After suffering for 7 days in critical condition from severe head trauma and contusions in his body, Nicolas David Neira Alvares died at age 15. He was brutally beaten by 8 Bogota, Columbia pigz and left to die.
This Mayday, like many others around the world, workers from many social movements gathered in Bogota, Columbia to march for worker's rights and to commemorate the events of 1886 in Chicago. According to accounts there was music and dancing and folks were in a non-violent mood. As the march reached the downtown area, pigz suddenly opened fire with tear gas and rubber bullets. Exploiting the chaos that ensued the pigz(faces concealed) charged into the crowd brutally beating people. In this moment 8 pigz singled out a 15 yr old male anarchist and beat him into unconsciousness. Many comrades bravely attempted to interfere to rescue him. It is unclear how long it was before they were successful. Alvares was then taken to the Salud Coop Hospital where he suffered for 7 days until his death. Apparently the trauma was so extensive that they were unable to operate to save him.

The above is from "Anarchist, Nicolas David Neira Alvares, Died Yesterday After Brutal Beating From 8 Pigz" by V! (Portland IMC) and was e-mailed in by Yazz.

From Portland IMC, I'd also note "Continuing crisis in Haiti exemplified by plights of imprisoned Prime Minister, Yvon Neptune, and singer So Anne:"

In Haiti's overcrowded prisons the constitutional Prime Minister Yvon Neptune lies on his deathbed as hundreds of other political prisoners languish behind bars without charges.
Neptune's sacrifice has cast a light into the shadows of Haiti's prisons and thousands of people around the world have felt compelled to speak out, unable to forget the injustices illuminated by Neptune's courageous and tragic hunger strike.
Neptune's case is a microcosm of a much larger problem that has plagued Haiti since the overthrow of the democratically elected government in February 2004. Since that time Haiti's justice system has been hijacked by an interim government intent on silencing dissent and there is no semblance of due process for those identified as Aristide supporters.

There are text and video options if you check out the link.

From Boston IndyMedia, Seth highlights Sofia Jarrin-Thomas' "Living in the Shadows: Undocumented Children Strive to Succeed." Here are the opening two paragraphs:

As an immigrant, Araceli has a hard time feeling like she belongs. She fled social unrest in Guatemala with her family when she was only five years old, speaks English better than Spanish, but has been forced to live in the fringes of society because she is considered illegal. "I've been here for sixteen years. I consider myself an American," she said.
The first time she found out about her status was when she tried to apply for college and was told the benefit of a higher education did not apply to her. One year after graduating from high school with a 3.5 GPA and unable to work legally in this country, she feels uneasy about her future. "Put your self in my shoes. I want an education and a career," she said.

Joy notes Kathleen Beckett's "Mordechai Vanunu speaks - March 30, 2005" (Madison IMC):

While visiting Jerusalem and the West Bank in late March and early April, my husband and I met Mordechai Vanunu who is under house arrest at the St. George's Guest House where we were staying.
Mordechai Vanunu, was an Israeli nuclear technician at the Dimona nuclear "research center" in the Negev Desert near his home at Beersheba. He worked there during the 1970's and early 80's. The facility harbored an underground plutonium separation plant operated in strictest secrecy. Vanunu took photographs of the facility and left the country. Captured by Israeli agents on September 30, 1986, Vanunu spent more than 11 1/2 years in solitary confinement completing his entire 18-year sentence in Israel's Ashkelon Prison on April 21, 2004.

Beckett has posted a link to the audio of Vanunu's speech.

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

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

For those e-mailing asking if there will be an Indymedia spotlight tonight, yes, there will be.

As noted earlier, we were doing a link to Feministe since Jill was going over there to blog with Lauren. As Maria requested, it's right below the link for Jill's Third Wave Agenda.

Since I was going into the template anyway, I figured I'd do some links that needed to be done.

First, in case there are any visitors or newer members who are unaware, if someone is a blogger their site is decided on by a panel of members. In the first months of this site, any link that went up would lead to someone e-mailing, "Oh my God! I hate ____! How could you link to ____!"
I was steered to ____ by a member. And if I didn't think ____ had something to say, I wouldn't have linked.

But because of this feeling that came up (with nearly every link), and because we are a community, I decided to turn it over to members. Dahr Jamail may be the only blogger that has never resulted in e-mails complaining. (He's also a journalist publishing in papers but pretend he's not for this example.) Everytime someone went up (suggested by some members), the complaints would come in. Maybe they were valid, maybe they weren't?

But it seemed to me that these links needed to be membership driven. We're using Dahr Jamail for this example because everyone loves Dahr. So one method would be to post, "Would everyone like to add Darh Jamail?" That would be the most democratic method. But if we posted that and then didn't add Jamail wouldn't that be a little humilitating to him? And would we publish the results (which might be even more humilitating -- again, we're using him for an example and using him because no one has ever objected to Jamail)? If 90% of the members said no and we posted that, wouldn't that be humiliating? So would we be like the Oscars and just not note the actual vote?

Though more democratic, I didn't see that as the answer. I thought of sending out e-mails to members to allow a direct vote but not to post about it here to allow anyone who didn't get linked not to feel snubbed. But when we share our favorite songs or movies or whatever, some members want to change their selection. Sometimes after the selections are up. So I wasn't wanting to deal with a vote for, a vote against, a vote for all by the same member.

So the idea of a panel came to mind. The panel rotates around members. (The current panel is serving two months consecutively because they are working on guidelines and a proposal to be voted on by members. Normally, each panel will serve one month.) I don't serve on that panel.
This is composed of members.

When a member e-mails requesting that a blog be added to the sidebar links, I pass that on to the current panel. They then read posts and debate amongst themselves.

