Cheese & Bacon Dennis' Funeral Dip in the Kitchen

Cheese & Bacon Dennis' Funeral Dip
1/2 cup of sour cream
3 ounces cream cheese
4 ounces blue cheese
4 slices bacon (cooked and crumbled)
1/2 onion sliced
dash of Tabasco
1 minced garlic clove
dash of fresh pepper
dash of cumin
dash of red pepper

Put ingredients into a food processor and process until smooth. (You can use a blender as well). Place in the fridge to chill.

Serve with pita chips, potato chips, Trisquits or another form of cracker.

That's a recipe my friend Gail makes whenever there's a death. She always apologizes for bringing "just a dip" but it's always the first thing that's all gone.

It's funeral time.

Time to bury the candidate.

I'm referring to Dennis Kucinich.

I've wasted everyone's time for a year and I apologize to one and all.

If anyone's angry, I'm angry at myself.

I thought Dennis Kucinich was a candidate who would stand up.

I should probably note here that Green Party members e-mailed me over the last few months talking about how Kucinich betrayed his followers in 2004 at the DNC convention. So I can't claim that I didn't have warnings.

I assumed he was the real deal.

He wasn't.

I was fine with getting the word out on him. I didn't know whether he'd win or lose. That didn't matter because I believed in what he stood for and I thought he believed in what he stood for. He believed in nothing.

He made a deal with Barack Obama to toss his supporters his way in Iowa.

Barack Obama is a War Hawk.

"I am the only one on this stage . . ." How many times did we hear Dennis say that?

And he tosses his votes.

If you look at the results, you'll see that there were still some "undecided"s, even with the rigged system that is an Iowa caucus. Dennis Kucinich supporters didn't have to go anywhere. In fact, on CNN, I saw a woman arguing with a Richardson captain that she she didn't want to go to another candidate. (Richardson, Biden and Dodd are also rumored to have made deals with Obama.) So no one needed to be told to go elsewhere.

Dennis Kucinich doesn't respect the people who support him.

He certainly doesn't respect me.

A claim, that his campaign has tried to put out, that "This was just for Iowa" is nonsense. He's running for national office. Everything he does sends a message.

The message he sent was: "The illegal war doesn't matter."

If he'd tossed to John Edwards (who I am probably now supporting) that would be one thing. Edwards' plan isn't as good as Kucinich's, but he's not a war hawk.

He disrespected all of his supporters.

He didn't have to endorse anyone (any of his opponents). If he felt he had to, he could have gone with the most anti-war of the 'front runners.'

Instead, he went with Obama.

Kucinich is a joke now.

Again, there's a good chance he would have lost. I knew that. I also knew that if we tried really hard, worked really hard, got the word out on him, it might make a difference.

So I wasted weeks on him.

His campaign is dead.

He killed it.

I grimaced when he made himself a joke. (I grimaced when Al Gore did the same.) But I overlooked that.

He wants to laugh at himself, that's one thing. He wants to laugh at those of us who have supported him, turn us into a cheap joke?

That's what "My people should vote for Obama" is. It disrespects our position on the illegal war, yes.

But it also says that Kucinich supporters are a dumb cult and when "Leader" tells us to do something, we say, "Yes, master."

Screw Dennis Kucinich. His tired ass needs to drop out of the race immediately.

His actions demonstrate that he is not a candidate trying to fight. If you're not fighting, you're not a candidate. (One of my problems with Edwards. He won't stand up to Obama.)

He's wasted everyone's time.

He's certainly wasted my time.

Meanwhile, if you're voting Democratic or thinking about it, you should have a chance to vote for a candidate that's going to fight. He's fooling everyone by staying in the race.

He is a weakling. He is a coward.

At this point, should he lose his House seat, I won't even care.

It's amazing how many times he's called on people to support him. Whether it was on impeachment or anything else. And people have. They've backed him. The only one who won't back Dennis Kucinich is Dennis Kucinich.

Whether he gets out of the race or not, his presidential campaign is now dead.

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

Friday, Janurary 4, 2007. Chaos and violence continue and the little state of Iowa leads to a lot of gas baggery.

World Report notes that January 26th is a day for national demonstrations in Canada in support of war resisters, "The date commemorates the day four years ago when Jeremy Hinzman first applied for refugee status in Canada. The Nelson event, which is planned for the United Church, will be held inside because of the harsh January weather. Ryan Johnson suggests 'some light refreshments and a time to write hand written letters with someone delivering them to the post office afterwards. . . It would be a huge statement to have a box full of letters going to parliament. In Tonronto they are mraching to the Canada Post to drop them in the box'."

What's it about? In Canada where some war resisters went to seek asylum, the Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay in Canada. November 15th, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the appeals of war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Parliament is the solution.Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, 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, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

Yesterday, three US service members were announced dead by the US military. How did that play out in the media? To note two outlets, Democracy Now! and the New York Times, not very well. DN! covered the four people who died in Turkey in headlines and didn't note the three US service members killed in Iraq. The New York Times noted both on A9 of this morning's paper. Sabrina Tavernise covered "Bomb Explosion Kills 5 in Kurdish Area in Turkey" -- yes, it got it's own story -- and in a 14 paragraph story by Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Khalid al-Ansary, it was noted in paragraph four: "In another development on Thursday, two American soldiers were shot dead and a third soldier was wounded in Diyala Province, the American military said. On Wednesday a soldier was killed by an improvised bomb south of Baghdad, the first death of an American soldier this year." It's not important to US outlets. It doesn't matter. They know nothing about the five killed in Turkey but that's more important to them. It says a great deal.

Meanwhile Donna St. George (Washington Post) reports on Hannah Gunterman McKinney, a woman serving in Iraq who was killed when the man she had sex (apparently consensual but it's sketchy) with ran her over and how her parents, Barbie and Matt Hearvin, were offered a variety of explanations for the September 4, 2006 death, "Her case would become one in a litany of noncombat deaths in Iraq, which number more than 700, from crashes, suicides, illnesses and accidents that sometimes reveal messy truths about life in the war zone. The cases can be especially brutal for parents who lose a child and struggle to understand why. In McKinney's case, many of the details are in a 1,460-page file and court-martial transcript obtained by The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act."

Another woman is the subject of Sanhita SinhaRoy's Q & A (In These Times) where she interviews Iraqi Haifa Zangana who favors the US withdrawing from Iraq immediately ("gradual withdrawal is actually a gradual building of bases in Iraq") and notes of the illegal war:

But here we are with troops, with military occupation, with economic occupation and the cultural occupation. They try to erase our memory, our history, our archaeological sites and kill our civilians.
In four and a half years, we have lost 1 million Iraqis. And that's terminated, physically. We're not talking about the consequences of conventional weapons, the depleted uranium, the phosphorous, the cluster bombs.
As for detentions, the International Red Cross has recorded up to 60,000. And those are security detainees.

Zangana is the author of City of Widows: An Iraqi Woman's Account of War and Resistance, (Seven Stories Press). Today KUNA reports that the UK base in southern Iraq (Basra Airport) was attacked with a missile yesterday.

In other news of violence . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Baghdad roadside bombings (no known casualties) and a tanker bombing in Maysan that claimed the lives of 2 police officers with "others" wounded. Reuters notes an attack by a US helicopter which fired a rocket outside Baghdad and killed 1 person with two more wounded.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a US attack/raid "with air cover" in Najaf that wounded four (on Thursday). Reuters notes an Iraqi was shot dead in Jurf al-Sakhar.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.



