Monday, August 6, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, at least 63 Iraqis are reported dead today, the US military announces the deaths of 5 more US service members, the puppet of the occupation's cabinet continues to shed members, who is arming so-called 'insurgents?, Marjorie Cohn discusses the illegal war with Amy Goodman, and more.      

Starting with war resistance. "Justice is justified by what the elite want to justify." So said Bob Watada, father of Ehren Watada, yesterday. Ehren Watada is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq (June 2006) and whose court-martial (February 2007) ended in a mistrial, over defense objection, when the defense was clearly leading. The next court-martial is scheduled for October. It may or may not take place. Issues involving the first court-martial are working their way through the appeals court. Bob Watada was speaking in Eugene, Oregon yesterday at Alton Baker Park. Andrea Damewood (The Register-Guard) reports approximately 150 gathered to "remember the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Jagasaki, Japan, . . . to remind that the weapons that unleashed such horror 62 years ago are more plentiful today. . . . With dusk approaching, peace activists moved to the duck pond where they lit tea candles and placed them in paper bags. The bags glowed orange as they caught the wind and set out as small beacons of hope, before slowly extinguish-ing. Koto zither music tinkled softly, and traditional Butoh dancers, painted entirely white, were silhouetted against the darkening sky."

On a similar horror scale, in the illegal Iraq War, torture has taken place repeatedly, most infamously at Abu Ghraibl In Aidan Delgado's The Sutras Of Abu Ghraib: Notes From A Conscientious Objector In Iraq, he recounts his own journey which does include a stint at Abu Ghraib (beginning in November of 2003) when a prison uprising took place. From pages 150 to 152 of Delgado's book:

 

Speaking on Democracy Now! today, Marjorie Cohn, president of the National Lawyers Guild, answered Amy Goodman's question as to what "a body of lawyers" can do in terms of dealing with the illegal war: "We [National Lawyers Guild] have a new joint anti-war task force which is cooridinating our work, the Military Law Task Force which counsels thousands of GIs every month who are disenchanted, who don't want to go back to Iraq, who want to file for consientious objection status, some of them go to Canada. We have Mass, a huge Mass Defense Project where we do legal observing at anti-war demonstrations and we have an international committee that deals with these issues as well. We are putting out literature to try to convince members of Congress who don't think that high crimes and misdemeanors have been committed by the Bush administration that in the fact the war is illegal, it's not a mistake. And so we've been cooridinating all of our work and really focusing the major part of our work on ending the occupation." Among the literature NLG has released is (hot off the presses last week) Punishing Protest written by Heidi Boghosian (available online in PDF format for free and avaible in book format for $3 at the National Lawyers Guild website). The accounts from legal observers at demonstrations (on Iraq, on WTC and more) provide a strong *spine* to Boghosian's report.

 

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Joshua Key, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

 

 

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. IVAW and others will be joining Veterans For Peace's conference in St. Louis, Missouri August 15th to 19th.

 

Bob Watada wasn't the only one taking part in Sunday's Peace day. David Collins (The New Mexican) reports that IVAW's Adam Kokesh took part in the Sante Fe action and spoke of how he'd be willing to return to Iraq: "I'd like to organize some nonviolent resistance to the occupation. If the Iraqi people can get as many millions of protesters as they can when Sadr (Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr) says get in the streets, imagine what they could do if they just sat in around the bases there, prevented convoys from leaving the bases." Staying with IVAW, A.N.S.W.E.R. notes "Iraq War Veterans to Lead Mass 'Die-In' During September 15 Antiwar Demonstration to Coincide with Congressional War Debate" which will take place in DC; however, those with DC burnout, don't tune out yet, the mass "die-in" does demonstrate this will not be reheated left-overs. A.N.S.W.E.R. notes: "Those organizing for the September 15th demonstration include the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition; Ramsey Clark, United States Labor Against the War, Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation; Mounzer Sleiman, Vice Chair, National Council of Arab Americans; Cindy Sheehan, Cynthia McKinney; Veterans for Peace (National); Iraq Veterans Against the War; Tina Richards, CEO of Grassroots America; Rev. Lenox Yearwood, CEO of Hip Hop Caucus; Code Pink; Father Roy Bourgeois and Eric LeCompte, School of Americas Watch; Kevin Zeese, Democracy Rising; Navy Petty Officer Jonathan Hutto, co-founder Appeal for Redress; Liam Madden, Pres. Boston Chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War and co-founder of Appeal for Redress; Malik Rahim, founder of Common Ground Collective, New Orleans; Howard Zinn, Author and Historian; Carolos & Melida Arredondo, Gold Star Families for Peace. . . . To make arrangements for interviews with antiwar leaders, organizers, activists and military families, call Sarah Sloan at 202-904-7949." A.N.S.W.E.R. also notes CODEPINK will stage a September 17th "Peoples March Inside Congress." Saturday is the 15th, Monday is the 17th. There will be other actions in DC but the two may bring a new excitement to 2007 (and September 17th isn't that far away so CODEPINK will hopefully put some information up specifically about the "People March Inside Congress"). While we're noting actions (and being fully aware of what a downer DC is seen as on most campus currently -- hopefully the above actions will build some excitement) let's not that Congress is out of session until September 4th and United for Peace and Justice encourages you to think globally by acting locally -- meet with your representatives and senators who should be in their home districts (reps) and in their home states (senators). Since they are home, today also is the re-launch for the Occupation Project -- where nonviolent menas are used to occupy congressional offices. SDS -- Students for a Democratic Society -- is one week away from their action camps to be held in Lancaster, Penn (August 13-16th). SDS just finished their National Convention in Detroit. James Neshewat (CounterPunch) reports the convention addressed the theory of oppression.

 

World Can't Wait has their Orange Summer where each Friday, they're asking people to wear the color orange to show that the time is past due to "Drive Out the Bush Regime!" Orange because "the color that has been assigned to those detained and tortured with no due process". [Scott Horton (Harper's magazine) addresses new realities with "The Boot is Descending" as does Robert Parry (Consortium News) in "Bush Gets a Spying Blank Check."]