They will either recommend a link or not. (There is no requirement that any links go up. There is not a set number that have to go up. The panel can approve every suggestion or shoot down everyone.)

This is more "representative democracy." But it allows no one to feel publicly snubbed and it allows members to determine the links.

This wasn't a way to avoid taking the heat. I determine links for organizations and magazines and if a journalist in another format blogs, I will add them as well. But the panel decides blogs by people who are primarily bloggers.

I'll stand by any decision on an organization, magazine, etc. But I don't claim to be a blog expert. So the panel decides on that.

I hope that's clear. (Adding links tonight was a three hour nightmare with one problem after another. So if it's not clear, blame it on my frustration over the last three hours.)

A number of people have wondered where the May links are for blogs? Good question. The panel does have some decisions (which I haven't seen yet) but they are currently focusing on preparing the policy for members to vote on.

I hate going into the template and always fear a problem that will cause the whole thing to crash.
So when the May links were delayed, I used it as an excuse to delay adding any links on my own.
But when Maria's e-mail came in, I e-mailed the panel members and got the approval of over half (and approval from the others came in as well, no panel member had a problem with adding Jill's new outlet since she had been approved for Third Wave Agenda).

Here's what was added and I'll note a few word abouts each if needed.
Feministe (Lauren & Jill's site): Jill's moving on to Feministe and Rebecca has an entry on that so we'll link to that.

David Sirota: Almost a month ago, I noted the need to link to his site. Members were excited about that and have waited and waited and waited and . . . Since I was in the template, I added it today. Sorry for the delay. Most members are already familiar with Sirota and love his truth to power re: DLC so if you're a visitor or member not familiar with Sirota (whose writing often appears in The Nation and In These Times), please check it out.

Global Exchange: This is an organization that Medea Benjamin is a part of it and for most members that says everything that needs to be said. I think it does as well so we'll just say, check out that site.

The Huffington Post: This was one we should have linked to the day it went active. (Which was the plan.) But intentions often exceed time constraints on this end. It's up now, I hope you'll check it out. This is the site Arianna Huffington is running which will provide a variety of voices and hopefully members have a taste of it from highlights here and at Rebecca's site (Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude).

James Wolcott: The second day of this site, Attack Poodles was noted in suggestions of books to give as gifts. It's a great book. Wolcott is a critical mind who finds a way to critique with humor.
We have a link to Vanity Fair and with that link you could find Wolcott's blog (Wolcott writes for Vanity Fair) but he has his own link now (as he should have for some time).

AlterNet Peek: Members love this. Evan is the person running this (I believe). It's a part of AlterNet and you can access AlterNet through this link. Besides Maria, Eddie, Joy and Liang, who note it almost daily in e-mails, members in England are noting it as well and feel it gives a strong look into the blog world "in the States."

Michelle in Manchester believes it gives her a better feel of what's going on in this country "than any other medium." That's good enough for me. So we've added it.

DIY Dragon: This is a blogger. Normally it would go through the panel. Why was the panel bypassed here? (The panel knows of this add and agreed they didn't need to be consulted.) Because Mooki is a community member. The site was started prior to The Common Ills; however, Mooki is a long term member of this community and was not that into blogging anymore for a period. When Mooki found inspiration (which is partially credited to this community), it seemed to me that this was the same as a member creating a site after we started up. (And Mooki has been a contributing member via topic suggestions in e-mails since just after Thanksgiving.) This isn't a policital blog. It does address politics but it addresses a wide range of topics. In addition, Mooki is an artist so if you visit, please make a point to check out the art work.

But, head's up, do not click on the link to The Common Ills from DIY Dragon -- it doesn't work.
The "url" (thanks to an e-mailer this week for teaching me that term) is wrong (it has "%20" tacked on at the end).

Consortium News: Robert Parry (among others) writes at this site. Parry is someone that we've noted here and provided links to. Rebecca thinks he's one of our best journalists (I'd agree) and since he is the editor of the site (and also behind it's creation), when Rebecca brought him up in a Third Estate Sunday roundtable, it seemed way past time to think about adding Constorium News.

Grist Magazine: Saturday, we linked to an interview in Grist Magazine with Betsy Rosenberg (host of Air America's Sunday program Eco-Talk -- which, if it's on too early for you, I'd steer you to the Air America Place archives). The reaction was positive and usually noted, "I'm so glad there was an environmental link!" We need to do more of those, no question. Since people who went to the interview and looked around Grist were happy, this seemed a good place to start.

So that's what's been added. If you're curious, please access the links. If you're not (and many of you note that you have "just enough" time to read through the entries here, so that's fine), just know that they were added.

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

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

Democracy Now! (Marcia: "always worth watching")

Headlines for May 12, 2005
- Haitian PM Neptune on Verge of Death After 24-Day Hunger
-Strike- Iraq Attacks Kill 79, as Resistance Escalates
- Antiwar European Politicians Accused of Iraq Corruption
- Europe Condemns Turkey Over Trial of Kurdish Leader
- Fidel Castro Defends Assata Shakur, Calls for Mass Demo May 17
- US Student Tortured in Saudi Arabia Accuses FBI of Involvement
- Iraq War Resister Pablo Paredes Convicted
- Army Recruiter Threatens Recruit With Arrest

A ‘Right-Wing Coup’ at PBS & the CPB? A Roundtable Discussion on the Future of Public Broadcasting
On Wednesday, Reps. David Obey (D-WI) and John Dingell (D-MI) called for an investigation of the Corporation Public Broadcasting. This comes following accusations that the CPB has been largely taken over by conservatives who are influencing programming and hiring decisions. Obey requested that the Inspector General for the CPB, investigate whether the CPB is violating the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 that prohibits interference by federal officials over the content and distribution of public programming, and forbids "political or other tests" from being used in CPB hiring decisions.
We speak with Obey as well as PBS host Tavis Smiley, PBS board member Norman Ornstein, Jeff Chester of the Center for Digital Democracy and media analyst Robert McChesney, who is organizing this weekend’s National Conference on Media Reform.