Let's do US presidential politics. Shortly before noon yesterday, the Chris Dodd campaign e-mailed supporters asserting, "We've led in Washignton, D.C. on ending the war in Iraq and restoring the Constitution, but tonight all eyes are focused on Iowa . . . You'll hear from me later tonight. And when we earn that ticket to New Hampshire, I hope you are ready to provide the fuel we need to hit the ground running." Iowa was the first shot (as always) for the country to weigh in (at over 90% Anglo-White, Iowa is veeery representative -- that was sarcasm) and the country weighed in yesterday, Iowans, people posing as Iowans, they made their voices heard the in the corrupt scam that gets trotted out every four years as an example of "democracy." Like Dodd, Joe Biden's campaign declared, "Simply put, the Biden for President campaign will shock the world on Januray 3rd." As The Detroit Free Press reported today, both Biden and Dodd have dropped out of the race. Pay attention to Dodd's departure (it matters in a moment). Before we go further, let's quote Iowa's Secretary of State, "Although not an election, the Iowa Caucuses are the method by which citizens select presidential delegates to the county conventions. The political parties run the caucuses according to party rules. The Iowa Caucuses are not governed by the Secretary of State's Office." Translation, don't blame this on them. In December former editor of The Des Moines Register Gilbert Cranberg, former executive secretary of the state's Freedome of Information Council Herb Strentz and former director of research for The Des Moines Register Glenn Roberts contributed a column to the New York Times entitled "Iowa's Undemocratic Caucuses" noted that, unlike the GOP, the Democratic Party operated in secrecy, "The one-person, one-vote results from each caucus are snail-mailed to party headquarters and placed in a database, never disclosed to the press or made available for inspection." Wayne Ford could (and did) lie on Democracy Now! today that the Iowa represented "the purest form of democracy" but there's no reason everyone else had to go along with it. "We've been doing it since the 60s," he insisted. Exactly why Iowa goes first -- because it is non-reflective and undemocratic and the '60s' is when the system changed. By holding onto Iowa as the "kick off," the party machine tries to control. Make no mistek that's what happens every four years and -- as Wally and Cedric have repeatedly noted, even with the Olympics, they rotate it every four years. With those realities in mind, add, as Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted January 28, 2004, John Kerry, in 2004, was "only the third Democrat in three decades to win both Iowa and New Hampshire in contested races." That's a reality not noted in the press today -- the same press that (big or small) announces it's over for either John Edwards or Hillary Clinton but applaud John McCain who tied for third with a TV actor.

Here are the totals the Iowa Democratic Party says are final:

Senator Barack Obama: 37.58%
Senator John Edwards: 29.75%
Senator Hillary Clinton: 29.47%
Governor Bill Richardson: 2.11%
Senator Joe Bide: .93%
Uncommitted: 0.14%
Senator Chris Dodd: 0.02%
Precincts Reporting: 1781 of 1781

Along with multiple rounds of selection, Iowa's caucus allows those present in the location to know how others are voting. It's not a fair ballot, it's not a secret ballot and if the Democratic Party couldn't control it, Iowa would have long ago been ditched (as it should be) as the "kick off" each presidential election.

Robert Parry (Consortium News) offers: "Sen. Barack Obama thrashing Sen. Clinton". Ruth Conniff (The Progressive) is gleeful as well (it's nice to see Conniff offer something, anything, indicating life), "Since she lost in Iowa, it's hard to see what is left." As Conniff offers up razor blades and sleeping pills and our online latter day Dylan throws in the towel (no link, we don't link to trash), one wonders how Hillary is a "loser" and Barack a "sure thing" off one race?

It takes an informed woman and, in this case, it's Deliah Boyd (A Scriverner's Lament) who explains delegates and super delegates and points out the obvious: Michigan has 156 delegates. Matters because? Hillary's on Michigan's ballot. Who's else is? Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. Chris Dodd was but he's ended his campaign. Biden, Edwards, Obama and Richardson all sucked up to the DNC and refused to get on the ballot. So the reality is Hillary is close to Bambi and, apparently, has the lock on the 156 delegates in Michigan. (The DNC says they'll refuse to allow Michigan delegates. They may or may not be able to pull off that threat.)

Over at The Nation -- where few ever grasp anything -- Ari Melber demonstrates (by omission) why it matters that readers be informed and not trust The Nation. The mag that called Hillary out on a vote she missed . . . due to Bill having heart surgery, offers Ari's wet dreams of "Why Obama's Win Is Bigger Than You Think" which takes Hillary to task for spending $7 million of her campaign money. How much did Obama spend? Melber's not interested in saying. $9 million. Doesn't fit with the spin Ari wants to blow out his butt so it doesn't make his blog post. He's not really a reporter (real ones don't work for that rag), so let's turn to a real reporter.

Amy Goodman: I think one big difference, Ellen Chesler [cross talk] I think one big difference and I think this has certainly been brought out is that Barack Obama said he was opposed to the illegal war from the beginning and of course Senator Clinton voted for it.

See the problem? Obama tells Monica Davey (New York Times, July 26, 2004) he doesn't know how he would have voted if he'd been in the Senate. Two years later, he's telling David Remnick (The New Yorker) he doesn't know how he would have voted. Why is Amy Goodman not noting that or the fact that, until the summer of 2007, he voted for every authorization? Why is she noting in the segment that Hillary Clinton's campaign offices have been occupied by peace activists but not noting that Barack's have as well? Shouldn't Wayne Ford have been asked about that?

Hillary's a War Hawk. That's who she is and needs to be pointed out. So is Barack Obama. And these attempts to shield the public from reality may be part of what a political party does (or tries to) but it's not reality and has no place in journalism. Ari thinks it's cute to call Hillary out for her millions spent in Iowa while ignoring how much money Obama spent (like he thought it was cute to call her out for missing a vote when Bill was having surgery). Glen Ford and Bruce Dixon (Black Agenda Report) have repeatedly pointed out that Hillary and Barack are siamese twins. So it's not impossible to report the truth. And it's not impossible to give readers, viewers, listeners the information and trust them to make their own decisions.

Ellen Chesler, speaking for Clinton's campaign, needs to get her act together. Stating that Obama wasn't in the Senate isn't telling the full story. Obviously, Goodman isn't going to bring up the illegal war with Barack's supporter Wayne Ford. Rebecca, back when Obama was lying on stage and hitting Edwards with Edwards' 2002 vote, made the point that Obama needed to be challenged on that nonsense. Obviously the press isn't going to do that (maybe Big Media, but not Little), so any supporter needs to drive the reality home. [Note, the transcript at DN! is currently wrong. Amy Goodman, not Ellen Chesler, says, "Well, let me put the question to Danny Glover. Do you think John Edwards has the same position as Obama, as Clinton, on the war?"]

This isn't minor. The war was a question for Chesler and for Danny Glover (speaking for John Edwards' campaign). For Obama? Wayne Ford wasn't asked one word. If you're not seeing the problem, you're lying to yourself. A bit like the lie being spread that "Obama's a closet socialist, hop on board, he's big time left, he just can't say so." He's not and he's not left. Do we want a War Hawk in the White House, as the US moves to the wars to Africa, who can lie to the camera and say, "Oh, my father was from Kenya, this is a just war, don't even ask me that!"

I haven't decided who I will vote for in 2008. We'll note one excerpt from a guest in that roundtable, Danny Glover speaking of John Edwards:

Well, I certainly, when we look at what has happened over the last few years -- and certainly the present administration is indicative of what has happened over the last few years in terms of just corporate greed -- certainly I don't believe that. I think that when people begin to address the issues of globalization, they look at corporate greed. When they begin to identify what is happening in the community, they look at greed, whether it's corporate greed, whether it's the greed that gentrifies the community or the greed that gentrifies a whole nation of people. I think that it's important that we look at the real issue, the real issues around poverty in this country. And [inaudible] poverty, those numbers are thirty-seven million, are indicative of the level of poverty and what people face. We look at the issue around the middle class. We look at the issue around the disparity in wages and the increasing gap between wealth in this country. And those are real issues here, you know? I mean, at some point in time, we're going to have to address that. And I don't think--I think that John Edwards says he spent less than anyone else. He's been--and I believe if it's a two-person race, then that "two-person" is between Obama and Edwards.