 

And of course Iraq Veterans Against the War and Tina Richards and Military Families Speak Out continue to get the word out: "Funding the war is Killing Our Troops." It's a message boiled down to the basics. One that will help destroy the nonsense pushed by the administration and some members of Congress that funding the illegal war is offering 'protection' to anyone.

 

At Military Families Against the War (UK), Tracy Hughes writes of having a son is in the Royal Engineers and how the wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) "are using our brave children as political pawns. The people who are responsible for them being there, (Tony Blair and George Bush) have the blood of hundreds of troops on their hands, we can only pray that our new prime minister will see what a fiasco Iraq and Afghanistan are and get our troops out of there asap."

Turning to violence, Amitabh Pal (The Progressive) looks at the nonsense wave of Operation Happy Talk (the killing of US troops is down to 2006 levels! -- only it isn't) and observes, "There's something of a whiff of racism in claiming that the Iraq War is not going too badly because American casualties have been marginally lower last month. On purpose or otherwise, this analysis misses the larger purpose of why U.S. troops are meant to be in Iraq: to make life better for the troops." The deaths of Iraqi increased and are basically back to the level the United Nations were noting with (rightful) alarm. Pal notes the right-wing blogger Hugh Hewitt is on board with Operation Happy Talk. Hewitt doesn't just do a blog, he also has a radio show (and I'm sure other outlets as well) and that's where John F. Burns (alleged reporter and Baghdad chief for the New York Times) appeared last week to declare, "I think there's no doubt that those extra 30,000 American troops are making a difference" and that if the US leaves Iraq it will "lead to much higher, and indeed potentially cataclysmic levels of violence, beyond anything we've seen to date." That would be an alleged reporter for the New York Times, rushing to be a guest on a right-wing talk show, offering non-verifable predictions which is a big no-no by the paper's guidelines. For simply making observations Linda Greenwood got smacked down by the paper who felt she'd crossed a line (she hadn't) between reporting and opinion (and her remarks were made on a campus, not broadcast over the airwaves). Will John F. Burns be disciplined for his unprofessional remarks (by the Times' standards for reporters, those were unprofessional remarks)? Magic Eightball says "It is unlikely."

 

Burns' dubious predictions (no one knows what will happen when US troops withdraw and -- at some point -- they will withdraw) are based on the assumption that things are 'bad' but not 'as bad' as they could be. Of course, had the foreign forces left in 2006, or 2005, or 2004, things wouldn't be as 'bad' as they are today. And had the US government not decided to illegaly start a war . . . Burns can't address that. In fact, the paper's reporters will repeat the company line when asked that they can't comment on a hypothetical and what does it mater since there is a war? It's interesting that reporters for the paper aren't supposed to predict or opine but when they do it and it's favorable to the administration, they never get into trouble.

For realities on the illegal war, go to (Democracy Now!) Amy Goodman's conversation with Cohn today:

The war is illegal but War Hawks attempt to mask that reality under the guise of "help." Thomas M. DeFrank (New York Daily News) reports that US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, appearing on NBC's Meet the Press, claims that "the military side of" things are going well but that the Iraqi government is failing "to get its political act together" (DeFrank) so it's doubtful there will be a reduction in the number of US troops in Iraq. Gates, to no surprise, shows no concern with the Iraqis (who are once again dying in huge numbers) but he is concerned with the 'benchmarks.' As Marjorie Cohn noted, that is the theft of the Iraqi oil. Heather Stewart (UK Observer) reported Sunday that Hussein Shahrastani, the country's Oil Minister, has banned "unions from participating in any official discussions about the new [oil] law" via a directive. On Friday, UPI reported that Ali al-Adeed "says a law governing oil reserves should be delayed until occupation forces leave the country." al-Added is a member of the Iraqi Parliament as well as a member of Nouri al-Maliki's political party. Steve Kretzmann (Oil Change) reports on a new poll ( 2,200 Iraqis surveyed -- New York Times polls typically feauture less than 1,000 respondents, often less than 9,000 by contrast) ) which has found 63% declaring Iraq's oil should "be developed and produced by Iraqi public sector companies rather than foreign companies" and a mere "4% of Iraqis feel they have been given 'totally adequate' information for them to feel informed about the oil law." Not surprising when many members of Iraq's parliament (that would be the branch tasked with legislation) have never seen the US drafted oil law. While Gates speaks of failed responsibilities and the illegal war is seven months away from the five year mark, exactly what responsibilities is the US administration going to cop to? AP reports Iraq's power grid is on "the brink of collapse." Last week was the news that the water was out. Other than some badly painted school buildings (that either have no or low attendence) what has the US done of the positive nature?         

 

Well they've flooded the Iraqi blackmarket with weapons. Glenn Kessler (Washington Post) reports that 190,000 AK-47 assault rifles and pistols given to Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005" are now unaccounted for. On Saturday, Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) reported on the distrust within the US military serving in Iraq as "U.S. commanders are offering large sums to enlist, at breakneck pace, their former enemies, handing them broad security powers in a risky effort to tame this fractious area south of Baghdad." June 22, 2004, Patrick McCaffrey and Andre Tyson were killed in Balad. The families of both were told the killers were the catch-all 'insurgents'. That was not the case. The killers were known to McCaffrey and Tyson, they had been training them. For two years the US government lied to the families about how McCaffrey and Tyson had died. Marjorie Cohn (at CounterPunch) notes that the military refused "requests to see autopsy reports by the McCaffrey family" and that although the Army knew without a deoubt in September 30, 2005 (when they completed their investigation), they didn't notify the families until after US Senator Barbara Boxer wrote a letter (May 22, 2006) supporting the families and their right to know the details -- Cohn writes, "Nadia McCaffrey learned that after her son was shot, a US truck arrived. It picked up Lt. Tyson, who was dead, but did not take her son who was still alive. The truck returned later and took him to the base, where he bled to death." Democracy Now! has interviewed Patrick's mother Nadia McCaffrey many times. In a June 23, 2006 interview with Nadia McCaffrey, Amy Goodman quoted Senator Boxer stating her guess as to why there was the delay/cover-up, "I think it's pretty obvious that if the American people knew that the Iraqis we train would turn on our soldiers, support for the war would erode." In June of 2006, Hector Becerra and Scott Gold (Los Angeles Times) quoted Nadia McCaffry stating, "There have been so many lies, and so many things hidden. I have had enough. I have absolutely no doubt that the same thing that happened to Patrick -- being shot by people he was training -- has happened over and over and is still happening today. He was killed by the Iraqis that he was training. People in this country need to know that." And it will continue to happen as long as the US government thinks greed will trump all, thinks they can toss some paper bills around and suddenly former foes are now friends.           

