From Scotland's The Herald, we'll note Stephen Graham's "UN engineer killed in bombing of Kabul internet cafe:"

A UN engineer was among three people killed when a suicide attacker blew himself up in an internet cafe in Kabul, the first fatal attack on a UN staffer in the capital since the Taliban fell in 2001.
The weekend bombing followed a series of kidnap attempts on foreigners and the killing of a British development worker, deepening a sense of insecurity as a Taliban-led uprising revives in the south.
The country's top law-enforcer said police were erecting extra checkpoints.
"There are criminal elements who have a lot to gain by destabilising Afghanistan and halting and reversing the progress the country has made," said Ali Ahmad Jalali, the interior minister. "We will never allow that to happen.

From The Economist, Billy e-mails "Hunting Uganda's child-killers:"


NO ONE doubts that terrible crimes have been committed in northern Uganda. The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), a rebel group led by Joseph Kony, a man who thinks himself semi-divine, has spent the past 18 years slaughtering peasants, enslaving children and slicing off the lips and noses of conscripts it suspects of disloyalty. But does this mean that the newly established International Criminal Court (ICC) should be going after Mr Kony and his lieutenants? Several community leaders in northern Uganda think not.
As the ICC prepares to issue its first arrest warrants against the LRA's leaders, Rwot Acana II, the paramount chief of the northern Acholi people, who have borne the brunt of the rebels' atrocities, predicts that it will be "the last nail in the coffin" of a fragile peace process. The threat of prosecution, he argues, will deter the rebels from accepting a government-offered amnesty, and therefore prolong the war. He and other Acholi leaders have been furiously lobbying the ICC to back off. They argue that it would be better to apply traditional Acholi justice. If the rebels confess their guilt and undergo cleansing rituals, they will be accepted back into their communities, say the ICC's critics.

Also from The Economist, we'll note "Stagflation, the remix:"

LIKE the disco era it dominated, stagflation has a distinctive beat: slow growth, rising inflation, high oil prices and weak labour markets. In the 1970s this nasty combination haunted the global economy. Could it be making a comeback?
Today's world economy does seem to be playing some similar tunes. In the statement accompanying its latest interest-rate hike on May 3rd, America's Federal Reserve fretted about both price pressure and a slowdown in spending. On May 4th, the European Central Bank kept interest rates unchanged, but worried aloud about oil prices and slowing growth.
The evidence is mounting that global growth has slowed. In America, output grew by an annualised 3.1% in the first three months of 2005, the slowest pace for two years. More recent figures, from weak retail sales to soggy consumer confidence, suggest this "soft patch" may be getting softer by the day. In Britain, the latest numbers--in retail sales and manufacturing--point to weaker growth. And in the euro zone, sluggish economies are looking ever more lethargic.
Yet even as growth is slowing, price pressures are looming. In America, consumer prices rose 3.1% in the year to March, up from 1.7% a year ago. In Britain, inflation jumped unexpectedly in March. And in the euro zone, consumer prices are still rising faster than the 2% goal that the European Central Bank targets. With output slowing and inflation stubborn, it is small wonder that the concerns about stagflation are back in fashion.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

We'll start with Reporters Without Borders and the article "US army asked to explain why it is still holding CBS News cameraman after one monthConcern about arrests of other journalists:"

Reporters Without Borders wrote to General John Abizaid, head of US Central Command today calling for the release of Iraqi cameraman Abdel Amir Hussein in the absence of evidence against him. Hussein works for CBS News in Mosul. The letter also voiced alarm about all the other journalists currently detained in Iraq.
"Hussein has now been held for a month without the US army producing any concrete proof of its allegations," the press freedom organization said in its letter said, noting that it had already voiced concern about his detention on 9 April.
"We would like to express our concern to you again today, and to reiterate our request for a more detailed explanation," the letter continued. "The result of an explosives test in a country at war does not seem to us to be either sufficient or substantial as justification for his detention. In the name of international law, we call on you yet again to release this journalist if you are unable to produce tangible evidence against him."
Noting that, according to recent information from US military sources, a total of nine Iraqi journalists "suspected of helping insurgent groups" are currently held in US and Iraqi detention centres without being charged, the letter called on the US army and the Iraqi authorities to display more transparency and discernment in the arrests of journalists.
"The competent authorities must also provide the identity of each detained journalist as soon as possible together with the reason for their detention," Reporters Without Borders said.
"As the number of arrests rises, so does our concern about the scale of the problem," the letter added. "
At a time when the United States is committed to the development of democracy in Iraq, the US army should set an example by respecting press freedom. Journalists are news professionals. They are not party to the conflict and should not be treated as belligerents or as potential terrorists."

From Aljazeera, we'll note Christian Henderson's "Weapons of Mass Deception" (a profile on Danny Schechter):


In the prelude to the war, the Bush administration hinted at the existence of a link between Iraq and the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon.
However, intelligence investigations commissioned by the White House and Congress have since determined the suggested links were false.
According to Danny Schechter, a media veteran of almost 40 years who nicknamed himself the News Dissector, the 70% figure suggests US media failed their public and led them to believe a baseless claim.
As the invasion played out on television screens around the world, Schechter "self-embedded" in his living room and examined US media coverage of the war.
He turned his conclusions into Weapons of Mass Deception www.wmdthefilm.com, a documentary film that examines how the media covered the war.
In the post-September 11 nationalistic ardour, the film concludes the US mainstream media failed to challenge Washington over its reasons for going to war, shut out anti-war voices and blurred the lines between commentary and journalism.

