to nineteen percent. The Democratic and Republican presidential campaign emerged as the most-covered issue over the same period."





iraq
aidan delgado
camilo mejia
joshua key
iraq veterans against the war
democracy now
amy goodman
the washington post
megan greenwell
anne e. kornblut
the new york times
damien cave
stephen farrell
the los angeles times
carol j. williams

mcclatchy newspapers
iraq veterans against the war
Posted by at

Friday, August 17, 2007

Danny Schechter, Andrew Clevenger

It's Friday at last! :D The weekend's here. It'll go by in the blink of the eye so try to enjoy it before it does. Let's get started. Okay, this is from News Dissector Danny Schechter's "'An Entity We Can’t Even See' Mythifying Markets and Mystifying the Public About the Financial Crisis:"

Feeding our ignorance on the origins of this rollercoaster, which some fear could lead to other bubbles bursting and a global recession, or something worse, is a media that mythologizes markets and presents them as neutral self-correcting mechanisms that fairly regulate supply and demand and deserve confidence. There is nary a word on how they can be dominated, monopolized and ologopolized. (Is that a word?) Last week we were warned about "contagion." This week, the calming buzzword is "correction."
Left out in all this is any discussion of the shadowy forces that we don't see who are calling the shots and the many ways in which the game is damaging our society and is even self-destructive to business. (Remember Lenin's warning: "sell them enough rope and capitalists will hang themselves.") Who is investigating the profiteers and the tactics they use? What politicians are speaking out? Isn't the handwriting on the wall?
Steven Lendman writes, "Some astute financial observers now believe current excesses and resulting turmoil were caused by the intentional engineering of the US housing bubble with the Fed in on the scheme." The Federal Reserve Bank) by the way, contrary to appearances, is NOT a government agency but a private body run by big banks.
"Insiders made loads of easy money in the process and now stand to cash in big troubled assets for a fraction of their value the way they always do in the wake of market meltdowns. It’s called "vulture" investing with shrewd buyers profiting hugely in good and bad times that are all good for them."
He concludes, "The problem is deep, structural and aided by stripped away regulatory protections giving predatory lenders and Wall Street schemers free reign to target unsuspecting victims." In other words, see who benefits.
Enough of all the uncritical market hyping in the media! Lets get at truths that are obscured with vague references to faith-based market "psychology" which has actually been described as motivated by "animal spirits" as if that's a good thing. They make it sound like fun time-when it's a crime.

I could follow that (but would have posted it if I hadn't, I like Danny). It's amazing, if you think about it, how markets 'just happen.' At best, we get told of official deals. Little attention is ever made to the 'deal' that involves a declared or undeclared war.

If you're scratching your head over that, I was going to include something someone e-mailed to me. But as I read it some more, I was puzzled and then went to C.I. and Elaine with questions.
The guy is supportive of today's SDS and attacking the old SDS. He's also misrepresenting today's SDS, by the way. But I just couldn't follow his nonsense. They knew him then and pointed out he wasn't as involved as he self-presents ("from time to time") today. He writes like he's cheering SDS on but he's really trying to steer it. He's not a part of it and needs to find something else to steer.

That's really pathetic, really pathetic. Think about it. Here's a man who really did nothing during Vietnam to end that illegal war and today he's trying to insert himself in as the adviser to SDS. Why? So they won't do anything? He really needs to find another group to 'report' on. And maybe next time he can try reporting on something instead of counseling on it.

He also let a lot of his opinions on the Weather Undergound spill into his supposed discussion of his SDS days. C.I. said, "He supports some of Weather Underground's actions depending upon what day you catch him. The rest of the time, he's running from them." I said,"There's no way he ever would support Weather Underground" because I'd just read his column. C.I. goes, "Save your post." I did and C.I. did a quick search on the computer and found 4 different pieces where the guy's writing favorably of Weather Underground. (C.I.'s staying over tonight after speaking in the area.)

