 |
Monday, September 22, 2008
Monday,
September 22, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military
announces another death, Shell returns to Iraq, evaluating the 'surge'
and more. NPR's Lourdes Garcia-Navarro (Morning Edition) reports
on the growing tensions in Khanaqin, a city in Diyala Province (and,
not noted by NPR, an oil rich area containing the Naft Khana oil
field). Garcia-Navarro notes that "Khanaqin is a disputed city that
lies about 15 miles outside of the Kurdish provincial borders. As far
as the Iraqi government is concerned, it falls under the province of
Diyala's control. Last month the Iraqi government sent the Iraqi army
into Diyala Province one of the most restive in the country to flush
out al Qaeda in Iraq as part of that operation the Iraqi national
security forces tried to move into Khanaqin but they were stopped by
the Kurdish troops." "Last month" is actually July 29th. During
Saddam's rule, Kurds were expelled from Khanaqin and Arabs were brought
in. The illegal war changed that and now Arabs are expelled.
Garcia-Navarrot notes that "these days it's the Kurdish leadership
that's been expanding its control since the US-led invasion in towns
and cities outside of Kurdistan. It's been deploying Kurdish forces
and bankrolling local governments. Many Arab-Iraqis suspect that Kurds
are trying to get control over an ever-widening swatch of land as a
precursor to an eventual bid for independence. The Kurds deny it." The
report notes that the Iraqi military has been refused entry Khanaqin
and that last week Abd al-Qadir al-Mufriji, Iraq's Defense Minister,
and the US military's 2nd command in Iraq visited the region in an
attempt to work out some understanding but none was reached and the
Iraqi military is still refused entry and the Kurdish pesh merga patrol
the city. Saturday BBC reported, "A roadside bomb killed six Kurdish peshmerga fighters in Khanaqin town in Diyala province, north-east of Baghdad." Sam Dagher (New York Times) observed
that the Saturday bombing increased "tensions with the Iraqi government
and local Arabs over the Kurds' presence in the area. The Kurdish
presence in Khanaquin, and in other nearby areas, has been a growing
source of tension. Kurdish forces have been moving the borders of their
semiautonomous region in northern Iraq, in what they say is an effort
to improve security. But the move has been viewed by many Iraqi and
American officials as a threat to stability in areas that are already
prone to violence." Amit R. Paley (Washington Post) reported
before the bombing, "Kurdish leaders have expanded their authority over
a roughly 300-mile-long swath of territory beyond the borders of their
autonomous region in northern Iraq, stationing thousands of soldiers in
ethnically mixed areas in what Iraqi Arabs see as an encroachment on
their homelands. The assertion of greater Kurdish control, which has
taken hold gradually since the war began and caused tens of thousands
of Arabs to flee their homes, is viewed by Iraqi Arab and U.S.
officials as a provocative and potentially destabilizing action." An Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy (at Inside Iraq) reviews
the benefits for the Kurds and wonders if "is it right to cause a state
to collapse into entities to realize your dream?" The correspondent
notes how the Peshmerga appears to decide what they will do and which
areas (Kurdish or non-Kurdish) they will 'patrol.' Of oil-rich Kirkuk,
the correspondent notes that Kurds compose only an estimated 40% of the
city's population but have "taken control of it and the Pershmerga
handle the security there". Of the Iraqi Constitution, the
correspondents notes that "the Kurds objected to the statement that
read 'Iraq is an Arab state and part of the Arab nation' pointing out
that there are other ethnic groups that would be offended. So the
statement was struck out -- as if by a magic wand disregarding the
other constituents of the Iraqi population. Arabs constitute 84% of
the population." The Washington Post's Amit R. Paley noted
then (September 12th), "The face-off between the Iraqi army and pesh
merga has stoked fears of Arab-Kurdish strife just as Iraqis begin to
recover from years of sectarian violence between Shiites and Sunnis."
The Foreign Relations Minister of the KRG (Kurdistan Regional Government), Falah Mustafa Bakir, disputed that in a letter to the Post
published Sept. 18th where he maintained that "the city was peaceful
until Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki sent Iraqi military forces
there last month in an unwelcome and unnecessary provocation that
sparked demonstrations by tens of thousands of residents. This
aggressive act caught the Kurdistan regional leadership by surprise,
given that it occurred around the time that the KRG and other Iraqi
parties had nearly reached agreement on a provincial election law, a
key Iraqi benchmark. Since then, the election law has stalled, and the
KRG has negotiated with Baghdad for the redeployment of some Kurdish
pesh merga forces, as noted in the article." That's a curious
re-writing of history. The Iraqi military moved into Diyala Province
on July 29th and the Kurdish lawmakers walked out of parliament over
the issue of Kirkuk and provincial elections July 23rd. From the July 23rd snapshot: "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. . . . 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'." The
walkout took place the 23rd, the move into Diyala began the 29th. At best Falah Mustafa Baker has his dates mixed up. Possibly
due to traipsing around DC last week insisting "The KRG is part of
the solution, not the problem, in meeting these Iraqi benchmarks" to
the administration, the Pentagon and the State Dept. Last week, UPI reported
that despite Massoud Barzani's denials (he's the Kurdish prime
minister) last week that there were no intentions to take over Diyala
Province, the week prior he "pointed out that 99 percent of the
Khanaqin population had voted in favor of Kurdish parties in 2005,
suggesting the area would be incorporated into Kurdistan once
constitutional issues over the Kurdish territories were resolved." From possible conflict between warring sides to known conflict. Maggie Fox (Reuters) reported
late Friday on a UCLA study which argues, via satellite imagery,
that the small drop in Baghdad violence can be attributed not to the
'surge' (escalation of US troops) but to the ethnic cleansing/violence
which created the Iraqi refugee crisis (resulting in more than 4
million refugees -- external and internal): "The images support the
view of international refugee organizations and Iraq experts that a
major population shift was a key factor in the decline in sectarian
violence, particularly in the Iraqi capital, the epicenter of the
bloodletting in which hundreds of thousands were killed." The study is
published in Environment and Planning A, [PDF format warning] John
Agnew, Thomas W. Gillespie, Jorge Gonzalez and Brian Min's " Baghdad nights: evaluting the US military 'surge' using nighttime light signatures" which notes at the start: In
this commentary we attempt to intervene in a way that applies some
fairly objective and unobtrusive measures to a particularly contentious
issue: the question of whether or not the so-called 'surge' of US
military personnel into Baghdad -- 30000 more troops added in the first
half of 2007 -- has turned the tide against political and social
instability in Iraq and laid the groundwork for rebuilding an Iraqi
polity following the US invasion of March 2003. Even though the US
media attention on the Iraq war has waned, the conflict remains a
material and symbolic issue of huge significance for both future US
foreign policy and the future prospects of Iraq as an effective state. They continue: In
this paper we use remotely sensed information, specifically nighttime
light imagery of Baghdad and other cities in Iraq, and correlate this,
as best possible, with group-based information on ethnic distributions
and violence by neighborhood. Our
purpose is to assess the degree to which the overall nighttime light
signature of the city and its distribution across neighborhoods have
changed during the period of the surge. If the surge has truly
'worked' we would expect to see a steady increase in nightime light
output over time, as electrical infrastructure is repaired and
restored, with little discrimination across neighborhoods. The
sistuation in other cities is used as a datum against which to compare
the Baghdad trend. Most of the other cities we examing have typically
had much lower levels of ethnic intermixture and levels of violence
than Baghdad. And skipping further ahead: The
overall nighttime light signature of Baghdad since the US invasion
appears to have increased between 2003 and 2006 and then declined
dramatically from 20 March 2006 through December 2007 (table 1). In
other words, the period of the surge coincides with a decline in the
nightime light of the city after an increase following the invasion and
before the onset of the surge. This result can be stated with a high
degree of statistical confidence (Mann - Whitney U-test, P <
0.001). The city as a whole, therefore, experienced a net decrease in
its electricity output over the course of the surge. This was not just
temporary, and thus cannot be put down to military operations
disrupting supplies, because the end date of 16 December 2007 is well
after the most intensive military sweeps in the city." The
second result is that the decrease in the nighttime light signature was
not uniformly distributed across the city (table 2; figures 3 and 4).
The neighborhoods of East and West Rashid int he southwestern section
of the city have experienced the greatest decline in nighttime lights
during the period of the surge. These were historically mixed areas
with a predominance of Sunnis, but between 2006 and 2007 they become
highly segregated with signficant loss of total population (Jones,
2007). The nighttime light intensity was also lower after the surge in
Adhamiya (historically a Sunni area), Kadamiya (historically Shia),
Rusfa, and Karada (historically mixed and/or Sunni neighborhoods).
However, there was no change or an increase in nighttime lights in Sadr
City (one of the poorest areas of the city but overwhelmingly Shia),
New Baghdad (heavily Shia), Karkh (Green Zone), and Al Mansour
(historically mixed but by late 2007 heavily Sunni in its western
periphery). This pattern of declines correlates closely with the map of
ethno-sectarian violence and neighborhood ethnic cleansing presented in
the Jones Report (2007) (figure 5). Must of this was concentrated in
the western and southwestern sections of the city before and during the
surge. And skipping further ahead: Our
findings suggest that in these terms the surge has had no observable
effect, except insofar as it has helped to provide a seal of approval
for a process of ethno-sectarian neighborhood homogenization that is
now largely achieved but with a tremendous decline in the extent of
residential intermixing between groups and a probable significant loss
of population in some areas. That is the message we take from the
nighttime light data we have presented. Furthermore, the nighttime
light signature of Baghdad data when matched with ground data provided
by the report to the US Congress by Marine Corps General Jones and
various other sources, makes it clear that the diminished level of
violence in Iraq since the onset of the surge owes much to a vicious
process of interethnic cleansing. This might resume if US forces
withdraw. But as the case we have made strongly implies, the massive
residential segregation and population loss happened anyway even when
US forces were present in increased numbers. Perhaps they are not as
central to events in Baghdad and Iraq as US government and popular
opinion seems to believe. They certainly have not been over the past
two years. Meanwhile want a vacation spot that's cholera adjacent? Sunday Erica Goode and Riyadh Mohammed (New York Times) reported the
chair of the country's Board of Tourism, Humoud Yakobi, who plans to
use the isle of Jazirat A'aras (conviently located in proximity to the
Green Zone, which also puts it in walking distance from various
drive-bys and bombings) into a one-stop resort with "hotels,
restaurants and shopping malls" -- in fact, "'a six-star hotel,' spas,
a yacht club, an amusement park, a shopping center and luxury villa".
Readers of Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise Of Disaster Capitalism
will no doubt flash on other areas where the US brought 'democracy' --
slums alongside vast wealth, shopping malls built ontop of torture
chambers. And Yakobi just needs some (gullible) investors willing to
help him stake his claim. As Goode and Mohammed observe, "Some might
argue that Mr. Yakobi's vision is premature, if not absurd." They also
inform that Yakobi is jazzed over a November conference (in Baghdad)
that will "promote the island . . . and other projects. Those include a
hotel expected to open soon in the ancient city of Babylon in Babel
Province, where cholera cases have recently been reported." Another
Baghdad conference! Wait. The
planned October oil conference (Iraq's Energy Expo and Conference) was
cancelled. Because the convention center wasn't complete. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) reported
that the isle is "a slab of land surrounded by water from the Tigris
River". That would be the highly polluted Tigris River (remember in
2004 when the New York Times actually bothered to report on that?).