Yesterday, violence in Iraq claimed the lives of over 100 Iraqis. Today?         

Bombings?

Tal Afar is again the setting for mass fatalities after a car bombing there today. Robin Stringer and Camilla Hall (Bloomberg News) report that 27 died in the bombing with twenty-eight more wounded. CNN notes the death toll rose to 28 with (citing AP) nineteen of the dead being children. CBS and AP note Brig. Gen Rahim al-Jibouri (Tal Afar police) states the death toll will most likely rise and that 9 are dead in a Baghdad roadside bombing (eight wounded). Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a rocket attack in Basra claimed 1 life. Reuters notes an eastern Baghdad bombing that claimed 2 lives.

Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that Hama Ali Ahmed was kidnapped outside Kirkuk on Sunday and the 55-year-old truck driver's captors are asking for a ransom of the US equivalent of $100,000 for his release.

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 17 corpses were discovered in Baghdad. CNN notes: "Iraqi security forces found the bodies of five Iraqi soldiers Monday in the town Sharqat, about 70 miles (113 kilometers) north of Tikrit, police said. The soldiers, dressed in civilian clothes, were on leave from a base in Mosul and were heading to Baghdad in a private car."

Today, the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier was killed and two Soldiers were wounded during combat operations in an eastern section of the Iraqi capital Aug. 5." And they announced: "Four Task Force Lightning Soldiers died as a result of injuries sustained from an explosion while conducting combat operations in Diyala province, Monday."

The violence continues with at least 63 reported deaths of Iraqis and the deaths of 5 US service member. The puppet? On Sunday, Molly Hennessy-Fiske (Los Angeles Times) reported on how al-Maliki 'protects' -- by looking the other way. His p.r. flack -- Ali Dabbagh -- maintains no one pays attention to the issue of gays in Iraq which must be why no one noticed that they were being targeted and no one noticed that Ayatollah Ali Sistani "issued a fatwa" on them in October of 2005 that has still not been revoked. Also on Sunday, Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) reports that puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki, has refused to accept the resignations last week of the six cabinet ministers. Not surprising, al-Maliki refuses to accept reality. Accept it or not, al-Maliki has more walk outs. Peter Graff and Mariam Karouny (Reuters) report that four more ministers have left the puppet's cabinets (bringing the total to 17 to those who've walked out or are protesting via boycott).      

Over the weekend, Jesse Spielman (who had confessed to some war crimes in the gang-rape and murder of Abeer Qassim al-Janabi and the murders of her parents and her 5-year-old sister) was sentenced after he was found guilty of additional crimes. Paul von Zielbauer (New York Times) reported on the sentencing Sunday in a brief article that was the first article which ran in the Times by a reporter for the paper which mentioned 14-year-old Abeer by name.Reuters reported Spielman was found to have "participated in the planning of the attack as the soldiers drunk whiskey and played cards, and acted as a lookout. He was found guilty of four counts of murder, of rape, conspiracy to commit rape, housebreaking with the intent to commit rape, and conspiracy to commit rape. At the start of the hearing, he pleaded guilty to wrongful touching of a corpse, arson, obstructing justice and violating rules against drinking alcohol in a war zone." James P. Barker and Paul Cortez have already been convicted for their actions (which included partipating in the gang rape). Steven D. Green, who maintains he is innocent, has been fingered as the ringleader. He will be tried in a federal court due to having already been discharged back when the War Crimes were blamed on 'insurgents.'

Prospects for a modest U.S. troop pullback by year's end have been doomed by the Iraqi government's failure to get its political act together, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates strongly hinted yesterday.
Although "the military side of the [U.S. troop] surge has been successful," Gates told NBC's "Meet the Press," the performance of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government in creating political reconciliation is "a disappointing picture."
Gates seemed particularly dismayed that the Iraqi parliament has gone on vacation for a month while U.S. soldiers die. Two months ago Gates bluntly told Maliki, "For every day that we buy you, we're buying it with American blood, and the idea of you going on vacation is unacceptable." The lawmakers adjourned anyway.

The above is from Thomas M. DeFrank's "Iraqi bumbling kills hopes for U.S. pullback, sez Gates" (New York Daily News), noted by Micah. That's cute how Gates blames the Iraqis for Bully Boy's escalation. As if Iraqis haven't repeatedly made clear they want all foreign forces out of their country? As if the majority saw this as a gift and then weren't appreciative enough of it after arrived.

Now remember way back when Gordo of the Times was trying to anything in his power to connect Iran with weapons and we noted (here and here) that the black market in Iraq was deluded with US arms? Lloyd reminds of that (thanks for the links, Lloyd) and notes Glenn Kessler's "Weapons Given to Iraq Are Missing" (Washington Post):

The Pentagon has lost track of about 190,000 AK-47 assault rifles and pistols given to Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005, according to a new government report, raising fears that some of those weapons have fallen into the hands of insurgents fighting U.S. forces in Iraq.
The author of the report from the Government Accountability Office says U.S. military officials do not know what happened to 30 percent of the weapons the United States distributed to Iraqi forces from 2004 through early this year as part of an effort to train and equip the troops. The highest previous estimate of unaccounted-for weapons was 14,000, in a report issued last year by the inspector general for Iraq reconstruction.

