Melissa noted a few weeks back when I explained the trick on pizza and egg rolls and wondered if I had any idea how to cook liver and onions? She used to have that all the time when she was a child and never learned to make it herself. Her mother's coming for a visit and she thought she'd make it for her mother who always cooked it for her.
I hope this isn't a revenge dish where Melissa's planning on getting back at her mother because she actually hated liver.
A few things, you need beef liver. The younger you're comfortable with, the better. That's up to you. I'm not recommending baby calf to anyone (I don't even eat veal). That's up to you. I actually like the taste of liver but one thing to remember is that it (and gizzards) are the garbage filter for the human body and the same in animals. If you're eating the liver, you're eating everything the animal's been pumped with so organic beef is the best choice.
If you're fixing four slices of liver you need at least one medium white onion (some people love yellow onions, that's fine, use it if you love it). Cut the onion into rings. Heat a skillet (cast iron is best but use what you have) with butter. On a low to medium-low heat, place the onions in the skillet. While they slowly cook/heat, use a cutting board or a plate with flour to dredge the liver with flour. I usually use a flour (1 cup of flour) paprika mixture (one teason of paprika) and a little salt and pepper for taste. You're getting flour (or the flour mixture) on the liver and then you'll beging putting it into the pan. I leave the onions in to add more flavor. You may have to cook the liver 2 pieces at a time depending upon the size of your skillet. That's fine. If you have a platter, it's better (appearance wise) to serve it on that. You can also use a plate. You cook the liver on both sides. When you're cooking the first side, you'll see the blood rise up. You'll know it's time to flip the piece over to the other side when you can lift it with a spatula or spoon and the piece is firm and not limp.
It's not complicated at all.
If it weren't for concerns about what's pumped into beef (and concerns about Mad Cow, to be frank), I'd fix liver more often. I probably fix it twice a year. But I love it and just typing up the recipe has me hungry for some.
Now, let's turn to politics. Dennis Kuccinich, who is running for the Democratic Presidential nomination for 2008, has several events planned:
Ohio Congressman and
Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich begins a four-day, four
state campaign swing tomorrow (Saturday) that begins in Cedar Rapids and
Dubuque IA and wraps up Tuesday in Albuquerque, NM.
In between, Kucinich will be the keynote speaker at a breakfast meeting
of the National Latino Congreso in Los Angeles and will address the
California State Employees Convention in San Jose. Both events are Sunday.
Last year, the National Latino Congreso event attracted more than 2,000
delegates and attendees representing more than 700 organizations from 20
states to create a united national agenda on issues ranging from
immigration laws and education reform to foreign policy and climate change.
The Congressman's schedule includes the following events and
appearances:
Saturday, October 6
9:30 - 10:30 a.m.: Speech and meet-and-greet, Cedar Rapids Downtown
Farmer's Market, Cedar Rapids, IA
1:30 - 2:30 p.m.: Presentation, Loras College, Ballroom C, Student
Center, Loras Blvd. & Cox Street, Dubuque, IA
4:30 - 5:30 p.m.: Presentation and meet-and-greet, Johnson County
Democrats' Fall Barbeque, Johnson County Fairgrounds, Iowa City, IA
Sunday, October 7
8:30 - 9:30 a.m.: Keynote speaker, breakfast meeting, National Latino
Congreso, Sheraton Hotel, 711 S. Hope Street, Los Angeles
1:30 - 2:00 p.m.: Presentation, California State Employees Association,
McHenry Convention Center, Exhibit Hall #1, 150 W. San Carlos St., San
Jose, CA
7:30 - 8:00 p.m.: Presentation, Oregon AFL-CIO State Convention, Best
Western Hotel, 414 North Prom, Seaside, OR
10:15 pm - 11:15 p.m.: Fundraiser, 3549 SE Main St., Portland, OR
Monday, October 8
Private schedule, no public events
Tuesday, October 9
6:00 - 7:00 p.m.: Presentation, Central New Mexico Community College,
Smith-Brasher Hall, southwest corner, University Blvd. & Coal Ave.,
Albuquerque, NM
Today he's supposed to be on the radio at 2:00 p.m. EST. Florida's WMAT is a conservative (Fox) radio station and he'll be on the People Power Hour interviewed by George Crossley. There are no archives so if you plan to listen you'll have to listen live. A man Wally's mother works with (actually, one she supervises) listen to that station and told her Kucinich was going to be on.
On an event Sunday, here's more information:
LOS ANGELES, Oct. 6 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The National Latino
Congreso, meeting in Los Angeles this weekend, has unanimously passed one
of two resolutions presented by representatives of the Kucinich for
President campaign and will consider a second one today.
The Congreso, expected to draw upwards of 2,000 Latino elected
officials, community leaders, and activists from across the country, is
developing a political and social action agenda for the coming year, and
hopes to have a major impact on the 2008 Presidential election campaign.
The campaign of Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich is the only Presidential
campaign that is officially sponsoring the Congreso.
Kucinich will be the keynote speaker Sunday morning at a breakfast
sponsored by the Latino Vote Caucus. Today (Saturday), Rep. Kucinich's
wife, Elizabeth, will address a luncheon meeting on "America & the World in
the 21st Century."
The resolution approved Friday night calls for the Maricopa County,
Arizona, Sheriff's Department to shut down a telephone hotline set up to
encourage people to report the whereabouts and activities of persons the
callers suspect of being in the country illegally. The Congreso resolution
says the hotline encourages "racial profiling and promotes discrimination
of the Latino community of Maricopa County."
The second resolution deals with the "Minuteman Project," a group of
individuals who patrol the U.S. border with Mexico to discourage crossings.
The group is all volunteer, raises its funds from private sources, and,
while heavily armed is undocumented as being a bona fide law enforcement
agency.
The Congreso resolution finds that the Minuteman Project "promotes
violence, hatred, racism and discrimination which are not representative
traits of the honorable and just American society that has a rich legacy of
immigration and inclusiveness."
On Saturday, a group supporting the Minuteman Project will picket
outside of the Sheraton Los Angeles Hotel where the Congreso is being held.
The protestors claim they will be peaceful, although one pro-Minuteman
Internet blog on Friday discussing the Congreso included the comment
"Target rich environment...I suggest we treat the event like a M.O.V.E.
house in Philadelphia..."
The blog referred to an incident in Philadelphia on May 13, 1985, when
police dropped an incendiary device on a row house after being fired upon
when attempting to serve arrest warrants on four of the occupants. The
resulting fire from the device burned down 50 houses, killing six people
and leaving another 200 neighborhood residents homeless.
Kucinich staffers from California, Nevada, New Mexico and Arizona are
participating in the Congreso.
Turning to music, C.I. noted this week that, "Kat's review of Stephen Stills and Ani DiFranco's latest CD releases went up and Kat reviewed Joni Mitchell's Shine on Monday and Ben Harper & The Innocent Criminals' Lifeline on Sunday." Those are all three wonderful reviews. My favorite review (and favorite CD) is Joni Mitchell's Shine. (My husband's as well.)
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" from yesterday and a lost happened last week even if Iraq did not receive a great deal of media attention:
Friday, Ocotber 5, 2007. Chaos and violence continue in Iraq, the US military announces more deaths, Ehren Watada's court-martial is still set to start next Tuesday, the bait and kill teams get a white wash, and more.
Starting with war resistance. In June 2006, Ehren Watada became the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to the Iraq War. As Aaron Glantz (The War Comes Home) notes Ehren Watada's second court-martial is scheduled to begin this coming Tuesday. And if it takes place and the prosecution is trailing, Judge Toilet (aka John Head) can call another "do over." Glantz reported on the first court-martial each day of the court-martial (as well as on the Sunday rally of support that preceded the court-martial) and you can click here for some of that audio. Truthout also covered the court-martial daily and they announce: "Truthout will be covering the court-martial from Fort Lewis, Washington, beginning Monday." Their coverage last time provided both video and text reports. Mike Barber (Seattle Post-Intelligencer) reports on yesterday's events, "U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Settle on Thursday afternoon heard arguments from Watada's lawyers and a lawyer from the U.S. Attorney's Office about whether he has jurisdiction in the case. Settle held the hearing after Watada's defense attorneys, Jim Lobsenz and Ken Kagen, sought an emergency halt to next Tuesday's court-martial. They said they were compelled to go to federal court after receiving no word from the military justice system's highest appellate court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, concerning Watada's challenge to his court-martial." AP reports that a decision by Settle may come down today; however, Michael Gilbert (Washington's The News Tribune) reports, "A federal judge indicated he won't likely decide whether to halt Lt. Ehren Watada's second court-martial until Tuesday morning, when the proceeding is scheduled to begin in an Army courtroom at Fort Lewis." Meanwhile, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer editorializes "Watada Court-Martial: Let him go:"However the defense appeals turn out, we think there is a case for letting Watada leave the Army without further ado. That could be taken as a statement of higher-level confidence, a choice to focus on the larger military mission that President Bush and Gen. David Petraeus insist is making new progress. At a minimum, many of those who oppose the Iraq war would welcome the leniency for someone they view as a person of conscience."
In Canada this week, war resister Robin Long was arrested this week. Charlie Smith (Vancouver's Straight) reports that when twenty-year-old war resister Brad McCall attemptedto enter Canada on September 19, 2007, he was arrested "and driven to a jail in Surrey" with McCall telling him, "I don't know what kind of police officer he was. He put me in handcuffs in front of all these people that were watching that were trying to get into Canada also" and McCall aksed the Canadian Border Services Agency, "I told them, 'Why are you playing the part of the hound dog for the U.S. army?' They didn't know what to say. They just started stuttering and mumbling." Brad McCall did make it into Canada and is staying with Colleen Fuller in Vancouver. As is very common in stories of war resisters going to Canada "over the Internet". McCall also speaks of hearing about atrocities/war crimes in Iraq as participants bragged about the actions. Robin Long also cited that in his interview for CBC Television. McCall explains he was interested in CO status but when he raised the issued with "his commander and sergeants," the dismissed it which has happened repeatedly with many war resisters. Aiden Delgado and Camilo Mejia are among those who can share their struggles to receive CO status -- Delgado was one of the few to be successful in his attempt. Robert Zabala has the distinction of being awarded CO status by the US civilian court system. Agustin Aguayo attempted the process both within the US military and within the civilian court system.
Another who attempted CO status is Kevin Benderman. Monica Benderman, Kevin's wife, addressed Congress in May of 2006 noting, "My husband violated no regulations. His command violated many. The command's flagrant disregard for military regulations and laws of humanity sent my husband to jail as a prisoner of conscience. Times have changed -- and so has conscientious objection. What has not changed is the Constitution, the oath our volunteer soldiers take to defend it, and every American citizen's right to freedom of choice. This conscientious objection goes beyond religious teaching. It is not dramatic. There is no epiphany. There is reality. Death is final, whether it is your own or you cause the death of another. No amount of field training can make up for the sights, sounds, tastes, and smells of a real battlefield, and no amount of threats, intimidation, and abuse from a command can change a soldier's mind when the cold, hard truth of an immoral, unethical justification for war is couple with real-life sensations." Monica, and not Kevin, addressed Congress because Kevin was still serving the sentence on the kangaroo court hearing he was subjected to when he attempted to be granted CO status by following every detail by the book with no margin for error. But the US military brass doesn't like to issue CO status and they were willing to manuever and lie in their attempts at retribution towards Kevin Benderman. The laughable charge of "desertion" (which has no basis in reality) was shot down (he was acquitted of that ludicrous charge) but the brass was successful with other charges (trumped up charges) and that goes to how they control the court-martials, how they refuse to allow evidence to be entered and arguments to be made in an arrangement that's already stacked against the individual. (For instance, in Ehren Watada's trial, Judge Toilet was known to report to his superiors who, presumably, gave him orders throughout the February court-martial. In a civilian court, a judge reporting to a 'superior' and taking advice from one would be grounds for an aquittal.) Kevin and Monica Benderman fought the brass and continued fighting when others might have given up. Letters from Fort Lewis Brig: A Matter of Conscience is the new book, out this week from The Lyons Press (US $24.95), in which they tell his story. Letters from Fort Lewis Brig: A Matter of Conscience is also the fourth book by a war resister of the Iraq War to be published this year. The other three are Aidan Delgado's The Sutras Of Abu Ghraib: Notes From A Conscientious Objector In Iraq, Camilo Mejia's Road from Ar Ramadi: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia and Joshua Key's The Deserter's Tale. Early on as the brass was targeting her husband, Monica Benderman visited bookstores attempting to learn more about CO status and similar topics and she couldn't find anything. The four books rectify that and join Peter Laufer's
compelling Mission Rejected: U.S. Soldiers Who Say No to Iraq which covers the stories of variety of war resisters and was released in 2006. In an ideal world, bookstores across the country would stock all five and no Monica Benderman, in search of information, would ever be greeted with "We don't carry anything like that." Kevin and Monica Benderman have done their part to make sure it doesn't happen. Again, Letters from Fort Lewis Brig by Kevin Benderman with Monica Benderman was released this week, is available at bookstores and online and it'll be the focus of a book discussion at The Third Estate Sunday Review this weekend.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters.
Canada's in the news not only for the arrest of war resisters these days but also for their oil deal. In a curious press release that proclaims "THIS PRESS RELEASE IS NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO THE UNITED STATES NEWSWIRE SERVICE OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES" at the top, Canada's Heritage Oil Corporation declares (to "Business Editors") that they are "pleased to announce that it has executed a Production Sharing Contract with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) over Miran Block in the south-west of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq and that Heritage will be operating as a 50/50 partner with the KRG to create a 20,000 barrel per day oil refinery in the vincinity of the license area. . . . Heritage will join the existing and increasing presence of international oil exploration, development and production companies operating in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. . . . Heritage will commence geological work immediately, having established its local office in Erbil in 2005, and aims to commence a high-impact exploration drilling program in 2008." Last month a deadly clash took place on Lake Albert between "Congolese troops and the Ugandan army" which Heritage Oil has denied any part in despite media reports. Andy Rowell (Oil Change) notes that the Kurdish government has "announced four new oil exploration deals with international energy companies. The news is likely to upset the central government in Baghdad and the US." In addition, this week Canada refused entry to CODEPINK's Media Benjamin and retired US State Dept and army colonel Ann Wright. Today, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) interviewed Wright:
AMY GOODMAN: So, Ann, you were turned back at the border. You go back to Washington, D.C. You meet with Canadian officials at the embassy. What did they tell you?
ANN WRIGHT: Well, they told us that any time that the FBI puts people on this NCIC list, they just accept it at face value, that they don't really investigate things. And we kept saying, "Well, you ought to, because a lot of these things appear to be going onto this list because of political intimidation," because, indeed, the list itself for the database says that people like foreign fugitives, people on the ten most-wanted list or 100 most-wanted list, people that are part of violent gangs and terrorist organizations, are supposed to go on that NCIC list. It didn't seem like that we were a part of -- we haven't done anything to be on the list. And since this thing is just now -- we are the first ones that we know of that have been formally stopped from going into Canada. In fact, it happened to me in August, when I went up to Canada to participate in the Security and Prosperity Partnership. I had to buy my way in, $200 for a three-day temporary resident permit. "If I'm so dangerous, why would they even give me that permit?" I asked the immigration officer in the Canadian embassy.
Turning to the Iraqi puppet government Susan Cornwell (Reuters) reported: "Widespread corruption in Iraq stretches into the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, an Iraqi investigating judge told U.S. lawmakers on Thursday, and an American official said U.S. efforts to combat the problem are inadequate. Judge Radhi Hamza al-Radhi, who was named by the United States in 2004 to head the Iraqi Commission on Public Integrity, said his agency estimated corruption had cost the Iraqi government up to $18 billion." Renee Schoof (McClatchy Newspapers) adds, "Enormous sums of oil revenues ended up in the hands of Sunni and Shiite militias, he said. Radhi Hamza al-Radhi, who is seeking U.S. asylum because of death threats against him, said that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his government prevented al-Radhi's U.S.-backed Commission on Public Integrity from taking action against top national officials."
Turning to the topic of violence, AP notes that the mercenary corporation Blackwater USA has a new p.r. flack -- Burson-Marsteller -- and that, "The State Department, which pays Blackwater hundreds of millions of dollars to protect U.S. diplomats in Iraq, has stringent rules barring the private security contractor from discussing with the media the details of its work, according to those familiar with the arrangement." While Sudarsan Raghavan, Joshua Partlow and Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) explain the latest reports on the September 16th slaughter Blackwater conducted in Baghdad, "U.S. military reports from the scene of the Sept. 16 shooting incident involving the security firm Blackwater USA indicate that its guards opened fire without provocation and used excessive force against Iraqi civilians, according to a senior U.S. military official. The reports came to light as an Interior Ministry official and five eyewitnesses described a second deadly shooting minutes after the incident in Nisoor Square. The same Blackwater security guards, after driving about 150 yards away from the square, fired into a crush of cars, killing one person and injuring two, the Iraqi official said. The U.S. military reports appear to corroborate the Iraqi government's contention that Blackwater was at fault in the shooting incident in Nisoor Square, in which hospital records say at least 14 people were killed and 18 were wounded."
Staying on violence . . .