Susman explains, "Before a sometimes skeptical crowd of mainly Iraqi
journalists, the head of the tourism board, Hamood Yakoubi, said the
resort, whose name translates to Wedding Island, would be modeled on
the "One Thousand and One Nights" tales. Not that King Shahryar,
Scheherezade, Sinbad or Alladin had Ferris wheels, fast-food
restaurants or a water park to entertain them. But Yakoubi and Ahmed
Ridha, the chairman of the government's National Investment Commission,
said the point was to give visitors a feel for ancient Baghdad while
providing five-star service and amenities." Meanwhile Royal Dutch Shell is in Iraq. Sam Dagher (New York Times) reports
that, having signed their "multibillion-dollar natural gas deal with
the Iraq government" today, the corporation makes its "official return
to Iraq after 36 years." In other suspected crimes, AP reports
that First Lt Michael C. Behenna's court-martial began yesterday and
that he is alleged to have carried an Iraqi prisoner "to a remote
desert location," disrobed the prisoner, shot the prisoner "in the head
and chest and then watching as another soldier set fire to the body
with an incendiary grenade". Appearing at the court-martial was
"Harry," an Iraqi translator, who states he was an eye witness to the
alleged crimes. Turning to some of today's reported violence . . . Bombings? Shootings? Corpses? Today the US military announced:
"A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier died as a result of a
small-arms fire attack on his patrol at approximately 11 a.m. in
Baghdad." The death raises the total number of US service members
killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4169 with 18 for the month of September thus far. Turning to the US presidential race. Leonard Doyle (Independent of London) reports
that GOP vice presidential candidate Governor Sarah Palin campaigned in
Lady Lake, Florida over the weekend and "as many as 60,000 people
turned out". John McCain is the GOP presidential nominee and the
ticket has been packing in audiences. Matt Lira (JohnMcCain.com) posted
a photo of the crowd that turned out in Blaine, Minnesota for McCain
and Palin and that's a huge crowd. Staying with the GOP ticket,
[language warning] Melissa McEwan (Shakesville) asks,
"Why Sandra Berhnard, why?" She's referring to Bernhard's 'comedy'
routine in which she wished rape upon Governor Palin. McEwan notes,
"There is video at the link, should you be so inclined. It does not
include her comment that Palin 'would be gang raped by blacks in
Manhattan,' so I have no idea what the specific context is for that
line--although I quite honestly can't imagine a context in which it
would be anything less than deeply misogynist and racist. I also can't
imagine a person as clever as Bernhard has always struck me to be
honestly believing that making fun of a woman's appearance and calling
her a b**ch and a w**re is somehow "edgy." That s**t's about as cutting
edge as the f**king wheel, okay?" Former president Bill Clinton appeared on ABC's The View today
and, asked about sexism in this election cycle, stated, "I think a lot
of it is almost subconscious and that maybe makes it more insidious. I
think we have become because what we've been through the last forty to
fifty years more sensitive to our own tendancy to be racially
insensitive or to be discramatory. I think that the perceptions we
have about men and women and their roles and what they should do and
how people should feel threatened or not by this or that or the other
thing, I think that's a lot harder to unpack. Do I think there
was some of it in the election? I do. And it's interesting. I noticed
in West Viriginia was the only place I saw election polls. They
actually asked voters if Senator Obama's race or Hillary's gender had
anything to do with their voting. And 15% said yes to race and 20%
said yes to gender. And I actually thought that was a good thing and
I'll tell you why. Because it showed that there was a certain
self-awareness about this. You know, if you will sort of 'fess up to
where you're coming from then you can talk about it." Now,
if you're nodding, stop. Stop and think about when Hillary won West
Virginia. What followed? Non-stop ravings from Panhandle Media (print
and broadcast -- on the latter, Philip Maldari has been among the
worst) about that poll (which they never seem to have studied) and what
it said about . . . race. Gender was included in the polling and the
response to gender was larger. But it's cute the way that fell out of
the conversation, right? Let's fall back to June: Katie Couric:
Over the last week it's been almost impossible to pick up a newspaper
or turn on a cable show and avoid the endless post-mortems on Hillary
Clinton's campaign. Senator Clinton has received her fair share of the
blame and so has her political team. But, like her or not, one of the
great lessons of that campaign is the continued and accepted role of
sexism in American life -- particularly in the media. Many women have
made the point that if Senator Obama had to confront the racist
equivalent of an "Iron My Shirt!" poster at campaign rallies or a
Hillary nutcracker sold at airports or mainstream pundints saying they
instictively cross their legs at the mention of her name, the outrage
would not be a footnote, it would be front page news. It isn't just
Hillary Clinton who needs to learn a lesson from this primary season,
it's all the people who crossed the line -- and all the women and men
who let them get away with it. That's a page from my Notebook, I'm
Katie Couric, CBS News. The continued and accepted role of sexism in American life -- particularly in the media. And
no one demonstrated that as well as Panhandle Media. And continues to
demonstrate it while avoiding real issues as much as they avoid Ralph
Nader (who is about real issues). Ralph Nader is the independent
presidential candidate. Emily Przekwas of Team Nader notes: William Greider put it best yesterday
when he called Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's upcoming bailout of
Wall Street: "All sugar for the villains, lasting pain and damage for
the victims." "As
I have been saying for several months, this crisis has the potential to
bring down one or both political parties, take your choice," Greider
said. And investment analyst Christopher Whalen chimed in: "The
joyous reception from Congressional Democrats to Paulson's latest
massive bailout proposal smells an awful lot like yet another
corporatist lovefest between Washington's one-party government and the
Sell Side investment banks." Strip aside the rhetoric of the two major parties. And what is left is one party devoted to Wall Street. Who represents Main Street? Nader/Gonzalez. So, why is that when the Presidential debates open this Friday, only Wall Street will be in the ring? And the man who predicted the disaster of deregulation is out? Because the Commission on Presidential Debates is controlled by the two parties and funded by the corporations. That's why we're sponsoring a National Day of Action to Open the Debates. This Thursday, September 25, 2008, the day before the first debate. Once
again the Commission intends to silence the majority of Americans by
shutting out Nader/Gonzalez from the debates. We're asking all of our supporters to get ready. Because on Thursday, there are four ways you can take action to Open Up the Debates. 1. Write Letters
to the editor, to your friends, family and anyone in your address book,
companies and corporations who sponsor the presidential debates. 2. Phone The
Commission on Presidential Debates, Obama and McCain Campaigns, Talk
Shows, Newspapers, and National and Local Media Outlets. 3. Create Posters,
fliers and literature to pass out and hang up at college campuses and
other high traffic areas and banners to display to morning and evening
rush hour traffic -- Check out our "Open the Debates" section on the website for downloadable materials.
4. Protest Outside
the Democratic and Republican headquarters in your community, at
corporations that sponsor the debates, at radio stations, newspapers
and media outlets not covering Ralph Nader. (Phone numbers, e-mails and addresses will be available tomorrow at votenader.org/debates.)
Many Americans believe they are getting the full story when they tune into the televised and highly publicized debates. What people don't see is that behind the scenes the debates are controlled by a corporate funded entity. Third
party and independent candidates are arbitrarily required to be polling
at 15% according to five national polls in order to participate in the
debates, even though these third parties are forced to devote all
resources to get on the ballot in all 50 states during the months
leading up to the debates -- costing well over a million dollars! Who decides who gets into the debates? The
so-called "non-partisan" Commission (as described by the New York Times
today). Non-partisan? Headed by Paul Kirk and Frank Fahrenkopf, the
former heads of the Democratic and Republican parties? Since
the media blithely adopts the framing of the corporate parties, we must
take it upon ourselves to expose the Commission on Presidential Debates
as the real spoiler of the democratic system in this country. Just recently Green party candidate Elizabeth May was included into the debates in Canada. Why? Massive
e-mailing, phone calls, and letters to the editor, including one from
former Prime Minister Joe Clark, displaying public outrage prompted the
debate commission to invite Elizabeth May to participate. So on Thursday, take action. And then send us your videos and photos and we'll post them on our Open the Debates page. And here is something you can do right now. Donate to Nader/Gonzalez.
We're in the middle of our Three Way Race fundraising drive. And we need to hit $150,000 by the end of the month.
And if you donate $100 now, we'll ship to you a copy of The Ralph Nader Reader,
a 441-page collection of Ralph's writings on Wall Street vs. Main
Street, the battle for democracy, the corporate state, and our
hyper-commercialized culture. If you donate $100 now,
we will send you this historic collection -- autographed by the man
himself -- Ralph Nader. (This offer ends at 11:59 p.m. September 30,
2008.)
Onward to November |
Posted at 03:02 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
US military announces another death in Iraq
Today the US military announced:
"A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier died as a result of a
small-arms fire attack on his patrol at approximately 11 a.m. in
Baghdad." The death raises the total number of US service members
killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4169 with 18 for the month of September thus far. Meanwhile Reuters notes
2 dead from a Baghdad car bombing (five more injured), 1 dead from a
Baghdad mortar attack (four wounded), two wounded from a second Baghdad
car bombing, 1 corpse discovered in Suwayra and, dropping back to
yesterday, 2 brothers shot dead in Mosul (a third wounded). AP reports
that First Lt Michael C. Behenna's court-martial began yesterday and
that he is alleged to have carried an Iraqi prisoner "to a remote
desert location," disrobed the prisoner, shot the prisoner "in the head
and chest and then watching as another soldier set fire to the body
with an incendiary grenade". Appearing at the court-martial was
"Harry," an Iraqi translator, who states he was an eye witness to the
alleged crimes. Mohammed Abbas (Reuters) examines Moqtada al-Sadr and his movement and offers some opinions: Meanwhile,
rival political groups are consolidating power, while a series of
crackdowns by an increasingly assertive Maliki has forced the Mehdi
Army from many of its former bastions.Attacks
on Shi'ites by Sunni militants, which drove many to Sadr's militia for
support, have plunged. Criminal elements among the Mehdi Army's ranks
have also frustrated Sadr.Turning to the US presidential race, Brandon notes this from Team Nader: No Debate About It - A Letter to the Editor  Another
great example of how an individual can help us break the media blockade
and hold the media accountable to the people. It was published in the
Chicago Sun-Times on September 18th.
No debate about it: We need to hear more viewpoints
September 18, 2008
by Robert Radycki My Polish-born wife tells me stories about her father in post-World War II Poland that Americans should hear. He
used to put a blanket around the door to their apartment to listen to
"Radio Free Europe'' and "Voice of America'' in the early morning or
late evening. The radio had to be muffled so no one could hear. If you
were caught listening by the Stalinist government, it was off to jail
or to a mental hospital. Yet Poles defied their masters. There was the fire in their bellies to seek the truth. I
am a native-born Chicagoan of Polish descent. After taking a trip to
Europe as a college student, I decided to learn the Polish language.