Rep. Bernie Sanders on the Importance of Media Reform As A Political Issue
In this broadcast from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign we hear an excerpt of a speech by Rep. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vemont. He spoke at the conference "Can Freedom of the Press Survive Media Consolidation?"
Marcia asks for everyone to listen closely to note that Norman Ornstein, "great friend of the so-called left," brings out the knife for Bill Moyers.

Marcia: Norm Ornstein is digusting. I'm glad Amy Goodman had him on the panel because people who just know him from Al Franken's show may think he's "one of us." He's not. (And I agree with Rebecca on Al.) Jeff Chester does an incredible job (and refutes Ornstein). So does Tavis Smiley. Make time to listen or watch this segment. There's no transcript yet but even if there were, I'd argue listen or watch if you have the option.

At The Daily Howler, Bob Somerby advises no Howler for Thursday or Friday. (Possibly one on Saturday.) I'll dispute that because there is a post today (Thursday) that, while brief, is a post. It deals with an issue Yazz noted in the Times this morning, Hillary Clinton. Somerby has made notes of the very sad (my opinion) Margaret Carlson and Chris Matthews from the fact challenged broadcast of Hardball last night.

Maria e-mails to note Jill's latest at Third Wave Agenda:

Third Wave Agenda, as we know it, is over.
Lauren of Feministe has asked me to co-blog with her, and because she and her blog are so amazing, there was no way I could turn down that offer. I'm really excited to be posting over there, and I hope that all the great, loyal commenters will follow me!I'm not sure what the future of Third Wave Agenda will be. I'll probably keep posting on it, but posts will probably be few and far between and it will likely turn into something a bit more personal and much less political -- the interesting political stuff will go on Feministe, while the stupid crap about "feelings" and what I did today will go here.
So, it will probably be very boring to anyone who doesn't know me (and honestly, most people who do know me will probably be bored with it too). And while I hate going all Livejournal on people, hopefully when ya'll see how rad Feministe is, you'll get over it and will spend lots of time there to fill the hole in your heart that TWA's demise has certainly created. So... this is my semi-official farewell. I graduate tomorrow and will probably be sad, so I'll post something about that here so that I can start getting into the new "personal blog" format. We'll see how it all works out.

Maria asks if we can provide a link to Feministe. I've been able to reach half the panel plus one and explain Maria's argument (which I agree with): Jill passed the panel, the community likes her blog, she's stopping her blog and going to Feministe, since she's been approved, can we go ahead and provide a link to Feministe. All that I was able to reach were fine with it. So we will provide a permalink to Feministe tonight (and, as Maria requested, put it right under Third Wave Agenda's link). (I've also advised Rebecca as Maria requested and she says she'll add Feministe to Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude later today.)

Lloyd e-mails to note a BuzzFlash editorial entitled "Andrea Mitchell Has a New Book Coming Out in the Fall. It Should be Called, 'I'm What's Wrong with Journalism:'"

In an ideal world, the public airwaves used by giant corporations to help entrench the Republican Party would not be owned by private companies. They are a commodity that belongs to the citizens of the United States. But the mistake of privatizing the airwaves is long behind us.
How do we now begin to recapture control of television news so that the information necessary to make decisions in a democracy becomes the norm, not the rare exception?
And, although we can hope to put pressure on the FCC not to further deregulate the media, who is going to buy what exists and return broadcast journalism to the age of Edward R. Murrow -- or a new modern incarnation of the integrity that he symbolized?
That's a question to which no answer is forthcoming. The wealthy Americans on the pro-democracy movement side generally fund movements, activism and politicians, not efforts to democratize the media. (We know personally at BuzzFlash. We survive because of lots of relatively modest premium purchases. No one has sent us a check where we had to count the zeroes.)
As for now, Andrea Mitchell symbolizes how journalistically compromised the modern mainstream media has become. After all, she's in bed with Alan Greenspan, General Electric, and the Republican Party. That's some menage a trois.
It may be a nice glitzy frolic for her, but it's toxic for democracy.

Cedric also found something at BuzzFlash (no surprise, there's so much worth reading), "Rep. John Conyers, Jr., on Judicial Nominations, Partisanship and Preserving the Filibuster:"

Over the past several weeks, we have seen unprecedented attacks on the independent judiciary by leading members of the Republican majority. Most of the public, however, may have missed earlier efforts of the majority to "capture" the courts through the arguable abuse of both legislative and executive authority. These attempts by the administration and Republicans in Congress threaten to debase permanently the courts and undermine the stability of our legal system for mere short-term political gain.As was apparent from the message of Justice Sunday - a nationally televised Christian conservative political rally, the right-wing of the Republican party has made the appointment of judges the latest battle ground in the raging "culture" wars. The telecast's participants accused Democrats of using the filibuster to keep judges of a certain faith off the bench and essentially tarred their opponents as the enemies of God. The participation of Senator Frist in this event is troubling because the implication that any party or any senator would impose a litmus test against people of faith is not only wholly inaccurate, but irresponsible.In reality, this debate is over the nature of our democracy and respect for the independent federal judiciary. For 200 years, the Senate has used the filibuster to protect the rights of the minority in Congress and prevent intensely divisive legislation from passing. The filibuster is part of a series of Senate rules designed to encourage compromise and protect our democracy from being captured by one party or faction controlling all the branches of government, precisely the situation we have today.

For Cindy, I'll note that both of the above are BuzzFlash exclusives.

