The Common Ills


Saturday, July 12, 2008
Cynthia McKinney, Let her shine

Cynthia McKinney, Let her shine

Kimberly Wilder notes this video of presumed Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney. As Austin Cassidy's Independet Political Report notes, "With Green Party delegates poised to select a presidential nominee this morning, NewsBlaze runs down the contenders and their standings, saying that 'with 419 votes needed to win the nomination, former George Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney leads the delegate race with 304.5 delegates'." In what should be a day that focuses some attention on the Green Party's convention (going on through tomorrow) and taking some civic pride in their nominee (whether it's McKinney or someone else), the reality of our non-democracy comes through best at, where else?, Aging Socialite's Cat Litter Box where Cynthia's presumed victory translates into "Can McKinney Really Hurt Obama?" Everything is not about the Christ-child.

Cynthia McKinney seems to be on the verge of receiving the nomination of a national political party. That is news. That is news all by itself. That is something to celebrate. Whether you plan to vote Green or not, that is something very big.

The honor is reduced when the immediate response is, "What does that mean to Barack!"

Cynthia McKinney is a politician with a history of experience and a history of results. She was crucified not once, but twice by the party 'leaders' in the Democratic Party and, both times, written off for dead. Her presumed victory speaks to her strength and her abilities.

As a woman, her anticipated victory later today is something all (women and men) should take pride in. That would be true if it were 2004 but it is especially true after the Democratic primary this year when women were dragged through the mud, were targeted with attacks and were slammed and lectured to.

As an African-American, what a statement she makes. She says you can be authentically yourself and not attempt to alter yourself to curry votes or favors. She says you can pick up the torch for racial equality and carry it further. Cynthia McKinney is not merely her race but neither does she run from her race. That's a very positive and needed statement in the country today.

For those who value the speaking of truth, it's a huge victory.

Her assumed nomination today translates into so many things including issues because she has run an issue based campaign.

What should be celebrated as embodying the best that country strives for does not need to be turned into, "How's she's going to hurt Obama!"

Can we not take the time, regardless of who we plan to vote for or if we plan to vote, to take pride in the accomplishments and gains that Cynthia makes and represents?

Or are we so divided as a country (and on the left) that we can only see it in terms of ourselves and our own self-interests?

The Green Party represents one more choice in a nation where choice continues to dwindle. You don't have to be a Green or planning to vote Green to celebrate the hard work Cynthia has put into her campaign and the huge obstacles she overcame for not toeing the line. Today is a strong day for democracy.

Presumably, Cynthia will be elected her party's nominee. In a year, it should be noted, when the DNC is attempting to prevent a floor vote at their own convention. Unless it's a drive-by, we're not read by John McCain supporters, but even McCain supporters should be able to see Cynthia's win as good for America. They might not agree with anything she stands for (since they would largely be Republicans), but just in terms of what democracy is supposed to stand for and the fact that we are supposed to root for and value democracy, they should be able to take a moment to take some pride in her accomplishment.

It's really funny, if you think about the end of the Democratic primaries, when some party 'healers' wanted to preach the line that it said something about the country but, strangely, none of them are trotting out the argument for Cynthia.

Regardless of whom you plan to vote for (or if you plan to vote), we should all be able to set aside our likes and dislikes to appreciate what Cynthia has accomplished.

A moment should be manageable for everyone to leave their own political opinions to the side and appreciate her victory.

The Greens are going to be excited (rightly) and some of that will be personal excitement for their party (as it should be) but it's also going to include what is being said about democracy. It'll be a real shame if members of the 'big' parties show off that they're actually smaller of heart and pride in democracy than third party members. (Though that might not be surprising, it will be a shame.)

I'm fully aware that any press -- especially for a third party -- can be seen as good press but I'm appalled that before Cynthia even has the nomination, it's already time to trot out the "what does this mean for ___" columns.

Before a single piece is written noting what it means for Cynthia, or what it means for America, or what it means for democracy, it's time to toss her up against a man and wonder if she'll hurt him?

That devalues her, that devalues America and it devalues democracy.

I don't care for sports, so I'll go to another form of analogy. It's as though today Cynthia was announcing her engagement and someone had to stand up right after and say, "Guess what? I'm pregnant!" Are the gas bags that small and petty that Cynthia (and the Green Party) can't even have a moment after months of hard work?

It is a Saturday. It is a slow news day. And it is appalling that the presumed nominee can't even shine for one day without fear of what it means to somebody else. Sometimes it just means that it's her turn to shine and it's hard to believe that if the "her" wasn't in there, everyone would rush so to ignore the candidate.

For gas bags who need guidance, the angles are Cynthia McKinney, democracy and America. There's no need to pit her against your hero to have an angle. That's not only insulting, it's rather aggressive. Not surprising when you consider the way attacks on women were publicly embraced this year. Did the gas bag set greet McCain's nomination with "What will this mean for the Democrats!" I don't think so, maybe they did. But they damn well took the time to also note McCain in his own right. When the primaries ended, the coverage took time to celebrate Barack's presumed victory. Is it only when the candidate's a woman that we deny her the right to be her own person? That we refuse to bask in the moment?

It's really starting to look that way and another 'angle' can be what the response to Cynthia's victory says about America (reality as opposed to dream). This is her day, let her shine.

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

Since yesterday morning, the following community websites have updated:

Rebecca's Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude;
Cedric's Cedric's Big Mix;
Kat's Kat's Korner;
Betty's Thomas Friedman is a Great Man;
Mike's Mikey Likes It!;
Elaine's Like Maria Said Paz;
Wally's The Daily Jot;
Trina's Trina's Kitchen;
Ruth's Ruth's Report;
and Marcia's SICKOFITRADLZ

Correction, Wally's heard me griping as I wrote this and he and Cedric are going to post Saturday night. (This is written ahead of time and Mike is kind enough to post it after everyone's posted.) So look for Wally and Cedric tonight and they hope to somehow address the topic of the non-response to Cynthia.

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












Posted at 10:42 pm by thecommonills
 

Bob Rae does what needs doing (and does it well)

Bob Rae does what needs doing (and does it well)

Forty years ago, American conscription created a lottery that meant a generation -- my exact contemporaries -- did not have the luxury I had of expressing political opinions without having to disobey the law. Many were able to get their requirement of service deferred. Some enlisted and then deserted, others just came to Canada as visitors and never left.
It was a different time then. Immigrants were not legally barred from applying for landed immigrant status from within Canada, and immigration officials were given much discretion in allowing young men through without asking too many questions about draft status or military service. That is not to say that decisions were taken lightly.
At the time, those coming over as draft dodgers and deserters knew they would not be able to return home without facing arrest. It would be years before a general amnesty would allow that to happen, and it applied just to the draft dodgers; deserters are still arrested if they return.
There was a sense of a deep inner conflict in each decision. Families left behind, parents bewildered, loyalties and values divided, often in ways that proved impossible to resolve.
The Pearson and Trudeau governments kept the border open, despite U.S. objections, and refused to allow Canadian border officials to become agents of American military policy. It strained the relationship -- as did public statements by Canadian officials about the war itself -- but it did not break it.
The Vietnam generation has made an extraordinary contribution to the life of the country. In every walk of life, in every profession, in every community, Canada is a better place because we decided to become a place of refuge for those seeking a different political home, even those who were defying American military law to do so.

The above is from Bob Rae's "Why U.S. war resisters deserve refuge in Canada" (Toronto Star) proving that not everyone has forgotten what actually happened and that some can make an argument that is effective and factual. To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca"). Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote. Now they've started a new letter you can use online here. The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here.

On the front page of the New York Times, Alissa J. Rubin contributes "Iraqi Shiites Reclaim a Village Razed by Sunnis" about Al Etha in Diyala Province:

Now, after nearly two years, 60 of the families have returned, offering a glimpse both of the tentative new peace that is becoming visible in many places throughout Iraq and of the tremendous difficulties ahead. The displaced return not only to destroyed houses, but also destroyed lives.

Rubin sees peace emerging. (She's not stating "Peace has come!") I see a people who feel wronged returning and the resentment breeding all over again (on both sides, Shi'ites and Sunnis). She's a reporter and she's offering her visual observations in an article worth reading. [Revolutions (rebellions and resistance) was one of my areas of emphasis in poli sci and I see something completely different taking place. And you can add in the impact on the elections -- if they take place -- in October.] The article should be read with Campbell Robertson's "Iraqi Forces Raid Mosque With Links To Sadrists" and the thing to concentrate on there is how will that help 'peace'. (Answer: It won't. It will only give the illusion of peace and allow more resentments to fester.)

Alan Feuer's "With Final Word of Soldiers' Deaths, More Tears, More Sorrow, Some Relief" covers the reactions to the news that US soldiers Alex R. Jimenez and Byron Fouty are no longer missing, classified as MIA or POWs. We noted the news in yesterday's snapshot. We'll quote Byron's mother Hillary Meunier here: "They said we'd never find him, but I have a sense of relief that at least he's back on American soil. I've believed for quite some time that Byron had passed on, that they had killed him. I had a small shread of hope but, in my heart of hearts, I knew that he was gone." Others were noted yesterday. (Hillary Meunier was noted from an interview published yesterday but conducted before she knew her son's body had been discovered.)

Do not read this as an insult to Ralph Nader's campaign or to him but I've made the decision (and will take any flack for it -- complain to me not Beth) that we're not noting him today. That has nothing to do with him. It has to do with today being Cynthia McKinney's day. The Green Party is holding its convention this weekend (it ends on Sunday) and that's really not be noted by most outlets you'd assume you could count on for coverage. Ralph's not usually noted by them either. The community is for Ralph. There's no "the majority is for . . ." Giving Cynthia her due today takes nothing away from Ralph. But the Democratic outlets (that we once wrongly assumed were actually left outlets) can't make time for Cynthia. We're not going to repeat that error here. The next entry will note Cynthia in some form. It is her day.

It being her day does not detract or minimize anyone else. It is merely giving her the due she's earned. (Is expected to earn when she receives the nomination today.)

I had said yesterday that we'd note Jason Wallace today and I think we still can since he's a Green. It's his day today as well. Ava and I caught some of the 'public affairs' programs yesterday and no one seems to know that a political party in this country is holding their convention. Doesn't know or doesn't care?

Wallace is running for Illinois' 11th Congressional district's seat in the House of Represenatives and this is his campaign's "Veterans issues personal for Wallace:"

Contacts: Tanya Austin, Campaign Manager, 309-532-3446, tanya.austin@electwallace.us
Brandon Punke, Media Relations Coordinator, 309-826-6605, media@electwallace.us
Normal, IL - Veterans issues are of key importance to 11th Congressional district Green Party candidate Jason Wallace. Wallace, the only veteran in the race, is calling for several key changes in the government's approach to caring for those who have served in the United States military. These include changes in funding and coverage as well as his support for the idea of replacing Silver Cross in Joliet with a VA hospital.
Jason Wallace personally recognizes the frustrations that can be encountered by veterans when trying to obtain benefits. As a member of the Air National Guard, Jason was activated twice to serve in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom for a total of seventeen months. While serving in Kuwait, Jason volunteered for the base Honor Guard and earned the Air Force Meritorious Unit Award, Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with valor, and the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal. Wallace feels that his personal experience in the military gives him an advantage over his opponents in understanding the problems veterans encounter. Wallace commented that "while I appreciate the service of Debbie Halvorson's stepson in the armed forces, my own military career of six years has allowed me to personally experience the realities of the VA."
Wallace calls for complete, mandatory funding for the VA. This is an idea that is supported by voters in the district. According to a question posed on the February 5th 2008 primary ballot in 23 counties, 1.14 million people voted yes when asked if the federal government should fully fund the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide care to those who were honorably discharged. Over ninety percent of voters in Lasalle and Grundy counties approved the referendum. Wallace added, "I will provide all of our veterans with free health care so that they can seek the medical care they need anywhere in the district, state, or country. Furthermore, while I support the idea of turning Silver Cross into a VA hospital, it would be useless if the system continues to be chronically under funded."
For more information on Jason Wallace, please visit http://www.electwallace.com/
###

I assume it's obvious that I'm ticked off about the lack of coverage. If you 'consumed' 'news' yesterday -- especially from Panhandle Media -- think about how much coverage Barack or McCain got and ask yourself if you even heard that the Green Party was holding their convention?

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






Posted at 05:41 pm by thecommonills
 

Friday, July 11, 2008
Iraq snapshot

Iraq snapshot

Friday, July 11, 2008.  Chaos and violence continue, 2 US soldiers classified MIA/POW are discovered dead, the Green Party convention kicked off yesterday and runs through Sunday and more.

 

Starting with war resistance.  Patrick Arden (Metro) reported earlier this week on the NYC demonstrations to show support for Canadian war resisters and noted Matthis Chiroux:

 

Wearing his dog tags and waving a copy of the U.S. Constitution, Matthis Chiroux is a sergeant in the Army's Individual Ready Reserve. Last summer he was honorably discharged after five years of active duty that included a stint in Afghanistan. In February he received a reactivation order.   
"I was supposed to report for deployment to Iraq on June 15," said Chiroux, 24, who intends to stay in Brooklyn. "They'll have to arrest me."        

 

 

 

On IVAW, Joy Wiltermuth (Downtown Express) profiles Fabian Bouthillette who "is the secretary and outreach coordinator for Iraq Veterans Against the War's New York chapter, which shares space with the War Resisters' League in Noho, at 339 Lafayette St." as he lays out his last night years (he enlisted at 18).  He explains, "I'm a guy who grew up ppor.  It was just that simple. . . I was quick to jump on it [leaving the Navy -- he did not self-checkout].  I was not going to work hard to support the war machine anymore.  Once I came to that realization, I could no longer do it."

 

Meanwhile in Canada, Judge Robert Barnes' decision in US war resister Joshua Key's case last week opens up a number of possibilities for war resisters. Dee Knight (Workers World) reports on the latest and also provides the background such as: "Joshua Key went to Canada with his wife Brandi and their four small children following 16 months living underground in the United States after he decided not to return to Iraq. He served as a combat engineer in Iraq for eight months in 2003. His book, 'The Deserter's Tale,' has been an international best seller. He said he and his family have felt support from 'about 95 percent of the Canadian people'." 

 

Last night we were noting continued failure of the war resistance 'movement' to get across the point (or even be aware of it) that Canada gave asylum to deserters during Vietnam (and didn't ask: "Were you drafted or did you enlist?") and reviewing real time press noting war resisters (who were deserters) like Jeff Enger, Jack Colhoun, Victor Schwarzmann who did make lives for themselves in Canada.  And it's all wiped away/ignored by today's 'movement' which continues to blater on about "draft dodgers" when there is no draft today so it's really not pertinent to the discussion but certainly does allow the right-wing to dismiss calls for asylumn by insisting, "Well that was draft dodgers.  There's no draft today!" Today, the the Wall St. Journal's offered the editorial "AWOL in Canada" which shows 'reason' and 'sympathy' by stating, "Vietnam-era draft dodgers were breaking the law, but at least they could claim to be avoiding conscription.  Today's U.S. soldiers and reserves are volunteers, who enlist knowing full well that they could be sent overseas and into combat."  Repeating: Five years the 'movement' has wasted. Five years of gas bagging about a draft -- when there is no draft today. Five years of insisting that Canada took in draft dodgers -- when there are no draft dodgers today. Five years of blathering on about crap that doesn't matter. The only point today's 'movement' should have made regarding Canada granting asylum to today's war resisters was: "They should because they welcomed deserters during Vietnam."
That's not a difficult sentence. And, unlike what the 'movement' offers today, it is factually correct. Until the basics are correct -- until they are stressed over and over -- the 'movement' will continue to muddle along.  "Almost 40 years ago we accepted deserters from an illegal war" is the talking point the movement in Canada should be using and the US side should be noting, "Hey, 40 years ago, they accepted deseters from an illegal war."  Canada is not being asked to do anything it hasn't done the past.

 

To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca").  Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote.  Now they've started a new letter you can use online here.  The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here.
 
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).
 
 
Early this morning, Patrick Donahue (Bloomberg News) reported AP was stating -- but the DoD has not confirmed -- that Alex Jimenez and Byron Fouty's corpses have been discovered while David Aguila (AP) cited Fouty's step-father as confirmation that the corpses of both were "found in the Iraqi village of Jurf as Sakhr."  Jeannie Nuss and Milton J. Valencia (Boston Globe) speak with Ramon "Andy" Jimenez (Alex's father) who states that, in his grief, "It comforts you when you accept something, and Alex did what he wanted to do."  Korie Wilkins (Detroit Free Press) quotes Byron's friend Ashley Tremble stating, "What was important [for him] was the here-and-now.  There is no bad to Byron" while his mother Hilary Meunier states, "A part of me believes he's already gone, but I still have hope."  And please note, there's no mention of his body being found in Wilkins' article. David Aguilar spoke with his step-father Gordon Dibler who said Byron's corpse was found on Thursday. Boston's NECN has video of the family of Alex Jimenez gathering and lighting candles. O'Ryan Johnson (Boston Herald) quotes Ramon Jimenez stating of his son, "He always had the hope that he would return back to the city.  But due to the nature of where he was, it was difficult for him to return alive."   Mark E. Vogler (Eagle Tribune) reports that, in Lawrence, "American flags fly at half staff on municipal buildings throughout the city today in honor of the late Army Sgt. Alex Jimenez."  This afternoon the US Dept of Defense released a statement: "The Department of Defense today announced the deaths of two soldiers previously listed as "Missing-Captured" while supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. On July 10, the Armed Forces Medical Examiner positively identified human remains recovered in Iraq July 9 to be those of two soldiers who had been previously listed as 'Missing-Captured.' . . . Jimenez and Fouty were part of a patrol that was ambushed by enemy forces south of Baghdad on May 12, 2007. They were assigned to the 4th Battalion, 31st Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), Fort Drum, N.Y. The Department of Defense previously announced the names of soldiers killed in the attack. They were Pfc. Joseph J. Anzack, Jr., 20, of Torrance, Calif.; Sgt. 1st Class James D. Connell, Jr., 40, of Lake City, Tenn.; Pfc. Daniel W. Courneya, 19, of Nashville, Mich.; Cpl. Christopher E. Murphy, 21, of Lynchburg, Va.; and Sgt. Anthony J. Schober, 23, of Reno, Nev." 
 