"Shams survived, but is now blind. She is one of hundreds who were injured, but survived this attack. More than 200 others died. This is her story," so begins Alive in Baghdad's video report this week entitled "Car Bomb Survivors, No Longer Statistics" which focuses on the aftermath of the November 23rd bombing for the year-old Shams whose mother died shielding her from the blast and whose brother Ghaith was left with shrapnel. Her father, Hesham Fadhel Karim, explains his wife, Shams, and Ghaith and Taif (two sons) were in their car in Sadr City when three bombs went off, "My baby girl Shams was injured and lost her two eyes, her mother was killed and my older son Ghaith was injured by shrapnel in his back. . . . Shams face was injured because she was beside her mother who was burning. As for my wife, the fireman came to extinguish her and I carried her to the ambulance which brought her to the hospital. We took her out of the ambulance into the hospital. I was trying to extinguish her but I could not, because she burnt my hands, legs, and shoulder. At last, she died. As for Shams, I didn't know which hospital she was in. I searched for her in every hospital in Sadr City but I couldn't find her because she was carried to the Adnan Khairallah Martyr hospital." The search for Shams was made more difficult by the night time curfews forbidding travel. After finding her, her family attempted to get treatment for her in Jordan and Iran but were told there was nothing that could be done about her eyes. Shams' grandfather declares, "In fact, I appeal to this world and the humanitarian world to care for the children of Iraq because there are millions of children who are without eyes, deformed or having their arms or legs amputated."
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reports, "Up to twenty-four Iraqi civilians are reportedly dead following a U.S. air strike near the city of Baquba. Another twenty-seven people were wounded. The toll is said to include women and children. Witnesses say at least four homes were leveled in the attack. Some of the victims were killed after rushing out of their homes to help those hurt in the initial bombing." AFP reports, "Witnesses said US helicopters attacked Jayzani, northwest of the mainly Shiite town of Al-Khalis, at around 2:00 am (2300 GMT), destroying at least four houses. An AFP photographer saw at least four trucks, each carrying several bodies from Jayzani, being driven through Baghdad to the Shiite holy city of Najaf for burial. One of the dead was clearly an elderly man" and AFP quotes Ahmed Mohammed saying, "There are 24 bodies on the ground in the village and 25 others wounded in Al-Khalis hospital." Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a bombing today "near Latifiyah Bridge" outside Babil left three people injured while a Tuz Khurmatu bombing left three wounded. Reuters notes that a Laitifya roadside bombing left three people injured.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Sheikh Yasir Al Yasiri was shot dead yesterday and Sheikh Khalid was shot dead last night, both in Basra, both were professors at "Al Sadr religious university".
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 2 corpses were discovered in Kifil.
Today the US military announced: "Two Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldiers were killed and two others were wounded when an improvised explosive device detonated during operations in the southeastern region of the Iraqi capital Oct. 5." And the US military announced: "One Multi-National Corps - Iraq Soldier was killed and three were wounded in Salah Ad Din province today when an improvised explosive device was detonated near their vehicle." ICCC's total number killed in the illegal war since it started (March 2003) stands at 3813 and Reuters stands at 3812.
Turning to news of white wash, Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) 'investigates' the bait and kill teams of US snipers in Iraq by . . . reading court transcripts. Work that will no doubt to elevate him to the level of Maury Povich or at least Ted Baxter. Parker writes: "Interviews and court transcripts portray a 13-man sniper unit that felt under pressure to produce a high body count, a Vietnam-era measure that the Pentagon officially has disavowed in this war. They describe a sniper unit whose margins of right and wrong were blurred: by Hensley, if you believe Army prosecutors; by the Army, if you believe the accused." Wow, shock and dull, shock and dull. In June of this year, James Burmeister went public with the news of the kill teams. All Things Media Big and Small ignored it in this country. Last week, a court-martial forced them to cover it with limited hangout. Now it's time for the white wash and Parker shows up in flip flops, a half-shirt and Daisy Dukes, scrub brush in hand.
Meanwhile, James Foley (Medill Reports) quotes Kelly Dougherty (IVAW) declaring, "People say it's an all-volunteer army, but the truth is many people's contracts have been extended, some involuntarily extended. That's not only against an all-volunteer military, but putting the same people in a combat zone again and again . . . We get a lot of calls (asking) 'What should I do? Should I go back.'" Tim Dickinson (Rolling Stone) highlights two articles -- First, Philip Dine (St. Louis Dipatch) reveals that "Thousands of U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- as many as 10 a day -- are being discharged by the military for mental health reasons. But the Pentagon isn't blaming the war. It says the soldiers had 'pre-existing' conditions that disqualify them for treatment by the government." This is an effort to deny treatment for service members suffering from PTSD by claiming that the PTSD is actually a prior condition. Dikinson then notes a report on the number of service members who are deployed "for only 729 days. . . exactly one day short of the 730 days needed to guarantee thousands of dollars a year for college."
Today on the second hour of NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, Rehm's roundtable guests were McClatchy Newspapers' Warren P. Strobel, the Washington Post's Keith Richburg and UPI's Martin Walker.
Diane Rehm: Let's talk about what's happening in Iraq with Iraq buying $100 million worth of weapons from China.
Martin Walker: Well you go to the best. I mean if you want, if you want the kind of material you need to supress people and maintain an authoritarian state where do you go? China. The point that the US wasn't able to supply the weaponry required and the Chinese are able to supply cheap knock-offs of AK-47s.
Diane Rehm: But haven't the Iraqis had terrible trouble keeping track of weapons to begin with?
Martin Walker: The place is awash in weapons but don't forget it also took place as we've got this new report about corruption in Iraq and about the way in which corruption is being covered up and protected by al-Maliki's government and I would be amazed if some of that money for the Chinese weaponry doesn't matter to leak out some way or another.
Diane Rehm: At twenty-seven before the hour, you are listening to The Diane Rehm Show. Do you want to add to that, Keith?
Keith Richburg: Just to add, it's ironic that these weapons are supposedly going to be going to the Iraqi police which is the one unit that all US investigators going in there have said is the most corrupt, the most inept and basically should be abolished and reconstituted from scratch. Here's Talibani saying, "Actually we need weapons to arm this force."
Diane Rehm: Warren?
Warren P. Strobel: Yeah, absolutely. There was a hearing in Congress this week that highlighted the issue of corruption and a report, the State Department's own report, shows that virtually every ministry has just massive corruption problems. It's hard to believe that lots of the weapons won't end up in the street. It's hard to believe there won't be huge kickbacks, as Martin said, for the weapon sale.
A caller brought up Seymour Hersh's report that the administration is planning to start a war with Iran.
Diane Rehm: Didn't Sy Hersh also go on to say that many in the administration know we don't have the resources to go into Iran, Warren?
Warren P. Strobel: Which is true, we don't in any serious way. Diane, if I had a dollar for every tip I got, or every e-mail I got, or every caller I got that the administration was about to launch another war on Iran, I'd be a rich man. I think we have to be very careful here. Some people in the administration, close to it, say "yes," some say "no." Cheney is said to be pushing this -- I'm not so sure. I think it's a debate that's going to go on right till the very the end of administration.
[. . .]
Keith: I would just add, well, two things. First, I agree that the resources, the troops aren't there for an invasion. If you're talking about some kind of an airstrike, I would just say the most dangerous period I think you can be in is when you've got a lameduck president with nothing to lose, facing a military catastrophe in Iraq at the moment. And secondly, I find this demonization of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a new Hitler and a new dictator a bit curious because within Iran he's not a dictator. They're all kinds of other institutions that are keeping him relatively constrained including the various ayatollahs who actually run the country. He's not a dictator and also he's not incredibly and also he's not incredibly popular as well.
[. . .]
Martin Walker: There's another factor which tends to get forgotten here, which is that Iran has bought -- and had delivered last year -- from the Russians a state of art anti-aircraft missile system called the S300 which is probably better than the Patriot. Now that's now installed. It's being made operational. Even before that, I was told by a former head of the Air Force that the US Air Force would need a US air strike would need something like three days to suppress the anti-aircraft to be able to go in and hit the targets. What's going to happen on Capitol Hill in those three days on that kind of suppression of the anti-aircraft system? He would be impeached.
Keith: Just to add one quick thought there as well, I think one reason you can see the echo chamber of hostility towards Iran building is because
Diane Rehm: Could or would the US go to war against Iran without total Congressional support?
Keith: Well it depends on "What is war?" Are a series of air strikes war?
Diane Rehm: A series of air strikes.
Keith: Well I think some might argue that he needs Congressional approval, I think others might say that's within his perogative as commander-in-chief to do that. I think within Congress you're going to see a lot more, it's a Democratic Congress first of all, and you're already hearing a lot more people saying, "Wait a minute. North Korea has already exploded a nuclear bomb, Iran is still ten years away, why are they the greater threat?"
Martin Walker: Well it depends. I think one could certainly see and envisage some kind of provocations taking place or perhaps being concoted and engineered under which there's an exchange of fire on the border, US marines get arrested in the way that those British navel personnel were so you can see something being whipped up along those lines. But I was at, I was at an event, a social event recently with two former National Security Advisors and one of them said, "These guys ain't nuts." And the other one replied, "Yes, but they aren't sane either."
Which works as a transition to PBS' Bill Moyers Journal (Friday in most markets, check local listings -- and it's a listen, watch and read online after the episode airs) when Moyers explores the group Christians United for Israel and also speaks to Rabbi Michael Lerner and Dr. Timothy Weber on the topic of? Should the US strike Iran. A YouTube preview is up and, at the program's website, essays on the topic will be posted as well. Again, the hour long show begins airing on most PBS markets on Friday (check local listings -- and at the website, you can also locate the airtime for your local PBS station). Also Friday on most PBS markets, NOW with David Brancaccio airs their latest half hour installment and this week interview Michael Apted about his owngoing documentary where he tracks a group of British people every seven years, energy conversation will be addressed with a report on Decorah, Iowa and Ken Burns will be interviewed about his latest documentary The War. On October 12th, NOW with David Brancaccio will air a one hour program, "Child Brides: Stolen Lives" documenting "the heartbreaking global phenomenon of forced child marriage, and the hope behind breaking the cycle of poverty and despair it causes." They've created an e-Card you can send to friends and family or to yourself to provide a heads up to the broadcast (and there is no cost to send the e-Card). Last (and one time only) we're tossing a link to the Democratic magazine American Prospect. Due to the fact that it has David Bacon's "Mexican Miners' Strike for Life". Excerpt:
In a well-run mine, huge vacuum cleaners suck dust from the buildings covering the crushers, mills and conveyer belts. The Cananea miners call these vacuums colectores, or dust collectors. Outside the hulking buildings of the concentrator complex, those collection tanks and their network of foot-wide pipes are five stories tall. But many of the tanks have rusty holes in their sides the size of a bathroom window. And the pipes, which should lead into the work areas inside, just end in midair. None of the dust collectors, according to the miners' union, have functioned since the company shut them down in 1999.
So for the past eight years, the dust that should have been sucked up by the collectors has ended up instead in the miners' lungs. That is the most serious reason why the miners are out on strike. But there are other dangers. Many machines have no guards, making it easy to lose fingers or worse. Electrical panels have no covers. Holes are open in the floor with no guardrails. Catwalks many stories about the floor are slippery with dust and often grease, and are crisscrossed by cables and hoses. Not long ago, one worker tripped and fell five stories to his death onto a water pump below.
The community is a left community, it is diverse and American Prospect is geared towards Democrats. That's their right and we don't spend time knocking them for it. We're covering mainstream media and independent media and we really aren't able to note things from Democratic Party magazines because we do have Greens and other political party members. Bacon's written an important article -- that was the first and last exception for American Progress. (Short of them hiring Bacon to blog or to be a regular contributor. He's a labor beat reporter and there are so few of them that such a move would probably alter the above and members would be fine with it.)
iraq
ehren watadamike barber
brad mccallrobin long
kevin benderman
aidan delgadojoshua keycamilo mejia
karen deyoungthe washington postjoshua partlowsudarsan raghavan
david bacon
aaron glantz
mcclatchy newspapersrenee schoof
warren p. strobel
the diane rehm showdiane rehmbill moyersbill moyers journalpbsnow with david branccacio
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Nelson Police arrest Robin Long and plan to deport
War resister Robin Long has been arrested in Canada in a scheme to deport him. Betty called me and she's done a 'found in the paper' type entry. Her site is Betinna's story. To cover this, she presented things that Betinna could have found in the paper. I'm tired and do not blog during the week. At my age, one post a week may be all I can manage. But I had seen the snapshot earlier and it's all we talked about at the dinner table tonight. So when Betty called to ask if I thought she could pull off a 'found in the paper' type entry for Betinna (due to what's been going on, Betinna's life has been upended), I told her I thought so and that I would attempt to do something very small here as well.
"NDP calling for the release of US war resister Robin Long"
TORONTO -- Following the arrest of US war resister Robin Long yesterday in Nelson, B.C., NDP immigration critic Olivia Chow (Trinity-Spadina) and NDP MP Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior) are calling on the Harper government to reexamine their decision to deport Long and allow him to stay in Canada.
"Canada has always been a country that stands up for basic human rights. Conscientious objectors who have fled George W. Bush's illegal war in Iraq should be allowed to stay," said Chow.
"Two war resisters' cases are currently before the Supreme Court of Canada," pointed out Atamanenko. "No one should be arrested or deported before the Court has a chance to make a decision."
Robin Long, from Boise, Idaho, received his orders in March 2005 and left for Canada the following June, believing the war in Iraq was illegal. He lives in Canada with his Canadian partner Renee and their young son. The Immigration and Refugee Board did not find his claims to be untruthful but ruled against his case and his deportation is imminent.
"Canada has always been a place of refuge for war resisters who refuse to fight in illegal wars," noted Chow. "From Vietnam to now, Canada has a proud and distinguished history of putting justice first, and allowing people of conscience to seek refuge in our country. Canada has to release Mr. Long and allow him to stay in Canada."
Chow noted that a recent poll taken in Ontario showed that almost two thirds of Ontarians believe that Canada should allow war resisters to stay in Canada.
I wish I had some words of wisdom here. No Mother Mary is coming to be ("Let It Be"). But this is important and part of the continued assault on war resisters which the press repeatedly ignores. Robin Long, they are so desperate to get a hold of, is going to be in one country and his child in another because the BC police are again working with the US military. The whole thing revolves around some trumped up issue of "We sent you something!" that they never sent and they've used that as their pretext to arrest him and try to deport him. He has an attorney (Jeffry House) for his refugee claim. If Long had received something or House had, they would have dealt with it. Nothing was sent. It's petty crap being used to continue the assault on war resisters. Not unlike "Tent City" in this country.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:
Tuesday, October 2, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, war resister Robin Long is arrested by the same creeps who pulled the stunt earlier with Kyle Snyder, Blackwater's Erik Prince testifies to Congress, the UK announces a drawdown, the US Congress (Democratically led) keeps buying into the illegal war, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Robin Long was arrested yesterday. War resister Long went to Canada in June 2005. He applied for refugee status. Like everyone who has applied thus far, Long was denied. The New Democratic Party of Canada issues a statement "calling on the [prime minister Stephen] Harper government to reexamine their decision to deport Long and allow him to stay in Canada." It's noted that Long "lives in Canada with his Canadian partner Renee and their young son." So the Canadian government has arrested Long, intending to deport him and thereby split up a family. Olivia Chow points to "a recent poll taken in Ontario [which] showed that almost two thirds of Ontarians believe that Canada should allow war resisters to stay in Canada." The War Resisters Support Campaign notes that the poll was "conducted by phone from June 5 to 11, 2007" and that "close to two thirds of Ontarians favour letting US Iraq War resisters settle in Canada" and that polling was "conducted by the national research firm Strategic Communications Inc". Shirley Douglas (who worked her butt of during Vietnam and is as dedicated today) is quoted declaring, "This poll shows that the Canadian tradition of welcoming Americans who dissent from the policies of war is still important to us. The Canadian government should move now to make it possible for the war resisters to settle in this country, as so many did during the Vietnam War." The Christian Radical notes that Nelson was "arrested by the Nelson B.C. Police who intend to take him to Vancouver and hand him over to the US authorities at the border nearby. He was seized as he walked along a street. He is now detained in the local jail. Robin was not allowed to receive visits from friends; however he was able to call his spouse. She says that he is calm and hopeful that he will soon be released." The is the same Nelson B.C. Police that arrested Kyle Snyder on the orders of the US military -- in direct violation of Canadian soveriegnty. In the US, Gregory Levey (Salon) becomes the first at a US news outlet to cover that and he is also the last because it's just too much work for independent media apparently. Now a similar thing has happened to Robin Long. Exactly when the hell does independent media in the United States intend to do its damn job? The Christian Radical notes: "The War Resisters Support Campaign is urging all our friends and supporters to CALL THE NELSON POLICE AT 250-354-3919 AND TELL THEM TO RELEASE ROBIN LONG. We urge you as well to contact your local Member of Parliament and ask her or him to help release Robin."
Along with Kyle Snyder being arrested in a similar stunt (on his wedding day), the US military itself crossed over into Canada and posed as Canadian police officers -- harassing Winnie Ng at her home and demanding to know where war resister Joshua Key was. As independent media in this country -- including the "Nobody owns The Nation" useless piece of crap -- has refused to cover this story, the US has grown ever more bold about issuing orders to lackeys in Canada who aren't concerned with upholding Canadian law, just with being suck ups to the United States.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko,Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters.
Blackwater USA. Today, Erik Prince -- CEO of the mercenary company -- popped into Congress for a hearing on the issue of private security in Iraq held by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform chaired by Rep Henry Waxman. Prince fidgeted throughout, used the phrase "I don't know" repeatedly, showed his disdain for Congress by frequently rolling his eyes, smirking and, when Rep Peter Welch was questinging him, combined the two with an extended head turn to the right and away from Welch. With his disain on full display, the obvious question was for committee members to ask him about his physical presentation. No one did. A lot of representatives wasted time. Rep Diane Watson was the best example of wasted time on the Democratic side and Prince's nonstop smirks during that exchange may have been warranted as Watson went on and on (about topics that had nothing to do with Blackwater such as the MoveOn ad and Rush Limbaugh) only to suddenly declare "And so my question to you" before going back to yammering on. Each time she would say "my question to you," Was there a point to her remarks? It was the embarrassment from the Democratic side as she seemd determined to deliver a free association monologue. Each time she would use the term "question," Prince would lead forward, open his mouth, then close it because Watson wasn't interested in an answer and wasn't interested in getting to a question. What was her point? Who knows with lines like "You are providing a service." At one point, around the fourth or fifth time Prince had leaned in to answer only to grasp she wasn't yielding, he looked around and as if he was about to laugh. Across America -- to the left, to the right, to the center -- many others may have been laughing as well.