Click the link above or here to read the interview with Danny Schechter.


From IPS, Lori e-mails Sanjay Suri's "Iraq Clouds Blair VictoryAnalysis:"

The invasion of Iraq rebounded a little on the government of British Prime Minister Tony Blair to dent his majority as he returned to a third term as prime minister. But it was not serious damage. Iraq did not prevent Blair from returning with a comfortable enough majority and this is the first time in its history that a Labour government has been re-elected for a third successive term.
Nonetheless Iraq was still an issue and it came home to Blair in his own constituency Sedgefield. The incumbent prime minister was challenged by an independent candidate Reg Keys, whose son was killed during the Iraq war.

From The Independent, Ben e-mails Andrew Grice and Colin Brown's "Blair set 18-month deadline to quit as cabinet ministers round on him:"


Tony Blair's most senior Cabinet colleagues plan to urge him to stand down within 18 months because he lost seats for Labour at last week's election.
Even normally loyal ministers want him to resign by the time the party holds its conference in September 2006 - two years earlier than Mr Blair wishes.
Left-wing MPs will demand this week that Mr Blair drops controversial plans for identity cards and are threatening to mount a leadership challenge against him this autumn.
But insiders believe a much bigger threat to Mr Blair is posed by his own Cabinet, saying it will turn against him if he tries to hang on for longer than 18 months.
Yesterday, ministers publicly rallied round Mr Blair, condemning as "self-indulgent" calls by Labour backbenchers for him to quit sooner rather than later.
But Cabinet sources said privately that the Prime Minister will not be able to complete anything like the "full term" he intends to serve before leaving Downing Street ahead of the next general election.

From Scotland's The Herald, Zach e-mails Catherine MacLeod and Douglas Fraser's "Scots Labour MPs line up to give Blair an early push:"

THERE were growing calls last night within Labour ranks for Tony Blair to stand down to make way for Gordon Brown by the end of year, with many of his Scots MPs joining the clamour.
Senior cabinet colleagues, however, urged back benchers to rally behind him as the prime minister aimed to reassert his authority today when he completes his reshuffle.
Despite these pleas, and a historic third victory, according to a BBC survey in Scotland, nearly half of Labour's 33 MPs want the prime minister to resign within two years, and four of them want him to go immediately.
Ian Davidson, the most outspoken critic of Mr Blair and the New Labour project, said it was time for "regime change".
He said he had found in his Glasgow South West campaign that people were unhappy with Labour's direction, with the Iraq war, and with Mr Blair.
Mr Davidson also judged that it was across a range of devolved responsibilities that Labour had failed to make progress about his constituents' problems.
"Inequalities have got to be tackled by a drastic process of social change. We've got to put more money into housing, into health, into jobs, into training . . . I don't think we've been doing that as we should."

From Scotland's Sunday Herald, we'll note James Cusick's "Rebel Hell:"


Tony Blair's majority was slashed by almost 100 seats last Thursday and with it went the New Labour style of government which had consistently bypassed parliamentary authority in favour, it claimed, of a direct dialogue with the people. Now the long-ignored backbench ranks of Labour MPs, many of whom were never hypnotised by the Blair-Brown project and were branded rebels if they failed to kowtow to the official Downing Street line, believe it's their turn to be listened to.
Alan Simpson, member for Nottingham South and one of the leading members of the Socialist Campaign Group of leftist MPs, told the Sunday Herald: "There's been a warning shot over everyone's bow. Labour was lucky on May 5. Had there been a credible opposition on offer, I believe the electorate would have taken up that option. Instead there was a slap in the face [for Blair] and it marks the end of the presidential politics that Blair and Peter Mandelson tried to install in Westminster. What we have seen is the public striking back."
In common with many of his like-minded parliamentary colleagues, Simpson believes the 2005 poll result was a call for a return to consensus politics. And if he doesn't get it, he, the rest of the campaign group, and many other "rebels" are intent on making life as difficult as they can for Tony Blair. For how long? "Until he gets the message," said Simpson.

Bernardo e-mails "Bomb attacks claim 7 US soldiers" from Australia's ABC:

A total of seven US soldiers were killed and another wounded in a series of three bomb explosions over the weekend in Iraq, the US military says.

From Aljazeera, Cindy e-mails "Iraq cabinet approved, minister quits:"

The Iraqi parliament has approved appointments for six cabinet vacancies, handing four more positions to the Sunni Arab minority.
But the Sunni selected as human rights minister turned down the job, saying he cannot accept a position awarded on sectarian criteria.
Less than half of the National Assembly, 112 of the 155 legislators present, approved Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari's six nominations on Sunday, including Shia Arab Ibrahim Bahr al-Uloum as oil minister and Sunni military man Saadoun al-Duleimi as defence minister.

Also from Aljazeera, we'll note Scott Taylor's "Iraq instability threatens Turkey:"

Over the past few weeks, the media reports coming out of Iraq have focussed extensively on the insurgents' escalating attacks against US military and Iraqi police forces.
Overshadowed by the coverage of this series of suicide bomb attacks has been the dramatic and ominous development of unrest along the Iraq-Turkey border.
For the first time since US President George Bush launched his military intervention to topple Saddam Hussein in March 2003, the violent anarchy which ensued throughout Iraq is now spilling over into neighbouring countries.
On 20 April, following 10 days of sporadic combat, the Turkish government announced its defence forces had killed 33 Kurdish rebels after they had crossed the Iraqi border.
Although the military did not release its own casualty figures, Namik Tan, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, estimated that Turkish security forces "suffered between 15 and 17 fatalities in the clashes with the Kurds".
These losses are significant. However, Turkish intelligence estimates that since the beginning of April some 1500 Kurdish guerrillas have crossed into eastern Turkey via the mountain paths along the Iraq border.
These fighters belong to the hardline Kurdish separatist group known as the PKK (the Kurdish acronym for the Kurdistan Workers Party) which has been linked to terrorist activities.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]
 

Our friend Luke of wotisitgood4 addresses the New York Times story "discussion of the story suggests that Sanger's also been receiving orders from Judith Miller. (Luke finds the story very "Judy Miller-ish.")