 
On Saturday an attack took place outside Mahmudiya.  Damien Cave (New York Times) reported: "A cooridnated attack on seven American soldiers an Iraqi Army interpreter Saturday morning south of Baghdad left five of them dead and three missing".  Initial reports, based on what the US military was saying, included that five US service members were killed.  The US military corrected this on Sunday: 4 US soldiers died as did 1 Iraqi translator.  Three US soldiers are still missing. Scott Canon (McClatchy Newspapers) reported that approximately 4,000 US service members were searching for the 3 missing soldiers on Sunday. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) reports that at least one of the five dead had "gunshot woundes, though it was unclear whether he was shot before or after blasts enveloped the soldiers' two vehicles in flames, said U.S. Army Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, a military spokesman."  Joshua Partlow (Washington Post) notes that the group was "parked in two Humvees in an area 12 miles west of Mahmudiyah" when the attack took place with "a roadside bomb . . . followed by gunfire, officials said.  The two vehicles went up in flames and were spotted 15 minutes later by a surveillance drone, after a nearby unit that heard explosions could not make contact with the Humvees. The extent of the damage made it difficult to identify the slain soldiers."  Stephen Farrell and Tom Baldwin (Times of London) note that the Islamic State in Iraq has claimed, via a website, responsibility for the raid and that they have the three missing US soldiers.  Scott Canon (McClatchy Newspapers) noted that the grop has "offered no proof". CBS and AP report that the group claiming to have the three American soldiers issued a warning: "'If you want their safety do not look for them,' the Islamic State of Iraq said on a militant web site.  'You should remember what you have done to our sister Abeer in the same area,' the statement said, referring to five American soldiers who were charged in the rape and killing of 14-year-old Abeer Qassim al-Janabi and the killings of her parents and her younger sister last year.  Three soldiers have pleaded guilty in the case."  AFP notes that, in June of last year, two US soldiers were captured and their "bodies . . . were later found outside a power station south of Baghdad, mutilated and bearing signs of torture."  That attack was also seen as resulting from the gang-rape and murder of Abeer in Mahmoudiyah on March 12, 2006 and, as Gregg Zoroya (USA Today) reported last September, Justin Watt came forward with what he was hearing about Abeer and her family when the June attack on US soldiers took place.  Though the statement put up by the group claiming to have the 3 missing US soldiers is cited often in part, most outlets have avoided noting the mention of Abeer.  (But then many avodied reporting on the Article 32 hearing last August or much that has happened since.  As CBS and AP noted, 3 US soldiers have confessed to their part.  Steven D. Green, who has been portrayed as the ringleader in press accounts as well as the testimonies of those who have pleaded guilty, maintains he is innocent.)  Julie Rawe and Aparisim Ghosh (Time) reported last June, "Abeer's brother Mohammed, 13, told TIME he once watched his sister, frozen in fear, as a U.S. soldier ran his index finger down her cheek.  Mohammed has since learned that soldier's name: Steven Green."

 

ICCC has moved the two over the total for deaths in Iraq since the start of the illegal war bringing that total to 4118.  The third missing soldier was Joseph Anzack who was later found dead (and it listed in the DoD announcement).  As for Steven D. Green? Green's scheduled trial was postpone for a quilting bee and, apparently, hasn't been rescheduled even though that was months ago.  (All other US soldiers involved in the incident entered pleas of guilty.)

 

On the subject of Iraqi women, Zaineb Naji tells her story at Baghdad Life (Wall St. Journal) and explains that the decrease in violence (that's how she judges it) means some tentative steps back towards the time before the start of the Iraq War, "After sectarian violence increased after the Samarra shrine bombing in February 2006, fundamentalist insurgents and Shiite militias started to forbid women to drive cars, saying it was unacceptable according to Islamic law. They threatened to kidnap women drivers or kill them and leave their bodies by the road. They also said women would have a similar fate if they didn't wear the traditional Islamic clothing -- an abaya and a hijab (head scarf).  So women, including me, stopped driving. I stopped driving even in my neighborhood, which made me feel depressed because I felt like I had lost one of my rights. I had always worn a hijab, but women who didn't started to wear one to protect themselves.  Not driving affected my work as a reporter and it was difficult to use other means of transportation, such as taxis or buses. I couldn't take my children to school or pick them up, or even go shopping alone.  In the early 1950s, Iraq was one of the first Arab countries that allowed women to drive cars. During the Hussein regime, women drivers were very common on the streets and women even drove public buses or tractors in the countryside."

 

From life on the ground in Iraq to in the air.  Iraq does not control their air space currently and the treaty being discussed by the White House and the puppet government in Baghdad had one puppet so excited that maybe Iraq could control its own air space!  So what's going on in the air in the meantime.  The Jerusalem Post reports the back and forth in Iraq as to whether Irsraeli Air Force has been utilizing Iraqi air space to prepare "for a possible attack against Iran in its airspace" (the article has the latest official statement from Iraq as "no" it is not happening).  UPI carries the denials from the US government and the Israeli government.  On claims, Ann Scott Tyson and Dan Eggan (Washington Post) report the latest claim of success just around the corner -- Lt Gen James Dubik Happy Talked Congress yesterday: "The ground forces will mostly be done by middle of next year; their divisions, brigades and battalions are on a good timeline." Can you die from a whopper?  I believe Bully Boy's false claims of yellow cake uranium demonstrate that many can. 

 

In some of today's reported violence . . .

 

Bombings?

 

Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing that left six people wounded, a suspected bombing attempt outside Samarra that led to 4 suspects being shot dead by Iraqi police.

 

Shootings?

 

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an attack on a Baghdad checkpoint this afternoon "and casualties are still unknown." 

 

Corpses?

 

Reuters notes 2 corpses discovered in Iskandariya today and 1 in Hilla yesterday.

 

Turning to the race for US president, Drew Pritt denies masturbating in public.  Yesterday's snapshot note Austin Cassidy's Independent Political Report article on Drew Pritt's attack on presumed Green Party presidential nominee Cynthia McKinney.  Pritt only continued his attack after the article published by taking to the comments section repeatedly.  Insisting, "I do not stomp squirrels, or masturbate in public, or do the other things I am accuesd of," and blaming malicious gossip on any rumors to the contrary, he then goes on to repeat an obvious lie, that his hero Jesse Johnson will be "denied a nomination, by a woman who used the Green Party REPORTEDLY to pay off her debt, before she switched parties."  That is a lie.  It's an ugly lie.  And while whining about the meaness towards him, Drew Pritt wants to lie about McKinney. Democratic Party member Pritt (who's run for several state offices in Arkansas) maintains, "If the Green Party is to thrive it has to appeal to progressives like myself.  Cynthia McKinney does not appeal but repels."  Again, Democrats need to stay out of the selection of the Green Party's presidential nominee.  He does not know what he's talking about (McKinney's "HIGH WATER MARK" is not 3%, she's defined victory -- if she's the nominee -- as 5%). If any Greens are offended by Pritt's attempts to derail their own selection (and they should be), hopefully, they'll remember that in 2012 because a number of 'high profile' Greens damn sure didn't feel bad about butting into the Democratic primary.  Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) annouces the "hope to have video up sometime today" of the ongoing Green Party Convention taking place in Chicago through Sunday and notes, "There is a great feeling that Cynthia McKinney will be the next candidate."  Regardless of whom the nominee is, the acceptance speech will be made Saturday and a press conference with the presidential and vice-presidential nominee will be held after.  Yesterday, Kat Swift's questionnaire response was not mentioned.  It had not been posted.  It still hasn't. ("Questionnaire from Kat Swift will be posted shortly.")  Since she has publicly asked people to donate to Cynthia's campaign, it may not end up posted.  The convention isn't just about the national ticket.  On the charitable side, Green Party 2004 v.p. nominee Pat LaMarche is overseeing "donations for area shelters" and states, "I would like for folks with less agreeable resting places for their heads to know that Greens came to town and that we did not forget them."  A noble effort and one that the big-money RNC and DNC might consider emulating.  Green Party Congressional candidate Steve Alesch spoke yesterday at the start of the convention.  Patrick Ferrell (Suburban Chicago News) notes that was one of two "high-profile positions at the group's national convention" for 2 "local Green Party candidates" and explains the other, IVAW's Jason Wallace, was slotted for "a Friday morning speech" and "selected to serve as the convention's election administrator.  In that role he will oversee the casting of delegate votes for the presidential and vice presidential nominations as well as the approval of the national party platform."  Tuesday Jason Wallace's campaign announced: "Veterans issues are of key importance to 11th Congressional district Green Party candidate Jason Wallace.  Wallace, the only veteran in the race, is calling for several key changes in the government's approach to caring for those who have served in the United States military.  These include changes in funding and coverage as well as his support for the idea of replacing Silver Cross in Joliet with a VA hospital. . . . Wallace calls for complete, mandatory funding for the VA.  This is an idea that is supported by voters in the district."  [The press release will run in full tomorrow, there isn't room for it in the snapshot.] Ron (Green Party Watch) reports: "Jason Wallace, Illinois candidate for the 11th district CD, noted that he is running in one of the top five competitive races in America. Wallace noted that his campaign is committed to run for ten thousand dollars only, 10K in 08, versus the multimillion dollar campaigns his Republican and Democrat opponents are working with. Education is probably his number one issue, and he has seen first hand the impact of underfunded education on middle class families. Wallace is also a member of Veterans for Peace, attended Winter Soldier, Wallace was serving in the Iraq 'Occupation'. The war is obviously a big issue for Wallace. Wallace also wants to make his district in Illinois a leader in the production of "green manufacturing"."

 

Though the votes haven't been made (let alone counted) National Journal states: "Road to the White House features Bob Barr, and will cover Green Party WH candidate Cynthia McKinney's Green Party Convo speech (C-Span, SUN, 6:30 pm/9:30 pm)."  (The other Cynthia, the evil faux-gressive, will be on The Chris Matthews Show so she'll probably make time for a hate-out to McKinney.)  The Minneapolis Star Tribune notes, "Former U.S. Rep. Cynthia McKinney's trek back from defeat takes her to Chicago this weekend and an improbable political rebirth. She is expected to be nominated as the presidential candidate for the Green Party of the United States and could appear on the ballot in as many as 36 states." Grist magazine picks up on McKinney's v.p. choice, "Yesterday hip-hop activist Rosa Clemente accepted McKinney's invitation to run as the VP candidate. More to come on the Green ticket soon."  NYC IMC offers, "Clemente, born in the South Bronx, is a graduate of SUNY Albany and Cornell Univeristy." What About Our Daughters? explains that, if McKinney is the nominee, this is the third time two women of color would be on the ticket with the first being Lenora Fulani and Maria Elizabeth Munoz in 1992 (New Alliance Party) and Monica Moorehead and Gloria La Riva (Workers World Party) in 1996.  Deanna Taylor (Dee's 'Dotes) observes, "It will be interesting to see how Cynthia McKinney's choice affects her chances for obtaining the GPUS Presidential nomination."  Wake Me Now advocates for Cynthia, "Former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who seems poised to capture the Green Party presidential nomination, in Chicago, this month, 'is at this juncture in history the only vehicle through which progressives can both register their outrage at Barack Obama and begin the process of rebuilding a mass, Black-led movement for real social change.' Meanwhile, the frequency of Obama's Right turns seem to increase in direct proportion to the nearness of the general election. 'Surely no one with a brain any longer believes that Obama is a closet progressive, or even a genuine liberal.' The question is, How many progressives will put their votes and resources to honorable use?"  Matt (The Underview) notes Cynthia McKinney will be among his guests on Shared Sacrifice Saturday which airs "from Noon to 2:00 PM mountain time" and is also downloadable.  Rick Pearson (Baltimore Sun) sums up Cynthia's positions on the issues: "In her presidential campaign, she has pushed for a quick end to the Iraq War and has promoted impeachment proceedings against the Bush administration. She also has advocated a 10-point human rights plan that includes integrity in the nation's voting system, full employment and reparations to African Americans over slavery--which has been a plank in the Green Party platform." Cynthia's campaign site has reposted an essay by Vivian Berryhill which asserts, "Securing the Green Party's 2008 standard-bearer position would bestow on McKinney the historic title of 'first' African American woman to be on the ballot as a viable candidate of a major party for President of the United States. That title alone will not only lessen the aura surrounding Barack Obama's position as the 'first' African American male presidential nominee, but she may also siphon off just-enough left-wing, African American, and women voters, to sink both their chances for victory in the Fall." The one and only Roseanne weighed in Wednesday at her site (Roseanne World) stating: "for president GREEN PARTY. . . .the party for feminists. Let's replace pelosi with sheehan as soon as possible, and then as fast as we can replace the entire woman hating democrat party with a green ecofeminist progressive socialist one that really works and is not afraid to make campaign finance reform a priority."  Pacifica Radio will broadcast a three hour special on Sunday "as the convention comes to a close) that will stream online at the Pacifica website (noon to 3:00 p.m. EST; 11:00 a.m. to 2 p.m. Central and 9:00 a.m. to noon PST). 

 

Barack Obama is the presumed Democratic Party nominee.  Susan (Random Thoughts) notes Tom Hayden's July 4th moment of "WHAT'S WRONG WITH HIS EYES!" (Mia Farrow in Rosemary's Baby -- the response is "He has his father's eyes.") and advises, "Well, Tom, maybe you SHOULD have critically looked at Obama's slipperiness on this and many other issues before making a fool out of yourself."  I have to disagree with Susan on this because if Tom Hayden couldn't make a fool out of himself, what would he have to offer at this point? Yes, I really agree with Susan (though Tom-Tom has nothing left to offer) and Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report) also notes Hayden and Hayden's (drug induced?) belief that a 'movement' exists for Barack and it can and will (didn't happen with FISA) pressure him: "Nothing of that nature will occur, because Hayden and other progressives are not organizing to make it occur. They are too concerned with remaining 'for' Obama. Not only are Hayden's and Fletcher's peculiar 'movements' without political content - they emerge like magic, requiring none of the hard work of organizing.  And just how were those popular 'rising expectations' that Hayden speaks of supposed to express themselves? Progressives waited until it was far too late to bring these 'expectations' - to whatever extent they exist - to bear on the candidate. Obama coasted through the primaries with virtually no dissent from his loyal progressives, and now sees his way clear to publicly dismiss them, so as to never again be 'tagged as being on the Left'." Tom-Tom's probably hopping from foot to foot and straining to contain himself -- it's truly been years (decades) since he received so much attention.  Black Agenda Report -- Ford, Margaret Kimberly and Bruce Dixon -- are not 'waking up,' they always called it like it was and if Tom-Tom needs tuturing, he might try contacting them.  In the meantime, he can read Kimberley's latest: "All hell broke loose and tongues wagged endlessly and needlessly because of an accurate statement made by the candidate first husband and former president Bill Clinton. 'It is wrong that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he had been against the war. There's no difference in your (Obama's) voting record, and Hillary's, ever since. Give me a break. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen'. The words fairy tale resonated in millions of ears, but the validity of Clinton's comments were lost on a public incapable of distinguishing fact from fiction, or trivia from substance."  Added note, the Green Party will be discussing impeachment at their convention.  "Calls for impeachment have become so common in the last few years that we forget how recently it has entered the political arsenal.  Once viewed as a blunderbuss, it is now used as a bludgeon."  That's from Jo Freeman's review of David E. Kyvig's The Age of Impeachment (link goes to her own site, it's also available at Senior Women Web here).  In terms of the current administration, you can refer to Jason Leopold's latest at The Public Record. While the Green Party convention goes on, Bill Moyers Journal explores the GOP and, no doubt, has Cynthia, Ralph and Bob Barr penciled in for an upcoming show in order to maintain the PBS diversity mandate. Tonight also provides a new feature "What's your vision for the future of the American Dream?"  It's a segment tonight (tonight in most markets) and will also be an online feature.  Click here for YouTube video.

 

Ralph Nader is running for president.  Check the transcript of  "Election 2008: Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader" (Washington Post) and Team Nader notes:

 

Here's is your task for today.

Drop a $20 bill on Nader/Gonzalez.

Why $20?

Because we want to get to $20,000 by the end of the day.

On our way to 15 states.

And $60,000.

By July 20.

We are now at over $15,000.

In just two days.

So, $20,000 by the end of the day shouldn't be a heavy lift.

(If we get there early, take us to $25,000. We're easy.)

On our way to 15 states.

And then 45 states.

By September 20.

Nader/Gonzalez is the positivo campaign.

Two rules here at Nader/Gonzalez headquarters:

Rule Number One: No whining.

And Rule Number Two: Get it done.

It's not that we don't take our world seriously.

We do.

