Garlic Pasta in the Kitchen

Before getting into a recipe, I want to put something else at the top. Bonnie Faulkner hosts/anchors KPFA's Guns and Butter and Wednesday's broadcast featured speeches by the independent presidential ticket Nader-Gonzalez [Click here for KPFA archive.] This is Ralph Nader speaking:

The two-party system -- a 220-year-old political prison, winner take all, electoral college, duopoloy -- basically says to voters: "You got two choices. You stay home and not vote. Or, if you want your vote to mean something, and you want to be with the winner, you vote for one of the two major party candidates. Otherwise, you are wasting your vote." And you hear Matt [Gonzalez] say, "Were those voters in the 19th century who spun off from the Whigs and the Democrats and didn't try to spin the difference between these two parties on slavery waste their vote?" Aren't we glad that enough voters voted for the Liberty Party at least to put it on the political map in 1840 and the Woman's Suffrage Party, the Populist Party, the Labor Party, the Greenback Party. All these parties and then Norman Thomas' Socilaist Party, Progressive Party will follow it. Eugene Debbs. What did they propose? A-ha. The blasphemy of their days is the common place of our days. They proposed direct election of senators, 40-hour week, progressive income tax, Social Security, Medicare. They proposed labor standards. They proposed regulation of big business. So we have three kind of voters in this country. One, the hereditary voters who will vote Republican and Democrat no matter who the nominee is because their grandparents did. That's a big chunk. [NYC] Mayor [Michael] Bloomberg, when he was thinking of running for [presidential] office, I had a telephone conversation with him -- actually, just before he was going to announce that he wasn't, on that day. And he said "I've done surveys and polls all over the country. Here's my conclusion. 15% of the Republicans will vote for the Republican nominee if the Republican nominee was Leon Trotsky. And 15% of the Democrats would vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee was Ayn Rand." That was a way of saying, if he threw his hat in the ring, he starts with a 30% handicap. Maybe he's understimating it? But that's one, the hereditary voter. The second is the tactical voter. The tactical voter says, "Let's be realitistic. We don't care about how bad the Democratic Party is in terms of our supporting it as long as we know the Republican Party is worse. That's the tactical vote. "Be realisitic." The tactical voters is one who spends three years moaning and groaning about the Democratic Party. "They didn't roll back any of President Bush's legislation when they took over in 2007! Not one. Not even the disallowing Uncle Sam to negotiate for volume discounts with the drug companies when the Drug Benefit Act -- a bonaza worth tens of billions of dollars to the drug companies -- was enacted. They didn't roll back anything. They keep funding the war. Their leader -- presumptive nominee -- wants more soldiers in Afghanistan. He doesn't have an exit strategy. They don't do anything about strengthening the corporate criminal crime laws. John Conyers has a single-payer bill, HR 676, 85 members of the House have signed on but he can't get one Democratic Senator to introduce it in the Senate. Not one. Not Obama, not Clinton and not those two great, new progressive senators Bernie Sanders and Senator Brown. Sherrod Brown from Ohio. Those are the great hopes of the progressive wing. Now why don't they introduce it? Senator Sanders who has come out against impeachment vigorously along with Senator Brown "It's exactly what Karl Rove wants us to do -- is to initiate impeachment." 'So he can turn the 26% of the people who support Bush against us!' Is that what he really means? I'm putting that word in his mouth. I mean this is the lowest popular president in modern times and Cheney's at 16% which is almost happen-stance, you know. Harry Truman proposed universal health care. 1945. Sent it to Congress 1950. What are we talking about here? Isn't it about time that we join the community of nations? Taiwan has universal health care. Every western country has universal health care. A country we give four billion dollars a year to, Israel, has universal health care. Maybe they should have a foreign aid program? Reverse it back to us? Now what does it mean when you don't have health insurance? What is means is that 18,000 Americans die every year according to the Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, that's six 9-11s every year. The Urban Institute just came out with an estimate: 22,000. That means hundreds of, hundreds of thousands of people get sick, stay sick, don't have their injuries treated cause they can't afford health insurance. Why doesn't that get us angry? Because the people who can do something about it, who can have their calls returned, have health insurance. How many people here do not have health insurance? That's pretty impressive. How many are under twenty-five? See, that's what people out of school are now facing. Trying to find affordable health insurance, or health insurance of any kind, affordable housing, trying to deal with rapacious student loan companies like Sallie Mae with all their fine print and their gouging interest rates, wondering whether their jobs are going to be outsourced abroad because anything with software, architect, engineer, accounting, computer, all that can be outsourced. Law -- a lot of law jobs now are starting to be outsourced. Even media jobs are starting to be outsourced. I'm still looking for CEO jobs to be outsourced. I think there are some very good bi-lingual Chinese executives, brilliant skills, who for 10 percent of the pay would take care at General Motors and Exxon and Pfizer. After all, they're outsourcing their own employees jobs to keep up with the global competition. Well . . . let's start at the top. Huh? So the tactical voter is a complicit voter -- wittingly or unwittingly -- because the moment you go you're so terrified of the worst party you go to the next worst party -- on a huge number of issues, a huge number of corporate power issues. Then you're saying to the least worst nominee -- Obama, for example -- that your vote can be taken for granted because you are so terrified of the Republicans that you will not make any demands on Obama in the area of women's rights and abolishing poverty and consumer protection and environment and tax changes and the wars and all the rest of it. And labor reforms and repeal of Taft-Hartley. So you don't make any demands. Don't, don't disturb them! I mean, they gotta' be elected! They've got a strategy for election. They sure have. Mondale. Dukakis. Kerry. Gore -- who won but it was taken from him, but it was a lot closer than it should be. Clinton who had Bob Dole as his opponent, who would campaign in Missouri and look at his watch and say, "I think I got to go to the airport so I can get home." Washington, DC. He really wasn't that serious. It is not a winning strategy. It is a losing strategy. Clinton, as Matt just said, benefitted greatly from those 19 million votes [referring to the 19 million who voted for H. Ross Perot, the third-party candidate]. Then there's the third class of voter. The third class of voter reflects what Eugene V. Debbs once said. He said, "Better to vote for someone you believe in and lose than someone you don't believe in and win." What did he mean by that? He meant if you vote for someone you don't believe in and win that someone is going to betray you, that someone is not going to look back on what your support is supposed to mean. And the Democrats have betrayed this country in ways that some chroniclers will fill many books in the coming future. So the important thing here is to measure these parties by what the American people need, want, deserve, are entitled to. That's way over do. Those are the yardsticks. The Democrats could have stopped Bush on the war. They had the votes to block almost everything he did. You know the Senate can, when you've got over 40 seats you can almost block anything. Ask the Republicans.

C.I. included that in Thursday's snapshot. In today's snapshot (at the end), Matt Gonzalez' speech is included.

Now we're turning to food.

The task we're trying to achieve here is to provide inexpensive recipes that are easy to cook. There are a lot of you e-mailing wonderful ideas. I really appreciate that. But one thing to remember is that some who will be cooking them have children and children can be finky eaters. I say that because there were two really wonderful beet recipes that I've added to my own list of favorites; however, a number of children will not touch beets no matter how you dress them up.

Should they? Absolutely. But I am not comfortable offering a weekly recipe that, if all the directions are followed, someone putting it on the table might find that her or his children are not going to eat. That would be wasting their money.

By the same taken, a woman e-mailed a recipe for lasanga requiring sixteen ingredients and hours of cooking and preparation. That would not work for most of the people coming here. I love recipes and I am always willing to try anything so feel free to e-mail just for me. But in terms of what we are going for here, it is inexpensive and easy.

Callie had an easy and inexpensive recipe that we'll be using this week.

Garlic Pasta
1 pound dry pasta
4 garlic cloves
1 cup olive oil
3/4 cup of Paremesan cheese

Cook the pasta according to directions and drain. Heat the cup of olive oil in the microwave (warm, not boiling). Crush the garlic cloves. In a large bowl, toss the pasta with the warm olive oil, garlic cloves and cheese. Serve immediately.

This is a great recipe. Lynda does one of the 'test kitchens' and she wasn't sure about her younger daughter. But the recipe is so easy and inexpensive that she told herself if it didn't meet her daughter's standards, it would take only a few seconds to put some Ragu sauce on top. She didn't have to.

French bread really works great with this but so does Italian. You can also use garlic bread. You can make a green salad for a meal. If you don't have the time to make a green salad or don't have the ingredients on hand, green beans go well also.

People e-mailing have been noting the economy. In the 'unscientific poll' going on in the e-mails, most of you assume the economy is going to get worse and it will be at least six months before it improves. I actually think it will be much longer but I will go with that optimistic opinion.

Winter is coming up and one thing I would encourage you to do now is begin purchasing dried beans. Not to stock up, but to begin experimenting with. When winter rolls around (or late fall), a warm bowl of beans can be very tasty.

But what I'm getting back in the e-mails is that most writing and concerned about money have no idea how to prepare them.

The most important thing is to soak the beans. You can do a quick soak but there's confusion on that so let's just set that aside. Soak the beans overnight. The day before you cook them, put them in a large bowl, cover with water (at least two inches) and put it on the stove top (cold burner). The next day (morning is fine), all that water is going. You do not cook it in it. By cooking it, you're wasting the whole point of the pre-soak. So drain the water and rinse the beans. Put them back in the pot with fresh water and follow the instructions for cooking on the bag.

Garbonzo beans are always interesting. You can do black eyed peas. With some beans, you may want to put in a slice of bacon or a ham bone or some ground turkey. (Cook the turkey first and drain off the grease.)

You can also buy an X-number bean soup. Too many people have apparently tried to do that themselves: make a X-number bean soup. The mistake you're making (judging from the e-mails) is not grasping that the packet in the bean soup is a type of seasoning and also a little broth. That's why your bean soup do-it-yourself is nothing but watery beans. If you want to try making your own bean soup, you'll need to add seasonings and a bit of broth or you're going to end up with seasoned watery beans.

I have eight children and there's no one dried bean that worked best for all. For my last three children, if I had a pan of black eyed peas cooked (and kept warm on the stove), they would have bowl after bowl. On cold days, you'll find one thing, children who don't eat beans and are coming in and out of the house (from the cold to the warmth) will be surprisingly interested in what's warming on the stove.

That's not going to work in the summer. So if you're nervous about using dried beans and want to practice now, go ahead but then put them in container and in the fridge. They can be eaten cold or rewarmed. Beans have fiber and protein.

Red kidney beans were the favorites of my older children.

There are beans soups you can make and I'll offer a simple one next week that can be eaten hot, warm or cold.

