Wednesday,
July 23, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Talabani says "NO!" to
elections this year, the US Congress stages a feel-good session for the
US army, and more.
Starting with war resistance. In June 2006, Lt Ehren Watada became the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to the illegal war. Since Judge Benjamin Settle ruled last November
that the US military could not attempt a second (kanagroo)
court-martial of Watada while the double-jeopardy issue remains, he has
been in limbo. In a grab-bag column about a number of topics, Christina Clark (Nebraksa's Gateway) mentions
Watada while discussing how the Iraq War is illegal: "Bush did not
receive permission from the United Nations to invade Iraq. In
September 2004, then-U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan stated that the
war was 'not in conformity with the U.N. Charter, from our point of
view and from the Charter point of view, it was illegal.' A number of
military personnel, most notably 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, have refused to
serve in the war because they consider it 'illegal' and have been court
marshaled as a result." As Rebecca noted
of Watada last Friday, "the contract expired in 2006. it's time for the
military to release him. instead they keep him in the military and he
has to report for duty on the base every day."
Meanwhile Chris Vanderveen (9 News Denver) reports that the War Resisters Support Campaign's
Lee Zaslofsky has gone to Colorado to show his support for US war
resister Robin Long who was extradited from Canada last Tuesday and
states of Robin being expelled, "(Canadians) are very distressed by
this. This is going against the tradition we have in our country."
Meanwhile Angela Giles (The Chronicle Herald) argues
for war resisters' right to remain in Canada and notes, "They have a
higher obligation to international law than their 'duty' to just follow
orders. . . . We now know soldiers are systematically ordered to
violate international humanitarian law in Iraq -- from torture to
intentionally targeting civilians -- and there are more revelations of
war crimes emerging every day. . . . The U.S. soldiers seeking refuge
in Canada signed up to defend their country, not to commit war crimes."
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.
Long expulsion does not change the need for action and the War
Resisters Support Campaign explains: "The War Resisters Support
Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to
put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately
cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to
respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by
implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see
the take action page for what you can do."
There
is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which
includes Andrei Hurancyk, 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.
Turning to Iraq and starting with the latest in the provincial elections bill -- CNN reports it has been rejected today. Yesterday,
the Kurdish bloc in the Iraqi Parliament staged a walk-out over a bill
regarding the alleged provincial elections that allegedly would take
place October 1st. The walk-out means the already much postponed
provinicial elections may be postponed further. Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) covers
the political process backdrop for yesterday's actions: "Some Iraqis
think that the offensives that Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki launched
in the southern cities of Basra and Amara and the Baghdad slum of Sadr
City were to weaken his political rivals, the Sadrists, who controlled
those areas. The possibility of a months' long delay in the elections
could fundamentally alter the priorities of local and national
politicians." Ned Parker and Saif Hameed (Los Angeles Times) zoom
in on the backstory/history, "The contentious issue was among several
points that have delayed a vote on the law that would pave the way for
the first local elections since January 2005, when most Sunni Arabs and
many Shiite followers of cleric Muqtada Sadr boycotted the vote. U.S.
officials believe the participation of such groups could go a long way
toward righting the balance of power in provincial politics, in which a
small number of parties, mainly Kurdish and Shiite Muslim, have
dominated." Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) focuses
on the struggle for the oil-rich Kirkuk, "The disagreement centered on
the multiethnic city of Kirkuk, one of several areas in Iraq where
there are competing claims over which province a city or district
belongs in. The question for Kirkuk is whether it should be absorbed
into the Kurdistan region -- a particularly charged question because
the city sits on some of the largest unexploited oil reserves in the
country. Both Arabs and Kurds lay claim to the area. At bottom, the
disagreement is also about the ethnic identity of Iraq and about Arab
frustration with the Kurds. Although the Kurds are a minority, they
have proved adept at turning the political process to their advantage,
often to the chagrin of larger ethnic and religious groups." Last
December, Stephen Farrell (New York Times) reported
on the attempts of the Kurdish region to take control of Kirkuk (with
something other than the security forces they currently utilize) --
forcing Kurds out of the Kurdish region and into Kirkuk to live in "the
squalor of the Kirkuk soccer stadium." CNN quotes
this statement from President Jalal Talabani's office today, "The
president, who does not agree with such a law, which was voted on by
127 deputies who do not represent half of parliament, is confident that
the presidency council will not pass it." Al Jazeera points out, "Wednesday's
move, which comes after protests by Kurdish and some Shia MPs, is
likely to delay the elections, which have been encouraged by US
officials as a key step toward repairing Iraq's sectarian rifts." BBC states,
"Correspondents say this would be a blow to the outgoing US
administration of President George W Bush, which sees the elections as
a key step to the national reconciliation between Iraq's dividied
communities." Is anyone going to make the obvious point? If elections
are called out, why does Moqtada al-Sadr need to hold the line on a
truce? al-Sadr's cooperation was thought to be in part due to the
'October' elections that were coming. al-Maliki started throwing down
rules (or trying to) about who could and who could not participate.
This was after the assault on Basra began. al-Sadr calmed the
situation. And most likely did so so that the Sadr bloc could turn out
for elections in October. Meanwhile AFP reports
that August 1st will be the launching date for the assault on Diyala
Province according to unnamed Iraqi "army and police officers." If
elections are on hold until 2009, the assault might play out elsewhere
in Iraq the same way the Basra assault did. In some of today's reported
violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 woman. Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing that left three police officers wounded and a Mosul mortar attack that left two people wounded.
"The
purpose of today's hearing," US House Rep Susan Davis said yesterday as
she brought to order the House Armed Services Committee's Military
Personnel Subcommittee, "is to take a hard look at the current state of
the Army Medical Action Plan This will be the third hearing this
subcomitt has held on the Army Medical Action Plan -- the army's
response to the revelations at Walter Reed Army Medical Center last
year, since it was issued in June 2007. When the Army Medical Action
Plan execution order was issued last summer, the military personnel
subcomittee believed that the army had finally demonstrated a full
understanding and acceptance of the organizational and systemic short
comings that had led to the scandalous conditions at Walter Reed. We
felt that the Army Medical Action Plan was a comprehensive and
ambitious blue print to tackle these issues head on. After years of
frustration many on the subcomittee believed that the army was finally
ready to take the necessary steps to solve these problems. However,
from our very first briefing on the Army Medical Action Plan, we had
two significant concerns. The first was that the army would be unable
to initially dedicate and then maintain over the long haul the level of
resources required by the Army Medical Action Plan. Specifically, we
were worried that the army would be unable to assign adequate numbers
of personnel to the Warrior Transition Units. Why? Because the core
of the Warrior Transition Units were to be the same soldiers that make
up the backbone of our brigade combat teams: mid-grade,
non-commissioned officers. And these soldiers were already in short
supply. The second concern was that army commanders would overwhelm
the Warrior Tranistion Units by sending them all of their soldiers with
medical issues rather than just those with complex injuries or
conditions that required comprehensive case management. In truth, we
do not feel that this was necessarily a bad thing especially if it
helped units deploy at full strength while injured or ill soldiers had
the opportunity to fully recover Of course, this would only work if
Warrior Transition Units were properly resourced to take care of these
soldiers. From June 2007 through February 2008, the members and staff
of this subcommittee made numerous visits to Warrior Transition Units
throughout the army. The overall trend we observed was positive. The
Army Medical Action Plan was clearly providing better support for
recovering soldiers than the previous medical holdover system. One
wounded warrior commented, 'Thank God for the Warrior Transition Unit.
Things are so much better than they were before.' That was good to
hear but despite the positive trends we were frustrated at the slow
progress of implementing the AMAP. We felt that things should have and
could have been moving faster. We also felt that there was a
discconnect between how quickly the army leadership believed things
were happening and what the facts on the ground seemed to indicate.
Again, despite the challenges, we felt things were moving in an
overall, positive direction. However our concerns about Warrior
Transition Unit staffing levels and the potential of line units,
quote, 'dumping ' soldier on the Warrior Transition Unit continued. We
asked General [Eric] Schoomaker about this repeatedly during our
hearing in February to get an update on the AMAP In response to a
question asked by Mr. [John] McHugh, the army surgeon-general declared,
'For all intents and purposes we are entirely staffed at the point we
need to be staffed.' As the facts at Fort Hood demonstrate that is
clearly not the case now. Gentlemen, the Army Medical Action Plan was
designed by the army. It is your plan. The army senior leadership has
publicly trumpeted your commitment to wounded soldiers at every
opportunity -- and we believe that that is true. But the Secretary of
Defense agrees -- as Dr. [Robert] Gates has made clear -- apart from
the war itself, this department and I have no higher priority." . Over
the course of this hearing we will review the following topics.
Resources. Why has the army failed to properly resource the Warriror
Transition Units population growth. Why did the army fail to predict
the growth in the WT population. We were assured by the army in Feb.
that you had the processes and reviews in place to stay on top of the
population and clearly that's not the case today. Priority. Is the
Army Medical Action Plan truly the army's number two priority? Our
visits do not leave us with that impression. And creativity. From the
outset the Army Medical Action Plan has been sold as a bold roadmap to
overhaul outdated, inefficient and deteremental policies and
procedures. . . . And oversight. Finally and perhaps most importantly
why did it take oversight visits from the subcommittee to identify and
spure the army to fix these issues and what will take to ensure that
the army follows its own plan and lives up to its own promises it
Gentlemen, aside from telling us that you will will harder to implement
it -- and we do believe that, we know that you are working very hard
at this -- what concrete steps are being taken to ensure better follow
through?"
Rep John McHugh (ranking Republican) noted
"there continues to be serious shortfalls. Shortfalls that our staff
did identify and I know the army continues to try to deal with.
Serious questions. That of resources. A mechanism that anticipates
the population growth that we have seen -- an explosion" that it is
only reasonable to expect will continue. Davis and McHugh were
speaking to the army's Lt Gen Michael D. Rochelle, Lt Gen Robert
Wilson, Maj Gen David A. Rubenstein and Brig Gen Gary H. Cheek. PDF
format warning, you can click here for the brass' prepared statement.
Dana Milbank (Washington Post) describes the scene:
"The generals were nervous.Lt. Gen. Robert Wilson moved his index
finger across the page as he read his statement with a halting
delivery. Maj. Gen. David Rubenstein, holding a discolored washcloth
under the witness table to dry his perspiration, accidentally dropped
the cloth and felt for it with his shoe. The anxiety, even for men with
two or three stars on each shoulder, was to be expected. They had come
before a House Armed Services subcommittee to explain why, 16 months
and at least eight fact-finding investigations after the Walter Reed
scandal, the Army still hadn't fixed the health-care system for
soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Milbank
rightly notes that the witnesses played contrite. True. They also
played suck up. Shortly after stating the obvious ("Make no mistake
about it, our army is stretched"), Rochelle would declare, "It is clear
to us that this committee foresaw that better than we did." Why was
that? No need to explore that. No need to worry because Rochelle
insists, "But our heart was in the right place and remains in the right
place." Were these adults testifying before Congress? And did this
tender-hearted brass miss all of Davis and McHugh's many statements
that bordered on the way an adult would speak to a very young child --
stressing repeatedly that the action, not the people, were bad; that
the action, not the people, was at fault. It was a bit puzzling to
hear Davis and McHugh hit those points repeatedly at the start of the
hearings but, a half-hour in, as McHugh had to again reassure the
toddlers with stripes and bars on their shoulders, you were left with
the impression that anything more age appropriate would have left the
generals sucking their thumbs, curled up in a fetal position and
sobbing on the House floor.
McHugh had to again do that
tap-dance before getting to his point. Having again assured the brass
that everyone at the table was a special and wanted general, McHugh
slowly and carefully declared, "In many ways, this challenge isn't
being met. And I find the current circumstances unacceptable." It
seemed to linger in the air as the bragg fidgeted. "You gentlemen
agree with that?" McHugh asked. Silent pause. "Anybody disagree with
that?"
he then asked. Still no comment. Realizing the guilty
children had agreed ahead of time to all stick together, McHugh began
noting the numbers. 6,000 WTs were in the program in June of 2007 and
increased to 12,000 by June of the following year with current
predictions that it will "grow to another 20,000". McHugh wanted to
know if the problem was the model, the problem with the personnel or
the problem due to the 90-day review not being done? Apparently
feeling he had to answer, Rubenstein stated "I'll go first" and quickly
began talking about . . . people who weren't hired. McHugh (stating
"I'm going to interrupt you") attempted to get the conversation back on
track. If hearing Rubenstein discuss how he meets neighbors while he
mows his yard is back on track . . . Around that time, McHugh would
tell Rubenstein, "I'm not hear to argue with you" and, approximately
ten minutes later, "General Rubenstein, I don't mean to engage in a
debate per se" -- then why was the hearing held? US Rep Niki Tsongas
appeared to waste the least amount of time doling out affirmations to
the generals and instead focused on the realities involving the
increased number of WTs. She rightly noted that the White House's
escalation troops are returning and that "if we do eventually engage in
a timetable for the redeployment of our soldiers so again you'll be
bringing back larger soldiers at once and particularly where the issue
is PTSD -- where you might not have to deal with it really until the
soldiers do come home. Can you envision what you would do in a
situation where you simply become overwhelmed by the demand?"
Rubenstein agreed to go first and then began talking about the need to
"keep our arms around" the wounded. If we can leave the happy place
for a minute, Tsongas asked about preparation for the expected influx
into the program. She didn't ask about group hugs. "Where we can't,"
he said finally getting near the question asked, "and where we may not
be able to meet the needs if the numbers are overwhelming, we fall to
our civilian network providers."
US House Rep
Niki Tsongas: And this is a plan you have in place so that it kicks in
automatically or is it really reacting to any given moment?