But whining and negativo man attitude doesn't get us where we need to go.

Which is 45 states by September 20.

Take the telecom immunity/spying bill that Obama voted for, McCain dodged, and Bush signed into law.

It's an unconstitutional law.

Did we whine and cry about it?

No, we did not.

We spoke out against it.

We're running this campaign, in part, to defend the Fourth Amendment and the Constitution.

And we've produced an awesome video denouncing the new law.

Or take ballot access.

Our young roadtrippers are busting it all around the country to leap the ballot access hurdles the Democrats and Republicans have erected to make life miserable for us.

But we refuse to be miserable.

Check out this neat video about our roadtrippers in Nevada.

No whining there.

We tried to get on the ballot in 2004 but only made it on 34 states. (We're shooting for 45 this time around.)

Why only 34 states?

One reason: The Democrats organized an underground campaign to knock us off.

When we say this, people don't believe us.

But just yesterday, a grand jury in Pennsylvania indicted twelve Democratic political operatives for the illegal use of millions of dollars in taxpayers' funds, resources and state employees for political campaign purposes. (See Nader/Gonzalez press release here.)

The grand jury found that as many as 50 Democratic House Caucus staff members contributed "a staggering number of man-hours" to successfully knock Ralph Nader off the ballot in 2004.

A House Democratic employee testified before the grand jury that "everybody was working on this."

"A veritable Army" of Democratic staffers were enlisted in the effort to deny Nader ballot status, the grand jury found.

It was virtually a caucus-wide endeavor and many of the employees spent an entire week on the Nader petition challenge, the grand jury found.

This is a scandal of immense proportions.

And twelve Democrats in Pennsylvania now stand charged with crimes.

Attorneys General Oregon, Illinois and Ohio - three states where Democrats successfully knocked us off in 2004 - should launch similar investigations.

This year, we're not taking no for an answer.

We're building our funds to secure ballot access and to fight back if they come after us again.

So, please, drop a $20 bill now on Nader/Gonzalez.

We're fighting not just for 2008 - but for future generations of independent citizen activists, candidates and campaigners.

(In case you missed it, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals knocked out a requirement that only residents of Arizona be allowed to petition in the state. Ralph Nader challenged this requirement as unconstitutional We're hoping to carry this victory to other states that have similar requirements. See story here.)

We're a positivo locomotive.

We've got the Big Mo.

Nothing will stop us now.

Together, we are making a difference.

Onward

Posted at 03:39 pm by thecommonills
 

Facts do matter, war resistance should grasp that

Facts do matter, war resistance should grasp that

Vietnam-era draft dodgers were breaking the law, but at least they could claim to be avoiding conscription. Today's U.S. soldiers and reserves are volunteers, who enlist knowing full well that they could be sent overseas and into combat. Military recruiters don't hide this detail. In return for their service, volunteers often get substantial education and other benefits. Fulfilling their service tour is part of the deal.
War is hell, and no doubt some of these deserters are responding to the trauma of their experience. But a military can't succeed in its mission if soldiers can decide on their own when and whether to obey orders. The Army officially describes desertion or going AWOL as "crimes that not only affect the soldier, but in a time of war, put other soldiers' lives at risk. Not only do these crimes go against Army values, they degrade unit readiness." This is why, in previous eras, deserters were simply shot.
The Harper government's decision to send the Yanks home shows respect for the U.S. military and our rule of law. It also honors those Canadians who are serving, and dying, as part of the NATO force in Afghanistan. American deserters need to return and face their responsibilities.

The above is the Wall St. Journal's editorial "AWOL in Canada." Is it correct? To listen to today's 'movement,' it is. Repeatedly we have noted that Canada welcomed war resisters. Over and over. Just last night, we were walking through it again. If the 'movement' would wake the hell up, then we could all laugh at the Wall St. Journal for getting it so wrong. Those of us who have TOLD THE TRUTH still can laugh. But a lot of people can't. Because they have LIED over and over. They have refused to tell the truth. Then there are people who feel they can be 'leaders' without ever bothering to learn what happened. That's the sort of 'leader' I want flying the plane home tomorrow, a 'leader' who decides to be a pilot and feels no need to study! (Yes, that was sarcasm.) The 'movement' has had five years to get their act together and they still can't. The Wall St. Journal is wrong. But not a lot of people can point that out because they've spent the last five years stamping their feet and insisting, "Well Canada welcomed draft dodgers!" Yes, little children (and old people who blew their brains on drugs), Canada did. And yes, it also welcomed deserters. And that last one, that's the one that applies to today. That's the one the 'movement' should have been stressing for five years instead of WASTING everyone's time with talk about the draft. A draft that is no more.

By repeatedly ignoring that Canada welcomed BOTH deserters and draft dodgers, the 'movement' has created this nonsense argument. Again, they've had FIVE YEARS to get their damn act together and still can't. They can't tell you what Ford did and what Carter did. They apparently love them some Jimmy so they give him credit for things HE DID NOT DO. Facts be damned.

In fact, if today's 'movement' has a slogan, that's probably it: "Facts be damned."

I'm really sorry that today's 'movement' thought they could get by without facts, thought there was no need to educate themselves or others.

This isn't the only editorial in the US that's been discussed. It's just the first to make it into print. More may follow.

Five years the 'movement' has wasted. Five years of gas bagging about a draft -- when there is no draft today. Five years of insisting that Canada took in draft dodgers -- when there are no draft dodgers today. Five years of blathering on about crap that doesn't matter.

The only point today's 'movement' should have made regarding Canada granting asylum to today's war resisters was: "They should because they welcomed deserters during Vietnam."

That's not a difficult sentence. And, unlike what the 'movement' offers today, it is factually correct.

Factually correct.

Facts are facts.

But prepare for the stupidity, here's "Most Canadians say: Let war resisters stay" (Northumberland Today):


As a member of the Individual Ready Reserve, Glass could still be recalled to active duty, possibly in Iraq, at any time until July 2010 and be forced to serve past that date, through the "stop loss" program.
Often described as the "back-door draft", stop-loss legislation allows the U. S. military to unilaterally extend soldiers' contracts for an indefinite period of time (in one case, for over 25 years), even after they have already completed their required tour of duty. Many other resisters in Canada also face a fate similar to Glass's if the Harper government continues to ignore Parliament and the majority of Canadians.

They are wrong. Corey Glass is wrong. From another article (the one noted last night that we're not linking to because it's one error after another), Glass is quoted stating, "My MOS (Military Occupation Specialty) typically gets stop-lossed because of the nature of the job that I was trained to do. And we get stop-lossed a lot." "We" may but there's no indication that Corey Glass was. What he thinks has happened is that he may be in the IRR. The IRR is not stop-loss.

By his own statements of what he thinks has happened to him, Corey Glass has not been stop-lossed. (He signed up in 2002 -- an 8-year contract presumably which would mean his contracts hasn't expired.) By his own statements, he appears to have been placed in the IRR.

Elaine was going to grab this topic but now 'editorial boards' are repeating this LIE so we have to address it here. (She'll still address it tonight.)

Someone should have taken him aside and explained the facts to him. If he's unable to grasp the facts, keep him away from the press.

Camilo Mejia was stop-lossed. Before his contract expired, right before, he was informed he had been stop-lossed and was being extended.

The IRR is not "stop-loss." The IRR has a long history. After you are discharged, you are in the IRR. The IRR is being abused for a number of reasons today -- including the fact that the Iraq War is not a national emergency. But Corey Glass was not stop-lossed and floating the possibility that he might be -- might be! -- is as much a waste of time as all the other nonsense. And some editorial board wants to make a case on he might be stop-lossed? Are the facts too much work? Is it just so much better to 'invent' and 'create'? Heaven forbid anyone deal with the actual facts and merits, right?

He deserted with time still on his contract. He signed up in 2002, he deserted in 2006. He may now be in the IRR (he may not be). He has not been stop-lossed.

Facts are facts.

Here's Tom Squitieri's "Army expanding 'stop loss' order to keep soldiers from leaving" (January 5, 2004, USA Today) reporting on stop-loss:

The Army will announce as early as Tuesday new orders that will forbid thousands of soldiers from leaving the service after they return this year from Iraq, Afghanistan and other fronts in the war against terrorism, defense officials said Monday.
The "stop loss" orders mean personnel who could otherwise leave the military when their volunteer commitments expire will be forced to remain to the end of their overseas deployments and up to another 90 days after they come home. "Stop movement" orders also bar soldiers from moving to new assignments during the restricted period. The orders do not extend any unit's stay overseas.
Although the orders cover all the approximately 160,000 returning troops, the Army said it estimates only about 7,000 of the returnees will have their time in the service involuntarily extended. Most deployed soldiers are not affected because they have service obligations that extend beyond their current deployments, Army Col. Elton Manske, chief of the Army's Enlisted Division, said Monday.
"This decision is really being driven by the readiness of units and the absolute intent to keep the units themselves intact down to as low as the squad and crew level, so we are assured of putting the best fighting force on the battlefield," Manske said.

That's stop-loss. Your contract is not up, you have not been discharged. Individual Ready Reserve is what Adam Kokesh, Cloy Richards and others were in when the military tried to crack down on them. They had been discharged. They were in the IRR. It's the same thing with Matthis Chiroux currently. The IRR and stop-loss are two different policies.

Corey Glass was in the National Guard, he falls under the army. You can click here for the army's policies re: IRR. In Canada and in the US, Corey Glass has been called a liar because the army says he is discharged and not a deserter. If Corey Glass' status changed, it changed without his knowledge. Glass did not lie on that. But when he then appears to not know the difference between stop-loss and IRR, he just invites laughter from the right-wing -- begs for it. And some 'leader' in the Canadian 'movement' should have sat him down and explained it to him. In the US especially, pro-war bloggers with military experience will pounce on his statements. They will go to town on him. He invited it. No one needs speculation about what might happen after 2010. Since Glass wasn't smart enough to take the army's claim (true or false) and build a case for staying in Canada with that, his whole story is speculation after the point he self-checks out. You don't need to pile on further speculation by saying "And, this one time, at IRR camp, they said that in two years, I might be stop-lossed."

And the 'movement' invites nonsense arguments. Wall St. Journal is unaware that deserters were welcomed in Canada during Vietnam, neither's the bulk of the 'movement' and neither is Courtney Whalen. From Whalen's "Orillians rally for U. S. war resisters: Group urges Ottawa to let ex-soldiers remain in Canada" (The Packet and Times):


While he said he empathizes with the war resisters, Stanton said the situation Canada is facing today is different than that of the Vietnam War, when individuals had no choice about joining the military. At that time, Canada welcomed so-called draft dodgers.
"There is a process there they can go through to become conscientious objectors," said Stanton.
He will present the Orillia and Midland petitions to the House of Commons when it resumes in the fall.
"I think it's a political issue that's worth spreading the news," said Vivien Abbott. "I think there are quite a number of us who don't feel it's worth sacrificing some principles for showing friendship to the Bush administration."

Do we need to repeat it? Canada welcomed deserters. The draft made no difference -- Canada didn't have a draft. During Vietnam -- draft dodger or deserter, you could get asylum in Canada (after 1969) and there was no, "You're a deserter? Well did you freely enlist or were you drafted?" questions. It didn't matter. How many times is the 'movement' going to play AND be stupid? This should have been established in 2003. It should have been established in 2004. It is 2008 and the 'movement' still hasn't provided the basic education required to fight that revisionary lie. History is on war resisters in Canada's side. The truth is on their side. It's too damn bad the 'movement' isn't on their side. All this time later and the lie continues.

Dee Knight's "Canadian court reopens door for U.S. war resisters" (Workers World):

A Canadian court on July 4 ordered Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board to review U.S. war resister Joshua Key’s claim for asylum. In a ruling that could affect many other U.S. war resisters, the court said, "Military action which systematically degrades, abuses or humiliates either combatants or non-combatants is capable of supporting a refugee claim."

The court concluded that the Immigration and Refugee Board imposed "a too restrictive legal standard" on Key. In a clear statement affecting other U.S. war resisters, the court also found that "similarly situated individuals" should have their refugee claims reviewed.

Key's lawyer, Jeffry House, said the ruling is "a huge victory for numerous soldiers who are here [in Canada] and maybe others who are thinking of coming here." House himself is a Vietnam-era war resister. A spokeswoman for Canadian Immigration Minister Diane Finley said her ministry was reviewing the court decision, which adds another layer of pressure to let the war resisters stay.

The decision could not come at a better time. A large-scale campaign is under way in both Canada and the U.S. to press the Canadian government to stop the deportation of Corey Glass, slated for July 10. Glass would be the first U.S. war resister to be deported from Canada. The Toronto-based War Resisters Support Campaign has led a massive effort in Canada to force the Canadian government to stop his deportation and respect a majority vote in Parliament on June 3 that called on the government to stop deportation of U.S. war resisters and let them stay permanently.

A national poll in June showed that 64 percent of Canadians favor letting the war resisters stay. Meanwhile, in the U.S., vigils and demonstrations are taking place at Canadian consulates in 14 cities, organized by Courage to Resist, Veterans For Peace, Iraq Veterans Against the War and Project Safe Haven.

Elliott Adams, the national president of Veterans For Peace, will visit the Canadian Embassy in Washington July 10 to deliver an "Open Letter to the Canadian People and their Government." The letter says, in part:

"U.S. soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen who have refused to participate in this war have shown great moral courage. Unlike many governments around the world, these war resisters are respecting international law and following their own consciences. They witnessed war crimes with their own eyes. They were sickened by the racist attitudes that the U.S. military fostered toward the Iraqi people. Some are struggling with the psychological wounds of war, commonly known as Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome.

"So it is from the bottom of our hearts that we thank the many Canadians who have sheltered our war resisters," the letter says, and concludes with a strong demand that the Canadian government respect the Parliamentary vote and the will of the Canadian people, and let the war resisters stay.

Joshua Key went to Canada with his wife Brandi and their four small children following 16 months living underground in the United States after he decided not to return to Iraq. He served as a combat engineer in Iraq for eight months in 2003. His book, "The Deserter's Tale," has been an international best seller. He said he and his family have felt support from "about 95 percent of the Canadian people."

Key's lawyer, Jeffry House, said there are about 200 U.S. war resisters in Canada now. While that is "no comparison to the later period of the Vietnam War," he said, it does compare with the early Vietnam War period. "Early on during Vietnam there were only a small number, but later the doors opened more widely," he said. "By November 1969 [Canadian Prime Minister] Trudeau declared Canada 'should be a refuge from militarism,' and the doors opened and people flooded in." More than 50,000 U.S. war resisters found refuge--or a new home--in Canada during the Vietnam War.
According to Gerry Condon of Project Safe Haven, making it possible for war resisters to stay in Canada is an integral part of building the GI resistance.
Articles copyright 1995-2008 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php

I'm dictating this around links I put in earlier. And really want to be done with it. But it needs to be noted that Workers World has been one of the few outlets to get it right throughout. That's because they have a historical basis and background. And no need or desire for political closets. In a nation that treats Communism like a dirty word (now more than ever), Workers World has demonstrated the power in that political party and the knowledge in the party as well. It's that knowledge base -- and the efforts to share it -- that help explain why Workers World does not make the same repeated mistakes that so many other outlets do.

Lewis notes this from Team Nader:

We Welcome Disillusioned Obama Supporters

Posted by Greg Kafoury on Wednesday, July 9, 2008 at 05:47:00 PM

We Welcome Disillusioned Obama Supporters .

Were you drawn to the Nader website because Obama broke his word to you on FISA/Telecom? Or was it because his vote not only immunized and concealed blatantly criminal conduct, but helped lay the legal foundation for a future police state? Or perhaps it was simply his new fundraisers, where the price of admission exceeds $30,000?

No matter. You are here now. Seduced and abandoned. We all know the stages of grief, but we are also serious people, and we are not at a funeral, we are in a fight, a fight for justice in our country and our world.

For now -- at least -- stand with Ralph Nader. Our campaign has far more promise than you have been led to believe. With only a modest increase in our poll numbers, Obama and McCain will be debating Nader this fall. Google and YouTube are sponsoring a debate in New Orleans, and the bar is set at 10% support. Nader is at 6% and growing. Such an event could bring a seismic shift in our politics, because the public is far more progressive than the corporate media would have us believe.

Nader's platform is the real center.

There remains a more tantalizing possibility: Such a debate could create a genuine 3-way race. Today, 14% of voters say they would support Nader if he was competitive, and forcing open one debate could open them all.

You know that Nader is responsible for seatbelts and airbags, but did you also know that he led the campaign against nuclear power, an effort that has blocked the construction of new nuclear plants in America for more than 30 years? You may know that he is largely responsible for the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Freedom of Information Act, but did you know that in recent years he secured cheap, generic AIDS drugs for India?

Nader became an American hero when be brought General Motors to its knees by exposing their campaign to intimidate and smear him for having written about auto safety. Since then, he has founded more than 100 public interest groups. His impact and accomplishments dwarf those of his opponents. His is a story worth repeating, and his campaign is worthy of your support.

Those most impressed with Nader are those who have known him the longest. He will never flatter you, never pander to you, never betray you.

Gregory Kafoury



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







Posted at 03:38 pm by thecommonills
 

Iraq

Iraq

Patrick Donahue (Bloomberg News) reports AP is stating -- but the DoD has not confirmed -- that Alex Jimenez and Byron Fouty's corpses have been discovered. David Aguila (AP) cites Fouty's step-father as confirmation that the corpses of both were "found in the Iraqi village of Jurf as Sakhr."