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

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

Via BuzzFlash here are five items you might want to follow.

From The Nation, Ayelish McGarvey's "Dr. Hager's Family Values:"

Late last October Dr. W. David Hager, a prominent obstetrician-gynecologist and Bush Administration appointee to the Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), took to the pulpit as the featured speaker at a morning service. He stood in the campus chapel at Asbury College, a small evangelical Christian school nestled among picturesque horse farms in the small town of Wilmore in Kentucky's bluegrass region. Hager is an Asburian nabob; his elderly father is a past president of the college, and Hager himself currently sits on his alma mater's board of trustees. Even the school's administrative building, Hager Hall, bears the family name.
That day, a mostly friendly audience of 1,500 students and faculty packed into the seats in front of him. With the autumn sunlight streaming through the stained-glass windows, Hager opened his Bible to the Old Testament Book of Ezekiel and looked out into the audience. "I want to share with you some information about how...God has called me to stand in the gap," he declared. "Not only for others, but regarding ethical and moral issues in our country."
For Hager, those moral and ethical issues all appear to revolve around sex: In both his medical practice and his advisory role at the FDA, his ardent evangelical piety anchors his staunch opposition to emergency contraception, abortion and premarital sex. Through his six books--which include such titles as Stress and the Woman's Body and As Jesus Cared for Women, self-help tomes that interweave syrupy Christian spirituality with paternalistic advice on women's health and relationships--he has established himself as a leading conservative Christian voice on women's health and sexuality.
And because of his warm relationship with the Bush Administration, Hager has had the opportunity to see his ideas influence federal policy. In December 2003 the FDA advisory committee of which he is a member was asked to consider whether emergency contraception, known as Plan B, should be made available over the counter. Over Hager's dissent, the committee voted overwhelmingly to approve the change. But the FDA rejected its recommendation, a highly unusual and controversial decision in which Hager, The Nation has learned, played a key role. Hager's reappointment to the committee, which does not require Congressional approval, is expected this June, but Bush's nomination of Dr. Lester Crawford as FDA director has been bogged down in controversy over the issue of emergency contraception. Crawford was acting director throughout the Plan B debacle, and Senate Democrats, led by Hillary Clinton and Patty Murray, are holding up his nomination until the agency revisits its decision about going over the counter with the pill.


From Truthout, William Rivers Pitt's "One of These Days:"

So the phone rings and I answered it while trying to navigate Memorial Drive in Cambridge - yes, at that moment I was the jerk on his cell phone who almost kills you with his car - and on the line is a producer from MSNBC who wanted me on the Connie Chung show. Hot damn, I thought. This is getting serious. The producer wanted me on the show to talk about Hans Blix and the weapons inspections taking place in Iraq. Great, I said. Yeah, she went on, we want you to talk about how the inspectors are doing a really bad job.
So picture this moment. There I was, trying to drive down one of the worst roads in Cambridge with a cell phone the size of a gallon of milk stuck to my ear, and I have this MSNBC producer telling me that if I go on the show, I have to dump all over the inspectors who at that time had been in-country about a week. Coincidentally, that was exactly the same line of rhetoric being pushed by the White House at exactly that time. I'm sure the look on my face was priceless, and I'm lucky me, the car and the giant cell phone didn't wind up in the Charles River.
I asked her if she knew who she was talking to. She didn't understand. My book, I told her, says there are no weapons of mass destruction and therefore no reason to go to war there. I'm the last person on the planet, therefore, who is going to haul water for the idea that there are weapons in Iraq. Furthermore, I said, I don't know where you get off trying to gin up resentment against the inspectors. They just got there, and if they can finish their work without getting derailed by nonsense like this, it'll hopefully keep a lot of people from getting killed. The MSNBC producer laughed quietly - that's the part I will never forget, how she laughed - and hung up.
For me, that's it in a nutshell. That's what ails us as a nation. The corporate media does not report the news anymore. They create consensus, they manufacture the common fictions under which we are expected to live. With the TV media, this behavior is all the more insidious because TV reaches everyone.

From Common Dreams, Justin Quinn's "Anti-Bush Protesters Plan Lawsuit Over Arrests:"

Lawyers representing "The Smoketown Six" are scheduled to announce today the filing of a federal civil rights lawsuit against law enforcement agents who arrested the protesters during a visit by President Bush to East Lampeter Township earlier this year.
A press conference concerning the lawsuit is expected to be held this morning in Philadelphia.
The lawsuit alleges that the demonstrators' right to free speech was violated after police arrested them for stripping down to thong underwear and piling on top of each other in an attempt to re-enact a photograph from the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq.
The protesters were taken into custody minutes before the president's tour bus passed through Smoketown in July. They later were charged with disorderly conduct.

From AlterNet, Bruce Schneier's "National Insecurity Cards:"

As a security technologist, I regularly encounter people who say the United States should adopt a national ID card. How could such a program not make us more secure, they ask?
The suggestion, when it's made by a thoughtful civic-minded person like Nicholas Kristof in The New York Times, often takes on a tone that is regretful and ambivalent: Yes, indeed, the card would be a minor invasion of our privacy, and undoubtedly it would add to the growing list of interruptions and delays we encounter every day; but we live in dangerous times, we live in a new world ... .
It all sounds so reasonable, but there's a lot to disagree with in such an attitude.
The potential privacy encroachments of an ID card system are far from minor. And the interruptions and delays caused by incessant ID checks could easily proliferate into a persistent traffic jam in office lobbies and airports and hospital waiting rooms and shopping malls.
But my primary objection isn't the totalitarian potential of national IDs, nor the likelihood that they'll create a whole immense new class of social and economic dislocations. Nor is it the opportunities they will create for colossal boondoggles by government contractors. My objection to the national ID card, at least for the purposes of this essay, is much simpler.
It won't work. It won't make us more secure.
In fact, everything I've learned about security over the last 20 years tells me that once it is put in place, a national ID card program will actually make us less secure.