Maj
Gen David Rubenstein: It's -- it's a plan that's in execution as we
speak today. In October at Fort Hood we sent about 350 of our
warriors downtown Killeen [. . .] to receive health care. Those same
soldiers, six months later, in April of this year had 19,000
appointments downtown so we already use the system
Lt
Gen Michael D. Rochelle: May I add, ma'am, Madam Tsongas, the two
things that you hinted in your question is being pro-active in looking
at both the deployment of individual elements of army unit brigades and
support elements and being pro-active for those that are redeploying as
well. That we have come to learn is - - is one -is one of our
misconnects -- disconnects at the -- at the senior levels of the
army and we're going to do better at that. We already have a very
reliable -- very reliable -- metric.
The
answer to Tsongas' question is "NO." Tsongas was speaking of the
troops that will be returning as the escalation continues to wind down
so dropping back to last year or last April really doesn't address
that. She was also asking noting that there may be some limited
withdrawal in 2009 and is the army preparing for that? When Rubenstein
is offering that last April Fort Hood (which is supposed to be served
primarily by the Carl R. Darnall Army Medical Center) was already
scheduling 19,000 appointments with civilian providers (via the TriCare
contracts/outsourcing) the answer is "NO!" the army is not prepared for
it and does not appear to be doing anything to prepare for it.
(Whining, as Rubenstein did elsewhere, that emergency room nurses in
civilian settings can work to 12 hour shifts and get paid for forty
hours allowing them to make more than they would working for the
military is not "dealing with" or "anticipating" an influx.) Various
members of the committee spoke of visiting Fort Drum and their surprise
or disappointment that so much was still wrong. Rep Nancy Boyda spoke
of a mother of a wounded soldier who was unable to get the help he
needed and was in limbo ("literally dying to get in" to some sort of
treament) and subcommittee chair Davis spoke of being told about the
healing groups ("focused healing environment") in place and instead
seeing people sitting around in frustration and boredom "not feeling
that things were happening for them." Davis asked "how you see that
changing at all? That people are able to get the appointments they
need?" Rubenstein offered nonsense about how, military or civilian, no
one ever gets what they need or the time they think they deserve in a
medical visit. In other words, it was a lot of garbage. Near the end,
Davis offered that the army might need more money and that they could
meet again in September but Rochelle insisted he felt "September would
be too soon." Since the generals could point to nothing accomplished
the idea that they're going to skip out on a September meeting is
rather appalling. Dana Milbank (Washington Post) observes,
"Finding no argument, the lawmakers brought the hearing to a prompt
close, but not before another round of mutal flattery." Yes, it really
was that pathetic. Two hours and ten minutes wasted with no answers
given, no indications that the military actually is addressing the
expected influx of wounded. A lot of airy statements and
back-patting. In the 2004 presidential race, US Senator John Kerry
(the Democratic presidential nominee) rightly noted these problems were
coming. He stated that the White House was underfunding and diverting
resources. His reward for that truth telling was to have FactCheck.org
smack him down with one of their psuedo 'fact checks.' Nearly four
years later, there is still no indication that anything is being done
unless the Washington Post shines a large flashlight on the
problem. The paper did that and brought public awareness and public
outcry. The US Congress seems unwilling and/or unable to follow up on
that. The hearing was an embarrassment. The fact that Milbank and Talk Radio News Service appear to be the only ones who bothered to cover it is even more embarrassing.
In England Gordon Brown, Prime Minister, is in the news for making another statement. Philip Webster, Deborah Haynes and Tim Reid (Times of London) reports
that Brown is saying that 'most' British troops will be out of Iraq "in
a year." There are approximately 4,1000 of them -- that's actually the
number of British troops and the number of contradictory statements
Brown has made in his brief time as prime minister as to whether
England would leave or stay in Iraq. Take the wait and see approach
with Brown's statements which, like the weather, seem to change hourly.
Turning to the US presidential race. MediaChannel
-- for some unknown reason -- is pushing a stupid study by "Media
Tenor." "Media Tenor" is not a media watchdog, it's part of Democracy
In Action -- yet another front group funded with blood money. Go to
MediaChannel if you're interested in reading it. (My comments are not
about MediaChannel, they are about "Media Tenor"). It's an
'analysis' that is both factually 'free' and non-content based. It's a
'study' in the way your eight-year-old brother or sister might write a
book 'report.' It's also insulting. Barack Obama and John McCain are
not candidates for president. They are 'presumptive' candidates. Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader are
actual candidates and they're shut out of the 'analysis.' It's
superficial crap that wants credit for finger-pointing at . . .
super-ficial crap. As Phoebe famously said on Friends,
"Hello Monica, this is kettle, you're black." Media Tenor's garbage
doesn't need to be circulated, it needs to be put in the trash. MediaChannel
got a link, but no link to the trash of "Democracy" In Action or "Media
Tenor" or all the other partisan outlets staffed with dimwits paid in
blood money. Shame on you all. (If need be, Ava
says we can revisit the garbage being offered by Media Tenor at Third
in our TV commentary Sunday but, if we do, we'll be doing a 'greatest
hits' and not offering anything on any program airing this week.)
Paul Street takes on the myth of Saint Barack here (Black Agenda Report). Kenneth J. Theisen (World Can't Wait) calls out the War Hawk Barack here. Sally Soriano of Team Nader notes:
Yes, indeed.
You read that right.
You can win the grand prize -- a dinner with our main man -- Ralph Nader (at a mutually agreed time and place.)
How?
We're
looking to build our e-mail list, to expand our grassroots support, and
to spread the bedrock Nader/Gonzalez campaign message -- shift the
power from the corporate controlled political parties back into the
hands of the people.
So, we're having a contest.
The person who brings in the most e-mail sign-ups by August 7 at midnight to votenader.org wins.
Open to legal U.S. residents, 18 years or older at time of entry.
You invite your friends, family, neighbors and anyone else to sign up for Nader/Gonzalez updates.
The person who brings us the most e-mails wins the grand prize -- dinner with Ralph Nader.
He
quickly moved up into Canada. It's believed upwards of a couple hundred
American military deserters are living in Canada at this moment, says Lee Zaslofsky, who works with many of them. On Tuesday, Zaslofsky came to Colorado to support Robin Long. "(Canadians) are very distressed by this. This is going against the tradition we have in our country," he said. Zaslofsky
is now a Canadian citizen. In the mid 60s he too left the United States
after a brief stint in the military during the Vietnam War era. Back then it's believed tens of thousands of Americans traveled to Canada to avoid participation in the Vietnam War. "The (Canadian) government at that time believed they should be welcomed," he said.
Dominick
Mirabile (July 17 opinion piece) argues that U.S. war resisters had a
choice whether or not to enlist. However, signing a contract with the
U.S. military does not obligate someone to participate in war crimes.
Whether they volunteered or not is irrelevant. They have a higher
obligation to international law than their "duty" to just follow orders. Mr.
Mirabile argues that war resisters "broke the law. They are in
violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice." But under Principle
2 of Nuremburg, "The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty
for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not
relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under
international law." In other words, international law trumps the
Uniform Code of Military Justice if, under the guise of the UCMJ,
soldiers are being ordered to participate in war crimes. We
now know soldiers are systematically ordered to violate international
humanitarian law in Iraq -- from torture to intentionally targeting
civilians -- and there are more revelations of war crimes emerging
every day. The Nuremberg Tribunal ruled that "the very essence of the
(Nuremberg) Charter is that individuals have international duties which
transcend the national obligations of obedience imposed by the
individual state." A
contract runs both ways. Those who argue that the war resisters should
be deported back to the U.S. miss one simple, basic truth. While the
war resisters signed a contract voluntarily, they are not the ones who
broke it. The U.S. administration is. The U.S. soldiers seeking refuge
in Canada signed up to defend their country, not to commit war crimes.
On
July 15, 2008 U.S. Army PFC Robin Long became the first war resister
since the Vietnam War forced to leave Canada and to be turned over to
the U.S. military. Robin is currently being held in the El Paso County
Jail, in Colorado, awaiting his Courts Martial. He will be present for
his Courts Martial at Fort Collins, Co. He will likely be charged for
AWOL, desertion, and possibly speech-related violations of military
discipline; he is facing a General Courts Martial, the maximum penalty
of such a trial is 20 years confinement. Support Robin Long and all
troops with the courage to resist!
By mail: Make checks out to "Courage to Resist / IHC" and note "Robin Long" in the memo field. Mail to:
Courage to Resist 484 Lake Park Ave #41 Oakland CA 94610
Courage to Resist is committed to covering Robin's legal and related defense expenses. Thank you for helping make that possible.
Also: You are also welcome to contribute directly to Robin's legal expenses via his civilian lawyer James Branum. Visit girightslawyer.com, select PayPal, and in the comments field note "Robin Long". Note that this type of donation is not tax-deductible.
2. Send letters of support to Robin
Robin Long, CJC 2739 East Las Vegas Colorado Springs CO 80906
Robin's pre-trial confinement has been outsourced by Fort Carson military authorities to the local county jail.
Robin
is allowed to receive hand-written or typed letters. To help ensure
that he receives them, do not include drawings, stickers, copied photos
or print articles. Robin cannot receive packages of any type (with the
book exception as described below).
3. Send Robin a money order for commissary items
Anything
Robin gets (toothbrush, shirts, paper, stamps, snacks, supplements,
etc.) must be ordered through the commissary. Each inmate has an
account to which friends may make deposits. To do so, a money order in
US funds must be sent made out to "Robin Long, EPSO", along with the
sender's name. Mail to the address above.
4. Send Robin a book
Robin is allowed to receive books which are ordered online and sent directly to him at the county jail from Amazon.com or Barnes and Noble. These two companies know the procedure to follow for delivering books for inmates.
5. Public statement of support
Coming soon -- sign the public statement in support of Robin Long and all war resisters.
Turning to the US presidential race. Yesterday's snapshot noted Matt Gonzalez (Ralph Nader's running mate) speaking at the the National Latino Congreso 2008. Below is the video of him being interviewed at the Congreso:
More videos from the Nader-Gonzalez campaign can be found here.
Bob Barr is the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate and this is a video for his campaign:
Cynthia McKinney
is the Green Party's presidential candidate and this is from her
victory speech earlier this month at the party's Chicago convention.
Barr,
McKinney and Nader are presidential candidates. Barack Obama and John
McCain are the presumptive nominees of their parties. Yesterday the McCain campaign released two videos and here's the one to "Can't Take My Eyes Off of You"
The other is to "My Eyes Adored You." From Team Nader:
Nader and Gonzalez to Campaign in Houston, Sun., July 27
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, chris@votenader.org
NADER AND GONZALEZ TO CAMPAIGN IN HOUSTON, SUN., JULY 27
Who: Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader and Vice Presidential Candidate Matt Gonzalez What: Nader/Gonzalez News Conference and Campaign Rally When: Sun., July 27, 1:30 p.m. News Conference and 2 p.m. Campaign Rally Where: University of Houston Hilton, 4800 Calhoun Suite 207, Houston, TX 77204
Independent
Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader will campaign in Houston, Sun. July
27, hosting a news conference and campaign rally with Vice Presidential
Candidate Matt Gonzalez at the University of Houston Hilton, 4800
Calhoun Suite 207, Houston, TX77204. The news conference starts at 1:30
p.m. and the campaign rally is scheduled for 2 p.m.
Mr.
Nader and Mr. Gonzalez will both address critical issues the major
party candidates have taken "off the table" that the Nader/Gonzalez
campaign has put on the table, including:
a comprehensive, negotiated military and corporate withdrawal date from Iraq;
a single-payer, Canadian-style, private delivery, free-choice public health insurance system for all;
a living wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act;
a no-nuke, solar-based energy policy supported by renewable, sustainable, energy-efficient sources;
a carbon tax to deter global warming;
an
end to the corporate welfare and corporate crime that has resulted in
millions losing pensions, savings and jobs and squandered tax dollars;
and,
more direct democracy reflecting the preamble to our
constitution which starts with "we the people," and not "we the
corporations."
About Ralph Nader Celebrated
attorney, author, and consumer advocate Ralph Nader has been named by
Time Magazine one of the “100 Most Influential Americans in the 20th
Century”. For more than four decades he has exposed problems and
organized millions of citizens into more than 100 public interest
groups advocating solutions. His organizations have helped establish
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Consumer Product Safety
Commission, and enact the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Motor Vehicle
Safety Act, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and countless other
pieces of important consumer legislation. Because of Ralph Nader we
drive safer cars, eat healthier food, breathe better air, drink cleaner
water, and work in safer environments. Nader graduated from Princeton
University and received an LL.B from the Harvard School of Law.
About Matt Gonzalez Matt
Gonzalez was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 2000
representing San Francisco’s fifth council district. From 2003 to 2005
he served as Board of Supervisors President. A former public defender,
Gonzalez is managing partner of Gonzalez & Leigh, a 7-attorney
practice in San Francisco that represents individuals and organizations
in mediation, arbitration, and administrative proceedings before state
and federal regulatory bodies. Gonzalez graduated from Columbia
University and received a JD from Stanford Law School.
For more information on the Nader/Gonzalez campaign, visit VoteNader.org
Yesterday,
the Kurdish bloc in the Iraqi Parliament staged a walk-out over a bill
regarding the alleged provincial elections that allegedly would take
place October 1st. The walk-out means the already much postponed
provinicial elections may be postponed further. Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers)
reports some are ceterain the bill would be vetoed (most likely by
Iraqi president Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, who sits on the presidential
council) or fail to stand up "in constitutional courts" and it's also
being called a "secret vote" by Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman. From
Youssef's "Kurds storm out as Iraqi parliament OKs Oct. 1 elections:"
Iraqi
politics has pivoted this entire year on holding provincial elections.
Newly emerged local leaders hoped to win a legitimate role in
government, and major political blocs were vying for support among
their base. The U.S. has called the process crucial for much-needed
political reconciliation. Some Iraqis think that the offensives that
Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki launched in the southern cities of Basra
and Amara and the Baghdad slum of Sadr City were to weaken his
political rivals, the Sadrists, who controlled those areas. The
possibility of a months' long delay in the elections could
fundamentally alter the priorities of local and national politicians.