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com (and it's currently working).

Thanks to community member Isaiah for once again sharing his artwork. To those e-mailing where the Sunday comic was, it was there in the inbox. But as I noted in the entry Ava and I wrote this morning, I couldn't get log in to the account. There were five other stories from this morning's Times that members had e-mailed about but by the time I got into the inbox, the attitude was to walk on, walkon.org. (Their attitude, not mine.) So we'll focus on the stories from the press in other countries and that will probably be it for tonight.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist at the center of a federal corruption investigation, led a Congressional delegation to Pakistan in 1997 but failed to tell the group's sponsor or the lawmakers that he was a registered lobbyist for the Pakistani government, according to the sponsor and the two House members on the trip.
"I wish I'd known that he had a bias that way," said Representative Michael R. McNulty, Democrat of New York, who was on the trip. Gregg Hilton, whose nonprofit organization, the National Security Caucus Foundation, sponsored the trip for Mr. McNulty and Representative Howard Coble, said he felt "deceived" by Mr. Abramoff.
The trip to Pakistan and Mr. Abramoff's role in it came to light with the release of documents this week showing that he had also used his personal credit card to pay more than $350,000 in travel expenses for other Congressional trips, some of them sponsored by the National Security Caucus Foundation, which is now defunct.

That's from Philip Shenon and Anne E. Kornblut's "Lobbyist Paid by Pakistan Led U.S. Delegation There" which is in this morning's New York Times.

We'll also note Eric Lipton's "U.S. to Spend Billions More to Alter Security Systems:"

After spending more than $4.5 billion on screening devices to monitor the nation's ports, borders, airports, mail and air, the federal government is moving to replace or alter much of the antiterrorism equipment, concluding that it is ineffective, unreliable or too expensive to operate.
Many of the monitoring tools - intended to detect guns, explosives, and nuclear and biological weapons - were bought during the blitz in security spending after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
In its effort to create a virtual shield around America, the Department of Homeland Security now plans to spend billions of dollars more. Although some changes are being made because of technology that has emerged in the last couple of years, many of them are planned because devices currently in use have done little to improve the nation's security, according to a review of agency documents and interviews with federal officials and outside experts.

We'll note Carl Hulse's "Filibuster Fight Nears Showdown:"

With the Senate clock ticking toward a momentous procedural clash over judicial nominees, lawmakers and advocates on each side are readying a final push to win over the few uncommitted lawmakers and frame the fight to their best political advantage.
Beginning Monday, when both Republicans and Democrats will mark the four-year anniversary of President Bush's initial round of nominations, the parties and their allies will follow a day-by-day schedule of demonstrations, legislative maneuvers and other public events in anticipation of an imminent floor showdown.
With the climax nearing, the tone of the debate is escalating. A radio address taped by three Christian conservative leaders for broadcast Monday called the judiciary "the last playground of the liberal left." In the address, James C. Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family, described the fight as the tipping point of the Bush presidency. "Nothing good took place last November, only the potential for something good," Dr. Dobson said.

The last playground (of the "liberal left" or otherwise)? Focus on the Fool Dobson wants to come along and take a dump in it. He probably never knew how to play well with others.

We'd like to recommend Douglas Jehl's "Tug of War: Intelligence vs. Politics" as worth reading. We can't. While it's true that it has some strong analysis, we've considered the first sentence and what's not in the article. Here's the first sentence:

For more than two years, critics who accused the Bush administration of improperly using political influence to shape intelligence assessments have, for the most part, failed to make the charge stick.

Doesn't that sentence beg the reader to believe that the story The Times of London broke last week will be included in the "analysis" of this article. (The Times has labeled this "analysis." We're not mocking Jehl.)

We'll refer you to BuzzFlash's "Impeachment Time: 'Facts Were Fixed'" by Greg Palast:

Here it is. The smoking gun. The memo that has "IMPEACH HIM" written all over it.
The top-level government memo marked "SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL," dated eight months before Bush sent us into Iraq, following a closed meeting with the President, reads, "Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam through military action justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
Read that again: "The intelligence and facts were being fixed...."
For years, after each damning report on BBC TV, viewers inevitably ask me, "Isn't this grounds for impeachment?" -- vote rigging, a blind eye to terror and the bin Ladens before 9-11, and so on. Evil, stupidity and self-dealing are shameful but not impeachable. What's needed is a " high crime or misdemeanor."
And if this ain't it, nothing is.

The Times (the Times refers to the New York Times) hasn't mentioned The Times of London's reporting and still manages to overlook it this morning. Do you think that they're unaware of it? Don't kid yourself. As with Naomi Klein's story about James Baker (which ran in The Guardian and The Nation), the Times is choosing to ignore what's what.

That is their choice. But the next time Bill Keller wants to hop on his high horse about what a great job the Times does and how mean bloggers pick on it for no reason, he might want to consider the fact that whether the Times puts it in print or not, people are aware of what's being covered and what's not being mentioned.