Also today, Camilla Hall and Robin Stringer (Bloomberg News) report that the death toll in this morning's bombing in Tal Afar has risend to 27 (from 25). Reuters notes it's now up to 28 and that (counting corpses) there are already reports of 43 dead today. This as AP reports Iraq's power grid is on "the brink of collapse." I supposed Gates can tell us the grid failure is the fault of occupied Iraq as well? At what point does the US government take responsibility for what is their legal responsiblity? Or maybe we shouldn't expect legality in an illegal war to begin with?


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

the washington post
the new york times

Today, the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier was killed and two Soldiers were wounded during combat operations in an eastern section of the Iraqi capital Aug. 5."

In news of yesterday's violence (which claimed the lives of over 100 Iraqis), Martha notes Megan Greenwell's "Mortar Attack Kills 13 in East Baghdad" (Washington Post):

At least 13 people were killed Sunday morning when mortar shells rained down on their east Baghdad neighborhood, police said.
At least three mortar rounds hit a major thoroughfare in Mashtal, a predominantly Shiite neighborhood on the eastern outskirts of the capital, according to police. Most of the victims were waiting in line for fuel, an officer said.
Gas station lines have increasingly been targeted in car bomb and mortar attacks because of the potential for a large number of victims. With severe fuel shortages, ever more cars on the streets and the growing popularity of generators, lines often stretch more than a mile. Drivers generally budget six to nine hours to fill their gas tanks.
At least 65 people were killed Thursday in car bomb attacks near two gas stations.

Yesterday, the news was that puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki was refusing to accep the resignations of the six cabinet members who quit last week. Today Stephen Farrell (New York Times) reports:

President Jalal Talabani shuttled between Shiite and Sunni leaders in Baghdad on Sunday, trying to find a way to bring Sunnis back into the fold after they walked out of the government last week.
[. . .]
The withdrawal of Sunni cabinet ministers on Wednesday gravely damaged the government's credentials as a national unity coalition. They complain that they have been excluded from decision-making on security matters, and they demand that Shiite militias be disbanded and prisoners being held without charge be released.

And we'll drop back to yesterday's Los Angeles Times to note Molly Hennessy-Fiske's report on the realities of 'democracy' in 'liberated' Iraq for gays and lesbians:

Human rights groups say that Iraqi gays are increasingly targeted by militias and police. The United Nations and State Department have issued reports documenting some of the more recent killings.
A U.N. report in January cited attacks on gays by militants, as well as the existence of "religious courts, supervised by clerics, where homosexuals allegedly would be 'tried,' 'sentenced' to death and then executed."
Iraqi leaders dismiss those allegations, and Middle East experts say it's difficult to tell whether the attacks are state-sanctioned.
"Nobody's paying attention to this issue," said Ali Dabbagh, spokesman for Prime Minister Nouri Maliki. "It is not the custom of the people of Iraq. Not only Iraq, but the whole region."
In October 2005, Iraq's leading Shiite Muslim cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, issued a fatwa, or religious decree, on his website forbidding homosexuality and declaring that gays and lesbians should be "punished, in fact, killed."
"The people involved should be killed in the worst, most severe way," the decree said.
The fatwa against gay men was removed from Sistani's website last year, but it was not revoked, said Ali Hili, an Iraqi gay-rights activist living in London who petitioned Sistani's office to remove it.

That's cute how al-Maliki's flack claims no one's paying attention but a fatawa is issued.

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

megan greenwell
the washington post
the los angeles times
molly hennessy-fiske
the new york times

Although much has changed in the USA: public opinion of George and his war of choice for profit have tanked and Congress changed in November '06, everything else has gotten worse. Besides the obvious loss of our freedoms, BushCo in tandem with Congress Inc, has increased worldwide Islamic Jihadism and fueled intense hatred of US corporate imperialism. The dead and mutilated bodies keep piling up in Iraq and the flag-draped coffins are surging home under the mainstream media’s radar. The people of Baghdad have gone without water for days now and anyone of us can go to any faucet in our homes and pour ourselves a glass of safe water. The Iraqis are human, goddamnit, and their lives count, too! By our inaction, we form a union of callousness and violence with our federal employees. 535 members of Congress are about to go on undeserved vacations while our troops and the people of Iraq and Afghanistan are suffering under the most direst of circumstances and BushCo are poised to invade Iran and we all know Gonzo may have to resign and George will use the sleazy recess appointment process to foist another criminal on us.
Congress and BushCo have dismal approval ratings, but what does that say about "We the People?" It says that in our Representative Republic, "We" have no say. That's because many of us believe that our responsibilities in that Representative Republic are fulfilled in the voting booth. If we don't stand up to the people whom we employ and pay and make sure our votes count literally and for what we stand for, then we are doomed to being ruled by the ruthless elite who get their legislative orders from the special interests.
As Congressman John Conyers wrote over a year ago in his fabulous treatise on the crimes of BushCo called, Constitution in Crisis, "We have seen so many transgressions by this Administration that it is easy to forget last week's scandal amid this week's new outrage. I am hopeful that compiling all of these events of the last few years will help wake all of us up to the gravity of these matters and the cumulative damage to our country."
Wake up America…the situation is indeed grave and we have three branches of government (and a complicit "fourth estate") that are committed to politics and profits before people.
Nothing is going to change until we put people before the politics of profit or the profit of politics.

The above, noted by Mia, is from Cindy Sheehan's "I'm Perturbed As Heck" (Common Dreams).

It is amazing to hear the talking point from some gas bags that we have to be 'non-partisan'. That was the winning strategy for 2002, right? Oh, it was the losing strategy. But, as Sheehan rightly points out, how do you strategize over dying? Over the destruction of your own country? Coming to agreement with a movement that has destroyed this country and claimed countless lives is nothing to strive for. Giving a little to a crowd of totalitarians is shameful.