On the Republican side? They win as ensemble, too many did far too much for just one to be signaled out. Top honors within the ensemble go to Lynn Westmoreland who wasted everyone's time by putting on his glasses and reading his remarks from prepared text. If you can write down everything ahead of time, don't even show up, just fax your prepared remarks to the media. And that was honestly a problem for most. Those who didn't so obviously read from their prepared remarks for their entire allotted time also didn't appear to listen too closely. That was true regardless of political party. Democrats John Sarbanes and Peter Welch deserve (positive) notice for questions and comments that demonstrated they were aware of what had been asked as well as what had been asked but not answered. Bruce Braley (Democrats) also deserves credit for not wasting his allotted time with a bunch of sop but instead tearing away at the issue of the laws that would or would not govern Blackwater in Iraq -- tearing away at the topic and refusing to let go. Noting the Blackwater employee -- allegedly drunk, who shot dead an Iraqi bodyguard on Christmas Eve 2006 (the committee agreed not to ask about the September 16th incident where Blackwater slaughtered at least 11 innocent Iraqis at the request of the Justice Department) and what passed for 'punishment' --Braley pointed out the message to take away was, "If I screw up . . . the worst that's going to happen is I have to give up a window seat for an aisle seat."
Braley was referring to the fact that Blackwater didn't discipline him. Prince repeatedly -- throughout the hearing -- would immediately go to flogging insisting (over and over) "We can't flog". The inablity to flog appears to be a big issue with Prince. Prince explained (at several points) that -- though they couldn't flog -- what Blackwater did with the employee was pull his plane ticket, withheld the employee's paycheck and the employee's bonus. Prince -- falling back on the flogging -- declared that Blackwater did all they could. Witholding earned wages is supposed to be against the law so it's a shame no one asked Prince what law Blackwater was operating under when they made that decision. A bonus can be given or taken away and any dispute over it can be handled by the courts but earned wages are earned wages and companies do not have the right to withold them.
What Price left out was that the employee didn't just leave. He was proud that the employee's security clearence was pulled. But he failed to show the public his pride over the fact that Blackwater hustled the employee out of Iraq before any serious questions could be asked. Price -- noting he watches crime shows on TV -- begged off ruling whether it was murder, homicide or manslaughter but didn't quibble that, in fact, it was a crime. That being the case, why an employee who had committed a serious crime was being whisked out of Iraq is a question he should have been asked repeatedly.
The point Braley was making was US service members -- in the same situation -- would be facing a court-martial but all the Blackwater employee basically lost was a window seat on the trip home. Throughout it at all, regardless of any question other than about his time in the US Navy Seals, Prince repeatedly fell back on "I don't know." On violence, on whether Chilean thugs who worked for Pinochet were now working for Blackwater (Jan Schakowsky brought that issue up and hit hard repeatedly on the human rights issue), what the make up of the Blackwater force in Iraq was, etc. It was left to Chris Murphy (after many had left the hearing -- press and committee members) to state the obvious, "Certainly as CEO you can tell us what your profit has been?" No, he couldn't.
But he could indicate that he believes Blackwater employees are destroying Blackwater equipment intentionally. That probably wasn't his intent but he declared, to Murphy, that "Our helicopters get fragged." "Frag" is internal not external. If the Blackwater helicopters are being "fragged" then the "fragging" would have to be done by a Blackwater worker. Listening to Prince go on and on about Blackwater's "costs" What costs? That's a serious question. Replacing a helicopter? Well talk to anyone in the trucking industry or the delivery industry and they'll tell you equipment's replaced all the time. But the point was driven home best when Jan Schakowsky was asking (repeatedly) how Blackwater checks out their employees. According to Prince, they basically just run Social Security numbers. So Glory, Glory Private Business . . . as it still depends upon all the tools of the federal government. As Henry Waxman noted in his opening statement, "Over the past 25 years, a sophisticated campaign has been waged to privatize government services. The theory is that corporations can deliver government services better and at a lower cost than government can. Over the last six years, this theory has been put into practice. The result is that privatization has exploded. For every taxpayer dollar spent on federal programs, over 40 cents now goes to private contractors. Our government now outsources even the oversight of the outsourcing. At home, core government functions -- like tax collection and emergency response -- have been contracted out. Abroad companies like Halliburton and Blackwater have made billions performing tasks that used to be done by our nation's military forces. What's been missing is a serious evaluation of whether the promises of privatizing are actually realized." Instead of addressing the reality, Prince elected to play like he didn't know, couldn't recall and invent fantasies. Such as when he wanted to tale the tale of his proudest moment of life. Picture it, if you could, because he couldn't. A man, an officer, unnamed, but this is the most vivid moment of Prince's life, right? So the officer tells him that all the troops serving under him know that if they get into trouble into Iraq, call Blackwater first. A lie and an obvious one. But if Prince wants to stick by it, then the US military might want to address policy with those serving because troops do NOT first call mercenaries when they are in need of help. In fact, to do so is a violation of the chain of command.
House Rep and 2008 presidential Democratic hopeful Dennis Kucinich attempted to seriously address the issue of the contracts Blackwater has been awarded by the federal government. He raised serious issues (including the huge increase Blackwater sees each year -- $48 million in 2004, $500 million last year). Prince told Kucinich these weren't "no bid" contracts, that Kucinich misunderstood. He fell back on that repeatedly allowing him to avoid Kucinich's questions. Then, after several other members had their turn at questioning, Prince wanted to clarify the record, turns out some of those contracts he was declaring weren't no-bid, were no-bid contracts.
It was very similar to his appalling response to US service members being scapegoated for the actions of Blackwater: "I don't believe that false story lasted in the media for more than a few hours." But when you're attempting to hustle someone out of the country, every hour counts. And what's a lie to Blackwater? Prince did the same thing with Kucinich's questions. He lied. Then, after he'd eated up the time on the clock, he would clarify his statements on the no-bid contracts. In fairness, if Prince is the idiot he pretended for the committee, then his lawyer assisted him because his attorney (seated to the left of him) was advising him throughout. But that is Blackwater for you. Lying doesn't matter if they correct it . . . after they've gotten what they wanted whether it's time to whisk an employee out of the country or to run down the clock on questions.
He smirked when the e-mail on the shooting was read, when "At least the ID of the shooter will take the heat off us" was read into the record. The heat was off Blackwater and it was placed on the US service members. But Prince thinks it's fine because it -- the lie -- was just out there for "a few hours." At another point, Prince would declare (of this same incident), "Look, I'm not going to make any apologies." No, he wasn't going to. And that he hasn't been forced to goes to how little accountability there is. Which is why he could also declare, "I believe we acted appropriately at all times."
If there was a more appalling moment than that -- to hear a CEO responsible for a company where an employee killed someone (they were focusing on the one death) declare he had no apologies to make -- it was when Mike Turner elected to whine about all the sympathy being shown. Why, he insisted, no one was even noting al-Qaeda. The issue wasn't al-Qaeda. The issue was a US company (of mercenaries) are harming Iraqi civlians (specific instances cited), not facing any punishment for it and it's the US service members that get blamed for it and have to deal with the further hostilities. But Turner -- who appeared genuinely stupid -- couldn't grasp that at and let his whine continue to declare that the focus on Iraqi civilians killed by Blackwater bothered him because "I think it crosses the line between our team and their team." Fortunately for Turner, there were other moments that people will probably zoom in on.Such as Lynn Westmoreland's crack-pot theories about a menace (Red?) in cahoots with trial attorneys across the nation. Thankfully, Westmoreland assured the country that this unnamed menace was not serving in the legislative branch ("There is a party not in Congress . . .").Less concerned with finger pointing within the halls of Congress, Darrell Issa attempted to paint the entire motive for the hearing as partisan, insisting that the hearing was being held because Blackwater has given so much money to Republicans. Erik Prince rejected that, noting, "Blackwater is not a partisan company." It flew over Issa's head. "I think you're exactly right!" Issa crowed, ignoring what Prince had just stated, and insisting this was an attempting to turn it into a partisan issue. Henry Waxman rightly pointed out, "The only one who's done that is you."Christopher Shays, before all but falling to his knees to praise the military, declared, "I was a conscientious objector. I was in the Peace Corp!"
As noted earlier, the September 16th slaughter was taken 'off the table'. Demetri Sevastopulo (Financial Times of London) reports that the FBI's plans to open an investigation into the incident ("last month shot and killed 11 Iraqi civilians") and "send a team to Iraq to assist a State department investigation." There are plenty of witnesses for them to talk to. Jomana Karadsheh and Alan Duke (CNN) report that the Iraqi police officer operating in the square asserts Blackwater "became terrorists" and that "they entered the square, throwing water bottles at the Iraqi police posted there and driving in the wrong direction." The police officer explains, "I saw parts of the woman's head flying in front of me, blow up and then her entire body was charred. What do you expect my reaction to be? Are they protecting the country? No. If I had a weapon I would have shot at them."
After Eric Prince completed his testimony, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform heard from US ambassadors David M. Satterfiled, Richard J. Griffin and William H. Moser. This aspect of the hearing was much shorter than Prince's and that may be due to the fact that even the most basic questions from US Representatives were met with obstruction from the three employees of the State Department. As Jan Schakowsky declared during her questionign, "I have heard all of that." One typical exchange went Q: "Are you refusing to answer" A: "I'm not able to confirm the details."
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer (five more wounded), while 5 other Baghdad roadside bombing claimed 2 lives (twelve wounded). Reuters notes a Khalis bomber killed himself as well 4 civilians "outside a police station" (one woman and one child were among the four dead) and a Jalawla roadside bombing left eleven injured. KUNA reports 6 dead with ten more injured in an Al-Khalis car bombing.
Shootings?
Reuters notes "a businessman and his son" were shot dead in Wihda while "primary school teacher Alaa al-Zubaidi" was shot dead in Suwayra, one person was shot dead in Hilla, an armed struggle in Abbasi claimed 2 lives
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 9 corpses were discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 corpses discovered outside Kirkuk.
Meanwhile, Mark Deen and Kitty Donaldson (Bloomberg News) report, "Prime Minister Gordon Brown, preparing for a possible election in the U.K., said he plans to pull 1,000 troops out of Iraq by the end of this year. The withdrawal would leave about 4,250 U.K. soldiers stationed near the city of Basra and put Iraqi forces in charge of day-to-day security across the south of the country." AFP notes, "In policy terms, Brown has so far shown little divergence from Blair on Iraq, although he has accepted the issue has been politically 'divisive' and that 'mistakes' were made in the post-war planning and reconstruction."
Meanwhile, Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) notes, "The Democratic-led Senate has voted to authorize spending another $150 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Senate passed the spending measure by a 92 to 3 vote. Democrats Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Republican Tom Coburn of Oklahoma voted against the war spending. While the Senate bill authorizes the money to be spent, it does not guarantee it. President Bush will have to wait until Congress passes a separate appropriations bill before war funds are transferred to military coffers." On Bill Moyers Journal (last Friday in most markets and available online A/V and transcript) the issue of the financial costs of the illegal war were addressed:
BILL MOYERS: You said the other day to someone that we think we can fight the war in Iraq without paying for it. JOHN BOGLE: Well, we borrow the money to fight the Iraq War by some estimates and they're not absurd estimates is running now towards a $1 trillion. We could be doing what the British empire did. We could be bankrupting ourselves in the long run. And-- BILL MOYERS: You see us as an empire? JOHN BOGLE: Well, of course it's an empire. We reach all over the world. We thought of ourselves in many, many respects as the policemen of the world. God knows we know we're the policemen of the Middle East. And there are those say, even from Alan Greenspan on up or down, that oil is the root of that. I mean, these are great societal questions. Protecting oil, which is in turn polluting the atmosphere.We have problems as a society. And we don't have to surrender to them. But, we have to have a little introspection about where we are in America today. We've go to think through these things. We've got to develop a political system that is not driven by money. I mean, these are societal problems for us that don't have any easy answers.But you don't have to be an economist to know that a great deal of or a minimum in our economy is coming from borrowed money. People are spending at a higher rate than they're earning, and we're starting to pay a price for that now. Particularly in the mortgage side. But, eventually, that could easily spread and people won't be able to do that anymore. You can't keep spending money you don't have. It gets a lot of it, you know, and it wasn't that many years ago -- maybe a couple of generations ago -- that if you wanted something, you saved for it. And when you completed saving for it, you bought it. Imagine that. And that wasn't so bad. But, now, we know that we can have the instant gratification and pay for it with interest payments, of course, over time, which is not an unfair way to do it. We're going to pay a big price for the excessive debt we've accumulated in this society both in the public side and the private side.And it's no secret that this lack of savings in our economy -- just about zero -- is putting us at the mercy of foreign countries. China owns -- I don't know the exact number -- but, let me say about 25 percent of our federal debt. China does. What happens when they start to buy our corporations with all those extra dollars they've got there? I mean, I think that's very-- these problems are long term, are very much worrisome and very much intractable.
And, finally, tomorrow is an anniversary. As Dennis Kucinich's presidential campaign reminds: "Five years ago tomorrow (Wednesday, October 3), Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich stood on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives to deliver an impassioned, point-by-point refutation of the Bush Administration's arguments seeking passage of the Iraq War Resolution. For days leading up to that moment, Kucinich also widely circulated his own independently conducted analysis of the 'intelligence' that the Administration had presented to Congress in support of the resolution. Eight days later, despite the warnings of Kucinich and 132 other members of the House whom he had managed to persuade to oppose this prelude to war, the majority of the House and the majority of the Senate gave the President the war powers he sought. Among those supporting the 'Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002' were Senators Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Chris Dodd, and Joe Biden, all of whom spoke forcefully in favor of the President's strategy -- all four of whom are now Democratic Presidential candidates. All four subsequently approved additional measures for supplemental appropriations to fund the war, as did Democratic Senator Barack Obama after he was elected to the Senate in 2004. Now, five years after they approved a war that should never have been authorized in the first place, those same Democrats are scrambling to explain, excuse, or defend their votes. At the same time, the foremost among them are refusing to pledge an end to the war, admitting that it may extend well beyond 2013. Kucinich, the only Democratic candidate for President who voted against the original war authorization and every war-appropriation since, has recently raised loud warnings, in the Congress and in public statements, that House-approved and Senate-approve measures targeted towards Iran are 'dangerously and frighteningly similar' to those anti-Iraq resolutions approved five years ago." PDF warning: here for the independent analysis, here for the floor speech.
iraq
joshua keykyle snyder
bloomberg news
mcclatchy newspapers
gregory levey
bill moyersbill moyers journal
pbs
democracy now
"NDP calling for the release of US war resister Robin Long"
TORONTO -- Following the arrest of US war resister Robin Long yesterday in Nelson, B.C., NDP immigration critic Olivia Chow (Trinity-Spadina) and NDP MP Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior) are calling on the Harper government to reexamine their decision to deport Long and allow him to stay in Canada.
"Canada has always been a country that stands up for basic human rights. Conscientious objectors who have fled George W. Bush's illegal war in Iraq should be allowed to stay," said Chow.
"Two war resisters' cases are currently before the Supreme Court of Canada," pointed out Atamanenko. "No one should be arrested or deported before the Court has a chance to make a decision."
Robin Long, from Boise, Idaho, received his orders in March 2005 and left for Canada the following June, believing the war in Iraq was illegal. He lives in Canada with his Canadian partner Renee and their young son. The Immigration and Refugee Board did not find his claims to be untruthful but ruled against his case and his deportation is imminent.
"Canada has always been a place of refuge for war resisters who refuse to fight in illegal wars," noted Chow. "From Vietnam to now, Canada has a proud and distinguished history of putting justice first, and allowing people of conscience to seek refuge in our country. Canada has to release Mr. Long and allow him to stay in Canada."
Chow noted that a recent poll taken in Ontario showed that almost two thirds of Ontarians believe that Canada should allow war resisters to stay in Canada.
I wish I had some words of wisdom here. No Mother Mary is coming to be ("Let It Be"). But this is important and part of the continued assault on war resisters which the press repeatedly ignores. Robin Long, they are so desperate to get a hold of, is going to be in one country and his child in another because the BC police are again working with the US military. The whole thing revolves around some trumped up issue of "We sent you something!" that they never sent and they've used that as their pretext to arrest him and try to deport him. He has an attorney (Jeffry House) for his refugee claim. If Long had received something or House had, they would have dealt with it. Nothing was sent. It's petty crap being used to continue the assault on war resisters. Not unlike "Tent City" in this country.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:
Tuesday, October 2, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, war resister Robin Long is arrested by the same creeps who pulled the stunt earlier with Kyle Snyder, Blackwater's Erik Prince testifies to Congress, the UK announces a drawdown, the US Congress (Democratically led) keeps buying into the illegal war, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Robin Long was arrested yesterday. War resister Long went to Canada in June 2005. He applied for refugee status. Like everyone who has applied thus far, Long was denied. The New Democratic Party of Canada issues a statement "calling on the [prime minister Stephen] Harper government to reexamine their decision to deport Long and allow him to stay in Canada." It's noted that Long "lives in Canada with his Canadian partner Renee and their young son." So the Canadian government has arrested Long, intending to deport him and thereby split up a family. Olivia Chow points to "a recent poll taken in Ontario [which] showed that almost two thirds of Ontarians believe that Canada should allow war resisters to stay in Canada." The War Resisters Support Campaign notes that the poll was "conducted by phone from June 5 to 11, 2007" and that "close to two thirds of Ontarians favour letting US Iraq War resisters settle in Canada" and that polling was "conducted by the national research firm Strategic Communications Inc". Shirley Douglas (who worked her butt of during Vietnam and is as dedicated today) is quoted declaring, "This poll shows that the Canadian tradition of welcoming Americans who dissent from the policies of war is still important to us. The Canadian government should move now to make it possible for the war resisters to settle in this country, as so many did during the Vietnam War." The Christian Radical notes that Nelson was "arrested by the Nelson B.C. Police who intend to take him to Vancouver and hand him over to the US authorities at the border nearby. He was seized as he walked along a street. He is now detained in the local jail. Robin was not allowed to receive visits from friends; however he was able to call his spouse. She says that he is calm and hopeful that he will soon be released." The is the same Nelson B.C. Police that arrested Kyle Snyder on the orders of the US military -- in direct violation of Canadian soveriegnty. In the US, Gregory Levey (Salon) becomes the first at a US news outlet to cover that and he is also the last because it's just too much work for independent media apparently. Now a similar thing has happened to Robin Long. Exactly when the hell does independent media in the United States intend to do its damn job? The Christian Radical notes: "The War Resisters Support Campaign is urging all our friends and supporters to CALL THE NELSON POLICE AT 250-354-3919 AND TELL THEM TO RELEASE ROBIN LONG. We urge you as well to contact your local Member of Parliament and ask her or him to help release Robin."