We're going to make that it for this morning's New York Times. We is Ava and myself. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com and, possibly, later today I'll be able to get into that account. But for the last six hours as I've been assisting The Third Estate Sunday Review, I've had no luck getting in on any breaks. (And yes, we are on a break right now. Most of The Third Estate Sunday Review's edition is up but there are still three more entries to go.)

So if you've e-mailed this morning about a story you found of interest in the Times, please don't think you're being intentionally ignored. An error message comes up when I attempt to log into the e-mail that says basically "try again later." My apologies to anyone who's sent something in that didn't get highlighted.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

I'm helping The Third Estate Sunday Review currently but we're all on a break and I'm reading through as many e-mails as I can.

Stephanie found something via BuzzFlash from Daily Kos that she wanted to highlight. Melody Townsel's "Townsel: Help Me Keep It Real!" Townsel is the one, my opinion, who by coming forward about Bolton, forced people to take another look. (And I believe that Sam Seder is the one who broke Townsel's story, on The Majority Report, which was probably in conjunction with actions of The Daily Kos web site.) From Townsel's post:


Apparently, the SFRC staff began distributing the transcripts related to my story regarding John Bolton late yesterday -- and the MSM coverage is already frustrating at best.
In one AP story, they pull a single quote out of context and say that I've softened my criticism of Mr. Bolton. If you read my entire transcript, you'll know that that's simply not true. More below: Diaries :: Melody Townsel's diary :: :: Trackback ::
The Washington Post says the transcripts provide a "murky picture" of what happened back in Moscow -- although they received the transcript of a contemporaneous witness able to verify all parts of my story. In fact, Fox News last night even reported the contemporaneous verification of Bolton's behavior toward me.

That is an excerpt so use the link to read in full.

Billie also e-mailed regarding Townsel to highlight something from one of our her local alternative weeklies, The Dallas Observer. From Kelsey Guy's "Undiplomatic: Plus: UTD orders investigation of Waterview:"

On a warm, windy morning last week, in front of a neighborhood coffee shop, Melody Townsel asks herself the question that hangs in the air. "Would I do it again?" she says. She doesn't know the answer; she's leaning, at this moment, toward a big, fat no. She says it with a rueful smile, though any smile at this point is a far cry from the way she felt the day before, when she answered the question "How are you doing?" with a simple "Suicidal."
A month ago you did not know the name Melody Townsel, and a month from now you probably will have forgotten it, unless you are family or a friend or a client of the public relations woman whose business shrinks a little more each week. But now, her name shows up regularly in newspapers and weekly magazines and on Web sites devoted to the bickering of political partisans.
There she is in last week's Time, her picture next to that of Colin Powell; there she is being mentioned on CNN and Fox News Channel. She's inescapable as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee ponders her allegations that President Bush's nominee for United Nations ambassador, John Bolton, is a bully who, in the summer of 1994, put her "through hell."
Over the last three weeks, Townsel has become the target of Republican businessmen who charge she's lying and cannon fodder for right-wing bloggers who say much worse, because she sent the committee a letter urging its members "to consider blocking in committee" Bolton's nomination.
It was her complaint that caused Republican Senator George Voinovich to claim "my conscience got the best of me" two weeks ago, causing a delay in a vote once considered a slam dunk. (There are 10 Republicans on the committee and eight Democrats, including Joseph Biden.) The vote is now scheduled to take place May 12.
All this began on April 8, when Townsel wrote to the committee about an incident she says occurred while she was working for a private contractor on a U.S. Agency for International Development mission in Kyrgyzstan, a former Soviet republic. It was her job in the summer of 1994 to sell the economic reformation of that country, creating TV programs and T-shirts and even comic books informing citizens how to use their new privatization coupons that, more or less, gave them ownership in the formerly Communist republic.

If you click the link and read the article in full, Daily Kos did break the story. I could go back up and change the earlier paragraph but besides being crunched for time, it underscores the importance of this community. I assumed Daily Kos helped break the story, but wouldn't have known that for a fact had Billie not passed on this article (which I read only as I started pulling from it). Individually, we may each know a few things and see a few things, combined we're quite a force of brain power and information gathering.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

Carl e-mailed to highlight Folding Star's "Harry Reid is at it Again:"

Senator Harry Reid is at it again. According to a news report, the Democratic Minority Leader in the Senate has been assuring Republican colleagues that he has no plans to filibuster any Supreme Court Nominees, except in 'extreme' cases. This from the very man who pledged to stand firm on the issue of judicial filibusters to begin with and then caved and offered the Republicans a deal that would have effectively killed the filibuster in practice while saving it in theory.
The leader of the Opposition (though I wonder if Harry Reid has any idea that that's what he is? He doesn't act like it!) shouldn't be rushing around assuring Republicans that his party has no plans to filibuster a Supreme Court Nominee. Let's get real- Bush isn't going to nominate a moderate to the Supreme Court! Should he have the chance, he'll go with another Scalia or Rehnquist. He aims to reshape that court, above all others, into a place of far right judicial activism.

As long term members know, Folding Star is a Common Ills member who decided to DIY (do it yourself) and start a blog: A Winding Road. The focus is primarily the Senate (when it's in session) and Folding Star does a wonderful job.