How can anyone be so schizoid? Elaine says the guy was always like that and never really able to commit to the peace movement in any form. I say, "Loser!" :D

Okay, this is from Andrew Clevenger's "Couple Arrested at Bush Rally Settles Lawsuit for $80,000:"

The federal government has agreed to pay $80,000 to a Texas couple arrested for wearing anti-President Bush T-shirts at a 2004 event with the president in Charleston.
Jeff and Nicole Rank went to Bush’s Fourth of July speech at the state Capitol wearing homemade T-shirts with a red circle with a bar through it over the word "Bush."
On the back, hers read "Love America, Hate Bush" and his read "Regime Change Starts At Home."
When the couple refused to cover up their shirts, they were arrested and charged with trespassing. Those charges were later dropped by the city of Charleston, and city officials later apologized.
The American Civil Liberties Union subsequently filed a lawsuit on the Ranks' behalf in federal court in Charleston, alleging that the Ranks' First Amendment right to free political speech had been violated.

That's our better news for today. I won't say "good" news because first of all the arrests should have never happened and weren't an accident, second of all I'm not Koo Koo Katrina babbling on about "Sweet Victory" while Rome burns.

Now for news on Iraq, here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, August 17, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, al-Maliki tries to save his ass via a Sunni shut out, the 4,000 mark for foreign fighters killed in Iraq has passed, a mosque is attacked in Iraq, A.N.S.W.E.R. is attacked in the US, IVAW & Vets for Peace & Military Families Speak Out and others gear up for a march in St. Louis this Sunday, and more.

Starting with war resisters. Melissa Fryer (The Nanmio News Bulletin).reports on war resister Timothy Richard who enlisted in the National Guard in 1999 and self-checked out and moved to Canada after he was stop-lossed: "In August 2005, just three months before his six-year contract expired, he was called up and moved from calvalry to infantry, and began training at Camp Shelby, Miss. for deployment to Iraq. . . . His contract was extended to 2031 without his permission, due to a clause that allows the U.S. government to extend military contracts at their discretion". Camilo Mejia, who tells his story in his new book Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia, also found his 'contract' (legally binding only when it's in the military's favor) extended to 2031. Richard self-checked out during the Thanksgiving 2005 break and moved to Canada. Fyrer reports,
"Because his dad is Canadian, Richard was able to acquire Canadian citizenship, which allows him to work and go to school, and protects him from extradition to the U.S. to face desertion charges. . . . Other war resisters are not so fortunate. To support them, and to help repay the support he was shown when he landed in Nanaimo, Richard is using his singing talents to raise money for the Nanaimo War Resisters Support Group and St. Andrew's United Church" with "A Concert for Peace" scheduled to take place August 19th, starting at seven p.m. at St. Andrew's Church (ten dollars is the price for a ticket).


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. IVAW and others will be joining Veterans For Peace's conference in St. Louis, Missouri August 15th to 19th. (And, on the 19th, there will be a march led by, among others, war resister Darrell Anderson. See further details at later in the snapshot.)

Earlier this month, when the United Nations Security Council voted to 'expand' the UN's role in Iraq, Matthew Rothschild (The Progressive) wrote of the "fig leaf" nature of the UN 'mission' in Iraq observing that "U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon expects to send all of thirty more U.N. personnel to Iraq. But the staff union at the U.N. opposes this, and even wants those currently in Iraq to be withdrawn until the safety situation there improves" and also noted how it was "difficult to imagine how the U.N. will be able to help the security situation any. The response by Britain's U.N. ambassador, Emyr Jones Parry, was laughable. He said he hopes 'the U.N. will soon be able to redeploy a contingent to Basra, where its expertise would be helpful in delivering capactiy building in Iraq's southeast'." Basra would be the site where the UK has seen many losses throughout the illegal war (the current number of UK soldiers killed in the illegal war is 168). So the "all of thirty more U.N. personnel [sent] to Iraq" is laughable and, indeed, a fig leaf.