The
contentious issue was among several points that have delayed a vote on
the law that would pave the way for the first local elections since
January 2005, when most Sunni Arabs and many Shiite followers of cleric
Muqtada Sadr boycotted the vote. U.S. officials believe the
participation of such groups could go a long way toward righting the
balance of power in provincial politics, in which a small number of
parties, mainly Kurdish and Shiite Muslim, have dominated.
The
elections, sought by U.S. officials for more than a year, have stalled
amid political competition as parties in the Iraqi government have
feared that local elections could cost them influence. Disagreements
have centered on the question of whether voters should be allowed to
choose individual candidates or pick from closed party lists. Lawmakers
have also argued about whether parties could use religious imagery in
the campaign and whether parties with links to militias could
participate.
The government
had aimed to hold the election in October. But the country's election
commission announced over the weekend that the date was unrealistic and
that the law needed to be passed by the end of the month if Iraq wanted
to hold the elections by December.
The status of Kirkuk
has proved to be a major stumbling block. Last week, the parliament's
Kurdish bloc led its first walkout over a draft of the electoral law
because of its provision to either delay provincial elections in Kirkuk
until the city's future is decided or to redistribute power equally
among Arabs, Kurds and Turkmens.
The
disagreement centered on the multiethnic city of Kirkuk, one of several
areas in Iraq where there are competing claims over which province a
city or district belongs in. The question for Kirkuk is whether it
should be absorbed into the Kurdistan region -- a particularly charged
question because the city sits on some of the largest unexploited oil
reserves in the country. Both Arabs and Kurds lay claim to the area. At
bottom, the disagreement is also about the ethnic identity of Iraq and
about Arab frustration with the Kurds. Although the Kurds are a
minority, they have proved adept at turning the political process to
their advantage, often to the chagrin of larger ethnic and religious
groups. It is an article of
faith among Kurds that Kirkuk should be part of the Kurdistan region, a
principle on which they have refused to compromise. Kirkuk,
the capital of Tamim Province, is home to Kurds, Arabs and Turkmens as
well as Christians. Successive political policies altered the
demographics of the area. Saddam Hussein forced Kurds out and moved
Arabs in. After Mr. Hussein's ouster, the Kurds tried to reverse his policies, pushing Kurds to return and Arabs to leave.
If
you're a drive-by and this is news you, you may be a consumer of
Panhandle Media which has (for years) allowed a US voice to steer the
conversation on Iraq while failing to note that he is paid lobbyist for
the Kurdish region. That was apparently too much information to provide
you with. (Though The Nation and it's laughable offshoots have played dumb, it should be noted that The Nation's Tom Hayden addresses it in his book that came out last year.) From the Assyrian International News Agency earlier this year:
"Peter Galbraith, a Clinton-era ambassador retained by the Kurdistan
Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) to
lobby on their behalf, even suggests constructing a U.S. military base
in the region." Former ambassador and advisor to the Pentagon. As Jane Mayer noted in 2004 ("The Manipulator," The New Yorker):
Peter
Galbraith, a former Ambassador to Croatia and a human-rights activist,
who has long supported Chalabi's efforts to depose Saddam, suggested
that if the Administration was unhappy with the outcome in Iraq it had
only itself to blame. "Chalabi is one of the smartest people I know,"
he told me. As Galbraith put it, Chalabi "figured out in the eighties
that the road to Baghdad ran through Washington. He cultivated whom he
needed to know. If he didn't get what he wanted from State, he went to
Capitol Hill. It's a sign of being effective. It's not his fault that
his strategy succeeded. It's not his fault that the Bush Administration
believed everything he said. Should they have? Of course not. They
should have looked critically. He's not a liar; he believed the
information he was purveying, and part of it was valuable. But his goal
was to get the U.S. to invade Iraq."
Galbraith was stating that in 2004. To provide some context, in May 2003, Jack Shafer (Slate) was already offering this in "Reassessing Miller:"
Now, thanks to the reporting of the Washington Post's
Howard Kurtz, we understand why Miller and the administration might
have seen eye-to-eye on Iraq's WMD. On the same day as the Times editorial appeared, Kurtz reproduced an internal Times e-mail in which Miller described Ahmad Chalabi, the controversial Iraq leader, former exile, and Bush administration fave, as one of her main sources on WMD. "[Chalabi] has provided most of the front page exclusives on WMD to our paper," Miller e-mailed Times Baghdad
bureau chief John Burns. Miller added that the MET Alpha--a military
outfit searching for WMD after the invasion--"is using Chalabi's intell
and document network for its own WMD work." The
failure of "Chalabi's intell" to uncover any WMD has embarrassed both
the United States and Miller. As noted previously in this column, she
oversold the successes of the post-invasion WMD search. On April 21, she reported in the Times that
an Iraqi scientist had led MET Alpha to a site where Iraqis had buried
chemical precursors for chemical and biological weapons. "Officials"
told Miller this was "the most important discovery to date in the hunt
for illegal weapons."
And to provide a little more context, one year later, Liar Chalabi was back in the news. Richard Engel (MSNBC) would report
that Chalabi's campaign for Prime Minister of Iraq included bragging
about his claims to the illegal war including a campaign poster that
read: "We liberated Iraq!" (and of course featured Chalabi's grotesque
face). From that report:
The
idea that Chalabi 'liberated Iraq' is a growing theme with his party. A
few days ago we spoke to the editor of Chalabi's newspaper about the
Los Angeles Times report that the U.S. military has been planting
articles in Iraqi newspapers. The editor told us he didn't see a
problem with it. "We brought the Americans here," he told us, "so why wouldn't we print the military's point of view?" It was as if he was saying, we used the U.S., so why not let them use us a little?
While
in Lebanon, Chalabi developed his connections in the Middle East. In
1972 he married the daughter of the speaker of the Lebanese parliament.
He also made full use of his family’s monarchical contacts. The Chalabi
family maintained their ties with the Jordanian Hashemite monarchy
after the coup in Iraq, and in 1977 Crown Prince Hassan invited Ahmed
to establish a bank in Jordan. Chalabi's
Petra became the second largest commercial bank in the country. The
rotten foundation underlying its growth was only uncovered in the
aftermath of a severe financial and currency crisis that gripped Jordan
in the late 1980s. As the Jordanian dinar’s value plummeted, the
country’s central bank demanded that financial institutions deposit 35
percent of their holdings into the central bank's reserves. Petra was
the only bank that proved unable to comply. A subsequent audit revealed
evidence of unprecedented fraud and theft. Foreign
exchange assets on the bank's books had disappeared, while millions of
dollars of depositors' money had been illegally transferred to other
businesses and financial institutions owned by the Chalabi family. This
extraordinary looting operation cost Jordan an estimated $US500
million—equivalent to approximately 10 percent of the country's gross
domestic product. Escaping
prosecution, Chalabi fled Jordan in August 1989. Three years later,
after a comprehensive investigation, he was charged on 31 counts of
theft, embezzlement and illegal currency speculation. He was sentenced,
in absentia, to 22 years hard labour. Four of Chalabi's brothers were
also convicted over the affair. After
Petra's demise, the authorities in Switzerland shut down two
Swiss-based financial institutions run by the Chalabi family, amid
reports of illegal practices. Two of the brothers who had been involved
in the Petra fraud, Jawad and Hazem Chalabi, were prosecuted on charges
of falsifying documents, and received six-month suspended sentences in
September 2002.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, chris@votenader.org
NADER AND GONZALEZ TO CAMPAIGN IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, SUN., JULY 27
Who: Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader and Vice Presidential Candidate Matt Gonzalez What: Nader/Gonzalez News Conference and Campaign Rally When: Sun., July 27, 7:00 p.m. News Conference and 7:30 p.m. Campaign Rally Where: Trinity United Methodist Church, 600 East 50th St. Austin, TX 78751
Independent
Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader will campaign in Austin, Sun. July
27, hosting a news conference and campaign rally with Vice Presidential
Candidate Matt Gonzalez at the Trinity United Methodist Church, 600
East 50th St. Austin, TX 78751. The news conference starts at 7:00
p.m., followed by a 7:30 p.m. campaign rally. Suggested donation for the rally is $10/$5 students.
Mr.
Nader and Mr. Gonzalez will address critical issues the major party
candidates have taken "off the table" that the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign
has put on the table, including:
a comprehensive, negotiated military and corporate withdrawal date from Iraq;
a single-payer, Canadian-style, private delivery, free-choice public health insurance system for all;
a living wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act;
a no-nuke, solar-based energy policy supported by renewable, sustainable, energy-efficient sources;
a carbon tax to deter global warming;
an
end to the corporate welfare and corporate crime that has resulted in
millions losing pensions, savings and jobs and squandered tax dollars;
and,
more direct democracy reflecting the preamble to our
constitution which starts with "we the people," and not "we the
corporations."
About Ralph Nader Celebrated
attorney, author, and consumer advocate Ralph Nader has been named by
Time Magazine one of the "100 Most Influential Americans in the 20th
Century." For more than four decades he has exposed problems and
organized millions of citizens into more than 100 public interest
groups advocating solutions. His organizations have helped establish
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Consumer Product Safety
Commission, and enact the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Motor Vehicle
Safety Act, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and countless other
pieces of important consumer legislation. Because of Ralph Nader we
drive safer cars, eat healthier food, breathe better air, drink cleaner
water, and work in safer environments. Nader graduated from Princeton
University and received an LL.B from the Harvard School of Law.
About Matt Gonzalez Matt
Gonzalez was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 2000
representing San Francisco's fifth council district. From 2003 to 2005
he served as Board of Supervisors President. A former public defender,
Gonzalez is managing partner of Gonzalez & Leigh, a 7-attorney
practice in San Francisco that represents individuals and organizations
in mediation, arbitration, and administrative proceedings before state
and federal regulatory bodies. Gonzalez graduated from Columbia
University and received a JD from Stanford Law School.
For more information on the Nader/Gonzalez campaign, visit VoteNader.org
Tuesday,
July 22, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, another journalist is
announced dead, Barack sucks up all the time with his Gidget Goes To Europe and the MidEast, John McCain calls it out, and more.
Wolf
Blitzer: Americans seeking to dodge the Vietnam War have found a have
in Canada. Many began new lives there. But, now, right now, times
have changed. Brian Todd is working the story for us. Brian, it's a
different situation for what we're calling the Iraq War generation.
Brian
Todd: It certainly is, Wolf. This one case of an American deserter
being handed over turning this theory on its ear, the idea that Canada
is an unqualified haven for American deserters. It's the kind of
history Robin Long probably wishes he wasn't making. He is believed to
be the first American deserter during the Iraq War handed back to the
U.S. military by the Canadian government. During the Vietnam War,
Canada was haven for US draft dodgers and deserters. In this case, a
Canadian judge ruled that Long didn't adequately prove he would suffer
irreparable harm if he returned to the United States. The leader of a
Canadian war resisters group that had supported Long is frustrated.
Unidentified
Male: I don't think there's any doubt that someone who has been up in
Canada and a vocal opponent of the war will be treated harsly by the
American military.
Brian
Todd: Long, who had trained as a tank commander, took off from Fort
Carson, Colorado, to avoid serving in Iraq. Even though he had
volunteered for the army, his attorney told the court that Long became
disillusioned over the mistratment of Iraqi detainees and by the fact
that no weapons of mass destruction had been found. In nearly three
years in Canada, he fathered a child, was turned down for refugee
status last year, and was arrested recently for not checking in as
required with border officials. Commanders at Fort Carson will now
decide his fate. They can court-martial him, give him a less than
honorable discharge, or even reassign him. A former military lawyer
who has defended and prosecuted deserters says the first option is the
most likely.
Unidentified
male: I do believe that he is going to be most likely court-martialed
in this instance. The fact that he has been vocal, not to say that
they would infringe on his First Amendment right to state his case or
his objections, but rather his stated reason for leaving, to avoid
service in Iraq, is going to be sort of the threshold issue for the
legal authorities.
Brian
Todd: But experts say US military officials may also be thinking about
deterrence here, sending a signal to others thinking of deserting that
prison time could await them and Canada may not be so receptive to
harboring them in the future. If he's court-martialed and convicted,
Robin Long could get up to five years in prison. Wolf?
Wolf Blitzer: Do we have any idea how many deserters are in Canada?
Brian
Todd: The leader of this war resistance group in Canada who we talked
to today about this says that there are about 50 who they know of. But
they say there are hundreds more they think who are living underground
in Canada. You can believe this case is probably going to keep them
underground.
Wolf Blitzer: I believe it. Brian, thank you.
Hasan Arif (Telegraph Journal) notes
the above report and it's a shame more in Canada didn't catch it
because they might have learned something. Take the laughable
editorial board of Kamplops This Week:
"Every one of these American citizens voluntarily joined the military.
Not one was drafted. . . . These are not the draft dodgers of the
Vietnam War era, the young men who had no choice in whether they wished
to fight the Vietcong." Happy to flaunt their ignorance of Canadian
history. The draft wasn't an issue in the decision during Vietnam and
Canada welcomed dodgers and deserters. Deserters were not required to
swear they had been drafted and not enlisted on their own. It wasn't
an issue. And little Billy Bulter is eager to flaunt his ignorance to The Orillia Packet & Times insisting
that (a) the term "war resister" (a historical and well used in the
last century by the MSM) is not accurate, that anyone can become a CO
very easily (Willie Boy, tell them your stupidity is here) and that the
war resisters "joined the military"! We don't normally provide links
to trash but the 'movement' needs to take some damn accountablity.
These are the arguments that should never have been made but too many
in the 'movement' didn't know their own facts or didn't want to tell
it. They have created this straw-man argument that has no basis in
today's reality by refusing to point out that deserters were welcomed
in Canada during Vietnam. There was never a need for any of this
nonsense.
No one in the world needed to hear Tom Hayden
yack on and on endlessly in interviews about his 'invasive' physical.
(Tom Hayden never served in the US military. He was not a draft
dodger. He was not a deserter. He had no 'war story' so he went to
town on a physical and, as Rebecca noted, Tom needs to put his feet in
some stirrups before he next whines about 'invasive' physicals.)