O'Ryan Johnson (Boston Herald) reports:

Jimenez was assigned to the hard-charging 10th Mountain Division that was operating inside Iraq hot spots when the battalion was ambushed by insurgents in May 2007. Five men were killed and three captured.
"He always had the hope that he would return back to the city. But due to ther nature of where he was, it was difficult for him to return alive," said Ramon Jimenez, the soldier's father, through a translator.
The bodies of Alex Jimenez and Pfc. Brian Fouty were discovered in the Jurf As Sakhr region of Iraq and flown back to the United States, where their dental records were used to confirm the identities, a source close to the families said. The source said the bodies of both men are now at Dover Air Force Base. Prior to yesterday, the bodies of only one of the captured men, Pfc. Joseph Anzac, had been found and identified.

ICCC has moved the two over the total for deaths in Iraq since the start of the illegal war bringing that total to 4118.

A McClatchy Iraqi correspondent notes the rations program in "Corruption" (Inside Iraq):

Two days ago, I was talking about few house issues with my wife when she told me that my brother paid about 100$ just to buy flour to our family. I was surprised to know that because I usually never asked about the house needs since I know my youngest brothers take care of such things. I asked her about the reason because as far as I know, we get more than our need of flour through the ration food card. She told me that no family in my neighborhood didn't receive one kilo during the last three months because the agent of the ministry of trade who provide part of the neighborhood with the food hadn't receive any for the last three months.
At the same day (Wednesday), I attended a conference about fighting corruption in the governmental establishments. The officials talked about the big efforts they do to fight what they called (the cold terror) which according to their point of view funds the (hot terror).
I wonder why the officials don't start with the most important ministry, the ministry of trade since it is concerned with the most important part of Iraqis' life.



The Washington Post offers "Election 2008: Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader" which is a transcript of an online exchange:

Staten Island, N.Y.: Mr. Nader, what exactly is your plan for withdrawal from Iraq, and how long do you think it would take to implement it? Thank you.

Ralph Nader: The Nader/Gonzalez plan for the military and corporate withdrawl from Iraq would be on a six-month timetable. During that period, we urge UN-sponsored elections, continuation of humanitarian aid, since we owe it to the devestated Iraqi people, and negotiations with the three groups: Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds regarding a level of autonomy within the overall framework of a unified Iraq. All three groups want a unified Iraq but they want some autonomy. By returning Iraq and the oil back to the Iraqis, the bottom will fall out of the insurgency since its only objective is to evict the invader/occupier.

_______________________

Pikesville, Md.: I am a 28-year-old father, husband, student and educator. Would you be in favor of repealing No Child Left Behind? Do you believe -- as many educators do -- that NCLB punishes lower-income students/schools while rewarding the schools that already have a wealth of money and community support? Explain.

Ralph Nader: The Nader/Gonzalez campaign favors repeal of the No Child Left Behind law. Narrowly-based multiple choice standardized tests rupture the relationships between teachers and students and forces the teachers to teach to the test which themselves are of poor design. States are gaming the law, violating it and the overwhelming number of teachers are opposed to it - for good reason. There are far better ways to stimulate higher qualities of education and their assesment.

_______________________

New York: Many people I've spoken to have seen your presidential campaigns as nudging elections toward the republican candidate and not nearly achieving the votes needed to get third-party status. Can you explain why they're wrong, or why this time will be different?

Ralph Nader: As long as liberal voters continue to vote for the Democratic party no matter how badly the party behaves, so long as the Republicans are worse, the Democratic nominee will take these liberal votes for granted and move toward right-wing positions and also move toward the corporate interests that are tugging at the candidate. The only way this can change is if liberal or progressive voters signal to the Democratic nominee that they have somewhere else to go. That somewhere else can be the progressive Nader/Gonzalez campaign otherwise the liberal/progressive voters will be in a trap and will be taken for granted. This is already happening with the liberal progressive voters' relationship with Barack Obama. So it is up to these voters to generate leverage instead of surrender.

We'll come back to Iraq but while we're on Ralph Nader, who is running for president, Oliver notes Nader's "Hey Rush, Get Off Welfare:"

Posted by Ralph Nader on Thursday, July 10, 2008 at 04:05:00 PM


Hey Rush, Get Off Welfare .

Listen to Ralph Nader's audio message here

According to press reports, Rush Limbaugh will be making $38 million a year.

For eight years.

Rush is making this money by being a radio talk show host.

On public property.

That would be - the public airwaves.

Owned by the American people.

For which Rush - and his affiliated companies - pay no rent.

Rush Limbaugh is on welfare.

Corporate welfare.

The public airwaves belong to the American people.

The Federal Communications Commission is supposed to be our trustee.

The people are the landlords.

The radio and TV stations and the corporate giants who own them are the tenants.

Rush's show is syndicated on over 650 radio stations.

Rush has enormous leverage over these stations.

They pay no rent.

And therefore, he pays no rent.

Here's the problem:

Since the Radio Act was passed in 1927, the corporate tenants have been more organized and more powerful than the tens of millions of listeners and viewers.

The result?

Rush Limbaugh and his corporation get to use the public's valuable property for free.

No payment of rent.

Zero.

Nada.

Nothing.

This freeloading on the backs of the American people is called corporate welfare.

Rush Limbaugh is the Kingboy of corporatist radio.

And it's past time he set a corporatist example for his peers and -

pay rent to the American people for using their property.

It's past time Rush Limbaugh takes himself off the corporate welfare rolls.

Rush need not wait for the FCC and Congress to do the right thing and order him to pay.

He can lead by example.

And pay voluntary rent - for the hours and hours every month Rush occupies on the hundreds of stations that carry his show every weekday.

And by the way, this fits well within Rush's so-called conservative philosophy.

Payment of rent for the use of public airwaves owned by the American people is the conservative position.

Real conservatives oppose corporate welfare.

Note the Cato Institute's position.

Real corporatists feed off the public trough - from the hundreds of billions of dollars in corporate welfare gushing out of Washington, D.C. every year - your tax dollars.

So, Rush, today I ask you - which side are you on?

Freeloading?

Or paying rent for the public property you have been using free for so many years?

Today, I mailed a letter to Rush asking him to get off welfare.

The letter is posted at votenader.org.

Take a look.

And then let Rush know what you think.

You can e-mail Rush at: ElRushbo@eibnet.com

Tell him - hey Rush, I agree with Ralph Nader.

Get off welfare.

Start paying rent.

Onward

Ralph Nader

PS: We invite your comments to the blog.

Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.

Contribute.





Lloyd notes Dana Milbank's "Putting Her Foot Down and Getting the Boot" (Washington Post):

When Gina Gray took over as the public affairs director at Arlington National Cemetery about three months ago, she discovered that cemetery officials were attempting to impose new limits on media coverage of funerals of the Iraq war dead -- even after the fallen warriors' families granted permission for the coverage. She said that the new restrictions were wrong and that Army regulations didn't call for such limitations.
Six weeks after The Washington Post reported her efforts to restore media coverage of funerals, Gray was demoted. Twelve days ago, the Army fired her.
"Had I not put my foot down, had I just gone along with it and not said regulations were being violated, I'm sure I'd still be there," said the jobless Gray, who, over lunch yesterday in Crystal City, recounted what she is certain is her retaliatory dismissal. "It's about doing the right thing."

Now mark your calendars so you remember the latest military brass claim. From Ann Scott Tyson and Dan Eggan's "U.S. General: Iraqi Forces to Be Fully Ready in '09" (Washington Post):

Iraq's army and police will be fully manned and operational by mid-2009, possibly as early as April, the top U.S. general in charge of building Iraqi security forces said yesterday, signaling the prospect that Iraqi forces could assume primary combat responsibilities in the country while U.S. troops shift to a supporting role.
Asked when Iraqi ground forces could handle security so U.S. troops would not have to, Lt. Gen. James Dubik told lawmakers on Capitol Hill that the strength of Iraq's ground forces had grown significantly. "The ground forces will mostly be done by middle of next year; their divisions, brigades and battalions are on a good timeline," Dubik said in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee. "Could be as early as April. Could be as late as August," said Dubik, who until last week led the effort to train Iraqi forces.

Yes, you've heard it all before. No, it's never been true so far. By the way, to deal with something here, that doesn't make Ann Scott Tyson or Dan Eggan liars. They are reporters. There's apparently some barrier in Canada that allows dumb asses to think that reporters are psychics. The two did their job even if they stopped there. They didn't stop there. The next paragraph:

While U.S. commanders' predictions on Iraqi security forces have proven excessively optimistic in the past, the general's assessment is central to the debates in Washington and Baghdad over a timeline for when Iraqi forces can take charge of security, allowing the bulk of the approximately 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq to withdraw.

Had they left that off, they still would have done their jobs. Adding that paragraph, that perspective and information, makes them good reporters. But it's not their job to track down things that don't have to do with their story. For example, if someone gave them a quote and then later spoke to an attorney and found out that the quote they gave was wrong, that wouldn't be the reporters (or any reporter's) fault. There is apt media criticism. But to make it you probably need to understand what the media is actually supposed to do ideally.

If this isn't clear to you, you didn't e-mail about a stupid article last night. Check out Elaine tonight because I've been about as nice on this topic as I can be and Elaine will let it rip tonight. (And good for her.) I realize journalism is confusing -- especially with Panhandle Media, especially with Panhandle Media that employs Lyndon La Rouche-trained 'journalists' to cover Barack Obama. Bad enough The Nation prints them, CounterSpin interviews them. Lying is not new to someone trained by LLR and Panhandle Media has no standards. Skip the New York Times, nothing worth reading. Check out Rebecca's "british government pays for war crimes" and Mike's "More lies from The Progressive and the Falluja slaughter."

If you're confused as to the LaRouche-y, a friend asked that we note James Kirchick's "Robert Dreyfuss, Lyndon LaRouche, and The Nation" (The New Republic) and I'd forgotten until CounterSpin decided Drey-Drey was just the guy-guy to drool over. :

Robert Dreyfuss, a contributing editor to The Nation, has written a piece this week entitled "Hothead McCain." I wonder if Dreyfuss would use a similar descriptor for his longtime former employer, the convicted felon and political cult-leader Lyndon LaRouche. Though Dreyfuss officially left the employ of LaRouche (in the sense that he does not currently write for LaRouche's publications, at least not under his own byline), his politics clearly haven't changed much from the tinfoil hat variety characteristic of the 8-time fringe presidential candidate and conspiracy theorist. Dreyfuss still spends his days feverishly slumped over his keyboard warning of neocon conspiracies and shilling for authoritarian regimes--hallmarks of any good LaRouchite. Now, he just gets published in ostensibly respectable magazines like The Nation.

CounterSpin will have him on today -- along with the White woman who thought it was okay to appropriate the works of women of color. It's cute the way CounterSpin no longer just rolls around the gutter but actively rubs urine into its own flesh.

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












Posted at 03:37 pm by thecommonills
 

Thursday, July 10, 2008
I Hate The War

I Hate The War

Yeah, I saw the story. We're not linking. It's nonsense. It does explain a lot, though, doesn't it. Like how the 'movement' in Canada still struggles?

It's a bunch of nonsense. The 'journalist' doesn't even grasp that war resisters who went to Canada during Vietnam included deserters and, no, not all of them were drafted into service.

Whatever was supposed to have been accomplished with the article, nothing was. But in terms of the movement (or 'movement'), until everyone stops repeating this nonsense that Canada took in draft dodgers but not deserters, any real movement building suffers.

The stupidity at this point is the biggest obstacle to building a war resistance movement in Canada. Note the following:


Jeff Enger, a deserter from the Army and therefore excluded from the Presidential pardon, will be sworn in as a Canadian citizen next Friday, one of the many self-exiled American war resisters who "want to make our lives here." However, like other deserters, Mr. Egner would like to be able to travel freely in the country of his birth.
The Presidential pardon covered nearly all draft evaders of the Vietnam War period. Mr. Carter postponed a decision on the men who entered but then deserted the armed forces.
Jack Colhoun, a leader in the Toronto exile community, is one of those deseters who insist that they would fight in a "just war," or "if the United States were attacked," as Mr. Colhoun put it.
The men interviewed, who rerpesent a cross section of the estimated 20,000 to 25,000 American war resisters living in Canada, have in common a yearning for recognition by Americans at home that their actions were an acceptable exercise of principle "in the American tradition," as one said.
"We don't expect to be congratulated or anything," said Mr. Egner, a law student at the University of Toronto, "but we believe we acted correctly."
They also share a deep conviction that the deserters, as well as the draft evaders, should be pardoned.

Robert Trumbull, "Pardon Brings Cautious Response From Some War Exiles in Canada," New York Times, January 23, 1977. Let's just stay with the Times because I pulled all their articles from that period out of the journals and put them in a folder.

For Sidney and Ruth Schwarzmann of Nassau County, the war in Vietnam did not end when the last troops came home. Or when former President Gerald R. Ford declared his clemency program. Or when President Carter, on his first full day in office, signed a pardon for some Vietnam war resisters.
The Schwarzmann's 31-year-old son, Victor, has been living in Canada since 1968, in what amounts to enforced exile, since he faces desertion charges if he returns to the United States. He left the Army after passing his physical, applying for conscientious objector status and being turned down.

That's Paul Wilner's "After Vietnam, a War of Emotions," New York Times, April 3, 1977. In August 1976 when then candidate Jimmy Carter spoke to the American Legion in Seattle, what did he say? "I do not favor a blanket amnesty but for those who violated Selective Service laws, I intend to grant a blanket pardon." He's speaking of the draft. That's all he offered. If you doubt it, go to a real library and pull the rolls of film to look up January 22, 1977 when the Times ran "Evaders In Canada Call Action A Sham: Exclusion of Deserters Is a Source of Bitterness to Exiles Who Say Pardon Will Affect Only 2,000." The author is again Robert Trumbull. Second paragraph in the article:

Jack Colhoun, co-editor of a magazine for the self-exiled Americans in Canada who is a deserter from the Army, branded Mr. Carter's plan "a real sham, sinsiter, almost Nixonesque."
[. . .]
There is no official figure, since the Canadian Government omits reference to military status in its immigration procedures, but Mr. Colhoun's group estimates that the number is from 20,000 to 25,000 of whom 6,000 to 7,500 are believed to hae become Canadian citizens.
After counting out the deserters and those who have taken Canadian citizenship, only about 2,000 of the exiles in Canada, or one of every 10 or 17, will benefit by Mr. Carter's pardon, Mr. Colhoun declared.

Carter's decision was called out for leaving out deserters before Carter took office. In December 28, 1976, Tom Wicker was doing just that from the op-ed pages of the New York Times in "Clemency, It's Not So Simple."

We could go on and on all night. Carter did not pardon deserters. He set out the framework he was using on the campaign trail in 1976. He refused to alter it. Gerald Ford did offer a clemency program for deserters and draft dodgers. You had to jump through hoops and most war resisters found it to be a joke, but he offered it. Carter focused on draft dodgers, not deserters. For those who like to play what-if, if Carter hadn't talked up his 'big plan,' Ford might have issued a pardon. He was considering it. It was reported. But Carter had been elected and was coming in with his 'big plan.' As Elizabeth Holtzman told PBS on the first day of Carter's administration, she hoped he would revist his decision. He didn't. There was that hope. A lot of people were hoping. But he didn't revisit it.

Until the war resistance movement (in Canada and in the US) starts telling the truth about what happened, it's going to be a long muddle. You can find muddles and lies all over the internet, click here for one example, but that doesn't change reality. Canada's not being asked to do anything that they didn't do before. That's the talking point. Until that's established, the counter-argument will always be "There's no draft today!" There's no need for that back-and-forth. It's counter-productive and it wastes time. Canada welcomed draft dodgers and deserters during Vietnam. Today it's being asked to recognize deserters the same way it did during Vietnam. It's not being asked to do anything different or new.

It's that basic.


But even the CBC can't get it right today. Despite reporting on it real time. Here they are playing stupid in 2006: "Tens of thousands of Americans moved to Canada during the war, many of them settling in B.C. As many as half returned to the U.S. after president Jimmy Carter declared an amnesty in 1977." The amnesty was only for draft dodgers and the CBC has no idea how many moved back because there was no official figure kept by the Canadian government on them (dodgers or deserters).

Thing is, while the left wallows in stupidyt, the right-wing does know what happened. They know because the condemned Ford and Carter in real time. They know because they've kept their hatred alive over the issue while the left has failed (repeatedly) to pass it down.

We called out the CBC, let's call out the US. Here's Democracy Now! serving up misinformation in 2006:

AMY GOODMAN: How does amnesty--didn't Carter give amnesty for resisters?
TOD ENSIGN: Well, not exactly amnesty. He set up a program--he gave amnesty to the draft refusers who were more--tend to be more white and middle class. The soldiers, he gave what was called "clemency," and you had to actually go to a military base and apply for it, and then you were given what was called a "clemency discharge," which in some ways was a stigma also, because it told the employer that you were a Vietnam refuser. At any rate, only about 8,000 people actually applied for that program, so it was not a very large program. Remember, there was half a million desertion cases from the Vietnam War, so that was a very large number.

