 |
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Tuesday,
September 23, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, corporations make a
killing in Iraq, the US military announces another death, and more. "There
is a popular saying now in Iraq. They say every one dollar spent in
Iraq, fifty percent of it will go to corruption, forty percent will go
to security and other issues. In the end, only five percent may go to
Iraqi people." Abbas Mehdi shared that yesterday in the Democratic
Policy Committee hearing yesterday. The hearing follows on the heals of
many Senate hearings into waste and fraud in Iraq. March 11th the Senate Appropriations committee held a hearing to "Examine Waste, Fraud, and Abuse of American Tax Dollars in Iraq." April 16th, the same Senate committee heard testimony
from the White House budget director Jim Nussle. In the March hearing,
Senator Byron Dorgan declared that the waste and fraud discussed was
just "the tip of the iceberg" and that the hearing "ought to be the
first of a dozen or two dozen hearings." Dorgan chaired the committee
hearing. Senator Byron Dorgan: In
March, the Senate Appropriations Committee held a hearing at my
request, in which we heard from a very courageous Iraqi judge who
headed Iraq's Commission of Public Integrity. This agency was
established by the Coalition Provisional Authority after the US
invasion of Iraq, and charged with rooting out corruption in the new
government. Judge al-Radhi estimated that corruption in Iraq's
government had resulted in the loss of $18 billion in government funds,
and most of those funds had been US tax payer dollars. Judge Radhi
said that instead of supporting his efforts to fight corruption, the
top levels of the Iraqi government had ultimately suppressed his
investigations. [. . . ] Judge Radhi also testified that since the
establishment of the Commission of Public Integrity, more than 31
employees have been assassinated as well as at least an additional 12
family members. One would have expected that our own government would
have been doing everything it could to support Judge Radhi's
anti-corruption efforts. But in hearing of this committee back in May,
we heard from two State Dept officials who said that our own government
was not interested in ensuring accountability of U.S. funds in Iraq or
in rooting out corruption. In fact, one of the officials, retired
judge Arthur Brenna, said that some of the stolen funds were steered to
the Iraqi insurgency. Yet the administration was generally indifferent
to the problem. This indifference has had deadly consequences. We
will hear from witnesses today -- one of whom was Judge Radhi's chief
investigator in Iraq -- about how stolen US funds have gone to al Qaeda
in Iraq. Our earlier hearing with Judge Brennan showed us that the
State Dept turns a blind eye when it comes to corruption. Today's
hearing will show us what the State Dept turned a blind eye to -- and
what the consequences have been. The
committee heard from two witness and who knows what. Considering the
long practice of trotting liars to the US Congress to argue this or
that about Iraq (see the first Bush White House nonsense about
incubators), an 'anonymous' witness really isn't going to be taken
seriously by most people. (All the more so if they hear his reasons
for wanting to be anonymous -- Iraq was his country, he came to America
long before the start of the illegal war, some day he might want to
hold office in Iraq . . .) For the record, much of what the unnamed
stated fits points raised in snapshots; however, we're not going to
focus on an anonymous witness. The two actual
witnesses were Salam Adhoob whom Dorgan was referring to in the excerpt
above. Adhoob was the chief investigator for the Commission on Public
Integrity (CPI) in Iraq. He spoke via a translator throughout. Abbas
Mehdi was the other witness and he was the chair National Investment
Commission in Iraq. He spoke without a translator. In Adhoob's
prepared testimony that he read to the committee, he noted: Based
on the cases that I have personally investigated, I believe that at
least $18 billion have been lost in Iraq through corruption and waste,
more than half of which was American tax payer money. Of this $18
billion, I believe at least $4 billion have been lost due to corruption
and criminal acts in the Ministry of Defence alone. [. . .] During my
time at the agency, the CPI worked closely with the Bureau of Supreme
Audit which is Iraq's version of the Government Accountability Office.