If the illegal war matters (I obviously think that it does) then it matters that all the candidates be held to the same standard. Amy Goodman asks Hillary's supporter and John Edwards' supporter about the illegal war. Wayne Ford's not asked a word about. Meanwhile, Reuters lies about Obama's Iraq 'plan' claiming that "all troops out within 16 months" is the 'plan.' It's not. He would leave 'trainers' and other classifications and the "one or two brigades a month" is not firm and he's stated he might increase the number or halt the deployment based on what was happening.

If there's a winner on the Dem side in Iowa, it's Edwards. But we all do grasp that only 16% of the people in Iowa caucused, right? The 'process' is nothing like the rest of the country, it's a tiny state with only 7 electoral college votes. Now tiny New Hampshire (4 electoral college votes) with a 95.8% White population will weigh in. February 5th will better determine who the candidate for the two major parties will be. So why the narratives from the press and why is Little Media unable to hold Obama to the same standards they use to crucify Hillary?

16% of 'Iowans' turned out for their non-secret ballot caucus and it's being used to shape narratives. Left out of the narratives are the backdoor deals Obama made with other candidates. Like the idiot Wayne Ford, they pretend they're talking about something but they're just blowing gas. Ford declared today, "I want to talk about the reasons why Obam womn" but he had nothing to talk about. He didn't have anything to talk about in 2004 when he appeared on the program as a John Edwards supporter: "But I have always said that until we have a president who is going to say that one of the top problems in this country is race, and I'm willing to risk and deal with this problem to bring all Americans together." Blah-blah-blah. And that 'reason' was why he backed Edwards in 2004. He's a gas bag. Iowa means nothing and meant nothing. It's not representative. If there was a need for all the post-coverage it would be to examine where the candidates stood on the issue. In outlet after outlet, Iraq was not addressed because Obama was given yet another pass. Meanwhile, Allan Nairn (at CounterPunch) argues that the 2008 general election was decided long ago.

Two other candidates appear tonight on PBS' Bill Moyers Journal:Thousands of media outlets descended on Iowa, erecting a powerful wall of TV cameras and reporters between the voters and candidates. This week on Bill Moyers Journal in two interviews, Bill Moyers talks with Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, candidates with an inside view of the process who know well the power of the press to set expectations and transform the agenda. Also on the program, leading expert on media and elections Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, examines the campaigns and coverage in Iowa and looks at the media's power to benefit some candidates and disadvantage others.


Added artist and journalist David Bacon has a photo exhibit at the Galeria de la Raza (2857 24th St, San Francisco 94110): "Living under the trees" "Viviendo bajo los arboles." The exhibit is from January 11th through February 23rd (Enero 11 - Febrero 23, 2008). "An exhibition documenting communities of indigenous Mexican farm workers in California through photographs and the narrative experiences of community residents and leaders" y
"Una exposicion que documenta a traves de fotografias y testmonios de lideres y residentes las comundades indigenas de campesinos mexicanos." Inauguracion de exposicion (Opening Reception) Enero 11 7:30 p.m. (January 11th). Y mesa redonda de fotografos (photographers' panel) Sabado, Enero 26, 2:00 p.m. (photographers' panel, Saturday, January 26).


iraq
iraq veterans against the war
mcclatchy newspapers
sanhita sinharoy
amy goodmandemocracy now
david bacon
bill moyersbill moyers journalpbs
the new york timesrichard a. oppel jr.the washington postdonna st. george
robert parry
ruth conniff

Zucchini Farfalle

I did a very brief post on Christmas ("My oven doesn't work!") that a few wanted to add to or had questions. If you haven't read it, you just need to know a woman's oven went out after guests had arrived and two hours before the meal was supposed to begin.

Rita wanted everyone to know that it happens, "Please tell that woman that if you cook long enough, you'll realize it's just one of those things. I am sure all her guests understood but if anyone didn't, they just haven't lived long enough." Anna shared it happened to here in 2002 and she's still "highly embarrassed but I can laugh about it now." Monty said, "I'm sure it turned out to be a wonderful Christmas meal and drove home to those who showed up without anything just how much work goes into producing a spread." Theresa wondered about the issue of a microwave and that would be my fault if I wasn't clear, the woman didn't have a microwave. She had a stove top and and a toaster oven. (She also had a crock pot but that wasn't going to be of any help when she was trying to finish the cooking quickly.) Sarah "just wants to know if she made it through okay?"

Yes. She e-mailed yesterday to note that, "It wasn't the meal I planned but it did turn out okay." And that's really all cooking ever is. You can plan in great detail ahead of time but something will always pop up. A handle falls off a pot, you thought you had more salt then it turns out you did, turns out you didn't have the item you told yourself in the store you had at home, you picked up semi-sweet chocolate and the recipe calls for sweet, the serving dish you were so eager to use has a crack in it . . . You just adapt the best you can.

I'm sure there are a few fortunate souls for whom the sun always shines and it never rains, but for most of us, we're making do with whatever's thrown at us at the last minute. And that's just life.

Having been made aware of how many do use canned goods (I do as well) this year and how it appeared I was insulting them (I wasn't and my apologies to anyone who took that way), I have been attempting to think of a quick, easy recipe. I've found a canned good that I think makes for the basis of a quick and easy meal. I've adapted it for four people (I never have only four people eating at my table but that seems to be the most common).

Zucchini Farfalle
Two cans of Del Monte's Fresh Cut Zucchini
1 16 ounce bag of dry farfalle
Parmesan cheese
1 clove of garlic, sliced

As part of their "Specialties" series, Del Monte has "Fresh Cut Zucchini with Italian Style Tomato Sauce" in a 14 1/2 ounce can. It's currently my favorite canned good. You'll need two of these. Empty the contents of two cans into a sauce pan and add a clove of garlic (sliced) for flavor. If you don't have fresh garlic on hand, you can sprinkle with garlic powder. While you heat the contents of the sauce pan, boil a large pot of water. I salt my water for pasta or else add olive oil depending upon my mood. Salt supposedly allows the sauce to stick better while olive oil adds to the taste (the two cancel each other out, so I use one or the other). Add farfalle once the water boils and cook according to package directions. Farfalle is a past what resembles bow ties. You can use whatever pasta you like or have on hand. I think it works better with a short pasta but that's just my preference. You can use a long, stranded pasta if you prefer. Serve the pasta on a plate hot (meaning use hot water in the rinsing process after cooking the pasta and not cold water), ladel sauce on top of each plate of pasta and then sprinkle with Parmesan cheese. If you have another cheese on hand, feel free to use it instead.

Serve it with bread and you've got a simple, easy meal in less than a half hour. If you're throwing this together at the last minute, you can toast slice bread to serve with it. When I only have sliced bread on hand, I generally melt some butter with some grated garlic or garlic power and put that on the toast.

Monty also wrote that she's voting for Dennis Kucinich in the primaries (hers will take place on "Super Duper Tuesday") and she wishes it was already here because she's so sick of the "spectacle" and the lack of serious attention to Iraq.

She says she's preparing herself for the fact that he may not win the nomination but hoping everyone votes for who speaks for them and not just who they think is electable. She had a question that I'll answer in a moment but she wanted to share that she holds "The Nation magazine responsible for the uphill battle Dennis is fighting. If they'd covered him the way they have War Hawk Obama, he would stand a better chance of winning. I find Obama disgusting and pandering and my husband and I are not renewing our subscription to the magazine. It's gone from a political weekly to an Obama fan club bulletin. It seems like every time I turned around, there he was on the cover. He does not stand for their stated beliefs and to see them spend so much time salivating over him, so much time ripping apart Hillary and so little time even mentioning Dennis has turned me against the magazine forever. I do not remember the last primary cycle being this bad."

In our home, we stopped reading the rag when it was obvious 2007 was about nothing except the primaries and, specifically, Obama. I heard about a mailing that we haven't received yet where Victor Navasky asks former subscribers to come back. He doesn't put it that way, he just offers a trial subscription and stresses the magazine's allegedly strong points. But the mailing is going out (in e-mail and snail) to former subscribers. I would assume that circulation has continued to drop because I doubt there are enough groupies to support a magazine dedicated to Loving Bambi.