Tom-Tom couldn't shut up about the draft. Even though it has nothing
to do with today's illegal war. He was 'helping' war resisters today .
. . by throwing out crap from his past that had no bearing on reality.
No one needed it. All it did was let some who barely pay attention
fixate on "Draft Dodgers! You hear him, Ma! But there's no draft
today!" Tom-Tom, the patron saint of the yokels. Across the border a
number need to take accountability and start working on addressing
reality. Unless they're goal is for the 'movement' to repeatedly be
undermined with meaningless cries of "There is no draft!" Someone in
Canada speaking truth is University of British Columbia's Canadian
Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law, Dr. Michael Byers, who explains to Am Johal (IPS),
"Canada also extradited Robin Long, a U.S. war resister, who did not
want to take part in possible war crimes. This is a very different
role than Canada played during Vietnam." Extradition is the only term
to describe what Judge Anne Mctavish oversaw and ordered for Robin
Long.
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.
Long expulsion does not change the need for action and the War
Resisters Support Campaign explains: "The War Resisters Support
Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to
put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately
cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to
respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by
implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see
the take action page for what you can do."
There
is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which
includes Andrei Hurancyk, 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.
Puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki was in Berlin today where he met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Deutsche Welle reports
al-Maliki declared, "Iraq is able to take the security situation into
its own hands. We have achieved great success." It's an assertion
that Patrick Donahue (Bloomberg News) notes
and quotes him futher stating in the press conference with Merkel,
"Iraq has the foundation and is capable of taking the security
situation into its own hands. We can say with some pride that we're in
the position and capable -- with our police and army and with our
professional level -- to achieve that." However, Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
that, in Baghdad Monday, Ali Dabbagh, al-Maliki's spokesperson,
"announced that Iraq wants American combat troops to leave by the end
of 2010." That would be 24 months after the next US president takes
office. 24 months? Did al-Maliki say they were ready to takeover or
not? AFP ignores
the nonsense claims to focus on what the meeting was really about
quoting Merkel declaring, "We are pleased that the security situation
in Iraq has improved little by little and that is of course a
pre-condition for economic and political reconstruction to move
forward. Iraq is a country rich in raw materials and Germany has broad
technological and industrial know-how. We are pleased that some German
companies have already expressed interested in helping to rebuild Iraq."
Meanwhile there were dueling Nancy Youssefs over the weekend. First she filed on the simmering tensions
among supporters of Moqtada al-Sadr and quoted residents such as Nadhil
al Sudani stating, "There is anger inside our people. There is a
volcano that wants to erupts. But we are obedient to Sayed Muqtada."
Implication being that al-Sadr is the only thing that's keeping a
volcano from erupting. One day later, Youssef was offering:
"In a shift toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism,
Iraq's largest Sunni bloc ended a nearly yearlong boycott Saturday and
rejoined the cabinet, retaking six ministry spots." Well one boycott
ends and another begins. Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) reports
today on "a walkout by Kurdish lawmakers over how to deal with the
disputed oil city of Kirkuk" with regards to the supposedly upcoming
provincial elections and quotes Khalid al-Attiya (Deputy Parliamentary
Speaker) stating, "We cannot have a vote with an absence of a whole
faction. The vote is useless. It will be rejected by the
represenatives of this bloc and by the presidency council." CNN notes
the makeup of the presidency council: Jalal Talabani (President, Kurd),
Tariq al-Hsahimi (Vice President, Sunni) and Adel Abdul Mahdi (Vice
President, Shi'ite) and adds, "Many observers believe Talabani would
stand with his Kurdish compatriots and vote against the measure,
bringing it back to square one." Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman is quoted by AP stating,
"The draft of the provinical elections law will be referred to the
presidential council, which will definitely not approve it. So the
elections will be postponed until next year."
Reuters notes
"an Iraqi journalist working for a Kudrish magazine" was shot dead in
Kirkuk Monday and 5 people wounded in shootings in Haswa while Tirkit
was the site of an attack today "on the convoy of Khalid Burhan, head
of health office of Salahudding province" that left his guards
wounded. The journalist was Soran Mamhama. He was 23-years-old and AP states he worked for the "magazine Leven and often covered government corruption." Reporters Without Borders issued a statement
condeming the murder and stated, "We call on the Kudristan authorities
to carry out a thorough investigation into the circumstances of Hama's
murder. He wrote hard-hitting articles about local politicians and
security officials and had received threats from people telling him to
stop his investigative reporting. The authorities should therefore
give priority to the theory that he was killed because of his work." Xinhua notes
Soran was shot dead outside his home and quotes Journalist Freedoms
Observatory's Ziyad al-Ajili stating, "The first step to halt the
assassinations against journalists is to capture those culprits." Iran's Press TV quotes
Latif Satih Faraj (Kurdish Journalists Union in Kirkuk) stating, "If
the government can't protect Kurdish journalists in Kirkuk, we might
adviste them to withdraw from this city." Iraq's The Window reportsLeveen is calling for an investigation and that "Leveen,
which is an independent Kurdish magazine founded 6 years ago in
Sulaimani, is known as a muckraking journal in Kurdistan and Iraq."
During
his brief visit to Iraq, Barack Obama has been greeted by busloads of
Iraqi cameramen vying for shots of his arrivals and departures at
meetings with government officials.
But
on government-sponsored Al Iraqiya television Monday, the presumptive
Democratic presidential nominee received second billing to Prime
Minister Nouri Maliki's departure for Europe. Only Al Hurra, the
U.S.-sponsored channel, led with the story.
The
situation has been similar on the streets of Baghdad, where Obama's
visit has been duly noted but is not the No. 1 thing on people's
minds.Iraqis tend to be jaundiced about American politics and skeptical
that the differences between the presidential candidates have anything
to do with them.
"If either McCain or Obama
visits Iraq, it would be for campaign purposes, and therefore at this
point in time it won't have any effect on the situation in Iraq," said
Khalil Ibrahim, 34, a perfume shop owner.
We're now on the US race for president. Susan (Random Notes) observes
of self-loathing lesbian (which would make her a Barack supporter)
Donna Brazile: "It was people like you who created the situation in the
first place by not fully seating or stripping Clinton delegates from
Florida and Michigan, by not apologizing for the filthy, race-baiting
campaign 'Obama' ran, for not admitting 'Obama' didn't have the
majority of the popular vote, for not allowing Clinton to take the
contest all the way to the convention, and for not condemning the
smears by the attack dogs from the media and the 'progressive'
blogosphere for creating the rift." Susan's referring to closet case
Donna's attempt to do a reach-around on female Hillary supporters.
Back off Donna Brazile, you Bob Packwood-wanna-be, no one wants your
greasy, filthy, corporatists hands on them. She really thinks after
her infamous e-mail regarding Hillary supporters ("Message to the base: stay home")
that any Hillary supporter gives a damn what she says?
Donna, the loudmouth trash she was born as and will die as, is now
penning such tough-talk as, "How many ways do these Hillary delegates,
voters and supporters need to hear it before they get it?" LSekhmet (Alegre's Corner) calls out
Donna's latest lies, "We're angry because the nomination was stolen
from the rightful winner -- we're angry because the winner of the
popular vote has been hindered, not helped -- we're angry that a man
who truly isn't read to be President at this time has been propped up
by the DNC and the Democratic Party as a whole. And most especially,
we're angry at the supposition that we only have two choices in the
fall election -- Obama or McCain, neither of whom are acceptable."
That is offensive and someone might try explaining that to Philip
Maldari who declared on KPFA's The Morning Show today of the
next president, "whether it's McCain or Obama" . . . This was when
KPFA brought on a Democratic Congress member to schill for Barack. That
was really cute -- and so fair! It's really not Philip's role to
decide who will be president. His role is co-host of a morning chat
show. This was followed by a roundtable for the next segment where you
had two Barack supporters and one that you didn't know. Didn't know
because Aimee Allison (hopefully unintentionally) cut him off just as
he started to reject the notion of voting "the lesser of two evils."
Kevin Zeese thinks petitions will get Barack to change his views. He
thinks if there's a mass exodus of support for Barack to Cynthia
McKinney or Ralph Nader that it will force Barack to change. At which
point, what? By Zeese's 'logic,' people go running back to Barack.
Kevin Zeese is the perfect example of why third parties struggle.
Zeese supports them and has done tremendous work on campaigns in the
past. However, when it's time to talk, third party and independent
candidates do not exist for their own qualifications and merits. In
Zeese's world -- as stated on The Morning Show today -- they
exist solely to blackmail the Democratic Party within the midst of an
election. When you 'cast' them as supporting characters, it is very
hard for third party and independent candidates to assume lead roles.
People like Zeese need to start demonstrating some awareness that they
keep the two-party system going. And KPFA needs to grasp that bringing
on a Democratic member of Congress to try to assure the Bay Area that
Barack's-plenty-liberal-not-everyone's-as-liberal-as-we-are is not only
nonsense it's the sort of garbage we'd expect from Rush Limbaugh. And
if that point is not clear, we then got the Barack delegate to the DNC,
Norman Solomon. That is what he is now. He is not a media critic.
And he does not belong on KPFA as an 'objective' observer. It was
shameful that, well into the roundtable, Norman told listeners he was
a Barack delegate ("like Barbara Lee!" he insisted hiding behind Lee's
skirts). That disclosure was required to be made at the top of the
roundtable and Aimee Allison should have made it. In no way did The Morning Show offer anything that justified their free use of the public airwaves. (While begging yet again for more money.)
If
you're not grasping, that nonsense on KPFA (or take the crap Democracy
Now! squeezed out this morning) is exactly why people see the media as
in the tank for Barack. Gary Chapel Hill (The Confluence) writes of the recent Rasmussen poll
which found that the number of voters who "believe most reporters will
try to help Obama with their coverage" rose 5% since June to reach
49%. 49%? That figure is appalling. Journalists are not supposed to
be seen as biased. That the figure has climbed to 49% should be a wake
up call for those working in Real Media (there's no hope for Panhandle
Media -- they're all in that because they couldn't get work in Real
Media). Only 24% believe they can expect unbiased coverage. That is
APPALLING and it is an indictment of the media. (14% belived the media
"will try to help" McCain). Don't dismiss that 49% with, "That's all
Republicans!" 27% of Democrats feel the media is attempting to put
Barack into the White House. Those respondents not self-identifying
with either of the two major parties? 50% of swing voters "see a
pro-Obama bias". This is an indictment of the media. With Congress
and the White House already polling so low, you'd think the usual
gatekeepers would come out loudly insisting that the media at least
pretend independence.
This takes place as they're lead around by their rings in their noses. Campsunk (Alegre's Corner) posts the video of NBC News's Andrea Mitchell on Hardball
explaining of Barack's for-show campaign stops outside the US, "He
didn't have reporters with him, he didn't have a press pool, he didn't
have a press conference while he was on the ground in either
Afghanistan or Iraq. What you're seeing is not reporters brought in,
you're seeing selected pictures taken by the military, questions by the
military, and what some would call fake interviews, because they're not
interviews by a journalist. So there's a real press issue here."
Indeed. AlwaysforHillary (which is now supporting McCain in the general) exclaims,
"It seems practically every news person flew to be with 'the Holly One'
to get interviews with the Messiah! Maybe Obama will replace LOURDES
and people with disabilities and illnesses can get blessed and have
their problems disappear by touching the ANOINTED ONE!! DISGUSTING!!"
It truly is and Jeremy Pelofsky's little jabs at McCain's calling it
out ("Is the media in love with Obama?" -- Reuters) don't make the media look independent. Elizabeth Rauber (San Francisco Business Times) reports that not only is McCain calling it out, the campaign has created a video entitled "Obama Love." Click here
to see the videos at the McCain site -- two with different songs and
you can vote for which you enjoy best. The one set to "Can't Take My
Eyes Off You" is currently leading over "My Eyes Adored You."
Back
to the Idiot Brazile with her "It's Barack or John!"
nonsense. "The central issue of this election is not Barack Obama
versus John McCain. The central issue is the future of the Democratic
Party," Democrat Violet Socks (Reclusive Leftist) explains,
"Young feminists, for example: they say things like, "but don't you
know that Republicans are anti-choice?" Yes, dears; that's the point.
Republicans are anti-choice, which is exactly why it's so important that Democrats continue be pro-choice
-- and pro-women's rights, pro-Fourth Amendment, pro-separation of
church and state, pro-health care, pro everything that the Republicans
are against. That's why we're trying to keep Barack Obama from taking over the party. I'm willing to lose one election if it means ejecting him and getting our party back to its values."
I
use the summer to read books that usually require a rested brain! Very
often they have been on my reading list for a year or more. This summer
I am in the midst of three: Betrayed: The Assassination of Digna Ochoa by Linda Diebel; Race Against Time by Stephen Lewis; and The Deserter's Tale by Joshua Key with Lawrence Hill. Waiting close in line is Women Building Peace Between India and Pakistan
by Shree Mulay and Jackie Kirk. Shree is a good friend whom I look
forwarding to welcoming to St. John's later in the summer when she
moves into a new position at MUN. Two other friends of mine, Winnie Ng
and her late husband Eugene Yao, were part of Joshua Key's support
group in Toronto. I've just purchased Ray Guy: The Smallwood Years and am looking forward to many a chuckle from Ray to lighten my summer of otherwise heavy reading.
Key,
a native of Oklahoma, enlisted in the US army in 2002 to provide for
his family. When President George W Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq
the following year, he was sent to Ramadi. The 30-year-old father of
four says he participated in more than 200 house-raids in six and half
months. During those raids, he says the soldiers found, time after
time, terrified families and no trace of terrorist activity. "Children
cry, women scream at you; we were tormenting these people," Key told
Al-Ahram Weekly. "We never found anything -- no potential terrorists,
no cache of weapons, nothing. After a while, you start to ask yourself:
'Why are we continuing to do this?'" Key says he witnessed civilians
being beaten, maimed or shot with little or no provocation. Among the
haunting memories of the short period he spent in Iraq are watching his
comrades kicking around the severed heads of dead Iraqis "like a soccer
ball" and witnessing the killing of a seven-year-old girl whom he used
to give leftovers of army rations. "She was coming across the street as
she used to and, suddenly, her head exploded like a mushroom," he says.