In 2007, the BSA conducted an extensive audit of American
reconstruction projects in Iraq. The BSA attempted to track every
American-funded project in the country, visited project sites,
interviewed Iraqi government officials about the status of the projects
and reviewed contradicting documents that were available for
inspection. In a report that has never been made public, the BSA
revealed that it could not properly account for more than $13 billion
in American reconstruction funds. During their audit of American
reconstruction contracts, BSA officials uncovered ghost projects that
never existed, projects that the Iraqi government deemed unnecessary
and work that was either not performed at all or done in a shoddy
manner by both American and Iraqi contractors. To cite just one
example from the BSA audit, approximately $24.4 million was spent on an
electricity project in Ninewa Province that the BSA concluded existed
only on paper. While the BSA found that many of these projects were
not needed -- and many were never built -- this very real fact remains:
the billions of American dollars that paid for these projects are now
gone. Senator
Robert Byrd: If your investigators uncovered evidence implicating
American contractors or officials in case of fraud or corruption who
was responsible for making that case and making those arrests and did
you work with or receive good cooperation from your American
counterparts? Salam
Adhoob: I was already responsible for a lot of investigations and some
American counselors and advisers helped me; however, I have to say in
order to be honest that not all the advisers and counselors at the
American embassy were helpful. I would also go far as saying that some
of these have helped the corrupt people. Here's an example that one
American adviser specialized in human rights and he works for the Iraqi
Ministry of Defence. He visited him [Adhoob, the translator
begins going from "I" to "him"] in his office and he screamed at his
face and this is recorded he says asking him not to investigate a
particular case, screaming again and again, "Why are you investigating
this case? This is American money. This is not your money." And he
also sent a message in that regard. There are many, unfortunately many
Americans, who are like that particular adviser who, again, asked him
not to investigate with a particular American person because "the money
is American money." Senator
Robert Byrd: Mr. Adhoob, if corrupt officials illegally move funds
outside Iraq what resources did you have to continue investigation,
make an arrest or recover the stolen funds? Salam
Adhoob: He's giving one example. He says, I'll give you one example
here that there is a person an American who have helped the officials,
some officials, in the Ministry of Defence, and Mr. [Nair Mohammed]
Jummailly that he mentioned in his statement, he helped them to smuggle
outside of Iraq, six hundred million dollars to Jordan and one hundred
million to Beirut. And that person was an adviser to the Iraqi
Central Bank. When the officials in the airport, in the Baghdad
International Airport were again leaving or sending these sums of
money, these huge sums of money to leave Iraq, he would use -- that
adviser would use -- his influence with the central bank in order
to overcome the objections of the officials of the international
airport. In answer to Byrd's question
as to which "banks Iraqi officials were using to hide these funds,"
Adhoob listed the Jordanian Housing Bank ("great majority money of went
to"), the National Bank in Jordan, the International Bank of Beirut
"and to other banks in the UAE". Adhoob stated that money that went to
the Jordanian Housing Bank then saw a portion go to Germany "and he has
documents to prove that. The reason for Germany in particular is that
Mr. Jummaily that he talked about in his statement has accounts in
Germany, in addition, the current Minister of Defence has accounts in
Germany also. Other, smaller chunks of money settled finally in New
York and Pennsylvania." Dropping back to another opening statement. Abbas
Mehdi: The Commission of Public Integrity, the chief anti-corruption
agency in the country, has been given neither the authority nor the
independence it needs to work effectively. As a result, there have
been no prosecutions for the embezzlement of public funds. Even worse,
the Iraqi Parliament has now taken proactive steps to obstruct efforts
to root out corruption. At the press conference on August 30, 2008,
the head of the CPI also complained that the amnesty law passed by the
Iraqi Parliament on January 12, 2008 will prevent the investigation of
some 700 cases of alleged corruption, some at the cabinet level, in
Baghdad alone. The costs of corruption fall most heavily on ordinary
Iraqi citizens. They are the ones who suffer from the complete absence
of services: no water, no electricity, no oil and too little security.