Acting as if an illegal war is something we can agree to disagree on, is cowardice. Forget the votes they think they have in Congress currently (or, knowing them, the ones they know they'll line up in 2008), if Congress got serious about the illegal war, the public support would be there and it would drive other members of Congress to join them. Even members of Bully Boy's party. "We don't have the votes" was never a solid excuse for caving in the past. Now that they have control of both houses, "we don't have the votes" is not only idiotic it ignores the very real fact that the people are the bosses of Congress. With approximately 70% of Americans wanting US forces out of the Iraq war, those 'vote counters' betray their understanding of democracy and of the country.

And as they do that, the dying continues.


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 was 3648. Tonight? They've announced 3669. The dying's not stopping. Join Iraq Veterans Against the War, Tina Richards and Military Families Speak Out in speaking the truth: Fuding the war is killing the troops. That is reality. It's reality because without funding the illegal war would stop. It's reality because whether it's a week with one announced death or 30 (or more), the dying continues.

Today the US military announced: "Two MNC-I Soldiers died of wounds suffered during combat operations in Baghdad August 5." And they announced: "A Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier was killed and two others were wounded during combat operations in a western section of the Iraqi capital Aug. 4." And they announced: " One MNC-I Soldier died of wounds suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated next to the Soldier’s vehicle during combat operations near Baghdad August 4, 2007."

Funding the illegal war is killing Iraqis. No one seems to notice much but the daily count is back to the 100s. Not for one day or for two. It's back to that number it was when the UN decried the 100 daily dead. It happened again on Sunday. Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 mortar attacks in Baghdad with at least 11 dead and sixteen wounded today, 1 dead from a Baghdad car bombing, 1 body guard for Hazim al-Araji is dead (four more wounded) from a Baghdad attack, the Imam of Khadhraa was shot dead at his home and two of sons wounded "as they screamed for help seeing their father being killed in front of them," 18 corpses were discovered in Baghdad, outside Kirkuk two were wounded from a roadside bombing, and 6 corpses were discovered in Mosul. For today's violence, McClatchy is reporting 38 dead or discovered dead. Reuters reports three police officers wounded in an attack in Baghdad (gunfire), 2 dead from a car bombing in Mahmudiya, a "tribal leader" dead today in Suwayra after being attacked Saturday and not recovering from the attack, and a prisoner in Badoush prison (outside Mosul) was killed. We're not done with Reuters, they also report 60 corpses discovered in Baquba. That's 64 for Sunday. That's 102 dead on Sunday.

It's already Monday in Baghdad now and Reuters reports a Tal Afar truck bombing that claimed 25 lives. Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) reports that puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki, has refused to accept the resignations last week of the six cabinet ministers. Not surprising, al-Maliki refuses to accept reality.

In the US, Laura Bruno (Daily Record) reports the arrest of Michael B. Silva at his apartment. Bruno's not much of a reporter because she either didn't ask or didn't tell why police were sent to the apartment. (The military sent them.) To read her account, it's not only natural for the police to show up at someone's door asking about a self-checkout, it's also reasonable for them to demand a search (which is how Silva was discovered). Did they even have a warrant for a search? Another thing Bruno doesn't ask or doesn't tell. Silva served in Iraq prior to his self-checkout. How the police ended up at his apartment or why they thought they had reason to search are topics we're all, like Bruno, supposed to ignore. Don't shake the construction too roughly, it will fall apart.

Dave Lindorff and Barbara Olshanksy wrote a book on impeachment. Kayla asked that we note this: "Here's an offer you can't refuse! Read Chapter 1 of The Case for Impeachment for free at no obligation. Just go to the Barnes&Noble catalog page or the Powell's Books catalog page and click on the 'read a sample chapter' button (then buy the book!)". Using those links, you can read chapter one (I don't know if it's in PDF format or not, I do know it's a brilliant book). Kayla also notes this from Lindorff's "Tomasky on Impeachment: The Dumbest Advice the Democrats Ever Got" (This Can't Be Happening):


First, impeaching Bush and Cheney is not a matter of Democratic strategy and partisanship. It is a matter of defending the Constitution and the republic against an unprecedented threat. It is a matter of the members of Congress acting in accordance with their oaths of office, which call on them to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Impeaching this administration is what the American public wants Congress to do. In the face of a media black-out, or of mainstream media ridicule of the idea of impeachment, a majority of Americans--Democrats, independents and even many Republican--nonetheless knows better and wants these men impeached. Without even having good access to information about the grim details of the president’s and vice president’s crimes, and with the pundits like Tomasky and O’Reilly in full negative mode, the American people know a threat to their country when they see it.
And second, impeachment is a process, not an action. It was the hearings on impeachment in the House Judiciary Committee in 1974, televised and presented to the American people live, unmediated by glib corporate reporters, that convinced the American people and the politicians in Congress that Nixon deserved to be impeached. While there was great public skepticism about impeachment at the start of those hearings, when only 25 members of the House signed on, by the end of the hearings, the public was in favor, and three articles of impeachment were voted out of the committee, all of them with Republican support, and one of them by unanimous vote. It was the hearings, and the resulting wave of public revulsion against Nixon, that led Republican leaders to go to the president and tell him that he had to resign or he would lose the impeachment vote in the House, and that he would lose a trial in the Senate, and probably even end up in jail.
Tomasky has to know that the same thing is even more likely to occurf in the case of an impeachment hearing into the crimes of Bush and Cheney--crimes which are far more serious and more far-reaching than those of Richard Nixon.
It doesn't matter that Democrats have only a narrow margin in the House and a razor-thin majority in the Senate (no one, before impeachment hearings began, thought there was a chance that the Senate, with some 40 Republican members at the time, would ever oust Nixon in an impeachment trial either). What matters is standing up to the wholesale destruction of Constitutional government that is taking place under Bush and Cheney.
The real question is not the one posed by Tomasky about whether impeachment is "good for the Democrats"; it is what will be left of America and our Constitution if Bush and Cheney are not impeached before they leave office in January 2009.