I wished I'd seen this earlier today when I was having a conversation with a friend who's primary focus is the environment. She self-identifies Democrat (but admits to leaning Green more and more) and in a long conversation, she brought up the issue of a "coward" in the Senate.
Someone was apologizing for calling the Bully Boy a "loser." I knew right away it was Harry Reid. I didn't need to read the brief item in this morning's Times to know that Harry Reid had called Bully Boy a loser or to hear any news report that he'd backed down to know it was the increasingly spineless Reid. When I offered his name, she said that was indeed who was apologizing. (And then did a funny riff on Amy Heckerling's film Loser which, had I taken notes, I'd note here.) Reid continues to disappoint. For anyone who missed the send up to the spineless Reid at The Third Estate Sunday Reveiw, I'd refer you to "Harry Reid: Determined to lead us to the promissory note land?" Here's a highlight:

"Dems Adjust on Literature"
Elisabeth Bumiller (New York Times)
June 15, 2005
Following what some are terming a "focus group" and others are calling a very painful blood letting on Bill O'Reilly's The O'Reilly Factor, stinky Senator Harry Reid warily approached the press this afternoon to announce that the Democrats were strongly against literature.
"Uh, well," Reid began wiping some fop sweat from his brow, "I don't know what to tell you. Somewhere, somebody spread a nasty rumor that we supported literature. It's not true, it never was. Have you read Nabokov? Lolita? That's just smut. What about D.H. Lawrence? Smut, smut, smut, smut."
When asked if the Democratic Party was against reading, Reid appeared to backtrack as the Democrats so often do."We are for children's picture books -- especially if they're retelling Bible stories -- and we are for coffee table books. We are also for cook books."
When an aide to Senator Reid reminded him of all the monies the TV dinner industry had contributed, he corrected the last remark. "Cook books are smutty. We are officially against them and, of course, Martha Stewart as well."
Asked of education, Reid stated that as long as he was a functioning adult, the Democratic Party would continue it's "historical" support of education.
(Unfounded) Rumors abound that the suit Harry Reid was wearing was picked out by infamous feminist Naomi Wolf prompting some (in the press corps) to make cheap jokes at his expense.
America's mother, former First Lady Barbara Bush, long term education maven and all round round-the-way-gal, declared Reid's remarks repugnant.
"How dare he leave out Jokes for the John?" admonished the lovely Mrs. Bush. "My family is a typical family, like everyone else's, and we have long enjoyed fart jokes. When Senator Reid refuses to include them but includes coffee table books, it's obvious that this is one more example of a Democrat elitist who's less interested in the people and more interested in being . . . well, I won't say the word but it rhymes with 'bitch.'"

The piece is a send up. (To be clear after the confusion that came from Alexander Cockburn article we highlighted awhile back.) (And, disclosure, I assisted with this article, as did Rebecca and, if I'm remembering correctly, so did Betty and Kat.)

Heath notes that Anthony Lappé was on The Majority Report with Janeane Garofalo Friday (he will be a regular Friday night guest on The Majority Report) and that he highlighted a story he felt hadn't gotten enough attention. So from Guerrilla News Network, Heath refers us to Greg Palast's "Impeachment Time: 'Fact Were Fixed:'"

Here it is. The smoking gun. The memo that has "IMPEACH HIM" written all over it.
The top-level government memo marked "SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL," dated eight months before Bush sent us into Iraq, following a closed meeting with the President, reads, "Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam through military action justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
Read that again: "The intelligence and facts were being fixed...."
For years, after each damning report on BBC TV, viewers inevitably ask me, "Isn't this grounds for impeachment?" -- vote rigging, a blind eye to terror and the bin Ladens before 9-11, and so on. Evil, stupidity and self-dealing are shameful but not impeachable. What's needed is a "high crime or misdemeanor."
And if this ain't it, nothing is.
The memo, uncovered this week by the Times [of London], goes on to describe an elaborate plan by George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair to hoodwink the planet into supporting an attack on Iraq knowing full well the evidence for war was a phony.

We highlighted this via a BuzzFlash thing this week (if I'm remembering right and I could be wrong) but it bears noting again. And more information can be found at Greg Palast's web site.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]
 

Alice Walker
Medea Benjamin
Jodie Evans
Arundhati Roy
Camilo Mejia
Nancy Lessin
Cindy Sheehan
Carly Sheehan
Marti Hiken
MaryAnn Wright
Kit Gage
Patricia Foulkrod
Eve Ensler
Terry Tempest Williams
Rose Kabuye
Elise Boulding
Riane Eisler
Joan Almon
Catherine Ingram
Susan Griffin
Phyllis Bennis
Leslie Cagan
Fridea Berrigan
Eisha Mason
Rebecca Solnit
Diane Wilson
Marti Hiken
Becky Bond
Barbara Ehrenreich
Beth Osnes
Julia Ward Howe
Laura Flanders
Starhawk
Sonali Kolhatkar
Kavita N. Ramdas
Neela Marikkar
Sumaya Farhat-Naser
Gila Svirsky
Shirin Ebadi
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Rabia Roberts
Jasmina Tesanovic
Pramila Jayapal
Mary Robinson
Helen Thomas
Gael Murphy
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Amy Goodman
Janine Jackson
Andrea Buffa
Nina Rothschild Utne
Tad Bartimus
Patricia Scott Schroeder
Doris "Granny D" Haddock
Chellie Pingree
Lynn Woolsey
Barbara Lee
Jody Williams
Noeleen Heyzer
Helen Caldicott
Randall Forsberg
Joseph Gerson
Gar Smith
Arianna Huffington
Julia Butterfly Hill
Jennifer Krill
Naomi Klein
Benazir Bhutto
Wangari Maathai
Aya de Leon
Alli Chagi-Starr
Holly Near
Juana Alicia
Kathryn Blume
Cynthia McKinney
Adrienne Maree Brwon
Sharon Salzberg

What is the above? A list of the people contributing to Stop the Next War Now which Dallas compiled and e-mailed in hoping it might interest some members in the book. Stop the Next War Now: Effective Responses to Violence and Terrorism is a book attempting to increase our understanding of possible solutions and responses.