From Yahoo News, the Associated Press' "Critics Ask Congress to Temper Patriot Act" by Jesse J. Holland:

Sens. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., told the Senate that while they cannot show any specific abuses, the anti-terrorism law is written in a way that could allow abuses.
"Our law cannot be written for the best and the brightest. They must also anticipate enforcement from the worst and the weakest," said Craig, who is pushing a bill with Durbin that would scale back some of the Patriot Act's powers.
Critics of the law want Congress to pass the SAFE Act to limit the Patriot Act in several ways, including requiring government officials to inform suspects about the "sneak and peek" searches within seven days if a judge does not intervene. The current law does not specify when the government has to inform suspects about the secret search.

Tori sent a quote from a BuzzFlash interview that apparently went up yesterday but I can't find it on the site. When I do find it, we'll highlight it.

We will note, quickly because I'm running late this morning, that at Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Rebecca's been addressing the issue of the polio outbreaks. Click here and here to read her commentaries.

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

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

With a vote scheduled Thursday on his contested nomination as ambassador to the United Nations, John R. Bolton has told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that a policy maker should maintain the right to "state his own reading of the intelligence" even when it differs from that of intelligence agencies.
Mr. Bolton's statement came in a written response to a written question from Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a leading Democratic critic of the nomination, and was disclosed by Democrats legislators opposed to the nomination. They said they would cite it as evidence that Mr. Bolton would adopt a loose standard for accuracy in making statements based on intelligence.

That's from Douglas Jehl's "U.N. Nominee Asserts His Independence on Intelligence" in this morning's New York Times.

The Times notes this issue with intelligence:


Among newly declassified documents being reviewed by the committee are some from the Central Intelligence Agency expressing vehement opposition to testimony on Cuba that Mr. Bolton planned to give in June 2002, at least partly on grounds that Mr. Bolton was presenting as the government's view a conclusion that Cuba possessed biological weapons, when the intelligence agencies were not so certain.
The documents on Cuba were provided to the committee by the C.I.A., and were provided to The New York Times by a Democrat legislator opposed to Mr. Bolton's nomination. Many had initially been classified as secret, and they reflect intense, angry debate between Mr. Bolton's office and senior intelligence officials, including representatives of the National Intelligence Council, that focused in part on whether the intelligence agencies' had a right to challenge some of the planned assertions.

But it shies away from the charges discussed at The Raw Story and by Sam Seder on The Majority Report last night. From The Raw Story's "Larry Flynt: Bush UN nominee won't answer questions about troubled marriage:"

The controversial Hustler Magazine publisher Larry Flynt has waded into the conflict surrounding the nomination of Bush hawk John Bolton to a UN post by revealing Bolton's divorce records and unanswered questions about his sexual past, RAW STORY has learned.
[. . .]
"The first Mrs. Bolton’s conduct raises the presumption that she fled out of fear for her safety or, at a minimum, it demonstrates that Mr. Bolton’s established inability to communicate or work respectfully with others extended to his intimate family relations,” said Mr. Flynt. "The court records alone provide sufficient basis for further investigation of nominee Bolton by the Senate." These court records are enclosed here as an attachment. Mr. Flynt continued, "The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations must be free of any potential source of disrepute or blackmail."

Ruth reports that NPR's Morning Edition also didn't address the charges in their story this morning on John Bolton.

Kara e-mails to note David Johnston's "Terror Suspects Sent to Egypt by the Dozens, Panel Reports:"

The United States and other countries have forcibly sent dozens of terror suspects to Egypt, according to a report released Wednesday by Human Rights Watch. The rights group and the State Department have both said Egypt regularly uses extreme interrogation methods on detainees.
The group said it had documented 63 cases since 1994 in which suspected Islamic militants were sent to Egypt for detention and interrogation. The figures do not include people seized after the attacks of September 2001 who were sent mainly by Middle East countries and American intelligence authorities.
But since September 2001, the transfers have accelerated in part because Egypt has been willing to accept the detainees as part of its effort to root out Islamic militants inside Egypt, a campaign that has extended to countries where extremists have taken refuge. Almost all those sent to Egypt are Egyptian citizens or were born there, the report said.

Yazz e-mails to note Leslie Eaton's "Mrs. Clinton Not at Fault, Prosecutor Tells Jury:"


Before Hillary Rodham Clinton's former chief fund-raiser went on trial here for underreporting donations to her Senate campaign, political speculation has revolved around what if anything Mrs. Clinton knew about his alleged transgressions, as well as what if anything the trial would do to her presidential aspirations (assuming she has them).
A federal prosecutor tried to answer at least one of those questions in his opening statement on Wednesday in Federal District Court, when he told the jury, "You will hear no evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any way, shape or form."
Indeed, the prosecutor, Peter R. Zeidenberg, said that the fund-raiser, David F. Rosen, tried to keep Mrs. Clinton's campaign from discovering how much money was donated to cover the costs of the star-studded event at the heart of this criminal case. The reason, Mr. Zeidenberg said, is that Mr. Rosen was afraid he would be fired if the campaign found out how much money he had spent on the August 2000 event, the Hollywood Gala Salute to President William Jefferson Clinton.

Ben e-mails to note Carollotta Gall's "Afghan Protest Against the U.S. Becomes Violent:"

Four protesters were killed and more than 60 injured Wednesday in the eastern city of Jalalabad as the police and troops struggled to contain the worst anti-American demonstrations in Afghanistan in the more than three years since the fall of the Taliban.
[. . .]
The demonstrations were started on Tuesday by students angered by a report in Newsweek that American interrogators at the Guantánamo Bay detention center had desecrated the Koran by flushing a copy down the toilet.