Pru gets the last highlight. From Great Britain's Socialist Worker, "Gordon Brown shows his backing for George Bush's 'war on terror':"

Gordon Brown sent a clear message this week to all those who have despaired of the disastrous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and hoped that he would stand up to George Bush and bring the troops home.
On his trip to meet George Bush in the US, Brown made clear his devotion to the "strong relationship" with the US, and that Britain would continue to play a central role in the "war on terror".
Much of the media responded by looking for any difference between Brown's relationship with Bush and Blair's.
Brown said, "Afghanistan is the frontline against terrorism." Bush says it is Iraq.
Blair and Bush used to wear open necked shirts when they met. Brown and Bush wore suits this week.
Brown will stand together with Bush in pushing through an imperialist project in the Middle East.
Bush said, "There is no doubt in my mind that Gordon Brown understands that failure in Iraq would be a disaster for both our countries."
In the Washington Post newspaper, Brown wrote, "It is our shared task to expose terrorism."
Determination
He added, "All of us must be vigilant in our determination to prevent attacks and defeat the forces of terrorism. And it is the values we share that make us best placed to succeed."
The reality of what that means is continuing carnage in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The rhetoric over terrorism is translating into Brown's plan to increase detention without trial in Britain.
He has said that in the next session of parliament he wants to reopen the debate on raising the 28-day limit on the amount time that police can hold a suspect without charge.
The limit was extended to 28 days only 18 months ago. It is already the longest maximum period of detention without charge in western Europe.
The proposal for a 90 day period was narrowly defeated when put forward by Tony Blair in 2005.
But Brown has called for a "consultation" on increasing the time to up to 56 days, supporting police claims that they need yet more time to detain people to collect "evidence" in terrorist cases.
Brown also announced he is intending to bring in a "unified border force" to boost the "fight against terrorism".
This would create a "highly visible" force that would bring together immigration and customs officers.
He is also calling for a speed up to the introduction of identity cards.
Draconian
Other measures include support for using email and telephone intercepts as evidence.
Yet more draconian laws won’t mean an end to terrorism. It is Britain’s support for the US’s war that leads to terrorism.
In his Washington Post article, Brown said, “We must expose the contrast between great objectives to tackle global poverty and honour human dignity and the evils of terrorists who would bomb and maim people irrespective of faith, indifferent to the very existence of human life."
In a sense he is right. But it is an apt description of his "special relationship" with Bush and the carnage they preside over.
© Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by » making a donation.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. Repeating, that address is for things that appear at this site. Visitors wishing to trash other community sites are not protected. This has always happened and it has become a steady pattern in the last few months. People want to share their vileness at some other member of the community and write here instead of having the guts to say it to them because they think they are protected here. They are not protected. If you're writing the public e-mail address here, you are doing it for some reason related to this site. Your slams on others in the community will not be 'off the record' nor is it my job (or desire) to pass on your trash to them.

iraq
and the war drags on
donovan
cindy sheehan
dave lindorff
iraq veterans against the war
tina richards
the los angeles times
alexandra zavis
the socialist worker

A piece of flith named Dumb Ass, a friend of Bob Somerby's, has written an e-mail. That piece of filth is not protected by anything here. He knows (or should) full well why. That he wants to show back up after all this time is a suprise. That his trashy mouth is back is far less surprising. He wants everyone who does a community site to know something.

So why the hell is he writing me?

Bob Somerby was delinked (for good reason) some time ago. I've not written about it here. But Dumb Ass has a real problem (he also has a sick crush on Rebecca who thinks he's a creep and I think Rebecca's judgement is mild to the extreme). For some reason Dumb Ass thought we were buddies and bored me with e-mails back in the summer of 2005. Never about this site. Never about anything I've written.

Now he's back with his trashy little crap, whining again about things that went up at other sites.
The public e-mail address is not for that. Anyone thinking they can use it to gripe about things at other sites needs to check themselves real damn quick.

I'm not your secretary, Dumb Ass, I don't pass on your messages.

Among other things, Dumb Ass scribbles, "Thankfully, it seems you folks live in that special and inept bubble of the faux brilliant in NYC and luckily, when it comes to accomplishing the serious change needed for this country and globe, we won't need your help electing Hill anyhow. (BTW, she will be the nominee. Book it.)"

Dumb Ass, you stupid, tiny ___ed man, get it through your thick (and probably hairy) skull that I have not endorsed anyone. Yes, we're all fully aware that you and your buddy Bobby were on board the Hillary train in 2005. That sort of thing really needs a disclosure. In fact, writing that you haven't made up your mind in 2006, when you made up your mind in 2005, really qualifies as a "lie."

You and Bobby aren't setting the political world on fire anymore than you set the comic world on fire. You're both floundering comics who play at life like characters in a Christopher Guest mockumentary. "You folks" appears to include me. I don't live in NYC. I live on the West Coast. I'm not sure where you're getting your nonsense. But I'll assume failed stand up comics must especially hate NYC.

I don't know when you think you've ever been "overwhelmingly generous" to me. We've never met and I don't hang with the never-was crowd. You bored me with some e-mails in 2005 and I checked around on you to figure out who the hell you were (as I told you in the only e-mail I ever sent you) and then avoided you. (Rebecca avoided your creepy self completely.)

As your knuckles drag the floor you get off your usual hatred of women (no surprise) and we'll note this bit by you, "Yeah, code pink is the answer and the Daily Howler (or as your kind bloggers like to refer to him...that bitter, sexist, depressed old man) is the problem."

I can't follow "Your kind bloggers". Is that supposed to be "your kind of bloggers"? Is it supposed to "you kind bloggers"? I have no idea. Your e-mail reads like it was written by someone repeating third grade for the fourth year. (Perhaps that explains all the hate on display?)

I don't claim to be a "blogger" and this isn't a "blog."

"Depressed"? I don't think anyone has used that term to describe your buddy. I certainly haven't. Elaine would object to it being used without a qualifier of some kind to make sure it was noted that she wasn't participating in a diagnosis. He is sexist. He tears apart women. He will bend over backwards for any Wash Post columnist. It will be a new day and a fresh start. But a woman he disagrees even once (even when the woman is right), he tears into and there is no "new day" or "fresh start" for them. Jane Mayer was exactly right, the criticism was sexist.