I'm glad I did, because recently I read in the Polish language paper
Dziennik Zwiazkowy about an "Open the Debates" rally with Ralph Nader
in Chicago's old Polish immigrant neighborhood on the Northwest Side.
My grandparents lived in that neighborhood when they first arrived from
Poland, and I proudly returned there on a Saturday to again seek the
path to a stronger democracy. Unlike my father-in-law, I
didn't have to use a blanket to listen to the speaker, but I did have
to read about this rally in a foreign language and not in my native
English. I read about the rally not in the Chicago mainstream media but
in a small ethnic newspaper. Why do I have to go to
alternative sources to seek the truth? Whatever happened in this
country to Greek and British ideals of democracy? Have we sold out our
souls for the almighty dollar? Americans proudly declare,
'"free speech'' but what about, "free access?'' Will I someday have to
put a blanket over the door here in Chicago to listen to a foreign
radio station in a foreign language so I can get the truth? Many
Americans this election year will never get to hear the issues
presented to them free from the framing of vested interests. This is
because the organization that sponsors our presidential debates was
founded and continues to be run by former heads of the Republican
National Committee and the Democratic National Committee. This
Commission on Presidential Debates deprives voters of an accurate
choice and robust debate. When the CPD took over, in
1987, the president of the League of Women Voters, the organization
that had previously sponsored the debates, had this to say: "The
League of Women Voters is withdrawing its sponsorship of the
presidential debates . . . because the demands of the two campaign
organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has
become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add
debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance,
spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The league has no intention
of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.'' I
commend the Chicago Sun-Times for endorsing the Citizens' Debate
Commission. This initiative consists of national civic leaders from the
left, center and right of the political spectrum who are committed to
maximizing voter education. The spirit and promise of America still
lives, but it gets harder and tougher to seek it out. Open the debates! Robert Radycki is a retired computer programmer who lives in Rogers Park, Chicago, IL.
ShareThisShareThis Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate. Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and this is her "Seize The Time!" (McKinney-Clemente '08): We
the people must now seize the time! We have always had the capability
of determining our own destiny, but for various reasons, the people
failed to elect the leaders who provided the correct political will.
There was always some corporate or private special interest that stood
in the way of the public good. And they always seemed to have the power
of the purse to throw around and influence public opinion or our
elected officials. The very foundation of the U.S. economy is crumbling
underneath our feet. This represents a unique moment in U.S. history
and we must now seize the time for self-determination--for health care,
education, ecological wisdom, justice, and all the policies that will
make a difference in the lives of the people including an end to all
wars, including the drug war!The
crisis was staved off for a time for some of our major finance engines
when they were able to obtain bridge funding from certain sovereign
wealth funds. That option grows increasingly dim as The Federal Reserve
is becoming the lender of last resort. This means that the people are
becoming the owners of the primary instruments of U.S. capital and
finance. This now means that the people have a say in how these
instruments are to be used and what their priorities ought to be. The
people should now have more say in how their tax dollars are spent and
what the priorities of government and the public sector must be. We the
people must now set our demands to ensure and promote the public good.Now,
as we ponder the importance of this moment to do good and serve the
needs of the people, some politicians have already figured out their
answer for us: win or steal the next election, prepare for more war,
and leave it to others to try and figure out what to do next. While
banks are failing all around us and the U.S. taxpayer is drenched with
news of billion-dollar bailouts for *selected* companies, the Congress,
which has utterly failed in its twin responsibilities of setting policy
and Executive Branch oversight, plans to adjourn instead of setting new
policies; lessening the impact of the economic freefall on innocent
victims; or stopping war, expansion of war, new war, and occupation.In
a dizzying turn of recent events, we have all witnessed the collapse of
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage providers, investment banks Lehman
Brothers and Bear Stearns, and insurer American International Group
(AIG), and other companies. So far, at least eleven banks have filed
for bankruptcy this year. The case of the AIG bailout is particularly
curious as Merrill Lynch was denied taxpayer largesse. I wonder if AIG
was the selected company for bailout because of its relationship to the
U.S. intelligence community and what others would discover if AIG's
books were opened in an audit. The last person to get close to AIG and
its shady operations was Eliott Spitzer.But
some more fundamental issues must be explored here, relating to the
underlying assumptions that have guided U.S. political and economic
activity, particularly over the last eight years.The
Bush Administration's "anything goes, just don't get caught" attitude
has set the tone for what we are witnessing today. To be sure these
problems didn't start in January of 2001, but they sure were allowed to
accelerate during the George W. Bush Administration. For example, what
tone was set when the Administration shipped $12 billion to Paul
Bremer's provisional government in Iraq in cash on wooden pallets for
Iraq reconstruction? No wonder $9 billion of it was "lost." What I'm
constantly reminded of is that the money didn't just vanish, somebody
got it. Now it's up to us to find out who!However,
the Administration's blatant disregard for good governance, the rule of
law, standards of moral and ethical conduct, and even etiquette, when
coupled with a laissez-faire, "go-along-to-get-along" attitude from
Congress meant that no holes were barred and no hands were on the
deck--a sure prescription for disaster.In
my reading over the course of the last few years, I had to become
somewhat conversant with the language of the new economy: bundled
mortgages, securitization, SPEs, SIVs, derivatives. But in addition to
the old concepts that always seemed to be with us--predatory lending,
redlining, no affordable housing amid "the housing bubble,"-- it soon
became clear that basically folks had figured out a way to make money
off of a ticking time bomb. Kind of like prisons for profit. And even
though the Enron scandal was supposed to have cleaned up a lot of this,
unfortunately, even Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regularly engaged in
some of these practices and that's why you and I own them today. I
believe it is true that the very foundations of the U.S. economy and
conventional political behavior have been shaken. Now is not the time
for business as usual. And although this is by no ways exhaustive, here
are a few things that I think the Democratic-led Congress could work on
now instead of adjourning:1. enactment of a foreclosure moratorium now before the next phase of ARM interest rate increases take effect;2. elimination of all ARM mortgages and their renegotiation into 30- or 40-year loans;3. establishment of new mortgage lending practices to end predatory and discriminatory practices;4. establishment of criteria and construction goals for affordable housing;5. redefinition of credit and regulation of the credit industry so that discriminatory practices are completely eliminated;6. full funding for initiatives that eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in home ownership;7.
recognition of shelter as a right according to the United Nations
Declaration of Human Rights to which the U.S. is a signatory so that no
one sleeps on U.S. streets;8.
full funding of a fund designed to cushion the job loss and provide for
retraining of those at the bottom of the income scale as the economy
transitions;9. close all tax loopholes and repeal of the Bush tax cuts for the top 1% of income earners;10. fairly tax corporations, denying federal subsidies to those who relocate jobs overseas repeal NAFTA.And
since the Congress plans to adjourn early and leave these problems to
The Federal Reserve, The Federal Reserve should operate in the
interests of the U.S. taxpayer and not the interests of the private,
international bankers that it currently represents. This, of course
means that The Federal Reserve, too, must undergo a fundamental
ownership and mission change.This
crisis does not have to be treated as merely a "market correction," or
the result of a few rotten apples in an otherwise pristine barrel. This
crisis truly represents the opportunity to introduce fundamental
changes in the way the U.S. economy and its political stewards operate.
Responsible political leadership demands that the pain and suffering
being experienced by the innocent today not be revisited upon them or
the next generation tomorrow. But sadly, instead of affirmative action
being taken in this direction, the Bush Administration ratchets up the
drumbeat for war, Republican Party operatives busily remove
duly-registered voters from the voter rolls, and our elected leaders in
the Congress go home to campaign while leaving all of us to fend for
ourselves. For the Administration and the Democrat-led Congress, I
declare: MISSION UNACCOMPLISHED. For the public whose moment this is, I
say: Power to the People!Please visit www.runcynthiarun.org and read our platform. If you like it, please make a donation so we can spread the news and . . . seize the time! Though McKinney and Nader are currently shut out of the debates, the Illinois Daily Chronicle reports that 'Cynthia' will be at one debate: Kishwaukee
College has scheduled a mock presidential debate for Wednesday, Oct. 1,
according to a news release. The debate will be held from 1-2 p.m. in
Jenkins Auditorium and will feature students portraying presidential
candidates Barack Obama, Cynthia Ann McKinney and John McCain.The
students have become well-versed in their respective candidate’s
campaign platforms, the release said. The students will spend 40
minutes answering questions from moderator Jaime Long, Kishwaukee
College communications instructor and coach of the college’s forensics
team, then will spend 20 minutes answering audience questions submitted
at the beginning of the debate.The event is free and open to the public.Staying with students and the presidential race, Jack Willems' " Nader encourages political participation in university students" ( Arkansas Traveler) reports on a Nader campus event last week: "Sometimes,
students will smile at me and say, 'We're not turned on to politics,'"
Nader said. "Look at history. If you are not turned on to politics,
politics will turn on you."While
not being the Green Party candidate, Nader was invited to speak at the
university by the Campus Greens, said Mark Swaney, adviser to the
Campus Greens. Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party candidate, but
because neither candidate is likely to win, they are not worried about
splitting the vote, he said."If there are several voices running but they are saying the same thing, that's good," Swaney said.Nader
attacked the bailouts of investment banks by the Federal Reserve and
Treasury Department in recent weeks. The bailouts were conducted
without any congressional hearings and without any concern that the
government had any authority to do this, Nader said. The recent
mortgage crisis is the direct result of repealing the Glass-Stegal Act
in 1999, which has created "the greatest financial collapse in American
history," Nader said."In 1929, the bankers were jumping out windows. Today, they are jumping into golden parachutes," he said. Chris Herz reports on a weekend McKinney campaign event: A
black woman, former congressional representative Ms. Cynthia A.
McKinney spoke many wise and prescient words ... she surely revealed
herself as she is: One of the most carefully trained and fully
experienced analysts of the existing foreign policies of the USA, one
of its fiercest critics and one of the most talenteddesigners
of what, in the unlikely event of a sudden outbreak of sanity here,
might be a fit replacement for the present of one murderous rampage
followed by another.She's a
person of much more advanced scholarship and insight than her
colleague, Condoleeza Rice, presently leader of our US foreign policy
ministry, but indeed the impoverishment of the USA is measured NOT by
the meltdown of its most famous financial institutions, but rather by
the poverty of the solutions being advanced for the repair of the mess.As
Ralph and Cynthia are shut out of the debates (thus far) and shut out
of the media, most in the media play dumb. An exception is Bob Cuddy
who offers " What about the other candidates?" ( San Luis Obispo Tribune): Peter
Camejo finally made the front page. All he had to do to get there is
die. Camejo, who died Sept. 14 at age 68, was a perennial third-party
candidate. He was the Green Party candidate for vice president in 2004,
with Ralph Nader topping the ticket.
You've probably never heard of
Camejo, even though many Green Party ideas are now in the mainstream.
And this illuminates one of the many problems with the way we elect
presidents in the United States: We shut out all voices except those
from the Democrat and Republican parties.
By "we," I mean the
mainstream news media -- especially the electronic media -- in
collaboration with the two political parties, who tightly control the
debate format.