Along with Kyle Snyder being arrested in a similar stunt (on his wedding day), the US military itself crossed over into Canada and posed as Canadian police officers -- harassing Winnie Ng at her home and demanding to know where war resister Joshua Key was. As independent media in this country -- including the "Nobody owns The Nation" useless piece of crap -- has refused to cover this story, the US has grown ever more bold about issuing orders to lackeys in Canada who aren't concerned with upholding Canadian law, just with being suck ups to the United States.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko,Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters.
Blackwater USA. Today, Erik Prince -- CEO of the mercenary company -- popped into Congress for a hearing on the issue of private security in Iraq held by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform chaired by Rep Henry Waxman. Prince fidgeted throughout, used the phrase "I don't know" repeatedly, showed his disdain for Congress by frequently rolling his eyes, smirking and, when Rep Peter Welch was questinging him, combined the two with an extended head turn to the right and away from Welch. With his disain on full display, the obvious question was for committee members to ask him about his physical presentation. No one did. A lot of representatives wasted time. Rep Diane Watson was the best example of wasted time on the Democratic side and Prince's nonstop smirks during that exchange may have been warranted as Watson went on and on (about topics that had nothing to do with Blackwater such as the MoveOn ad and Rush Limbaugh) only to suddenly declare "And so my question to you" before going back to yammering on. Each time she would say "my question to you," Was there a point to her remarks? It was the embarrassment from the Democratic side as she seemd determined to deliver a free association monologue. Each time she would use the term "question," Prince would lead forward, open his mouth, then close it because Watson wasn't interested in an answer and wasn't interested in getting to a question. What was her point? Who knows with lines like "You are providing a service." At one point, around the fourth or fifth time Prince had leaned in to answer only to grasp she wasn't yielding, he looked around and as if he was about to laugh. Across America -- to the left, to the right, to the center -- many others may have been laughing as well.
On the Republican side? They win as ensemble, too many did far too much for just one to be signaled out. Top honors within the ensemble go to Lynn Westmoreland who wasted everyone's time by putting on his glasses and reading his remarks from prepared text. If you can write down everything ahead of time, don't even show up, just fax your prepared remarks to the media. And that was honestly a problem for most. Those who didn't so obviously read from their prepared remarks for their entire allotted time also didn't appear to listen too closely. That was true regardless of political party. Democrats John Sarbanes and Peter Welch deserve (positive) notice for questions and comments that demonstrated they were aware of what had been asked as well as what had been asked but not answered. Bruce Braley (Democrats) also deserves credit for not wasting his allotted time with a bunch of sop but instead tearing away at the issue of the laws that would or would not govern Blackwater in Iraq -- tearing away at the topic and refusing to let go. Noting the Blackwater employee -- allegedly drunk, who shot dead an Iraqi bodyguard on Christmas Eve 2006 (the committee agreed not to ask about the September 16th incident where Blackwater slaughtered at least 11 innocent Iraqis at the request of the Justice Department) and what passed for 'punishment' --Braley pointed out the message to take away was, "If I screw up . . . the worst that's going to happen is I have to give up a window seat for an aisle seat."
Braley was referring to the fact that Blackwater didn't discipline him. Prince repeatedly -- throughout the hearing -- would immediately go to flogging insisting (over and over) "We can't flog". The inablity to flog appears to be a big issue with Prince. Prince explained (at several points) that -- though they couldn't flog -- what Blackwater did with the employee was pull his plane ticket, withheld the employee's paycheck and the employee's bonus. Prince -- falling back on the flogging -- declared that Blackwater did all they could. Witholding earned wages is supposed to be against the law so it's a shame no one asked Prince what law Blackwater was operating under when they made that decision. A bonus can be given or taken away and any dispute over it can be handled by the courts but earned wages are earned wages and companies do not have the right to withold them.
What Price left out was that the employee didn't just leave. He was proud that the employee's security clearence was pulled. But he failed to show the public his pride over the fact that Blackwater hustled the employee out of Iraq before any serious questions could be asked. Price -- noting he watches crime shows on TV -- begged off ruling whether it was murder, homicide or manslaughter but didn't quibble that, in fact, it was a crime. That being the case, why an employee who had committed a serious crime was being whisked out of Iraq is a question he should have been asked repeatedly.
The point Braley was making was US service members -- in the same situation -- would be facing a court-martial but all the Blackwater employee basically lost was a window seat on the trip home. Throughout it at all, regardless of any question other than about his time in the US Navy Seals, Prince repeatedly fell back on "I don't know." On violence, on whether Chilean thugs who worked for Pinochet were now working for Blackwater (Jan Schakowsky brought that issue up and hit hard repeatedly on the human rights issue), what the make up of the Blackwater force in Iraq was, etc. It was left to Chris Murphy (after many had left the hearing -- press and committee members) to state the obvious, "Certainly as CEO you can tell us what your profit has been?" No, he couldn't.
But he could indicate that he believes Blackwater employees are destroying Blackwater equipment intentionally. That probably wasn't his intent but he declared, to Murphy, that "Our helicopters get fragged." "Frag" is internal not external. If the Blackwater helicopters are being "fragged" then the "fragging" would have to be done by a Blackwater worker. Listening to Prince go on and on about Blackwater's "costs" What costs? That's a serious question. Replacing a helicopter? Well talk to anyone in the trucking industry or the delivery industry and they'll tell you equipment's replaced all the time. But the point was driven home best when Jan Schakowsky was asking (repeatedly) how Blackwater checks out their employees. According to Prince, they basically just run Social Security numbers. So Glory, Glory Private Business . . . as it still depends upon all the tools of the federal government. As Henry Waxman noted in his opening statement, "Over the past 25 years, a sophisticated campaign has been waged to privatize government services. The theory is that corporations can deliver government services better and at a lower cost than government can. Over the last six years, this theory has been put into practice. The result is that privatization has exploded. For every taxpayer dollar spent on federal programs, over 40 cents now goes to private contractors. Our government now outsources even the oversight of the outsourcing. At home, core government functions -- like tax collection and emergency response -- have been contracted out. Abroad companies like Halliburton and Blackwater have made billions performing tasks that used to be done by our nation's military forces. What's been missing is a serious evaluation of whether the promises of privatizing are actually realized." Instead of addressing the reality, Prince elected to play like he didn't know, couldn't recall and invent fantasies. Such as when he wanted to tale the tale of his proudest moment of life. Picture it, if you could, because he couldn't. A man, an officer, unnamed, but this is the most vivid moment of Prince's life, right? So the officer tells him that all the troops serving under him know that if they get into trouble into Iraq, call Blackwater first. A lie and an obvious one. But if Prince wants to stick by it, then the US military might want to address policy with those serving because troops do NOT first call mercenaries when they are in need of help. In fact, to do so is a violation of the chain of command.
House Rep and 2008 presidential Democratic hopeful Dennis Kucinich attempted to seriously address the issue of the contracts Blackwater has been awarded by the federal government. He raised serious issues (including the huge increase Blackwater sees each year -- $48 million in 2004, $500 million last year). Prince told Kucinich these weren't "no bid" contracts, that Kucinich misunderstood. He fell back on that repeatedly allowing him to avoid Kucinich's questions. Then, after several other members had their turn at questioning, Prince wanted to clarify the record, turns out some of those contracts he was declaring weren't no-bid, were no-bid contracts.
It was very similar to his appalling response to US service members being scapegoated for the actions of Blackwater: "I don't believe that false story lasted in the media for more than a few hours." But when you're attempting to hustle someone out of the country, every hour counts. And what's a lie to Blackwater? Prince did the same thing with Kucinich's questions. He lied. Then, after he'd eated up the time on the clock, he would clarify his statements on the no-bid contracts. In fairness, if Prince is the idiot he pretended for the committee, then his lawyer assisted him because his attorney (seated to the left of him) was advising him throughout. But that is Blackwater for you. Lying doesn't matter if they correct it . . . after they've gotten what they wanted whether it's time to whisk an employee out of the country or to run down the clock on questions.
He smirked when the e-mail on the shooting was read, when "At least the ID of the shooter will take the heat off us" was read into the record. The heat was off Blackwater and it was placed on the US service members. But Prince thinks it's fine because it -- the lie -- was just out there for "a few hours." At another point, Prince would declare (of this same incident), "Look, I'm not going to make any apologies." No, he wasn't going to. And that he hasn't been forced to goes to how little accountability there is. Which is why he could also declare, "I believe we acted appropriately at all times."
If there was a more appalling moment than that -- to hear a CEO responsible for a company where an employee killed someone (they were focusing on the one death) declare he had no apologies to make -- it was when Mike Turner elected to whine about all the sympathy being shown. Why, he insisted, no one was even noting al-Qaeda. The issue wasn't al-Qaeda. The issue was a US company (of mercenaries) are harming Iraqi civlians (specific instances cited), not facing any punishment for it and it's the US service members that get blamed for it and have to deal with the further hostilities. But Turner -- who appeared genuinely stupid -- couldn't grasp that at and let his whine continue to declare that the focus on Iraqi civilians killed by Blackwater bothered him because "I think it crosses the line between our team and their team." Fortunately for Turner, there were other moments that people will probably zoom in on.Such as Lynn Westmoreland's crack-pot theories about a menace (Red?) in cahoots with trial attorneys across the nation. Thankfully, Westmoreland assured the country that this unnamed menace was not serving in the legislative branch ("There is a party not in Congress . . .").Less concerned with finger pointing within the halls of Congress, Darrell Issa attempted to paint the entire motive for the hearing as partisan, insisting that the hearing was being held because Blackwater has given so much money to Republicans. Erik Prince rejected that, noting, "Blackwater is not a partisan company." It flew over Issa's head. "I think you're exactly right!" Issa crowed, ignoring what Prince had just stated, and insisting this was an attempting to turn it into a partisan issue. Henry Waxman rightly pointed out, "The only one who's done that is you."Christopher Shays, before all but falling to his knees to praise the military, declared, "I was a conscientious objector. I was in the Peace Corp!"
As noted earlier, the September 16th slaughter was taken 'off the table'. Demetri Sevastopulo (Financial Times of London) reports that the FBI's plans to open an investigation into the incident ("last month shot and killed 11 Iraqi civilians") and "send a team to Iraq to assist a State department investigation." There are plenty of witnesses for them to talk to. Jomana Karadsheh and Alan Duke (CNN) report that the Iraqi police officer operating in the square asserts Blackwater "became terrorists" and that "they entered the square, throwing water bottles at the Iraqi police posted there and driving in the wrong direction." The police officer explains, "I saw parts of the woman's head flying in front of me, blow up and then her entire body was charred. What do you expect my reaction to be? Are they protecting the country? No. If I had a weapon I would have shot at them."
After Eric Prince completed his testimony, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform heard from US ambassadors David M. Satterfiled, Richard J. Griffin and William H. Moser. This aspect of the hearing was much shorter than Prince's and that may be due to the fact that even the most basic questions from US Representatives were met with obstruction from the three employees of the State Department. As Jan Schakowsky declared during her questionign, "I have heard all of that." One typical exchange went Q: "Are you refusing to answer" A: "I'm not able to confirm the details."
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer (five more wounded), while 5 other Baghdad roadside bombing claimed 2 lives (twelve wounded). Reuters notes a Khalis bomber killed himself as well 4 civilians "outside a police station" (one woman and one child were among the four dead) and a Jalawla roadside bombing left eleven injured. KUNA reports 6 dead with ten more injured in an Al-Khalis car bombing.
Shootings?
Reuters notes "a businessman and his son" were shot dead in Wihda while "primary school teacher Alaa al-Zubaidi" was shot dead in Suwayra, one person was shot dead in Hilla, an armed struggle in Abbasi claimed 2 lives
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 9 corpses were discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 corpses discovered outside Kirkuk.
Meanwhile, Mark Deen and Kitty Donaldson (Bloomberg News) report, "Prime Minister Gordon Brown, preparing for a possible election in the U.K., said he plans to pull 1,000 troops out of Iraq by the end of this year. The withdrawal would leave about 4,250 U.K. soldiers stationed near the city of Basra and put Iraqi forces in charge of day-to-day security across the south of the country." AFP notes, "In policy terms, Brown has so far shown little divergence from Blair on Iraq, although he has accepted the issue has been politically 'divisive' and that 'mistakes' were made in the post-war planning and reconstruction."
Meanwhile, Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) notes, "The Democratic-led Senate has voted to authorize spending another $150 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Senate passed the spending measure by a 92 to 3 vote. Democrats Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Republican Tom Coburn of Oklahoma voted against the war spending. While the Senate bill authorizes the money to be spent, it does not guarantee it. President Bush will have to wait until Congress passes a separate appropriations bill before war funds are transferred to military coffers." On Bill Moyers Journal (last Friday in most markets and available online A/V and transcript) the issue of the financial costs of the illegal war were addressed:
BILL MOYERS: You said the other day to someone that we think we can fight the war in Iraq without paying for it. JOHN BOGLE: Well, we borrow the money to fight the Iraq War by some estimates and they're not absurd estimates is running now towards a $1 trillion. We could be doing what the British empire did. We could be bankrupting ourselves in the long run. And-- BILL MOYERS: You see us as an empire? JOHN BOGLE: Well, of course it's an empire. We reach all over the world. We thought of ourselves in many, many respects as the policemen of the world. God knows we know we're the policemen of the Middle East. And there are those say, even from Alan Greenspan on up or down, that oil is the root of that. I mean, these are great societal questions. Protecting oil, which is in turn polluting the atmosphere.We have problems as a society. And we don't have to surrender to them. But, we have to have a little introspection about where we are in America today. We've go to think through these things. We've got to develop a political system that is not driven by money. I mean, these are societal problems for us that don't have any easy answers.But you don't have to be an economist to know that a great deal of or a minimum in our economy is coming from borrowed money. People are spending at a higher rate than they're earning, and we're starting to pay a price for that now. Particularly in the mortgage side. But, eventually, that could easily spread and people won't be able to do that anymore. You can't keep spending money you don't have. It gets a lot of it, you know, and it wasn't that many years ago -- maybe a couple of generations ago -- that if you wanted something, you saved for it. And when you completed saving for it, you bought it. Imagine that. And that wasn't so bad. But, now, we know that we can have the instant gratification and pay for it with interest payments, of course, over time, which is not an unfair way to do it. We're going to pay a big price for the excessive debt we've accumulated in this society both in the public side and the private side.And it's no secret that this lack of savings in our economy -- just about zero -- is putting us at the mercy of foreign countries. China owns -- I don't know the exact number -- but, let me say about 25 percent of our federal debt. China does. What happens when they start to buy our corporations with all those extra dollars they've got there? I mean, I think that's very-- these problems are long term, are very much worrisome and very much intractable.
And, finally, tomorrow is an anniversary. As Dennis Kucinich's presidential campaign reminds: "Five years ago tomorrow (Wednesday, October 3), Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich stood on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives to deliver an impassioned, point-by-point refutation of the Bush Administration's arguments seeking passage of the Iraq War Resolution. For days leading up to that moment, Kucinich also widely circulated his own independently conducted analysis of the 'intelligence' that the Administration had presented to Congress in support of the resolution. Eight days later, despite the warnings of Kucinich and 132 other members of the House whom he had managed to persuade to oppose this prelude to war, the majority of the House and the majority of the Senate gave the President the war powers he sought. Among those supporting the 'Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002' were Senators Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Chris Dodd, and Joe Biden, all of whom spoke forcefully in favor of the President's strategy -- all four of whom are now Democratic Presidential candidates. All four subsequently approved additional measures for supplemental appropriations to fund the war, as did Democratic Senator Barack Obama after he was elected to the Senate in 2004. Now, five years after they approved a war that should never have been authorized in the first place, those same Democrats are scrambling to explain, excuse, or defend their votes. At the same time, the foremost among them are refusing to pledge an end to the war, admitting that it may extend well beyond 2013. Kucinich, the only Democratic candidate for President who voted against the original war authorization and every war-appropriation since, has recently raised loud warnings, in the Congress and in public statements, that House-approved and Senate-approve measures targeted towards Iran are 'dangerously and frighteningly similar' to those anti-Iraq resolutions approved five years ago." PDF warning: here for the independent analysis, here for the floor speech.
iraq
joshua keykyle snyder
bloomberg news
mcclatchy newspapers
gregory levey
bill moyersbill moyers journal
pbs
democracy now
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Baked Pinapple Stuffing in the Kitchen
Brenda loves Recipe Goldmine and asked if I could provide a link to it. She also e-mailed her favorite recipe from the site:
Baked Pineapple Stuffing recipe
1 (20 ounce) can crushed pineapple, undrained
1/4 cup evaporated milk
1 cup packaged cornbread stuffing crumbs
1/2 to 3/4 cup granulated sugar
1/4 cup melted butter or margarine
3 eggs, beaten
Lightly grease the bottom and sides of a 3 1/2-quart crockpot (you may use a baking dish that fits in a larger crockpot). Combine all ingredients; pour into the crockpot. Cover and cook on HIGH for 2 1/2 to 3 hours.