Fig leafs are all that's left to cover the illegal war and the new one this week has been the so-called 'alliance' Nouri al-Maliki has formed which shuts out the Sunnis. Always quick to parrot the US government's talking points, Damien Cave (New York Times) misses every bit of reality and promotes the 'alliance' as just another manuever while quoting an unnamed US official who declares its too soon to tell whether the alliance will be successful or not? Too soon to tell? The shut out of the Sunnis violates the White House endorsed, Congressionally mandate 'benchmarks' two and sixteen. Joshua Partlow (Washington Post) reports that the make up of the 'alliance' "effectively undermines the coalition's chances of breaking the political gridlock that has frustrated U.S. and Iraqi officials" and quotes Sunni Hachim al-Hassani declaring, "This is not the solution for Iraq's problems. The solution for Iraq's problems is for the real parties to get together and agree on an agenda to fix Iraq's
problems." The Australian observes that the Sunni shut out in the 'alliance' "immediately raised questions about its legitimacy as a unifying force" and declares, "The key disappointment after days spent negotiating the pact's membership was the absence of Iraq's Sunni Vice-President, Tariq al-Hashemi, and his moderate Iraqi Islamic Party. That portends even deeper political divisions, but Mr. Maliki chose a more optimistic assessment." The Sunni shut out also comes after US efforts to arm and train some Sunnis alarmed many Shi'ites in the puppet government and the back-and-forth dance the US does with Sunnis and Shi'ites serves to throw everyone off balance (which is the point of it). al-Maliki, while trashing two 'benchmarks,' is already (once again) eager to spin happy about the chances to pass the theft of Iraqi oil, the privataziation of Iraqi oil opposed by most Iraqis but something the US administration wants. Sabah Jergest (AFP) reports "Leaders of Iraq's disenchanted Sunni Arab community on Friday slammed the new Shiite and Kurdish alliance formed to salvage Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's national unity government. The National Concord Front, the main Sunni Arab political bloc in the country's 275-member parliament, said the new tie-up between the two Shiite and two Kurdish parties was a 'futile' excercise."
David Hardaker (Australia's ABC) notes that "Sunni leader and Vice President Tariq Hashemi has severely criticised the government's record on security and human rights." And so has the mainstream press in recent months but the 'alliance' is a new chance to spin 'possibilities.'


Sam Dagher (Christian Science Monitor) provides context: "With a mid-September deadline looming for the Bush administration to deliver its Iraq progress report to Congress, American diplomats in Baghdad are working overdrive to prevent Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government from total collapse -- something that could shatter all efforts to forge a long-elusive national reconciliation." Fig leaf. That's all the 'alliance' is. An effort by the US and al-Maliki to have something -- anything! -- worth spinning as the September 15th 'progress' report (to be delivered to Congress) looms. In light of this comes the 'alliance' and also talk of a crisis summit. The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review observes of the latter, "How familiar is this dirge. The government is run by the Shiite majority, the Sunni minority feels put upon and many Kurds would just as soon go their own way." Among the Shi'ite militias Sunnis have called "death squads" is the Badr Brigade. Last week, the governor of the Qadasiyah province was assassinated. CBS News and AP report today that Sheik Hamid al-Khudhan, "secretary-general of the Badr Brigade" has just been elected the new govenor "by a narrow majority" of council members. With these and other actions, the puppet's cry of "We must unite" seems less like a slogan and more like a threat.


How familiar is this dirge? Tuesday multiple bombings in northern Iraq led to mass deaths. Today BBC reports the death toll at 344 with four hundred wounded and that Abdul Rahim al-Shimari, mayor of Baaj, held a press confrence where he declared, "People are in shock. Hospitals here are running out of medicine. The pharmacies are empty. We need food, medicine and water otherwise there will be an even greater catastrophe." The International Committee of the Red Cross has announced that they are "dispatching surgical and medical supplies to Telaafar General Hospital which is receiving an influx of casualties resulting from the four explosions that rocked the Sinjar district in the north west of Iraq late on Tuesday evening. Similar supplies for the treatment of over 400 wounded have also been dispatched to Sinjar General Hospital and Dohuk Emergency Hospital." While the Red Cross (and Red Crescent) provide aid, Damien Cave (New York Times) gets giddy that Nouri al-Maliki's puppet government has announced it will provide families with $1600 (US) for each family member killed. Ignoring all context and reality, this meager sum stands in stark contrast to to the puppet's July 2006 declaration that he would send $35 million (US) in aid to Lebanon.
Diamond Jim Brady al-Maliki has all the cash in the world to toss around . . . outside of Iraq but when Iraqi lives are to be compensated for, he sends the message that the lives are of much less value on the monetary scale.