As we noted on Wednesday:

Code Pink has a book out entitled How to Stop the Next War Now. For more information, see Code Pink or BuzzFlash. The book contains contributions from a number of women this community has noted and highlighted. Among the contributors: Medea Benjamin, Amy Goodman,  Barbara Lee, Naomi Klein, Eve Ensler, Janeane Garofalo and Arianna Huffington.

Dallas ordered the book via BuzzFlash and he e-mailed this afternoon to pass on the list of contributors thinking it might raise interest in the book. I agree this is an important book. I hadn't thought of purchasing it online from Code Pink or BuzzFlash when I saw it in my local independent bookstore -- I don't think BuzzFlash had offered it yet as a premium because the first I knew of the book was when the cover caught my eye. Whether you purchase the book from an independent bookstore, Code Pink, BuzzFlash, or wherever you usually purchase your books, I'd urge you to consider purchasing it. And for those on limited funds, check your local libraries and utilize their inter or intra library loan programs.

There are responses other than drop bombs and starve off a population (of food or medical supplies). Our current administration knows only war. Which is why so many of us flinch when someone starts saying "We have to do something about ___" -- fill in the blank. In five years our world view has been dangerously warped and our options reduced to one: war.

Stop the Next War Now: Effective Responses to Violence and Terrorism is an attempt to raise our understanding and provide us with other tools. If it's not your "bag," that's fine. But, like Dallas, I feel strongly about the issue. As does Rebecca and The Third Estate Sunday Review which is why, with Dallas' permission, this entry will be posted at both of their sites as well.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]
 

From the Air America home page:

Ring of Fire
Ring of Fire is now 5:00-7:00 p.m EST Saturday (re-airs Sunday 3:00-5:00 p.m .EST). If you want to talk with Bobby and Mike on the show, call our hotline anytime and leave us a message. 1-866-389-FIRE (3473)
The great muckraking novelist Upton Sinclair exposed the filthy secrets of American industry in the early 20th century and changed the course of history. Where are the Upton Sinclairs of today? (Hint: John Stossel need not apply. Mike talks with Lauren Coodley, author of a new anthology of Sinclair's work titled, "The Land of Oranges and Jails".
Which is more "fair and balanced" -- Fox News or Al Jazeera? Bobby talks with Hugh Miles, who used to work for a Rupert Murdoch-owned news service in England and monitored the Arab T.V. network's broadcasts. Hugh is the author of of a new book titled, "Al Jazeera: How Arab TV News Challenges America".
Agent orange, the toxic defoliant sprayed by the U.S. military during the Vietnam War, is linked to birth defects and cancer in civilians and veterans and their offspring. A federal judge recently ruled that South Vietnamese victims of the toxin (our allies during the war) are not entitled to compensation from Dow and Monsanto, the makers of agent orange. But the legal battle continues. Mike talks with attorney Dean Kokkoris.

The Laura Flanders Show
What to do when military recruiters come to your school? And how to take a lying war-monger down... We'll talk to TODD BOYLE on efforts to limit military recruiting in high schools and Colorado High School journalist DAVID MCSWANE on how he went undercover and taped recruiters telling him to lie. Novelist and historian TARIQ ALI, analyzes the the U.K. elections, and we speak to REG KEYS, who lost his son in Iraq and ran against Prime Minister Tony Blair in his hometown, Sedgefield, England. Then the Punk Rock Feminist Band LE TIGRE on their recent tour and new CD, "This Island". They get audiences to dance and think - and we can too!

There is no information given on the home page (or on the pages for their shows) for Marty Kaplan's So What Else Is News? or Kyle Jason's The Kyle Jason Show.

Betsy Rosenberg's Eco-Talk (airs Sunday mornings at seven to eight a.m. eastern time) has no information posted at it's AAR web site or at it's blog on topic or guests for this Sunday.

I've done a very poor job highlighting Eco-Talk because it airs much too early for me (though, come to think of it, many Sunday mornings, I'm still up helping The Third Estate Sunday Review, so I could easily flip on the radio and listen). I have listened to Eco-Talk, via Air America Place's audio archives, and is a strong show.

We'll note this interview with Betsy Rosenberg by Grist magazine:

Grist: What work do you do?
Betsy Rosenberg: I've gone from 20 years of general news reporting and anchoring for the CBS Radio network to creating an environmental radio minute to hosting and producing a one-hour nationally syndicated eco-awareness program called EcoTalk. I transitioned from journalist to activist a few years ago when, in the wake of 9/11, I decided that "saving the planet one sound bite at a time" was not enough and founded a gasroots group called Don't Be Fueled! Mothers for Clean and Safe Vehicles. The aim of the campaign is to tell the truth about unsafe SUVs and to promote hybrid vehicles. So I guess the combination of eco-activities makes me "radioactive"!
Grist: How does it relate to the environment?
Besty Rosenberg: In both my radio shows and activist campaign, I aim to demonstrate why people should take environmental problems more seriously, but I try to do it with a sense of humor. I try to show how these challenges relate to their own lives and families, and to help connect the dots between personal health and planetary health.
Grist: What do you really do, on a day-to-day basis? What are you working on at the moment?
Betsy Rosenberg: In addition to my radio production, being a wife and mom, and attending environmental events and talks, I work on Don't Be Fueled! by trying to convince "soccer moms" in my community that bigger is not necessarily better. At the moment, my primary work focus is on securing advertising sponsors for my one-hour show on Air America. If anyone knows any green-leaning companies, please send 'em my way!