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

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

We kid Brian Montopoli, we call him Candy Perfume Boy and we have an entire history for Candy Perfume Boy. But when Montopoli nails one down, we're glad to note that. Today at CJR Daily, our Candy Perfume Boy nailed one down with "There's Nothing About Mary."

Some (Rebecca) have offered we've confused our beloved creation (Candy Perfume Boy) with Brian Montopoli. That may or may not be true but when one community member e-mailed "There's Nothing About Mary" to both common_ills@yahoo.com and thirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com we eagerly read the copy and paste. And we were quite proud of Montopoli (whether as Montopoli or as our creation we'll leave to shrinks to decide).

Weighing in on Mary Matalin's appearence on Meet the Press, he lays out the problems with Matalin's facts and concludes with this:

Why, jaded readers might wonder, does this particular abomination so exercise us? After all, there are any number of talking heads out there willing to lie and spin with reckless abandon and then exhibit righteous indignation toward anyone who expresses disagreement -- and any number of talk shows eager to roll out the red carpet for same.
But Matalin, and "Meet the Press" itself, deserve to be singled out because they are thought to represent the best of political dialogue: a respected political operative who has worked in high places being grilled on the most revered political talk show in America. If anyone still thinks that the carnival barkers are confined to cable shoutfests while serious political dialogue endures elsewhere, last weekend's display should be enough to put that fleeting hope to rest once and for all.

Exactly to the point. On the money, illuminating and certainly something to take pride in. Like a really strong trailer that gives you goosebumps, "In a world gone crazy, one reporter . . . " Or, as a "critic" once said of The Professional, "makes Speed look like a slow ride to Grandma's."*

Earlier this week, on a blog report, Brian Montopoli/Candy Perfume Boy did disappoint us. As intrepid TV critics who fearlessly wade through the any and all drek, past and present, we read with sadness as he took on right wing bloggers convinced that Geena Davis' role in as the first female president in "an upcoming ABC drama" was a plot to elect Hillary Clinton president in 2008. We were saddened first of all because CPB quoted a right wing blogger without correcting the rwb. Geena Davis is not yet going to perform in "an upcoming ABC drama." It is pilot season where networks will look at various pilots and decide what will and what will not be added to the fall season schedule. It's the mistake of an amateur and we fully expect it from the rwb but we were disappointed that CPB didn't catch that.

We were further saddened to realize that CPB had no idea that, if the pilot is picked up, it wouldn't be the first female president on TV. In fact, if you drop back to 1985, you will find Patty Duke starring in Hail to the Chief! as . . . the first female president. Would rwbs argue that Hail to the Chief was an attempt to elect Nancy Reagan in 1988 or Big Babs Bush in 1988? Or maybe it was to prepare the country for Geraldine Ferraro's 1988 presidential run?

But today CPB took on Mary Matalin's Meet the Press appearence and did damn good. We're happy to note that. Thank you to Maria for giving us the heads up.

-- Ava and C.I.

* "Makes Speed look like . . ." written by Don Stotter, ENTERTAINMENT TIME-OUT SYNDICATION

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

 

Yesterday, we noted Folding Star's post on the filibuster. Mark asks if it can be excerpted:

Where do I even begin with Harry Reid? I am so frustrated and disgusted by this so called Democratic Leader. Each of those words is more unlikely than the next when applied to this man.Instead of standing firm, as pledged, we've seen him rush about making hollow, pointless assurances about future Supreme Court nominees and trying to make 'deals' with the right that would in effect be the kiss of death to the filibuster in all but name.

Now, Reid offers the Republicans an 'olive branch' in the form of not filibustering one nominee in particular, Thomas Griffith.

This step makes it look as if the Democrats are weakening on their pledge. Let's not forget that the Democrats have NOT filibustered 205 out of 215 of Bush's Nominees. All 205 of those nominees were confirmed by the Senate.

That's 95% of Bush's judicial nominees. Bill Clinton would have killed to have that rate. The fact of the matter is that these very Republicans who are talking about each nominee having an 'up or down vote by the full Senate' nixed a hell of a lot more of Clinton's judicial nominees in Committee, denying them an 'up or down vote', than the Democrats have even dreamed of doing with the filibuster.

Mark wanted this excerpted with a Third Estate Sunday Review piece. Though I wasn't worried Ava, Jim, Ty, Jess and Dona would say no, I did want to ask first. With their permission, it's below in full. [Disclosure, this entry was composed by Ty, Jess, Dona, Jim, Ava, Betty -- Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, Rebecca -- Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, and myself.]

From April 17th:

Harry Reid: Determined to lead us to the promissory note land?

Reading the Associated Press article "Dems. Adjust on Social Security Stance" (by Glen Johnson) from The Guardian, we started thinking how all the important issues should be farmed out to focus groups. (That's sarcasm.) We also wondered how stories would play out in the New York Times. What follows is a spoof. If, when reading it, you think for instance, "They are ragging on Helen Thomas!" We love Helen Thomas. We just couldn't see a Times reporter having anything nice to say about Thomas. The same thing with Senator Barbara Boxer and Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones as well as the United Nations.

"Dems. Adjust on Environmental Stance/ U.N. Continues to Plot World Destruction"
Judith Miller (New York Times)
May 21, 2005

After a very heated focus group session, annoying Senator Harry Reid announced the Dems would back off from their support for the environment."

People find the topic so depressing," Reid explained. "Like G.E., we just want to bring good things to life. Hey, if we say we're the party that brings good things to life, is that slogan different enough from G.E.'s that we can use it without being sued? Woah, rhetorical question! Let's put it to a focus group!"