This is something to worry about as we enter the
quadrennial presidential and vice presidential debates. Democrat Barack
Obama will square off against Republican John McCain three times
(Friday, Oct. 7 and Oct. 15), and their would-be vice presidents, Sarah
Palin and Joe Biden, will go head to head once (Oct. 2).
They will do so before a national audience in the tens of millions.
Libertarian Bob Barr, the Green Party’s Cynthia McKinney, and Nader, an Independent, will have no such forum.
All three are on enough ballots -- more than 40 states -- to win the Electoral College. And Austin Cassidy's Independent Political Reporter notes " Mike Gravel and Ralph Nader endorse candidate for Congress in PA:" Independent candidate for US Congress John Murphy, running in Pennsylvania’s 16th District, has been endorsed by both former Senator Mike Gravel and independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader.
Mike Gravel also ran for president this year as a Democrat and a
Libertarian. Conversely, John Murphy endorsed Ralph Nader and helped in
the effort to get him on the ballot.If you're wondering
about this morning's entries focusing mainly on wire services, you
haven't opened a paper today. Search in vain for the Iraq coverage. I
can't think of a day where it's ever been this bad before. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraq the daily chornicle jack willems chris herz bob cuddy
Posted at 06:40 am by thecommonills
Permalink
Kim Gamel (AP) reports
that school started in Iraq yesterday and that, for some, the start
date was too early, "Critics said the Education Ministry's decision not
to wait until after Ramadan to launch the academic year imposed
unnecessary hardship on the children who were trying to fast as
temperatures top 100 degrees Fahrenheit." Iraqi MP Mithal
al-Alusi was in the news earlier this month for visiting Israel and the
reaction to his visit by some in Iraq. Sameer N. Yacoub and Vanessa
Gera offer " AP Interview: Maverick Iraqi lawmaker pays a high price for advocating peace with Israel:" "What
has happened was a catastrophe for democracy," Al-Alusi told The
Associated Press in an interview in his Baghdad home. "Within an hour's
time, the parliament became the policeman, the investigator, the judge,
the government and the law. It was a sham trial."Al-Alusi
said he went to Israel to seek international support for Iraq as it
struggles against terrorism, and insisted that the outcry reflects
Iranian meddling in Iraq's internal affairs — an accusation often
leveled by Sunnis like himself against Iraq's mostly Shiite neighbor."Iran
is behind Hamas and Hezbollah and many other terrorist organizations.
Israelis are suffering like me, like my people. So we need to be
together," he said. "Peace will have more of a chance."Iraq
sent troops to three Arab wars against Israel, and fired Scud missiles
at it in the 1991 Gulf War. It remains technically at war with the
Jewish state. Iraq's once-thriving Jewish community has shriveled to
just a few people, most having fled after Israel was founded in 1948."Al-Alusi
has insulted the hundreds of Iraqi martyrs who fell while fighting the
Israelis," said Osama al-Nujeifi, a Sunni lawmaker. "It was a
provocative visit to a historical enemy."In
Al-Alusi's living room, decorated with oriental rugs and paintings, his
two dead sons, aged 19 and 29, smile from a photo hanging next to a
stately grandfather clock.A
secular Muslim, he lit a cigarette during an interview even though this
is the Muslim month of Ramadan, when food, water and smoking are
forbidden during daylight hours.Meanwhile an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy offers " Its Hard to fix the broken image" ( Inside Iraq) about how suddenly Iraqi politicians are tossing out words of concern for the people: Nowadays,
the political blocs concentrate on the services file. They criticize
basically the ministry of electricity for the great shortage that
Iraqis suffer from as if it's our only problem. Today and during the
speech of the Friday prayers; the Shiite sheikh who is theoretically an
independent lawmaker talked about the electricity issue again saying
that since the ministry started its work two years ago; it didn't make
any contract to increase the production.I
don't know where our great politicians were and how couldn't they touch
or feel the suffering of Iraqis. Why did they remember our suffering
now? At the New York Times Iraq blog, Iraqi cartoonist Qassem H.J. offers " The Daily Puzzle." We'll again note this from Team Nader: This Thursday National Day of Action to Open the Debates  William Greider put it best yesterday
when he called Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's upcoming bailout of
Wall Street: "All sugar for the villains, lasting pain and damage for
the victims." "As I have been
saying for several months, this crisis has the potential to bring down
one or both political parties, take your choice," Greider said. And investment analyst Christopher Whalen chimed in: "The
joyous reception from Congressional Democrats to Paulson's latest
massive bailout proposal smells an awful lot like yet another
corporatist lovefest between Washington's one-party government and the
Sell Side investment banks." Strip aside the rhetoric of the two major parties. And what is left is one party devoted to Wall Street. Who represents Main Street? Nader/Gonzalez. So, why is that when the Presidential debates open this Friday, only Wall Street will be in the ring? And the man who predicted the disaster of deregulation is out? Because the Commission on Presidential Debates is controlled by the two parties and funded by the corporations. That's why we're sponsoring a National Day of Action to Open the Debates. This Thursday, September 25, 2008, the day before the first debate. Once again the Commission intends to silence the majority of Americans by shutting out Nader/Gonzalez from the debates. We're asking all of our supporters to get ready. Because on Thursday, there are four ways you can take action to Open Up the Debates. 1. Write Letters
to the editor, to your friends, family and anyone in your address book,
companies and corporations who sponsor the presidential debates. 2. Phone The
Commission on Presidential Debates, Obama and McCain Campaigns, Talk
Shows, Newspapers, and National and Local Media Outlets. 3. Create Posters,
fliers and literature to pass out and hang up at college campuses and
other high traffic areas and banners to display to morning and evening
rush hour traffic -- Check out our "Open the Debates" section on the website for downloadable materials.
4. Protest Outside
the Democratic and Republican headquarters in your community, at
corporations that sponsor the debates, at radio stations, newspapers
and media outlets not covering Ralph Nader. (Phone numbers, e-mails and addresses will be available tomorrow at votenader.org/debates.)
Many Americans believe they are getting the full story when they tune into the televised and highly publicized debates. What people don't see is that behind the scenes the debates are controlled by a corporate funded entity. Third
party and independent candidates are arbitrarily required to be polling
at 15% according to five national polls in order to participate in the
debates, even though these third parties are forced to devote all
resources to get on the ballot in all 50 states during the months
leading up to the debates -- costing well over a million dollars! Who decides who gets into the debates? The
so-called "non-partisan" Commission (as described by the New York Times
today). Non-partisan? Headed by Paul Kirk and Frank Fahrenkopf, the
former heads of the Democratic and Republican parties? Since
the media blithely adopts the framing of the corporate parties, we must
take it upon ourselves to expose the Commission on Presidential Debates
as the real spoiler of the democratic system in this country. Just recently Green party candidate Elizabeth May was included into the debates in Canada. Why? Massive
e-mailing, phone calls, and letters to the editor, including one from
former Prime Minister Joe Clark, displaying public outrage prompted the
debate commission to invite Elizabeth May to participate. We can do it too! So on Thursday, take action. And then send us your videos and photos and we'll post them on our Open the Debates page. And here is something you can do right now. Donate to Nader/Gonzalez.
We're in the middle of our Three Way Race fundraising drive. And we need to hit $150,000 by the end of the month.
And if you donate $100 now, we'll ship to you a copy of The Ralph Nader Reader,
a 441-page collection of Ralph's writings on Wall Street vs. Main
Street, the battle for democracy, the corporate state, and our
hyper-commercialized culture. If you donate $100 now,
we will send you this historic collection -- autographed by the man
himself -- Ralph Nader. (This offer ends at 11:59 p.m. September 30,
2008.)
Onward to November Emily Przekwas
The Nader Team ShareThisShareThis Lauren had asked that it be noted and Dona and Jim noted it while filling in last night (thank you to Dona and Jim for filling in). The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqmcclatchy newspapers qassem h.j.the new york times
Posted at 06:39 am by thecommonills
Permalink
Sunday, September 21, 2008
And the war drags on . . . (Dona and Jim)
Earlier this month, Iraq's oil minister Hussain al-Shahristani was announcing that contrats with various western corporations including Shell had been cancelled. Today, Reuters reports Iraq's oil ministry annouced that they're throwing Royal Dutch Shell a bone -- a very big bone -- "a natural gas deal," to be signed tomorrow, which will allow Shell a 49% stake in the "joint venture". Quick, call the networks, a new show! The Baghdad Hillbillies. Starring Bully Boy Clampett and Granny Dick. 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 tearsThat 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 4,157 was the number. And tonight? 4168. Just Foreign Policy's counter estimates the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the illegal war to be 1,267,401 up from 1,255,026. Dona and Jim with you tonight filling in for C.I. who, with everyone else, is at the Emmys. The award ceremonies are interesting but we'll beg for tickets to something with musical acts (Grammys!) so we said weeks ago that we'd grab tonight. C.I. started an entry to help us out but we thought it worked as a stand-alone and have posted that already. C.I. was noting the New York Times' article on Iraq's own "Fantasy Island" and Zach notes Tina Susman's " Honeymoon in Iraq?" ( Babylon and Beyond, Los Angeles Times): Coming soon: a romantic island getaway in the heart of Baghdad! That's the hope, at least, of Iraq's Tourism Board, which held a news conference Sunday to announce an ambitious project to lure investors to build up the capital's Jazirat Al A'ras, a slab of land surrounded by water from the Tigris River.
Before a sometimes skeptical crowd of mainly Iraqi journalists, the head of the tourism board, Hamood Yakoubi, said the resort, whose name translates to Wedding Island, would be modeled on the "One Thousand and One Nights" tales. Not that King Shahryar, Scheherezade, Sinbad or Alladin had Ferris wheels, fast-food restaurants or a water park to entertain them. But Yakoubi and Ahmed Ridha, the chairman of the government's National Investment Commission, said the point was to give visitors a feel for ancient Baghdad while providing five-star service and amenities.Zach notes that C.I. had strong words (favorable) for Susman's work last week and wondered who else did an especially strong job? We'll answer for ourselves that we're always glad to see a piece with Susman and Alexandra Zavis' byline at LAT and (we miss Borzou Daragahi's Iraq reporting); at NYT Erica Goode and Richard A. Oppel Jr. are always worth reading (and today's think-piece in the paper by Dexy would have been better if it had been written by some with real thoughts -- as opposed to thoughts for the paper, different thoughts for college campus speaking gigs, and different throughts for TV interviews -- so we would have suggested Sabrina Tavernise, Damien Cave or Cara Buckley); at the Washington Post, Sudarsan Raghavan and Amit R. Paley don't waste words or times and are always a pleasure to read; Christian Science Monitor sometimes features Anna Badkhen whose writing we enjoy; Gina Chen at the Wall St. Journal and that may be it for domestic papers. Those are picks. We doubt C.I. would disagree but C.I. might have additional ones. Woops, we forgot McClatchy. Leila Fadel and the Iraqi correspondents like Laith Hammoudi and Hussein Kadhim who we're moving on to now as we note some of the weekend's violence. (We also like Sahar Issa at McClatchy.) Bombings? Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing in front of "the Journalists' Union in Waziriyah" Saturday that wounded five people ("including the head of the Journalists Union"), a Mosul car bombing Saturday that wounded three people, and a Saturday Tal Afar car bombing that claimed the life of the driver, 2 civilians and left seventeen other civilians wounded. McClatchy's Hussein Kadhim reports a Sunday Baghdad car bombing that wounded Ihsan Ridha ("general manager of the Ministry of Finance"), a Baghdad roadside bombing (also today) wounded five people, while another left seven wounded, and three more Baghdad roadside bombings resulted in fifteen people being wounded, another Baghdad car bombing left four people wounded, a Mosul oil tanker bombing wounded two people while a Mosul truck bombing claimed the life of the driver and 2 police officers with forty-five people left wounded, a Kirkuk car bombing claimed the life of the driver and the lives of 5 police officers with twenty-three more people wounded, and a Tikrit car bombing left three people wounded. Shootings? Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two police officers shot dead in Mosul Saturday and Sheikh Udai Ali Abbass was assassinated in Basra Friday night. McClatchy's Hussein Kadhim reports Brig Gen Adel Abass (of the Ministry of Interior) was shot dead today in Baghdad, a police officer was wounded in a Baghdad shooting today, Corpses? Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 5 corpses were discovered in Baghdad Saturday and three discovered in Tal Afar on Saturday. McClatchy's Hussein Kadhim reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad today. Moving over to the US presidential race, Matthew B. Stannard's " McCain, Obama closer in opinons on Iraq war" ( San Francisco Chronicle) tells some truths that will have many covering their ears: And Obama and McCain are no longer polar opposites on the war.