Just to give on example, $17 billion of Iraqi money plus $4 to 5
billion of US money has been spent on the electricity infrastructure in
Iraq. But what has more than $20 billion brought the Iraqi people? In
Baghdad today, more than five years after the start of war, residents
have electricity for about one hour in every seven hour period. A
CODEPINK protestor decided to make a statement in the middle of the
hearing by rising and declaring, "Excuse me, I don't know the protocol
here but it seems to me that it seems to me -- I'm sorry that the
travesty of the American public are losing money . . . I think we
should focus on the average Iraqi citizen who had nothing to do with
this occupation and are suffering -- and we can bail out Wall Street
and couldn't give anything to the average Iraqi citizen." Next up,
CODEPINK attends a vegan breakfast which they disrupt by calling for
people to stop eating meat. Senator Amy
Klobuchar: One thing I've taken away from these hearings, in response
to what the woman just said, the Iraqi citizens have suffered because
of this corruption and loss of money and we've also learned that the,
really, credibility of the Iraqi government has suffered and also our
American soldiers have suffered as we've had other hearings where we've
learned about contractors in a black market where ice is taken -- and
sold on the black market that was supposed to go to our soldiers when
it's 110 degrees outside. So I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman [Dorgan]
for holding these hearings. I also want to welcome Dr. Mehdi to this
hearing. I have known him for many years -- first through my father and
then my family has eaten dinner at his home, he's a very good cook,
Chairman Dorgan, so maybe at some point, he'll cook for us here in
Washington and he's also a well respected academic in Minnesota and has
worked on a bi-partisan basis to work with many elected officials and
give them his insight into what is going on in Iraq. So thank you very
much for your service. Mr. Mehdi, you said unless corruption is rooted
out there's very little chance of achieving stability in Iraq and I
think that the members of this committee would strongly agree with your
assessment. Given how pervasive this corruption is -- as we've heard
from you and our other witnesses -- what recommendations would you give
US officials on how to combat corruption and what role can Congress
play? Abbas
Mehdi: Thank you, Senator. You know, Senator, when United States went
to Iraq, they went with high minded mission and the goal for Iraq was
really high minded mission -- rebuild Iraq, socially, economically,
politically. And Iraq people in the beginning were happy and believed
what the US said. Now five years on, Iraq today in a bad shape, worse
than the era of Saddam, sadly to tell you this. So what can be done?
There were so many mistakes. And as a basic principle, you need to
recognize the mistakes first, then to admit these mistakes, then to go
from there. I think when Bremer went to Iraq, made a serious mistake,
there's are some problem with the Constitution, there's a problem with
the ethnic policy, and there's a problem they brought wrong people and
they give them power and authority. Now, if you really want to do it
right, because there is no hope now, you have to move everybody and you
start from the beginning. Is the United States ready to do that? I
don't think so? Maybe through the international community. Because
until now Iraq people are dying, suffering and, still in Baghdad --
this is the capitol, only one hour every seven hours they receive
electricity. There's no medicine. There's no food. How long is it
going to take? So either the United States is able to help Iraqi
people and do something dramatic or leave them alone. Staying with the topic of contracts (or 'rewards'), AP reports
that Perini Corp had just "won more work with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers valued at about $170 million to build bomb-resistant roofing
and buildings in Iraqi war zones." And the BBC notes
the deal between the 'government' of Iraq and Royal Dutch Shell ("the
second between the government and a foreign firm since the US-led
invasion of Iraq in 2003") that Hussein al-Shahristanti (Minister of
Oil) signed off on yesterday. Sam Dagher (New York Times) points out,
"The company described its decision to open an office here as a
milestone that partly reflected the vast improvement in Iraq's
stability compared with conditions during the worst years of the war.
But in a sobering reminder of the underlying dangers of doing business
here, the company would not disclose the location of its office, and
the senior Shell official who announced the gas deal was accompanied by
a phalanx of armed guards." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) explains,
"This is the second deal that the elected Iraqi government has
concluded with a foreign firm, after a $3 billion deal with the China
National Petroleum Corp." and that "Western oil companies are eager to
return to Iraq, but the parliament has yet to pass a law that would
give them a large stake in oil production in Iraq. Many Iraqis worry
that foreign oil companies would exploit the country's oil fields with
no benefit to Iraqis." Today the US Senate
Committee on Armed Services went through the motions. Appearing before
the commitee were the US Sec of Defense Robert Gates and the Joint
Chiefs of Staff chair Gen James E. Cartwright. It was time to yet
again serve up five-year-old left overs and hope someone nibbled.
Gates offered, "The president has called our reduction in troops
numbers a 'return on success.' I, of course, agree, but I might expand
futher. The changes on the ground and in our posture are reflective of
a fundamental change in the nature of the conflict. In past testimony,
I have cautioned that, no matter what you think about the origins of
the war in Iraq, we must get the endgame there right. I believe we
have now entered the endgame -- and our decisions today and in the
months ahead will be critical to regional stability and our national
security interests in the next few years." Staying with the Defense
Dept, Lt Gen Lloyd Austin III briefed reporters yesterday from Iraq and
used "positive" and "progress" repeatedly. For what doesn't matter, check out the write up by Adam Levine (CNN).