Tod Ensign likes to help. It's a shame when he doesn't know what he's talking about. The clemency program he's referring to was Ford's. Since he's being called out by name, let's note his jumping all over Dalia Hashad on Law and Disorder (scroll down, it's the the June 11, 2007 broadcast) when she pointed out Camilo Mejia's stop-loss was not only uncalled for, Dalia was right. That's because Daliah actually read the damn book. Dalia was not wrong. She actually read the book. She stated Camilo was stop-lossed through 2031. Dalia was jumped on for that comment. Camilo Mejia's book is Road From Ar Ramadi (highly recommended). It should be page 309 (that's from memory, it's in the Afterword by Chris Hedges regardless, but check page 309 first), this appears: "His commitment to the army was extend until the year 2031." If that's wrong, Chris Hedges is wrong, The New Press is wrong. But one thing is not wrong, Dalia Hashad's comments. Again, she read the book. We've noted that before without naming the individual, Mike's noted it, but if we're going to talk about reality and the ones who get it wrong, let's take a moment to defend Dalia who read the book and attempted to discuss it only to be loudly shut down. It wasn't pretty, it wasn't nice. She did not deserve it -- nor was she wrong.

Tod Ensign was wrong. Tod Ensign was wrong when he spoke to Amy Goodman.

Did Carter give amnesty? Tod said, "Well, not exactly amnesty." Carter used "pardon." And specifically stated he didn't approve of "blanket amnesty." An amnesty, Carter stated, "says what you did was right." Which is why he called it a pardon. It applied only to draft dodgers. Tod: "He set up a program--he gave amnesty to the draft refusers who were more--tend to be more white and middle class." Leaving out the word "amnesty" (which Carter rejected), Tod is correct on that. Tod: "The soldiers, he gave what was called 'clemency,' and you had to actually go to a military base and apply for it, and then you were given what was called a 'clemency discharge,' which in some ways was a stigma also, because it told the employer that you were a Vietnam refuser." No. A pardon, a presidential pardon, wipes away 'crimes.' That's what Carter did. The Clemency Program was Ford's. Tod is confusing the two programs. Ford set up The Clemency Review Board, headed by former US Senator Charles E. Goodell. Those wanting to take part in that program had to start by turning themselves into DoD (unless they were in prison already). Carter did not include deserters. Ron Kovic called that out in 1977 stating, "I didn't feel Carter's pardon went far enough. The only way our nightmare and trauma of the Vietnam war and truly heal ourselves as a nation is by granting a total and unconditional amnesty for all resisters of the Vietnam war. I'm definitely going to oppose any war started by any Administration from the point out. I'm definitely going to encourage deserters, and if I go to jail, I'm ready to speak out from jail, if necessary" (New York Times, front page to page ten, April 3, 1977). Tod: "At any rate, only about 8,000 people actually applied for that program, so it was not a very large program. Remember, there was half a million desertion cases from the Vietnam War, so that was a very large number." 500,000 desertion cases? I'd be interested in seeing the footnote on that. He may be lumping in "bad discharges" (the figure most often used for that was 750,000) or he may be lumping in draft dodgers with deserters (by 1971, the figure for the two categories combined was said to be between 70,000 and 100,000). Ignoring his numbers, he's speaking of Ford's program.

Not trying to be sarcastic, does Gerald Ford not have biographers? Do none of them hit the roof as his credit (he's the only president that did a damn thing for Vietnam deserters) is stolen and assigned to Carter? I think Ford's program was a joke. But in terms of what Carter did? Ford's credit's being stolen. And Carter's being cited as a wonderful, amazing person when that's not how his program was seen in real time. The arguments against Carter's pardon (by supporters of amnesty) included that the reasons he gave for pardoning draft dodgers was that they actually applied to deserters. Deserters were more likely to be poor, to be less educated and to be a racial minority (Wicker: "a fourth were black or Hispanic, three-fourths were high school dropouts, and 57 percent were from low-income homes").

Prior to Carter's first day on the job assignment, Time magazine published "Pardon: How Broad A Blanket?" on January 17, 1977:

What Carter promised was a blanket pardon "for those who violated Selective Service laws." This presumably would include all those civilians who fled the country to avoid the draft, simply failed to register or refused to submit to induction. As for those who deserted after induction or enlistment, Carter said each case "should be handled on an individual basis in accordance with our nation's system of military justice." That seemed to imply that military officials, hardly lenient in such matters, would have to process all of these desertion cases and try to decide what was in each person's mind, some four or more years ago, that caused him to desert.
This general approach also seems to contradict Carter's frequently expressed concern for the underprivileged in society. As he has noted, the draft evaders are overwhelmingly white and middleclass. A report prepared for President Ford in 1975 placed 87% of them in this category. The deserters are largely poor and disproportionately black--more than 50% low-income and 20% black. In general, the more affluent, better-educated war resisters found the means to avoid service by evading the draft; the underprivileged submitted, turning against the war later, if at all, by deserting.


According to the Univeristy of Texas' online statements, the bulk of the Ford papers on this are open to the public. Charles E. Gooddell headed the committee and, again the bulk of those papers are available to the public ["Open. Some items are temporaryl restricted under terms of the donor's deed of gift, a copy of which is available on request, or under National ARchives and Records Administration general restrictions (36 CFR 1256).]. From their online guide to those papers:

Shortly after assuming office, President Ford created a clemency program to allow the young men who were "convicted, charged, investigated or still sought for violations of the Military Selective Service Act or of the Uniform Code of Military Justice" to contribute a "share to the rebuilding of peace among ourselves and with all nations." On September 16, 1974, Ford issued a proclamation and executive order establishing the Presidential Clemency Board (PCB) to oversee this program and announced the appointment of the nine members of the Board. The President selected his old friend and former congressional colleague Charles Goodell as chairman.

The PCB handled applications for clemency on a case‑by‑case basis. As the number of applications went from 850 in early 1975 to 21,500 by the deadline at the end of March, it became apparent that the original board of nine members and less than 100 staff members was inadequate to complete the task in the specified time. In May 1975 the President authorized nine additional board members and a dramatic increase in staff to keep the work on schedule. The PCB finished its work in September 1975 and turned over all incomplete cases to the Justice Department.

During the year of its existence, the PCB disposed of 14,514 cases. For each case, they determined whether or not the individual deserved clemency and, if so, whether he should be required to complete a period of alternative service. Alternative service involved working for a non‑profit organization in a job promoting the national health, safety, or interest. Of the civilian clemency applicants, more than four out of every five received outright pardons, only a few were denied clemency, and the remainder were assigned to alternative service before receiving their pardons. Only slightly more than one‑third of military applicants received outright pardons, 7 percent were denied clemency, and the remainder participated in the alternative service program.

While the PCB claimed to have succeeded in its assigned task, many people disputed this statement. Only about 19 percent of the eligible people even applied for the program. Many draft evaders and deserters attacked the program for not going far enough and demanded an unconditional amnesty. At the same time many people in the military and in veterans organizations were unhappy with any form of amnesty or clemency.

Now Carter's papers are a joke -- you will discover he decided to reinstate Selective Service registration in October of 1979 even though he would announce it in his January 1980 State of the Union speech. But you have the realtime coverage on PBS (the program that is now The NewsHour) and you can watch it online, you can read it online. And though the CBC is shaky on that era today, they do have archives. (We link to it on the permalinks to the left.) You can watch their "Amnesty -- but not for all" from January 21, 1977 online and here's their text summary of the report:


In his first act as president, Jimmy Carter pardons those who peacefully evaded the draft by travelling abroad or failing to register. Military deserters, however, have not been included in the blanket pardon. In the two-tiered system, deserters can apply for a limited pardon to be reviewed on a case by case basis. CBC Radio's Barbara Frum talks to one frustrated military deserter who would like to go home again.

Any Democrat who runs for public office gets targeted with the smear that they were pardoned. Bill Clinton was, John Kerry was. And the right-wing gets all excited, "Carter pardoned them!" And then those with knowledge pass on the reality. Kerry was discharged, there was no need for a pardon. Had he not been discharged, he would have been covered by Ford's program because he would have been a deserter. (Kerry was discharged, he wasn't a deserter.) Bill Clinton did not evade the draft. He registered. He wasn't called up. There was no reason for him to be in Carter's pardon. As Jane Fonda correctly says in Sir! No Sir!, the right keeps going back to it. The left needs to as well because too many damn lies have taken hold. When we don't even know which president did what, too many lies have taken hold. When we don't even know that Canada welcomed deserters during Vietnam, too many lies have taken hold. The right-wing never stops talking about Vietnam (including revisionary tactics) but what does the left do? Not a whole damn much if we can't even get the basic facts right. Fonda's right that we do need to keep going back because until we do enough to get it right, we're not learning anything, we're not passing on anything. And we are certainly not accomplishing anything.

It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)

Two Thursdays ago, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4113. Tonight? 4116. Just Foreign Policy lists 1,236,604 as the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the Iraq War up from 1,225,898. Like last week, it still reads 1,225,898 last week. Maybe that's where the White House is getting their 'violence is down' talking point?

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












Posted at 11:16 pm by thecommonills
 

Iraq snapshot

Iraq snapshot

Thursday, July 10, 2008.  Chaos and violence continue, US war resister Corey Glass' good news, a Mosul assassination attempt was a flop yesterday but today . . ., Turkey's prime minister visits Iraq today for a two-day visit and apparently checks out early, the Green Party Convention kicks off in Chicago, and more.

 

Starting with war resistance.  There are celebrations in Canada today but before we get to that, two journalists get the facts right at the top and deserve note.  Patrick Arden (Metro) opens with, "Canada was a safe haven for 60,000 U.S. military draft dodgers and deserters during the Vietnam War."  Ian Austen (International Herald Tribune) also grasps and conveys the basics, "During Vietnam, Pierre Trudeau, the Liberal prime minister, welcomed American deserters and draft dodgers, declaring that Canada 'should be a refuge from militarism.' Americans who arrived were generally able to obtain legal immigrant status simply by applying at the border, or even after they entered the country."  Adding a detail, prior to Trudeau's 1969 declaration, some were being advised to fly in because you could not be immediately turned back the way you would be if you tried to enter through a land border.  London Topic notes a 5:00 pm rally this evening in Victoria Park for US war resisters attempting to be granted safe harbor in Canada and among those participating will be MP Irene Mathyssen who states of Judge Robert Barnes' decision in US war resister Joshua Key's case, "The federal court is filling the void that is left by the lack of political will demonstrated by Immigration Minister Diane Finley."  Demonstrations were scheduled to take place throughout Canada.  They found a celebratory note with some late breaking news.  The CBC reported that US war resister Corey Glass, due to be deported as early as today, "can stay in Canada while the court reviews and decides on his applications for leave and judicial review -- process his lawyer said could take months"; and they quoted him declaring, "I was shocked.  I was just enjoying my last little bit of time I had in Canada."  AP and Canada's GMA pointed out that Glass "is one of about 200 American deserters believed to have come to Canada to avoid service in Iraq.  So far, Canadian immigration officials and the courts have rejected efforts to grant them refugee status."  Canwest News Services (via Ottawa Citizen) quotes Glass stating, "I had my bags ready and had moved out of my apartment.  So I'm in the process of looking for another apartment."  Colin Perkel (The Canadian Press via CNews) quotes attorney Alyssa Manning stating, "The fact that the stay was granted in both cases means that the Federal Court judge decided that there was a serious issue to be decided in both of the applications.  There is a strong indication that leave will be granted."  Perkel also notes the one carrying on the spirit of Pierre Trudeau today, MP Olivia Chow, stating that the Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper needs "to stop wasting taxpayers' money" by refusing to implement any program (or heed the motion the House of Commons passed June 3rd) because "[i]n the meantime, we're wasting thousands and thousands of dollars throwing people in jail and attempting to deport them."  Amnesty International updated their call for Glass not to be deported noting the latest developments.  Kevin Connor (Toronto Sun) quotes the government's spokesperson for citizenship and immigration, Danielle Norris, stating, "His deportation has just been stayed -- it doesn't mean he can stay and he hasn't been granted refugee status."  Liam Lahey (Inside Toronto) notes attorney Manning explaining that "Glass still needs three decisions to go his way in order to be on the path to permanent Canadian citizenship.  The federal court first has to decide to hear his case.  If that happens, he'll get another hearing at and if that decision comes down in Glass' favour, he'd then be allowed to argue his deportation order anew with immigration officials."  In the US, UPI reports, "News of the judicial reprieve was greeted favorably by protesters in Washington, who gathered outside the Canadian Embassy to show support for Glass and other war resisters living in Canada."  CTV News notes that the news has led to celebrations and today's planned demonstrations "will now celebrate the news" but, War Resisters Support Campaign's Lee Zaslofsky explain, "We're also going to try to put pressure on the government to resolve this whole thing on war resisters instead of dealing with it one court at a time."   Which brings us specifically to US war resister Robin Long.  Rod Mickleburgh (Globe and Mail) explains, "Mr. Long, 25, was arrested and taken into custody by Nelson police last Friday on a warrant from the Canada Border Services Agency.  The CBSA alleged that he had violated his release conditions by failing to inform them of his address changes in the charming Interior city, home to several other U.S. deserters seeking to remain in Canada. With no work permit allowing him to earn money, Mr. Long had been 'couch surfing' at the residences of friends. He was further shocked on Tuesday to learn for the first time that authorities were planning to deport him almost immediately, despite a key Federal Court ruling last week ordering the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada to reconsider another deserter's failed refugee claim."  Jack Keating (The Province) adds, "The surprise decision was revealed by a Canada Border Services lawyer at an Immigration and Refugee Board Hearing in Vancouver on Tuesday. Long, 25, is being held in the Nelson city jail after being arrested by police last Friday on an outstanding immigration warrant."  Lahey pins down July 14th as the day Long faces deportation.  Meanwhile Steve Clarke, Federal Liberal candidate for Simcoe North, writes "Gov't can't keep ignoring motion concerning war objectors: Clarke" to the Orillia Packet & Times.

 

To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca").  Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote.  Now they've started a new letter you can use online here.  The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here.
 
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).
 
Turning to Iraq where Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrived.  China's Xinhua quotes him stating, "I assure the people of Iraq that you will always find us besdie you to overcome those difficulties."  "Difficulties" was undefined but most press reports are focused on the fact that this is the first visit by a Turkish prime minister in eighteen years.  CNN notes that Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki called the "two-day visit" "historic" and states the pact the two countries have now entered involves "military and border security issues, . . . economis and energy."  Hurriyet quotes Erdogan stating, "As the first Turkish prime minister visiting Iraq after 18 years, I am pleased to be here with my brothers and sisters. . . . I am confident that from now on we will not wait for another 18 years before a Turkish prime minister visits Iraq.  The agreement we have signed on Thursday for the establishment of a high strategic cooperation council is a symbol of our determination to promote relations."  Despite CNN stating it was a two-day visit, the Turkish Press reports the visit is over and that the prime minister "returned to Turkey from Iraq where he met top Iraqi officials on a one-day formal visit in Baghdad on Thursday."  They note that along with al-Maliki, Recep Tayyip Erdogan was also received by Jalal Talabani (Iraq's President), Tariq al-Hashimi and Adil Abd al-Mahdi (the two vice-presidents) and Mahmoud al-Mashhadani (the Speaker of Parliament). Mehmet Ali Birand (Turkish Daily News) observes the interest in the visit by all parties (including the US), "Kurds have been very successful in fortifying their status during the Sunni-Shiite conflict. They got constitutional recognition for their autonomous zone as well as increased their influence over the central government. The northern Iraqi administration has acquired internal and external prestige by becoming the only stable region in Iraq. The Kurds have played their cards well."
 
In other news from Iraq, Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) explores IRAMS (Improvised Rocket Assisted Munitions) which the US military is stating has become the weapon of choice in attacks by resistance fighters with "at least 21 peoplce, including at least three U.S. soldiers" dying from them so far in 2008; while Sally Buzbee (Los Angeles Times) explores the growing season in Iraq during a time "of drought and sand storms across Iraq -- a dry spell that has devastated the country's crucial wheat crop and created new worries about the safety of drinking water."  Patrick Cockburn (Independent of London) interviews the ever-present Ahmed Chalabi who states that if the treaty being worked out between the White House and Nouri al-Maliki does not include immunity from prosecution for mercenaries they will "likely" be targeted by Iraqi forces:  "The Iraqi forces will follow them with vigour because they are not popular in Iraq. People haven't forgotten about the Iraqis who were killed by private security men in Nisour Square."
 
In the US, Tony Fratto entertained the press corps with the White House briefing.  He noted that Gens David Peteraues and Raymond Odierno were being voted on (promotions) in the US Senate and his glee over that but the reporters present weren't interested in that or anything else Iraq related. Reuters reports the Petraeus vote was 95 for and two against and on Odierno (Lieface of Baghdad), 96 for and one against.  Senator Tom Harkin voted against on both votes.  Senator Robert Byrd voted against on Petraeus.  Staying on the topic of the US Senate, James Risen (New York Times) details why US Senator Byron L. Dorgan accuses General Jermoe Johnson of lying to the Senate Armed Services Committee when providing testimony in April of last year on KBR's work supplying water to US forces during which time Johnson denied that there was "widespread problems with water supplied by KBR" despite "the Pentagon's inspector general" stating that there was (and, yes, there were huge problems).
 
In other reported violence (yes, KBR's actions were violence):

 

Bombings?

 

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left four more wounded, a Baghdad car bombing that killed the bomber as well as two bystanders and left eleven people wounded.

 

Shootings?