I'm not surprised by how much you hate CODEPINK. You are his little buddy. CODEPINK is women.

It's amazing that in your e-mail you fail to mention that Bob Somerby and Matt Cooper are friends. That was the little slip you made in 2005. Do you remember 2005? Bob Somerby was calling Joe Wilson names. Shocking because Wilson is a man. But he was repeatedly stating Wilson was wrong and using harsher terms than that.

Well, I guess if I was friends with Matty Cooper and Matty Cooper was involved in the entire PlameGate, I'd go on the attack against Wilson as well.

See, that's one of the things that should have been disclosed when Somerby decided to trash Joe Wilson day after day, that he was friends with Matty Cooper who wasn't a disinterested party in the proceedings. Valerie Plame had been outed to Matty by Scooter Libby and by Karl Rove.
The people who kept wondering why Bob Somerby was repeatedly attacking Joe Wilson had a right to know that detail. It's amazing that Somerby has so frequently discussed Karl Rove but when Matty finally rolled over on Karl, there was nothing, not even faux outrage, about Karl Rove's actions at The Daily Howler.

For the record, CODEPINK didn't attack Joe Wilson. For the record, CODEPINK didn't repeat Republican talking points about Joe Wilson. For the record, CODEPINK didn't bill themselves as "media critics" and yet, somehow, miss the boat on Judith Miller. How did that happen anyway? How do you present yourself as a media critic and day after day avoid Judith Miller.
Somerby never had time to call out Miller.

His work? It's a joke. He's a joke.

He's the moron who said that the press had changed citing the 2004 coverage. This was the same coverage that found him exploding in the summer of 2004 at readers that he wasn't baking cookies, he was being serious! This is the same coverage that included the Not So Swift Floaties. But post-election, he sits down with CJR and sees growth and improvement in the media coverage?

He made himself useless. I'd be embarrassed, were I him, to have archives where people could see I failed to call out Judith Miller -- that wasn't a minor two-day story, we're talking about the coverage that helped sell an illegal war -- or that I advanced the right wing attacks on Joe Wilson (while failing to note how close I was to someone refusing to name Karl Rove in Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation). I'd be embarrassed that if anyone scrolled around in my archives, they'd see my claims to chuck it all and start covering eductation. I'd be even more embarrassed if they came across some of my (bad) posts on education. That didn't drive the traffic, so Bob went back to doing what he'd always done, the only thing that brought him any level of fame (comedy never did).

Maybe you and Bob can work with Matty Cooper on another stand up routine, only this time it can be about the idiot who quickly named Scooter Libby but refused to name Karl Rove. Refused to name him before the 2004 election. The election was close (some would say stolen) and possibly some of those "Bully Boy will bring us security!" voters would have had second thoughts had they known that the man running his campaign, his alleged "brain," was revealing that Valerie Plame was an undercover CIA agent?

So let's just boil this down to two things. Bob Somerby is completely useless as a media critic with regards to the Iraq War. He was useless when it was being sold, he's been useless since.
When Valerie Plame was outed and her career was destroyed, Somerby's route of choice was to attack Joe Wilson and repeatedly give coverage to Republicans. (He loved citing the Republicans on that, didn't he?)

So you can spout off your hatred at CODEPINK all you want, but Bob Somerby's useless.

And he is a sexist.

He's also a coward because TO THIS DAY if anyone puts out the falsehood that Naomi Wolf was a "fashion consultant" for Al Gore's 2000 campaign, you're 'brave' Bobby rushes to call them out. But Eric AlterPunk included that in his really bad book and Bobby not only didn't question it, he praised the book online.

He has compromised himself repeatedly.

You spill your hate while posing as if you're some friend.

Let me clear it up for you, we aren't friends. I don't hang with failed comics. You're a little nothing who never made his mark and that is why you fled NYC. Not because, as you maintain, you saw the crazies. You fled because you're a little nothing who couldn't make it. Again, I don't live in NYC but your comments about were insulting even to me.

You are a useless comic. Bob Somerby is a useless media critic. His contributions, such as they are, revolve mainly around the 'skill' in hollering "knee pads" at Elisabeth Bumiller while allowing every male a second chance, a fresh start.

Do not write me again. I feel debased just reading your rants. I don't know if you're on medication and from time to time go off your meds or if you're drunk when you write, but you really aren't fit to operate a keyboard.

Bob Somerby's been named in this. "Online Latter Day Dylan" is how I've referred to him for the most part here in any negative criticism. But you're not really interested in what's up here, you're interested in what's gone up at other sites.

Don't bore me with your crap again.

And, for the record, noted before but let's do it again, the public e-mail address does not exist so you can come whining about what someone else wrote. I don't want to hear about it, I don't need to know about it. If you're using the public e-mail address, you are supposed to be a visitor attempting to contact, Isaiah, Kat, Ruth or myself. And it should be about what we've done, not about what other sites have done.

Because you got drunk and spent "hours and hours" of time reading other community sites online is no reason to share your sexist, trashy opinions with me. Nor do I need, pay attention Dumb Ass, to note what you really think of progressives (I believe he uses "progs," I'm not re-reading that crappy e-mail). I have never called myself a "progressive" and I seriously doubt that anyone with a site in this community has used the term. If you're using the public address, you're writing about something to do with this website. If you're abusing the public address to trash friends of mine, you have no right to protection because that public address was never offered to allow you to spew your hate, vulgarities and filth. Rebecca and I have been friends since college. Insult her and you really tick me off.

I don't vet the copy at the other sites. (Wally and Betty read their stuff to me over the phone only to see if I laugh.) Each adult running a site is responsible for their own site. Writing me about what you read elsewhere makes about as much sense as me screaming at Ms. magazine about something that ran in another magazine.

I've never liked snitches and didn't let my own children tattle on one another. So I'm offended by Dumb Ass (and others) for that reason alone.

But it is also very insulting to adults working very hard on their own sites that this sort of crowd keeps running to me to complain about what they've written.