The press briefing was so much more interesting. Austin did a hard
sell on the "Awakening" Council members declaring, "One of our primary
focus areas as we move foward is transitioning the Sons of Iraq program
to the Iraqi government. The volunteer movement that started in Anbar
and spread across the rest of the country significantly contributed to
the security successes that we are now taking advantage of. The Sons
of Iraq have paid a heavy price fight al Qaeda and other insurgent
groups, and it's important that the government of Iraq responsibly
transition them into meaningful employment. Prime Minister Maliki has
assured me that the government will help those who help the people of
Iraq. And so next week in Baghdad the government will accept
responsibility for approximately 54,000 Sons of Iraq, and we will be
there to assist in the transfer. We spent the last few weeks working
hand in hand with our Iraqi partners on this transition, and I'm
confident that this will go well. And you should know that we will not
abandon the Sons of Iraq." In response to a question from Bill
McMichael of Military Times, Austin stated that there were
99,000 "Awakening" Council members and 54,000 are in Baghdad "so we
will start with the Baghdad province next month and transition that
element first, and then we will begin to move to other parts of the
country and transition those elements." The most interesting exchange
took place when JJ Sutherland (NPR) attempted to pin down Austin on
what happens when the 54,000 transfer over in terms of what they do now
and what they will do? Sutherland had to repeatedly bring up the issue
of "Awakening" Council members currently staffing checkpoints in
Baghdad and ask what happens to those checkpoints? Austin's repeated
replies indicated he hadn't understood the question because no one in
the US military had thought about that. Best echange.
JJ
Sutherland: Sir, I understand that but I'[m saying, "What happens in
October? I understand eventually you want to have them be plumbers or
electricians. But in October, there are a lot of checkpoints that have
been manned by the Sons of Iraq. Are those checkpoints all going to go
away? Are they only going to be staffed by Iraqi police now? That's
my question. It's not eventually, it's next month.
Lt
Gen Lloyd Austin: Yeah. Next month the Iraqi government will begin to
work their way through this. And there's no question that some of
them, some of the checkpoints, many of the checkpoints, will be -- will
be manned by Iraqi security forces. In some cases, there may be Sons
of Iraq that will be taksed to help with that work. But in most cases,
I think the Iraqi government will be looking to transition people into
different types of jobs. At which point the Pentagon's spokesperson (DOD press office director) Gary Keck jumped in with the cry of one more question. Erica Goode (New York Times) reported
today on the tensions in Baghdad as the transfer of "Awakening" to the
puppet government approaches and notes that "Awakening" Councils in
Adhamiya "have posed increasing problems. . . . Some residents complain
that the men, not a few of them swaggering street toughs, use their
power to intimidate people. Sometimes violence erupts." Bombings? Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
2 Baghdad roadside bombings that resulted in 1 death and seven people
wounded, and two Basra roadside bombings resulted in 1 death. Reuters
notes an Iskandariya roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 person
"and wounded his wife and son". Shootings? Corpses? Today the US military announced:
"A Multi-National Division -- Center Soldier was killed as a result of
a small-arms fire attack west of Salman Pak Sept. 23." McClatchy Mohammed Al Dulaimy reports
that Iraqi police state two US soldiers died, that 2 Iraqis were killed
in the exchange and that "[p]olice said the attacker saw American
soldiers searching an Iraqi woman using their hands, which prompted him
to pen fire on the soldiers." The announcement brings to 4170 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war with 19 for the month thus far. George Bryson's " Army Ordered to discharge soldier who found religon in Iraq" ( McClatchy's Anchorage Daily News)
reports that US District Judge John Sedwick has ordered that Private
First Class Michael Barnes be released from the US military as a
conscientious objector (with honorable discharge). Judge Sedwick found
the army's claims that this was some maneuver on Barnes' part to avoid
service were assertions the military failed to prove and that
"testimony by a chaplain, a psychiatrist, fellow soldiers and Barnes
himself proved the contrary." The ruling should shed a light on how the
military really isn't in the place to 'judge' faith and that should
have been evident in the case of Agustin Aguayo.
The military's rejection of Agustin's claim was an offence to faith
because it went against the teachings and beliefs of most faiths, with
the military arguing, in effect, that faith was a static state of being
and that it could not awaken or deepen. Obviously, most faiths advocate
that belief that a believer grows in their faith. That can be seen in
the stories describing the testings of Jesus Christ. (The testings of,
not the teachings of.) The process isn't going to change
tomorrow. And it didn't change greatly during Vietnam. (1968 saw a
shake up of the CO process and guidelines.) The peace movement of that
period ended the draft and that is and was an important victory but the
CO process is something that many members of Congress (at that time)
would make sympathetic comments of but the issue was dropped. Following
the end of the current illegal war, the peace movement would be smart
to pursue this because the policy rarely changes in the midst of a war
(of any war). Religious faith is not necessary for CO status
(though the military currently 'forgets' that and is allowed to get
away with 'forgetting' it) but we're going to focus on that aspect due
to the above ruling. A counter-argument against CO status (and
against war resistance) is, "You knew what you were signing up for."