"The differences between the two sides are becoming muddled by actions on the part of the (Bush) administration, even more so by acts on the part of the Iraqi government," said Wayne White, a former State Department intelligence analyst. And that, he said, makes it difficult to sort out which candidate has the best overall feel for the situation in Iraq.As Obama and McCain have sought to adapt to a rapidly changing situation, each has made statements that some analysts have interpreted as showing they are moving toward each other on Iraq strategy.
Obama has emphasized he will seek guidance from military leaders on the pace of withdrawal and has talked about succeeding in Iraq, not just leaving. McCain, when pressed, recently called al-Maliki's timeline "pretty good" and, in a speech about his hypothetical first term, said most U.S. troops could be home by 2012.Yeah, Barack and John are similar on Iraq. Barack's always been just words. If anyone had been paying attention during the primaries, they would have been calling him out then and not (like Tom Hayden) ignoring Samantha Power's BBC interview back in March (which the above excerpt just echoes -- Power's own words). But they didn't want to tell the truth, they wanted to whore for a War Hawk. As you'll remember, Tom Hayden showed up July 4th looking like he'd been beat up by his pimp and crying that he didn't know Barack was a War Hawk and how could anyone know and blah, blah, blah. All you had to do, as Barack infamously said at that time, was listen to what he said. It was no huge change. Even the things he said at his Hitler Youth rallies wasn't promising to end the illegal war. "We want to end the war!" That's not, "I will end the war." Buy a clue, Hayden. But in fairness to Hayden, he wasn't the only Hooker For Barack and have you seen any of the rest offer even a mini-mea culpa? Remember that list includes Amy Goodman, Laura Flanders, John Nichols, David Corn, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Matthew Rothschild, Philip Maldari, Jeremy Scahill (he'd deny it but we're thinking specifically of the interview he gave at Winter Soldier and how he dismissed Hillary doing what he supposedly wanted a candidate to do -- re: mercenaries -- and making excuses for Barack for refusing to do it), and, oh, so many more. They better all pray Barack doesn't get elected because if he does, their day of reckoning will come. They've staked their entire reputations on Barack -- a War Hawk -- ending the illegal war. Better for them he loses and they can falsely whine "It was racism!" No, it was coporatist, War Hawk, propped up by both the corporate press and Panhandle Media, allowed to steal other people's words (word for word), allowed to cave on NAFTA, FISA, Iraq and so much more and never be held accountable. As C.I. long ago noted, they treated Barack like an infant (which actually goes to their own racism) applauding his every baby step while never getting tough with him. We're voting for Ralph Nader. Lauren notes this from Team Nader: This Thursday National Day of Action to Open the Debates
Posted by Emily Przekwas on Sunday, September 21, 2008 at 03:29:00 PM
ShareThis
William Greider put it best yesterday when he called Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's upcoming bailout of Wall Street: "All sugar for the villains, lasting pain and damage for the victims." "As I have been saying for several months, this crisis has the potential to bring down one or both political parties, take your choice," Greider said.
And investment analyst Christopher Whalen chimed in:
"The joyous reception from Congressional Democrats to Paulson's latest massive bailout proposal smells an awful lot like yet another corporatist lovefest between Washington's one-party government and the Sell Side investment banks."
Strip aside the rhetoric of the two major parties.
And what is left is one party devoted to Wall Street.
Who represents Main Street?
Nader/Gonzalez.
So, why is that when the Presidential debates open this Friday, only Wall Street will be in the ring?
And the man who predicted the disaster of deregulation is out?
Because the Commission on Presidential Debates is controlled by the two parties and funded by the corporations.
That's why we're sponsoring a National Day of Action to Open the Debates.
This Thursday, September 25, 2008, the day before the first debate.
Once again the Commission intends to silence the majority of Americans by shutting out Nader/Gonzalez from the debates.
We're asking all of our supporters to get ready.
Because on Thursday, there are four ways you can take action to Open Up the Debates.
1. Write
Letters to the editor, to your friends, family and anyone in your address book, companies and corporations who sponsor the presidential debates.
2. Phone
The Commission on Presidential Debates, Obama and McCain Campaigns, Talk Shows, Newspapers, and National and Local Media Outlets.
3. Create
Posters, fliers and literature to pass out and hang up at college campuses and other high traffic areas and banners to display to morning and evening rush hour traffic -- Check out our "Open the Debates" section on the website for downloadable materials.
4. Protest
Outside the Democratic and Republican headquarters in your community, at corporations that sponsor the debates, at radio stations, newspapers and media outlets not covering Ralph Nader.
(Phone numbers, e-mails and addresses will be available tomorrow at votenader.org/debates.)
Many Americans believe they are getting the full story when they tune into the televised and highly publicized debates.
What people don't see is that behind the scenes the debates are controlled by a corporate funded entity.
Third party and independent candidates are arbitrarily required to be polling at 15% according to five national polls in order to participate in the debates, even though these third parties are forced to devote all resources to get on the ballot in all 50 states during the months leading up to the debates -- costing well over a million dollars!
Who decides who gets into the debates?
The so-called "non-partisan" Commission (as described by the New York Times today). Non-partisan? Headed by Paul Kirk and Frank Fahrenkopf, the former heads of the Democratic and Republican parties?
Since the media blithely adopts the framing of the corporate parties, we must take it upon ourselves to expose the Commission on Presidential Debates as the real spoiler of the democratic system in this country.
Just recently Green party candidate Elizabeth May was included into the debates in Canada.
Why?
Massive e-mailing, phone calls, and letters to the editor, including one from former Prime Minister Joe Clark, displaying public outrage prompted the debate commission to invite Elizabeth May to participate.
We can do it too!
So on Thursday, take action.
And then send us your videos and photos and we'll post them on our Open the Debates page.
And here is something you can do right now.
Donate to Nader/Gonzalez.
We're in the middle of our Three Way Race fundraising drive.
And we need to hit $150,000 by the end of the month.
And if you donate $100 now, we'll ship to you a copy of The Ralph Nader Reader, a 441-page collection of Ralph's writings on Wall Street vs. Main Street, the battle for democracy, the corporate state, and our hyper-commercialized culture. If you donate $100 now, we will send you this historic collection -- autographed by the man himself -- Ralph Nader. (This offer ends at 11:59 p.m. September 30, 2008.)
Onward to November
Emily PrzekwasThe Nader Team
ShareThisNew stuff at Third: Truest statement of the week
Truest statement of the week II
A note to our readers
Editorial: Spending in an economic meltdown
TV: Shrinkage and expansion
Real Change vs. Small Change
Arthur Krystal delivers a lesson in exclusion
Cock Rock Hall of Fame
Roundtable
Coming Up
Jerk off Artiste of the Week
E-mails (Dona and Jess)
HighlightsPru notes Ken Olende's " Thousands march at Labour conference against war" (Great Britain's Socialist Worker): More than 5,000 people marched through central Manchester today against the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the spread of war to other countries.
The demonstration was timed to coincide with the start of the Labour Party conference. As marchers passed the conference venue many held their palms up towards it, shouting "blood on your hands”.
Falak, a young woman from Liverpool, said, "If you don't speak up nothing's going to change. The threats to Iran and the trouble in Pakistan show this war isn't over."
At a rally at the demonstration's end Tony Woodley, the joint general secretary of the Unite union, called on marchers to remember the "many thousands of innocent victims of the lunatics that have taken us to war".
Lindsey German, the convenor of the Stop the War Coalition, said, "In the middle of this economic crisis Gordon Brown should be helping the people struggling to pay the bills, not spending £3 million a day on the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan."
Rose Gentle of Military Families Against the War said she was disgusted how the government treats its own soldiers. "They leave them to rot once they get back," she said.
The demonstration was diverse and good spirited. There were banners from Stop the War groups from around the country and trade union banners from Bristol Health Service Unite to Kirklees Unison.
The march was called by Stop the War, CND and the British Muslim Initiative.