At Christmas dinner, one of my nephews stated he was supporting Obama because he was "really a socialist." I am aware that the faux left has been putting out the "stealth socialist" lie for months now. (And I wouldn't be surprised if feather brains like Katrina vanden Heuvel believe it.) That might have played at a faux left dinner but the bulk of my relatives (by birth) are socialists. The joke on the others (such as myself) is that we're Democrats because we're too lazy to be socialists. So that rumor landed at the wrong house on Christmas day. My father, who had heard the rumor for weeks and laughed at how "stupid" so many on the left are, quickly walked my nephew through the facts on how Obama wasn't a socialist and how, in previous election cycles, candidates have been sold on that before causing people to waste their votes on candidates who weren't left and triangulated their way through their time in office.

Nothing in Bambi's sleight record indicates a support for liberal, let alone socialist, beliefs. We talk politics at the table and always have. My father was not attempting to convince his great-grandson not to support Obama, he just wanted to get across that it's never been helpful for anyone when we vote based on rumors as opposed to records. He used a number of illustrations such as the people who voted for Bully Boy in 2000 telling themselves he was a 'compassionate Christian' or that he had to pander to the base but wasn't really like that. Bully Boy's record in Texas ended up being his record in DC: a lot of vacations and real damage when he actually did some work. In 1992, people told themselves that Bill Clinton was more left than he was campaigning as and that Clinton had to campaign that way to get the nomination and, later, to win the election. Clinton's mixed record as governor ended up being not significantly different from his mixed record as president.

Bambi's supported by a number of imperialists and one group will probably be mentioned in Ava and C.I.'s upcoming TV commentary tomorrow at The Third Estate Sunday Review.

In the snapshot I will be reposting at the end of my post, C.I. addresses the realities about Barack Obama and the illegal war. When you read that (and use the links if it comes as a shock to you), grasp that The Nation has LIED repeatedly. I would include disappointment with Democracy Now! as well as The Nation. It's not become campaign central but it has repeatedly pushed Obama all year. It finds whatever alleged zinger Bambi's delivered to Hillary and quotes it repeatedly (twice in Friday's broadcast) or shows the clip. But no one 'zings' Bambi. Amy Goodman has refused to explore -- and remember Democracy Now! bills itself as "the war and peace report" -- the stands on the war of the candidates which allows the zingers and 'testimonials' from Bambi supporters to imply that Bambi is against the illegal war.

He's a craven and corrupt politician and if you didn't live through the inflated 'scandal' of Whitewater you might not think about the fact that his friend is under indictment or that said friend and Bambi had a little land deal. If the press could spend years on the non-scandal of Whitewater, you better believe they'll go after the parcel 'gift' from a friend under indictment for attempting to buy influence with politicians.

I'm going to be focusing on his campaign homophobia in a minute but there are a number of issues that are not being addressed and he's gotten a huge pass from The Nation, from Democracy Now! and others. On my own end, my son may forgive a left writer who promoted Bambi for screaming at him (Mike) in an e-mail; however, I do not. And if you want to claim in an e-mail to my son that you don't support Bambi, then stop schilling for him on TV. If you want to say you would never support Bambi, say it in your public writing or in your TV appearances. Don't scream at my son for quoting you (quoting you correctly). It wasn't Mike's fault that you endorsed Bambi by comparing him to a legend. In fact, you're a cowardly man because you wanted to play the game in public of Rah-rah-Bambi and when Mike noted your quote in passing and that it was a little disappointing coming from you, instead of griping to my son for what you DID SAY on Democracy Now!, you should have taken your e-mail and turned it into a column. You supported Bambi publicly on TV.

Yes, it's hard when Koo Koo Katrina controls who gets this or that grant. But a kiss-ass it just a kiss-ass and that's all you are now in my opinion. My son may have forgiven you, but I never will because you insist you don't support Obama but, on TV and radio, you supported him. You never corrected that and you're just a liar. You cheapened your own name to play the game. It doesn't make you a 'brave' voice, it makes you a kiss-ass and that's all you'll ever be.

When I was a little girl -- years and years ago -- there were some kids who wouldn't play with me because my father was a socialist. They confused socialism and communism. And my parents would always tell me that people like that weren't worth knowing. By the same token, 'radicals' that have provided cover to Barack Obama aren't worth knowing. Mike was really upset by those e-mails and my father read over them because (a) Mike was hurt by them and (b) Mike really values his grandfather's opinion. He told Mike it reminded him of a communist who tried to get him (my father) kicked out of the union in the fifties. The communist was saving his own ass because everyone knew the man was a communist from way back and the red scare had hit even our liberal area. So the man passed himself off as a Democrat and began pointing to my father (who never made a secret out of the fact that he was a socialist). My father never defended himself by outing the communist. That would have been easy to do. He could have pointed out that "the barking dog" was barking so loudly to cover his own beliefs. He suffered a little because of it but he never lied about who he was. While he feels sorry for that man, I don't. I drove by his funeral in the 90s and watched with amusement as the man was lowered into the ground with only two people present (none of which were his children). He tried to save his own ass by destroying my father and I never forget that or forgive it. And I hope the man screaming at my son in e-mails meets the same fate. I think fakes and phonies do the most damage in the world.

In terms of this community, my son's the only one who will ever highlight that man. Like my father, my son's trying to be the bigger person. The rest of us don't have to and if you think I'm angry about the fake's nonsense, you should hear Wally or C.I. talk about it.

Turning to homophobia, what is Southern Voice? Allegedly, it's a gay news publication and they run the following:



Six Democratic presidential hopefuls made history -- and headlines -- when they joined in an Aug. 9 forum broadcast live on gay cable channel Logo. The event, sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign, drew some criticism from its format of having the candidates appear separately to answer questions from a panel comprised of HRC President Joe Solmonese, lesbian rocker Melissa Etheridge, and journalists Jonathan Capehart and Margaret Carlson.
Longshot candidates Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich offered the most ringing endorsements of gay rights, both backing full marriage for gay couples. The event featured plenty of platitudes from leading candidates Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards about why they support "equality," while backing civil unions but not gay marriage, and also a few cringe-inducing moments, such as New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson saying that homosexuality is "a choice" in response to what should have been a softball question from Etheridge.
But it also proved how far the fight for gay rights has come in just a few years, as all of the candidates supported overturning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," banning job discrimination, and allowing some form of legal recognition for gay couples — positions that remain untenable for their GOP counterparts even today.


What a load of bunk and, since they're geared to gay readers, what a sham. They go on to call out the GOP but neglect to tell their readers that one candidate openly put known homophobes on stage at a campaign event and allowed homophobia to pour down from the stage: Barack Obama in South Carolina. Here's Larry C. Johnson in "Remember Punjab-Gate, Homophobia-Gate, Wasted-Lives-Gate?" (Atlanta Free Press):

Homophobia-Gate: From Radio Left blog's, "Senator Barack Obama, Tarnished Angel," November 3, 2007:
Obama organized a series of gospel concerts for black evangelicals in South Carolina. The objective was to bring them into the Obama for President camp.
Donnie McClurkin, a black gospel singer who claims to be cured of his homosexuality through Jesus Christ, headlined the events. (To see Mr McClurkin prance around the stage, you would never guess he had gone back into the closet.) When challenged about McClurkin by LGBT and civil rights groups, Senator Obama ignored the concerns and not only kept McClurkin on the program, but allowed him to talk to the audience from the stage. Mr. McClurkin, as would be expected, told them that homosexuality is a sin and he had been cured through prayer.
Senator Obama apologized, and hired a gay evangelist to appear at later concerts in the series.
Totally necessary Senator Obama made a mistake that demonstrates his lack of experience -- a primary concern about his candidacy. Worse, it was totally unnecessary. He could have allowed McClurkin to sing, but not make a speech. He could have engaged another gospel singer who doesn't have McClurkin's baggage. McClurkin's comments and McClurkin himself were not a requirement for Obama to successfully reach out to black evangelicals. To me, that is the saddest and most hurtful aspect of the entire affair.
[…]
Barack Obama owes that audience an apology for subjecting them to Donnie McClurkin's diatribe against gays.
So, far all Obama has done is make an incomplete apology and step into it again.