Staying on the topic of money, CNN reported yesterday on Iraqi women who have been forced into prostitution due to their losses from the illegal war as they attempt to support themselves and their children with some earning $8 (US) a day. Suha, not her real name, is 37-years-old, the mother of three children and she tells CNN, "People shouldn't criticize women, or talk badly about them. They all say we have lost our way, but they never ask why we had to take this path. I don't have money to take my kids to the doctor. I have to do anything that I can to preserve my child, because I am a mother." The Organization for Women's Freedom in Iraq's Yanar Mohammed explains to CNN that her group "pounds the streets of Baghdad looking for these victims often too humiliated to come forward," victims of the illegal war whom she points out have been forced into prostitution: "At this point there is a population of women who have to sell their bodies in order to keep their children alive. It's a taboo that no one is speaking out. There is a huge population of women who were the victims of war who had to sell their bodies, their souls and they lost it all."

On the anniversary of the fourth year of the illegal war, the Organization for Women's Freedom in Iraq released the following statement:

Women of Iraq have gradually let go of most of their 20th century gains and privileges in the last 4 years of occupation. Iraq turned from a modern country of educated and working women into a divided land of Islamic and ethnic warlords who compete in cancelling women from the social realm. Millions of women's destinies are wasted between the destructive US war machine and different kinds of Islamic rule who have have turned women into helpless black objects of no will or worth.
After 4 years of "democratizing" Iraq, systemic group rapes of detained women have become a routine procedure to be practiced in police staions and detainment camps. It has also become another ugly face of the atrocious sectarian war where assaulting females of
the other sect is considered a political victory and punishment.
Abeer, Sabrine and Wajidah's sufferings were known, heard, and ended but hundreds of unknown assaulted women still get beaten, raped and videotaped daily in the Iraqi ministries and around the American bases.

And yes, Virgil and Virginia, there is prostitution in Iraq and in Baghdad and it's been known throughout the illegal war though many outlets have worked overtime to officially ignore it (officially ignore).

Orphans? CBS News' Lara Logan files an update on the Baghdad orphan horror story (back in June, US soldiers found an 'orphanage' that was practicing neglect and abuse and rescued the children) by noting that the US soldiers who saved the children have been awarded but she fails to mention the names of those receiving awards other than Osman Koroma. She also fails to mention how the situation (and others like it that remain unreported) came to be.
Congratulations to Koroma (and the others) for a well deserved medal but the facts remain -- and remain unreported in US media -- that the orphanage and others like it exist due to the illegal war. This was not a case of children made orphans, this was actually (though Logan doesn't note it) a special needs residential center. In the Arab media, parents of the children and of other children have been interviewed, have discussed how they placed their special needs children there because they hoped the children would have the best chance at safety in a war torn country. Parents have been vocal -- outside the US media -- about how the story CBS broke (and others picked up) have made them decide that bombs falling, shootings, barely enough food to survive on, be damned, they were going to pull the children from these institutions. CBS News continues to act as if an isolated center was found and what took place happened by mere chance. That is not reality. There are many others and 'care givers' know they can get away with it because the daily violence makes visits by parents near impossible (and, as one father revealed, many of these centers require the parents to make appointments to visit) and they thrive because Iraqi parents (or in some cases, an Iraqi parent since the illegal war has left many families with one parent -- some with none) see the daily violence from the illegal war and look for any sort of safety for their children. By all means, applaud Osman Koroma and the other US soldiers who made a huge difference by not just discovering the children but by rescuing them (up the chain commanders deserve no credit or applause for the individual actions of the soldiers) but don't ignore the fact that this center and others like it exist due to the illegal war.


Meanwhile, yesterday a mark stood at 3999. The mark? The number of official military members who had died after foreign governments had sent them into Iraq to fight in the illegal war. The 4,000 mark has passed. Today the US military announced: "Thursday, a MNC-I Soldier died of non-battle related cause in Baghdad. An investigation into the cause of death will be conducted." And they announced: "A Task Force Lightning Soldier died of wounds sustained from enemy gunfire in Baghdad Province, Thursday." This took the total to 4001. As Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reported earlier today, "In Iraq, the coalition death toll has now topped four thousand. The vast majority are American, with thirty-seven hundred and two U.S. troops killed. Forty-four U.S. service members have died this month."