This is good with baked ham.
Serves 4 to 6.
I don't normally include recipes I haven't tasted. I did fix it for Friday night's Iraq study group. It smelled wonderful. But it was gone before I could even taste it. People bring dishes and chips and vegetables and dips. I usually cook a few things myself. Usually something that I can bake so that it's in the oven while the meeting is going on. (Otherwise, I'd miss the discussions.) A slow cooker wasn't something I had thought of using but it's actually ideal because I don't need to set the alarm on my watch to remind myself to rush to the kitchen and pull a dish out of the oven. My husband got some ham from the deli on the way home last night when I told him about Brenda's recipe. He did taste the stuffing and wants a ham at Thanksgiving with this stuffing. (I always threaten that I'll only cook either turkey or ham but end up cooking both.) If it tasted as good as it smelled, it's was delicious.
Another thing to remember about this recipe if you're planning to use it for a holiday is that it will free up the oven. Anyone who cooks a large holiday spread knows how important every burner is and how oven space is sorely lacking. I have a very large stove but even with that and the microwave and the hot plates and the toaster oven, I can always use more space. Holidays here can mean my parents, my husband parents, our brothers and sisters (we both come from large families), their children, their children's young children, our eight children (some of whom have spouses and now we also have a grandbaby) as well as friends who weren't able to make it home for the holidays. Seventy-two may be the smallest we've ever had here for either Christmas or Thanksgiving. We have tables set up all over the house for these events. One year, we tried to set up tables together and would have managed enough seating space for that if my brother, his wife and their children had shown up at the last minute when their flight was cancelled (they had planned to go to his in-laws). There are always people who show up just before it's time to eat and it just makes more sense to use the dining room, the kitchen, the living room and, honestly, the halls.
You may be nodding along with that story or may be thinking, "Thank goodness I don't have a large family!" But if you're cooking on the holidays, you know how stove and oven space is always in short supply. I'm going to try this out again mid-week and plan to include it in Thanksgiving as well (I'll have to increase the ingredients) but you've got plenty of time for test runs between now and the holidays.
Turning to Dennis Kucinich, Paul Hackett's campaigning against him. That's certainly Hackett's right and one of his groupies e-mailed an article this week saying, "You won't even mention it." Oh, but I will. I had to suffer through Hackett's many, many appearences on Air America Radio and I believe he was even on Democracy Now! twice. Hackett was in Falluja for the slaughter but, if understand correctly, he was just in charge of the biometric program. After Falluja was slaughtered the second time, it was time to institute American decided programs such as you couldn't enter the city without being waived in by Americans and only after you'd submitted to biometrics. Hackett never expressed any dismay over the use of white phosphorus and other chemical weapons on a civilian population or the fact that the city was reduced to rubble. He never showed any knowledge that tent cities sprung up for the refugees of Falluja and they didn't live there for a week, three years later many still live outside Falluja in those temporary encampments. He was all eager to get back to Iraq. (I don't doubt him. He sounded very sincere on that and other topics he shared on.) Hackett ran for the House of Representatives and lost. It was from Ohio and not a great deal of concern for me except I noted this was another candidate who was more like a Republican than a Democrat.
Paul Hackett then decided he would run for the Senate. Again, I never have doubted his sincerity so when Democrats in power made it very clear to him that he wasn't wanted in the race, he was very public in his whining. As a mother I use "whining" intentionally. Hackett could have stayed in the race. He didn't have the support of Democratic leadership? Well, wasn't he the fighter, isn't that what he campaigned on? I believe he sincerely believed he was a fighter but it's apparently easier to chase after civilians in the middle of the night -- here in the US -- with a loaded gun, force them off the road and hold them at gunpoint than it is to stand up to Democratic leadership. I wasn't bothered by his whining and thought that if you could leave the very personal nature of his campaign wound to the side, there was a great deal to be learned in his public remarks.
Like others in the field in 2006 who would crash and burn at the polls (Hackett might not have, he might actually have become a Senator), he was supported -- or hidden behind -- because he was a veteran. He didn't have any real ideas or plans, but he had been to Iraq. He wasn't for ending the illegal war so I'm not really sure what that experience was supposed to have in it for a positive. I gave birth to eight children. Maybe I should campaign for public office on that?
The Iraq War has no "up" for the United States. So a candidate whose only claim to fame is that he served in Iraq -- and possibly 'leadership' was shown there; however, the US is a democracy and you don't command in a democracy the way you do in the military -- and he's not calling for a withdrawal, just a 'smarter' illegal war, really has nothing to offer but a sugar coating shell for the Bully Boy's illegal polices.
Hackett would disagree but there were troubling aspects about his stances on gay rights and abortion. In the end, he would clarify those stances and do so in such a way that would indicate he might be in line with many who were in favor of both. I didn't see that as sop tossed out to fool the voters. I saw it as someone who had never bothered to think about either topic a great deal before deciding to run for the US Senate. Which, to me, indicated how unready he was to hold a position in the Senate since the only thing he had apparently thought about was his own life. That may be a natural issue of age (he is young) or it may be evidence that he has a hard time grasping the world isn't centered around him.
When he dropped out of the race for Senate, he made many public statements. He found his online buddies had turned on him. Democratic leadership said another person was the designate and he was shoved aside. Robert Parry (Consortium News) appeared to be firmly in support of Hackett and maintained that while others caved. C.I. was against Hackett but never wrote about Hackett's campaign (C.I.'s opposition was to the nonsense Hackett -- while not a candidate -- threw out repeatedly in interviews on Air America Radio and other useless outlets that hid behind the military because they were too cowardly to formulate their own opinions) but C.I. did defend Hackett's right to run and offered that Hackett should take back his decision to leave the Senate race. So he maintained support from Parry and C.I. advocated his returning to the race. I didn't ask C.I. about this but I know C.I. well enough to know C.I. making those comments were in response to the very quick and harsh way Hackett was dropped (I believe C.I. would use the term "used" and then dropped) and the very public manner in which that happened.
Hackett was dumped publicly. Like a contestant on a reality show sent packing. Now he's popped up to reveal a conversation he says took place between himself and Dennis Kucinich when Hackett was running for the House. I don't doubt that the conversation took place because I don't think Hackett's ever lied. I do find it interesting that who called who is not included in the retelling. (I'll assume that's the reporter's axe to grind and not Hackett's.) Left out of the retelling is that Hackett was asking for help in campaigning for the House. If you read this from the article e-mailed to me, you'll infer that help for his Hackett's campaign was being requested:
"He started his conversation off, which was pretty much a unilateral conversation, him to me while I was driving in my car in the 2nd Congressional District, by saying 'I would rather see Jean Schmidt get elected to Ohio's 2nd Congressional District than you. Because you are wrong on Iraq, you fought in Iraq, you're a Democrat in name only,' and a host of other issues."
I don't doubt Hackett's honesty, I do question his retelling abilities. How much of that is his problem and how much of it is the paper's own problem is unknown.
But I don't find anything appalling in that. Hackett was for the Iraq War. Kucinich had no reason to campaign for him. He had every reason not to campaign for him. If Bob Casey had phoned me for help, Bob Casey Jr., I would have responded in a similar manner due to Casey's opposition to a woman's right to choose.
Currently Kucinich is fighting in Congress with a handful of other reps to end the illegal war. The last thing he needed was another rep in the House who was going to push for the continuation of the illegal war. Those angry with the Democrats for still not ending the illegal war can certainly grasp that the obstructionists who continue the illegal war and buy into the illegal war are ignoring the people.
I say, "Good for Kucinich." Hackett goes on to call Kucinich a single-issue candidate which, it should be noted, was one more issue than Hackett ran on in either of his campaigns. Unless, of course, you consider a foul mouth an issue to run on.
Hackett's political immaturity still shines through as he denouces Kucinich as a single-issue candidate. Hackett's got VA benefits so he probably won't give much thought to single-payer health care any time soon. Again, we're back to the candidate (in a House race and a Senate race) who didn't think anything happened in the world if it had not happened to him personally. Kucinich is not a single-issue candidate. Hackett's still politically immature and thinks that because he was in Iraq, he's now an expert on life.
I doubt he's even an expert on destruction of life. But they conmen like Al Franken stroked his ego and led him to believe he was an expert. I would never have gone on Baby Cries A Lot show for any reason. But I gave birth to eight children and I think, in doing so, I provided more of a service to this country than someone who took part in destroying a country far away and still thinks that's a 'cool' thing to do. Hackett's attempting to destroy Kucinich today and it's a sign of how weak his understanding of the candidate he's supporting (or maybe how weak the candidate is) that all he can offer (or, in fairness, all the press can quote him on) is his uninformed attacks on Dennis Kucinich.
I don't care for Paul Hackett. Nothing he's ever said has made me wish I could vote for him. Al Franken, Sam Seder and the host of people who propped him up (when he had Democratic leadership backing) are disgusting types who hide behind the military. Adam Kokesh is a libertarian. I would be more than willing to consider voting for him because Kokesh has an understanding beyond on his own personal experiences. He is a thoughtful person who, when he runs (he will run for public office), has clearly given great thought to many issues. That's true of the illegal war but it's also true of many other things as well. If he was against a candidate who was equally strong, he wouldn't automatically get my vote.
Because I don't suffer from "Vote for Vets"! I don't hide behind a military and, more importantly, grasp that many caught up in that madness (as Hackett clearly is from his talk of his 'men') are not only threatening to women's rights, but threatening to democracy itself. But the military's been elevated so high by cowardly Democrats (such as Al Franken) who can't stand up for what they believe in but will gladly hide behind others, that we seem to be getting ever further away from what a democracy is founded upon. It's not founded upon a worship for the military and it's not founded upon a desire to militarize the United States.
During Vietnam, no veteran was spit upon. The myth survives to this day despite being repeatedly debunked. One reason is that some veterans of that era feel they didn't get their parades. I'm gald some made it back and regret that others died and "others" includes the Vietnamese. But had they thrown a parade in my area at the time, I wouldn't have (and I still wouldn't) turn out to applaud the boys who slit throats with piano wire, the ones dropping napalm on innocent civilians, the ones bombing the dykes in an attempt to starve the civilian populations. Similarly, I won't be applauding service in an illegal war. I will pray for those who were used in an illegal war. But I won't play the fool and turn out for a parade to honor participation in an illegal war.
The only thing I diagree with that's attributed to Kucinich is the thanks for service. Allowing the US to conduct an illegal war is not serving the United States. I grasp that young people may not realize that until they see it first hand, as was the case with Agustin Aguayo, to give one example. I realize that what Aguayo or Ehren Watada, Kyle Snyder or other brave people do is beyond the ability of many. But to have been in Iraq, to have participated in the illegal war, and then to return to this country and still cheerlead it doesn't show bravery, it shows ignorance. Service to the United States is holding a criminal administration accountable, not marching blindly to the orders of a crook.
Kucinich is for universal health care (not for a program that's far from it but is passed off as universal health care), he's for saving the environment (which isn't a side-issue but an issue very important to our very survival), he's for repealing the Patriot Act, he's for creating jobs in this country and a host of other issues. Calling him a one-issue candidate demonstrates either political immaturity or else a strong desire for the illegal war to continue -- so strong that it blinds you to reality.
Here's what Paul Hackett thinks is a single-issue candidate:
After the remarks, Kucinich and his wife spent about an hour answering questions and responding to comments from the audience. The topics ranged from Kucinich's odds of winning the White House to his strategy for the campaign, his thoughts on reducing Americans' dependence on automobiles, the importance of sustainable agriculture and the need for universal healthcare.
"Imagine the Department of Agriculture being really involved in the promotion of sustainable agriculture," Kucinich said as members of the audience laughed and cheered. "Every area of our government can be reorganized" to benefit the environment and improve the world.
One program Kucinich touted several times during his remarks was his universal preschool program for 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds. The program, he said, would provide child care; expose children to the arts, including music; and provide an education boost. "Our children need to be exposed to the fullness of our culture from an early age," he said.
Kucinich also favors a not-for-profit, universal healthcare system.
"Healthcare is a basic right in a democratic society, not a privilege," he said. Elizabeth Kucinich, a native of England, where such a system already is in place, backed her husband up on his plan.
"Everybody is for this," she said. "There is absolutely no reason why the U.S. can't have a single-payer healthcare system."
That's from Michelle L. Klampe's article in the Ventura County Star. Lastly, a member wrote wondering if there were any hard feelings between C.I. and I over my post last week? No. Nor on my part over C.I.'s noting Hillary will stand firm when she stands up. My post was noted in the Sunday entry and also Monday morning as well as in Monday's snapshot. I offered my opinions and C.I.'s repeat linkings were supposed to make clear that here's a viewpoint you should check out. C.I.'s not interested in telling anyone who to vote for and will also note good qualities of candidates as well. There was no problem for either of us with what the other wrote. I am actively supporting Dennis Kucinich. C.I.'s not going to endorse any candidate. Mike, my son, may not end up supporting Kucinich (he's still deciding who to vote for or if he's even going to support a Democrat in the primary). If he chooses to support a candidate in the primary and it's not Kucinich, there will not be a problem there. To be clear, C.I. is not supporting or endorsing any candidate. They get mentioned at The Common Ills only in relation to Iraq. There is no one that hasn't gotten a favorable mention for at least once telling truth on Iraq in some aspect. Kucinich and Richardson get mentioned more because they are talking about the illegal war. If one of the candidates says (or does) something to prolong the illegal war, they get called out on that. C.I. was here last night and is still here. They're leaving for California shortly. When C.I. came in from running with Mike this morning, I was informed by the two of them by an idea they had for a piece at The Third Estate Sunday Review dealing with the way the primary campaign is currently going. I would urge you to check out The Third Estate Sunday Review tomorrow.
I said "lastly" but . . . One thing C.I. and I spoke of last night was how furious we are over something. We're not supposed to write about it online. No one is. We're all supposed to support Mike's feelings that we just avoid it. I'm probably the only one who can get away with breaking that because I'm his mother. So let me weigh in. Dave Zirin is a piece of work. Writing a 21-year-old young man who has done nothing but praise you to hiss that you've been distorted and called a "flack" for Obama (Mike did not write that Zirin was a 'flack' for Obama) is really juvenile. Dave Zirin is a juvenile and he's an idiot. I don't care that he in some form retracted that in a later e-mail. The reality is Zirin went on Democracy Now! and praised Roberto Clemente. (And if it's Roger Clemente, I don't give a damn. I'm not a sports fan and think it's hilarious the way so many get so caught up in something as trivial as sports.) In the midst of that praise, he brought up Barack Obama. He may not wish he'd stated that Clemente did something brave and he doesn't see Obama's statements as brave; however, he did not say that on Democracy Now! What he did on that broadcast was praise Clemente and then offer a comparison to Obama that was not negative. In the midst of his gush-fest over Clemente, his comparison inserted of Obama reads like praise for Obama. The fact that in the later e-mail Zirin acknowledges that he was made aware of Mike (and Wally's) praise for Zirin's book in 2005 but never wrote to thank them may not seem like a big deal. It becomes a big deal when you consider that he never thanked either young man for that and he never thanked Mike for the repeated praise my son offered of him over a two year period. However, he shows up two years later, for the first time, to yell and screech at my son, making baseless accusations that (though withdrawn) seriously upset my son. I won't be silent on that even though Mike's asked us all not to mention it. Over 250 times Dave Zirin was praised by my son at his website. When Mike noted that he wasn't into Zirin that much these days, Zirin e-mails a nasty e-mail. Zirin was a personal hero of my son. It's not a question of hate mail because Mike gets that and laughs at. It's a question of someone you've gone out of your way to promote, someone whose work you have really enjoyed, never bothering to thank you over a two year period but showing up to be nasty about the fact that he (Zirin) can't speak clearly. I've seen my son depressed over lost games (that he played in or just watched), over elections, over relationships, but I've never seem him not bounce back quickly until this week. He will be fine. But that someone who has been a hero to him decided to go to town on him (hissing "slander" among other terms) because Zirin's not proficient enough in public speaking to be clear about his own meaning is really sick. Congratulations to you, Dave Zirin, you took someone who was your biggest fan and showed them exactly why they never should have wasted their time even reading you. I will not be silent on that.
And I think someone's ego needs to be checked when they want to reap all the positives from my son's ringing endorsement but when one thing is noted (and noted by Mike correctly), suddenly it's time to e-mail and act like an immature brat. The fact that in what I term "clarification" (not "apology"), Zirin notes he's familiar with all the praise goes to the fact that Zirin was happy to have his ego stroked but anything less than 100% praise means it's time to lash out demonstrates that Zirin has problems. That's my son and I will not be silent while Zirin does a number on him. I understand that Elaine (his girlfriend) and C.I. and others have to be silent. I'm Mike's mother, I do not have to be silent and I will not be silent. Long before the net, C.I.'s ignored the press. I've mentioned write ups since I met C.I. and have always been surprised by the remark, "I didn't read it." But I get the point now. C.I. has always maintained that if you read the good, you have to read the bad; that everyone's not going to like you; that you will do or say things that will upset some people; so you either go full out and read everything or you ignore it. C.I. elected to ignore it. C.I. has repeatedly noted people who read only their positive press and end up with an inflated view of themselves. I would think, "How silly. You are grounded. It's not going to go to your head." But obviously, it did go to Zirin's head. Which is why he felt he could attack my son for the mildest of statements based upon what Zirin did on Democracy Now! -- not on anything my son created, but what Zirin actually did. As Elaine noted (and I won't link to the actual post because Mike's asked us all not to link to any of this and just let it die -- Wally and Cedric link to everything and they told Mike they would emphasize it but they were linking to it):
C.I.'s known as a "really-real," actually, and it is because there's no pretense. C.I. was that way in college, C.I. was that way after the first blush of fame all those years ago. But, and this is in no way blaming C.I., it's probably equally true that the way C.I. is made Mike think that someone far less famous would be the way they self-present and that's not the case with Dave Zirin. Let me add far, far less famous. Maybe another "far" is needed? I doubt Dave Zirin will ever make even one magazine cover.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Friday:
Friday, September 28, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the air-war continues and NPR goes ga-ga over it, the mercenaries at Blackwater continue to raise questions, and Dems fund the illegal war again. And, ADDED, PBS examines the Iraq War (tonight in most markets) via Bill Moyers Journal and NOW with David Branccacio.