No, you didn't. You couldn't. And that is the story of the trials and
testing of Jesus. You may think you do, but there is the abstract and
there is the actual. Stephen Fortunato was a CO during Vietnam
and his case was not that different from Agustin's. Like Aguayo,
Fortunato had an awakening and stopped carrying his weapon. (Agustin
stopped carrying a loaded weapon.) Like Aguayo, Fortunato enlisted, he
was not drafted. After his discharge, he attended Providence College
and wrote a paper that was widely circulated at the time. In it, he
noted: I came to conscientious objection over a somewhat
circuitous route -- via the Marine Corps. At the age of eighteen I
freely enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve, more out of a spirit of
adolescent adventure than anything else, and certainly not because I
thought freedom would be better preserved if the government stuck an
M-1 in my hands.With all the passion and
exuberance of youth I became a trained killer. I went to classes where
I learned how to rip a man's jugular vein out with my teeth. I growled
like a tiger when I was told to growl like a tiger. (It would indeed by
edifying for religious and educational leaders to see their flocks
brandishing bayonets and yelping and grunting on command, like
well-trained jungle beasts -- all for the preservation of Western
civilization!)I was told that the Ten
Commandments, however worthy they might be in civilian life, had to be
suspended in the name of national interest. I was greatly impressed to
see that an act perpetrated by the enemy was ipso facto vicious and
deceitful, whereas the self-same act perpetrated by the United States
was just and praiseworthy.For two years I did my
reserve duty without questioning the purposes or the means of the armed
forces. It remained for one of the cruder excesses of military training
to wrench me from the spiritual doldrums.[. . .]My
first break with the ways of the military was emotional and intuitive.
The contradictions of war and war preparations became clear and
self-evident. It did not become a rational creature to permit himself
to be led in cries for destruction of human life; a truly free man
would not support a totalitarian system to defend freedom; one cannot
bring about peace by threatening to incinerate mankind. No, I came to
believe that a free man preserves his freedom by acting freely and not
by following those would would herd men into regiments or send people
scurrying like moles into bomb shelters. Most important of all, the
free man must remain free not to kill or to support killing. [. . .]I
knew I had arrived at conscientious objection. I was opposed in body
and soul to the organized, budgeted, and officially sanctified use of
violence called war. I was opposed to the compulsory and regimented
aberration from the laws of God and reason, called conscription. I
could no longer, in conscience, bear arms.What
course of action was I to take? I had freely enlisted in the reserves.
But how free was I? Our society conspires in favor of the armed camp
set-up we now live in. At the age of eighteen, I had not once
considered military service as confronting me with a moral decision. It
is one of the more gruesome paradoxes of our time than in a free -- or
supposedly so -- society the atmosphere of choice on such a crucial
issue had been so stifled.Again, in 1968 the
military's CO policies were updated and while that can be seen as a
small vicotry the problem then is the problem today: the written policy
is not really followed. During times of peace, it generally is and we
may back off from the issue as a result. But following the end of this
current illegal war, a serious investigation by Congress into how the
written policy was followed or ignored is needed. Many members of the
peace movement advocate for expanding the written policy (I'm not
opposed to that) but the reality is that the written policy is yet
again not being followed and that many attempting CO status would earn
it under the current policy (as is) if it were only followed. Turning to the US presidential race. The Democratic ticket is Obama-Biden. Yesterday, the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric featured a segment
with Senator Joe Biden. Couric asked Biden how he was doing preparing
for his debate with GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and, "Are
you worried that you're going to have to pull your punches a bit
because of her gender and you don't want to seem like you're bullying
her? It's a different dynamic when it's a male/female thing, isn't
it?" Biden replied, ""I don't know, is it? We're sitting here doing it
right now, aren't we? Look, all kidding aside. So maybe it's a
generational thing but I don't start this thing thinking 'Oh my God,
this is a woman, I had better treat her differently.'" On the Obama
campaign's recent ad mocking John McCain's computer skills, Biden
stated, "I thought that was terrible, by the way." Couric asked, "Why
did you do it then?" Biden replied, "I didn't know we did it and if I
had naything to do with it, we would have never done it." And chugging
down that high road, the Obama campaign unveils a new ad, as Wally and Cedric note, which deals with the very pressing 'issue' of what kind of cars GOP presidential nominee John McCain owns? He owns one car, by the way. The
broadcasts of the presidential debates this year will reach 60 million
or more Americans. The array of candidates running includes two former
members of Congress--Libertarian Bob Barr and Green Cynthia
McKinney--as well as me, but viewers will see only two choices: a
Democrat and a Republican. The rest of us are not invited.