But the number climbed still higher later in the day. Later today, the US military announced: "One Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier was killed and two were wounded when a roadside bomb detonated during a patrol in an eastern section of the Iraqi capital Aug. 17." And they announced: "Thursday, a MNC-I Soldier died of non-battle related cause in Baghdad." ICCC's total for the number of US service members who've died in the illegal war thus far this month is 48 and the total number who have died since the start of the illegal war stands at 3706. The total number of foreign military members (US, UK and "Other") killed in the illegal war currently stands at 4003.

As noted above a US soldier died of gun wounds on Thursday. The guns were fired from the roof of a mosque and have resulted in a mosque being the site of a battle. AP reports the US fired missiles at Honest Mohammed Mosque (which was damaged) as worshippers fled.
CNN reports 14 Iraqis were killed by the US including a "boy." The US military states the mosque battle took place in Tarmiyah while glossing over Iraqi fatalities.


In other violence today . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack that left three people wounded and 3 bombings that claimed 2 lives and left 8 people injured (four were Iraqi soldiers). KUNA reports a Kirkuk bombing wounded four civilians and five Iraqi police officers.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two people wounded from gun fire when unknown assailants in five vehicles opened fre as they drove through Albu Faraj village. AP reports the airing today of a taped execution of Alaa Abboud Fartous Diab who had been an official at the Iraqi Defense Ministry and was "killed with two pistol shots to the back of the head."

Corpses?


Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 11 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes 3 corpses discovered in Haditha ("gunshot wounds and signs of torture").

Yesterday, the media began reporting on US Army study that found a 15% increase in suicides among active duty members of the army which AP had. Today, Pauline Jelinek (AP) notes that "nearly a third of 99 [suicides] committed in 2006 were among soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan at the time of their deaths. Iraq accounted for the overwhelming number of those -- 27 of the 30." Military Families Speak Out's Nancy Lessing says, "This report only shows the tip of iceberg, as it does not cover those who took their lives after leaving active duty service. Until the war in Iraq is brought to an end, we think the tragic reality will only become worse" and notes the suicides of Brian Jason Rand and Jeffrey Lucey -- two of many suicides that were committed after the service members left active duty status and are not tracked in the heavily covered study.

This Sunday, [PDF format warning] Military Families Speak Out and others including war resister Darrell Anderson will be conducting a march in St. Louis, MO called "The National March Through the Arch" which will begin at 10:45 a.m. with partipants encouraged to meet at 10:30 a.m. at the corner of 9th and Cole streets.

Many organizations and individuals will also be taking part in an August 25th march in Maine. Kennebunks Peace Department announces the August 25th Rally and March for Peace which will include Cindy Sheehan, Cynthia McKinney, Dennis Kucinich, Melida and Carlos Arredondo, David Rovics, Indigo Girls, Pat Scanlon & Band and others. Participants should "gather in the park outside the Kennebunkport Consolidated School on School Street at 10 a.m. for a morning of speeches and music. Then the group will march to the Bush family compound on Walker's Point. The march will be followed by another speaking and music program."

In other peace activisim news, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reported yesterday that A.N.S.W.E.R. is being targeted for a demonstration next month, "In Washington D.C., city officials have threatened a ten thousand dollar fine to the anti-war group ANSWER unless it removes posters promoting an upcoming peace march. Several hundred yellow posters have been posted around the city announcing the September 15th event. The protest is timed to coincide with the release of a Pentagon report on the so-called troop surge in Iraq. D.C. officials say the posters are illegal because they don't meet city standards on adhesive use. ANSWER calls the fine threat a political move aimed at silencing the march."
A.N.S.W.E.R. maintains it "will not pay one penny to the government for our First Amendment rights or to stave off their threats against us. We are working with the expert constitutional rights attorneys at the Partnership for Civil Justice to determine our next steps for legal action against this government harrassment and attempted repression." They are asking for people to take action by calling the Director of Department of Public Workds, William O. Howland Jr. at 202-673-6833 and the DC Mayor, Adrian Fenty, at 202-724-8876 and/or to use this link to send or a letter or fax. And, to be sure everyone is clear, the march remains on.










Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)