This is from Don Frederick's "Obama's link to gospel singer sparks controversy" (Los Angeles Times) this month:

Barack Obama is drawing fire for including Donnie McClurkin, a Grammy-winning gospel singer who has crusaded against homosexuality, on a concert and political tour that the Democratic presidential candidate will launch in South Carolina later this week.
Commentator Earl Ofari Hutchinson, author of "A Colored Man's Journey Through 20th Century Segregated America" and several other books that examine race relations, posted a blog over the weekend calling on Obama to "cancel and repudiate" the tour -- "and do it now" -- because of McClurkin. Hutchinson terms the singer a "notorious gay basher" and charged that Obama "ripped a page from the Bush campaign playbook" by traveling with him.



And let's be really clear that he didn't just put one homophobe on stage. A friend asks why C.I. always notes "homophobes" and then citex McClurkin (who campaigned for Bully Boy in 2004 and took to the stage at the GOP convention that year)? Because Obama had a host of homophobes on the stage. Kevin Alexander Gray and Marshall Derks explained it last month:

Oddly, Obama threw a premature haymaker but it wasn't aimed at Clinton. The target was the GLBT community. Obama's wild swing involved having four of the most abrasively anti-gay gospel singers represent his campaign on his "Embrace the Courage" gospel music tour in South Carolina. The gay bashing headliners included Reverends Donnie McClurkin and Hezekiah Walker, Pentecostal pastor of Brooklyn mega-church, the Love Fellowship Tabernacle and Mary Mary (a sister act duo).
The Mary Mary sisters compare gays to murderers and prostitutes. In an interview with Vibe magazine, one of the singers said, "They [gays] have issues and need somebody to encourage them like everybody else - just like the murderer, just like the one full of pride, just like the prostitute."

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

Friday, December 28, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the lies of Bambi Peace King continue, the 3900 mark still remains largely unnoted and a peace organization decides to start a petition and do a tribute . . . to a media circus, all those disappointments and more.

Starting with war resistance, A Power Governments Cannot Suppress is a collection of Howard Zinn's essays and "Soldiers In Revolt" (pp. 173 -177) deals with war resistance within the military ranks:

It is undoubtedly the nature of this war, so steeped in deceptions perpetrated on the American public -- the false claims that Iraq possessed "weapons of mass destruction" and was connected to 9/11 -- that has provoked opposition to the war among the military. Further the revelations of the country from bombardment, foreign occupation, and sectarian violence, to which many of the dissenting soldiers have been witness, contribute to their alienation.

Zinn notes Jeremy Hinzman's remarks to CBS News (60 Minutes) "I was told in basic training that, if I'm given an illegal or immoral order, it is my duty to disobey it, and I feel that invading and occupying Iraq is an illegal and immoral thing to do." Zinn also notes Jimmy Massey testifyng "that he and his fellow marines shot and killed more than thirty unarmed men, women and children, and even shot a young Iraqi who got out of his car with his arms in the air."

In early 2005, Naval Petty Officer Third Class Pablo Paredes refused to obey orders to board an assault ship in San Diego that was bound for the Persian Gulf. He told a U.S. Navy judge: "I believe as a member of the armed forces, byond having a duty to my chain of command and my President, I have a higher duty to my conscince and to the supreme law of the land. Both of these higher duties dictate that I must not participate in any way, hands-on or indirect in the current aggression that has been unleashed on Iraq."
For this, Paredes faced a year in the brig, but the navy judge, citing testimony about the illegality of the Iraq War, declined to give him jail time, instead gave him three months of hard labor, and reduced him in rank.

As Zinn draws his essay to a conclusion, he quotes IVAW's Kelly Dougherty speaking to "an audience at Harvard" where she explains that her experience in Iraq led her to see, "I'm not defending freedom, I'm protecting a corporate interest." Again, that's Zinn's A Power Governments Cannot Suppress.

On November 15th, the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey? Does he even care? Judging by his column, the answer is no. An over hyped voice of the 'left' gives the greatest gift of all in 2007: The reality of how little the alleged 'left' cares about ending the illegal war. (Give to the DNC! Give to two presidential candidates who refuse to promise, that if elected in 2008, they would pull out the troops by 2013!) That just about sums it all up. In the real world, the Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.


There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, 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, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

Yesterday's snapshot noted: "The US military announces 11 people were killed in Al Kut and states they were 'terrorists' which required 'fire, and . . . supporting aircraft'. The US military also announces 12 'kills' from December 22 to 25th in Diyala Province and, again, tosses around the term 'terrorists'. AFP notes, 'Iraq officials said the dead included two civilians'." Today Solomon Moore (New York Times) quotes eye witness Jameel Muhammad explaining, "The American helicopters shelled our neighborhood for three hours. Dead bodies were scattered here and there. Houses and cars were set on fire, and people were scared and running all over the place." Moore also quotes Hassan Jassim who saw "three bodies lying in the street near his house" and he declares, "American helicopters fired on our houses." A press that could explore the assault? Thankfully Moore did but there's a media circus going on, in case you didn't notice.

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 8 dead from a Baghdad car bombing, a Baghdad mortar attack left 1 dead and another wounded and a Zighaniya roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 "child and injuring another." Reuters notes the number dead from the Baghdad car bombing is now 10.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a police officer shot dead in Baquba and a home invasion (the assailants were dressed as Iraqi soldiers) in Sadaa village that claimed the lives of 2 men and ejected a woman from the home which they then planted with bombs (which were defused) -- both men killed were members of the so-called 'Awakening Council'.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad

Free Bilal. Bilal Hussein is the Pulitzer Prize winning AP photo journalist who has been imprisoned by the US military since April 2006. On Sunday, attorney Scott Horton (Harper's magazine) walked readers through the latest on Bilal and we'll note this section:

The Pentagon was particularly concerned about the prospect of Bilal Hussein getting effective defense from his lawyer, former federal prosecutor Paul Gardephe. The judge was told to refuse to allow Bilal Hussein's U.S. lawyer to participate in the case. The judge accepted this advice. Consequently, the U.S. military has a five-man team to press its case, but Bilal Hussein's lawyer is silenced and not permitted to participate - and all of this has occurred as a result of U.S. Government intervention with the court. The irony of course is that under Iraqi law, the U.S. military has no authority or right to appear and prosecute, but Bilal Hussein's chosen counsel has an absolute right.The U.S. military continues to keep Hussein in their custody and will not allow his lawyer, Gardephe, access to him to conduct interviews or trial preparation without having both a U.S. military representative and an interpreter in the room at all times. Under international norms, this means that Bilal Hussein is not permitted access to counsel: a serious violation of his trial rights. And note that the violator is not the Iraqi authorities, who have no control over Bilal, but the United States Government.

The US military & government have repeatedly changed their stories since taking Bilal a prisoner on April 12, 2006. Now they're refusing to let him meet with his attorney and they occupy the country he will supposedly receive a 'fair' trial in. Never forget his 'crime' was reporting. Free Bilal.

Turning to presidential candidates because the LIES are getting to be too much. Monica Davey (New York Times) reported July 26, 2004 in "A Surprise Senate Contender Reaches His Biggest Stage Yet:"

He opposed the war in Iraq, and spoke against it during a rally in Chicago in the fall of 2002. He said then that he saw no evidence that Iraq had unconvental weapons that posed a threat, or of any link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.
In a recent interview, he declined to criticize Senators Kerry and Edwards for voting to authorize the war, although he said he would not have done the same based on the information he had at the time.
"But, I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports," Mr. Obama said. "What would I have done? I don't know. What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made."