Starting with war resistance. As Iraq Veterans Against the War notes, the government's 'do-over' (double-jeopardy) attempt at court-martialing Ehren Watada is scheduled for October 9th and "Lt. Watada is facing four charges that could land him in jail for up to six years." June 22, 2006, Ehren Watada became the first officer to publicly refuse to serve in the Iraq War (rightly) noting that the war is illegal. Daniel Ellsberg gave a speech (posted at ICH) last week where he noted Watada, "I've often said that Lt. Ehren Watada -- who still faces trial for refusing to obey orders to deploy to Iraq which he correctly perceives to be an unconstitutional and aggressive war -- is the single officer in the United States armed services who is taking seriously in upholding his oath." Watada's attorneys are appealing on a number of grounds including the fact that Judge Toilet (aka John Head) thinks he can be impartial and preside again as well as the fact that a second court-martial (after Head ruled the February court-martial a mistrial over defense objection) would be in violation of the US Constitution which forbids double-jeopardy.
At the start of the week, Audra D.S. Burch (Miami Herald) provided an overview of war resister Aidan Delgado's book The Sutras Of Abu Ghraib: Notes From A Conscientious Objector In Iraq, noting, "This is a story of one young man's transformation from reserve volunteer to soldier to conscientious objector, practicing Buddhist, author and always -- always -- relentless critic of the Iraq War, a peace advocate with a point of view based on real wartime experiences." Delgado is the third war resister to tell their story in book form this year. In May, Camilo Mejia shared his story in Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia while in February Joshua Key told his story in The Deserter's Tale.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Derek Hess, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko,Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters.
ADDED:In media news, the latest episode of Bill Moyers Journal airs on PBS in many markets tonight (check your local listings) and he will remember two US service members who died recently (two of the seven who wrote the New York Times column "The War as We Saw It") and this is also up at YouTube..In addition Bill Moyers Journal examines the Iraqi refugee crisis with NPR's Deborah Amos and War Hawk George Packer while also taking a look at the outrageous amount of monies being spent on the illegal war.
Also: This week (Fridays in most markets) PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio examines the issue of US service members wounded in the illegal war: "For many Iraq and Gulf War veterans, the transition from battlefield to home front is difficult. Bouts of fierce anger, depression and anxiety that previous generations of soldiers described as "shell shock" or "combat/battle fatigue" now earn a clinical diagnosis: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. But the relatively new medical label doesn't guarantee soldiers will get the care they need. On Friday, September 28 at 8:30 pm (check local listings), NOW looks at how America's newest crop of returning soldiers is coping with the emotional scars of war, and some new and innovative treatments for them."
On NPR's The Diane Rehm Show today (second hour), Al-Arabiya TV's Hisham Melhem explained the new meaning of Blackwater since the September 16th incident where they slaughtered at least 16 Iraqi civilians, "In the past, Susan [Page, USA Today], if you wanted to discredit the American war in Iraq or if you wanted to discredit the war on terror all you had to do is just invoke the names of places such as Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib or Haditha. Now you can add to that Blackwater USA. I mean this is a huge embarrassment and a problem for the United States in the future. These people are now seen by the Iraqis as the new face of the occupation. And the irony of all ironies now, because these people are in charge of providing protection to the American diplomats there -- I mean, you have a private army. This is the privatization of war. More than 30,000 men. And I'm not saying that many of them . . . are [not] honorable and former good soldiers, the problem is that given what they've done, as Robin [Wright, Washington Post] said, just imagine Ryan Crocker, one of the best American diplomats serving in the Middle East, probably the best one available for Iraq now, trying to visit a neighborhood in Baghdad, after the surge, whatever, he's going to be protected by whom? By elements of the Blackwater. That's the irony of ironies."
On the topic of Blackwater, today Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reported that among the deaths resulting from the US mercenary compnay are four Iraq journalists including Suhad Shakir who was shot dead February 2nd while driving to work inside the Green Zone while three guards of the Iraqi Media Network were shot dead, "picked off one by one by Blackwater snipers stationed on the roof of the 10-story Justice Ministry". The US Defense Department has maintained that they do not use Blackwater for their employees; however, the US State Dept does. James Risen (New York Times) reports that the State Department released a count that found Blaackwater "had been involved in 56 shootings while guarding American diplomats in Iraq so far this year." An Iraqi government investigation found Blackwater responsible for the September 16th deaths at a time when Nouri al-Maliki, puppet of the occupation, was issuing strong words that Blackwater would be gone. Instead, the puppet's strings were pulled and he agreed to go along with a US State Department led investigation. AFP reports today that US Gen David Petraues and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker have stated that this 'commission' has still not met and is still "preparing for its first meeting in Baghdad". Rather surprising when Steve Fainaru and Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) are able to report on the US embassy's insta-study of the situation today which finds 'confusion' and 'good intentions' (at least one Blackwater employee all but yelled, "Stop the madness!"). Though James Glanz and Sabrina Tavernise are back to pimp this report, the New York Times' reporters fail to use the term "self-serving" though they were very happy to apply that to the report on Blackwater from the Iraqi government. Since the mercenaries do not protect Iraqis, since they protect US embassy employees, exactly which report would be more likely to be "self-serving"? Play dumb, Glanz and Tavernise, play dumb. As Reuters notes, the official US State Dept response is "We're not commenting on the substance of the investigation" which allows them to float this, to get it out there, and if it explodes in their faces, claim they never said those things happened. Meanwhile, Kristin Roberts and Sue Pleming (Reuters) report that US Brig Gen Joseph Anderson declared today of the mercenaries, "I can certainly say I've seen them do some tactics that I thought were over the top. Are they quicker with the trigger? Are they quicker to wave a weapon, brandish a weapon, other tactics, cutting people off? All of us have experience, have seen different things at different times. I have seen them, in my opinion, over-react but that does not mean it's consistently the case."
Blackwater is far from the only problem facing Iraqis. Today on WBAI's Wakeupcall Radio (first hour), host Mario Murillo spoke with CorpWatch's Pratap Chatterjee who explained his latest piece ("The Boys from Baghdad: Iraqi Commandos Trained by U.S. Contractor") noting that Blackwater shooting at civilians was "just the tip of the iceberg . . . because you do have US soldiers and US security guards that are in the country shooting at civilians, dropping bombs on them, etc. -- creating mayhem. But in fact the role the US has played in creating the civil war in fact is far more long lasting, could be far more insidious and dangerous than the occasional massacre of civilians. That's in no way to condone it at all -- but just say that there are far worse things happening today. There are probably at least, to the best of my knowledge, six training programs to support 'Iraqi security'. The first couple are the training of the Iraqi police and the Iraqi army which interestingly enough were given over to private contractors. DynCorp from Virginia trains the police and Vinnell from Los Angeles originally had the contract to train the Iraqi army. Both of these have been pretty much disasters. And in fact one of the things I explain in this article is that in April 2004 when there were like two major incidents in the country -- and I was in Iraq at the time -- one was the civil uprisings in the south with the siege of various cities and the attack on Blackwater personnel in Falluja -- the US tried to press this police and army into service and in both cases, in fact they shipped police down to Najaf the Iraqi police and soldiers just basically fled the scene and refused to fight and, in some case, turned against the US. So the US quickly realized they needed something way beyond the sort of regular security forces. . . . So they came up with this idea of third force. The third force was going to be special commandos that would be highly trained -- a little like Special Forces that could go into action." Chatterjee explains in his article that these are Emergency Response Unit or ERU and that they training "began under General David Petreaus as an effort to bolster security in Iraq, and soon evolved into a system for providing support to the deeply sectarian Ministry of the Interior." That ministry provides their paychecks as well as controls them today. "Sometimes the people that they train are people who come from backgrounds that are either sectarian or criminal," Chatterjee explained to Murillo. "It's one thing to bring in Blackwater and have them protect US diplomats and shoot at anybody who comes close -- that's horrendous -- but it's another thing to actually go in and train people in the art of warfare and hand this training over to sectarian groups that are now creating multiple civil wars in the country. And that, to me, is one of the most insidious and dangerous parts of the US occupation."
Another insidious part of the illegal war is the little noted air war. (Norman Solomon has long noted the air war and it's under-reporting by the media.) Guy Raz (NPR's Morning Edition) reported today that "about every 90 seconds something takes off or lands at Balad Air Base there's C130 Cargo planes, there are helicopters, there are fighter jets and those are just a fraction of the forty different kinds of aircraft that use this base. It's not just busy, it's really busy. Actually the busiest Pentagon airport in the world and the second busiest airport in the world overall." Though such activity might give many pause, Guy Raz is a rah-rah-rah-er and tickled pink to be one of the 'boys'. This as Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Around 2 a.m. U.S. military used aerial fire targeting a building in Al Doura area south Baghdad, Iraqi police said. The aerial fire targeted building number 139 in Al Siha district. 10 people were killed and 7 others were injured according to the Iraqi police sources." Reuters notes eight dead. Meanwhile, the US military issues a press release regarding events Tuesday: "A U.S. Air Force F-16CJ Fighting Falcom dropped precision munitions near Al Nussayyib, Iraq Sept. 25, killing Abu Nasr al-Tunisi and two other Al Q'aeda in Iraq operatives. They were killed when the aircraft, assigned to U.S. Central Command Air Forces, dropped two laser guided 500 lb Joint Direct Attack Munition GBU-12 bombs, destroying the terrorist safe house when the three were meeting." If this is the announced 'investigation' into the Tuesday bombing in Mussyyib that claimed the lives of 5 women and 4 children (see yesterday's snapshot), consider it a white wash.
In news of other violence . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack that wounded two people while a truck bombing in Mosull "destroyed a bridge". Reuters notes the Mosul truck bombing left twenty people wounded. KUNA reports that the British military base in Basra was attacked with mortars overnight.
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "David Shamoun, a 28 Christian Iraqi . . . worked with a Turkish company and a college students" was shot dead in Mosul
Corpses?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 5 corpses discovered in Baghdad.
Meanwhile Dominic Evans (Reuters) reports that if the 59 announced deaths holds, September will be the lowest month of announced US service members deaths for the year. September in 2005 and 2003 was lower than the announced 59. Also worth noting is that M-NF 'elected' to allow DoD to announce deaths this month.
On the subject of the US military's "kill teams," the press continues to avoid the fact that war resister James Burmeister was publicly speaking of them months before the press stumbled onto them this week. Paul von Zeilbauer (New York Times) reported this morning on the court-martial of Jorge G. Sandoval and noted that Anthony G. Murphy had testified in July that there was a sense of sense "of disappointment from field commanders seeking higher enemy body counts" and that "Soldiers also testified that battalion commanders authorized a classified new technique that used fake explosives and detonation wires as 'bait' to lure and kill suspected insurgents around Iskandariya, a hostile Sunni Arab region south of Baghdad." AP reports that Sandoval was acquitted today of some charges; however, "the panel decided he had placed a detonation wire on one of the bodies to make it look as if the man was an insurgent."
In Wednesday's snapshot, the Joe Biden led push in the Senate (Biden is a senator and also a candidate for the Democratic Party's potential presidential nomination) to divide Iraq into three section in a vote that found 75 US senators voting in favor of it and only 23 voting against it. Ron Jacobs (CounterPunch) observes, "Partitioning Iraq is not a solution that is Washington's to make. The recent vote by the US Senate is misguided. In addition, it will do little to further the desire of the US public to bring the troops home. Instead, it will put US forces in the position of maintaining the newly created divisions along new lines in the sand. Senator Biden's bill is not a solution. It is another false approach that has as much chance at success as anything tried by the Bush administration. In other words, it is destined to fail." Al Jazeera reports that Nouri Al-Maliki is denouncing the US resolution and declaring, "They should stand by Iraq to solidify its unity and its sovereignty. They shouldn't be proposing its division. That could be a disaster not just for Iraq but for the region." Strong words from the puppet. Words that, if pattern holds, will vanish with the mere pulling of a string.
Which is why the Iraqi government, 'officially' led by the puppet, is held in such low opinion by Iraqis. Yesterday on Free Speech Radio News, Hiba Dawood reported, "The slow crumbling of Iraq's government began when the Sadrists withdraw their ministers from cabinet, demanding real authority to provide local services and a timetable for an end to the US occupation. In the fourteen months since then, the Sadrists and the Fadheela Party have split from the United Iraqi Alliance Coalition the largest Shi'ite grouping in the Iraqi parliament. The latest to leave the government were the ministers from the Sunni Accord. They accuse the government of serving sectarian ends. Shi'ite prime minister Nouri al-Maliki's government is accused of sectarianism even by other Shias who accuse him of marginalizing them. But the United Iraqi Alliance, now reduced to just the Dawa Party, and the Iraq Islam Supreme Council insists the government is still performing. Jinan [Jasim] al-Ubaydi is a member of parliament and with the Iraqi Islamic Supreme Council. She says the withdrawal of so many parties from the governing alliance doesn't effect government policy or performance: 'There dreams are negotiable and though there are many withdrawals, the government is not collapsing. Ryan Crocker said the Iraqi government has enjoyed many vital successes.' Despite the US ambassador's optimism few ordinary Iraqis say the government is succeeding. There is a growing frustration with both the government and the parties that have pulled out."
Despite this, the US Congress continues to fund the illegal war. John Nichols (Common Dreams) reports that the Senate raised the debt limit for the federal government and gave the Bully Boy "at least $9 billion in new funding for its war in Iraq" in a 94 to 1 vote with Russ Feingold being the sole senator to vote no (and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John McCain and Sam Brownback all missing the vote due to campaiging for their parties' presidential nomination) while the House of Represenatives passed the measure by a 404 to 14 vote with Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Earl Blumenauer, Keith Ellison, Ron Paul, Bob Filner, Barney Frank, Maurice Hinchey, Dennis Kunich, Jim McDermott, Donald Payne, Lynn Woolsey and Diane Watson voting no (Kucinich and Paul are running for their parties' presidential nomination). Meanwhile, the national Green Party has noted Democratic party hopefuls for their party's presidential nomination Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama declared this week in a forum broadcast by MSNBC that they couldn't guarantee all US troops would be home, if they were elected to president, by the year 2013. The Green Party notes:
The Green Party of the United States has called for full and immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, the occupation of which is entering its sixth year; the party opposes a US military attack on Iran and warns Americans not to believe the new flood of deceptive war propaganda.
Greens stress that Congress could end the war quickly if Democrats refused to move on bills for war funding, including the latest request for nearly $190 billion the Pentagon says is necessary to keep combat troops in Iraq for another year. Greens urge Congress to divert federal funds from war spending to human needs and services in the US, including restoration and rebuilding in the Gulf Coast.
The Green Party has called for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney for numerous abuses of power, including misleading the American people about the reasons for invading Iraq. Greens have called the invasion a criminal breach of the US Constitution and international law, motivated by desire for political and corporate dominance in the region, control over Iraqi oil and other resources, and cooperation with Israel's aggressive strategic objectives.
In news of pacts, CBS and AP report: "Turkey and Iraq signed a counterterrorism pact Friday aimed at cracking down on separatist Kurdish rebels who have been attacking Turkey from bases in Iraq. The agreement, however, falls short of meeting Ankara's demand to send troops in pursuit of Kurdish rebels fleeing across the border into northern Iraq, Turkey's Interior Minister Besir Atalay said. 'It was not possible to reach a deal on chasing Kurdish rebels, however, we hope this issue will be solved in the future,' Atalay said. 'We are expecting this cooperation against terrorism to be broadened as much as possible'."
Last night, Houston's The Progressive Forum (KPFT -- here for KPFT archives) devoted the second hour of the program to a speech by Gloria Steinem delivered September 17th in Houston, Texas and entitled "The Progression of Feminism: Where Are We Going?". Steinem declared near the start, "I arrived here this morning and I said, 'Oh, this is Ann Richards Airport.' Don't you think we're going to live to see the day when they'll be glad to change the name?" She then began addressing the efforts to destroy tribes, women, LBGT and other members in an attempt to dominate and colonialize. As she observed, "No, we can't go back and it's not about romanticizing the past but it is about understanding that if a system of male dominance had a beginning, it can have an end." Steinem's Outrageous Acts & Everyday Rebellions was mentioned in yesterday's snapshot as was a documentary, Anthony Thomas' Thy Kingdom Come, Thy Will Be Done which a typo turned into "They" (I put in links on a good day and then dictate later in the day -- I dictate very fast and would have my own typos if I typed the snapshots -- we're noting this one because the documentary's title was wrong due to the typo "They Kingdom Come, Thy Will Be Done.")
bill moyersbill moyers journal
now with david branccaciopbs
iraq
ehren watada
aidan delgadojoshua keycamilo mejia
iraq veterans against the war
ron jacobs
free speech radio news
wakeup callwbai
kpft
gloria steinem
the diane rehm show
the washington postsudarsan raghavan
the new york timessabrina tavernise
james glanz
blackwater usa
Baked Pineapple Stuffing recipe
1 (20 ounce) can crushed pineapple, undrained
1/4 cup evaporated milk
1 cup packaged cornbread stuffing crumbs
1/2 to 3/4 cup granulated sugar
1/4 cup melted butter or margarine
3 eggs, beaten
Lightly grease the bottom and sides of a 3 1/2-quart crockpot (you may use a baking dish that fits in a larger crockpot). Combine all ingredients; pour into the crockpot. Cover and cook on HIGH for 2 1/2 to 3 hours.