David Bender's Politically Direct started last Sunday. It airs from two p.m. to three p.m. easter time. Here's what's on tap for tomorrow as well as information on it from the show's Air America web page:

This Sunday, May 8th on Politically Direct, special guest Alec Baldwin will be on. The show will be taking calls live, so be sure to tune in! So you can have your phones at the ready the call in number will be: 1-866-303-2270About Politically Direct
The newest addition to Air America's expanding line-up of progressive talk is Politically Direct, a news and interview program broadcasting live every Sunday directly from Washington, DC, also known as our nation's temporarily-occupied capitol.
Sponsored by People for the American Way, Politically Direct will be hosted by veteran activist David Bender, who served as Air America's political director during the 2004 presidential campaign.
Bender says he hopes the show will serve as 'an antidote to the deadly and deadening diet of neo-cons, theo-cons and the journalists who enable them' by providing in-depth conversations with major progressive voices from across America.
So tune-in to Politically Direct every Sunday on Air America Radio for what you won't hear anywhere else: the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So help us.

Steve Earle's The Revolution Starts Now airs from ten p.m. to eleven p.m. eastern time each Sunday night. There is no guest information currently posted for this Sunday's show.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]

We're going to focus on only three stories in this morning's New York Times. Kara had a good point in her e-mail this morning and, acting on that, I e-mailed members who were suggesting links* to make sure they were fine with it.

So let's open with Douglas Jehl's "Ex-C.I.A. Official Says Bolton Interfered:"


John R. Bolton's effort in 2002 to oust a top Central Intelligence Agency analyst from his post in a dispute over Cuba represented a troubling breach of the line between policy makers and intelligence, the agency's former deputy director has told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, according to a transcript of the exchange.
The ex-official, John E. McLaughlin, who spent 32 years in the C.I.A., said the episode was "the only time I had ever heard of such a request" from a policy maker, that a C.I.A. officer or analyst be transferred.
The analyst, Fulton Armstrong, was the national intelligence officer for Latin America and had clashed with Mr. Bolton's office about a speech that Mr. Armstrong thought overstated the extent of Cuba's weapons programs.

And?

Rob: The case is still not being made. Why is this a problem? I get why. I don't get why Democrats aren't all over the place explaining why. Bolton is a nightmare and the last thing we need at the U.N. But the case is still not being made.

Kara: The argument is still not stated. The argument goes to the way we see the world and our place in it. Possibly they fear distortions and lies like 'global consenst' when John Kerry attempted to broach this subject in a debate but the Democratic Party needs to engage in this discussion unless they're counting on those who've suffered under a bad boss to rise up and lead.
They have been handed one horror story after another but largely they have avoided both connecting dots and explaining the broader theme. The nation needs to be engaged on this debate that goes to the fundamental nature of our character.

Shirley wonders if this is a "disconnect deriving from the fact that it is so obvious to Senate Dems" what is wrong with Bolton? "The average person, hearing or reading a report or two, grasps that Bolton is a bully. The average person has also suffered under decades of bully bosses being applauded and held up by the press, most often the financial press, as a 'leader.'
The message that is not getting out is why Bolton is not right for the U.N. Certain senators may feel it is obvious, which I agree it should be, but in conversations I've had, I'm repeatedly struck by how often I'm forced to give a primer on the U.N.'s goals and what we're supposed to stand for. That is the argument that is not being made strongly to the people."

Ben: If you've followed Bolton's nomination closely you can argue the reasons for his being unqualified. But outside of printed editorials and op-eds, the issue isn't being raised. Any other nominee suffering these embarrassing revelations would have sunk a long time ago. Kerik was sunk by sex which didn't require much more than shock and disgust over his ground-zero love nest. Bolton's problems go to larger issues that are lost on a public that's been misled to see bullying as strength. With a list of incidents handed to them, Democrats now need to to make a coherent argument building on those incidents that goes to who and what we are as a people and country and how Bolton's actions spit on our self-concepts.

We'll move now to John Files' "Appeals Court Backs Dismissal of Suit on F.B.I.:"

A federal appeals court agreed with the government on Friday that a suit by an F.B.I. translator who was fired after accusing the bureau of ineptitude could expose government secrets and jeopardize national security.
The decision, by a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, effectively ends the suit by the translator, Sibel Edmonds.
Her lawyer said, however, that she planned to take the case to the Supreme Court.
[. . .]
A lawyer for Ms. Edmonds, Ann Beeson, said in a telephone interview: "This vast expansion of the state secret privilege by the government makes us less safe, not more. If government employees cannot report security breaches without retaliation, then American national security suffers."