Do you get that, do you grasp it? Barack Obama told the New York Times in 2004 that he didn't know how he would have voted on the resolution HAD HE BEEN IN THE SENATE.

Now let's go to the June 3rd 'debate' in New Hampshire. The topic is the illegal war, we're picking up with John Edwards

But I have made very clear from the outset that the way to end the war is for the Congress to use its constitutional authority to fund. They should send a bill to the president with a timetable for withdrawal, which they did. The president vetoed. And then it came back. And then it was the moment of truth. And I said throughout the lead-up to this vote that I was against a funding bill that did not have a timetable for withdrawal, that it was critical for the Congress to stand firm. They were given a mandate by the American people. And others on this stage -- Chris Dodd spoke out very loudly and clearly. But I want to finish this -- others did not. Others were quiet. They went quietly to the floor of the Senate, cast the right vote. But there is a difference between leadership and legislating.BLITZER: You want to name names?EDWARDS: No, I think it's obvious who I'm talking about. BLITZER: It is to me, but it might not be to some of the viewers out there.EDWARDS: Senator Clinton and Senator Obama did not say anything about how they were going to vote until they appeared on the floor of the Senate and voted. They were among the last people to vote. And I think that the importance of this is -- they cast the right vote, and I applaud them for that. But the importance of this is, they're asking to be president of the United States. And there is a difference between making clear, speaking to your followers, speaking to the American people about what you believe needs to be done. And I think all of us have a responsibility to lead on these issues, not just on Iraq, but on health care, on energy, on all the other issues.BLITZER: I'm going to give both of them a chance to respond to you. Senator Obama?OBAMA: Well, look, the -- I think it is important to lead. And I think John -- the fact is is that I opposed this war from the start. So you're about four and a half years late on leadership on this issue. And, you know, I think it's important not to play politics on something that is as critical and as difficult as this.

"I opposed this war from the start"? The public record shows Obama gave a speech calling it a "dumb" war before it started. Then it started. He went on to then tell the New York Times that he wasn't sure how he would have voted had he been in the Senate.

He DID NOT oppose all along. He made some weak-ass statements before the illegal war started and then he got on board with the illegal war. "Dumb" war is not a position a lawyer should take. "Dumb" war might play well as a faux folksy talking point for Fred Thompson, but, as Patti Williams can't stop gushing, Barack Obama was the president of the Harvard Law Review. "Dumb" war is a "dumb" thing and a weak thing for a legal mind to state. And he admitted, in 2004, he didn't know how he would have voted if he'd been in the Senate in 2002. But that didn't stop him from calling out John Edwards and saying Edwards was "four and a half years late on leadership" in the New Hampshire debate this year.

And here's the thing, Bambi didn't just make the "I don't know how I would've voted in 2002 if I'd been in the Senate" statement once. And he was still making it in late 2006. Speaking to David Remnick (The New Yorker, November 2006), he was asked about differences between himself and Hillary Clinton. He responded:
I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq, although I'm always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was that I didn't have the benefit of U.S. intelligence. And, for those who did, it might have led to a different set of choices. So that might be something that sort of is obvious. But, again, we were in different circumstances at that time: I was running for the U.S. Senate, she had to take a vote, and casting votes is always a difficult test.

The conversation with Remnick is also available as an audio download. Casting a vote can be 'difficult.' Chicago's WBEZ reported (link has text and audio) last week that Obama "missed more than 160 votes on the Senate floor" as a result of "campaigning" and that "Obama's missed more than a third of the Senate's votes this year, about the same tally as two other senators running for the president: Joe Biden and Chris Dodd. Hillary Clinton has missed significantly fewer votes than Obama, while Republican John McCain has missed far more." Bernie Tafoya (WBBM) narrowed it down, "During September and October, Senator Obama missed 71 -- or nearly 80 percent -- of the 89 votes that have taken place in the Senate." That included the Iran resolution, the one Bambi wants to hiss, "Bad Hillary! You voted for it!" But he was a member of the Senate and he knew about the vote and chose not to show up. He says Iran says something about Hillary Clinton. It says a great deal about him: He didn't vote one way or the other. Is that what he would have done in 2002? Ducked the vote?

Or as US House Rep and Democratic Party contender for the presidential nomination Dennis Kucinich declared today in New Hampshire, "Senators Clinton, Edwards, Biden and Dodd voted to give the President the authorization to go to war in Iraq. Their judgment was wrong. They and Senator Obama have voted to continue funding that war. Their judgement was wrong."

We've gone remedial because Democracy Now! twice (here and here) offered Barack Obama's campaign spokesmodel David Axelrod's statement on today's show: "Barack Obama had the judgement to oppose the war in Iraq. And he warned at the time that it would divert us from Afghanistan and Al Qaeda, and now we see the effacts of that . . . Sen. Clinton made a different judgement. Let's have that discussion." Obama's position on the Iraq War has been all over the map. (Tariq Ali demolishes the other points from Bambi's spokesmodel.) Last night we noted the large number of Republican and Democratic presidential hopefuls rushing in to offer their thoughts on the thug and crook Benazir Bhutto. They should all be ashamed of themselves. We took media to task last night and yesterday as well. Add another group that's got some explaining: CODEPINK. Bhutto died yesterday. For Bhutto they can rush to offer a "tribute" and offer a "Petition." What was our complaint about media and the candidates? What were they not noting?

Today, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) notes it, "In Iraq, the U.S. death toll has topped 3,900. Two soldiers were killed on Wednesday in Mosul." And that's it from Democracy Now! For those wondering, the 3900 mark prompts nothing from our peace groups. We didn't call them out yesterday, they're volunteers and they're not news outlets or running for votes. But when CODEPINK has time to create a tribute (for someone who doesn't deserve it) and to start a petition, they DAMN WELL have time to note that 3,900 US service members have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war. As we noted last night, "'Independent' media (broadcast and some print) largely offered us state propaganda. Meanwhile the candidates for both major parties telegraphed just how little American deaths mean to them." And, again, US presidential wanna-bes are running to become the President of the United States, not the Prime Minister of Pakistan. A peace organization that has time to weigh in on breaking news has time to note the 3900 dead and, if they don't make that time while they rush to note some 'hot' topic, they send a message -- intentionally or not, they send a message.

Since we've noted Democrats running for president, the Green Party has an upcoming debate. Kimberly Wilder (On the Wilder Side) notes that January 13th, 2:00 p.m., Herbst Theater (410 Van Ness) in San Francisco, there will be a Green Party Presidential debate featuring Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, Elaine Brown, Jared Ball and Kent Mesplay. For a list of candidates -- from all parties -- that may be running, see Kimberly and Ian Wilder's candidates page.


Today Naomi Klein will be on PBS' The Charlie Rose Show. Klein's new book is The Shock Doctrine: The Rise Of Disaster Capitalism. Also today on PBS, NOW with David Brancaccio, the program "investigates the partnership of a Republican congressman and the Idaho Conservation League to protect a vast swath of the state's natural environment. Does their compromise legislation come at too high a price? The legislation, the Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act (CIEDRA), transfers some public land -- land Americans across the country pay for -- to private local ownership in exchange for protection of nearby wilderness. It also leaves land bordering the wilderness open to further recreational use, especially involving off-road vehicles." Among those speaking out on the program against the sell-out of public lands is Carole King -- King of Goffin & King in the 60s (chronological sixties), writing the music to more charting hits than may be humanly possible, easing into a group at the tail end of that decade (The City), going solo in the seventies, releasing the landmark album Tapestry, etc., still writing, still performing and working on the issue of the ecology for many, many years. Check local listings for the times both programs will be aired. Sunday on NYC's WBAI (streams online) from 11 a.m. to noon EST, The Next Hour will offer: "Author/actor/racounteur Malachy McCourt hosts his brothers Frank, Alf and Mike in what has come to be an annual McCourt family radio reunion." While Monday on WBAI's Cat Radio Cafe, 2:00 pm to 3:00 pm EST, "In an epilogue to WBAI's recent 'Celebration of Norman Mailer' (The Next Hour, December 16, 2007, 11 am-1 pm, archived at http://www.catradiocafe.com/), legendary actor Rip Torn weighs in on his old friend and fellow improvisor, along with an encorse airing of Joyce Carol Oates' observations on Mailer; and political satirist Will Durst with the Top Ten Comedic Stories of 2007. Hosted by Janet Coleman and David Dozer."

iraq
howard zinn
iraq veterans against the war
mcclatchy newspapers
kimberly wilder
democracy nowamy goodman
naomi klein
pbs
Charlie Rose Show
now with david branccaciocarole king
bilal hussein
scott hortonthe new york timeschristian parenti
solomon mooreradiowbaithe next hourcat radio cafe

My oven doesn't work!