These e-mails you're sending are not a problem. Don't hestitate to say, "I don't know how to do ___." For the first two years of my marriage, I never cooked with anything requiring cream because I wasn't sure and was too afraid to ask. Was that cream like in coffee? Was it whipped cream in a can? What was this cream? If there's something you don't know, chances are someone else doesn't know. (And I may not know. But I'll try to find out.)


This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, August 8, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Moqtada al-Sadr floats an offer for disbanding, US presidential candidate Ralph Nader prepares to visit Canada, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Last month US war resister Robin Long was extradited from Canada. Courage to Resist notes that Robin is "being held in the El Paso County Jail, near Colorado Springs, Colorado, awaiting a military court martial for resisting the unjust and illegal war against and occupation of Iraq. Robin will be court martialed for desertion 'with intent to remain away permanently' -- Article 85 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice -- in early September. The maximum allowable penalty for a guilty verdict on this charge is three years confinement, forfeiture of pay, and a dishonorably discharge from the Army. In order to expedite Robin's trial, it appears that his unit command, the Fourth Brigade Combat Team, Fourth Infantry Division is option to not charge Robin with speech-related violations of military discipline; opting to try and convict Robin as fast as possible."
They note the public support that Garrett Reppenhagan (IVAW) and others have shown in Colorado for Robin. A protest held at Fort Carson (see July 28th snapshot) was noted here last month and Lee Zaslofsky declared at the protest: "Robin Long did what he did because of his conscience and because he believed that the war was wrong, that he was simply running away or hiding out. . . . I think most Americans now realize that the war in Iraq is a complete mistake." James Branum is Robin's civilian attorney and he discussed Robin's case in this video (transcript of which is in the August 5th snapshot) noting, "So they had a hearing late at night. Robin was put into jail. And since that point, he has been held here in Colarado Springs in the Criminal Justice Center in El Paso County -- basically just a regular old county jail with all kinds of people, dangerous criminals many of them, and it's a difficult place to be. But Robin's in good spirits and we're now dealing with the consequences of his action in the military courts here."
Courage to Resist offers the followings to support Robin:


1. Donate to Robin's legal defense
Online: http://couragetoresist.org/robinlong
By mail: Make checks out to "Courage to Resist / IHC" and note "Robin Long" in the memo field. Mail to:
Courage to Resist 484 Lake Park Ave #41 Oakland CA 94610
Courage to Resist is committed to covering Robin's legal and related defense expenses. Thank you for helping make that possible.
Also: You are also welcome to contribute directly to Robin's legal expenses via his civilian lawyer James Branum. Visit girightslawyer.com, select "Pay Online via PayPal" (lower left), and in the comments field note "Robin Long". Note that this type of donation is not tax-deductible.
2. Send letters of support to Robin
Robin Long, CJC
2739 East Las Vegas
Colorado Springs, CO 80906

Robin's pre-trial confinement has been outsourced by Fort Carson military authorities to the local county jail.
Robin is allowed to receive hand-written or typed letters only. Do NOT include postage stamps, drawings, stickers, copied photos or print articles. Robin cannot receive packages of any type (with the book exception as described below).
3. Send Robin a money order for commissary items
Anything Robin gets (postage stamps, toothbrush, shirts, paper, snacks, supplements, etc.) must be ordered through the commissary. Each inmate has an account to which friends may make deposits. To do so, a money order in U.S. funds must be sent to the address above made out to "Robin Long, EPSO". The sender's name must be written on the money order.
4. Send Robin a book
Robin is allowed to receive books which are ordered online and sent directly to him at the county jail from Amazon.com or Barnes and Noble. These two companies know the procedure to follow for delivering books for inmates.


War resisters in Canada also need support and to pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca"). Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote. Now they've started a new letter you can use online here. The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here. Long expulsion does not change the need for action and the War Resisters Support Campaign explains: "The War Resisters Support Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see the take action page for what you can do."

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

Anna Badkhen files from Iraq for Salon. This week she's been reporting on the realities of the "Awakening" Council (aka "Sons Of Iraq," aka "Turncoats For Coins"). On Tuesday, Badkhen reported on an Iraqi who discovered grenades in Baghdad but didn't feel he could say anything: "If I tell the Iraqi police or the Sons of Iraq they will tell the wrong people, and I will be killed. I don't trust them. If I tell the Americans, they'll tell no one how they found about the grenades." Wednesday she reported on the "Awakening" Council members quoting US Lt Justin Chabalko explaining, "When the SOIs [Sons of Iraq] stood up, we were basically hiring terrorists." Badkhen observes:

The Sons of Iraq was formed in 2007, when Sunni tribal leaders, tired of violence and disillusioned with Islamic fundamentalists such as al-Qaida in Iraq, encouraged tribal members -- including some former militia members -- to guard Sunni and mixed neighborhoods against takeover by sectarian gangs. The Americans touted the creation of the Sons of Iraq as a major diplomatic success and agreed to finance the organization, paying each member a monthly salary of $300, despite the protests from the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government, which never liked the idea of legitimizing the Sunni-dominated fighting force.
The force helped quell the Sunni insurgency in Baghdad and in Iraq's tribal heartlands, such as the restive Anbar province. But what a year ago looked like a brilliant solution to sectarian violence is now looking like a time bomb. Many of the force's members once fought alongside al-Qaida in Iraq and other Sunni insurgency organizations against American troops and the predominantly Shiite Iraqi security forces. And now, a joint U.S.-Iraqi government plan to disband the force could put up to 80,000 men out of work -- and leave them armed and disgruntled.

April 8th, as The Crocker and Petraeus Variety Hour performed before Congress, US Senator Barbara Boxer pointed to reports that Nouri al-Maliki wouldn't put "half of them" onto the Iraqi security forces out of concerns about their loyalty and Boxer pointed out the US was buying their loyalty at $182 million a year, $18 million a month and wondered "Why don't you ask the Iraqis to pay the entire costs of that program?" A question worth asking then and now. Yochi J. Dreazen (Wall St. Journal) reports today that, "The U.S. military was supposed to be out of the employment business by now. When it introduced the Sons of Iraq initiative last year, senior commanders expected the local security personnel to be hired gradually into the ranks of the Iraqi army and police. But Iraq's Shiite-dominated central government has balked at the idea of bringing so many young Sunni men -- including many onetime militants -- into the country's fledging security forces. Less than 20% of the roughly 103,000 Sons of Iraq had been given government jobs as of early June. That has left U.S. forces responsible for employing -- and paying -- the Iraqis." Sudarsan Raghavan and Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) report on the "Awakening" Councils today and notes the tensions escalating as people think of elections: "The National Front and other onetime insurgent groups will join a bitter struggle for power between established Sunni politicians of the Iraqi Islamic Party and upstart leaders of the Sahwa, or 'Awakening' council, a U.S.-backed tribal alliance whose popularity has grown following its success in combating the group al-Qaeda in Iraq. 'Entering the elections is to change the current reality in our area, the domination of the Sunni spectrum by the Iraqi Islamic party,' said Effan al-Issawi, the top Awakening commander in Falluja. 'They are unworthy of leading the Sunnis'." No, it doesn't sound like 'peace,' now does it? That's what you get when you put thugs on the payroll and that was the intent, as US Secretary of State Condi Rice made clear in an interview this week where she referred to "Sons of Iraq in Anbar" as part of Gen Petraues' "smart counterinsurgency strategy".

This week the Iraqi Parliament adjourned their special session with no agreement on provincial elections which most analysts believe make it impossible for the elections to be held in October and others state it is impossible to hold elections this year period. Yesterday, the US State Dept was asked for comment on the development. Acting Deputy Spokesperson Gonazlo R. Gallegos replied as follow: "I believe I have something. Okay. We continue to urge the Council of Representatives to seek a compromise that can be adopted promptly. We regret that the Iraqi Parliament adjourned yesterday without finishing its work on a local elections law. The parliamentarians have made great strides towards finishing the closing agreement on most of the more difficult issues. We recognize that the election law brought to the floor important questions regarding the status of Kirkuk. The status of Kirkuk is, indeed a sensitive issue that needs to be addressed in a serious fashion, but it is an issue that cannot be solved through the legislative mechanism of the eleciton law. The election law should not be held hostage to that problem." Gallegos was also asked by the treaties the White House is attempting to negotiate with the puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki -- popularly and wrongly called SOFA. "Updates on the SOFA," Gallegos stalled. "My understanding is that they're continuing. I don't have anything particular to say about the process right now. We haven't discussed those publicly before. I'm not going to here. As we said, we'll provide you with details when we get through with this." Asked for an estimate of when such an agreement might be reached, Gallegos replied, "I would not be prepared to provide a timeline for that." Actually, the White House provided a timeline -- they stated the negotiations would be completed July 31st. [Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports on rumors of a deal being reached.] Meanwhile Mark Kukis (Time magazine) explains, "Shi'ite militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr stepped back into Iraq's political fray Friday with an offer that (if genuine) Washington would be hard-pressed to refuse: Set a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, and the Mahdi Army will begin to disband. 'The main reason for the armed resistance is the American miltiary presence,' said Sadr emissary Salah al-Ubaidi, who spoke to reporters in Najaf Friday. 'If the American military begins to withdrawal, there will be no need for these armed groups'." Ali al-Mashakheel and Nick Schifrin (ABC News) point out that al-Sadr's cease-fire/freeze "was one of the main reasons that violence in Iraq has dropped to the lowest levels in four years for both civilians and trooops."

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Tal Afar car bombing that claimed 18 lives and left twenty people wounded. Reuters notes the number wounded has already risen to twenty-five.

Turning to the United States presidential campaign. Ralph Nader visist Canada Monday:

Ralph Nader to speak on Monday August 11, on the trading floor of old Toronto Stock Exchange building.
Please circulate and post widely.
Event also features partial screening of the biographical documentary, An Unreasonable Man.
Now at over 5 percent in national polls, Nader is on his third run for President of the United States.
Find out why he runs and what's at stake for Canada this election.
Ralph Nader is the only major candidate for President of the United States standing up to implement Canadian-style universal healthcare, a Dion-style Carbon Tax, and ending the war in Iraq with a full 6-month withdrawal. Over ten million Americans say they will vote for him, and another 20 million say they would if they thought he had a chance of winning. He's on track to be on the ballot in 45 states, and has a shot at getting in the Google Presidential Debates to be held in New Orleans this September. Come see him this Monday August 11 at the Design Exchange in Downtown Toronto.
Event Program:
Screening of a portion of An Unreasonable Man, the acclaimed documentary on Ralph Nader
Ralph Nader Remarks on the US Presidential Election: What's at stake for Canada?
Q and A with Ralph Nader
Where: Design Exchange, 234 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario M5K 1B2.
Time: 7:00 to 9:30 pm
Ticket Price: Free, donations appreciated, RSVP to ensure seating.
To RSVP, email toronto@votenader.org or call Rashi Khilnani at 647 286 0396 for more details.