Few
voters likely know that the debate sponsor, the Commission on
Presidential Debates, was created in 1987 by the two parties. Don't be
fooled by its claim that its goal is to provide "the best possible
information to viewers and listeners." Its purpose is to give the
parties cover when they bar other legitimate candidates from debating. Okay, time for action. The first Presidential debate is Friday. And we're getting stonewalled. They won't let Ralph Nader into the Presidential debates. So,
here's what we're going to do. It's a two step process. Step one --
call Barack Obama. Tell Obama he should demand that Ralph Nader be
included in the debates. And step two -- e-mail the Commission on
Presidential Debates. And let them know you are onto their game. Here
are the details. Step one: Call Barack Obama at 866-675-2008. Hit 6 to speak with a campaign volunteer. Once connected, politely deliver the following message: Hi,
my name is ... I was wondering if Senator Obama, being a believer in
equal opportunity and equal rights, could insist that Ralph Nader and
other ballot qualified third party candidates be included in the
upcoming Presidential debates? After all, Nader is on 45 state ballots.
And he's polling well nationwide. And he could help Senator Obama
challenge the corporate Republicans. True, Ralph would critique Senator
Obama for his corporate ties also. But isn't that what democracy is
about? Could you please leave this message for the campaign manager?
Thank you. Step two: E-mail Janet Brown, the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates. Here's a sample e-mail: Dear
Janet Brown: Greetings. You must be busy. Preparing for the first
Presidential debate this Friday. So, I won't take much of your time.
Just wanted to let you know that the American people were not born
yesterday. We know the deal. Take that little private corporation that
you run. Controlled by the two corporate parties. And funded by big
business. For the purpose of excluding independent minded candidates.
Friday, two Wall Street candidates are scheduled to be in the ring.
Barack Obama and John McCain. The one candidate who represents the
American people, Main Street, if you will, will be on the outside
looking in. So, here's a simple request. Drop your exclusionary
restrictions. And let Ralph Nader into the debates. It will be good for
your conscience. Good for the American people. (I believe it was The
League of Women Voters that called your corporatized debates
"campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity, and honest
answers to tough questions.") And good for democracy. Let the American
people have a real debate for once. Main Street vs. Wall Street. Thank
you. Signed your name. Onward to November The Nader Team
Posted at 03:00 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Michael Barnes granted CO status
George Bryson's " Army Ordered to discharge soldier who found religon in Iraq" ( McClatchy's Anchorage Daily News)
reports that US District Judge John Sedwick has ordered that Private
First Class Michael Barnes be released from the US military as a
conscientious objector (with honorable discharge). Judge Sedwick found
the army's claims that this was some maneuver on Barnes' part to avoid
service were assertions the military failed to prove and that
"testimony by a chaplain, a psychiatrist, fellow soldiers and Barnes
himself proved the contrary." The ruling should shed a light on how the
military really isn't in the place to 'judge' faith and that should
have been evident in the case of Agustin Aguayo.
The military's rejection of Agustin's claim was an offence to faith
because it went against the teachings and beliefs of most faiths, with
the military arguing, in effect, that faith was a static state of being
and that it could not awaken or deepen. Obviously, most faiths advocate
that belief that a believer grows in their faith. That can be seen in
the stories describing the testings of Jesus Christ. (The testings of,
not the teachings of.) The process isn't going to change
tomorrow. And it didn't change greatly during Vietnam. (1968 saw a
shake up of the CO process and guidelines.) The peace movement of that
period ended the draft and that is and was an important victory but the
CO process is something that many members of Congress (at that time)
would make sympathetic comments of but the issue was dropped. Following
the end of the current illegal war, the peace movement would be smart
to pursue this because the policy rarely changes in the midst of a war
(of any war). Religious faith is not necessary for CO status
(though the military currently 'forgets' that and is allowed to get
away with 'forgetting' it) but we're going to focus on that aspect due
to the above ruling. A counter-argument against CO status (and
against war resistance) is, "You knew what you were signing up for."