This is good with baked ham.
Serves 4 to 6.
I don't normally include recipes I haven't tasted. I did fix it for Friday night's Iraq study group. It smelled wonderful. But it was gone before I could even taste it. People bring dishes and chips and vegetables and dips. I usually cook a few things myself. Usually something that I can bake so that it's in the oven while the meeting is going on. (Otherwise, I'd miss the discussions.) A slow cooker wasn't something I had thought of using but it's actually ideal because I don't need to set the alarm on my watch to remind myself to rush to the kitchen and pull a dish out of the oven. My husband got some ham from the deli on the way home last night when I told him about Brenda's recipe. He did taste the stuffing and wants a ham at Thanksgiving with this stuffing. (I always threaten that I'll only cook either turkey or ham but end up cooking both.) If it tasted as good as it smelled, it's was delicious.
Another thing to remember about this recipe if you're planning to use it for a holiday is that it will free up the oven. Anyone who cooks a large holiday spread knows how important every burner is and how oven space is sorely lacking. I have a very large stove but even with that and the microwave and the hot plates and the toaster oven, I can always use more space. Holidays here can mean my parents, my husband parents, our brothers and sisters (we both come from large families), their children, their children's young children, our eight children (some of whom have spouses and now we also have a grandbaby) as well as friends who weren't able to make it home for the holidays. Seventy-two may be the smallest we've ever had here for either Christmas or Thanksgiving. We have tables set up all over the house for these events. One year, we tried to set up tables together and would have managed enough seating space for that if my brother, his wife and their children had shown up at the last minute when their flight was cancelled (they had planned to go to his in-laws). There are always people who show up just before it's time to eat and it just makes more sense to use the dining room, the kitchen, the living room and, honestly, the halls.
You may be nodding along with that story or may be thinking, "Thank goodness I don't have a large family!" But if you're cooking on the holidays, you know how stove and oven space is always in short supply. I'm going to try this out again mid-week and plan to include it in Thanksgiving as well (I'll have to increase the ingredients) but you've got plenty of time for test runs between now and the holidays.
Turning to Dennis Kucinich, Paul Hackett's campaigning against him. That's certainly Hackett's right and one of his groupies e-mailed an article this week saying, "You won't even mention it." Oh, but I will. I had to suffer through Hackett's many, many appearences on Air America Radio and I believe he was even on Democracy Now! twice. Hackett was in Falluja for the slaughter but, if understand correctly, he was just in charge of the biometric program. After Falluja was slaughtered the second time, it was time to institute American decided programs such as you couldn't enter the city without being waived in by Americans and only after you'd submitted to biometrics. Hackett never expressed any dismay over the use of white phosphorus and other chemical weapons on a civilian population or the fact that the city was reduced to rubble. He never showed any knowledge that tent cities sprung up for the refugees of Falluja and they didn't live there for a week, three years later many still live outside Falluja in those temporary encampments. He was all eager to get back to Iraq. (I don't doubt him. He sounded very sincere on that and other topics he shared on.) Hackett ran for the House of Representatives and lost. It was from Ohio and not a great deal of concern for me except I noted this was another candidate who was more like a Republican than a Democrat.
Paul Hackett then decided he would run for the Senate. Again, I never have doubted his sincerity so when Democrats in power made it very clear to him that he wasn't wanted in the race, he was very public in his whining. As a mother I use "whining" intentionally. Hackett could have stayed in the race. He didn't have the support of Democratic leadership? Well, wasn't he the fighter, isn't that what he campaigned on? I believe he sincerely believed he was a fighter but it's apparently easier to chase after civilians in the middle of the night -- here in the US -- with a loaded gun, force them off the road and hold them at gunpoint than it is to stand up to Democratic leadership. I wasn't bothered by his whining and thought that if you could leave the very personal nature of his campaign wound to the side, there was a great deal to be learned in his public remarks.
Like others in the field in 2006 who would crash and burn at the polls (Hackett might not have, he might actually have become a Senator), he was supported -- or hidden behind -- because he was a veteran. He didn't have any real ideas or plans, but he had been to Iraq. He wasn't for ending the illegal war so I'm not really sure what that experience was supposed to have in it for a positive. I gave birth to eight children. Maybe I should campaign for public office on that?
The Iraq War has no "up" for the United States. So a candidate whose only claim to fame is that he served in Iraq -- and possibly 'leadership' was shown there; however, the US is a democracy and you don't command in a democracy the way you do in the military -- and he's not calling for a withdrawal, just a 'smarter' illegal war, really has nothing to offer but a sugar coating shell for the Bully Boy's illegal polices.
Hackett would disagree but there were troubling aspects about his stances on gay rights and abortion. In the end, he would clarify those stances and do so in such a way that would indicate he might be in line with many who were in favor of both. I didn't see that as sop tossed out to fool the voters. I saw it as someone who had never bothered to think about either topic a great deal before deciding to run for the US Senate. Which, to me, indicated how unready he was to hold a position in the Senate since the only thing he had apparently thought about was his own life. That may be a natural issue of age (he is young) or it may be evidence that he has a hard time grasping the world isn't centered around him.
When he dropped out of the race for Senate, he made many public statements. He found his online buddies had turned on him. Democratic leadership said another person was the designate and he was shoved aside. Robert Parry (Consortium News) appeared to be firmly in support of Hackett and maintained that while others caved. C.I. was against Hackett but never wrote about Hackett's campaign (C.I.'s opposition was to the nonsense Hackett -- while not a candidate -- threw out repeatedly in interviews on Air America Radio and other useless outlets that hid behind the military because they were too cowardly to formulate their own opinions) but C.I. did defend Hackett's right to run and offered that Hackett should take back his decision to leave the Senate race. So he maintained support from Parry and C.I. advocated his returning to the race. I didn't ask C.I. about this but I know C.I. well enough to know C.I. making those comments were in response to the very quick and harsh way Hackett was dropped (I believe C.I. would use the term "used" and then dropped) and the very public manner in which that happened.
Hackett was dumped publicly. Like a contestant on a reality show sent packing. Now he's popped up to reveal a conversation he says took place between himself and Dennis Kucinich when Hackett was running for the House. I don't doubt that the conversation took place because I don't think Hackett's ever lied. I do find it interesting that who called who is not included in the retelling. (I'll assume that's the reporter's axe to grind and not Hackett's.) Left out of the retelling is that Hackett was asking for help in campaigning for the House. If you read this from the article e-mailed to me, you'll infer that help for his Hackett's campaign was being requested:
"He started his conversation off, which was pretty much a unilateral conversation, him to me while I was driving in my car in the 2nd Congressional District, by saying 'I would rather see Jean Schmidt get elected to Ohio's 2nd Congressional District than you. Because you are wrong on Iraq, you fought in Iraq, you're a Democrat in name only,' and a host of other issues."
I don't doubt Hackett's honesty, I do question his retelling abilities. How much of that is his problem and how much of it is the paper's own problem is unknown.
But I don't find anything appalling in that. Hackett was for the Iraq War. Kucinich had no reason to campaign for him. He had every reason not to campaign for him. If Bob Casey had phoned me for help, Bob Casey Jr., I would have responded in a similar manner due to Casey's opposition to a woman's right to choose.
Currently Kucinich is fighting in Congress with a handful of other reps to end the illegal war. The last thing he needed was another rep in the House who was going to push for the continuation of the illegal war. Those angry with the Democrats for still not ending the illegal war can certainly grasp that the obstructionists who continue the illegal war and buy into the illegal war are ignoring the people.
I say, "Good for Kucinich." Hackett goes on to call Kucinich a single-issue candidate which, it should be noted, was one more issue than Hackett ran on in either of his campaigns. Unless, of course, you consider a foul mouth an issue to run on.
Hackett's political immaturity still shines through as he denouces Kucinich as a single-issue candidate. Hackett's got VA benefits so he probably won't give much thought to single-payer health care any time soon. Again, we're back to the candidate (in a House race and a Senate race) who didn't think anything happened in the world if it had not happened to him personally. Kucinich is not a single-issue candidate. Hackett's still politically immature and thinks that because he was in Iraq, he's now an expert on life.
I doubt he's even an expert on destruction of life. But they conmen like Al Franken stroked his ego and led him to believe he was an expert. I would never have gone on Baby Cries A Lot show for any reason. But I gave birth to eight children and I think, in doing so, I provided more of a service to this country than someone who took part in destroying a country far away and still thinks that's a 'cool' thing to do. Hackett's attempting to destroy Kucinich today and it's a sign of how weak his understanding of the candidate he's supporting (or maybe how weak the candidate is) that all he can offer (or, in fairness, all the press can quote him on) is his uninformed attacks on Dennis Kucinich.
I don't care for Paul Hackett. Nothing he's ever said has made me wish I could vote for him. Al Franken, Sam Seder and the host of people who propped him up (when he had Democratic leadership backing) are disgusting types who hide behind the military. Adam Kokesh is a libertarian. I would be more than willing to consider voting for him because Kokesh has an understanding beyond on his own personal experiences. He is a thoughtful person who, when he runs (he will run for public office), has clearly given great thought to many issues. That's true of the illegal war but it's also true of many other things as well. If he was against a candidate who was equally strong, he wouldn't automatically get my vote.
Because I don't suffer from "Vote for Vets"! I don't hide behind a military and, more importantly, grasp that many caught up in that madness (as Hackett clearly is from his talk of his 'men') are not only threatening to women's rights, but threatening to democracy itself. But the military's been elevated so high by cowardly Democrats (such as Al Franken) who can't stand up for what they believe in but will gladly hide behind others, that we seem to be getting ever further away from what a democracy is founded upon. It's not founded upon a worship for the military and it's not founded upon a desire to militarize the United States.
During Vietnam, no veteran was spit upon. The myth survives to this day despite being repeatedly debunked. One reason is that some veterans of that era feel they didn't get their parades. I'm gald some made it back and regret that others died and "others" includes the Vietnamese. But had they thrown a parade in my area at the time, I wouldn't have (and I still wouldn't) turn out to applaud the boys who slit throats with piano wire, the ones dropping napalm on innocent civilians, the ones bombing the dykes in an attempt to starve the civilian populations. Similarly, I won't be applauding service in an illegal war. I will pray for those who were used in an illegal war. But I won't play the fool and turn out for a parade to honor participation in an illegal war.
The only thing I diagree with that's attributed to Kucinich is the thanks for service. Allowing the US to conduct an illegal war is not serving the United States. I grasp that young people may not realize that until they see it first hand, as was the case with Agustin Aguayo, to give one example. I realize that what Aguayo or Ehren Watada, Kyle Snyder or other brave people do is beyond the ability of many. But to have been in Iraq, to have participated in the illegal war, and then to return to this country and still cheerlead it doesn't show bravery, it shows ignorance. Service to the United States is holding a criminal administration accountable, not marching blindly to the orders of a crook.
Kucinich is for universal health care (not for a program that's far from it but is passed off as universal health care), he's for saving the environment (which isn't a side-issue but an issue very important to our very survival), he's for repealing the Patriot Act, he's for creating jobs in this country and a host of other issues. Calling him a one-issue candidate demonstrates either political immaturity or else a strong desire for the illegal war to continue -- so strong that it blinds you to reality.
Here's what Paul Hackett thinks is a single-issue candidate:
After the remarks, Kucinich and his wife spent about an hour answering questions and responding to comments from the audience. The topics ranged from Kucinich's odds of winning the White House to his strategy for the campaign, his thoughts on reducing Americans' dependence on automobiles, the importance of sustainable agriculture and the need for universal healthcare.
"Imagine the Department of Agriculture being really involved in the promotion of sustainable agriculture," Kucinich said as members of the audience laughed and cheered. "Every area of our government can be reorganized" to benefit the environment and improve the world.
One program Kucinich touted several times during his remarks was his universal preschool program for 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds. The program, he said, would provide child care; expose children to the arts, including music; and provide an education boost. "Our children need to be exposed to the fullness of our culture from an early age," he said.
Kucinich also favors a not-for-profit, universal healthcare system.
"Healthcare is a basic right in a democratic society, not a privilege," he said. Elizabeth Kucinich, a native of England, where such a system already is in place, backed her husband up on his plan.
"Everybody is for this," she said. "There is absolutely no reason why the U.S. can't have a single-payer healthcare system."
That's from Michelle L. Klampe's article in the Ventura County Star. Lastly, a member wrote wondering if there were any hard feelings between C.I. and I over my post last week? No. Nor on my part over C.I.'s noting Hillary will stand firm when she stands up. My post was noted in the Sunday entry and also Monday morning as well as in Monday's snapshot. I offered my opinions and C.I.'s repeat linkings were supposed to make clear that here's a viewpoint you should check out. C.I.'s not interested in telling anyone who to vote for and will also note good qualities of candidates as well. There was no problem for either of us with what the other wrote. I am actively supporting Dennis Kucinich. C.I.'s not going to endorse any candidate. Mike, my son, may not end up supporting Kucinich (he's still deciding who to vote for or if he's even going to support a Democrat in the primary). If he chooses to support a candidate in the primary and it's not Kucinich, there will not be a problem there. To be clear, C.I. is not supporting or endorsing any candidate. They get mentioned at The Common Ills only in relation to Iraq. There is no one that hasn't gotten a favorable mention for at least once telling truth on Iraq in some aspect. Kucinich and Richardson get mentioned more because they are talking about the illegal war. If one of the candidates says (or does) something to prolong the illegal war, they get called out on that. C.I. was here last night and is still here. They're leaving for California shortly. When C.I. came in from running with Mike this morning, I was informed by the two of them by an idea they had for a piece at The Third Estate Sunday Review dealing with the way the primary campaign is currently going. I would urge you to check out The Third Estate Sunday Review tomorrow.
I said "lastly" but . . . One thing C.I. and I spoke of last night was how furious we are over something. We're not supposed to write about it online. No one is. We're all supposed to support Mike's feelings that we just avoid it. I'm probably the only one who can get away with breaking that because I'm his mother. So let me weigh in. Dave Zirin is a piece of work. Writing a 21-year-old young man who has done nothing but praise you to hiss that you've been distorted and called a "flack" for Obama (Mike did not write that Zirin was a 'flack' for Obama) is really juvenile. Dave Zirin is a juvenile and he's an idiot. I don't care that he in some form retracted that in a later e-mail. The reality is Zirin went on Democracy Now! and praised Roberto Clemente. (And if it's Roger Clemente, I don't give a damn. I'm not a sports fan and think it's hilarious the way so many get so caught up in something as trivial as sports.) In the midst of that praise, he brought up Barack Obama. He may not wish he'd stated that Clemente did something brave and he doesn't see Obama's statements as brave; however, he did not say that on Democracy Now! What he did on that broadcast was praise Clemente and then offer a comparison to Obama that was not negative. In the midst of his gush-fest over Clemente, his comparison inserted of Obama reads like praise for Obama. The fact that in the later e-mail Zirin acknowledges that he was made aware of Mike (and Wally's) praise for Zirin's book in 2005 but never wrote to thank them may not seem like a big deal. It becomes a big deal when you consider that he never thanked either young man for that and he never thanked Mike for the repeated praise my son offered of him over a two year period. However, he shows up two years later, for the first time, to yell and screech at my son, making baseless accusations that (though withdrawn) seriously upset my son. I won't be silent on that even though Mike's asked us all not to mention it. Over 250 times Dave Zirin was praised by my son at his website. When Mike noted that he wasn't into Zirin that much these days, Zirin e-mails a nasty e-mail. Zirin was a personal hero of my son. It's not a question of hate mail because Mike gets that and laughs at. It's a question of someone you've gone out of your way to promote, someone whose work you have really enjoyed, never bothering to thank you over a two year period but showing up to be nasty about the fact that he (Zirin) can't speak clearly. I've seen my son depressed over lost games (that he played in or just watched), over elections, over relationships, but I've never seem him not bounce back quickly until this week. He will be fine. But that someone who has been a hero to him decided to go to town on him (hissing "slander" among other terms) because Zirin's not proficient enough in public speaking to be clear about his own meaning is really sick. Congratulations to you, Dave Zirin, you took someone who was your biggest fan and showed them exactly why they never should have wasted their time even reading you. I will not be silent on that.
And I think someone's ego needs to be checked when they want to reap all the positives from my son's ringing endorsement but when one thing is noted (and noted by Mike correctly), suddenly it's time to e-mail and act like an immature brat. The fact that in what I term "clarification" (not "apology"), Zirin notes he's familiar with all the praise goes to the fact that Zirin was happy to have his ego stroked but anything less than 100% praise means it's time to lash out demonstrates that Zirin has problems. That's my son and I will not be silent while Zirin does a number on him. I understand that Elaine (his girlfriend) and C.I. and others have to be silent. I'm Mike's mother, I do not have to be silent and I will not be silent. Long before the net, C.I.'s ignored the press. I've mentioned write ups since I met C.I. and have always been surprised by the remark, "I didn't read it." But I get the point now. C.I. has always maintained that if you read the good, you have to read the bad; that everyone's not going to like you; that you will do or say things that will upset some people; so you either go full out and read everything or you ignore it. C.I. elected to ignore it. C.I. has repeatedly noted people who read only their positive press and end up with an inflated view of themselves. I would think, "How silly. You are grounded. It's not going to go to your head." But obviously, it did go to Zirin's head. Which is why he felt he could attack my son for the mildest of statements based upon what Zirin did on Democracy Now! -- not on anything my son created, but what Zirin actually did. As Elaine noted (and I won't link to the actual post because Mike's asked us all not to link to any of this and just let it die -- Wally and Cedric link to everything and they told Mike they would emphasize it but they were linking to it):
C.I.'s known as a "really-real," actually, and it is because there's no pretense. C.I. was that way in college, C.I. was that way after the first blush of fame all those years ago. But, and this is in no way blaming C.I., it's probably equally true that the way C.I. is made Mike think that someone far less famous would be the way they self-present and that's not the case with Dave Zirin. Let me add far, far less famous. Maybe another "far" is needed? I doubt Dave Zirin will ever make even one magazine cover.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for Friday:
Friday, September 28, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the air-war continues and NPR goes ga-ga over it, the mercenaries at Blackwater continue to raise questions, and Dems fund the illegal war again. And, ADDED, PBS examines the Iraq War (tonight in most markets) via Bill Moyers Journal and NOW with David Branccacio.