A huge section (regarding NPR) just got pulled because the snapshot's way too long. That will be carried over to Third for Sunday but the transition is now lost so just pretend that Nader, Bob Barr and Cynthia McKinney were just discussed. Adam Kokesh participated in last month's farce of an impeachment hearing and wrote about it at his site, "I was pleasantly surprised when I learned that Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Bob Barr would be testifying. He didn't disappoint. He made a great opening statement about 'Preserving Constitutional Liberty through Checks and Balances and the Separation of Powers,' but the best part of his testimony was in the second round before questioning. 'What we are facing now is a Constitutional clock, and it is countind own what remains of the Constitution of this great land. I might ask then to introduce for the record the disappearing Bill of Rights. This is the Bill of Rights that we as members of the Judiciary Committee know [he holds up a copy of the Bill of Rights] as adopted in 1791. [he flips it over to reveal a copy of the Bill of Rights that is largely redacted] This is what it is fast becoming.' You know it's a sad day when a former Congressman has to submit the Bill of Rights for the record in a Congressional hearing!" Kokesh shares many of his observations in the post and also includes Barr's written statement to the committee. The hearing was a farce. As Kokesh points out the Democrats "seemed to be really trying to make case for their won party's reelection. They failed. As petulant and petty as the Republicans were throughout the hearing, Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, the ranking Republican, hit the nail on the head: 'It seems that we are hosting an anger management class. This hearing will not cause us to impeach the president; it will only serve to impeach Congress's credibility.' The Democrats have become a sorry excuse for an opposition party. I don't think any of the many potentially deserving members of the Bush Administration will ever be impeached for the same reason that we didn't have impeachment hearings today or even months ago. The Democrats are just as corrupt, and complicit. Spineless Democrats are Neocon Appeasers and the blood is on their hands too." He goes on to predict that voters will be driven to the Libertarian Party (Bob Barr is the Libertarian Party's presidential nominee). The entire post is worth reading in full. Adam Kokesh is, of course, an Iraq War veteran and the co-chair of IVAW. His remarks are him writing for himself. IVAW is a diverse and growing group committed to ending the illegal war but it does not require that members belong to one political party (or any). Nor do they confuse their organization with a get-out-the-vote movement; instead, they are bringing an end to the illegal war.

Matt Gonzalez is Ralph Nader's running mate. He and Ralph spoke at Sebastopol on Sunday and NPR didn't consider that 'news' apparently. A real broadcast journalist did. Which is why Bonnie Faulkner devoted the hour of her KPFA Wednesday show to providing the voices shut out by the media. Yesterday we noted some of Ralph's speech and we'll note some of Matt's speech today. Bonnie Faulkner hosts Guns and Butter, [Here for KPFA archive.] Matt is speaking of how he and Ralph recently held a campaign event in Austin, Texas.

Matt Gonzalez: It was vey interesting to see that the weekly newspaper sort of put an ad about our appearance and they wrote something like, "Maybe Ralph will apologize for the last eight years?" And, you know, I thought -- I thought it was amusing sort-of, but then I started getting angry about it and i thought to myself, "Well wait a second, who should be apologizing? Who's voted for this war? Who voted for the Patriot Act? Who supports all these appropriations? Who supports the FISA bill?" I mean at some point there has to be responsibility taken for these positions. And this idea that it all belongs at the feet of Ralph Nader is just so absurd that it's insulting to our intelligence. The war in Iraq is probably one of the ugliest things we've ever engaged in. Nancy Pelosi told us, 'Elect me the Speaker [of the House of Representatives] and I'll get you out of the war.' Well I want you to know when she was not the speaker we put $116 billion into the war. She became the Speaker January of 2007, that amount went up by $50 billion. $50 billion more. From $116 to $165. This year, it went up to $189 -- so another $20 billion on top of that. What's wrong with our country? What's wrong with our opposition party that they can -- with a straight face -- tell you that the problem with this country is that candidates who hold views different than the ones that they hold are somehow not allowed to engage in the democratic process and not allowed to get out there and try to get our ideas out? Ralph Nader and I are fighting to end the war in Iraq. We want single-payer health care. We want to reform the Taft-Hartley law that has really taken the strength out of labor -- that's essentially outlawed general strikes, jurisdictional strikes, secondary boycotts, all kinds of things the labor movement can't do anymore. Now when I think about what was the problem in 2000 I'm just awestruck that so little has been done to cure the problem that we have in this democracy. Two things happened. We let somebody get announced and declared the president of the United States who got less votes than one of the other candidates. And we let someone be declared the winner who didn't even have the majority of the vote. Now we're all intelligent people, we can figure out how we would fix this problem: We would mandate that the winner would have to get over 50% of the vote. That would be that. How complicated is that? How is it that all the brain power in the Democratic and Republican Parties can't figure that out? Well first off for the Democrats, let me say this: "You like to invoke the name Ralph Nader but you never invoke the name Ross Perot who won 19% of the vote and 'elected' Bill Clinton president in 1992 with 43% or less of the vote. Clinton got less percentage of the vote than our current president did in 2000. But you never hear about." So the first thing I want to say is the antiquated line, you know, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. There is a reason why these political parties don't want to change the system. It's not because they don't know how. It's that if they were to change the system, the political spectrum would widen. What's possible in this country would widen. And they would whether have arbitrary outcomes and be in power roughly half the time than to fix the problem and really change American democracy. So if they're not willing to change the problem then aren't we rewarding them when we attack Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez and all the other candidates out there that are trying to talk about the real issues? Now it's astounding to me that Barack Obama likes to say 'Well . . .' -- for his explanation why he can't do the things that need to be done and take the positions that he should take, he likes to say -- 'super heroes don't get elected in politics.' Well, you know, there are no super heroes in the Canadian legislature that passed health care for their citizens. The [US] legislatures that vote against the Patriot Act are not super heroes. They're human beings like we are who believe in due process and equal protection and want a citizenry that isn't at the whim of governmental invasion of privacy. That's -- that's -- it's fundamental. There's a whole group of people out there that are trying to make apologies for the Democratic nominee, saying, 'Well he's only moving to the right now that he's secured the nomination.' It's not true. It's not true. Barack Obama supported the Republican Class Action Reform Law. This was something that David Sirota wrote for The Nation -- and many of their columnists made fun of -- they said 'This is a big business bonaza.' John Kerry voted against it, Hillary Clinton voted against it. The Democratic nominee has always supported limiting pain and suffering damages and medical malpractice cases -- favoring the wealthy in effect, those with good jobs over those with poor ones. He's opposed getting any kind of royalties from the mining of public lands -- the hard rock minerals on public lands. He voted for the Energy Policy Act in 2005 -- a vote that [John] McCain even opposed in 2005 Mobil Exxon, as we all know, has record profits now of over $40 billion a year. In 2005 they had record profits of over $35 billion a year and one of the Chicago newspapers -- in response to Obama's vote for this thing -- pointed out that it was an odd time to be dishing out oil-welfare. You know? Because we were giving tax breaks and subsidies in greater amounts than we were investing money in alternative energy. This is a candidate that opposes gay marriage. He has come out in response to progressives saying 'What are you doing -- what are you talking about with this faith-based initiative stuff?' And you know what he does? He scoffs at progressives and says, 'You have not been listening to me.' Well listen, we are listening to you now. We have listened to you with your FISA vote, with your 'change' on off-shore drilling, with your condemnation of a Supreme Court opinion related to the death penalty and you don't deserve our vote. You're not going to get it. And if you give these candidates your vote, you're guaranteeing that the system stays in place. You're guaranteeing that they can just say one thing to you and change their mind afterwards. One of the most notorious recent things that Obama said that just is astounding relates NAFTA. First off, he's campaigning in the primary and he's saying to everybody, he says 'I don't think NAFTA has been good for Americans and I never have." Well it turns out that an AP writer goes back and look at his -- a guy named Calvin Woodward -- goes back and looks at his Senate campaign in 2004 and guess what? At the time Obama said the US should pursue more deals such as NAFTA and argued that his opponent's calls for tarrifs would spark a trade war. Okay? So now he's against NAFTA, okay? He's in a tight race with Hillary Clinton, he's against NAFTA now, maybe he's figured out that NAFTA has created a scenario where we have displaced millions of Mexican workers, caused the migration to the north because we're subsidizing corn, for instance, dumping it in Mexican markets and ruining their agricultural system. What would you do in that situation? So now he tells -- he's in a fight with Clinton over who's against NAFTA more. He wins the nomination in effect and he gets interviewed by a writer for Fortune magazine, June 18th, Nina Easton, Washington editor, asking him, 'What about NAFTA, you said you would invoke the six month clause to unilaterally get out of it?' He says, 'Well, you know, sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified." So he went from calling it devastating and a big mistake to it's just rhetoric. And that's what we're supposed to buy into? We're supposed to buy into political rhetoric because we're not allowed to have better candidates? We're not allowed to have candidates that are saying, "Come on, we can have a better country. We can change this around"? The Democrats . .. You know, if voting for complacency and capitulation and appeasement worked, I would advocate it. It's not working. It's just not working. And notice they tell us 'If we can just have this, we'll win. If we can just have this next thing, we'll change everything.' I love how these US Senators run around and say, "Well if I were president the home morgate crisis wouldn't have happened and the oil prices wouldn't be what they are." You've been in the United States Senate, what the hell have you been doing there? Why do we have to elect -- give you a promotion, when you're asleep on the job. Right? Now you counter that, you counter that with Ralph Nader's history of achieving legislative accomplishments as an outsider. How does his record match up against Senator McCain's and Senator Obama's? Right? I mean Freedom of Information Act, Clean Air, Clean Water, all the automotive work, all the consumer protection work. a lifetime of trying to wake up the American public to stand up and fight back and not to take this anymore. Right? Imagine what it is to go into a progressive town and have a progressive publication say "Maybe they'll apologize for the last eight years?" It's really gross. It's not the way to treat Americans participating in a democracy trying to tell people, 'Come on, let's try to fix this.' I want to just close by making reference to the historical examples I think are important to keep in mind. There were candidates in the past that people said, "Don't vote for them. You're throwing your vote away if you vote for them. You know people like Eugene Debbs who ran for president a number of times and, you know, he thought we should have the forty-hour work week, you know? He thought women should be allowed to vote. Imagine that? The radical concept that women were 'advanced enough' intellectually and 'mature enough' that they could vote. This was actually a discussion in our society and it was Eugene Debbs that was saying "Yes." And maybe he got 6% of the vote, the best he ever did was 6%. So if you had lived in that time and somebody had said, "Don't vote for Eugene Debbs, you're throwing your vote away" -- what would you have said to them? Now with this historical lens to look back. How do we break through things? And you go even further back, you go to the Liberty Party of the 1840s James Birney advocating abolition of slavery. He can get 1% of the vote. You're throwing your vote away if you vote for him apparently. Well I don't believe that and I hope that you don't. I think it takes a lot of courage to be someone like Ralph Nader who is being attacked for standing up in a democracy and trying to articulate views that the other candidates are essentially throwing away, rejecting, you know? And I think we are at that historical moment are we going to vote for what we believe in or are we just going to keep buying into rhetoric about "hope" and "change" that it's already been proven to us is false? Thank you.