» email article » comment on article » printable version© 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.Quick notes in closing. Wally's with them and this is his first awards ceremony so they're planning to hit a few parties. Point (you thought we were going to steal from Ava and C.I. and say "Translation," didn't you?), tomorrow morning's entries here may go up late. Isaiah's planning a mid-week comic due to the fact that C.I. wouldn't be at the computer tonight. (Rebecca and C.I. are the ones who know best the ins and out of Flickr. The rest of us can handle Flickr when it's working right but when it's all goofy, we don't have a clue what to do.) Also, C.I. tries to tag everything. We're about to watch DVD (Jumper, finally) and our pizzas just got here so we're tagging minimally. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqand the war drags ondonovanmcclatchy newspapershussein kadhimlaith hammoudithe los angeles timestina susmanthe socialist workerthe third estate sunday reviewthe daily jot
Posted at 10:40 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Iraq's chief export: Delusions
The Iraqi tag sale never ends. In today's New York Times, Erica Goode and Riyadh Mohammed offer " Promoting a Vison of Tourist Bliss in Baghdad's Dusty Rubble" about the chair of the country's Board of Tourism, Humoud Yakobi, who plans to use the isle of Jazirat A'aras (conviently located in proximity to the Green Zone, which also puts it in walking distance from various drive-bys and bombings) into a one-stop resort with "hotels, restaurants and shopping malls" -- in fact, "'a six-star hotel,' spas, a yacht club, an amusement park, a shopping center and luxury villa". Readers of Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise Of Disaster Capitalism will no doubt flash on other areas where the US brought 'democracy' -- slums alongside vast wealth, shopping malls built ontop of torture chambers. And Yakobi just needs some (gullible) investors willing to help him stake his claim. Hopefully tongue-in-cheek, Goode and Mohammed observe, "Some might argue that Mr. Yakobi's vision is premature, if not absurd." Yakobi insists that tourism continues in Iraq! Look at the religious pilgrims! As reports repeatedly demonstrate the pilgrims do a long march by foot throughout Iraq. Not exactly the "six-star" crowd. While, no doubt, some wealthy foreigners come into Iraq to make the pilgrimage even now, there numbers are most likely small and it's the continued daily violence -- not the lack of a "six-star" hotel -- that's made that the case. The reporters tell you that Yakobi is jazzed over a November conference (in Baghdad) that will "promote the island . . . and other projects. Those include a hotel expected to open soon in the ancient city of Babylon in Babel Province, where cholera cases have recently been reported." Well talk about a fun get-away! On the issue of the November conference (in Baghdad) it needs to be noted that conferences in Baghdad don't always come off. In fact, another Baghdad conference planned for October was cancelled just this month. From the September 12th " Iraq snapshot:" Starting with Iraqi oil. Edward S. Herman (ZNet) noted at the start of this month, "On the oil front, in late June the newspapers featured the announcement of the Iraqi oil minister Mohamad Sharastani that contracts had been drawn up between the Maliki government and five major Western oil companies to develop some of the largest fields in Iraq. No competitive bidding was allowed and the terms announced were very poor by existing international contract standards. The contracts were written with the help of 'a group of U.S. advisers led by a small State Department team.' This was all in conformity with the Declaration of Principles of November 26, 2007, whereby the
Posted at 10:39 pm by thecommonills
Iraq's chief export: Delusions
The Iraqi tag sale never ends. In today's New York Times, Erica Goode and Riyadh Mohammed offer " Promoting a Vison of Tourist Bliss in Baghdad's Dusty Rubble" about the chair of the country's Board of Tourism, Humoud Yakobi, who plans to use the isle of Jazirat A'aras (conviently located in proximity to the Green Zone, which also puts it in walking distance from various drive-bys and bombings) into a one-stop resort with "hotels, restaurants and shopping malls" -- in fact, "'a six-star hotel,' spas, a yacht club, an amusement park, a shopping center and luxury villa". Readers of Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise Of Disaster Capitalism will no doubt flash on other areas where the US brought 'democracy' -- slums alongside vast wealth, shopping malls built ontop of torture chambers. And Yakobi just needs some (gullible) investors willing to help him stake his claim. Hopefully tongue-in-cheek, Goode and Mohammed observe, "Some might argue that Mr. Yakobi's vision is premature, if not absurd." Yakobi insists that tourism continues in Iraq! Look at the religious pilgrims! As reports repeatedly demonstrate the pilgrims do a long march by foot throughout Iraq. Not exactly the "six-star" crowd. While, no doubt, some wealthy foreigners come into Iraq to make the pilgrimage even now, there numbers are most likely small and it's the continued daily violence -- not the lack of a "six-star" hotel -- that's made that the case. The reporters tell you that Yakobi is jazzed over a November conference (in Baghdad) that will "promote the island . . . and other projects. Those include a hotel expected to open soon in the ancient city of Babylon in Babel Province, where cholera cases have recently been reported." Well talk about a fun get-away! On the issue of the November conference (in Baghdad) it needs to be noted that conferences in Baghdad don't always come off. In fact, another Baghdad conference planned for October was cancelled just this month. From the September 12th " Iraq snapshot:" Starting with Iraqi oil. Edward S. Herman (ZNet) noted at the start of this month, "On the oil front, in late June the newspapers featured the announcement of the Iraqi oil minister Mohamad Sharastani that contracts had been drawn up between the Maliki government and five major Western oil companies to develop some of the largest fields in Iraq. No competitive bidding was allowed and the terms announced were very poor by existing international contract standards. The contracts were written with the help of 'a group of U.S. advisers led by a small State Department team.' This was all in conformity with the Declaration of Principles of November 26, 2007, whereby the 'sovereign country' of Iraq would use 'especially American investments' in its attempt to recover from the effects of the American aggression." Thursday Andrew E. Kramer and Campbell Robertson (New York Times) reported on a Tuesday press conference, held by Hussain al-Shahristani (Iraq's Minister of Oil) at OPEC's meet-up, where it was announced that the contracts with western corporations (including Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP) were being cancelled which the coporations "confirmed on Wednesday." Ernesto London (Washington Post) reports on the cancellations today and notes that the companies "are expected to submit bids in coming weeks for deals" and explains it was not just public outrage that killed the contracts, "The oil companies were not surprised by the Iraqi decision, given the political sensitivities raised by the issue, according to an executive at one of the five companies. Speaking on the condition that he not be identified further, the executive said the deals had become less attractive because Iraqi officials had shortened the proposed length of the contracts from two years to one in response to criticism." The cancelled contracts aren't the only bad news for those hoping to play Let's Steal Iraqi Oil! Not all that long ago, with much happy gasbagging in the press, Iraq announced Iraq's Energy Expo and Conference to be held October 17th through 19th. Ben Lando (UPI) reports that, woops, no one bothered to think about construction -- the convention center's not done yet -- so the Expo's dates have been moved to December 3rd through 5th. The puppet government can't get it together to hold provincial elections and they can't even pull off a conference they got a ton of positive press for when they announced it. And Andy Rowell (Oil Change International) offers, "Oh it's so good to be back. After a 35 year absence Shell has become the first western oil company to land a major deal with the government in Baghdad since the invasion of the country five years ago. They will be smiling in the Hague and London. Shell has been awarded a $4bn contract in the south of the country to supply gas for Iraqi domestic use but also for export. Shell's project is intended to make use of the gas flared off by the oil industry in the south of Iraq. In that region alone, an estimated 700m cubic feet of gas is burned off every day -- enough to meet the demand for power generation in the entire country."Since the convention center's not completed (hence the cancellation of the Expo), one wonders where Yakobi plans to hold his conference? Or maybe he's assuming, drive-bys, kidnappings, bombings, cholera, lack of potable water, electricity shortage, et al won't result in too large of a crowd? The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. the new york timeserica gooderiyadh mohammednaomi kleinandrew e. kramercampbell robertsonthe washington posternesto londonoben landoandy rowell
Posted at 10:39 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Posted at 06:28 am by thecommonills
Permalink
US air raid kills civilians
In this morning's New York Times, Stephen Farrell offers " Iraqis Protest Deadly Raid By U.S. on Village in North" about yesterday's US air raid that resulted in the deaths of eight Iraqis. Unlike AP (see yesterday's snapshot), Farell attempts actual balance. The key contribution of his article may be this statement from Abdul Karim Khalil Ibrahim ("relative" of the deceased): The American forces surrounded my cousin's house, then they bombed it. I was watching from my roof through a hole in the wall. The American forces lit the place with flashlights. I saw my cousin with his wife escape from the backyard, when the American helicopter shot them and killed them immediately.Yesterday's snapshot noted a McClatchy story and my apologies because I credited it to Leila Fadel when it should have been credited to Fadel and Laith Hammoudi. From Fadel and Hammoudi's " U.S. strike kills civilians, Iraqis say" ( McClatchy Newspapers): Khaleel al Doori, a neighbor, said his home was raided during the operation and that the American forces had used a loudspeaker to order people not to leave their homes. Doori said the U.S. troops shot a man and his wife.
After Friday prayers, hundreds of residents took to the streets condemning the incident and chanting, "There is no God but one God, and America is the enemy of God."Again my apologies. It was my error and the article will be noted in Monday's snapshot along with my mistake. In the Los Angeles Times, Tina Susman's " U.S. says 3 women killed in Iraq Raid" offers: The incident is likely to heighten Iraqi demands that U.S. forces be subject to Iraqi prosecution for alleged crimes or mistakes that harm civilians. The demand has emerged as the key issue blocking agreement on a plan that would govern activities of American forces in Iraq after Dec. 31.Immunity has been a hot-button issue since September 2007, when 17 Iraqis were killed by guards working for Blackwater Worldwide, the North Carolina company that protects State Department employees. Although Blackwater guards are not military personnel, many Iraqis said the incident underscored the need to hold Americans liable for behavior that harms innocent Iraqis.The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqthe new york timessam dagherstephen farrellmcclatchy newspapersleila fadellaith hammoudithe los angeles timestina susman
Posted at 06:19 am by thecommonills
Permalink
Friday, September 19, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, a US air strike results in the deaths of Iraq civilians, the US State Dept gears up for a big push in Iraq, and more.
At the US State Dept today, deputy spokesperson Sean McCormack announced US Secretary of State Condi Rice was meeting with the Prime Minister and President of Kuwait "to talk about regional issues" and to "encourage the establishment of full diplomatic relations between Iraq and Kuwait." Asked about the status of the treaty between the US and Iraq (wrongly called a SOFA) McCormack fell back on, "I'm not going to talk about the substance of the negotiations. They continue. There have been a lot of ups and downs in these negotiations. But we still believe that we will be able to come to some agreement." US troops are currently legally covered by a United Nations mandate which expires at the end of the year. When that expires, if nothing is in place to replace it, as US Senator Joe Biden (also the Democratic vice presidential nominee) declared in a Senate session in April, then US troops would have to leave. McCormack was asked about instead of attempting a new agreement, attempting to yet again extend the UN mandate. McCormack dismissed the idea and stated, "The focus is still on getting an agreement between the United States and Iraq." McCormack stated that the State Dept's David M. Satterfield would be returning to Iraq ("leaving again Monday" for Iraq). Satterfield's title is Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State and Coordinator for Iraq.
While McCormack's trip will focus mainly on the treaty, it's part of a diplomatic push on the part of the State Dept in the final days of the current administration. Rice trip is part of that push. In recent weeks, Syria, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates have all appointed ambassadors to Iraq; however, only the UAE has stationed their Ambassador to Iraq in Baghdad. (The continued violence has prevented the other countries from doing so.)
The push comes as puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki makes noises against the treaty. As Tina Susman ( Los Angeles Times) reported yesterday and also on Wednesday (see Wednesday's " Iraq snapshot"), al-Maliki went on Iraqi TV Wednesday Steven Lee Myers and Sam Dagher (New York Times) discover the remarks today and report that al-Maliki declares the sticking point is over immunity for American troops in Iraq and that al-Maliki floated the idea of asking for an extension of the UN mandate declaring, "Even if we ask for an extension, then we will ask for it according to our terms and we will attach conditions and the U.S. side will refuse. U.S. forces would be without legal cover and will have no choice but to pull out from Iraq or stay and be in contravention of international law."
While al-Maliki raises that issue, one-time (and possibly current) CIA asset Ahmad Chalibi makes news. As one of the proponents (and liars) in the lead up to the illegal war, Chalabi continues to garner attention. UPI reports that he declared to the Islamic Republic News Agency that the treaties being proposed between the US and Iraq are an attempt by the US to push permanent bases. He is quoted stating, "Within the framework of the security pact, the United States does not wish to merely have open military bases (in Iraq), rather secret military bases (there). If a security deal is not signed … by Dec. 31, regarding the recent U.S.-Russia row over Georgia and the Iraqi government's decision not to extend the U.S. forces' presence in Iraq for another year, the U.S. presence in Iraq will come across with difficulty in terms of the law."