 

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two doctors ("husband and wife") were wounded in a shooting in Kirkuk and Brig Gen Riyadh Jarallah Kashmula ("Head of Iraqi Identity and Civil Affairs Department" and "a cousin of Durald Kashmula Governor of Nineveh") was assassinated in Mosul. Reuters notes Kashmula was shot dead "outside his office" and that another person was shot dead in Mosul.  Today a successful assassination attempt in Mosul, yesterday a failed one.  Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) explains yesterday's attack: "A suicide bomber detonated his car outside a regional traffic police building in Mosul, where Lt. Gen. Riyadh Jalal Tawfiq, the chief of the Iraqi military command for the city, was holding a meeting.  Genreal Tawfiq was not hurt, but five of the eight killed were civilians, and 41 people were wounded, including seven of his bodyguards, Iraqi officials said."

 

Corpses?

 

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad and 1 in Kirkuk.  Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered in Tuz Khumato.

 

 

Turning to the US presidential race.  "We were taught as young children," Ralph Nader explained, "that in our democracy, under our system of justice, nobody is above the law -- nobody.  But this bill puts the President and the telecom companies above the law."  It was the expansion of spying on Americans.  And it passed.  Barack Obama broke another pledge, flipped another flop, and voted for it.  (Those voting against it included Senators Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold .)   As Nader noted, "This legislation . . . sets up a double standard of justice.  Break the law as a citizen, go to jail.  Break the law as a corporation, go to Washington and get immunity. Remember, there were telecom companies, such as Qwest, that refused to follow President Bush's illegal wiretap orders and chose instead to obey the laws of the land."  Barack caved.  He broke his word.  He sold out his supporters and the rule of law.   Rebecca's "your frankenstein monster has escaped," Kat's "Hillary and Barbara stand up, Barack crawls," Marcia's "Ralph Nader, Jesse Jackson, Barack, Hillary," Ruth's "Barack, Hillary, Ralph, Glen Ford," Mike's "He tore apart the Democratic Party, now its families," Elaine's "Who stood up? The woman they attacked.," and Cedric's "Jesse Jackson Jnr. has a new Daddy" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! GUESS WHO GOT A NEW DADDY!" (joint-post on the last two) address it.  A Barack supporter blogs at the Nader-Gonzalez presidential campaign site: "With yesterday's vote, it was last straw, for my decision not to contribute to Senator Obama's presidential candidate." 

 

 

Meanwhile, the Green Party's confention began today and runs through the weekend (July 10th through July 13th).  It's taking place in Chicago. Pacifica Radio will broadcast a three hour special on Sunday "as the convention comes to a close) that will stream online at the Pacifica website (noon to 3:00 p.m. EST; 11:00 a.m. to 2 p.m. Central and 9:00 a.m. to noon PST).  Kimberly Wilder (On the Wilder Side) notes some initial press coverage.  Vying for the party's presidential nomination are Kat Swift, Kent Mesplay, Jesse Johnson and presumed nominee Cynthia McKinney.  Today is introductions and receptions.  Tomorrow will provide several news conferences with Congressional and public office candidates (first at nine in the morning) with a Presidential Candidates' Forum beginning at seven p.m.  The presidential candidates will hold their press conference at nine a.m. on Saturday. Saturday afternoon will have the roll call vote, the v.p. acceptance speech and presidential nominee acceptance speech followed by a press conference featuring the ticket.  Presumed nominee Cynthia McKinney has picked her running mate: Rosa Clemente.  Clemente declares, "I hope that my Vice Presidential run will inspire all people to recognize that they have more than two choices.  The time has come to stop talking about what we have to do, but do it by building a 3rd party.  I hope you join me on this journey."  Austin Cassidy's Independent Political Report notes that Democrat Drew Pritt has launched a blistering attack at McKinney.  As we said throughout the Democratic primary, if it's not your political party, butt the hell out.  It's a real shame some Greens couldn't adopt the same policy during the Democratic Primary but instead acted as cheerleaders for Barack (Ted Glick for starters). Speaking to Green Party Watch Radio, Kat Swift encouraged people to contribute to Cynthia so that she might qualify for federal matching funds.  The Green Party asked the four candidates to fill out a questionnaire.  It's shocking that with the Iraq War over five years old it doesn't even qualify for a question. Asking 'your thoughts' on "Middle East Policy, including Iraq, Iran, and Israel" is not asking about the Iraq War.  Note all candidates repsonses are in PDF format.  Johnson responds, "Diplomacy is key."  Mesplay responds at length but speaks of the "admitted mistake: poor intelligence."  After that and his apparently mistaken belief that WMDs were found in Iraq, I'm not interested in quoting him, use the link if you're interested.  Cynthia responds, "In 2006, I voted no on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date.  I consistently opposed every regular and supplemental appropriation meant to fund the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  I have participated in International War Crimes Tribunals (in Brussels, Spain and Malaysia) designed to bring to justice the Bush-Cheney administration.  I was targeted by AIPAC and others for my opposition to the Israeli occupation of and genocidal policies toward Palestine."  McKinney's referring to the House Resolution "On Prevailing in the Global War on Terror Bill" (June 12, 2006 for the vote).  Her record in the US Congress allows her to cite many votes and she repeatedly voted (in all of them) against the illegal war -- going all the way back to HR 114 in October 2002.  Should McKinney be the nominee, she would likely be one of two candidates who were in Congress in 2002 and voted on the original resolution.  While McKinney voted against it, presumed GOP nominee John McCain voted for it (in the Senate).  Mark Blumenthal (National Journal) writes of polling and his thoughts are mainly useless; however, someone might want to ask him where Cynthia McKinney is in his discussion?  She's expected to be the nominee Saturday night.  She's been expecte to be the nominee since at least January.  John McCain and Barack Obam are not yet their party's nominee.  So what's the excuse for leaving Cynthia out?  You'd think the press -- having rubbed themselves raw as they got off on their own sexism -- would be making an effort at this point to be inclusive.  But don't just call out the MSM, what's Yes! Magazine's pathetic excuse for Erik Leaver's crap called "Presidential Candidates on Foreign Policy" that does not cover Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader but includes John McCain?  Answer: There is no excuse and Yes! is struggling for readers. Crap like this explains why.  (A topic we'll return to tonight.)

 

Ryan Teague Beckwith (News Observer) notes Nader will be in Raleigh, Carolina Saturday night (St. Mary's School auditorium from 7:30 to 10:00 p.m.) and that he needs 500 signatures to qualify for the North Carolina ballot which should not be difficult since Nader "was the top write-in candidate in North Carolina" in 2004.  Matt Holmes (Charlottesville WCAV) notes Nader's Virginia Sunday rally, "Nader will be in Charlottesville on Sunday. He'll hold a rally at Gravity Lounge at 2pm. The campaign suggests a $10 donation for the general public, $5 for students who attend."  Nader will be in Richmond, Virginia Saturday as well, at the Virginia Holocaust Museum from one p.m. to three p.m.  And he became the first presidential candidate in nearly 50 years to campaign in Hawaii last week (1960 was the last time a presidential candidate campaigned in Hawaii).

 

Gregory Kafoury (Team Nader) asks:

 

Were you drawn to the Nader website because Obama broke his word to you on  FISA/Telecom? Or was it because his vote not only immunized and concealed blatantly criminal conduct, but helped lay the legal foundation for a future police state? Or perhaps it was simply his new fundraisers, where the price of admission exceeds $30,000? 

No matter. You are here now. Seduced and abandoned. We all know the stages of grief, but we are also serious people, and we are not at a funeral, we are in a fight, a fight for justice in our country and our world. 

For now -- at least -- stand with Ralph Nader. Our campaign has far more promise than you have been led to believe. With only a modest increase in our poll numbers, Obama and McCain will be debating Nader this fall. Google and YouTube are sponsoring a debate in New Orleans, and the bar is set at 10% support. Nader is at 6% and growing. Such an event could bring a seismic shift in our politics, because the public is far more progressive than the corporate media would have us believe. 

Nader's platform is the real center. 

There remains a more tantalizing possibility: Such a debate could create a genuine 3-way race. Today, 14% of voters say they would support Nader if he was competitive, and forcing open one debate could open them all. 

You know that Nader is responsible for seatbelts and airbags, but did you also know that he led the campaign against nuclear power, an effort that has blocked the construction of new nuclear plants in America for more than 30 years? You may know that he is largely responsible for the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Freedom of Information Act, but did you know that in recent years he secured cheap, generic AIDS drugs for India?

Nader became an American hero when be brought General Motors to its knees by exposing their campaign to intimidate and smear him for having written about auto safety. Since then, he has founded more than 100 public interest groups. His impact and accomplishments dwarf those of his opponents. His is a story worth repeating, and his campaign is worthy of your support. 

Those most impressed with Nader are those who have known him the longest. He will never flatter you, never pander to you, never betray you. 

 

robin long
joshua key
patrick arden
rod mickleburgh
colin perkel
jack keating
kevin connor
kpfa
the morning show

gerry condon

aimee allison
philip maldari
david solnit

jeff paterson

the new york times
the los angeles times
steven lee myers
sally buzbee
the washington post
ernesto londono
sabrina tavernise
james risen

Posted at 03:02 pm by thecommonills
 

Robin Long, Corey Glass, war resistance

Robin Long, Corey Glass, war resistance

London Topic's "War Resisters plan public rally in Victoria Park" notes a 5:00 pm rally this evening in Victoria Park for US war resisters attempting to be granted safe harbor in Canada and among those participating will be MP Irene Mathyssen who states of Judge Robert Barnes' decision in US war resister Joshua Key's case, "The federal court is filling the void that is left by the lack of political will demonstrated by Immigration Minister Diane Finley." Multiple demonstrations will be taking place in Canada today. The War Resisters Support Campaign notes:

In Winnipeg, Toronto, Calgary, Vancouver and many other cities and towns, Canadians will be urging the Prime Minister and Immigration Minister Diane Finley to implement the June 3rd parliamentary motion. It called for an end to deportations of U.S. Iraq War conscientious objectors - including Corey Glass, Robin Long and others who have come seeking refuge - and extending the opportunity for all to apply to remain in Canada as permanent residents.
The full list of actions (updated hourly) can be viewed at [here].


Meanwhile Patrick Arden does something amazing. In "Army deserters fight for a haven in Canada" (Metro), he tells the truth and does so from the start: "Canada was a safe haven for 60,000 U.S. military draft dodgers and deserters during the Vietnam War." Arden goes on to report:

At one of 14 rallies held in U.S. cities yesterday, anti-war demonstrators lined up in front of the Canadian Consulate here to protest the planned deportation of Corey Glass, a 25-year-old National Guard sergeant who served in Iraq before deserting while on leave in 2006. Hours later, Glass won a reprieve from a court deciding whether to hear his case.
The protesters expressed hope over the Canadian parliament’s passage last month of a non-binding resolution to stop deportation proceedings, but they were also distressed by Monday’s arrest of an AWOL U.S. soldier in British Columbia.
[ . . ]
Wearing his dog tags and waving a copy of the U.S. Constitution, Matthis Chiroux is a sergeant in the Army’s Individual Ready Reserve. Last summer he was honorably discharged after five years of active duty that included a stint in Afghanistan. In February he received a reactivation order.
"I was supposed to report for deployment to Iraq on June 15," said Chiroux, 24, who intends to stay in Brooklyn. "They'll have to arrest me."

There's a great deal in that excerpt. The US rallies were sponsored by, as Gerry Condon noted on KPFA's The Morning Show yesterday, Veterans for Peace, Courage to Resist, Project Safe Haven and Iraq veterans. Rallies in Canada will take place today. UPI notes that CBC had the news of Glass first late yesterday. From the CBC's "U.S. war resister granted stay of deportation order:"

Glass, 25, can stay in Canada while the court reviews and decides on his applications for leave and judicial review -- processes his lawyer said could take months.
Glass told CBC News that he had his bags packed and had moved out of his apartment, ready to be deported.
"I was shocked. I was just enjoying my last little bit of time I had in Canada," he said.
But the ruling comes on the heels of a news report that questioned whether Glass is actually a war resister.
ABC News reported recently that according to U.S. Army documents and officials, Glass was actually discharged from the California National Guard Dec. 1, 2006, four months after he arrived in Canada.
"He is not considered absent without leave. He is not considered a deserter," Maj. Nathan Banks, an Army spokesman told ABC News. "He is running for no reason. He is fully welcome in the United States. I cannot believe this is a big deal in Canada."
But Glass disputed Banks' interpretation of his status. AP and Canada's GMA note, "He is one of about 200 American deserters believed to have come to Canada to avoid service in Iraq. So far, Canadian immigration officials and the courts have rejected efforts to grant them refugee status."

The Victoria Sun runs a paragaraph of Canwest News Service's report; Ottawa Citizen runs a longer version of the story:

Geraldine Sadoway, one of the lawyers for Mr. Glass, said the Iraq war veteran who served with the National Guard will remain in Canada while the court reviews and decides on his applications for leave and judicial review.
Meanwhile, Canadian anti-war groups and supporters of American army deserters from the war in Iraq are stepping up their fight to keep war resister Robin Long from being deported to the U.S.

Let's move to Robin Long. Rod Mickleburgh's "U.S. deserter's incarceration decried" (Globe and Mail) notes:

Mr. Long, 25, was arrested and taken into custody by Nelson police last Friday on a warrant from the Canada Border Services Agency.
The CBSA alleged that he had violated his release conditions by failing to inform them of his address changes in the charming Interior city, home to several other U.S. deserters seeking to remain in Canada. With no work permit allowing him to earn money, Mr. Long had been "couch surfing" at the residences of friends.
He was further shocked on Tuesday to learn for the first time that authorities were planning to deport him almost immediately, despite a key Federal Court ruling last week ordering the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada to reconsider another deserter's failed refugee claim.
"His removal is imminent," CBSA lawyer Rick Lengert told a board hearing that approved Mr. Long's continued detention for one more week. The CBSA later agreed to make no move to have him deported until next Monday.
Nelson police chief Dan Maluta admitted that his department's cells are far from comfortable.

It would be nice if Dan Maluta could admit who he takes his orders from. Jack Keating's "American war dodger may be gone Monday" (The Province):

The surprise decision was revealed by a Canada Border Services lawyer at an Immigration and Refugee Board Hearing in Vancouver on Tuesday. Long, 25, is being held in the Nelson city jail after being arrested by police last Friday on an outstanding immigration warrant.
Last month MPs voted 137-110 that U.S. soldiers who fled to Canada to escape the war in Iraq should be allowed to stay here permanently.

"Gov't can't keep ignoring motion concerning war objectors: Clarke" is the title of a candidate's letter to the Orillia Packet & Times:


Letter to the editor:

The House of Commons passed a motion to recognize conscientious objectors of the illegal war in Iraq and allow them and their families to apply for permanent resident status in Canada. It also called for an end to deportation proceedings against them.

The Stephen Harper government has chosen to ignore the motion, and I would ask my Conservative opponent (Simcoe North MP Bruce Stanton) and his colleagues to reconsider this unprincipled position.

Their refusal to act is egregious in view of the very strong moral claim of these conscientious objectors. The Iraq-U. S. war is not sanctioned by the United Nations. Many people who agreed to one tour of duty are being sent back to Iraq without choice. Some signed up for the National Guard to serve domestically only to be sent to Iraq against their will. Others went willingly to Iraq in the belief they were participating in a noble cause, only to discover that the rhetoric of their government is at odds with reality When speaking to another motion passed by the House of Commons in 2005, Harper said, "The prime minister has the moral responsibility to respect the will of the House..." I only ask that the prime minister heed his own words today and respect the will of the House of the House of Commons on this very important motion pertaining to basic human rights.

Five years ago, the Liberal government made the principled decision not to participate in the War in Iraq. Harper was very critical of that decision and made it clear that, if he were prime minister, Canada would have gone to war. Harper got it wrong then, but he can make the right decision now and respect conscientious objectors and their families for making their own, very difficult, principled decisions.

In his very last speech in the House of Commons, our former MP, Paul DeVillers, said there should be no distinction between a person avoiding the draft and the one who refuses to join an unauthorized war. He called for treatment of U. S. war resisters today like that accorded to resisters of the Vietnam War. Paul was right, as are the majority of our elected parliamentarians who supported the recent motion to recognize conscientious objectors of the illegal war in Iraq.

The United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights requires that conscientious objectors be given protection by signatory states. It is time the government did what is right and lived up to this important agreement. It is time the government respected the will of Canadians as expressed by the majority of members in the House of Commons. And it is time the Simcoe North MP and his Conservative colleagues adopted a position on conscientious objectors that is more in line with Canadian values and less beholden to the discredited Bush administration.

Steve Clarke, Federal Liberal candidate for Simcoe North

Returning to Corey Glass, Colin Perkel's "U.S. war dodger wins deportation stay" (The Canadian Press via CNews:)

Articling lawyer Alyssa Manning, who was acting for Glass, said she was "definitely thrilled" at the deportation stay, which would likely last at least two months and much longer if the court actually agrees to hear the applications.
"The fact that the stay was granted in both cases means that the Federal Court judge decided that there was a serious issue to be decided in both of the applications," Manning said.
"That's a strong indication that leave will be granted."
[. . .]
Glass said he had mixed emotions in light of friend and fellow deserter Robin Long, who is now in jail in British Columbia awaiting deportation to the U.S.
Like Glass, Long also failed to win refugee status in Canada.
"It's bittersweet. It's awesome. But there's really no celebration until he gets out of jail," Glass said.
Federal New Democrat MP Olivia Chow said it was time for Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government "to stop wasting taxpayers' money" and offer some kind of residence program for the war dodgers before the courts force them to do so.
"In the meantime, we're wasting thousands and thousands of dollars throwing people in jail and attempting to deport them," Chow said.