In other news, the United Nations continued their secret plan to destroy the world with a dirty bomb set to go off as soon as they can stop raping third world citizens, destroying water supplies, farming out fat contracts to their friends, and implanting chips in the skulls of all people.

Inside sources in D.C. (Cheney) say that this is an important story and all Americans should focus on it. U.N. bad. U.N. evil. U.N. full of liars. Stinky U.N. makes me sick, sick, sick!

"Dems. Adjust on the Economy."
David E. Sanger (New York Times)
June 11, 2005

After a lively focus group with big lobbyists and Wall Street brokers, Harry Reid announced today that the Democrats would back off from their support for jobs.

"Only the working class needs them," explained Harry Reid wrinkling his nose. "We don't want to be the party of the little people. How many midgets vote anyway?"

"I'm just happy that big money is still interested in talking to us at all," Reid confessed. "Every now and then we'd throw a road block out there for them. Which is why it was so important that we support the Bankruptcy bill, to prove that we were for the big people. Having done that, we feel happy to ship jobs over seas and to turn the working class into indentured servants. Sure some people may whine, but didn't Charles Dickens write a lot of cool novels about a similar period? Write down that we support the arts and we support literature and we support education."

White House lovely Karen Hughes responded, "I am aghast at the Democratic Party's announcement this morning that they support the arts. Deep Throat? And I'm not talking Watergate. Nekkid statues? 'Smack My Bitch Up?' 'Move, Bitch, Get Out The Way?' This 'support' for the arts puts the Democratic Party on the opposite side of the American people."

"Dems Adjust on Support for the Arts."
Glen Johnson (Associated Press)
June 14, 2005

After a recent focus group that Frank Luntz conducted in a Rush Room, Democrats looked at the polling results and Harry Reid rushed out to speak to the press.

"I want to be very clear here, we do not support the arts," Reid explained. "We thought we did but we don't. When people hear 'art' they tend to think of two things, Europe or Hollywood and both are polling very badly. So we do not, take this down, support the arts."

When asked if they still supported literature and education, Reid responded that he'd have to get back to us on the issue of literature but that of course the Democratic Party supported education.

"We always have and we always will."

"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.'"

"Dems Adjust Stance on Education"
by Glen Johnson (Associated Press)
June 16, 2005

Emerging from the hearings of his newly formed committee Education Is Bad For Everyone, Senator Harry Reid attempted to escape reporters who ran after him.

Shouting, reporters persisted in following him, "Are the Democrats backing off from their historical support of education?"

"Historical!" Reid snapped turning around to face the throng. "What historical? The Democratic Party has never stood for education. Didn't you get that when we started triangulating in the 90s? What are teachers' unions but unions? And we stand against unions. All unions! Except the sacred union of a man and a woman in holy matrimony."

And what of the fate of America's children, America's future?

"Good Lord!" Reid exclaimed, "Who wants a nation of smarty pants! What good does reading do anyway? Reading leads to cook books and literature and yes, depraved coffee books with photos of felines! Pretty soon you're some depraved maniac wanting to cook your own meals and think for yourself! We've got a man in the White House who's most famous for reading a picture book and it sure hasn't hurt him any. We need to return to the good old fashioned values of illiteracy and ignorance and fart jokes like the great American, former First Lady, Barbara Bush said. In fact, later today, I'll be putting a whoopi cushion in Nancy Pelosi's chair because I'm a good, upstanding, average American. And that's what today's Democratic Party stands for. Today. Right now. At this minute. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm late for a focus group."

"Dems Adjust Their Stance on Two Party Rule"
by Adam Nagourney & Janet Elder (New York Times)
July 7, 2005

Following the devasting results of the latest CBS News/New York Times poll which found that an overwhelming 99% of respondents could not tell the difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, Senator Harry Reid held a press conference in front of the Abe Lincoln monument today.

"If I can nutshell it for you," Reid offered, "it would be this: we're Republicans."

When asked of the need for an opposition party, Reid dismissed concerns.

"Look, we tried being the loyal opposition, believe me, no one was more loyal than we were. We damn near broke the rubber stamp from using it so often. It didn't work. The American people have spoken. Now we could be cry babies or dreamers and dig in for a fight, but what's the point? When Trump says, 'You're fired,' it's end of story, time to go home now."

Longtime D.C. reporter and all around nut case Helen Thomas stood up and hurled an unprintable remark at Senator Reid. Reid shrugged and sighed.

"What Helen doesn't get is that we want to be Republicans. Who wants to resist the easy and profitable thing? I mean maybe Helen likes being banished to the back row, but that's not going to send any of our kids to college our pay off the bank for our second home, is it? It's about being practical and doing what is doable. We're taking the off ramp to Easy Street and we'll all be better for it. The American people have spoken. And via the liberal media. If the liberal media like CBS and the New York Times is against us, what chance do we have? Haven't they always been our friends? And who can intimidate a paper or CBS? No one and we don't have the energy to waste on a battle. The Republicans wouldn't battle the press and neither shall we. So we're going to cruise on over to Easy Street where most of us own second homes, by the way, and we'll accept that the American people have spoken. They have been heard. All 900 of them polled. In a random sample. From people too dumb to check their caller i.d. and avoid the call. So with this large of a sample, it's obvious that America wants one party rule. Real one party rule that's honest about it. Not the kind of one party rule we've given them lately where we pretend we're Democrats, but open and full faith one party rule where we proclaim loudly and proudly that we are with the GOP. It's time to step out of the closet and say, 'I'm here, I'm Republican, I'm out and proud!' In a non-gay way, of course, because we do not support same-sex marriages, civil unions or really even the talk show Ellen."