Team Nader notes:

This is it.
Our accounting team has decided to cut off our primary season online donations this Monday.
This means no more matching funds from the federal government after this weekend.
If you've already contributed, but have yet to donate up to $250, then this is your last chance to bump it up to $250 and have it matched.
If you haven't donated at all this is your last chance to have your contribution -- up to $250 -- doubled.
If you give $50, the government will give us $50.
If you give $100, the government will give us $100.
If you give us $250, the government will give us $250.
But we are running out of time.
We need you to do two things now:
One -- forward this urgent matching funds call to action to everyone you know.
And two -- make your donations double by giving up to $250 right now.
Our green eye shade people tell us it's time to shift to the general campaign.
It's time for Ralph to mount his 50 state campaign. It's time to mount an effort to get Ralph in the debates.
And whatever our green eye shade people tell us to do, we do.
So, here we go.
Time is running out.
Hit the button now.
And double your money, double our possibilities.
And after you hit contribute, sit back and watch Ralph Nader later today on C-Span.
Ralph will be discussing his plan to empty the prisons of non-violent drug offenders and fill them with corporate criminals at a 10am EST press conference. (Click here for C-span daily TV schedule.)
And remember, for a contribution of $100 or more to our campaign between now and Sunday night, we will send to you an autographed copy of Ralph's rousing call to arms -- Civic Arousal and a copy of No Debate -- the classic expose of the corporate control of the Presidential debates.
So, donate now.
We'll ship you the books.
And sit back and watch Ralph on C-Span.
Together, we are making a difference.
Onward



iraqrobin long
adam kokeshleila fadelmcclatchy newspapersthe washington postsudarsan raghavanerensto londono
anna badkhen
ali al-mashakheelnick schifrin
kpfabonnie faulknerguns and butter

Garlic Soup in the Kitchen

The request this week was for a soup recipe. Tomato soup is being made in a lot of kitchens across the country because it's simple and inexpensive. However, three e-mails came in asking if I knew a simple recipe that was also inexpensive

Garlic Soup
3 tablespoons of olive oil
1 cup of cubed bread (or croutons)
2 large cloves of garlic
1 teaspoon of paprkia
1/2 teaspoon of cayenne
5 cups broth
2 eggs slighty beaten
2 tablespoons mince parsley
salt and pepper to taste

You need a medium or large pan. In the pan, you will heat the olive oil over a medium setting on the stove. You will then add the bread cubes (or croutons) and brown them (if using croutons, you'll just be warming them). Mince garlic and add to the skillet. Saute the garlic and bread/croutons for three minutes. Remove about three-quarters of the bread/croutons and let cool on a plate. To the pan, add paprika, cayenne and the broth. You can use chicken broth, you can use beef broth, you can use vegetable broth. I think the recipe tastes best with 1/2 chicken and 1/2 broth. Bring the contents of the pan to a quick boil (turn the heat to the highest setting). Once the soup boils, turn off the burner and move pan to a cool burner. Add the eggs (slightly beaten means you crack them into a bowl and then whisk around the yolks and whites quickly -- this is what you add). After you add the eggs, quickly add the parsley, then the pepper and salt while stirring. Cover the pan for five minutes. Remember the croutons you set aside? Add a few to each empty bowl. Ladel soup into the bowl and top with a few croutons for each bowl.

That is a very simple soup. If you're not big on garlic, try it once and see. This isn't a garlicy-tasting soup.

By trying it early, if you like it, you can introduce it as a regular staple for dinners. And you'll be ready with something warm when the heat vanishes with summer.

The New York Times had two interesting stories on the economy this week. One was on the shift in the labor force (by employers) of full-time workers to part-time. As people struggle to make ends meet, a reduction in hours (with no additional pay increase) is of no help to anyone but the bosses. The hope is that when the economy lifts again (if it does), employers will already have employees to move to full time and won't have to bother with mass hirings. It's always about what benefits the employers. The second story was pretty frightening. All week, I was talking to friends and feeling like I was being alarmist. Then I spoke with C.I. on the phone and was told about a story I missed. Bennigans is no more, foreclosed, bankrupted, whatever. And other restaurant chains were suffering and teetering. Eating out is an expendable. People are eating out less. The third story was on the hotel industry. At the start of the decade, business was good so many hotels planned expansions and many new hotels were being built. We are not in 'good' times and the occupancy rate is very poor.

When I read the second story, I was alarmed. C.I.'s the only one who shared that alarm and applied the hotel story. As C.I. said, "Well we're living here in Allentown." In reference to the Billy Joel song "Allentown."

Well we're living here in Allentown
And they're closing all the factories down
Out in Bethlehem they're killing time
Filling out forms
Standing in line
Well our fathers fought the Second World War
Spent their weekends on the Jersey Shore
Met our mothers in the USO
Asked them to dance
Danced with them slow
And we're living here in Allentown
But the restlessness was handed down
And it's getting very hard to stay
Well we're waiting here in Allentown
For the Pennsylvania we never found
For the promises our teachers gave
If we worked hard
If we behaved
So the graduations hang on the wall
But they never really helped us at all
No they never taught us what was real
Iron and coke
And chromium steel
And we're waiting here in Allentown
But they've taken all the coal from the ground
And the union people crawled away

The song continues. I had forgotten about the song, honestly. And we have that on vinyl. I'm sure, knowing my husband, we have Billy Joel on CDs -- best ofs, boxed sets.

But when C.I. pulled that as a reference, it illustrated it for me perfectly, why I was so alarmed. Billy Joel wrote that song during the Reagan years and we were seeing towns swallowed up. Some really did not come back.

Where ever you live, imagine you live in a small city and there is one Bennigans and one hotel. The rising price of gas and the lousy economy means people are cutting back. The Bennigans is now no more. Travel is down so hotel occupancy is down.

The people working at Bennigans -- the wait staff, the bartenders, the hostesses, the managers are now all out of work. With occupancy down in hotels, some people ar being laid off. Or maybe full time workers are 'gifted' with part-time hours. That's housekeepers, janitors, clerks . . . Probably everyone but management.

That's bad for your city. That alone is bad for your city.

However, it doesn't end there. Those people who are out of work or on reduced hours spend less because they have less to spend. That effects your grocery store, it effects everything. If you lose your Bennigans, you lose some or all of your local traffic from the areas immediately surrounding your city. The areas further away aren't coming in. As a result, other businesses can close.

As C.I. and Ava have been pointing out repeatedly for the last nearly four years, it's a Bully Boy economy and now the people are really starting to feel that. But it's only going to get worse. You've got clothing store chains closing. These are not isolated closings. It goes to the systems that support and fuel the economy.

Who is addressing this on the campaign trail? I'm not seeing anyone but Ralph Nader. Barack's pretty words aren't going to put food on the table or money in the bank.

I'm voting for Ralph. I do believe he will fix the country. I am not sure how many people will be voting for him but I know I will. (And my family.) But it really drives home how much the 'leadership' in the Democratic Party (and all the useless people like Katrina vanden Heuvel) have failed the people. Hillary Clinton is a nuts and bolts, roll up the sleeves and get to work candidate. With her as the nominee, we would have someone working for us. We would have had someone who would have been a work horse. Barack tires on the campaign trail and starts whining about his waffles. He's had two vacations already since January and is planning another in August. Sound familiar? I believe his twin-brother is currently in the White House.

We needed someone who could lead and who could work. Barack cannot do either of those things. The Democrats are putting up a motivational speaker who should be confined to taping late-night infomercials. The worker was run off. She wasn't good enough for leadership even though she was the choice of the people.

I don't think Barack can get elected. I could be wrong, but I don't think he can.

If he loses, we need to remember all the people who destroyed the candidate with experience and a willingness to work.

Here's some of the names on my list that I will hold responsible:

Barack Obama
Nancy Pelosi
Howard Dean
Donna Brazile
Jesse Jackson, Jr.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Laura Flanders
Matthew Rothschild
Robert Parry
Robert Scheer
Ari Berman
Alexander Cockburn
Betsy Reed
Amy Goodman
Jeremy Scahill
Norman THE LIAR Solomon
Ruth Conniff

Sadly, there are many, many more names that can be added to that list.

This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Friday:


Friday, August 1, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Nouri al-Maliki makes like Pretty Woman on Rodeo Drive, Ralph Nader continues taking his campaign to the people, Kirkuk sees increased tension, and more.

Starting with war resistance, Jan Slakov (BCLocalNews) proposed ways to prepare for peace this week and the second step was: "Welcome war resisters: Former U.S. President John F. Kennedy once said: 'War will exist until that distant day when the CO [conscientious objector] enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today.' A majority of Canadian MPs understand this, and voted on June 3 to allow U.S. soldiers who object to the 'war on terror' on conscientious grounds to stay in Canada. However, the Conservative government is ignoring the will of these deserters to be deported to face punishment in the U.S." The Conservative government and conservative shills like Rondi Adamson who offers a string of lies in the Christian Science Monitor. In fact, Rondi's piece should be titled "No Lie Left Untold." Rondi admits Canada took in "draft dodgers" during Vietnam but forgets to note they also took in deserters. Rondi forgets to note the popular (or Parliament) support in Canada for war resisters. From the July 1st snapshot: "The Angus Reid Poll finds: 'A majority of Canadians would agree with the decision to let American military deserters stay in Canada as permanent residents, a new Angus Reid Strategies survey reveals. . . In the online survey of a representative national sample, three-in-five Canadians (64%) say they would agree to give these U.S. soldiers the opportunity to remain in Canada as permanent residents. Quebec (70%) houses the highest proportion of respondents who agree with the motion, while Alberta (52%) has the fewest supporters. A gender breakdown reveals that while both males and females would agree to let U.S. military deserters remain in Canada, females are much more sympathetic (69% versus 57%)'." And Rondi is apparently confessing that Canadians spat on US soldiers during Vietnam. That LIE has long been disproven in the US but apparently, Rondi wants us to believe it happened in Canada.

War resisters in Canada need your help. To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca"). Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote. Now they've started a new letter you can use online here. The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here. Long expulsion does not change the need for action and the War Resisters Support Campaign explains: "The War Resisters Support Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see the take action page for what you can do."