Along with MP support, Amnesy International issued "Canada: Stop the deportation of Conscientious Objector Corey Glass" yesterday:



James Corey Glass

Update: The Federal court agreed not to forcibly remove Corey Glass on July 10. Corey now has the opportunity to submit new applications to remain in Canada. A final decision has not yet been made as to whether or not he will be allowed to remain indefinitely.

The Canadian authorities intend to deport US serviceman James Corey Glass on 10 July. He fled to Canada to avoid being sent back to Iraq because of his conscientious objection to the war there. If they deport him, he risks being court-martialled and jailed for between one and five years. Amnesty International would consider him a prisoner of conscience.

Corey Glass joined the National Guard in 2002, and was assigned to non-combatant duties. His unit was later ordered to deploy to Iraq, where he completed five months of active service in 2005.

According to a statement outlining his position, he had concerns about the legality of the war before he was deployed to Iraq. While serving there, he developed further serious objections to the war, including what he saw as the abusive treatment of civilians by US forces, and the military system's failure to address these abuses. He said he had reported his concerns to his superiors and asked to be relieved of duty. His request was denied but he was given two weeks' leave. He refused to return to his unit and went absent without leave (AWOL) in February 2006.

In August 2006 he went to Canada, where his application for protection as a refugee was rejected. His subsequent applications to remain in Canada were also denied and he was ordered to leave Canada.

Corey Glass has spoken out publicly about his objection to the Iraq war, and has become a member of a Canadian organisation, the War Resisters Support Campaign, which works to persuade the Canadian government to offer sanctuary to US military personnel who want to come to Canada because of their opposition to the invasion of Iraq.

US law recognizes the right to conscientious objection only on grounds of opposition to war in any form. Corey Glass would not qualify, because his objection is only to the Iraq War. Other US soldiers with similar objections, who have sought to register their conscientious objection and apply for non-combatant status, have been turned down.

Corey Glass would be the first US conscientious objector known to have been deported from Canada.

TAKE ACTION:

Please send a message immediately

  • urging the authorities to cease any removal or deportation proceedings which may have been commenced against James Corey Glass;

  • pointing out that US law recognizes the right to conscientious objection only on grounds of opposition to war in any form, and Corey Glass was unable to apply for conscientious objector status because his objection was solely to the Iraq war;

  • explaining that, although he went absent without leave, Corey Glass took reasonable steps to secure his release from military obligations, and asked to be relieved of duty, so Amnesty International would consider him a prisoner of conscience if he were jailed on his return to the USA.

WRITE TO:


The Right Honorable Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2
Fax: 613 941 6900
Email: Harper.S@parl.gc.ca or pm@pm.gc.ca
Salutation: Dear Prime Minister

FURTHER BACKGROUND:

Amnesty International has recognised as prisoners of conscience a number of US soldiers refusing to deploy to Iraq because of their conscientious objection to the war. They include Camilo Mejía, who was sentenced to one year's imprisonment and Kevin Benderman, who was sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment.

Amnesty International believes the right to refuse to perform military service for reasons of conscience is part of freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as recognised in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Canada is a state party.

Amnesty International considers a conscientious objector to be any person who, for reasons of conscience or profound conviction, either refuses to perform any form of service in the armed forces or applies for non-combatant status. This can include refusal to participate in a war because one disagrees with its aims or the manner in which it was being waged, even if one does not oppose taking part in all wars.

Wherever such a person is detained or imprisoned solely for these beliefs, Amnesty International considers that person to be a prisoner of conscience. Amnesty International also considers conscientious objectors to be prisoners of conscience if they are imprisoned for leaving the armed forces without authorization for reasons of conscience, if they have first taken reasonable steps to secure release from military obligations.

Amnesty International opposes the forcible return of any person to any country where he or she would face a substantial risk of becoming a prisoner of conscience.




Kevin Connor's "War resister stays in Canada, for now" (Toronto Sun) returns to the topic of the decision:

"We have not yet received the reasons for the decision but we are relieved and delighted," Glass's lawyer, Alyssa Manning, said yesterday.
The decision doesn't mean Glass can remain in Canada permanently, said Danielle Norris, a spokesman with citizenship and immigration.
"His deportation has just been stayed -- it doesn't mean he can stay and he hasn't been granted refugee status."

Gerry Condon was interviewed on KPFA's The Morning Show yesterday and Joshua Key and Jeff Paterson (project director of Courage to Resist) by Aimee Allison and the broadcasts are archived and streamable online [for those needing text, see yesterday's snapshot for Condon's remarks, the day before for Key's]. Allison co-hosts the program with Philip Maldari and co-authored Army Of None with David Solnit.


Jeff Paterson has an article about the demonstrations at San Francisco Indymedia entitled "SF Protesters Rally to Support U.S. War Resisters in Canada" which also has six photos.

In US political news, Sabina notes "Five More States, $60,000, July 20:"


Posted by The Nader Team on Wednesday, July 9, 2008 at 09:17:00 AM


Five More States, $60,000, July 20 .

Ladies and gentlemen.

Today, it is July 9.

And thanks to you, we have met deadline one - get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in ten states by July 6.

Now, on to deadline two: Donate now.

Fifteen states by July 20.

That's five more states - Missouri, Massachusetts, South Carolina, Rhode Island and Arkansas.

All by July 20.

And to get there, we need to raise $60,000.

In eleven days.

Here is what we propose.

Donate now - in whatever denomination suits you - $5, $10, $20, $50, $100.

And if you choose, your name will pop up on our fundraising widget - which shows every dollar we raise as we approach our $60,000 goal.

You will be supporting Albert, Nicole, David and Deborah.

They are four of more than 50 valiant roadtrippers - who have spanned out around the country to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot.

Thanks to them - and thanks to you - we are on our way toward our goal of 15 states by July 20.

  • In South Carolina, we need 20,000 signatures. Fourteen of our roadtrippers, led by Albert Marino, David Peyton and Tom Hanson (pictured above), collected 3,500 signatures over the July 4 weekend. We now have 14,000 in hand. We need another 6,000 in five days. Come on, Carolina, help get us there now.

  • In Massachusetts, we need 20,000 signatures. We have 12,000 in hand and need another 8,000 in the next 10 days to push us over the top. Bay Staters - push us over the top.

  • In Missouri, we need 20,000 signatures. As of today, we have collected 12,000. We need another 8,000 in the next ten days. Missouri - show us the money.

Nicole Brooks and Janice Brower

  • In Rhode Island, we just flew in five roadtrippers for Ralph to launch our New England team. They will be led by Nicole Brooks (pictured here) and Deborah Schagen. After Rhode Island, this team will help push us over the top in New Hampshire and Maine. Little Rhody, let's get it done.

  • And in Arkansas, we're just getting started. We need 2,000 signatures. Please, Razorbacks - step up now.

Nader/Gonzalez.

It's a happy crew.

Why?

Because happiness is participation in power.

Feeling down about the corporate takeover of our democracy?

Donate now to Nader/Gonzalez.

You'll feel better.

And you'll help us meet our goal of $60,000 by July 20.

And we'll put your name in lights (if you choose).

Remember you can keep giving whenever you feel the urge - right up to the legal limit of $4,600 per person.

You might feel the urge, for example, this afternoon if Obama and McCain vote for the telecom immunity bill.

Again, thanks for your strong support.

Together, we are making a difference.

Onward

The Nader Team

PS: We invite your comments to the blog.

Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.

Contribute.



If you're not noticing, war resisters is a very big topic in the news. You need to be paying attention to who is bothering to cover it and who is busy working out their Obama obsessions while begging you for more money because they're unable to maintain their jobs without being panhandlers (hence, Panhandle Media).

It's such a news topic that The Nation offers an 'online exclusive,' Will de Nova's
"Canada's War Resisters" -- and you know it's online because the term Katrina banned from print ("war resisters") pops up in the title. But the story opens with the 'struggle':

Former Private Kimberly Rivera is a long way from home.
Since moving to Toronto with her family a year and a half ago, the 26-year-old Iraq War veteran and mother of two has confronted struggles both personal and political: estrangement from her family back in Texas, long periods of unemployment and, above all, the imminent threat of deportation.
Kimberly would not have it any other way. To Canada's first female defector from the United States military, her adopted home is a "peaceful environment, somewhere I can raise my family, somewhere I can be me".
The American military calls people like Kimberly "deserters". To their supporters in Canada and the US, they are "war resisters."

War resisters is the term. It has been used for years. It was used throughout Vietnam in the MSM. That's how pathetic Panhandle Media is, a spoiled brat gets put in charge of a magazine she can't handle and she's so historically ignorant (and so fearful that it will 'hurt' the Democrats in elections) that she bans a term from print and everyone has to take their articles elsewhere (on this topic -- as well as non election topics). de Nova gets an 'online exclusive' and has to waste time explaining a term that a trip through the archives of any major daily newspapers will demonstrate is a term with widespread and historical use.

[And if you're laughing at Democracy Now! this morning -- as usual -- enjoy it. If you're wondering why three journalists and a diplomat bring up Mark Thatcher repeatedly but none of them know what happened to Thatcher -- well that's the state of Panhandle Media. Click here for Thatcher reality.]

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








kpfa
the morning show

gerry condon

joshua key
aimee allison
philip maldari
david solnit



Posted at 06:49 am by thecommonills
 

Iraq

Iraq

In the New York Times today, Steven Lee Myers offers "A More Confident Iraq Becomes a Tougher Negotiating Partner for the U.S." which is dubbed an analysis

But Mr. Maliki's once enfeebled government, emboldened by several recent military successes, is eager to assert its sovereignty.
The Iraqi demands have put Mr. Bush in a politically awkward spot.
The president has explicitly opposed any binding timetables -- either from the Iraqis or from the war's critics here at home -- but he also pledged less than a month ago to abide by the will of Iraq's leaders.
"You know, of course, we're there at their invitation," Mr. Bush said in Paris during his recent European tour. "This is a sovereign nation."
This new Iraqi confidence is easy to overstate, and many of the statements simply prove that Iraq’s democracy has matured to the point that elected leaders there must pander to important constituencies, even if they quietly acknowledge the need for American military support for the foreseeable future.

It's a strange sort of analysis in that it leaves out why al-Maliki might float the notion domestically (Iraq is supposed to hold elections in October). Stronger Times coverage can be found in Sabrina Tavernise's "Iraq Military Commander Survives Suicide Bomb Attack:"


A suicide bomber detonated his car outside a regional traffic police building in Mosul, where Lt. Gen. Riyadh Jalal Tawfiq, the chief of the Iraqi military command for the city, was holding a meeting. General Tawfiq was not hurt, but five of the eight killed were civilians, and 41 people were wounded, including seven of his bodyguards, Iraqi officials said.
Mosul, home to many former military officers loyal to Saddam Hussein, continues to be violent as attacks in much of Iraq have declined. An aggressive sweep of the city by the American military and the Iraqi Army in the spring brought the number of attacks down, but violence still flares.

James Risen's "General Misled Lawmakers on KBR Work, Senator Says" (New York Times) details why US Senator Byron L. Dorgan accuses General Jermoe Johnson of lying to the Senate Armed Services Committee when providing testimony in April of last year on KBR's work supplying water to US forces during which time Johnson denied that there was "widespread problems with water supplied by KBR" despite "the Pentagon's inspector general" stating that there was (and, yes, there were huge problems). On the front page of the Washington Post, Ernesto Londono's "U.S. Troops in Iraq Face A Powerful New Weapon" explores IRAMS (Improvised Rocket Assisted Munitions) which the US military is stating has become the weapon of choice in attacks by resistance fighters with "at least 21 peoplce, including at least three U.S. soldiers" dying from them so far in 2008. Sally Buzbee's "Drought threatens Iraq's crops and water supply" (Los Angeles Times)explores the growing season in Iraq:

It's been a year of drought and sand storms across Iraq -- a dry spell that has devastated the country's crucial wheat crop and created new worries about the safety of drinking water.
U.S. officials warn that Iraq will have to increase wheat imports sharply this winter to make up for the lost crop -- a sobering proposition with world food prices high and some internal refugees already struggling to afford food.
"Planting ... is totally destroyed," said Daham Mohammed Salim, 40, who farms 120 acres in the al-Jazeera area near Tikrit, 80 miles north of Baghdad. "Even the ground water in wells is lower than before."

Barack supports spying on American citizens and made that clear yesterday. Rebecca's "your frankenstein monster has escaped," Kat's "Hillary and Barbara stand up, Barack crawls," Marcia's "Ralph Nader, Jesse Jackson, Barack, Hillary," Ruth's "Barack, Hillary, Ralph, Glen Ford," Mike's "He tore apart the Democratic Party, now its families," Elaine's "Who stood up? The woman they attacked.," and Cedric's "Jesse Jackson Jnr. has a new Daddy" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! GUESS WHO GOT A NEW DADDY!" (joint-post on the last two) address it.

Senators Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold were among those voting against the proposal and standing up for the rights of the people. (Links under names go to the senators statements on their opposition to expanding spying on Americans, Feingold provides audio as well as text.)

Megan notes independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader's position on yesterday's expansion of spying:

Nader Audio on Telecom Immunity

Posted by Ralph Nader on Wednesday, July 9, 2008 at 12:55:00 PM

Nader Audio on Telecom Immunity .

Listen to Ralph Nader's audio message on the Senate vote on FISA - here.

Good morning.

This is Ralph Nader.

Today is Wednesday July 9, 2008.

And I'm listening now to the debate on the Senate floor over legislation that will give President Bush new warrantless eavesdropping powers.

The bill will also grant immunity to telecom companies for cooperating with Mr. Bush in his illegal warrantless wiretapping on Americans - on any one of you.

We were taught as young children that in our democracy, under our system of justice, nobody is above the law - nobody.

But this bill puts the President and the telecom companies above the law.

It also conveniently assures a coverup of Mr. Bush's past crimes in this area - of wiretapping and surveillance.

On the Senate floor, Senator Feingold has just warned his colleagues that the Senate "will regret that we passed this legislation."

As my home state Senator, Christopher Dodd, said:

"If we pass this legislation, the Senate will ratify a domestic spying regime that has already concentrated far too much unaccountable power in the President's hands and will place the telecommunications companies above the law."

What does it say that Senators Dodd, Feingold, Harry Reid, and Patrick Leahy have led the valiant fight against this bill, but Senator Obama has said he will vote for it?

Again, this bill gives the President vast new warrantless eavesdropping powers and allows the government - for the first time ever - to tap into America's telecommunications networks with no judicial warrant requirement.

President Bush and the Democrats who support him argue that the telecommunications companies were only doing what they were told by the President and were acting as "patriotic corporate citizens."

This is pure hogwash.

First of all, corporations aren't citizens.

Second, the President can't order anyone - citizens or corporations - to break the law.

This legislation, which the Senate is debating right now, sets up a double standard of justice.

Break the law as a citizen, go to jail.

Break the law as a corporation, go to Washington and get immunity.

Remember, there were telecom companies, such as Qwest, that refused to follow President Bush's illegal wiretap orders and chose instead to obey the laws of the land.

The Senate is now poised to bury the rule of law.

What to do?

Join Nader/Gonzalez - the candidacy that will shift the power from the corporations back into the hands of the people.

We strongly oppose the wiretap surveillance legislation that Obama and McCain support.

We stand strongly with the American people and for the Constitution.

The Nader/Gonzalez campaign is now at six percent in the most recent CNN poll.

We're in the middle of a fundraising drive right now to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in 45 states by September 20.

Help us get there now.

Go to votenader.org.

Donate to your heart's content.

For the Constitution.

For liberty.

For freedom.

For justice.

For shifting the power from the corporations, back into the hands of the American people.

"We the people" are the first words of the Constitution - we should always remember.

Thank you.

PS: We invite your comments to the blog.

Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.

Contribute.




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
















Posted at 06:46 am by thecommonills
 

Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Iraq snapshot

Iraq snapshot

Wednesday, July 9, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, Barack Obama revists his sexist notion about women 'feeling blue,' and more.

 

Starting with war resistance.  "But in the meantime, these people need sancturay whether it's in Canada, in Europe or even in our own communities -- because increasingly there are AWOL GIs living right amongst us and the progressive community is providing them refuge in the United States," Gerry Condon explained today on  KPFA's The Morning Show, Aimee Allison (Allison co-hosts with Philip Maldari). 

 

Aimee Allison: This week we've covered the latest on Americans who have left the US military, deserted the US military, and are awaiting refugee status in Canada.  There have been some victories of late and we covered one just yesterday

 

Aimee Allison: Give us the latest on Robin Long.


Gerry Condon: Robin Long has been apprehended -- we believe illegally -- by the Canadian Border Services Agency in British Columbia.  He's being held now and threatened with deportation.  Neither he nor his lawyer were notified that the decision made to deport him.  He's been denied his right -- his legal right -- to appeal this deportation.  And we think the Canadian Border Services Agency is acting outside the law and certainly acting against the wishes of the Canadian people. We just had a poll from last week showing 64% of Canadians believe that US war resisters should be allowed to remain in Canada.  The Canadian Parliament has recently called on the government to allow US war resisters to immigrate.   And then on the Fourth of July a Federal Court in Canada rejected the narrow basis for the denial of refugee status to Iraq veteran and war resister Joshua Key.  So the Conservative government -- this minority Conservative government in Canada -- is totally isolated on this and yet they're going ahead like a rogue government and illegally arresting and threatening  to deport people.  There's a lot of people very upset about this in Canada and in the United States.  Today Veterans for Peace, Courage to Resist, Project Safe Haven, Iraq veterans and others will be going to Canadian consulates in 14 US cities to demand an end to these deportation proceedings -- against not only Robin Long but Iraq veteran Corey Glass -- and to call on the Canadian government to follow the will of Parliament and the Canadian of the people and allow US war resisters to immigrate to Canada.