No, you didn't. You couldn't. And that is the story of the trials and
testing of Jesus. You may think you do, but there is the abstract and
there is the actual. Stephen Fortunato was a CO during Vietnam
and his case was not that different from Agustin's. Like Aguayo,
Fortunato had an awakening and stopped carrying his weapon. (Agustin
stopped carrying a loaded weapon.) Like Aguayo, Fortunato enlisted, he
was not drafted. After his discharge, he attended Providence College
and wrote a paper that was widely circulated at the time. In it, he
noted: I came to conscientious objection over a somewhat
circuitous route -- via the Marine Corps. At the age of eighteen I
freely enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve, more out of a spirit of
adolescent adventure than anything else, and certainly not because I
thought freedom would be better preserved if the government stuck an
M-1 in my hands.With all the passion and
exuberance of youth I became a trained killer. I went to classes where
I learned how to rip a man's jugular vein out with my teeth. I growled
like a tiger when I was told to growl like a tiger. (It would indeed by
edifying for religious and educational leaders to see their flocks
brandishing bayonets and yelping and grunting on command, like
well-trained jungle beasts -- all for the preservation of Western
civilization!)I was told that the Ten
Commandments, however worthy they might be in civilian life, had to be
suspended in the name of national interest. I was greatly impressed to
see that an act perpetrated by the enemy was ipso facto vicious and
deceitful, whereas the self-same act perpetrated by the United States
was just and praiseworthy.For two years I did my
reserve duty without questioning the purposes or the means of the armed
forces. It remained for one of the cruder excesses of military training
to wrench me from the spiritual doldrums.[. . .]My
first break with the ways of the military was emotional and intuitive.
The contradictions of war and war preparations became clear and
self-evident. It did not become a rational creature to permit himself
to be led in cries for destruction of human life; a truly free man
would not support a totalitarian system to defend freedom; one cannot
bring about peace by threatening to incinerate mankind. No, I came to
believe that a free man preserves his freedom by acting freely and not
by following those would would herd men into regiments or send people
scurrying like moles into bomb shelters. Most important of all, the
free man must remain free not to kill or to support killing. [. . .]I
knew I had arrived at conscientious objection. I was opposed in body
and soul to the organized, budgeted, and officially sanctified use of
violence called war. I was opposed to the compulsory and regimented
aberration from the laws of God and reason, called conscription. I
could no longer, in conscience, bear arms.What
course of action was I to take? I had freely enlisted in the reserves.
But how free was I? Our society conspires in favor of the armed camp
set-up we now live in. At the age of eighteen, I had not once
considered military service as confronting me with a moral decision. It
is one of the more gruesome paradoxes of our time than in a free -- or
supposedly so -- society the atmosphere of choice on such a crucial
issue had been so stifled.Again, in 1968 the
military's CO policies were updated and while that can be seen as a
small vicotry the problem then is the problem today: the written policy
is not really followed. During times of peace, it generally is and we
may back off from the issue as a result. But following the end of this
current illegal war, a serious investigation by Congress into how the
written policy was followed or ignored is needed. Many members of the
peace movement advocate for expanding the written policy (I'm not
opposed to that) but the reality is that the written policy is yet
again not being followed and that many attempting CO status would earn
it under the current policy (as is) if it were only followed. When
any war ends, fatigue sets in and energies go into other issues. Over
the last forty years, the US has seen two wars where the written CO
policy/guidelines were not followed. Once a war starts, it is
impossible to get Congress to address almost anything. (Including
ending the illegal war.) Learning from mistakes argues for a demand on
Congress to examine the military's compliance with the CO policies
before the next war starts. A CO does not have to have a belief
in a god. That's in the policy. But that is routinely ignored today.
The concept of a religious awakening or deepening, consistent with
teachings of many faiths, is ignored. The policy, as written,
does not require that someone have a legal mind to navigate the process
successfully. But that is what is happening. Michael Barnes
qualifies for CO status. It should not require a federal judge issuing
a sixteen page ruling for him to be granted that status. He met the
requirements and yet he had to take his argument to the federal courts
because the military refused to follow their own policies. He won. Many
more do not. Again, I'm all for arguing that the policy needs to
be expanded. But the reality is that the policy, as it is written, is
not being followed by the military and, time and again, rejections
reveal not a flaw or error on the part of the applicant but either a
lack of understanding of the CO policy on the part of the military or a
refusal to follow it. In Iraq, Tina Susman examines the prison situation ins " IRAQ: Iraqi detainees face uncertain future" ( Bablyon and Beyond, Los Angeles Times): "I
was there when they took them away. It was in the afternoon, and I was
praying at the time," says Sumaychiya Abid Ahmad as she recalls the day
15 months ago when her sons, Waleed and Tawfiq, were arrested. The
Iraqi soldiers who led them from the family's home in Abu Ghraib,
southwest of Baghdad, said it would be a few minutes -- just enough
time to get their help with an electrical problem, since both young men
are electricians.