Turning to the US Congress, Senators Hillary Clinton (Democrat) and John Ensign (Republican) are proposing a plan regarding Iraq's oil to the US State Dept. Ben Lando (UPI) reports that the two senators are proposing that an oil trust fund be created for the Iraqi people and quotes an aide to Clinton explaining the proposal is similar to the Alaska model which "was 'inspiration for the idea of an oil trust' but that the State Department 'should develop a plan for Iraq so it fits Iraq's needs and provides several options'." Lando reports the State Dept's reaction: "The department said Iraqi leaders don't feel the time is right for such a trust fund, which demands too much from Iraq's fragile bureaucratic and financial systems." Lando adds that actions "continue to repair damage from storms in southern Iraq and a pipeline bomb in northern Iraq, bringing exports closer to the 1.9 million barrels per day averaged in August" and that an October 13th oil meeting will take place in London that "is expected to unveil the fields put to tender and the legal and technical specifics. The bidding for the fields is expected to be the first of many opportunities for international investment in Iraq's oil sector."
NPR's Lourdes Garcia-Navarro (All Things Considered) reports on the move for Baghdad's puppet government to take control of "Awakening" Councils next month with "at least 20 percent of the militiamen [due to be brought into] into the state security forces and find civilian jobs for the rest" and the reaction to the Sunnis about that plan which has left them suspicious following the targeting of Sunni "Awakening" leaders by al-Maliki. "Awakening" leader Khalid Ibrahim declares, "They [the US] should have consulted us before taking any decisions so we could have given our opinion. Instead they have treated us like a commodity that can be moved at will from one place to another. . . . The aim is to get rid of us. Why? Because of the upcoming provincial elections and then national elections. They fear that we will get power." The provincial elections were due to take place this month; however, the inability to comes to terms with a basic agreement makes it unlikely that any elections will take place before year's end. The United Nations is working on a proposal which they hope to present either by the end of this month or the start of October.
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a US air strike today which claimed mutliple lives in Al Dour. McClatchy's Leila Fadel explains that the deaths number at least eight "all from one family and including women," that the US military claims their helicopter only attacked 'terrorists' and that eye witnesses and Iraqi police disagree with the US military's statements including "Khaleel al Doori, a neighbor, [who] said his home was raided during the operation and that the American forces had used a loudspeaker to order people not to leave their homes. Doori said the U.S. troops shot a man and his wife." AP spends paragraph after paragraph parroting the US military's claims which is made all the more strange in paragraph seven: "U.S. airstrikes and conflicting claims about whether civilians have been killed have been common throughout more than five years of war as the Americans seek to minimize civilian casualties on the ground." Yes, they have repeatedly tried to minimize and fortunately for them AP joins them in minimzing today. AP quotes Sheik Faris al-Fadaam explaining the deceaded father (Hassan Ali) had been a Sunni police officer until the family had to leave Baghdad and that, "The family was very poor. The family came here and we helped them to rent that house. It was an extended family. They did not have any political affiliations. They did not engage in any hostile activity or have any connection with gunmen." Reuters does not give six opening paragraphs to the US military version of events, it gives one opening paragraph and then offers this: "A local Iraqi police officer put the death toll at eight. He said all were civilians from the same family and included three women. A helicopter air strike levelled the house at Dour, 140 km (85 miles) north of Baghdad, in Salahuddin province, he said."
Turning to some of today's other reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Shootings?
Independent journalist David Bacon latest book (just out this month) is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press). Bacon also explores migration in " Displaced People: NAFTA's Most Important Product" (NACLA Reports): Since the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993, the U.S. Congress has debated and passed several new bilateral trade agreements with Peru, Jordan and Chile, as well as the Central American Free Trade Agreement. Congressional debates over immigration policy have proceeded as though those trade agreements bore no relationship to the waves of displaced people migrating to the United States, looking for work. As Rufino Domínguez, former coordinator of the Indigenous Front of Binational Organizations (FIOB), points out, U.S. trade and immigration policy are part of a single system, and the negotiation of NAFTA was an important step in developing this system. "There are no jobs" in Mexico, he says, "and NAFTA drove the price of corn so low that it's not economically possible to plant a crop anymore. We come to the United States to work because there's no alternative."Economic crises provoked by NAFTA and other economic reforms are uprooting and displacing Mexicans in the country's most remote areas. While California farmworkers 20 and 30 years ago came from parts of Mexico with larger Spanish-speaking populations, migrants today increasingly come from indigenous communities in states like Oaxaca, Chiapas, and Guerrero. Domínguez says there are about 500,000 indigenous people from Oaxaca living in the United States, 300,000 in California alone.Meanwhile, a rising tide of anti-immigrant sentiment has demonized those migrants, leading to measures to deny them jobs, rights, or any pretense of equality with people living in the communities around them. Solutions to these dilemmas-from adopting rational and humane immigration policies to reducing the fear and hostility toward migrants-must begin with an examination of the way U.S. policies have both produced migration and criminalized migrants.Turning to public television. This weekend (Friday in most markets), NOW on PBS will offer a look at women and politics: How have women in politics changed America and the world? NOW on PBS investigates with an hour-long special hosted by Maria Hinojosa: "Women, Power and Politics: A Rising Tide?"See the show on television this weekend or watch online STARTING SATURDAY[. . .]
Show Description: Given the hoopla surrounding Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton's historical political ascendance, why does the U.S. rank so low among countries for percentage of women holding national office? On Friday, September 19 at 8:30 pm (check local listings), in a one-hour special, NOW's Maria Hinojosa talks to women leaders around the world and here in the United States for an intimate look at the high-stakes risks, triumphs, and setbacks for women leaders of today and tomorrow. Among these women are President Michelle Bachelet of Chile, the first woman leader in Latin America who did not have a husband precede her as President, and former New Hampshire Governor Jeanne Shaheen, now in a tight race for a seat in the U.S. Senate.We also travel to Rwanda, where, 14 years after a horrific massacre left nearly one million people dead, women make up nearly half of parliament; and to Manhattan, where ambitious high school girls are competing in a high-stakes debate tournament."Women, Power and Politics," is also about the personal journey of mother and award-winning journalist Maria Hinojosa as she strives to answer the question: "What does to mean to be a woman in power?"Watch a preview and excerpt of this special program at this web address:Use this directory tool to find out where the show is airing in your area:
The NOW website ... will feature web-exclusive commentary from noteworthy women including Maria Bartiromo, Sandra Cisneros, and Tina Brown; a personal essay from Maria Hinojosa; an interactive debate over Sarah Palin's candidacy; as well as opportunities for all women to post and share their stories of ambition, success, and discouragement.(The "interactive debate" over Sarah Palin's candidacy is live now ...)Bill Moyers Journal (check your local listings, begins airing on PBS in most markets tonight, it also streams online -- transcript, video, audio) guests will inclue Gretchen Morgenson (New York Times) will be on to discuss the economic meltdown and Kevin Phillips (whose most recent book is Bad Money). PBS' Washington Week finds Gwen sharing opinions with David Wessel (Wall St. Journal), Charles Babington (AP) and John Maggs (National Journal) along with one other who desperately trolled the streets in an attempt to purchase an opinion from someone, anyone, so she didn't arrive empty handed. (Babington was not booked this morning, the plan then was to have the bad writer for the NYT who also 'reports' for MSNBC on instead).
In the Public Interest
Statement On Auto Industry Bailouts
by Ralph Nader
The Big Three are in big trouble, and they have themselves to thank for it.
Ford and General Motors have reported substantial losses in the second quarter amounting to $15.5 billion, and $8.7 billion, respectively, while Chrysler, which was bought off last year by a private equity firm, Cerberus, refuses to reveal its financial standing.
It is no wonder why their lobbyists were spotted schmoozing with members of Congress at the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, liquoring up in their plush suites and private parties while they made their case for direct government loans which, if approved, would likely add to our federal deficit.
Last December, Congress approved a $25 billion loan to automakers and their suppliers under the Energy Independence and Security Act, though it has yet to be funded. That bill includes a modest requirement for automakers to increase their average vehicle fuel efficiency to 35 mpg—a benchmark we should have set decades ago, and would allow the companies to have their way with virtually no oversight or accountability.
This corporate Congress cannot be expected to issue serious demands, set tough conditions, or impose strict rules on the auto companies to ensure their workers receive fair pay and benefits, and prevent their fat-cat executives from making off big while leaving their companies in shambles.
Such blatant giveaways have become the norm in Washington since the corporate stranglehold of Congress and the White House have smothered the forces seeking worker, consumer and environmental justice.
But this recent example should not discount our long history of dealing with corporate failures in more public and effective ways than just ponying up billions on demand at any big corporation's whim.
In 1979 when Chrysler was on the verge of bankruptcy, the automaker came crying to Congress for a bailout, which they eventually got, but Congress wasn't as much of a pushover.
Back then, at least the corporate chieftains were grilled by Congress and had to agree to give something back for Uncle Sam bailing them out--good jobs and pensions for their workers, and more efficient cars to reduce reliance on foreign oil and reduce prices at the pump.
Now the CEOs don't even have to leave Detroit and they get much more money for almost no return commitment to America, while they outsource jobs and pollute our environment.
During discussion on a proposed loan bill to bailout Chrysler in October 1979, Senator William Proxmire (D-WI) who chaired the Senate Banking Committee issued his opposition to Chrysler;s request and noted: "We let 7,000 companies fail last year--we didn;t bail them out. Now we are being told that if a company is big enough… we can't let it go under." He went on to call the proposed deal "a terrible precedent."
Raising the government's demand for performance standards, President Carter's Treasury Secretary William Miller told Chrysler officials, "it's going to be so awful, you'll wish you never brought the whole thing up."
Today, we rarely hear such candid opposition to corporate orders shouted at their congressional servants who lack the fortitude to put serious restraints and conditions on mismanaged, reckless big business and their overpaid CEOs seeking tax-payer salvation.
As a part of the Chrysler deal in the late Seventies, the government took out preferred stock warrants and after the company turned itself around and repaid its loan seven years early, the government ended up cashing out, receiving $400 million in the appreciated stock.
And Congress made clear to Chrysler that it had specific conditions the company had to meet before receiving the loan guarantee. It forced the company to contribute $162,500,000 into an employee stock ownership trust fund geared to benefit at least 90 percent of its employees, design more fuel efficient autos to help reduce consumption of foreign oil, and prohibit wages and benefits from falling below a level set three months before the legislation was passed.
Today, congressional actions to grant multi-billion dollar loans to the corporations lack the reciprocity some in Congress demanded 30 years ago. Before Congress irresponsibly dips into the public piggy bank, this time it would be wise to look back at how the government once dealt with Chrysler's dilemma, require clear benchmarks to deliver on the next generation of green collar jobs, improved fuel efficiency and gain a substantial return on its investment, not just in monetary value, but in the long-term viability of the domestic motor vehicle fleet.