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


Turning to Iraq where puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki sits on a ton of money and spends it when he feels like on what he wants. Edmond Lococo and Gopal Ratnam (Bloomberg News) report, "Iraq is seeking to buy $10.9 billion in weapons and services from U.S. defense contractors including General Dynamics Corp,, Boeing Co., Textron Inc. and Raytheon Co. to 'establish security and stablity' throughout the country." It's been a busy week for the puppet -- a regular spending spree. The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency started the week with the announcement that they "notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of Armored Security Vehicles as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $206 milliion." Wednesday included "The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of Light Armored Vehicles as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $3 billion" and "The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of technical assistance for construction of facilities and infrastructure as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $1.6 billiion" and "The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of Helicopters and related munitions as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $2.4 billion." Thursday brought this announcement, "The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Iraq of M1A1 and Upgrade to M1A1M Abrams Tanks as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $2.16 billion."

This spending spree takes place as Selcan Hacaoglu (AP) reports on sewage treatment plant in Bahgdad that ("nearly three years later") is still nothing but a shell: "Raw sewage is still flowing freely through giant pipes into the Tigris River, ending up in some of the capital's drinking water. And those pipes are hardly the only source of contamination. Many residents only have to sniff the tap water to know something is not right. . . . Two-thirds of the raw sewage produced in the capital flows untreated into rivers and waterways, Stuart Bowen, special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, said in his quarterly report released Wednesday."

Tensions continue to flare over Kirkuk. The October provincial elections are thought to be pushed back (at least) over the efforts in the Parliament to include aspects (force through) to do with Kirkuk. That led to a mass walk out of Kurdish Parliamentarians last month. A special session will be held Sunday to attempt to address the issue of provincial elections. Now Kurdish leaders in Kirkuk (an ethnically diverse, oil-rich city that the Kurdish region wants to absorb) are stating that it will become part of Kurdistan. DPA notes that the demand came on Friday as did an attempted assassination via bombing of Kirkuk's police chief Jamal Taher. KHalid al-Ansary (Reuters) notes that the puppet government is Baghdad is insisting on calm and order. Not only is that not working, neighbors are noticing. Alsumaria reports, "Kirkuk issue takes the upper hand in Iraq's politics while Turkey has showed interest in the issue after Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al Maliki received a phone call from Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan who expressed his concern over Kurds demand to join Kirkuk to Kurdistan."

Meanwhile Sabrina Tavernise and Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) reported this morning, "The American military disclosed on Thursday that soldiers had killed three unarmed people during an operation northwest of Samarra on Wednesday, and injured a fourth. Ali Salih Jubarah, a spokesman for Salahuddin Province, the region where the killings occurred, said that Dahia Hussein and her two sons, Ali Jassim and Muhammad Jassim, all civilians, were killed during a raid on a house. He identified the injured person as Ms. Hussein's daughter, Sabeiha Jassim."

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing that claimed 1 life and left two people wounded and a Kirkuk roadside bombing that claimed the lives of 3 Iraqi soldiers and left a fourth wounded. AP reports, "Two suicide bombers detonated their explosive vests Friday wounding three Iraqi soldiers north of Baghdad during a raid".

Shootings?

Reuters notes an armed clash in Dhuluiya that claimed 4 lives.

Corpses?

Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered in Kut.

Turning to the US presidential race. "He's a lot more optimistic than me, I can tell you," Jurgen Vsych explains of Ralph Nader to Jan Baughman (Swans Commentary). "That's one thing that we used to fight about, because I'm, I wouldn't say pound-for-pound I'm a total pessimist, but I am pretty pessimistic about a lot of things in the economy and the political successes, he has lots of success stories to tell, although I don't know, I guess because a lot of his work has been undone, systematically undone by dergulation, so how he keeps his spirits up I don't know -- I really don't." Jurgen Vsych is a filmmaker (including Ralph Nader Crashes The Two Parties) and check out the website she's creating entitled Nader Tube & Ralph Nader Radio. Jugen Vsych has also written the book What Was Ralph Nader Thinking? which Baughman reviews here. Speaking at the Dominican University in February of last year, a man complained, "But we all know you don't have a snow ball's chance in hell of getting elected." Ralph replied, to the hearty approval of those present, "How about in heaven?"

"Are you a sports fan? Do you know any sports player who gives up?" Lisa Riley Roche (Desert News) quotes Ralph Nader saying at a news conference in Salt Lake City this morning. Nader was in Utah capitol on a campaign stop that began Thursday evening when he spoke at the University of Utah. Introducing him, former Salt Lake City mayor Rocky Anderson explained, "This whole nation needs to be turned around. We're not going to do it with the Democrats saying, 'We'll get around to it someday'." Speaking to the crowd of over 400, Ralph Nader wondered, "Do you realize there is no discernible breaking point for the American people? We're headed for a cliff . . . where's the breaking point?" He added, "If none of us have breaking points, none of us have a moral compass." Robert Gehrke (Salt Lake Tribune) reports that "Nader filed paperwork putting himself on the ballot in Utah" this morning and quotes Ralph stating, "This country is not owned by the two major parties. They don't own the voters. There is not even the word 'party' in the Constitution. There isn't even the word 'corporation' in the Constitution, and yet these two institutions have run our country into the ground and are tearing the heart and soul out of America." Salt Lake City's KSL reported on the press conference this morning (link has video as well as a text article written by Richard Piatt):

Tonya Papanikolas: Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader is officially a candidate here in Utah.

Scott Haws: Yeah, he's trying to get the word out with a limited budget and minimal support but at a news conference this morning, he was not afraid to take on the big guys. Richard Piatt was there and joins us with more. Rich?

Richard Piatt: Well, as you know Scott, Ralph Nader has been taking on the big guys for forty years now, starting with General Motors in the 1960s, you'll recall he successfully got a car called the Corvair pulled off the market. These days, in his seventies, he is just as entergetic. And he's diligent about running for president this time again. Nader registered as an official presidential candidate in Utah at the lieutenant governor's office this morning. He called his rivials John McCain and Barack Obama "corporate candidates." He appeared with former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson at a news conference this morning. Nader says the average American tax payer is not being served by the status quo. Unfair tax policies, inadequate health care options and gridlock in Congress are among the problems he sees. He says voters need a more diverse campaign. But he points out that he is being excluded from most of the major presidential debates, furthering what he calls a "corporate candidate quagmire."

Ralph Nader: The two parties have spoiled our elections. They've spoiled our government. They've spoiled our political system. And they've turned our government over to big businness that's about the worst constitutional crime you can imagine.

Richard Piatt: Nader has been labeled a spoiler in the past, depriving other candidates, like John Kerry, of votes by defusing the support. But according to a Dan Jones poll in May here in Utah, Nader barely registers in Utah this year. The poll showed Nader with only 2 percent of the 604 statewide voters at that time in May. Even so, he refuses to see himself as a spoiler or even a bad candidate. Instead, he says he's the only candidate who . . . is a real alternative. Nader is scheduled to appear next in Davis, Calif., on Saturday for a rally with his running mate Matt Gonzalez. Back to you.



The Nader-Gonzalez '08 campaign (Matt Gonzalez is Ralph's running mate) has been keeping a very busy schedule and some of the upcoming events include:

Sat. August 2nd, 8:00pmNader for President 2008 Rally w/ Matt GonzalezDavis, CAVarsity Theater616 Second St., Davis, CA 95616Contributions $10/ $5 student(530) 554-8250 or events@votenader.orgMap it
Sun. August 3rd, 1:30pm Nader for President 2008 Rally w/ Matt Gonzalez Sebastopol, CA Sebastopol Community Center 390 Morris St., Sebastopol, CA 95472 Contribution $10/$5 student (415) 897-6989 or events@votenader.org Map it
Sun Aug. 3rd, 4:30pm Ralph Nader Book Signing and Speech w/ Matt Gonzalez Healdsburg, CA Copperfield's books 104 Matheson St., Healdsburg, CA 95448 (707) 235-1026 or events@votenader.org Map it
Sun Aug. 3rd, 7:30pm Nader for President 2008 Rally w/ Matt Gonzalez Kentfield, CA (Marin) College of Marin- Olney Hall 835 College Ave., Kentfield, CA Contribution $10/$5 students (415) 897-6989 or events@votenader.org Map it

We'll return to the topic of Nader shortly but expanding the focus to other contenders includes noting a surprise failure to stick to the attack plan on John McCain by the Democratic Party. Last week David Brancaccio (NOW on PBS) interviewed former Democratic presidential hopeful (and 2004 Democratic vice-presidential candidate) John Edwards. From the exchange:

BRANCACCIO: Have you had occasion to talk to the candidates left standing about your poverty proposals?EDWARDS: Yes, yes I have. Well, before I got out of the race, I talked to Obama and Clinton at the time about some very specific things, which for now I'll keep private. But I got very specific commitments from them about making poverty central to their campaign, making it central to their presidency. And some very specific substantive ideas behind that. I've also spoken to McCain. It's a little harder with him.BRANCACCIO: But you've talked to McCain about these poverty issues.EDWARDS: I have I have. I know John McCain very well. Served with him. Traveled around the world with him. It's a little tough because I'm supporting his opponent in the presidential race and doing it vigorously. (some laughs) But having said that, while he doesn't agree with a lot of the policy issues that I'm behind, he's been receptive to the concept that this is something we have to do something about.


John McCain is the presumed GOP presidential nominee. McCain is currently in the news for his refusal to allow Barack to play the race card. Before we get to that, McCain spoke this week in Nevada and Susan (Random Thoughts) attended and has posted video of the event at her site. This week, Barack was speaking on his favorite topic . . . himself. As usual Vanity Sux couldn't shut up about how great he thinks he is. As usual he tried to link McCain to the current White House occupant because, when you have no record to run on, you use the same desperate tactics that the illegal war was sold on (false links). So Barack declared that McCain and Bully Boy were going to say of Barack (because Barack wants the WHOLE WORLD talking about him), "he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollars bills." First off, Barack IS NOT PRESIDENT. "HE DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ALL THOSE OTHER PRESIDENTS ON THE DOLLAR BILLS"? Barack, you ARE NOT president. Joseph (Cannonfire) explains, "McCain never said anything about Obama's patriotism or his name, and he certainly never said anything about race. Yet the Obots actually have defended this rhetoric. They applaud their candidate for running against a hallucinated line of attack." Marcia weighed in, "Barack has played the race card non-stop throughout his run. As an African-American, I know what the bi-racial blunder's doing, he's trying to egg up support from the African-American community. He's trying to turn us into his street team. His 'okey doke' and all of that other bull was an attempt back in the primaries. It is the only card he has left to play and it's not going to play in a general election." Silly Barack declared today, "There was nobody there who thought at all that I was trying to inject race in this" because, apparently, none of our presidents have had two ears, two eyes, one mouth and one nose. Is that what Barack's trying to say? Or was he trying to draw attention -- yet again -- to his 'divine' figure? is he running to become the bulimic president? Barack's Cult has trouble with facts so that probably sailed over them. Yesterday Martha and Rebecca both called out the factually challenged Barack groupie at VIBE.