"I had a feeling someone in my platoon did that." Key says he was
shocked by the extent of lack of accountability for what the soldiers
did. "You could make up any excuse you wanted to kill an Iraqi and no
one would questions," he says. Key says he reported to his superiors
some of the incidents that he found outrageous. "I was told it was none
of my business," he says. "You're not supposed to have sympathy; you're
not supposed to have a conscience. You're supposed to be the 'perfect'
American soldier -- a killing machine who does as he is told. But I
realised that it was my concern and it was my business, that I did have
my conscience." When he came home on leave in late 2003, Key knew he
did not want to return to Iraq. He sought legal advice and was told
that he had two options: go back to Iraq or go to jail. He decided to
go underground and, after 14 months of hiding in the US, crossed the
border into Canada with his wife and children.
Charlie notes Am Johal's "CANADA: Gov't Slow to Defend Guantanamo's 'Child Soldier'" (IPS)
from last night which addresses Omar Kadhr, a prisoner at Gutanamo Bay
who was imprisoned -- without trial or justice -- at Guantamo beginning
when he was 15-years-old and remains there today and whom his own
government (he's Canadian) has refused to rally for. Charlie notes this
section of the article:
Dr.
Michael Byers, Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and
International Law at the University of British Columbia, told IPS, "The
release of these interrogation tapes confirms that the authorities are
talking to someone who was a child who was subject to sleep deprivation
and other tactics by the U.S. military. I sincerely hope that the tapes
will resonate with the Canadian public in a way that will push the
government to change their approach to this issue." Byers added that
the Canadian government's refusal to intervene follows with Prime
Minister Stephen Harper's willingness to prioritise a relationship with
U.S. President George W. Bush over fundamental human rights and
Canada's historic role in championing the rights of its own citizens in
jurisdictional matters.
"The Harper
government has shown a consistent pattern of placing its faith in the
Bush administration over human rights issues such as this one and
others including the refusal to push for clemency of Canadians on death
row. Canada also extradited Robin Long, a U.S. war resister, who did
not want to take part in possible war crimes. This is a very different
role than Canada played during Vietnam," said Byers.
The
second story on Wolf Blitzer's broadcast was about an American war
deserter, who was seeking refuge in this country but is now being
returned to American authorities to face prosecution. This is the first
time in Canadian history that such a thing has happened. During
the Vietnam War, many Americans dodging the draft or deserting the army
to escape a bloody and unnecessary war found refuge in Canada. It
should only make sense for this tradition to continue for another
bloody and unnecessary war, this one in Iraq. However, the Conservative
government doesn't think so. It seems that making George W. Bush happy
is more important.
Democracy Now! is a never-ending crap-fest of lies. It's not journalism. Ava and I covered a number of things last week here. Pru was hoping we'd note Naomi Klein's idiotic statement that Barack's good on foreign policy. So, for Pru, here's Mike Gonzalez' "Obama's 'backyard' politics for Latin America are very much like George Bush's" (Great Britian's Socialist Worker)
here's the reality that too many are scared to speak (and Klein should
worry because -- barring an earlier death -- she's going to be an
important voice for the next five decades, nonsense about Barack will
haunt her, especially if he were to become president):
A
few weeks ago US presidential hopeful Barack Obama travelled to Miami
to speak to the Cuban American Foundation, a right wing organisation
much loved by George Bush.
Obama
promised to maintain the 50 year old embargo on Cuba. He also used the
speech to let the world know that he was not going to go soft on Latin
America.
He delighted his audience
by calling Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez a "demagogue" and
supporting the Merida Initative, a plan launched last year by Bush to
fund Central America’s police and military in a "new war on drugs".
It
is all too familiar. When former US president Bill Clinton signed the
Plan Colombia agreement in 2000, it delivered billions of dollars of
financial and military assistance to help Colombia’s “war on drugs”.
That
became a "war on terror" after 9/11 and today has reverted to its
original title. But in reality it is the same continuous policy. Then
as now, Colombia is the launching pad for US strategy in Latin America.
A highly militarised state, it
borders on Venezuela, Ecuador, Central America and Brazil and overlooks
the Caribbean. Its president, Alvaro Uribe, has long worked hand in
glove with the drug barons and has been complicit in the systematic
murder and repression of political opponents, peasant leaders and trade
unionists.
Obama, like others across
the spectrum of US politics, has complained that the war on Iraq has
not only consumed resources, but has also distracted the US from its
own backyard.
Over the last ten
years, new governments have come to power across Latin America with
mass support and at least a language of change and reform.
Allies
Despite
the constant demonising of Chavez, the reality is that his arguments
for Latin American integration and unity have found allies across the
political spectrum.
Late last year, a
majority of Latin American states voted against the creation of a Latin
American Free Trade Area which would have locked the region into the
global arrangements proposed by Bush.
The US right began to shout that the US had "lost Latin America". Their strategy for getting it back would soon become clear.
Very
broadly, Latin America is divided. On the one hand, the governments of
Michelle Bachelet in Chile, Cristina Kirchner in Argentina and
President Lula in Brazil work within the global system as it is,
combining social reform with neoliberal economic policies.
On
the other hand, Chavez in Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia and Rafael
Correa in Ecuador have argued for a more radical vision -- seeking
alliances and trade relations with China and the Middle East and
breaking the dependence on the US.
In Ecuador, Correa has already announced the closure of the US military base at Manta when its lease runs out.
US
tactics are reasonably clear. Brazil, the most powerful member of the
“reformist” bloc, is happy to work with the US. The presence of
Brazilian troops in Haiti supporting a US-backed state against a mass
protest movement is hugely symbolic.
Much
more significant is Lula's close relationship with Brazilian commercial
agricultural interests, particularly in the development of bioethanol
as an alternative fuel. This has brought him into direct confrontation
with the MST -- the landless workers’ movement that enthusiastically
supported his presidential campaign six years ago.
Capital
Lula,
the radical workers’ leader of yesterday, is today forging a powerful
capitalist state that works closely with multinational capital to win
dominance in the region.
On the other
hand, Bolivia, Venezuela and Ecuador are under a permanent and
increasing assault veiled as the "war on drugs". In Bolivia, the US
government has been actively supporting the so-called Half Moon, the
group of wealthy provinces claiming autonomy from central government.
This
is not, of course, about regional government -- but about winning
control over Bolivia's gas and oil, nationalised under Morales and the
key to his government’s social programme. Today, and for the last two
years, Morales has been effectively paralysed.
Three
months ago, Colombian troops crossed the border with Ecuador and
attacked a camp of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc),
murdering their second in command in his tent.
It
was a serious blow for an organisation that has been fighting
successive governments since the 1950s, especially when its historic
leader, Tirofijo (meaning "Sureshot"), died a few weeks later.
The current campaign against the Farc -- the claim that they are "narcoterrorists" for example -- goes beyond Colombia.
Uribe
claims that the Farc has been financed by Venezuela. Clearly this is a
justification for crossing frontiers and attacking the enemies of
empire.
The new “war on drugs” in
Central America is obviously part of a strategy that attempts to
isolate Venezuela and its radical allies.
One
of the issues behind all this, as ever, is oil. Venezuela’s actual and
potential oil reserves give it real power in the world economy,
especially when it develops joint strategies with Bolivia and Ecuador,
also important oil-producing countries.
The
US-led attempt to isolate Venezuela, attack Ecuador and dismember
Bolivia are objectives which Barack Obama obviously shares. Oil talks!
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by »making a donation.
That's
reality. It may be unpleasant, but reality can be unpleasant. Ask War
Hawk Sammy Power what it's like to wake up next to a man with a chili
bowl haircut despite the fact that his hairline is in 'retreat' by
many, many inches. You can catch him making nice with Trashy Goodman
today. You will not catch Goody correcting her lie that
McKinney-Clemente are the first woman of color ticket. See Cedric's "Goodman can't stop pimping 'dat man" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! AND SHE PIMPS AGAIN!" joint-post.
Last month, we laid out our ambitious ballot access timetable:
Ten states by July 6.
Fifteen states by July 20.
Thirty states by August 8.
Forty states by September 1.
Forty-five states by September 15.
Thanks to you, we have met the goals of stage one and stage two on time.
In
Arkasas, our road trip team along with many volunteers collected more
than 2,000 signatures, more than double what was needed.
In New Jersey, a dedicated group of volunteers helped us collect more than 2,000 signatures, more than double what was needed.
And
in Massachusetts, we’ve collected more than 19,000 signatures--10,000
valid are required--and are now in the midst of turning in our
petitions to hundreds of towns across the state to get them verified.
We
are now entering our most difficult phase--the third phase, where we
are facing deadlines in an additional 15 states by August 10.
If
you have been thinking of dropping what you’re doing this summer and
hitting the road for Nader/Gonzalez, the next three weeks are when we
need you most.
Please contact mark@votenader.org today to find out what states you can help in now.
And click here to see our day-by-day live interactive map of how our road teams are doing.
Tomorrow we will be launching a contest to build our e-mail list.
There will be a whole lot of prizes -- including the grand prize of dinner with Ralph Nader.
Keep an eye on tomorrow’s e-mail for all the details.
And finally, when people ask you -- why is Ralph Nader running for President?
Here’s one way to answer:
Just show them the new Democratic Party Convention bag.
And Glenn Greenwald’s most recent article -- The AT&T Convention in Denver – here.
The two parties have been taken over by the corporations.
And the people need a candidacy to counter that of the two corporate parties.
That candidacy is Nader/Gonzalez.
Once again, thank you for your generous donations this week.
You helped power us over the finish line for stage two.
Onward to stage three.
The Nader Team
PS: Last week, we offered the DVD An
Unreasonable Man--autographed by Ralph Nader--to anyone who donated
$100 or more by yesterday midnight. Well, 242 of you came through. That
offer is now closed. We will be shipping those DVDs out later this week.
During
his brief visit to Iraq, Barack Obama has been greeted by busloads of
Iraqi cameramen vying for shots of his arrivals and departures at
meetings with government officials.
But
on government-sponsored Al Iraqiya television Monday, the presumptive
Democratic presidential nominee received second billing to Prime
Minister Nouri Maliki's departure for Europe. Only Al Hurra, the
U.S.-sponsored channel, led with the story.
The
situation has been similar on the streets of Baghdad, where Obama's
visit has been duly noted but is not the No. 1 thing on people's
minds.Iraqis tend to be jaundiced about American politics and skeptical
that the differences between the presidential candidates have anything
to do with them.
"If either McCain or
Obama visits Iraq, it would be for campaign purposes, and therefore at
this point in time it won't have any effect on the situation in Iraq,"
said Khalil Ibrahim, 34, a perfume shop owner.
The above is from Said Rifai and Saif Rasheed's "Among Iraqis, Obama is not Topic No. 1" (Los Angeles Times). Barack's doing staged photo-ops and the bulk of the press is refusing to do anything but say ga-ga as they drool.
Which is one reason why the New York Times' refusal to run John McCain's submitted column is so embarrassing. Kate Phillips writes an idiotic dithering
where she attempts to justify her employers. Earn that bonus, Kate!
Nowhere in it does she grasp that the paper should be running any
column by any presidential candidate (that's Barack, McCain, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader)
or that the rejection of the column is a rejection of McCain's campaign
style by the paper (which has never been as high-road as Kate wants
people to believe -- apparently, we're not only supposed to forget Bob
Herbert's foaming at the mouth throughout the Democratic primaries but
also the work of William Safire among others). If you missed it -- and
apparently the whole world did -- yesterday the New York Times
got outed by a major publication (newspaper) on their giddy-love for
Barack and their belief (in 2006) that he would be the next president
(a belief they shared with others in the press, which is how they got
outed). It wasn't a good day for the McCain story to break. Before some
drive-by yet again falsey accuses me of supporting McCain (I'm not
voting for either Barack or McCain), I'll say hunt for it yourself --
but here's a clue, the reporter just a won an award recently.
(And don't e-mail: "They endorsed Hillary in the primary!" They had to. She is the state senator and NYT
is not done with its plans for physical expansion. Shortly after
endorsing her, you may remember, they began trashing her in their
editorials. It's called having it both ways and hoping Hillary has a
short memory.)
In the meantime, you can ask
yourself why these less-than-cermonial trips (so much less than what
Barack sneered at when speaking of Hillary) are being greeted by
supposedly intelligent people who sneered at the same stunts by the
Bully Boy for the last seven years? (Answer: Because there are no
standards and no grown ups, just a lot of little whining brats looking
for a father figure.) Strike up Rice and Lloyd Weber!
Now I don't like to spoil a wonderful story But the news from Rome isn't quite as good She hasn't gone down like we thought she would Italy's unconvinced by Argentine glory They equate Peron with Mussolini Can't think why
What
people should be thinking is why a first-term US senator who has
already racked up a lousy voting record (missed votes) is now off
playing Gidget Goes To Europe and the MidEast. In this installment of
the Gidget movie franchise, Barack's a "stew" and doing a quick series
of stop-overs. And people treat it as if news. The backlash will
probably be Americans asking, "Why the hell isn't he competing for my
vote instead of going on a world tour?"
Rachel
McDonald: James Burmeister was injured by a roadside bomb. He went
AWOL while recuperating in Germany. Besides being given six months in
jail, Burmeister was denied pay, reduced in rank to private and given a
bad conduct discharge that will deny him veterans' benefits.
Burmeister's mother Helen says the sentence was unfair.
Helen
Burmeister: I'm very disappointed in the way they feel they can treat
veterans of war. I think the reason that my son went AWOL was for a
good reason and I don't think he deserves the punishment that he got.