An aunt's heard about my son's website (Mikey Likes It!) and mine and had never 'toured' the 'world wide web.' Mike was showing her them on the computer in the kitchen (the one I'm on) and she wondered what kind of e-mails we get? So he went into his Yahoo account and they read two e-mails and then she wondered what kind of e-mails I receive?

I'm at the stove cooking and busy so I shouted out the password and Mike logged in only to say, "Uh, Ma, there's a problem." A woman wrote and included her phone number. She had a problem: her oven went out.

That's most likely a heating element and, if someone knows a little about ovens, they can rig it to work enough to get through the day. But not a lot of people know about that. I called her and the good news is that she was serving ham and not turkey, the ham is pre-cooked and just needs warming so that can be done in the microwave oven.

She'd already begun transferring what she could over to the stove top and was going to use a toaster oven to brown the rolls.

She does serve green bean casserole and apologized for that. No need, if you like it, you probably have a wonderful recipe for it. How do you make a casserole like that? On the stove in a pan. All the ingredients but the fried onions should be put in a pan, you should simmer it and cook it down since it's not in the oven. At least a half-hour so it is thick and not runny. Put it into a dish and for the fried onions (already fried, from a can) either 'warm' them in a non-stick skillet and then place on top or, if you have a large toaster oven, put them on top of the mixture and cook them in the toaster oven for five to ten minutes.

Everything that can be done on a stove top can usually be done in the microwave as well if you have one (she didn't).

These things pop up if you cook often enough and you adjust. She apologized for "my frantic e-mail" and there's no need for an apology, I'm sad that I haven't covered something so basic here. So I'm doing this quick post in case anyone else had that problem or ends up having that problem at a future date.

Happy Holidays.


This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" from yesterday.

Monday, December 24, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, 'tis the season for . . . mass kidnappings, mercenaries are back in the news and, in honor of the gift giving season, a 'left' 'voice' telegraphs just how unimportant the illegal war is to him.

Starting with war resistance. And let's deal with why, unless your name is In These Times, left and 'left' print magazines don't have anything to point to with pride in 2007. They've been silent on war resisters (this also goes to a number of radio programs) and have refused to cover any war resisters (in the US, in Canada or Eli Israel, the first service member to publicly resist while serving in Iraq though you wouldn't know that fact if you counted on independent media to bring the news to you). Every year at this time The Nation's Katha Pollitt does a column on where you could donate your money. This year's column appears to address some of last year's criticism, so here's the link. That is Pollitt's trademark and has been for years -- that column. Paul Loeb apparently thinks he can be the male Katha. (In his dreams. And, yes, I'm aware he's one of those three named monstrosities but he's signing off his Free Press column with "Paul Loeb." It's entitled "Who I Give To" with the message that it's who you should give to.

And what do we have. In order: Working Assets, Better World Club, IPA, MoveOn, Sojourners, WellstoneAction, America Votes, Democracy for America, the DNC, John Edwards' presidential campain, Barack Obama's presidential campaign, Public Campaign, 1Sky coaltion, Focus the Nation, Climate Crisis Coalition, Sierra Club, Fight Back America, Jobs With Justice, NAACP, ACLU, Peace Action, True Majority, The War Resister's Leauge, The Backbone Campaign, Americans For Peace Now and Brit Tzedek. He notes the last two are "pro-Israel." Reading over the list, where is IVAW? Where is Courage To Resist? Where is the War Resisters Support League? Where is Veterans for Peace? Where is CODEPINK? Where is SDS? Where is United for Peace & Justice? Where is World Can't Wait? Where is A.N.S.W.E.R.? Where is the National Lawyers Guild? (NLG has a group for war resisters.)

No where. An overly praised, fawned over writer opens his empty head to reveal to you just how shallow 'voices' are. Anyone stupid (and you have to be stupid, there's no other word for it) to give to two presidential candidates and not grasp they are not 'helping' either and they are cancelling their donation out, already started out in the Dumb Zone. But could that money not have gone to IVAW, War Resisters Support Campaign or Courage To Resist?

"I'm not a pacifist," he feels the need to reassure (no one thought he was a pacifist, it would be surprising if anyone thought he had the skill or ability to think long enough to reach that position), "but The War Resister's League has carried the banner of peace activism for 85 years, and I always admire what they do." The American Friends Service Committee has 'carried the banner' for 90 years. But though Working Assets and True Majority (covering the same damn terrain) can get shout outs and it's non-stop election central (including donating to two candidates running for the same slot), American Friends Service Committee is not mentioned .Paul gives a true gift this holiday season: a glimpse into the heavily pimped shallow mind that makes up too much of the so-called left today. With his list, that he wrote himself, he has told you what is important and what isn't and he has told you that he can't even plug the War Resister's League without rushing to reassure any reader that he's not a pacifist. Running scared and running brain dead, one of the most heavily pimped 'lefties' of the decade makes it very clear that he's all about the Democratic Party and elections and he's not at all about ending the illegal war. What's surprising is that he left off a Hurricane Katrina charity -- how many bad articles did he bore America with on that topic after Katrina hit? Well, that's the 'left' you for, a tiny-minded mocking bird, flittering and fluttering from here to there but never landing.

An illegal war is going on and the answer in an overly long, bad column (men who try to copy Katha Pollitt will always come up short), he tells you where his priorities are. He supports Jewish organizations that are pro-Israel, he supports Sojourners with money though he doesn't agree with their 'evangical' measures. He supports anything and everything but those committed to ending the illegal war with one exception and, when noting that exception, it's important for him to rush to assure America he's no pacifist. No one ever thought a shallow thinker could wade to that conclusion, Loeb, no one ever did.

Apparently there's no show tune for him to stumble across ("the impossible will take a little while") about war resisters so they're not on his list of concerns. But, in that list, you see 2007 independent (or 'independent') media coverage in all its horror. Give money to candidates! Give it to two candidates running against each other! Give money to the Democratic Party! Give money to groups working on clean elections! Give money to groups working on getting people elected! Give, give, give till it hurts.

And the reality is, in 2007, independent media has hurt war resistance. This December 23rd published column also explains how useless independent media is. Is anyone really thinking, this late in the game, "I must get a gift! I know I'll donate!" If they were, links would be required for someone wanting to be 'helpful.' No links are provided. Typical independent media in 2007, advocating badly.