Starting with war resistance. As Iraq Veterans Against the War notes, the government's 'do-over' (double-jeopardy) attempt at court-martialing Ehren Watada is scheduled for October 9th and "Lt. Watada is facing four charges that could land him in jail for up to six years." June 22, 2006, Ehren Watada became the first officer to publicly refuse to serve in the Iraq War (rightly) noting that the war is illegal. Daniel Ellsberg gave a speech (posted at ICH) last week where he noted Watada, "I've often said that Lt. Ehren Watada -- who still faces trial for refusing to obey orders to deploy to Iraq which he correctly perceives to be an unconstitutional and aggressive war -- is the single officer in the United States armed services who is taking seriously in upholding his oath." Watada's attorneys are appealing on a number of grounds including the fact that Judge Toilet (aka John Head) thinks he can be impartial and preside again as well as the fact that a second court-martial (after Head ruled the February court-martial a mistrial over defense objection) would be in violation of the US Constitution which forbids double-jeopardy.
At the start of the week, Audra D.S. Burch (Miami Herald) provided an overview of war resister Aidan Delgado's book The Sutras Of Abu Ghraib: Notes From A Conscientious Objector In Iraq, noting, "This is a story of one young man's transformation from reserve volunteer to soldier to conscientious objector, practicing Buddhist, author and always -- always -- relentless critic of the Iraq War, a peace advocate with a point of view based on real wartime experiences." Delgado is the third war resister to tell their story in book form this year. In May, Camilo Mejia shared his story in Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia while in February Joshua Key told his story in The Deserter's Tale.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Derek Hess, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko,Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters.
ADDED:In media news, the latest episode of Bill Moyers Journal airs on PBS in many markets tonight (check your local listings) and he will remember two US service members who died recently (two of the seven who wrote the New York Times column "The War as We Saw It") and this is also up at YouTube..In addition Bill Moyers Journal examines the Iraqi refugee crisis with NPR's Deborah Amos and War Hawk George Packer while also taking a look at the outrageous amount of monies being spent on the illegal war.
Also: This week (Fridays in most markets) PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio examines the issue of US service members wounded in the illegal war: "For many Iraq and Gulf War veterans, the transition from battlefield to home front is difficult. Bouts of fierce anger, depression and anxiety that previous generations of soldiers described as "shell shock" or "combat/battle fatigue" now earn a clinical diagnosis: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. But the relatively new medical label doesn't guarantee soldiers will get the care they need. On Friday, September 28 at 8:30 pm (check local listings), NOW looks at how America's newest crop of returning soldiers is coping with the emotional scars of war, and some new and innovative treatments for them."
On NPR's The Diane Rehm Show today (second hour), Al-Arabiya TV's Hisham Melhem explained the new meaning of Blackwater since the September 16th incident where they slaughtered at least 16 Iraqi civilians, "In the past, Susan [Page, USA Today], if you wanted to discredit the American war in Iraq or if you wanted to discredit the war on terror all you had to do is just invoke the names of places such as Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib or Haditha. Now you can add to that Blackwater USA. I mean this is a huge embarrassment and a problem for the United States in the future. These people are now seen by the Iraqis as the new face of the occupation. And the irony of all ironies now, because these people are in charge of providing protection to the American diplomats there -- I mean, you have a private army. This is the privatization of war. More than 30,000 men. And I'm not saying that many of them . . . are [not] honorable and former good soldiers, the problem is that given what they've done, as Robin [Wright, Washington Post] said, just imagine Ryan Crocker, one of the best American diplomats serving in the Middle East, probably the best one available for Iraq now, trying to visit a neighborhood in Baghdad, after the surge, whatever, he's going to be protected by whom? By elements of the Blackwater. That's the irony of ironies."
On the topic of Blackwater, today Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reported that among the deaths resulting from the US mercenary compnay are four Iraq journalists including Suhad Shakir who was shot dead February 2nd while driving to work inside the Green Zone while three guards of the Iraqi Media Network were shot dead, "picked off one by one by Blackwater snipers stationed on the roof of the 10-story Justice Ministry". The US Defense Department has maintained that they do not use Blackwater for their employees; however, the US State Dept does. James Risen (New York Times) reports that the State Department released a count that found Blaackwater "had been involved in 56 shootings while guarding American diplomats in Iraq so far this year." An Iraqi government investigation found Blackwater responsible for the September 16th deaths at a time when Nouri al-Maliki, puppet of the occupation, was issuing strong words that Blackwater would be gone. Instead, the puppet's strings were pulled and he agreed to go along with a US State Department led investigation. AFP reports today that US Gen David Petraues and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker have stated that this 'commission' has still not met and is still "preparing for its first meeting in Baghdad". Rather surprising when Steve Fainaru and Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) are able to report on the US embassy's insta-study of the situation today which finds 'confusion' and 'good intentions' (at least one Blackwater employee all but yelled, "Stop the madness!"). Though James Glanz and Sabrina Tavernise are back to pimp this report, the New York Times' reporters fail to use the term "self-serving" though they were very happy to apply that to the report on Blackwater from the Iraqi government. Since the mercenaries do not protect Iraqis, since they protect US embassy employees, exactly which report would be more likely to be "self-serving"? Play dumb, Glanz and Tavernise, play dumb. As Reuters notes, the official US State Dept response is "We're not commenting on the substance of the investigation" which allows them to float this, to get it out there, and if it explodes in their faces, claim they never said those things happened. Meanwhile, Kristin Roberts and Sue Pleming (Reuters) report that US Brig Gen Joseph Anderson declared today of the mercenaries, "I can certainly say I've seen them do some tactics that I thought were over the top. Are they quicker with the trigger? Are they quicker to wave a weapon, brandish a weapon, other tactics, cutting people off? All of us have experience, have seen different things at different times. I have seen them, in my opinion, over-react but that does not mean it's consistently the case."
Blackwater is far from the only problem facing Iraqis. Today on WBAI's Wakeupcall Radio (first hour), host Mario Murillo spoke with CorpWatch's Pratap Chatterjee who explained his latest piece ("The Boys from Baghdad: Iraqi Commandos Trained by U.S. Contractor") noting that Blackwater shooting at civilians was "just the tip of the iceberg . . . because you do have US soldiers and US security guards that are in the country shooting at civilians, dropping bombs on them, etc. -- creating mayhem. But in fact the role the US has played in creating the civil war in fact is far more long lasting, could be far more insidious and dangerous than the occasional massacre of civilians. That's in no way to condone it at all -- but just say that there are far worse things happening today. There are probably at least, to the best of my knowledge, six training programs to support 'Iraqi security'. The first couple are the training of the Iraqi police and the Iraqi army which interestingly enough were given over to private contractors. DynCorp from Virginia trains the police and Vinnell from Los Angeles originally had the contract to train the Iraqi army. Both of these have been pretty much disasters. And in fact one of the things I explain in this article is that in April 2004 when there were like two major incidents in the country -- and I was in Iraq at the time -- one was the civil uprisings in the south with the siege of various cities and the attack on Blackwater personnel in Falluja -- the US tried to press this police and army into service and in both cases, in fact they shipped police down to Najaf the Iraqi police and soldiers just basically fled the scene and refused to fight and, in some case, turned against the US. So the US quickly realized they needed something way beyond the sort of regular security forces. . . . So they came up with this idea of third force. The third force was going to be special commandos that would be highly trained -- a little like Special Forces that could go into action." Chatterjee explains in his article that these are Emergency Response Unit or ERU and that they training "began under General David Petreaus as an effort to bolster security in Iraq, and soon evolved into a system for providing support to the deeply sectarian Ministry of the Interior." That ministry provides their paychecks as well as controls them today. "Sometimes the people that they train are people who come from backgrounds that are either sectarian or criminal," Chatterjee explained to Murillo. "It's one thing to bring in Blackwater and have them protect US diplomats and shoot at anybody who comes close -- that's horrendous -- but it's another thing to actually go in and train people in the art of warfare and hand this training over to sectarian groups that are now creating multiple civil wars in the country. And that, to me, is one of the most insidious and dangerous parts of the US occupation."
Another insidious part of the illegal war is the little noted air war. (Norman Solomon has long noted the air war and it's under-reporting by the media.) Guy Raz (NPR's Morning Edition) reported today that "about every 90 seconds something takes off or lands at Balad Air Base there's C130 Cargo planes, there are helicopters, there are fighter jets and those are just a fraction of the forty different kinds of aircraft that use this base. It's not just busy, it's really busy. Actually the busiest Pentagon airport in the world and the second busiest airport in the world overall." Though such activity might give many pause, Guy Raz is a rah-rah-rah-er and tickled pink to be one of the 'boys'. This as Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Around 2 a.m. U.S. military used aerial fire targeting a building in Al Doura area south Baghdad, Iraqi police said. The aerial fire targeted building number 139 in Al Siha district. 10 people were killed and 7 others were injured according to the Iraqi police sources." Reuters notes eight dead. Meanwhile, the US military issues a press release regarding events Tuesday: "A U.S. Air Force F-16CJ Fighting Falcom dropped precision munitions near Al Nussayyib, Iraq Sept. 25, killing Abu Nasr al-Tunisi and two other Al Q'aeda in Iraq operatives. They were killed when the aircraft, assigned to U.S. Central Command Air Forces, dropped two laser guided 500 lb Joint Direct Attack Munition GBU-12 bombs, destroying the terrorist safe house when the three were meeting." If this is the announced 'investigation' into the Tuesday bombing in Mussyyib that claimed the lives of 5 women and 4 children (see yesterday's snapshot), consider it a white wash.
In news of other violence . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack that wounded two people while a truck bombing in Mosull "destroyed a bridge". Reuters notes the Mosul truck bombing left twenty people wounded. KUNA reports that the British military base in Basra was attacked with mortars overnight.
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "David Shamoun, a 28 Christian Iraqi . . . worked with a Turkish company and a college students" was shot dead in Mosul
Corpses?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 5 corpses discovered in Baghdad.
Meanwhile Dominic Evans (Reuters) reports that if the 59 announced deaths holds, September will be the lowest month of announced US service members deaths for the year. September in 2005 and 2003 was lower than the announced 59. Also worth noting is that M-NF 'elected' to allow DoD to announce deaths this month.
On the subject of the US military's "kill teams," the press continues to avoid the fact that war resister James Burmeister was publicly speaking of them months before the press stumbled onto them this week. Paul von Zeilbauer (New York Times) reported this morning on the court-martial of Jorge G. Sandoval and noted that Anthony G. Murphy had testified in July that there was a sense of sense "of disappointment from field commanders seeking higher enemy body counts" and that "Soldiers also testified that battalion commanders authorized a classified new technique that used fake explosives and detonation wires as 'bait' to lure and kill suspected insurgents around Iskandariya, a hostile Sunni Arab region south of Baghdad." AP reports that Sandoval was acquitted today of some charges; however, "the panel decided he had placed a detonation wire on one of the bodies to make it look as if the man was an insurgent."
In Wednesday's snapshot, the Joe Biden led push in the Senate (Biden is a senator and also a candidate for the Democratic Party's potential presidential nomination) to divide Iraq into three section in a vote that found 75 US senators voting in favor of it and only 23 voting against it. Ron Jacobs (CounterPunch) observes, "Partitioning Iraq is not a solution that is Washington's to make. The recent vote by the US Senate is misguided. In addition, it will do little to further the desire of the US public to bring the troops home. Instead, it will put US forces in the position of maintaining the newly created divisions along new lines in the sand. Senator Biden's bill is not a solution. It is another false approach that has as much chance at success as anything tried by the Bush administration. In other words, it is destined to fail." Al Jazeera reports that Nouri Al-Maliki is denouncing the US resolution and declaring, "They should stand by Iraq to solidify its unity and its sovereignty. They shouldn't be proposing its division. That could be a disaster not just for Iraq but for the region." Strong words from the puppet. Words that, if pattern holds, will vanish with the mere pulling of a string.
Which is why the Iraqi government, 'officially' led by the puppet, is held in such low opinion by Iraqis. Yesterday on Free Speech Radio News, Hiba Dawood reported, "The slow crumbling of Iraq's government began when the Sadrists withdraw their ministers from cabinet, demanding real authority to provide local services and a timetable for an end to the US occupation. In the fourteen months since then, the Sadrists and the Fadheela Party have split from the United Iraqi Alliance Coalition the largest Shi'ite grouping in the Iraqi parliament. The latest to leave the government were the ministers from the Sunni Accord. They accuse the government of serving sectarian ends. Shi'ite prime minister Nouri al-Maliki's government is accused of sectarianism even by other Shias who accuse him of marginalizing them. But the United Iraqi Alliance, now reduced to just the Dawa Party, and the Iraq Islam Supreme Council insists the government is still performing. Jinan [Jasim] al-Ubaydi is a member of parliament and with the Iraqi Islamic Supreme Council. She says the withdrawal of so many parties from the governing alliance doesn't effect government policy or performance: 'There dreams are negotiable and though there are many withdrawals, the government is not collapsing. Ryan Crocker said the Iraqi government has enjoyed many vital successes.' Despite the US ambassador's optimism few ordinary Iraqis say the government is succeeding. There is a growing frustration with both the government and the parties that have pulled out."
Despite this, the US Congress continues to fund the illegal war. John Nichols (Common Dreams) reports that the Senate raised the debt limit for the federal government and gave the Bully Boy "at least $9 billion in new funding for its war in Iraq" in a 94 to 1 vote with Russ Feingold being the sole senator to vote no (and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John McCain and Sam Brownback all missing the vote due to campaiging for their parties' presidential nomination) while the House of Represenatives passed the measure by a 404 to 14 vote with Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Earl Blumenauer, Keith Ellison, Ron Paul, Bob Filner, Barney Frank, Maurice Hinchey, Dennis Kunich, Jim McDermott, Donald Payne, Lynn Woolsey and Diane Watson voting no (Kucinich and Paul are running for their parties' presidential nomination). Meanwhile, the national Green Party has noted Democratic party hopefuls for their party's presidential nomination Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama declared this week in a forum broadcast by MSNBC that they couldn't guarantee all US troops would be home, if they were elected to president, by the year 2013. The Green Party notes:
The Green Party of the United States has called for full and immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, the occupation of which is entering its sixth year; the party opposes a US military attack on Iran and warns Americans not to believe the new flood of deceptive war propaganda.
Greens stress that Congress could end the war quickly if Democrats refused to move on bills for war funding, including the latest request for nearly $190 billion the Pentagon says is necessary to keep combat troops in Iraq for another year. Greens urge Congress to divert federal funds from war spending to human needs and services in the US, including restoration and rebuilding in the Gulf Coast.
The Green Party has called for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney for numerous abuses of power, including misleading the American people about the reasons for invading Iraq. Greens have called the invasion a criminal breach of the US Constitution and international law, motivated by desire for political and corporate dominance in the region, control over Iraqi oil and other resources, and cooperation with Israel's aggressive strategic objectives.
In news of pacts, CBS and AP report: "Turkey and Iraq signed a counterterrorism pact Friday aimed at cracking down on separatist Kurdish rebels who have been attacking Turkey from bases in Iraq. The agreement, however, falls short of meeting Ankara's demand to send troops in pursuit of Kurdish rebels fleeing across the border into northern Iraq, Turkey's Interior Minister Besir Atalay said. 'It was not possible to reach a deal on chasing Kurdish rebels, however, we hope this issue will be solved in the future,' Atalay said. 'We are expecting this cooperation against terrorism to be broadened as much as possible'."
Last night, Houston's The Progressive Forum (KPFT -- here for KPFT archives) devoted the second hour of the program to a speech by Gloria Steinem delivered September 17th in Houston, Texas and entitled "The Progression of Feminism: Where Are We Going?". Steinem declared near the start, "I arrived here this morning and I said, 'Oh, this is Ann Richards Airport.' Don't you think we're going to live to see the day when they'll be glad to change the name?" She then began addressing the efforts to destroy tribes, women, LBGT and other members in an attempt to dominate and colonialize. As she observed, "No, we can't go back and it's not about romanticizing the past but it is about understanding that if a system of male dominance had a beginning, it can have an end." Steinem's Outrageous Acts & Everyday Rebellions was mentioned in yesterday's snapshot as was a documentary, Anthony Thomas' Thy Kingdom Come, Thy Will Be Done which a typo turned into "They" (I put in links on a good day and then dictate later in the day -- I dictate very fast and would have my own typos if I typed the snapshots -- we're noting this one because the documentary's title was wrong due to the typo "They Kingdom Come, Thy Will Be Done.")
bill moyersbill moyers journal
now with david branccaciopbs
iraq
ehren watada
aidan delgadojoshua keycamilo mejia
iraq veterans against the war
ron jacobs
free speech radio news
wakeup callwbai
kpft
gloria steinem
the diane rehm show
the washington postsudarsan raghavan
the new york timessabrina tavernise
james glanz
blackwater usa
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)