Rachel
McDonald: Helen Burmeister says she's unsure whether to appeal the
ruling because it could prolong James' stay in jail. James Burmeister
says he left because of military bait and switch tactics. Soldiers
would plant equipment to lure Iraqis whom American snipers would then
kill. I'm Rachel McDonald in Eugene.
Dee Knight (Workers World) clearly grasped what was done to Burmeister and why, hence the title "Army court-martials resister for blowing whistle on 'bait-and-kill'."
Knight speaks to Erich Burmeister (James' father) who reveals the
military attempted an deal where a guilty plea by Burmeister would
result in 1 "year in military prison and a dishonorable discharge"
which means -- looking at the sentence Burmeister received last week --
it was very smart to turn down that proffer. Knight also reports, "His
parents have waged an unceasing struggle for the Army to release him.
They called on their representative, Peter DeFazio, to launch a
congressional inquiry into James's case, but have so far heard
nothing." No surprise there. US House Rep DeFazio doesn't do a damn
thing. Suzanne Swift was
the victim of rape, abuse and harassment. DeFazio grabbed a lot of
feel-good headlines before the 2006 elections and then refused to do a
damn thing. As Sara Rich, Swift's mother, explained of DeFazio to Jennifer Zahn Spieler (Women's eNews) in December 2006,
"His office gave us a lot of red tape. And he basically laughed at our
petition. I walked away feeling rather humiliated by him."
Retired army Col and US diplomat Ann Wright (reposted at Securing America Community) reports,
"The prosecution brought up the public statements and interviews
Burmeister gave on 'bait and kill.' . . . He was taken from the court
directly to jail."
Tom
Banse: A spokesman for the army's Desertion Information Center says the
punishment for the Boise native could fall within a wide ranger. At
the light end: reprimand and return to duty; at the severe end:
court-martial and jail time -- according to the army's Ryan Bruce.
Ryan
Bruce: It would be treated more seriously if a soldier did desert his
or her unit during a time of war, especially if that unit was at war or
going to war, as opposed to a soldier who just deserted from initial
entry training, for instance.
Tom
Banse: Private Long fled to Canada to avoid deployment to Iraq. His
unit went to war and has since returned to Fort Carson, Colorado.
Instructive perhaps is the sentence handed down this week to a soldier
from Eugene. Private 1st Class James Burmeister fled to Canada while
on leave from his unit in Iraq. He got six months in jail after
returning voluntarily to face punishment. I'm Tom Banse in Olympia.
Citing Fort Carson spokespersons Gregory Dorman and Karen Linne, the Colorado Springs Gazette reported Robin was in El Paso County Jail as of Friday night and "is being held on a military confinement order, jail records show." (The Denver Channel credited the paper for breaking the news, AP 'forgot' to give credit.) Jim Fox (St. Petersburg Times) 'reported'
on Long Sunday without mentioning his name ("A U.S. Army deserter who
fled to Canada was ordered deported from British Columbia . . .") and
without getting his facts right (he was not "returned to his unit in
Fort Knox, Ky." -- his unit at Fort Carson, CO). KBS Radio notes,
"According to Bob Ages who is the chairman of the Vancouver war
resisters campaign Robin Long was in Buckley which is South East of
Seattle as of Friday, and was moved once again to a location that is
unknown to the group." Ann Wright observes,
"Ironically, war resister Long was handed over to US officials at the
Peace Arch on the US-Canadian border, just north of Seattle,
Washington." As noted here Saturday and at Third on Sunday,
Robin Long was not deported, he was extradited. Deportation would be
expelling him from the country, turning him over to the US government
is extradition. Judge Anne Mctavish will have a lot of questions to
answer if anyone's paying attention. W.E. (Bill) Belliveau (Times and Transcript) points out
that Robin being expelled was "the first time a resister to the U.S.
war effort in Iraq has been removed from this country by Canadian
authorities." Workers World quotesGerry Condon explaining,
"This is a gift from [Canadian Prime Minister] Stephen Harper to George
Bush. And it is a gift to the headline writers, who will trumpet that
Canada is no longer a safe haven for AWOL GIs. But it is an illusion
because this is not the first of many deportations. It may be the
first and the last. A minority government that ignores the will of its
people and its Parliament will not be allowed to rule much longer."
Vietnam war resister Michael Hendricks informs the Toronto Star that the Haper government's decision to ignore the motion passed by Parliament
and the huge support for war resisters means Canadians have to ask
themselves a few things: "The questions we have to ask before the next
federal election are: What is the government doing to the Canada that
we treasure? Do we really want to live in a Canada built in the image
of the present government?" Harris MacLeed (Hill Times) quotesWar Resister Support Campaign's
Lee Zaslofsky stating, "We've been trying to get a meeting with
[Immigration Minister] Diane Finley and we've basically been told
she'll be busy until she dies." Meanwhile apparent bar fly Karin Wilson (Kelowna Capital News) explains
"one of those bar conversations I'll probably remember for a lifetime"
and declares that the expulsion of Robin should have everyone "hanging
our heads in shame. Here was someone willing to stand up for what he
believed in and leave his country rather than fight in a war he
believed was illegal." Wilson goes on to repeat the myth that leaves
deserters out of the group Canada received during Vietnam hinting that
it's best not to confine your research to bar room coversations.
Harris MacLeed (Hill Times) tells
the story of Canadian citizen Andrei Hurancyk who decided (2005) to
become an American citizen and enlist in the Iraq War. He began serving
in Iraq in March 2007, then self-checked out and returned to Canada. He
states "I just realized we're not fighting terrorists there, it's just
the occupation of the country and a lot things go unreported there,
things that are not supposed to be happening in a war zone, things
being covered up." July 4th, Judge Robert Barnes' decision in US war resister Joshua Key's case was released. Tamam Ahmed Jama (Al-Ahram Weekly) quotes
Josh's attorney Jeffry House explaining, "It's a huge victory for
numerous soldiers who are here and maybe others who are thinking of
coming here" and quotes Joshua remembering his time in Iraq, "Children
cry, women scream at you; we were tormenting these people. We never
found anything -- no potential terrorists, no cache of weapons,
nothing. After a while, you start to ask yourself: 'Why are we
continuing to do this?' . . . You're not supposed to have sympathy,
you're not supposed to have a conscience. You're supposed to be the
'perfect' American soldier -- a killing machine who does as he is
told. But I realised that it was my concern and it was my business,
that I did have my conscience." Key tells his story in The Deserter's Tale (written with Lawrence Hill).
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.
Long expulsion does not change the need for action and the War
Resisters Support Campaign explains: "The War Resisters Support
Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to
put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately
cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to
respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by
implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see
the take action page for what you can do."
We've
focused largely on US war resisters in Canada of late due to so much
news in that region. There are a number of things that have been
held. One was about IVAW's chair and US war resister Camilo Mejia. Earlier this month, Federico Martinez (The Muskegon Chronicle) reported on the popularity of State Radio and "Camilo" at Michigan's music festival and noted, "State Radio's
song is about Sgt. Camilo Mejia, who in 2003 spent six months in combat
in Iraq, but then refused to return from a two-week furlough because he
objected to a war that was 'illegal' and 'immoral.' Chad Stokes, lead
guitarist and vocalist for State Radio, tried to explain the song's
popularity during a pre-festival interview. 'It's just a human story,'
said Stokes. 'It's about a human connection. It's symbolic, but it's
still his individual story. I think that's why people connect to it."
The video can be found on YouTube here. A portion of the lyrics directed to the White House:
Your words just a bloody fallacy
A house of cards you painted white
You tried to recreate Normandy
But you made up the reason to fight
And now red oil is spillin' down on the street
And your eyes so big for the belly is weak
Will you not refuse this currency
Or is blood money just money to you
Is blood money just money to you
News of an event that Camilo Mejia will be appearing at,
"A faith-based nonprofit organization hopes to inspire attendees at the
annual convention of a major religious denomination to make ending the
war in Iraq their major focus for the rest of the 2008 political year. The Unitarian Universalist Service Committee
(UUSC), an international human rights organization based in Cambridge,
Mass., will be hosting a series of training sessions and workshops at
the General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association to be
held from Wednesday, June 24 to Sunday, June 29, at the Fort Lauderdale
Convention Center, Fort Lauderdale, Florida." Mejia will be a speaker
on June 25th as well as on June 28th. More information can be found here.
There
is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which
includes Andrei Hurancyk, 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.
Turning to Iraq, Sabrina Tavernise and Jeff Zeleny (New York Times) report
on puppet of the occupation Nouria al-Maliki attempting to play a
'do-over' as he "tried to step back Sunday from comments in an
interview" with Der Spiegel published on Saturday where
al-Maliki appeared to voice support for Barack Obama's limited
non-promise that he might withdraw US combat troops (only combat troops
-- leaving behind an estimated 50,000 other US troops) in 16 months
were he to be elected president. Tavernise and Zeleny tell you that
al-Maliki's surrogates insist he was misquoted; however "the
interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki's office, not the
magazine." From Der Spiegel's interview:
SPIEGEL: Would you hazard a prediction as to when most of the US troops will finally leave Iraq? Maliki:
As soon as possible, as far as we're concerned. U.S. presidential
candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be
the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight
changes. SPIEGEL: Is this an endorsement for the US presidential
election in November? Does Obama, who has no military background,
ultimately have a better understanding of Iraq than war hero John
McCain? Maliki: Those who operate on the premise of short time
periods in Iraq today are being more realistic. Artificially prolonging
the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems. Of course, this
is by no means an election endorsement. Who they choose as their
president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis
to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government
are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq
should be limited.
The New York Times listened to tape of the interview and had it translated:
Nouri
al-Maliki: Obama's remarks that -- if he takes office -- in 16 months
he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase
or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence
of the forces in Iraq. . . . Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a
better assessment of the situation in Iraq.
Der Spiegel notes
the controversy over the story and that "SPIEGEL stands by its version
of the conversation." Nobody bothers to note that al-Maliki is either
more stupid than anyone thought or joining in the lie passed off as
truth that Barack's talking withdrawal. Combat troops only. And his
'promise' isn't a promise -- he told CNN on June 5th he'd decide what
to do after he became president (such an ego) which echoes what War
Hawk Sammy Power told the BBC in March. Bambi spoke to CBS' Lara Logan
(Face The Nation) yesterday -- transcript here, video here
-- and declared, "There's starting to be a broad consensus that it's
time for us to withdraw some of our combat troops out of Iraq, deploy
them here in Afghanistan. And I think we have to seize that
opportunity. Now's the time for us to do it." Barack wants to fight a
war that should never have started and will be seven years shortly. He
wants to "withdraw some of our combat troops out of Iraq" and send them
to Bully Boy's other misbegotten war. He's not a dove, he's not a
peacenik and he's not anti-war. Despite the false claims by Katrina
vanden Heuvel, Tom Hayden, Laura Flanders, Jeremey Scahill and
oh-so-many others, Barack again demonstrated that he has no respect for
any other country's national soveriegnty: "What I've said is that if we
had actionable intelligence against high-value al-Qaeda targets, and
the Pakistani government was unwilling to go after those targets, that
we should. My hope is that it doesn't come to that - that in fact, the
Pakistan government would recognize that if we had Osama bin Laden in
our sights that we should fire or we should capture him." Translation,
if Pakistan doesn't act on US intelligence (whether it's valid or not
or -- remember the start of the Afghanistan War -- whether or not it's
shared with Pakistan), Barack's happy to bully his fat belly to the bar
and go-it-alone. (For those who do not remember, the US asked the
Taliban -- then in control of Afghanistan -- to turn over Osama bin
Laden. The Taliban asked for proof. Then US Secretary of State Colin
Powell stated they would get the proof after they turned over bin
Laden. They refused to, the bombing began.) Check the interview and
wonder if the real reason Barack Obama won't produce his birth
certificate is because, under father, it reads "George W. Bush"? He
sounds exaclty like the Bully Boy when Logan asks him to define what
would be 'success' for him in Afghanistan: "Well, a 'mission
accomplished' would be that we had stabilized Afghanistan, that the
Afghan people are experiencing rising standards of living, that we have
made sure that we are disabling al-Qaeda and the Taliban so that they
can longer attack Afghanistan, they can no longer engage in attacks
against targets of Pakistan, and they can't target the United States or
its allies." Terrorism is a crime and best addressed through the
courts. Everything else our once-again-lip-glossed Senator is speaking
of (sounding just like the current White House occupant) is not why the
military exits and has nothing to do with a legal war.
Yesterday Hala Jaber (Times of London link has text and video) reported
that the 5 contractors kidnapped in May 29, 2007 was allegedy down to
four according to a videotape released by those holding the five men
which asserts that "Jason" killed himself -- the group holding the men
have called themselves The Shi'ite Islamic Resistance in Iraq and they
state: "This proscrastination and foot-dragging and lack of seriousness
on the part of the British government has prolonged their psychological
deterioration, pushing one of them, Jason, to commit suicide on
15/5/2008. He surprised our brethren, who were taking care of him,
with his suicide." AFP reports
UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown used the opportunity to grandstand by
declaring, "This abhorrent film will only add to the anguish of
families who have suffered a great deal over a year for their loved
ones who have been kept in captivity."
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad house bombing (the home belonged to "the mother of Mithal al
Alosi, a lawmaking in the Iraqi parliament"), a Baghdad car bombing
that left five people wounded, a Diyala Province tractor bombing that
claimed 5 lives and left eight more wounded, a Falluja residential
bombing at the home "of the father of Falluja police deputy chief
Lieutenant Colonel Esa Sayer" which left five wounded and another
Falljua residential bombing at the home of "Asif Ghazi, an officerin
Falljua police" with no reported wounded or dead but an addition two
bombs were discovered "near the house and . . . detonated under
control."Reuters notes a Mosul car bombing that killed the driver of the car and 2 bodyguards outside of the car.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 "Awakening" Council member shot dead in Diyala Province, sheikh Abdul Ghaffar Abdullah shot dead in Diyala Province. Reuters notes
2 people shot dead as they traveled in the car in Mosul and 2 brothers
and 1 cousin shot dead while driving in their car in Mosul.