Dumb Ass clearly thinks he's the "big man". I don't claim to be an expert on masculinity but I do find it strange that a middle-aged man thinks the height of masculinity is playing tattle tale.

I haven't mentioned Bob Somerby (even as "Online Latter Day Dylan") at this site since we delinked from him. I had no interest in pointing out that he was attacking Joe Wilson while friends with Matt Cooper (he's not the only one who hid that fact while attacking Wilson). But I'm not going to put up with bullying e-mails (about what others have written) from his little friend -- and fellow failed comic -- Tim Howe.

Yes, Dumb Ass, we know. You both got on board the Hillary Clinton train in 2005. We know that. We know that Bob Somerby posed as if he hadn't gotten behind a candidate in 2006. (He may have posed this year as well, I don't read him.) I have called out Hillary and I've said she was right when she has been. I have not endorsed anyone and will not endorse anyone. So in your sections that appear to be directed at me (but who knows?), you don't know what you're talking about. If you were tanked when you wrote, lay off the booze when you're e-mailing.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. That's for things that Kat, Ruth or myself write or to comment on Isaiah's comics. It is not for you to pass on vile aimed at adults who all have their own e-mails posted at their own sites where they work very hard on their writing. The rules on privacy refer only to when you're commenting on this site. You cannot hide behind that rule to launch your attacks on other community sites and the people who run them.

Isaiah's latest The World Today Just Nuts "A Flunky Scorned." Standing in front of slumped characters, Bully Boy explains, "The Democrats just signed on to my illegal spying. Now some people say they were born spineless. That's just not true. In fact, I keep all their spines in a closet in the Lincoln bedroom. Next to the skull of Ger


the world today just nuts
bully boy
spineless
comic
the common ills

Today's New York Times contains only one Iraq article. It runs on A11. "Rape of Iraqi Girls and Killing of Family gets G.I. 110 Years" Paul von Zielbauer. Last week an AP article the Times ran did the apparently unthinkable, it named Abeer Qassim al-Janabi. PvZ becomes the first reporter for the paper to use Abeer's name in an article the paper has run. PvZ notes Steven D. Green will be the next tried (the article's on the conviction of Jesse Spielman) in a civilian court.

Isaiah will go up shortly (and if you went to Flickr this morning you saw it despite all the other computer problems -- Isaiah says thanks to Kendrick who caught Geronimo being mispelled when he saw it on Flickr).

The Third Estate Sunday Review's features:

Truest statement of the week
A Note to Our Readers
Editorial: Are you angry yet?
TV: Plotz, Plots, Fizz, Fizz . . .
The Woody Allen Canon
Aidan Delgado's The Sutras Of Abu Ghraib
No End In Sight when the peace movement gets behind crap
The New Plantation
John Conyers Is No MLK (Betty, Cedric & Ty)
Ah, that's why The Nation sucks so
Green Party facts
Highlights

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

the new york times
the third estate sunday review

Ruth: I followed the weeks in California with a family vacation and this was noted in places at different community sites as well as this one but for those visitors who missed it, I am "still around."

In terms of radio, two programs stand out the most from last week.

Friday on Uprising, which airs on KPFK at 8:00 am PST, a conversation took place that I give credit to both the host, Sonali Kolhatkar, and the guest, Stephen Zunes, for having. I might need to say, "Especially in light of the previous Friday's broadcast"?

The previous Friday, Ms. Kolhatkar was speaking with a scholar when it was time for Glen Ford's Black Agenda Report radio commentary. After that, Ms. Kolhtkar asked the scholar to speak of Mr. Ford's points. The scholar was off in Hillary Clinton Is The Devil Land. Which was rather strange because Mr. Ford's commentary was "Barack Obama's Game: Erase the 'Black Problem'." The issues Mr. Ford raised related to Senator Obama were shoved aside as the scholar rushed to list all of Senator's Clinton's negatives.

Yesterday, Ms. Kolhatkar specifically raised the issue of Senators Clinton and Obama to Professor Zunes who was able to address the issues she raised. He did not feel either was that different from the other though Senator Obama's imperialism came with a happy stamp. While it was amazing that a real conversation of the two Senators could take place, it should be noted that I have never heard Professor Zunes stammer or hesitate so much in any interview. By his answers, he had obviously given considerable thought to the issue so I will chalk his nervousness down to the fact that there is a strong push to deny reality when it comes to Senator Obama.

Reality about Senator Obama is that he was against the illegal war before it began, and before he was a member of the U.S. Senate. Reality is also that, by the time he began campaigning for the U.S. Senate, he was publicly against withdrawal from the war he was against. Reality is also that, as former U.S. Senator Mike Gravel pointed out in the Democratic Presidential Candidates YouTube discussion, Senator Obama is funded by corporations. Reality even includes the New York Times explaining a few weeks back that Senator Obama's alleged "small donors" are not donating monies to his campaign. Those small amounts are actually no more than concession sales from his rallies. As the Times explained, and small media ignored, every t-shirt, every bumper sticker, every $4.95 for a key chain is chalked up as a "donation." No, that is not the Howard Dean phenomenon. As the paper pointed out, no other campaign is known to do that or to have ever done that.

Hopefully Friday's discussion is a sign that if we must have non-stop 2008 election coverage, we can at least have reality in the discussion. For that to take place, it will probably be helpful to remove the likes of Patricia J. Williams whose Obama campaigning, passed off as a KPFA interview, included her not only snarling at at a caller with a Mid-Eastern accent and correcting the caller who was, in fact correct, but it also included Professor Patti flying her elitist flag as she gushed repeatedly over the thought that someone who was president of the Harvard Law Review could run for president.

The second program that stood out most strongly was WBAI's Law and Disorder which aired last Monday. C.I. has written about it here and here and Mike has written about it here. The hosts Michael Ratner, Michael Smith and Dalia Hashad used the hour to examine resistance and spoke with Iraq Veterans Against the War's Adam Kokesh, his attorney, and CO and war resister Camilo Mejia who has recently published his account in Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia.

Sgt. Kokesh,