 

Aimee Allison:  Now Robin Long and Corey Glass are just two former military members who have gone with their families to Canada and are applying for refugee status.  Robin Long was in the application process still? 

 

Gerry Condon: Yes, he had been denied his refugee status but then he was in what's called the pre-removal risk assessment phase which is prior to possible deportation and he was not informed that they had ruled against him on that. So he and his lawyer were not allowed to their legal right to appeal it. So this has happened several times now that the Canadian Border Services Agency in British Columbia has . . . made some very, very questionable arrests of US war resisters.  Actually, Robin Long was arrested once before under similar circumstances and it seems like somebody in the chain of command there really has an axe to grind against US war resisters and perhaps some people in the Conservative government eager to set the precedent of finally actually deporting one of these guys .

 

Aimee Allison: Well let's talk about that because have any US war resisters been deported in this era -- the Iraq War era to date?

 

Gerry Condon: No, none have been deported yet. There have been -- Although Corey Glass was given until tomorrow -- Thursday --  to leave Canada or face deportation and that's really sparked a political crisis in Canada over this issue.  But so far, no, there have been no deportations.  And we intend to keep it that way. Nobody should be punished for refusing to participate in an illegal, immoral war and that's the bottom line. 

 

[. . .]

 

Aimee Allison: Let's talk about how many people are in Canada in Robin Long's situation.

 

Gerry Condon: Right.  There are about 200 estimated to be in Canada at this time.  And that includes men and women from all four branches of the US military and many of them are Iraq veterans.  About 50 of them have applied for refugee status and generally they are being turned down and then appealing.  And this has, you know, come to a point now where, like I said, we have the support of the large majority of Canadians -- from 70% in Quebec to 52% in Alberta -- and we have the Parliament behind us.  Looks like the courts are starting to turn our direction finally because this decision last week  by the Federal Court in Canada to . . . order the refugee board to redo the hearing for Iraq veteran Joshua Key is very significant.

 

Aimee Allison: Well today there are actions at Canadian consulates in 14 US cities and then in Germany as well.  Can you tell me a little bit about what you hope to accomplish and some of the logistics.

 

Gerry Condon: Well we believe that pressure from people in the US has been very helpful.  Courage to Resist, based in the Bay Area there, of course, has managed to organize 10,000 people in this country to send letters to the Canadian government and political leaders and I think that really helped actually tip the balance toward the Parliament's decision finally to formally call for the government to allow US war resisters to immigrate.  One concern that some Canadians have is that by allowing US war resisters to remain in Canada, they may be offending the United States and we're here to tell them that, you know, just like in Canada, the majority of people in this country, the large majority are against the war in Iraq. want to see the occupation -- US occupation of Iraq -- come to an end.  And we are happy that Canadians are providing sanctuary for our war resisters and we're thanking the Canadian people for this and urging their government to follow the will of the people to do the right thing and allow US war resisters to remain in Canada.  

 

Aimee Allison: That's Gerry Condon, director of Project Safe Haven,  who is organizing support efforts for US war resisters seeking refugee status in Canada.   

 

Allison, co-author of  Army Of None with David Solnit, interviewed US war resister Joshua Key and Jeff Paterson of Courage to Resist on yesterday's The Morning Show -- the broadcast and today's are archived.  Key's interview was noted in yesterday's snapshot as was Robin Long's arrest. Travis Lupick (Georgia Straight) reports the CBSA informed Robin "he would be deported to the U.S. by as early as Monday (July 14)". The Canadian Press quotes Bob Ages (War Resisters Support Campaign) stating, "This is quite a bombshell in what we thought was a pretty routine administration hearing."  Rod Mickleburgh (Globe & Mail) notes, "There had been no warning to Mr. Long that he was in danger of being sent back to the United States so quickly, and it came as a particular shock to his lawyer, Shepherd Moss, in light of last week's court decision upholding deserter Joshua Key's appeal of his failed refugee application."  Allison Cross (Vancouver Sun) explains Robin took part in yesterday's hearing via "phone from Nelson" and that "he was told officials had decided in May Long wouldn't be at risk to torture or punishment if he was returned to the US".  The War Resisters Support Campaign issues a press release which includes the following:

 

"The actions of the CBSA amounts to harassment," says Lee Zaslofsky, spokesperson for the War Resisters Support Campaign. "This young man has complied with his requirements and his whereabouts were well-known. The Harper government is ignoring the will of the House of Commons and the Canadian people. It is doing the bidding of the Bush administration in seeking to remove these soldiers of conscience to face persecution in the US."  
Bob Ages, of the Vancouver War Resisters Support Campaign said, "Our
legal counsel will be asking that Robin Long be immediately released and
members of Parliament will be taking up this matter with the government and
the Canadian public."

 

 

Oxford Review notes US war resister Rich Droste took part in the Port Dover Canada Day parade by providing information and raising awareness on the issue and the urgency: "Supporters of war resisters are rallying across Canada this Thursday July 10, the date when resister Corey Glass has been ordered to leave Canada."  Meanwhile Straight Goods joins New Catholic Times in running the "Appeal from Canada's faith communities to the Government of Canada."

 

To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca").  Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote.  Now they've started a new letter you can use online here.  The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here.
 
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).
 
Moving to Japan where (US) White House spokesperson Dana Perino declread today that
"we don't have timetables for troop withdrawals, we don't have timetables for negotiations." Perino was responding to questions about the treaty the White House wants with Nouri al-Maliki and al-Maliki's floating of the notion that timetables for US withdrawal may be included in the treaty.  Perino and other White House staff arrived with the Bully Boy in Japan on July 6th.  Asked when Bully Boy had last spoken to al-Maliki, Perino declared this morning, "he just spoke to him right before we left.  I can't remember what day we left, but the President had a secure videoteleconfrence" with al-Maliki and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker "checks in with the president daily.  Almost."  Perino attempted to spin talk of withdrawal as a positive in a sort of 'And before the US invasion, no one ever talked in Iraq!' manner. As though an eviction notice would ever be seen as a sign of progress?  In this morning's New York Times, Campbell Robertson became the first to get the White House on record regarding al-Maliki's withdrawal statements.  Robertson quoted the White House's Gordon D. Johndroe stating, "Negotiations and discussions are ongoing every day.  It is important to understand that these are not talks on a hard date for withdrawal, but are discussions on a security horizion that reflects the Iraqis' increasing capacity, as well as improved conditions on the ground that should allow for a further reduction of U.S. forces."  Meanwhile Ernesto Londono and Dan Eggan (Washington Post) quote Mowaffak al-Rubaie (the National Security Advisor of Iraq) stating, "There should not be any permanent bases in Iraq unless these bases are under Iraqi control."  Londono and Eggan go on to state that the White House maintains recent statements by Iraqi officials are "aimed at local and regional audiences and do not reflect fundamental disagreements with the Bush administration."  Reuters offers two theories for al-Maliki's floating of the idea.  1) Local elections are supposed to take place in October (which would go along with the White House's call that the remarks are aimed at local populations -- Iraqis want all foreign troops out of their country).  2) "Iraq's Arab neighbours -- sensitive to any U.S. military presence on Middle Eastern soil -- have long been reluctant to extend full legitimacy to Maliki's Shi'ite-led government partly because of its heavy reliance on American soldiers."
 
Meanwhile 38 year-old AP camera journalist Ahmed Nouri Raziak has been held by the US military since last month and AP has been informed he will be held for at least six weeks. He has worked for AP Television for five years and was stopped by the US military (or rounded up, let's be honest) in Tikrit. I can't find a link for this but will get one for the next entry.  AP notes: "The decision came as a surprise to the AP, which had earlier been led to believe that the cameraman, Ahmed Nouri Raziak, was likely to be released because of lack of any evidence against him."
 
Today one Mosul bombing (there were others) gets some attention from the press.  Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) explains of the bombing that claimed at least 14 lives with thirty-five wounded, it was "a suicide car bomb that targetedd Nineveh Operations Command Major General Riyadh Jalal Tawfeeq."  AFP quotes Tauffiq stating, "The bomber drove his car into my convoy in the Al-Faisaliya neighbourhood of east Mosul.  When my guards tried to arrest him, he detonated his car."  Al Jazeera reports, "General Riyadh Jalal Tauffiq, the head of the security operations in Mosul and the surrounding province of Ninawa, escaped unharmed when the suicide bomber drove his car into the convoy on Wednesday."  BBC explains, "The victims were his bodyguards and civilians in the area." Al Bawaba offers this perspective, "The violence came as Iraqi officials issued data showing attacks have declined sharply over the past year."
 
In some of today's other reported violence . . .
 
Bombings?
 

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Falluja bombing (fifteen minutes apart) which claimed 5 lives and left seventeen people wounded, a Mosul car bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer, another Mosul bombing wounded one member of the Iraqi military and a Kirkuk bombing in Kirkuk resulted in "destroying a tower for Atheer cell phone net company".   On the Falluja bombings, RTT adds, "The incident occurred outside a bank when police and a crowd gathered in the area after an explosion at 6:30 a.m. local time."

 

Shootings?

 

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Iraqi police and military shot dead 1 person during a raid, 1 police officer was shot dead in Mosul, one member of the Iraqi military was injured in a Mosul shooting.

 

Corpses?

 

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad and 11 in Ramadi.  CBS and AP up the corpse count by 11, noting that twenty-two corpses were discovered in Ramadi "most of them under concrete in a playing field."  Reuters notes 1 corpse ("young girl" was discovered in Kut and 1 in Tuz Khumato.

 

Today the US military announced: "A Coalition force Soldier was killed in an explosion while conducting operations in Salah ad-Din July 9.  Additionally, two other Soldiers were wounded in the explosion."  The announcement brought the total number of US service members who have been killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4116.

 

Turning to the US presidential race.  Team Nader announces that the "ten states by July 6" target was reache and the new goal is "15 states by July 20." Ralph Nader is an independent candidate for president.  As such he has to fight for ballot access.  The five that they are going for next are Arkansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, Rhode Island and South Carolina. "And to get there, we need to raise $60,000.  In eleven days. Here is what we propose. Donate now - in whatever denomination suits you - $5, $10, $20, $50, $100.

And if you choose, your name will pop up on our fundraising widget - which shows every dollar we raise as we approach our $60,000 goal."  And Ralph Nader notes:

 

 

Listen to Ralph Nader's audio message on the Senate vote on FISA - here.

Good morning.

This is Ralph Nader.

Today is Wednesday July 9, 2008.

And I'm listening now to the debate on the Senate floor over legislation that will give President Bush new warrantless eavesdropping powers.

The bill will also grant immunity to telecom companies for cooperating with Mr. Bush in his illegal warrantless wiretapping on Americans - on any one of you.

We were taught as young children that in our democracy, under our system of justice, nobody is above the law - nobody.

But this bill puts the President and the telecom companies above the law.

It also conveniently assures a coverup of Mr. Bush's past crimes in this area - of wiretapping and surveillance.

On the Senate floor, Senator Feingold has just warned his colleagues that the Senate "will regret that we passed this legislation."

As my home state Senator, Christopher Dodd, said:

"If we pass this legislation, the Senate will ratify a domestic spying regime that has already concentrated far too much unaccountable power in the President's hands and will place the telecommunications companies above the law."

What does it say that Senators Dodd, Feingold, Harry Reid, and Patrick Leahy have led the valiant fight against this bill, but Senator Obama has said he will vote for it?

Again, this bill gives the President vast new warrantless eavesdropping powers and allows the government - for the first time ever - to tap into America's telecommunications networks with no judicial warrant requirement.

President Bush and the Democrats who support him argue that the telecommunications companies were only doing what they were told by the President and were acting as "patriotic corporate citizens."

This is pure hogwash.

First of all, corporations aren't citizens.

Second, the President can't order anyone - citizens or corporations - to break the law.

This legislation, which the Senate is debating right now, sets up a double standard of justice.

Break the law as a citizen, go to jail.

Break the law as a corporation, go to Washington and get immunity.

Remember, there were telecom companies, such as Qwest, that refused to follow President Bush's illegal wiretap orders and chose instead to obey the laws of the land.

The Senate is now poised to bury the rule of law.

What to do?

Join Nader/Gonzalez - the candidacy that will shift the power from the corporations back into the hands of the people.

We strongly oppose the wiretap surveillance legislation that Obama and McCain support.

We stand strongly with the American people and for the Constitution.

The Nader/Gonzalez campaign is now at six percent in the most recent CNN poll.

We're in the middle of a fundraising drive right now to put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in 45 states by September 20.

Help us get there now.

Go to votenader.org.

Donate to your heart's content.

For the Constitution.

For liberty.

For freedom.

For justice.

For shifting the power from the corporations, back into the hands of the American people.

"We the people" are the first words of the Constitution - we should always remember.

Thank you.

 

 Marcia and Ruth noticed confusion online regarding Nader's appearances Saturday -- there are two and the one in Richmond is in the afternoon.  So we'll join them in noting Ralph Nader's upcoming events:


Sat. July 12th 1-3pm 
Nader for President 2008 Rally 
Richmond, VA 
Virginia Holocaust Museum 
2000 E Cary St. Richmond, VA       
Contact John: 804-432-1611
Suggested contribution: $10/$5 student  
Map it   ****  
Sat. July 12th 7:30-10pm 
Nader for President 2008 Rally 
Raleigh, NC 
St Mary's School (Pittman Auditorium)  
900 Hillsborough St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27603  
Contact: Thomas (919) 828-6236 
Suggested contribution: $10/$5 student  
Map it   *****       
Sun. July 13th 2-4pm    
Nader for President 2008 Rally       
Charlottesville, VA         
Gravity Lounge      
103 South First Street Charlottesville VA 22902   
Contact: Michael: 520-906-8661      
Suggested Contribution $10/$5 student      
Map it        

 

Brian Montopoli (CBS News) examines presumed Democratic nominee Barack Obama. Montopoli explores an interview Barack gave to the Christian outlet Relevant magazine.  During the course of the interview, the magazine publisher (Cameron Strang) sums up a position for Barack which includes this opening, "You've said you're personally against abortion . . ."  To be really clear, were the person Strang speaking to Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton or any other number of women in Congress, it would be one thing.  But when it's the man who refused to vote "yes" or "no" and went with "present" while in the Illinois state legislature, that's a different matter.  Equally true is a woman making that statement may or may not have found herself in the position where she had to take the theoretical into practice.  Though the press credits the Christ-child with amazing powers, it's highly unlikely that Barack has ever found himself pregnant.  The summary (and the fact that Barack doesn't object to it) should (at the very least) raise eyebrows.  Roe v. Wade as a scare tactic is not going to work.  And one of the main reasons is Barack won't talk to women.  He sneers at women.  When it's time to talk abortion, why is he running to a 'Christian' magazine and allowing that he is "personally against abortion"?  More insulting -- and this is insulting to women, to pro-choice advocates of both genders and to medical professionals (especially those in the mental health field) -- is this remark: "I absolutely can, so please don't believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don't think that 'mental distress' qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions."  Barack is an IDIOT about the law -- obvious when he didn't grasp who the plantiff and defendent were in the landmark case Loving v. Virginia -- but that series of sentences contains something to offend just about everyone.  A) He's talking about banning late-term abortions which isn't really something he campaigned on while pretending to be 'liberal.'  B) Barack has no medical degree so he doesn't know the first damn thing about "mental distress."  That's insulting to those in the mental health practice as well as women.  Repeating, Barack has most likely never been pregnant. He sure seems to think he knows a great deal, doesn't he?  Despite being a basically C-average student most of his life.  Marie Cocco (Washington Post Writers Group) breaks it down:

 

Obama says that these women should not be able to obtain a late-term abortion, because just "feeling blue" isn't the same as suffering "serious clinical mental health diseases." True enough. And totally infuriating. 

During the recent Obama pander tour -- the one in which he spent about a week trying to win over conservative religious voters -- the presumptive Democratic nominee unnecessarily endorsed President Bush's faith-based initiative, a sort of patronage program that rewards religious activists for their political support with public grants. Then in a St. Louis speech, Obama declared that "I let Jesus Christ into my life." That's fine, but we already have a president who believes this was a qualification for the Oval Office, and look where that's gotten us. 

Obama's verbal meanderings on the issue of late-term abortion go further. He has muddied his position. Whether this is a mistake or deliberate triangulation, only Obama knows for sure. 

One thing is certain: Obama has backhandedly given credibility to the right-wing narrative that women who have abortions -- even those who go through the physically and mentally wrenching experience of a late-term abortion -- are frivolous and selfish creatures who might perhaps undergo this ordeal because they are "feeling blue." 

 

iraq

kpfa
the morning show

gerry condon

joshua key
aimee allison
philip maldari
david solnit

robin long
joshua key
allison cross
rod mickleburgh
travis lupick

mcclatchy newspapers

the new york times
marie cocco
the washington post
ernesto londono
dan eggan
campbell robertson

Posted at 03:04 pm by thecommonills
 


Next Page




<< July 2008 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 01 02 03 04 05
06 07 08 09 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31

Contact Me

If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:




rss feed