Congress needs to call on the auto industry to innovate their way out of this morass into which they've engineered themselves. A sensible strategy would be to issue stock warrants to the government, like in the 70s, which would create an incentive for Congress to keep pressure on the auto industry to improve. Public Congressional hearings are a must.
Will Congress echo its actions of 30 years ago when it scrutinized corporate demands, grilled company executives, and imposed conditions to ensure fair compensation and safety for workers? Or will Congress continue down the road of corporate servitude, refusing to stand up for workers, consumers, taxpayers and the environment in its session-ending stampede and flight away from auto industry accountabilities?
|
Posted at 11:36 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Two days ago there was a session for the parliament to assess what they had achieved and done for the Iraqi people whom they represent. Even this point they didn't reach a point on it.The above is from an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy's " Parliament's work" ( Inside Iraq) and, in four telling paragraphs, the post captures not only how little is done for the Iraqi people but how little progress (on any front) is being made. Add in, how there is not check -- not even a self-check -- on the supposed representation of the Iraqi people. At the Los Angeles Times's Bush blog ( Countdown to Crawford: The Last Days of the Bush Administration), James Gerstenzang promotes one of the paper's print articles in " What surge? In Baghdad, they just turned out the lights and left:" To hear President Bush tell it, there is one reason, overall, that violence has fallen in Baghdad: The surge.
It was the surge, he said last week, that allowed the U.S. to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq. "Since we launched the surge last year, violence has fallen to its lowest point since the spring of 2004," he said in his radio address last Saturday. And just two days ago, he said of the surge: "The United States and the world is better off because of it."
Not so quick, according to a team of UCLA researchers.
Studying satellite imagery of night light in Baghdad neighborhoods dominated by Sunni residents, they came up with an alternative conclusion: The Sunni Muslims and Shiite Muslims had largely stopped killing each other by the time the "surge" of U.S. troops arrived in 2007.
In other words, the remaining Sunnis, defeated, turned out the lights and left. And then the U.S. troops came in.
The report, being published today, is "Baghdad Nights: Evaluating the US Military 'Surge' Using Nighttime Light Signatures."Independent journalist David Bacon latest book (just out this month) is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press). Bacon also explores migration in " Displaced People: NAFTA's Most Important Product" (NACLA Reports): Since the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993, the U.S. Congress has debated and passed several new bilateral trade agreements with Peru, Jordan and Chile, as well as the Central American Free Trade Agreement. Congressional debates over immigration policy have proceeded as though those trade agreements bore no relationship to the waves of displaced people migrating to the United States, looking for work. As Rufino Domínguez, former coordinator of the Indigenous Front of Binational Organizations (FIOB), points out, U.S. trade and immigration policy are part of a single system, and the negotiation of NAFTA was an important step in developing this system. "There are no jobs" in Mexico, he says, "and NAFTA drove the price of corn so low that it's not economically possible to plant a crop anymore. We come to the United States to work because there's no alternative."Economic crises provoked by NAFTA and other economic reforms are uprooting and displacing Mexicans in the country's most remote areas. While California farmworkers 20 and 30 years ago came from parts of Mexico with larger Spanish-speaking populations, migrants today increasingly come from indigenous communities in states like Oaxaca, Chiapas, and Guerrero. Domínguez says there are about 500,000 indigenous people from Oaxaca living in the United States, 300,000 in California alone.Meanwhile, a rising tide of anti-immigrant sentiment has demonized those migrants, leading to measures to deny them jobs, rights, or any pretense of equality with people living in the communities around them. Solutions to these dilemmas-from adopting rational and humane immigration policies to reducing the fear and hostility toward migrants-must begin with an examination of the way U.S. policies have both produced migration and criminalized migrants.Bacon has several events this month including: Sept 21 Presentation at REFORMA Conference, 10AM National Association to Promote Library and Information Services to Latinos and the Spanish Speaking, El Paso, Texas Sept 22 Book presentation, Illegal People,12:30PM Fall for the Book, Grand Tier III, Center for the Arts, Photography exhibition, Johnson Center's Gallery 123, 9/21-26 George Mason University, Fairfax, VA Sept 29 Book discussion, Illegal People, 6PM World Affairs Council, 312 Sutter St., #200, San Francisco Sept 30 Book discussion, 7:30PM Illegal People and The Accidental American, by Rinku Sen Modern Times Bookstore, 888 Valencia St., San FranciscoTurning to public television. This weekend (Friday in most markets), NOW on PBS will offer a look at women and politics: How have women in politics changed America and the world? NOW on PBS investigates with an hour-long special hosted by Maria Hinojosa: "Women, Power and Politics: A Rising Tide?"See the show on television this weekend or watch online STARTING SATURDAY[. . .]
Show Description: Given the hoopla surrounding Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton's historical political ascendance, why does the U.S. rank so low among countries for percentage of women holding national office? On Friday, September 19 at 8:30 pm (check local listings), in a one-hour special, NOW's Maria Hinojosa talks to women leaders around the world and here in the United States for an intimate look at the high-stakes risks, triumphs, and setbacks for women leaders of today and tomorrow. Among these women are President Michelle Bachelet of Chile, the first woman leader in Latin America who did not have a husband precede her as President, and former New Hampshire Governor Jeanne Shaheen, now in a tight race for a seat in the U.S. Senate.We also travel to Rwanda, where, 14 years after a horrific massacre left nearly one million people dead, women make up nearly half of parliament; and to Manhattan, where ambitious high school girls are competing in a high-stakes debate tournament."Women, Power and Politics," is also about the personal journey of mother and award-winning journalist Maria Hinojosa as she strives to answer the question: "What does to mean to be a woman in power?"Watch a preview and excerpt of this special program at this web address:Use this directory tool to find out where the show is airing in your area:
The NOW website ... will feature web-exclusive commentary from noteworthy women including Maria Bartiromo, Sandra Cisneros, and Tina Brown; a personal essay from Maria Hinojosa; an interactive debate over Sarah Palin's candidacy; as well as opportunities for all women to post and share their stories of ambition, success, and discouragement.(The "interactive debate" over Sarah Palin's candidacy is live now ...)Bill Moyers Journal (check your local listings, begins airing on PBS in most markets tonight, it also streams online -- transcript, video, audio) guests will inclue Gretchen Morgenson (New York Times) will be on to discuss the economic meltdown and Kevin Phillips (whose most recent book is Bad Money). PBS' Washington Week finds Gwen sharing opinions with David Wessel (Wall St. Journal) and John Maggs (National Journal) along with two others who are desperately trolling the streets currently in an attempt to purchase an opinion from someone, anyone, so they don't arrive empty handed. Jill notes this from Team Nader:
In the Public Interest: Statement on Auto Industry Bailouts
In the Public Interest
Statement On Auto Industry Bailouts
by Ralph Nader
The Big Three are in big trouble, and they have themselves to thank for it.
Ford and General Motors have reported substantial losses in the second quarter amounting to $15.5 billion, and $8.7 billion, respectively, while Chrysler, which was bought off last year by a private equity firm, Cerberus, refuses to reveal its financial standing.
It is no wonder why their lobbyists were spotted schmoozing with members of Congress at the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, liquoring up in their plush suites and private parties while they made their case for direct government loans which, if approved, would likely add to our federal deficit.
Last December, Congress approved a $25 billion loan to automakers and their suppliers under the Energy Independence and Security Act, though it has yet to be funded. That bill includes a modest requirement for automakers to increase their average vehicle fuel efficiency to 35 mpg—a benchmark we should have set decades ago, and would allow the companies to have their way with virtually no oversight or accountability.
This corporate Congress cannot be expected to issue serious demands, set tough conditions, or impose strict rules on the auto companies to ensure their workers receive fair pay and benefits, and prevent their fat-cat executives from making off big while leaving their companies in shambles.
Such blatant giveaways have become the norm in Washington since the corporate stranglehold of Congress and the White House have smothered the forces seeking worker, consumer and environmental justice.
But this recent example should not discount our long history of dealing with corporate failures in more public and effective ways than just ponying up billions on demand at any big corporation’s whim.
In 1979 when Chrysler was on the verge of bankruptcy, the automaker came crying to Congress for a bailout, which they eventually got, but Congress wasn’t as much of a pushover.
Back then, at least the corporate chieftains were grilled by Congress and had to agree to give something back for Uncle Sam bailing them out—good jobs and pensions for their workers, and more efficient cars to reduce reliance on foreign oil and reduce prices at the pump.
Now the CEOs don’t even have to leave Detroit and they get much more money for almost no return commitment to America, while they outsource jobs and pollute our environment.
During discussion on a proposed loan bill to bailout Chrysler in October 1979, Senator William Proxmire (D-WI) who chaired the Senate Banking Committee issued his opposition to Chrysler’s request and noted: “We let 7,000 companies fail last year—we didn’t bail them out. Now we are being told that if a company is big enough… we can’t let it go under.” He went on to call the proposed deal "a terrible precedent."
Raising the government’s demand for performance standards, President Carter’s Treasury Secretary William Miller told Chrysler officials, "it’s going to be so awful, you’ll wish you never brought the whole thing up."
Today, we rarely hear such candid opposition to corporate orders shouted at their congressional servants who lack the fortitude to put serious restraints and conditions on mismanaged, reckless big business and their overpaid CEOs seeking tax-payer salvation.
As a part of the Chrysler deal in the late Seventies, the government took out preferred stock warrants and after the company turned itself around and repaid its loan seven years early, the government ended up cashing out, receiving $400 million in the appreciated stock.
And Congress made clear to Chrysler that it had specific conditions the company had to meet before receiving the loan guarantee. It forced the company to contribute $162,500,000 into an employee stock ownership trust fund geared to benefit at least 90 percent of its employees, design more fuel efficient autos to help reduce consumption of foreign oil, and prohibit wages and benefits from falling below a level set three months before the legislation was passed.
Today, congressional actions to grant multi-billion dollar loans to the corporations lack the reciprocity some in Congress demanded 30 years ago. Before Congress irresponsibly dips into the public piggy bank, this time it would be wise to look back at how the government once dealt with Chrysler’s dilemma, require clear benchmarks to deliver on the next generation of green collar jobs, improved fuel efficiency and gain a substantial return on its investment, not just in monetary value, but in the long-term viability of the domestic motor vehicle fleet.
Congress needs to call on the auto industry to innovate their way out of this morass into which they’ve engineered themselves. A sensible strategy would be to issue stock warrants to the government, like in the 70s, which would create an incentive for Congress to keep pressure on the auto industry to improve. Public Congressional hearings are a must.
Will Congress echo its actions of 30 years ago when it scrutinized corporate demands, grilled company executives, and imposed conditions to ensure fair compensation and safety for workers? Or will Congress continue down the road of corporate servitude, refusing to stand up for workers, consumers, taxpayers and the environment in its session-ending stampede and flight away from auto industry accountabilities?
ShareThisShareThis The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqmcclatchy newspapersdavid baconthe los angeles timesnow on pbspbswashington week
Posted at 07:55 am by thecommonills
Permalink
|
|
|
|
|
|
the new york times
alissa j. rubin
the cbs evening news
mohammed al dulaimy
npr