Does Loeb know that on November 15th, the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey? Does he even care? Judging by his column, the answer is no. An over hyped voice of the 'left' gives the greatest gift of all in 2007: The reality of how little the alleged 'left' cares about ending the illegal war. (Give to the DNC! Give to two presidential candidates who refuse to promise, that if elected in 2008, they would pull out the troops by 2013!) That just about sums it all up. In the real world, the Canadian Parliament has the power to let war resisters stay in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. Both War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are calling for actions from January 24-26.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, 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, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:
In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

On Sunday, Alissa J. Rubin and Damien Cave (New York Times) provided the lengthiest coverage of Iraq the paper's offered in some time as they explored the 'Awakening' Councils that US government has decided is the quick-fix to reducing the violence just enough to stop Americans from caring that an illegal war is going on. Not noted in the article is that the Sunni thugs want the US out. Noted in the article is that the they don't support al-Maliki's puppet government. This is why the Shi'ite thugs are furious. They were armed and backed by the US early on and were very effective at 'cleansing' areas through force, intimidation and death squads. Now the US is arming their enemies and they're worried. Arming but unable to control. In Ramadi, Cave and Rubin join Second Lt. Stephen Lind who discovers that, despite "a rule that bans the Iraqi Army from the city," the Iraqi army is at a sheik's and, when asked by Lind why, the response is: "The sheik told us to come." And that's that, time to roll out and rules (like laws) really don't matter but let's all pretend the US is somehow in 'control.' Rubin and Cave observe, "The standoff, though, underscored the Awakening's long-term challenge."


The US is not 'improving' things in Iraq, they are laying the groundwork for further tensions and anyone could tell them that but the government doesn't want to listen. Very similar to how they did not want to listen about the issue of mercenaries. Steve Rainaru (Washington Post) reports on how warnings were repeatedly ignored by the State Dept and the Pentagon
which addresses how warnings were ignored by the government (US) repeatedly regarding mercenaries, cites the lack of "substantive action to regulate" mercenaries -- lack of action from the State Dept. or the Pentagon and while "previous wars . . . had prohibited contractors from participating in combat . . . in Iraq, military planners rewrote the policy" via a September 20, 2005 order that granted mercenaries the power "to use deadly force". From the article:

Critics, including the American Bar Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, warned that the Pentagon had used an obscure defense acquisition rule to push through a fundamental shift in American war-fighting without fully considering the potential legal and strategic ramifications.The provision enabled the military to significantly raise troop levels with contractors whose "combat roles now closely parallel those of Constitutionally and Congressionally authorized forces," wrote Herbert L. Fenster, a partner with McKenna Long & Aldridge, a Washington-based international law firm that represents several major defense contractors. Fenster questioned the provision's legality in a lengthy comment he filed in opposition. The practice "smacks of a mercenary approach," he wrote in an e-mail.But neither the military nor the State Department set guidelines for regulating tens of thousands of hired guns on the battlefield. Oversight was left to overburdened government contracting officers or the companies themselves, which conducted their own investigations when a shooting incident occurred. Dozens of security companies operated under layers of subcontracts that often made their activities all but impossible to track. They were accountable to no one for violent incidents, according to U.S. officials and security company representatives familiar with the contracting arrangements.



In England, accountability is also an issue with regards to contractors. PA reports that the Parliament may be addressing "clains that a UK-based security company" ArmorGroup "deliberataly withheld intelligence from the British armed force in Iraq" with regards to "militia infiltration of the Iraqi police in Basra" Henry McDonald, Duncam Campbell and Richard Norton-Taylor (Guardian of London) report that Colin Williamson (who worked for ArmorGroup in Iraq) has made "[t]he most serious allegations" which include this, "My role was to go to certain Iraqi police stations daily in the Basra area. But we were told not to report back any intelligence we picked up there, not to hand it to the British military. Why? Because our bosses and probably, in turn, the FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth Office] didn't want to expose how corrupt and infiltrated by the militia the police were." If true, his statements mean that ArmorGroup is just another contractor that's yet to face accountability.


Equally unaccountable are the US employees who gang-rape and sexually harass in Iraq. Yvonne Roberts (Guardian of London) addresses the crimes against Jamie Lee Jones and notes that there has been no accountability in the two years since the gang-rape was reported and that laws favorable to US corporations (Halliburton/KBR are who Jones' attackers worked for) may allow them to avoid prosecution. Roberts notes, "MoveOn, a democracy-in-action pressure group is organising a petition calling on Congress to investigate Jamie's case, hold those involved accountable, and bring US contractors under the jurisdiction of US law so this can't happen again. Sadly, the petition can only be signed by American voters. If you take a look at what happened to Jamie Leigh Jones and at least 11 other women now claiming they have been raped and sexually assaulted while working in Baghdad's Green Zone, then it's difficult to avoid the notion that if these contractors behave in such a sexually barbaric fashion to their working colleagues, what have they been inflicting on the female Iraqi population - apart from apparently randomly beating and shooting their men?"Meanwhile, Walter Pincus (Washington Post) reports today on a disgusting development for those who did not assume the United States resorted to tactics of totalitarian regimes: 'deprogramming.' Maj. Gen. Douglas Stone is identified as the one responsible for what's called "the battlefield of the mind" and just the fact that the US uses such languages and wants to 'militarize' the mind should be enough to frighten most. But reading on you realize that Iraqi prisoners are now experiment subjects -- against their will -- and may every anthropologist, sociologist, medical personal, et al be haunted eternally for what are they doing. Pincus tells you that who the military wants to assist with these attacks on a person's sanity, will and mind are "teachers, religious and behavioral science counselors" and that the goal is 'reintegration.' Here's a thought: How can Iraqis be reintegrated into their own occupied country? If the military's telling you this much, it's probably much worse; however, Stone doesn't have the common sense to grasp how offensive what he is peddling to the public is. I am unaware of an waiver that allows for brain-washing in a war (legal or illegal) but apparently that's one more thing being tossed aside.


Moving on, Leila Fadel (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) shares details of Eid al Adha celebration including the shopping ("a toy store where little boys crowded around toys, picking their holiday gifts. They all wanted the same thing, toy guns, just like the men they see on the streets.. . . The toys hear are a reflection of the reality they live, humvees, military helicopters and guns. All the little boys want sto emulate the violence on the street"), a McClathy correspondent's relative who has to to Iran for medical treatment ("Although a trickle of people are returning so many professionals are absent and simple medical procedures are only available outside Iraq") and a meal where inquiries about marital status were made with Iraqi woman explaining, "My fiancee was killed at the beginning of the war. I've never found anyone like him."

And the violence goes on . . .


Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Bagdad mini-bus bombing that claimed 1 life and left five wounded, two Baghdad roadside bombings that wounded six people and a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and wounded three more. AP reports that the mini-bus bombing was "near the Baghdad governor's office" and "near the heavily guarded Green Zone" and that it's "unclear if it was detonated remotely or just went off."


Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed clash at a police station "north east of Sulaimaniyah."

Kidnappings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 14 people were kidnapped from a mini-bus north of Baquba, 7 truck drivers were kidnapped south of Kirkuk. Reuters reports that the 14 kidnapped off the bus today were all "members of one family". AFP reports on the 14 Shi'ites kidnapper that they were stopped at a fake check-point outside of Baquba and were taken off a bus at the checkpoint and kidnapped -- this was "all the passengers" on the bus "including some women and children" according to Iraqi police officer Hazim Yassin.

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

In addition, Al Jazeera reports on a Sunday train crash that claimed the lives of many members of the Hamid Hrat family -- two adults, five girls and six boys for a total of 13 -- who were apparently unable to move over the train crossing (stalled car? who knows?) and were plowed into by a train in Hilla. (AP and some other domestic sources report the train crash as happening today.)

Finally, despite PO'LICeandTICksOh providing a back channel to Nancy Pelosi's Blue Dog Congressional enemies last Friday, Dennis Camire (The Honolulu Advertiser) reports that US House Rep Neil Abercrombie states that Dems will "push on with the effort" to end the illegal war and that "Rep. Abercrombie said it's only a matter of time and American casualties before the public gets fed up enough and forces politicians to bring the troops home." Apparently, the writers' strike has also resulted in Congress airing re-runs. The 'strategy' is not 'new.' It's the one John Harris (PO'LIceandTICsOh) summed up as describing what Congress was hoping for in 2007 when speaking on PBS' Washington Weak over the weekend. (Here for the program's web site. Here for Ava and my review.)




iraq
iraq veterans against the warthe new york timesalissa j. rubindamien cave
the washington post
walter pincussteve fainaruyvonne roberts