Turning to the US race for president. Presumptive GOP nominee John McCain has been turned down by the New York Times. Reuters reports
McCain wrote a column and the Times (which just published Barack's
ditherings last week) turned it down and turned it down with this
nonsense "that a new draft should articulate how McCain defines victory
in Iraq." Excuse me, McCain delcared victory in Iraq last week.
Considering the bulk of the garbage that stinks up the NYT
op-ed pages, it's never been apparent that anyone was turned down for
any reasons other than political (such as when Alice Walker's column
against the impending Iraq War was rejected). McCain's the presumptive
GOP nominee. That means you run his column. In a real democracy, that
would also mean you run columns by Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader.
The paper appears to think it's not well written. If so, let him
embarrass himself but, again, the paper's only real reason for turning
down columns is political. McCain should post the rejected column at his website, I'm sure many sites would be happy to repost it in full. And the New York Times
should be called out loudly for that nonsense. (Before any drive-by
e-mails, I have said since this site started in 2004, I will not vote
for John McCain. This is not about my vote, this is about an informed
society needed for a real democracy.) Meanwhile, in his addition to this morning's entry, Jim steered everyone to the July 14th snapshot for this point: "Leave it to Aileen Alfandary to bring in 'uninformed' which, for the record, she did on the first news break of KPFA's The Morning Show where she declared of the Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente
ticket, 'This year's Green ticket marks the first time a US has
nominated women of color for both president and vice-president.' Uh,
no, Alfandary, it's not. From Friday's snapshot: "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." Dumb ass Amy Goodman
(or maybe just liar) declared today that McKinney and Clemente (aka
"Don't call me a Latina!") were "the first all-women-of-color
presidential ticket in US history." During the interview, Goody
couldn't stop lying: "What do you make of Senator Obama's trip to Iraq
and Afghanistan to talking about a timetable for pullout, Nouri
al-Maliki saying he shares his view, though he was castigated, it looks
like, by the President, and Senator McCain saying Barack Obama has the
most extreme record in the Senate, suggesting perhaps he's a
socialist?" Amy Goodman needs to meet the truth one day. The recap of
Dave Helling (Kansas City Star) interviewing McCain via Jake Tapper (ABC News):
At
a town hall meeting in Kansas City, Missouri, Sen. John McCain,
R-Ariz., said that rival Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, had the "most
extreme" record in the Senate.
Kansas City Star reporter Dave Helling later asked McCain about that comment.
"Extreme?" Helling asked. "You really think he's an extremist? I mean, he's clearly a liberal."
"That's
his voting record," responded McCain. "All I said was his voting
record, and that is more to the left than the announced Socialist in
the United States Senate, Bernie Sanders of Vermont."
Asked Helling: "Do you think he's a socialist, Barack Obama?"
"I
don't know," McCain said with a shrug. "All I know is his voting
record, and that's what people usually judge their elected
representatives by.'"
No, LIAR Amy Goodman,
McCain didn't suggest Barack was a socialist. He was asked it by
Helling (who brought the issue up) and McCain said he didn't know.
"Most extreme voting record"? McCain's referring to the National Journal labeling "Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007" at the end of January based on their examination of his record.
February 8th on CounterSpin,
Janine Jackson demolished the claim. However, that was the same
February 8th that Goodman allowed Robert Kuttner to cite that same
study as reason to support Barack: ""I think it was National Journal recently
came out with a rating that showed that Obama has the most
left-of-center record." So when Kuttner cites it, Goodman raises no
objection. McCain cites it and she's ripping him apart with lies. Get
your act together. What a disgrace. [Jackson's demolishing of the National Journal and Kuttner's idiocy on Democracy Now! were covered Feb. 10th at Third.] Repeating, McCain referred to the National Journal
'finding' that Goody accepted on her show from Kuttner. He was then
asked if he thought Barack was a Socialist. He didn't raise that
issue, he was asked. When asked, he stated he didn't know. This is exactly the garbage Ava and I were talking about Sunday:
gossip -- uninformed gossip -- passed off as news intended to make you
enraged. In headlines today, Goodman pimped the same gossip: "In
campaign news, Senator John McCain has accused Barack Obama of having
the most extreme record in the Senate and suggested Obama might be a
socialist. McCain was asked about his views in an interview with the Kansas City Star."
No, McCain didn't ACCUSE Barack of having the most exterme record, he
was referring to the National Journal study -- one Goody allowed to be
cited Feb. 8th on her show without objection or question. And McCain
NEVER suggested Barack was a Socialist. Get your damn facts right,
Pravda on the Hudson.
Last month, we laid out our ambitious ballot access timetable:
Ten states by July 6.
Fifteen states by July 20.
Thirty states by August 8.
Forty states by September 1.
Forty-five states by September 15.
Thanks to you, we have met the goals of stage one and stage two on time.
In
Arkasas, our road trip team along with many volunteers collected more
than 2,000 signatures, more than double what was needed.
In New Jersey, a dedicated group of volunteers helped us collect more than 2,000 signatures, more than double what was needed.
And
in Massachusetts, we've collected more than 19,000 signatures--10,000
valid are required--and are now in the midst of turning in our
petitions to hundreds of towns across the state to get them verified.
We
are now entering our most difficult phase--the third phase, where we
are facing deadlines in an additional 15 states by August 10.
If
you have been thinking of dropping what you're doing this summer and
hitting the road for Nader/Gonzalez, the next three weeks are when we
need you most.
Please contact mark@votenader.org today to find out what states you can help in now.
And click here to see our day-by-day live interactive map of how our road teams are doing.
Tomorrow we will be launching a contest to build our e-mail list.
There will be a whole lot of prizes -- including the grand prize of dinner with Ralph Nader.
Keep an eye on tomorrow's e-mail for all the details.
And finally, when people ask you -- why is Ralph Nader running for President?
Here's one way to answer:
Just show them the new Democratic Party Convention bag.
And Glenn Greenwald's most recent article -- The AT&T Convention in Denver -- here.
The two parties have been taken over by the corporations.
And the people need a candidacy to counter that of the two corporate parties.
That candidacy is Nader/Gonzalez.
Once again, thank you for your generous donations this week.
You helped power us over the finish line for stage two.
Onward to stage three.
The Nader Team
PS: Last week, we offered the DVD An
Unreasonable Man--autographed by Ralph Nader--to anyone who donated
$100 or more by yesterday midnight. Well, 242 of you came through. That
offer is now closed. We will be shipping those DVDs out later this week.
Harris MacLeed's "Canadian Iraq War deserter who fought under U.S. Forces, says war is wrong" (Hill Times)
tells the story of Canadian citizen Andrei Hurancyk who decided (2005)
to become an American citizen and enlist in the Iraq War. He began
serving in Iraq in March 2007, then self-checked out and returned to
Canada. He states "I just realized we're not fighting terrorists there,
it's just the occupation of the country and a lot things go unreported
there, things that are not supposed to be happening in a war zone,
things being covered up." Talk turns to the deportation of US war
resister Robin Long last week and Hurancyk notes how Parliament's
resolution was ignored. From the article:
Lee Zaslofsky,
of the War Resisters Support Campaign, an organization that lobbies for
and gives support to Iraq war deserters, said Prime Minister Stephen
Harper's (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) government today is a lot different
from the Trudeau-era government that allowed him to stay in Canada when
he came here as a Vietnam draft dodger in 1970. He said the
Conservative government should heed the non-binding opposition motion,
passed in the House on June 3, calling for a freeze on deportations of
U.S. Army deserters, and for them to be allowed to apply for permanent
resident status. "The Canadians government has
basically taken a hands-off attitude. Their tactic is to try to keep
this as a refugee question, now Parliament's motion says nothing about
refugees but the government chooses to ignore that because they want to
say that it's the refugee process," said Mr. Zaslofsky. "If
they decide they're not [refugees], well then of course we just
automatically throw them out of the country." Mr. Zaslofsky, who said
there are about 200 Iraq war deserters living in Canada, said that
while he has met with members of all three opposition parties, the
government has ignored his organization. "We've been trying to get a
meeting with [Immigration Minister] Diane Finley and we've basically
been told she'll be busy until she dies."
Two things,
in the paragraph right after Lee speaks of a Canadian MP who is
Conservative but shows support of some form and doesn't name him. He's
apparently unaware that the man has already been named (by a US war
resister in Canada) in other Canadian press (that was at the end of
last week). Second, Lee, which is it? You were avoiding the draft or
you deserted. There's a huge difference and by not being clear, you've
brought the topic by the myth of what the Canada did for 'draft
deserters' during Vietnam and stayed silent on what they did for
deserters. Maybe it's the reporter who can't grasp it but this myth
keeps going around and considering that Lee has recently identified as
a deserter (which press in real time during Vietnam and press in this
country during the current illegal war has repeated), it makes a BIG
difference.
As
an American war resister who has lived a happy and productive life for
the last 40 years in Canada, I have been encouraged by the positive
support that the new wave of resisters to the Iraq war found among
Canadians. In fact, our Parliament has demonstrated that support in
voting to offer refuge to these young men and women. Polls show that
about two-thirds of the Canadian population, with a majority in every
province, support them. But the Harper government rejects this simple
humanitarian gesture. Why? The questions we have to ask before the next
federal election are: What is this government doing to the Canada that
we treasure? Do we really want to live in a Canada built in the image
of the present government? Michael Hendricks, Montreal, Que.
Michael, from New Jersey originally, went to Canada as a war resister who was avoiding the draft. We last noted Michael June 25th. On Robin Long, KBS Radio notes,
"U.S. Iraq war resister Robin Long received word on July 14th, in
Vancouver that his appeal to have his deportation order stayed was
denied and he was deported the next day. That has left some people
wondering...what happened next? According to Bob Ages who is the
chairman of the Vancouver war resisters campaign Robin Long was in
Buckley which is South East of Seattle as of Friday, and was moved once
again to a location that is unknown to the group."
Jim adding for C.I. Amy Goodman lies, Rosa Clemente plays the idiot and upcoming Nader events:
First, Elaine, C.I. was so pressed for time that it was "pull an Elaine" this morning (with hair).
Second,
Rosa Clemente's trying real hard to walk it back on Democracy Now! as I
type -- and pretend like she gives a damn about Latinos. Keep lying
Rosa. That shaky voice of her's recalls Katharine Hepburn in On Golden Pond
("Norman, the loons!") and it's hard to tell whether it's that voice or
if she honestly said "Iran" when she meant Iraq. Funniest moment is
when Clemente's asked to list the most important issues to young people
around America. She starts with? "Prison-industrial complex." She's so
touch in with the youth of America! She's too old to be the youth and
should honestly not be asked to speak for them. She's closing in on
middle-age at 36 -- which is a good thing since the age requirement is
35. Rosa Clemente, the prison-industrial complex is a real issue and
one that a number of Americans care about. It is not the most pressing
issue of any age demographic. "Go Big Red!"
"The first all women of color ticket" in "presidential history." Goody tells some lie like that this morning. From C.I.'s July 14th snapshot:
Leave it to Aileen Alfandary to bring in "uninformed" which, for the record, she did on the first news break of KPFA's The Morning Show where she declared of the Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente
ticket, "This year's Green ticket marks the first time a US has
nominated women of color for both president and vice-president." Uh,
no, Alfandary, it's not. From Friday's snapshot: "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."
Cynthia
McKinney's worth listening to in the interview, just FYI. Ava and C.I.
may have to tackle this because Goody's spinning like crazy.
News Advisory FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, chris@votenader.org (national); Susan Stonecypher, 601-842-6769 (local).
NADER TO CAMPAIGN IN MISSISSIPPI, SAT., JULY 26
Who: Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader What: Nader/Gonzalez News Conference and Book Signing/Speech When: Sat., July 26, 5:30 p.m. News Conference and 6 p.m. Book Signing/ Speech Where: Lemuria Bookstore, 202 Banner Hall, 4465 I-55 North, Jackson, MS 39206
Independent
Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader will campaign in Mississippi, Sat.
July 26, hosting a news conference and book signing/speech at the
Lemuria Bookstore, 202 Banner Hall, 4465 I-55 North, Jackson. The News
Conference starts at 5:30 p.m. and the speech and book signing is
scheduled for 6 p.m.
Mr.
Nader will address issues major party candidates have taken "off the
table" that the Nader/Gonzalez campaign has put on the table,
including:
a comprehensive, negotiated military and corporate withdrawal date from Iraq;
a single-payer, Canadian-style, private delivery, free-choice public health insurance system for all;
a living wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act;
a no-nuke, solar-based energy policy supported by renewable, sustainable, energy-efficient sources;
a carbon tax to deter global warming;
an
end to the corporate welfare and corporate crime that has resulted in
millions losing pensions, savings and jobs and squandered tax dollars;
and,
more direct democracy reflecting the preamble to our
constitution which starts with "we the people," and not "we the
corporations."
News Advisory FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, chris@votenader.org (national); Xaiver Kim 404-446-7093 (local) .
NADER TO CAMPAIGN IN GEORGIA FRIDAY JULY 25
Who: Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader What: Nader/Gonzalez News Conference and Campaign Rally When: Friday July 25, 5 p.m. News Conference and 5:30 p.m. Campaign Rally Where: University of Georgia, Master's Hall, 1127 South Lumpkin St., Athens, Ga. 30602
Independent
Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader will make a campaign stop in Athens,
Ga. Friday July 25 with a news conference scheduled for 5 p.m. and a
campaign rally at 5:30 p.m., both to be held at the University of
Georgia, Master's Hall, 1127 South Lumpkin St., Athens, Ga. 30602.
Rally general admission will be a suggested contribution of $10/$5
student.