Lloyd: Near daily briefings on the [Michael] Jackson case contrast poorly with the paper's coverage of Sibel Edmonds's case. The headlines reads like a confession by the paper of how poorly it's stepped up to the plate on this case, Edmonds's name doesn't even make the headline because the casual reader hasn't noticed this case that has not been featured prominetly in the paper. While Nicholas Kristof rouses himself every few weeks to scream 'threat of a dirty bomb isn't getting the attention needed!' he's opted out of any attempts to drive the Edmonds case. If a dirty bomb is a threat, that threat is made stronger by allegations that the F.B.I. might be blowing translations of key information they have. For all the talk of reforming intelligence that the paper and others did after the 9-11 committee's findings, when presented with an opening to address this head on, they close their eyes and shut their mouths. Kristof should temper his incessent outrage of late since he's failed to take leadership on the Edmonds's case. [Paul] Krugman and [Bob] Herbert have used their columns to hammer home points which have sometimes resulted in the reporters at the paper awakening to issues ignored. Kristof shows up every few weeks to scream "Sudan!" or "Dirty bomb!" and then goes back into hibernation. The Edmonds's case has national implications and should have been covered with twice the attention of the celebrity scandal [Michael Jackson] but reporters and eternally outraged Kristof have ignored press conferences held by Edmonds and have refused to dig into the story on their own.

The ACLU has a statement posted on the Edmonds' case:

In a one-line order with no explanation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia today upheld the dismissal of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' case, despite a Justice Department Inspector General’s report which concluded that Edmonds' whistleblower allegations were in fact "the most significant factor" in the FBI’s decision to terminate her.
"First the government claims that everything about me is a state secret, then the court hearing is closed to the public, and now the court issues a decision without any public explanation. The government is going to great lengths to cover up its mistakes," Edmonds said. "If the courts aren't going to protect us, then Congress must act."
Edmonds, a former Middle Eastern language specialist hired by the FBI shortly after 9/11, was fired in 2002 after repeatedly reporting serious security breaches and misconduct. Edmonds challenged her retaliatory dismissal by filing a lawsuit in federal court, but her case was dismissed last July after Attorney General John Ashcroft invoked the so-called "state secrets privilege," and retroactively classified briefings to Congress related to her case.
"This decision endangers us all. If government employees cannot report security breaches without retaliation, then national security, and all Americans, suffer," said Ann Beeson, Associate Legal Director of the ACLU, who argued the case on behalf of Edmonds. "We are determined to take this case all the way to the Supreme Court."
The state secrets privilege has historically been rarely invoked, and even more rarely employed to dismiss an entire case at the outset. When properly invoked, it permits the government to block disclosure of evidence that would cause harm to national security. In the Edmonds case, however, the government used the privilege to urge dismissal of the entire lawsuit, insisting that every aspect of Edmonds' case involves state secrets--including where she was born and what languages she speaks.
In a surprise move last month, the appeals court closed the courtroom during the oral argument in Edmonds' appeal to members of the press and general public. Several media organizations, including The Washington Post, The New York Times, Reuters America, the Associated Press and The Hearst Corporation, filed emergency motions to open the courtroom. The motions were denied without opinion.

For more of the ACLU's statements click the link preceding or click here. That the Times and other media organizations would file an appeal to be in the court and then, after being refused, appear to back down on an issue their actions indicate they felt was important is rather sad. Especially when a "happy talk" article on jobs' "creation" makes the front page even as it gets a slap down from the editorial board on A26.

Lastly, we'll note Sarah Kershaw's "In a Reverse, Microsoft Says It Supports Gay Rights Bill:"

Microsoft, faced with unrelenting criticism from employees and gay rights groups over its decision to abandon support of a gay rights bill in Washington state, reversed course again yesterday and announced that it was now in support of the bill.
[. . .]
The bill, which would have extended protections against discrimination in employment, housing and other areas to gay men and lesbians, failed by one vote on April 21. But it is automatically up for a new vote next year because bills introduced in the Washington Legislature are active for two years even if they are voted down the first time.

Marcia notes that the "reverse" is after the fact: "Only after the outrage and after the vote is killed does Microsoft take action. I won't take any comfort in their new claims since by next April they may decide to pursue another back-door, in secret attempt to derail the bill yet again.
The heat from their actions they never expected. Their actions becoming public they never expected. This is damage control and until they demonstrate that their public remarks and their private lobbying efforts go hand in hand it's just empty talk."

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

*Which brings us to this footnote. Yesterday, while attempting to explain to "Flower" that there would be no weekend reply to her e-mail, I confused long term members. My apologies for that.
Long term members who have needed replies to e-mails have always gotten some badly dashed off reply when possible that immediately gets sent.
Each day, however, brings new e-mails from new people. They may or may not be whom they present themselves to be. I don't know, I don't know them. For this reason, those without a long term e-mail relationship, do not get an immediate reply. If a reply is written, it's saved to draft and sent out the following day by a friend. On Friday, there were over eighty such e-mails that were sent out. This is one of many filters put in place to ensure privacy. When Krista replied to my e-mail this morning, she was the first to note her surprise over hearing from me after last night's remarks. Krista and Gina do their round-robin and get e-mail replies at all times of the day that go out immediately. The same is true for other long term members.
If, however, I don't know you, the filter is used for privacy reasons. Everyone who e-mails receives the automatic generic e-mail. The volume of e-mail is too much for everyone to receive a reply but when a reply is done (either immediately or through the filter) members should receive top priority. That's not always the case, such as Thursday when a first time e-mailer requested some information about domestic abuse resources, but that is the goal.
Hopefully these comments clarify the confusion but, if not, Krista and Gina will be addressing this in their round-robin next Friday with a series of questions they're currently formulating so look for that and if there's a question you have in the meantime, e-mail the site and I'll attempt to address it my responses to Gina and Krista's questions.

[Note: This entry originally appeared at The Common Ills.]