Actually, Senator Reid was playing fast and loose with the facts, a Democratic trademark long noted in these pages and one some insiders (Nagourney & Elder) hope he will drop now that he's stepped over to the right side of the spectrum. In actuality, 858 Americans were polled randomly, not 900 as the Senator lied.

Responding on the poll results and on Reid's announcement, our personal pin up George W. Bush (put on your boxing gloves, Peggy Noonan, we'll fight you for him) said, "This just proves what I've always said. The American people are a hard working, decent peoples who wake up each morning wanting to see the moon shining up in the pink sky."

Again, Senator Reid lied. The polling sample was 858, not 900.

"Only His Tailor Knows for Sure LOL!"
by Elisabeth Bumiller (New York Times)

On the heels of recent revelations that Republican Senator Harry Reid's spine was removed on the evening of March 14, 2001, Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones and Senator Barbara Boxer, two of the last elected officials who remain in the Democratic Party, called for an investigation.

"I think it's pretty clear what was done and I just want to know if the United States' Congress is going to have the guts to tell the American people," screeched Tubbs-Jones.

Vice President Dick Cheney announced to a crowd of people fashionably attired in white sheets, "I hear tell that Harry Reid loaned his spine out to Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. In fact, we almost strong-armed Collie Powell into telling the U.N. that."

Urging the crowd to participate in voluntary bon fires on the homes of other people, our second in commanding commander-in-chief left the stage.

"What we have here is another case of the Democratic Party engaging in hyperbole and lies," explained smart and sexy GOP consultant Mary Matalin. "Obviously Senator Reid's spine was removed. We've all seen the x-rays. All over the TV! But maybe he wanted his spine removed? Maybe he thought it was the hot new look? Maybe he thought it would help him squeeze into those Dockers that had gotten too tight around the waistline? Why does everything have to be some sort of tin foil hat conspiracy plotted by Karl Rove? We have tried to work with the Democratic Party, with both of them, and they are resistant to our plans to end poverty by utilizing the death penalty. They say our plans are inhumane and we say that's pre-9-11 thinking on their part."

Senator Barbara Boxer made wild accusations supported by the public record.

"Karl Rove bragged about this to the press," Senator Boxer alleged waving a column by Robert Novak. "We have that in writing. On January 12, 2001, Bob Novak wrote it in his column 'I Want to Out a CIA Agent and Karl Rove Wants to Remove Harry Reid's Spine.' Karl Rove admits to giving some pills to Harry Reid on the evening of March 13th though he claims they were only Flinstone chewables. Harry's wife said he would never willingly part with his spine. She said he'd often commented that it was his best feature. From the records, we know that Karl Rove, who much of the press seems to forget is not a doctor, was acting as the attending in the operating room on the 14th when Harry Reid's spine was removed. From the X-rays, we know that Harry's spine was removed. From the tape of 2005 White House Press Club Dinner, we have Karl Rove bragging 'I removed Harry Reid's spine in 2001.' And laughing about it! For Mary Matalin or anyone to suggest that this is tin foil hat conspiracy talk begs the suggestion of a gigantic coverup."

For no real reason we can think of, our wonderful and fashionable Secretary of State Condi Rice released a statement responding to Senator Boxer's remarks. Since we live and die by our official sources and how well we're able to pimp for them, we'll reprint the text here in full:

Senator Barabara Boxer once again shows her liberal California roots and how out of touch she is with the American people in her statements just made to New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller minutes ago by questioning the loyalty of our troops. Baghdad Boxer would do well to hang her head in shame for those uncalled for remarks suggesting that our military is disloyal.

Not quite sure what to do since the x-rays are all over the TV news, so I phoned a tailor in France. What follows are a series of bantering remarks we exchanged on various topics such as off the rack fashion, pastries and the weather.

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

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

Matthew Rothschild (editor of The Progressive) has not one, not two, but three "This Just In"s.
Lucy e-mailed to note all three. Below is an excerpt from each. Click the title to read in full.

"Bolton a Test of Cheney and Rove"
On Thursday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is set to vote on the nomination of John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the U.N.
It'll be an interesting test.
Not of whether Bolton deserves to be ambassador.
He obviously doesn't.
No one has been more unqualified for high office since Dan Quayle and Clarence Thomas.
Bolton's sneering at the UN and his laughably undiplomatic behavior should long ago have disqualified him.
Now the only test is whether Dick Cheney and Karl Rove can shove Bolton through, no matter how bad he is.

"A Socialist in the Senate?"
There may soon be an avowed socialist in the U.S. Senate.
Bernie Sanders, Vermont’s eight-term member of the House of Representatives, is likely to run for the seat that Senator Jeffords is vacating in 2006.
Sanders, a democratic socialist and independent, appears to have a strong early lead.
A recent poll has him crushing all possible challengers by more than a two-to-one margin, as David Sirota has reported.
And Sanders just got a big boost from his fellow Vermonter Howard Dean. Even though Sanders is not a Democrat, Dean, the head of the DNC, says he’s for Sanders.
"A victory for Bernie Sanders is a win for Democrats," Dean said.
Sanders in the Senate could stiffen the spine of Democrats.

"National Day of Prayer: Bush's Bone to the Dobsons"
Last Thursday, May 5, was the National Day of Prayer, which Congress made official back in 1952, at the apex of McCarthyism.
As an atheist and a believer in the separation of church and state, I'm offended that our government has set aside a day for this.
And it offends me even more that George Bush has given the day over to the far right.
Many of the day's events "are coordinated by the National Day of Prayer Task Force, a private group run by Shirley Dobson, wife of radio broadcaster and Religious Right kingpin James C. Dobson," according to Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. It says the group "operates from the offices of Focus on the Family," which James Dobson heads.

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

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