Mr. Nader will
address issues major party candidates have taken "off the table" that
the Nader/Gonzalez campaign has put on the table, including:
a comprehensive, negotiated military and corporate withdrawal date from Iraq;
a single-payer, Canadian-style, private delivery, free-choice public health insurance system for all;
a living wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act;
a no-nuke, solar-based energy policy supported by renewable, sustainable, energy-efficient sources;
a carbon tax to deter global warming;
an
end to the corporate welfare and corporate crime that has resulted in
millions losing pensions, savings and jobs and squandered tax dollars;
and,
more direct democracy reflecting the preamble to our
constitution which starts with "we the people," and not "we the
corporations."
In
a shift toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism,
Iraq's largest Sunni bloc ended a nearly yearlong boycott Saturday and
rejoined the cabinet, retaking six ministry spots. Until now, some
Iraqis questioned how well Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki's
Shiite-led government represented the nation's Sunnis, who were part of
the ruling class under Saddam Hussein. Only two of the 38 ministries
were given to Sunnis even though they make up 20 percent of Iraq's
population. Many hope that new posts will symbolize that the government
is committed to much-needed reconciliation. Reconciliation could
lead the Iraqi government to find the economic and political means to
maintain the recent security gains. While Iraqis nationwide celebrate
the improvements, they believe their government is too divided to
compromise across sectarian lines. The largest Sunni bloc, the Iraqi
National Accord, said they rejoined the government because the schism
between the party and Maliki had diminished and that many of their
demands had been met.
The
Friday sermon is the key to keeping the peace. After prayers, hundreds
of young men began demonstrating Friday in front of nearby government
forces. Some men began lunging at the Iraqi troops; most held them back. "Go on! Go on! Keep walking. Head home to your families," a woman told the men, who sheepishly followed her orders. "There
is anger inside our people. There is a volcano that wants to erupt. But
we are obedient to Sayed Muqtada," said Nadhil al Sudani, a Sadr City
resident and the chief of security for the women's section of Friday
prayers, referring to Sadr with an honorific. "We respect the army
if they respect themselves. Many don't. They push the doors and enter
homes without due respect to our privacy. Through these confrontations,
they try to trigger some violent reaction from the Sadrist trend." Sadr's
order not to fight fellow Iraqis, no matter what, has prevailed so far
over hotheaded youths seeking revenge. But residents said they were
always fighting the urge to lash out at what they describe as abusive
soldiers. "It is only Muqtada's orders that are stopping us. The
Iraqi army knows that they would become hostages within hours," one
worshipper told a McClatchy reporter after Friday's sermon. At stake is not just the future of Sadr City but also security nationwide.
Meanwhile in the New York Times this morning, Sabrina Tavernise and Jeff Zeleny report
on puppet of the occupation Nouria al-Maliki attempting to play a
'do-over' as he "tried to step back Sunday from comments in an
interview" with Der Spiegel published on Saturday where
al-Maliki appeared to voice support for Barack Obama's limited
non-promise that he might withdraw US combat troops (only combat troops
-- leaving behind an estimated 50,000 other US troops) in 16 months
were he to be elected president. Tavernise and Zeleny tell you that
al-Maliki's surrogates insist he was misquoted; however "the
interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki's office, not the
magazine."
SPIEGEL: Would you hazard a prediction as to when most of the US troops will finally leave Iraq? Maliki:
As soon as possible, as far as we're concerned. U.S. presidential
candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be
the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight
changes. SPIEGEL: Is this an endorsement for the US presidential
election in November? Does Obama, who has no military background,
ultimately have a better understanding of Iraq than war hero John
McCain? Maliki: Those who operate on the premise of short time
periods in Iraq today are being more realistic. Artificially prolonging
the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems. Of course, this
is by no means an election endorsement. Who they choose as their
president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis
to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government
are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq
should be limited.
"Talks of" is the right phrase to
use (Barack revealed on CNN June 5th that it wasn't a promise --
something Samantha Power had revealed to the BBC back in March). It is
also not withdrawal.
The New York Times listened to tape of the interview and had it translated:
Nouri
al-Maliki: Obama's remarks that -- if he takes office -- in 16 months
he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase
or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence
of the forces in Iraq. . . . Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a
better assessment of the situation in Iraq.
Here, Der Spiegel notes the controversy over the story and that "SPIEGEL stands by its version of the conversation."
News Advisory FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, chris@votenader.org (national); Susan Stonecypher, 601-842-6769 (local).
NADER TO CAMPAIGN IN MISSISSIPPI, SAT., JULY 26
Who: Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader What: Nader/Gonzalez News Conference and Book Signing/Speech When: Sat., July 26, 5:30 p.m. News Conference and 6 p.m. Book Signing/ Speech Where: Lemuria Bookstore, 202 Banner Hall, 4465 I-55 North, Jackson, MS 39206
Independent
Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader will campaign in Mississippi, Sat.
July 26, hosting a news conference and book signing/speech at the
Lemuria Bookstore, 202 Banner Hall, 4465 I-55 North, Jackson. The News
Conference starts at 5:30 p.m. and the speech and book signing is
scheduled for 6 p.m.
Mr. Nader will address issues major party
candidates have taken "off the table" that the Nader/Gonzalez campaign
has put on the table, including:
a comprehensive, negotiated military and corporate withdrawal date from Iraq;
a single-payer, Canadian-style, private delivery, free-choice public health insurance system for all;
a living wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act;
a no-nuke, solar-based energy policy supported by renewable, sustainable, energy-efficient sources;
a carbon tax to deter global warming;
an
end to the corporate welfare and corporate crime that has resulted in
millions losing pensions, savings and jobs and squandered tax dollars;
and,
more direct democracy reflecting the preamble to our
constitution which starts with "we the people," and not "we the
corporations."
News Advisory FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, chris@votenader.org (national); Susan Stonecypher, 601-842-6769 (local).
NADER TO CAMPAIGN IN MISSISSIPPI, SAT., JULY 26
Who: Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader What: Nader/Gonzalez News Conference and Book Signing/Speech When: Sat., July 26, 5:30 p.m. News Conference and 6 p.m. Book Signing/ Speech Where: Lemuria Bookstore, 202 Banner Hall, 4465 I-55 North, Jackson, MS 39206
Independent
Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader will campaign in Mississippi, Sat.
July 26, hosting a news conference and book signing/speech at the
Lemuria Bookstore, 202 Banner Hall, 4465 I-55 North, Jackson. The News
Conference starts at 5:30 p.m. and the speech and book signing is
scheduled for 6 p.m.
Mr.
Nader will address issues major party candidates have taken "off the
table" that the Nader/Gonzalez campaign has put on the table,
including:
a comprehensive, negotiated military and corporate withdrawal date from Iraq;
a single-payer, Canadian-style, private delivery, free-choice public health insurance system for all;
a living wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act;
a no-nuke, solar-based energy policy supported by renewable, sustainable, energy-efficient sources;
a carbon tax to deter global warming;
an
end to the corporate welfare and corporate crime that has resulted in
millions losing pensions, savings and jobs and squandered tax dollars;
and,
more direct democracy reflecting the preamble to our
constitution which starts with "we the people," and not "we the
corporations."
It was one of those bar conversations I'll probably remember for a lifetime. We
were sitting around talking about work, when my always articulate
friend Robert waxed poetic about how Canada has taken an abrupt turn
that we may never be able to recover from. That turn came when, this
week, we deported war resister Robin Long. We should all be hanging
our heads in shame. Here was someone willing to stand up for what he
believed in and leave his country rather than fight in a war he
believed was illegal. In other words--he is a conscientious objector.
He has a right to say "no," and if he needs to leave his country so he
can avoid taking part in a war that Canadians too refused to take part
in, then we should support him in that. During the Vietnam War
thousands of American soldiers fled the country, many of them landing
in B.C. One of the more famous ones--Corky Evans--ended up in politics.
This year he’s retiring, and the B.C. legislature won’t be the same
without his colourful comments. And there are many more who have
given to this country in ways we may never even realize. Don Gayton, a
local ecologist and author, is another member of that select crowd.
Over the years he's offered up a perspective on our land that we are
only now in our “greening” period truly coming to appreciate.
The above is from Karin Wilson's "Canada: She ain’t what she used to be" (Kelowna Capital News) and Vic
noted and asked that we give "the half-assed helper a history lesson."
He's referring to the next paragraph after the excerpt when helper
Karin decides knowledge and facts don't really matter. That's when she
repeats the LIE that the only ones going to Canada during Vietnam were
"draft dodgers." Everybody sing, "Karin, Karin, Karin, does it hurt to
be so stupid, Karin, Karin, Karin, does it hurt to be so dumb, Karin,
Karin, Karin . . ."
We noted several articles two Thursdays ago,
but we'll again note Robert Trumbull's "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" (New York Times, January 22, 1977):
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.
Oh
my! Yes, Canada took in draft evaders and deserters during Vietnam.
Note the "and." And guess what? The deserters? Some of them were never
drafted, they enlisted. Real time studies in the seventies showed that
deserters tended to come from poorer backgrounds and they tended to
include a higher percentage of non-Whites. The reason for that? Draft
evaders tended to be college students, from middle class families, and
they already knew about alternatives. Deserters were more likely to be
the working class and they were the soldiers who saw what was really
happening on the ground in Vietnam. The war itself turned them against
that illegal war. And Canada welcomed them all. There was no issue of,
"Okay, you are a deserter so we need to first make sure that you were
drafted because if you enlisted, you're on your own!" To the contrary,
those who enlisted and turned against the war were seen as more
effective to tell the story by the press at that time. They'd believed
in the war believed Johnson or Nixon's spin and lies, enlisted, gone
over to Vietnam and seen reality. Their awakening (and this is true of
the press and of the peace movement) was seen as something big. (By the
press because they love stories where a person starts off one way and
completely transforms. By the peace movement because they thought such
stories really drove home the illegal and brutal nature of that war.)
But
someone wanted to help and didn't think to do her homework. "Karin,
Karin, Karin, do you have to be so stupid, Karin, Karin, Karin, do you
have to be so dumb?" I'm reminded of the drama student back in college,
who was suddenly 'awakened' to the horror of Vietnam and went around
screaming "Bananas!" That's all she could handle. She quickly became
the joke of the campus and did far more damage than anyone would have
thought. A peace activist (who was the head of the campus' College
Democrats) decided to explain the truth about Vietnam to her (let's be
honest, he was hot for her) so he started explaining US imperialism to
her one day in the liberal arts building. Everything was over her head
except "bananas." That she latched onto and went around repeating, over
and over. With no other context. She helped no one. A lot like Karin
Bananas. Hopefully Karin won't also decide that the way to really get
the message across is to show up at the student union topless and with
smashed bananas covering her chest and face while screaming, "End the
war on bananas!" (f she should, don't worry. You may grimace while it's
happening, but months later you will be able to laugh at it -- along
with everyone else. For years and years to come.)
A
U.S. Army deserter who fled to Canada three years ago was ordered
deported from British Columbia by the Federal Court of Canada. He was
returned to his unit in Fort Knox, Ky., where the company commander
will decide his punishment. He is the first Iraq war resister to be
deported. Fifty other deserters are seeking refugee status to remain in
Canada.
He is also Robin Long and it's strange that a brief would forget to mention that.
They're just there to try and make the people free, But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me. Just more blood-letting and misery and tears That this poor country's known for the last twenty years, And the war drags on. -- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)
Last Sunday,
ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the
illegal war hit the 4,118 mark. And tonight? It's down. I've waited and
waited for it to come back up, finished this entry, worked on other
things and it's still down. Thursday's number was 4122 and Friday one more death was reported for a total of 4123. Looking at MNF announcements,
I'm not seeing any announcements so, unless DoD got stuck announcing
deaths (they're only supposed to identify the dead), the number should
be 4123. Just Foreign Policy's counter estimates the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the illegal war to be 1,245,538 up from 1,236,604.
In some of the reported violence by McClatchy (starting with Sunday) . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad car bombing ("adhesive IED stuck to a civilian car") claimed
1 life (driver), a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed 1 life (three more
wounded), a second Baghdad roadside bombing resulted in five police
officers being wounded, another Baghdad car bombing claimed 1 life and
left "seven people including one policeman and one baby girl" wounded,
a grenade wounded four people in Baghdad, a roadside bombing just
outside of Baghdad left three injured ("including a little girl), a
Diyala roadside bombing claimed the lives of 2 police officers, a
Nineveh Province car bombing claimed the life of 1 driver, and 2
"foreign private security contractors" and a Kirkuk roadside bombing
wounded one police officer. Dropping back to Saturday, Hussein Kadhim reported
2 Baghdad roadside bombings with four people wounded and Salahuddin
Province roadside bombing on Friday that wounded four people.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
3 people were shot dead in a Mosul drive-by, 1 person was shot dead
outside his home in Mosul, 1 police officer was shot dead in Mosul and
"An American Special Force raided the residence of Khalaf Issa Turk in
al-Asri neighbourhood, Baiji at dawn, Sunday and opened fire upon Husam
Hamed Hmoud al-Qaissi, son of the Governor of Salahuddin Province while
he was asleep in the guest room and also opened fire upon Auday Khalaf
Issa al-Qaissi, his cousin killing them both, and detained two others
without giving any explanation, said a security source in Salahuddin
Province. The American military said its forces shot two armed men
during a raid because they felt they had 'hostile intent'. The
statement added that the forces also injured and captured an al-Qaida
financer during the operation. " On Saturday Hussein Kadhim reported 1 police officer shot dead in Mosul.
Corpses?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 1 female corpse was discovered in Basra. Saturday Hussein Kadhim reported
1 corpse discovered in Baghdad, 2 corpses (mother and daughter)
discovered in Sulaimanlyah Province, and, in Diyala Province, "two
heads for two shephers who were kidnapped last Wednesday" were
discovered.
Pru notes that most people have already seen "Barack Obama is already moving to the right" (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) but that with "all the apologists for Obama in the States, it might be wise to run it." Here it is:
ehren watada
angela giles
nancy a. youssef
mcclatchy newspapers
the los angeles times
ned parker
saif hameed
the new york times
alissa j. rubin
jane mayer
rick kelly
jack shafer
andrei hurancyk
harris macleed
joshua key
jeff zeleny