Tonight (in most markets) on PBS, Bill Moyers Journal continues exploring Capitol Crime with an increased focus on the Abramoff Congressional-lobbyist scandals. NOW on PBS examines the case of Ted Stevens, US Senator from Alaska now under indictment. And on Washington Week, Gwen and the gas bags chews up this week's factoids and the scenery. Guest stars include: Time's Karen Tumulty and National Journal's James Barnes.


Finally Team Nader notes:

Good morning.
Here's something you can do right now.
Donate six dollars.
To Nader/Gonzalez.
Why?
Because we're celebrating.
For two reasons.
Number one reason to celebrate: CNN poll from two days ago---Ralph Nader at six percent.
After being totally blocked out from the mainstream media for months.
(This is the fourth major poll putting us at five percent and above. Remember, John Anderson and Ross Perot both got into Presidential debates because they met the then League of Women Voters' threshold of five percent in a number of polls.)
And that's quite remarkable.
Six percent.
With little to no national news coverage.
Number two reason to celebrate: In 2004, we were on only 34 state ballots.
Now, in 2008, thanks to your help, we're heading toward 45 states.
For example, in 2004, we were not on in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, Arizona, and Massachusetts.
But we will be on these states in 2008.
Today, for example, we will turn in more than 53,000 signatures in Pennsylvania. (25,000 valid required.)
So, yes, we are moving on up.
We'll take the six percent in the polls.
And we'd gladly take six percent national coverage from the mainstream media -- to match our most recent poll number.
But no.
To the mainstream corporate media, we're untouchable.
Why?
Because we represent what the majority of Americans want?
Because we favor single payer health insurance?
And Obama and McCain oppose it?
Because we would quickly end the corporate and military occupation of Iraq?
And Obama and McCain wouldn't?
Because we stand for a shift of the power away from the corporations and back into the hands of the American people?
Because we would cut the bloated, wasteful military budget?
Yes, that's why.
Because the corporate media is just doing its job.
Protecting corporate power.
And we are doing ours.
Representing the majority of the American people.
So, they are doing what they must do.
And we are doing what we must do.
So, drop a six spot here now.
And support the campaign that represents the American people.
Against the corporate masters.
And help us reach our new fundraising goal -- $100,000 by August 10.
Thanks to your generous contributions so far, we're a third of the way home.
Let's keep moving on up.
Both to our goal of $100,000 by August 10.
And let's drive our numbers in the polls to seven, eight, nine and ten points and beyond.
So that even the corporate media will have to sit up and take notice.
Together, we are making a difference.
Onward

iraqjan slakov
rondi adamsonwashington weekpbsbill moyer journalnow on pbs
mcclatchy newspapers
the new york timessabrina tavernisesteven lee myers

Meatloaf in the kitchen

What about a meatloaf? That was Becky's suggestion. She's okay financially ("so far"), she writes, but she loves meatloaf and thinks it is an economic recipe. I agree and checked with the readers I know are watching their budgets. They were up for it as well.

You will need 1 pound of ground turkey. You can use 1 pound of ground beef if you'd like. Ground turkey should be less expensive. You will need one medium size onion that you will chop up. You will need two eggs, 2 eight-ounce cans of tomatoe sauce, at least 1 half a loaf of bread, salt and pepper. Tear one half a loaf of sliced bread (white or wheat as you prefer). If you use a full loaf, you'll be stretching the recipe further. In a large bowl, put the bread crumbs you've just made. (You want to tear small.) Add the ground turkey or beef. Add the tomatoe sauce. Crack the eggs and add them. (You can use just the egg whites if you're wathcing your cholestrol count.) Add the onion. With your hands (clean hands), begin working the ingredients in the bowl together. You can imagine that you're making them all into a large bowl, if you'd like.

If you have a glass bread pan (or really any bread pan), you can put the ingredients into one that you've oiled or greased (with butter as grease). If you don't have a bread pan, you can use any oven save dish you have available -- even one you'd use for a casserole. At this point, if you'd like, you can add an additional eight counce can of tomatoe sauce to the top of the meatloaf or some catsup. Bake in a 350 degree oven. It will take at least 30 minutes and may take an hour depending on your oven. You can use a tooth pick or a fork to determine if it's ready. Stick either in and pull out. If the ingredients are gummy or damp, keep cooking.

If you can master that (I think you can and quickly), you can try another variety. Use one pound of your favorite ground sausage.

I use a more in depth and more ingredients meatloaf recipe (I still cook as if all eight children are living at home which allows for left overs but it's honestly because I'm still used to cooking for a large number of people). One time I had all the ingredients and was in the midst of whipping up the meatloaf when I saw that the ground beef looked funny. I smelled it and it didn't smell right. So I tossed it. I was digging around the fridge trying to figure out what else I could make with the ingredients on hand and found some breakfast sausage. I figured I didn't have anything to lose so I went with it.

My meatloaf is popular but this turned out to be even more so. It gave a special flavor to it and there were no left overs.

So you could make this recipe three different ways: ground turkey, ground beef and sausage. You can also dice 1 bell pepper and add that to the mix (in the mixing in the bowl step) for a different flavor.

All the time wasted on Barack's many visits to foreign lands this week sucked the news right out of the cycle. And I wasn't planning on mentioning the for-show trip.
But Barack cancelled a trip to a hospital in Germany where he was supposed to visit wounded U.S. service members. His team is attempting to say it was the Pentagon's doing. From Dan Balz' "Obama Campaign Cancels Visit to U.S. Service Members in Germany" (Washington Post):

The Pentagon said on Friday that it did not prevent an Obama visit.
"Nobody denied Senator Obama the opportunity to visit our wounded being cared for at Landstuhl. Obviously, as a sitting senator, he has an interest in that and can certainly visit in an official capacity," said Bryan Whitman, a spokesman for the Pentagon, who added that there are "restrictions on what you can do as a candidate for political office, that stems from trying to maintain political neutrality and not have the military involved in politics."
"The senator's staff was informed of the limits on what the military can do with respect to a political campaign and how we could support a senator's visit to Landstuhl and, quite frankly, I expected them to have the visit," Whitman said.

Poor Barack. Usually everyone lies for him. But the Pentagon's not going to do that for him and now he's exposed as the man who decided to skip out on wounded service members after he was informed he couldn't turn it into a campaign stop. If a tree falls in the forest when no one is around, did it make a sound? If Barack emotes with no cameras around, he thinks it won't make for a media sound-byte. So it was okay for him to blow off US soldiers. How disgusting is he?

Pretty disgusting. And as C.I. notes in the snasphot, Barack's staff keeps referring to him as the president. Even when reporters point out that he's not the president. Not only is he not the president but until the Democrats hold their convention, he can't even claim to be the nominee.

He's the 'presumptive' nominee. Meaning that people are assuming he is the nominee but he has yet to win the nomination. He's not even received the nomination and his people are calling him the president?

And he's blowing off wounded service members?

Is anyone else noticing the HUGE ego on this person or is it just me?

But it's always been about him. He presents himself as if he's a gift. I'm refusing the package -- unopened.



This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Friday:


Friday, July 25, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Congressional hearings, BonusGate and more.

Starting with war resistance. "When we arrived Al Assad, this was April or the beginning of May 2003," declared Camilo Mejia, "and this is the very beginning of the occupation and this is when we were being told that we had to keep people on sleep deprivation, to psychological torture; the orders came from way up top. Actually the people who were in charge of running these camps were ghost agents, you know, working for the US government. And when the Abu Ghraib scandal came out they tried to tell the American public that, you know, this was an isolated event that had only began in November or December of 2003. And that it was the result of a few people, you know, who one day woke up and, you know, they were evil, when -- in reality, you know from -- from my experience, I can tell you that this was actually something that was coming from the very top and that happened from the very beginning and that it was not isolated to Abu Ghraib but that was happening elsewhere in Iraq from the very beginning of the occupation." Mejia was speaking on PBS two weekends ago and he continued, "Well in the military, we have what is called spooks. And these are people who are highly trained in counterinsurgency. They're highly trained in linguistics and interrogation and weapons systems and things like that. And they don't wear name tags. They don't wear Unit ID badges or anything like that. They . . . [use] pseudonyms and you know they don't respond to anybody in uniform. They -- they basically take their orders from -- from the very top. And they're -- they're untraceable and -- and obviously, you know, they can conduct themselves with absolute impunity. These were people who were giving the commands when we were there -- not our commanders, not the people who belonged to any unit, you know, but basically people with top secret clearance and, you know, who would never be held accountable for any of the things that happened."

The PBS program was Foreign Exchange with Daljit Dhaliwal and Ava and I wrote about that appearance two weeks ago. (And have heard the complaints re: streaming, transcripts, DVDs, et al and we will be noting that in Sunday's TV commentary. But anyone using that link will quickly realize that they can't watch online.) When we noted it previously, we focused on Camilo's rejection of the illegal war. Camilo tell his story in Road to Ar Ramadi: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Camilo Mejia and he is also the chair of Iraq Veterans Against the War. In terms of his place in the resistance of the Iraq War, he was the first Iraq War veteran to publicy oppose the illegal war. As noted earlier this week, "The Unitarian Universalist Service Committee (UUSC), an international human rights organization based in Cambridge, Mass., will be hosting a series of training sessions and workshops at the General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association to be held from Wednesday, June 24 to Sunday, June 29, at the Fort Lauderdale Convention Center, Fort Lauderdale, Florida." Mejia will be a speaker on June 25th as well as on June 28th. More information can be found here."

Though Meija never went Canada during his resisting while in the military, he has been a very vocal supporter and has joined many in calling on the Canadian government to grant safe harbor to US war resisters in Canada. To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca"). Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote. Now they've started a new letter you can use online here. The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here. Long expulsion does not change the need for action and the War Resisters Support Campaign explains: "The War Resisters Support Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see the take action page for what you can do."

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

On Wednesday, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing entitled "VA's Response to the Needs of Returning Guard and Reserve Members" and the most interesting exchange took place at the end of the second panel in the last thirty minutes. The second panel was made up of Dr. Joseph Scotti (West Virginia University), Col Bradley Livinsgton (Director of the Joint Staff, Joint Force Headquarters, Montana National Guard), Lt Col John Boyd (Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel Vermont Army National Guard), Sgt Roy Meredith (Team Leader Maryland Army National Guard) and Maj Cynthia Ramussen (RN, MSN, CANP Combat Stress Officer Sexual Assualt Response Coordinator 88th Regional Readiness Command).

Senator Jay Rockefeller: My first question would appear to be hostile but it's not. Why is it that everybody, but Dr. Scotti, had to say "I'm speaking personally not on behalf of the Reserve, the Guard or the Department of Defense? I really want to know that. Does that mean that they're afraid that you might tell the truth? Does that mean that they are embarrassed by what you might say because their culture is "everything always works and it always works right"? I'd like to know why you have to say that?

Col Bradley Livingston: Sir I might be able to address that because my testimony --

Sen Jay Rockefeller: You can't correct it because you said it --

Col Bradley Livingston: (Overlapping) Correct --

Sen Jay Rockefeller: you can explain it.

Col Bradley Livingston: Okay, I can explain it then. My testimony had not been vetted through DoD and so I --

Sen Jay Rockefeller: Well Isn't that a very good thing?

Col Bradley Livingston: Sir, . . . I was instructed that my testimony had to have that statement put on it, sir.

At "I was instucted," everyone burst into laughter including Livingston.

Sen Jay Rockefeller: You see, I can understand that I'm -- I've got so many questions, I don't even know where to begin. I can understand that if you're from the Department of Transportation. If you come back from the kind of experiences that you've all come back from your testimony, Major Rasmussen, probably was the best I've ever heard here and I've been on this committee for 24 years. I -- it just -- it just breeds a sense of suspicion. Not at you but in them. They got to be "right." You didn't vet it with them. Therefore, you're dangerous. You're telling the truth, you're telling the truth like few people ever do before this committee. One of the -- one of the problems in fact is that when -- when the VA and other people come before this committee we know that everything they've said has been vetted. So there's no real reason for us to listen particularly careful to them because we know that it's not necessarily what they think. You're telling us what you think. And therefore, you're real. You really help us. This is superb help to us just at the time that the whole care of veterans has become -- along with global warming -- one of the two top issues for the entire Congress because it's like we've suddenly rediscovered you. Our own guilt, our own mistake, regardless of political party or anything else going back over many years. And there are reasons for that but I won't go into them. It annoys me that you have to say that because it implies that if you didn't, you'd get in trouble. And that makes me angry.

We'll come back to the second panel but Les Blumenthal (McClatchy Newspapers) reported on the first panel when the committee learned that the VA "failed to send benefit packages to nearly 37,000 National Guard and Reserve members" who served in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars which had Senator Patty Murray pointing out, "While the VA has targeted outreach programs in place to help service members, we still miss far too many veterans who need help and aren't aware of the services and benefits they have earned." You may remember Iraq Veterans Against the War Winter Soldier Investigation in March. From the March 17th snapshot:

The panel on The Crisis in Veterans' Healthcare followed. Adrienne Kinee spoke on that panel and a correction to Friday's snapshot: Kinne did not state that, "The best preventative healthcare . . . for our soldiers in uniform is to not use them to fight illegal wars"; she stated, "The best prevantative healthcare . . . for our soldiers in uniform is to not use them to fight illegal occupations in the first place." Kinne testified about serving in the military, discharging in 1998 and then enlisting again and discharging during the Iraq War. The differences she saw were immense. The first time she left the US military, she found a great deal of help and resources, people helped her with her paperwork, they advised her of her benefits and assisted her in a smoother transition to civilian life. By contrast, when she discharged during the Iraq War, she was provided no help, no assistance and something as simple as having a physical would require that she live on a base for four to six more weeks before the military would discharge her. There was no attempt made to explain the benefits available to veterans.

For any who missed Iraq Veterans Against the War Winter Soldier Investigation -- which was broadcast live at IVAW's site, at War Comes Home, at KPFK, at the Pacifica Radio homepage and at KPFA -- you can find archives at IVAW, War Comes Home and -- via KPFA -- here for Friday, here for Saturday, here for Sunday. Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz anchored Pacifica's live coverage.

But the point is, Congress keeps getting the same song and dance and the first panel was indicative of that. It's a problem Senator Murray has noted. On Tuesday (link has text and video), she took to the Senate floor to address the issue of the suicide rates of troops and veterans:

Earlier this month, we lost a young man in my home state of Washington just hours after he sought care at the Spokane VA hospital. He was the sixth veteran in that community to take his own life this year. Now, the Spokane VA is investigating all six of those cases. I have also spoken to Secretary Peake. He has assured me that his team is also on the ground, taking a hard look to see what went wrong and what they can learn from the situation.
[. . .]
More than five years later, we should have the resources to treat the psychological wounds of war as well as we do the physical ones. But we don't. It is the duty of the VA and of a grateful nation to be prepared to care for their unique wounds. And in order to do that, we need strong leadership and attention to detail in Washington, D.C., Spokane, Washington, and everywhere in between. At the end of the day, this isn't about bureaucracy or protecting turf, it's about saving lives. We must make it a national priority to address this tragedy.

1-800-873-TALK is the VA's suicide prevention hotline, 24 hours. That was Tuesday. Back to Wednesday. "The military is a culture of its own," Maj Cynthia Rasmussen explained in her opening testimony. (Click here for prepared remarks but that's nothing like what she delivered in her stated opening remarks.) Sen Rockefeller would single her out for praise and we'll note a portion of her opening testimony (again, it will not match up with the prepared remarks submitted prior to the hearing).


Maj Cynthia Rasmussen: Multiple competing tasks when a service member gets home cause confusion. We don't know how to think that way. We know how to be mission oriented. We receive an op order it tells us who, what, when, where, why and how -- basically. We don't get op orders when we get home five days after when we take the uniform off. Owen Rice -- who is a Hennepin County sherrif deputy in Hennepin County Jail has been to Iraq, Traumatic Brain Injury in Iraq -- says, "Ma'am it's like this: One person talks in the military and everyone else listens; when you get home: everyone talks, everyone listens and nobody hears." What I hear from soldiers across the country -- service members across the country: "Ma'am, it's too chaotic here. Please send me back where I know how to survive, I know how to function, I know how to do that." [. . .] Emotions and anger. In war, we control our emotions. Obviously, you would not want your warrior having their emotions out in the open anywhere. Plus we cannot accomplish a mission if we have different emotions going on. We numb out. Anger is useful. Anger is not only useful, anger is an awesome emotion. We want anger, we like anger we encourage it. Because it's the fight/flight response. It makes your body, your mind and everything about you be the best that you can be and accomplish the mission you need to accomplish. We encourage it, we live that way, we like to live that way. But guess what? When you take the uniform off, that anger that you've learned in practice and felt good about does not go away. It looks like this: Not talking about your emotions and being angry in war is a strength. It only leads to you can't talk about your emtions at home which is considered a weakness. We look insensitive to others when we get home. It's not that we're insensitive, it's that we have not practiced those emotions for a long time. Emotions take practice. We have a decreased ability to read other's emotions -- not because we don't care, not because we're cold hearted warriors, but because we haven't practiced that for a long time. This can lead to increased irritability and defensiveness because if you're spouse, you're mom, dad or someone accuses you of not caring anymore and not showing emotions. We're not going to say, 'Oh, yes, you're right thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry I was unable to articulate that.' We're going to say, 'What are you talking about? That's not true.' We're going to get defensive -- as all of us would if someone siad that to us. It leads to increased alcohol and drug use to cover up our emotions. You know why? Not because we're warriors and we learned to do that. It is more socially acceptable in our society to go to the bar and have a few drinks or to sit home and slam down a case of beer with your friends or buddies then it is to raise your hand and say "I need help. I need medication. I need to talk to someone" -- not just in the military but across the board. In our program we work with all branches of the service and many VA and civilian organizations across the country. Despite this amazing comprehensive program, service members and families are still falling through the cracks. I had the honor and opportunity to speak to 150 Purple Heart National Service Officers at their training in Phoenix a few months ago. I received this note, handwritten, put it in my pocket and went back to my hotel room. And it read: "Ma'am, for the last three years I've been treated for PTSD by doctors, nurses and others that have no clue over what is being a soldier and have this feeling inside," this is a quote by the way, "I can't thank you enough for coming today. In the last two hours, you have done what nobody could have done: You make me feel normal again. That is a feeling that I thought I would never feel again since I was discharged from the army. Thank you and God bless." This was an Operation Iraqi vet from Puerto Rico, approximately 24-years-old. One final point I want to make. Not all issues with service members are about PTSD. We need to deal with the combat stress, the operational stress, those things I just talked to that are normal habits for all service members. When I spoke to the Purple Heart receipiants, a WWII vet raised his hand and started sobbing and said, "Where were you when I came home?" I had a Korean wife say to me last weekend, Battle Creek VA, if you had been around 40 years ago I would not be divorced from my husband who is a Korean vet because now I understand why we had all the problems we had. This isn't PTSD. This is a warrior taking his uniform off and trying to come home. We have operational stress, we have grief issues, we have lost a year or more in whatever life it was we thought we were going to have. We have depression, we have anger issues, we have PTSD, we have all king of issues. Please, please, please stop just calling it PTSD, I want to be called a combat vet coming home with some issues. Thank you.

Wednesday's snapshot covered Tuesday's House Armed Services Committee's Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing. Dana Milbank (Washington Post) covered it in depth (and was noted in that day's snapshot) Talk Radio News Service provided a summary of the main points and that was it from the press. Today the New York Times makes that hearing their lead editorial (A18), entitled "Wounded Warriors, Empty Promises" and describes it as "the latest low moment for Army brass". From the editorial:

Under skepitcal questioning during a hearing in February, Lt. Gen. Eric Schoomaker, the Army surgeon general, told the subcomittee that "for all intents and pruposes, we are entirely staffed at the point we need to be staffed." He also said: "The Army's unwavering commitment and a key element of our warrior ethos is that we never leave a soldier behind on the battlefield -- or lost in a bureaucracy."
That was thousands of wounded, neglected soldiers ago. There are now about 12,500 soldiers assigned to the warrior transition units -- more than twice as many as a year ago. The number is expected to reach 20,000 by this time next year.
The nation's responsibility to care for the wounded from Iraq and Afghanistan will extend for decades. After Tuesday's hearing, we are left pondering the simple questions asked at the outset by Representative Susan Davis, the California Democrat who is chairwoman of the military personnel subcommittee: Why did the Army fail to adequately staff its warrior transition units? Why did it fail to predict the surge in demand? And why did take visits from a Congressional subcommittee to prod the Army into recognizing and promising -- yet again -- to fix the problem?


Still on Congress and veterans, Edward Colimore (Philadelphia Inquirer) reported on a Congressional bill 'addressing' stop-loss. Stop-loss is the (illegal) policy by which Bully Boy has extended service members' length of service. The service contract has been completed but instead of moving towards discharge, Bully Boy is claiming a national emergency and extending service. If the Iraq War has caused a "national emergency" for the United States, you certainly can't tell it by the tiny trickle of reporting on the Iraq War. So Congress has decided to 'address' it. By writing a law making clear how unlawful the policy is? No, by tossing out a few dollars at the problem -- "an additional $1,500 a month of extnded duty . . . retroactive to October 2001". If this is step-one, it's needed. It's past due. But if this is the 'fix,' it's not repairing anything. IVAW's Kristopher Goldsmith favors ending the illegal stop-loss and tells Colimore, "Instead of being a civilian again and starting my life, I was doing the polar opposite: putting on a unifoorm and returning to Iraq. I had come back with pretty severe PTSD and depression and was having panic attacks."

It's Friday. And Gidget's finishing up the World Salvation Tour so the press can't be bothered too much with Iraq. In the limited reports from Iraq . . .

Bombings?

Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing that left three police officers injured.

Shootings?

Reuters notes that 1 Iraqi soldier was shot dead in Mosul.

Corpses?

Reuters notes that 1 corpse was discovered in Baghdad.

Turning to US presidential politics and starting with Gidget the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party. But don't tell his staff that. Apparently, selecting his shade of lip gloss tires them out. Which is why the Telegraph of London's Toby Harnden (at RealClearPolitics) explains that Jim Steinberg got huffy with the press and started talking about how when he worked for another president (Bill Clinton), he never had to go on record with the press -- only to have the press remind Steinberg that Barack was not president. He's not even the nominee. But don't confuse them. Susan Rice -- lunatic and War Hawk -- was defending Barack Does Berlin and insisting he wasn't be political, "When the President of the United States goes and gives a speech, it is not a political speech or a political rally." Causing a reporter to shoot back, "But he is not President of the United States." It's all so confusing for the Cult. He's not even the nominee yet. Cedric and Wally weighed in on Ms. Minelli's Cabaret last night.

Ralph Nader is a presidential candidate, not a 'presumptive' one, an actual candidate for president. Stealing from Marcia yesterday, "Ruth (Ruth's Report) has been covering it, Kat [Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills) ] has been covering it, Elaine (Like Maria Said Paz) has been covering it, Rebecca (Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude ) has been covering it. C.I. (The Common Ills) has covered it over and over and Third Estate Sunday Review has covered it." She had noted Mike in the previous paragraphs but he's covered BonusGate as well. BonusGate, where at least 50 Democrats conspired to keep Ralph Nader off the state's ballot in the 2004 eleciton. John L. Micek (The Morning Call) explains that Pennsylvania's AG Tom Corbett was "armed with a 74-page grand jury presentation two weeks ago, alleged that Democratic House employees worked to challenge the 51,273 signatures Nader and running mate Peter Camejo had gathered for access to the 2004 presidential ballot. A dozen former and current House Democratic lawmakers and employees face theft, conspiracy and conflict of interest charges, partly for their alleged role in derailing Nader's campaign." Nader held a news conference on the issue yesterday. Charles Thompson (The Patriot-News) reports "Nader wants relief from an $81,102 penalty for legal costs following court battles over his presidential nomination petition in 2004. He said he will file a challenge with the state Supreme Court. Nader said those damages should be dropped in light of criminal charges brought this month" and quotes Nader stating, "This was one of the most fraudulent and deceitful exercises ever perpetrated on Pennsylvania voters." Amy Worden (Philadelphia Inquirer) quotes him stating, "According to the grand jury, millions of dollars in taxpayer funds, resources and state employees were illegally used for political campaign purposes -- including to remove the Nader-Camejo ticket from the ballot." Alex Roarty (Politicker) reported yesterday, ""House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese (D-Greene County), law firms and the country's 'corrupt' two-party system -- each were warned Wednesday by Ralph Nader that the ongoing 'Bonusgate' investigations will reveal their rampant political corruption." Surprisingly, "Democracy" "Now" can't be bothered with this story. While addressing all of that, Nader's still running a presidential campaign and Nader and Matt Gonzalez are on the move all weekend. From Team Nader:

We need gas money.
Why?
Starting today, Ralph Nader is on the road again.
This time campaigning through the South and then out West.
Over the next two weeks, Ralph will be in South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Texas, Utah and up and down California.
His VP, Matt Gonazalez, will be joining Ralph on the campaign trail starting in Texas.
Check out the schedule below.
If you are in the neighborhood, come on out to hear and meet Ralph and Matt.
With both Obama and McCain saber rattling over Iran, the Nader/Gonzalez message of peace through justice is now more important than ever.
If your friends or relatives in the neighborhood, give them a shout and let them know.
But right now, we need gas money to fuel Ralph's South and West Coast Tour.
We've rented a car.
Gas prices are high.
And Ralph is on the move.
So, please donate whatever you can now to fill up our tank.
You can give up to $4,600.
But $500, $100, $50 - whatever you can donate is what we need.
Help us fill 'er up.
So we can get 'er done.
Onward.
The Nader Team
Ralph Nader's Tour of the South and West
Friday July 25, 2008 5:30 p.m. Athens, GeorgiaNader for President 2008 RallyUniversity of Georgia, Georgia Center- "Masters Hall" 1127 South Lumpkin St. Athens, GA 30602Contribution- $10/ $5 student(404) 446-7093 or events@votenader.org
Friday July 25, 2008 8 p.m.Atlanta, GeorgiaEvening with RalphSuggested Contribution $100 minRSVP (202) 471-5833
Saturday July 26, 2008, 6 p.m.Jackson, MississippiBook Signing/ SpeechLemuria Bookstore202 Banner Hall- I-55 North Jackson, MS 39206(601) 842-6769 or events@votenader.org
Saturday July 26, 2008 8:00 p.m.Jackson, MississippiEvening with Ralph NaderRSVP (202) 471-5833Suggested Contribution $50
Sunday July 27, 2008 2:00 p.m.Houston, TexasRalph Nader w/ Matt GonzalezHilton University of Houston4800 Calhoun Suite 207, Houston, TX77204Contribution- $10/$5 student(202) 471-5833 or events@votenader.org
Sunday July 27, 2008 7:30 p.m.Austin, TexasRalph Nader w/ Matt GonzalezTrinity United Methodist Church600 East 50th St. Austin, TX 78751Contribution $10/$5 student(202) 471-5833 or events@votenader.org
Thursday July 31, 2008 7:30pmSalt Lake City, UtahNader for President 2008 Rally w/ Rocky AndersonLibby Gardner Concert Hall1375 E President Circle, Salt Lake UT Contribution-$10/ $5 students(801) 916-6307 or ashley@votenader.rog
Saturday, August 2, 2008, 8:00 p.m. Davis, CaliforniaNader for President 2008 Speech Ralph Nader w/ Matt GonzalezVarsity Theater616 Second StreetDavis, CA 95616Contribution: $10/ $5 students(202) 471-5833 or events@votenader.orgSunday August 3, 1:30 p.m.Sebastopol, CaliforniaNader for President SpeechRalph Nader w/ Matt GonzalezSebastopol Community Center390 Morris St., Sebastopol, California 95472Contribution: $10/ $5 students(202) 471-5833 or events@votenader.org
August 3, 2008, 4:30pmHealdsburg, CaliforniaNader for President SpeechRalph Nader w/ Matt GonzalezCopperfield's books104 Matheson St., Healdsburg, California 95448Contribution: $10/ $5 students(202) 471-5833 or events@votenader.orgAugust 3, 7:30 p.m.Kentfield, CaliforniaNader for President 2008 Speech in MarinRalph Nader w/ Matt GonzalezCollege of Marin- Olney Hall835 College Ave., Kentfield, CaliforniaContribution: $10/ $5 studentsMore Info: (415) 897-6989 or events@votenader.org
PS: We invite your comments to the blog.

NOW on PBS (begins airing tonight in most markets) sits down with John Edwards to discuss the troubles facing families across the country, some struggle to make it in single parent homes, for example. Bill Moyers Journal explores torture (among other topics) and Jane Mayer is a guest. BMJ's Michael Winship files an editorial on torture, "The Company We Keep:"

The administration remains in denial. Former Attorney General John Ashcroft told the House Judiciary Committee, "I don't know of any acts of torture that have been committed by individuals in developing information," he said. "So I would not certainly make an assumption. I would attribute the absence of an attack [since 9/11] at least in part, because there have been specific attacks that have been disrupted, to the excellent work and the dedication and commitment of people whose lives are dedicated to defending the country. Interrogators have used enhanced interrogation techniques but they haven't used torture." Grim hairsplitting. This week, as the result of a Freedom of Information Act suit, the ACLU received a heavily redacted copy of an infamous August 2, 2002 memo, signed by then-head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel Jay Bybee and written with his subordinate, the equally infamous John Yoo. "An individual must have the specific intent to inflict severe pain or suffering," it reads. "… The absence of specific intent negates the charge of torture… We have further found that if a defendant acts with the good faith belief that his actions will not cause such suffering, he has not acted with specific intent." Jameel Jaffer, head of the ACLU's national security project told Spencer Ackerman of The Washington Independent, "Imagine that in an ordinary criminal prosecution a bank robber tortures a bank manager to get the combination to a vault. He argues that the torture was not to inflict pain, but to get the combination. Every torturer has a reason other than to cause pain. If you're going to let people off the hook for an intention other than to cause pain, you're not going to be able to prosecute anyone for torture." Deborah Pearlstein, a constitutional scholar and human rights lawyer who has spent time at Guantanamo monitoring conditions there, testified to Congress that, "As of 2006, there had been more than 330 cases in which U.S. military and civilian personnel have, incredibly, alleged to have abused or killed detainees. This figure is based almost entirely on the U.S. government's own documentation. These cases involved more than 600 U.S. personnel and more than 460 detainees held at U.S. facilities throughout Afghanistan, Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay. They included some l00-plus detainees who died in U.S. custody, including 34 whose deaths the Defense Department reports as homicides. At least eight of these detainees were, by any definition of the term, tortured to death."

More is online at Bill Moyers Journal where you can watch, listen or read (transcripts) and BMJ never forgets to serve all communities and remembers public television's key word is "public." On Washington Week, Gwen and the Gas Bags jaw over the non-news. Helene Cooper (New York Times) is the only one qualified to address the international scene so expect a lot of snorts, bromides and tidbits from the rest.


iraq
camilo mejia
iraq veterans against the war
aaron glantz
kpfa
aimee allison
david solnit
daniel barlowles blumenthalamy wordenwashington weekpbsbill moyer journal
jane mayernow on pbshelene cooper
dana milbank
the washington post
like maria said pazkats kornersex and politics and screeds and attitudetrinas kitchenthe daily jotcedrics big mixmikey likes itruths reportsickofitradlz