But as the Los Angeles Times reported Monday,
the two are among several thousand Iraqis being held in Iraqi detention
centers who say they have never seen a lawyer or been brought before a
judge after months or even years of detention. It's a problem that U.S.
and Iraqi officials acknowledge exists, but fixing it is proving
difficult as stepped-up security efforts pour more and more detainees
into the Iraqi system.If you've forgotten War Pornographer Michael Gordon was all giddy in print July 30, 2007, " Justice From Behind the Barricades in Baghdad" ( New York Times).
Things were changing! Things were improving! That "Rule of Law Complex"
was supposed to mean 'justice' would take place much more quickly. It
didn't change a thing. In fact, the only thing that keeps Iraqi
over-populated prisons going is that the puppet government regularly
resorts to mass releases. Why? If the prisoners are guilty, surely they
should stay behind bars. But it's not about guilt or innocence and
that's why we've seen the mass releases every year of the illegal war. There
is no justice and every year we're told it is improving and every year
it doesn't improve. The problems are neither new nor unknown. Nor is what Erica Goode's addressing on the front page of the New York Times. Not an insult, just noting that she's covering something that has long been going on. " On Safer Streets in Baghdad, Friction Infiltrates Sunni Patrols"
notes the continued tension and violence and, focusing on the Baghdad
neighborhood of Adhamiya (a Sunni neighborhood), the "Awakening"
Councils "have posed increasing problems. . . . Some residents complain
that the men, not a few of them swaggering street toughs, use their
power to intimidate people. Sometimes violence erupts." It's a
lengthy article and needs to be. It may also be the paper's first
acknowledgment that the "Awakening" Council has an impact on a
neighborhood that goes beyond "ooooh, I can walk down the street."
(Yes, I'm thinking of one article in particular. And "I" is a reporter,
not a citizen of Iraq.) There has been a long refusal to look beyond
the 'pretty fences' and acknowledge what life is like for the citizens
when the "Awakening" Councils are 'empowered.' Goode's article is a
strong corrective to that and notes, "Other areas of Iraq, like Diyala
and Salahuddin Provinces, where local leaders say Awakening groups have
carried out kidnappings and killings aimed at rival councils, might
also offer fertile recruiting grounds" for the "insurgency." Goode's
article also notes the concerns of the "Awakening" Council members with
the transfer from the protective wing of the US military to the puppet
government in Baghdad. Nouri al-Maliki (and others before him) staffed
the ministries with 'guards' and 'police' that were Shia thugs. The
Sunnis thugs do have cause to worry. The de-de-Baathification
has still not taken place (as US House Rep Lloyd Doggett pointed out in
last week's House Budget Committee hearing) and the impacts of Paul
Bremer's decision to implement de-Baathification are now evident. The
'government' struggles and is 'staffed' with people who must learn
their jobs. (Of course, people who knew their jobs might mean Shell and
others would not be able to profit today.) As the persh mega and the
Iraqi military remain in conflict in Diyala Province and as Baghdad
sees festering tensions over the 'embrace' of the "Awakening" Councils
it should first of all be remembered that the US administration is
guiding all that is happening. After that's grasped, we should all
wonder why US House Rep Tim Bishop was informed in the committee
hearing last week that the US predictions for what happens in Iraq
after de-de-Baathification takes place (they call it de-Baathification,
but de-Baathification was what Bremer did, purging the Baathists from
the public sector) is an issue that can't be discussed in an open
hearing. There is a repeated claim by many who support
continuing the illegal war which states if the US leaves Iraq, a
bloodbath will ensue. A bloodbath already has ensued and continues. Now
you have the Kurds in conflict with the central 'government' of Iraq
(the pesh merga refusing to allow Iraqi soldiers to enter and patrol
some areas of Diyala Province) and the conflict between the central
'government' and the "Awakening" Councils. Three of the four are
creations of the US. (The pesh merga is not. It is, however, supported
by the US and has been allowed to overreach with US encouragement. Only
last week did the US finally attempt to step by sending the second in
command to Khanaqin, where he was rebuffed.) Any violence that ensues
is a result of US policies. The fact that violence will most likely
follow the implementation of the de-de-Baathifcation policy and that
the this is a finding that must be kept from the American people
(according to the administration) is outrageous. It also questions the
argument that the US' continued presence is preventing violence when it
is only sewing greater conflict. Lying to the American people
was at the start of the illegal war. When Congress is told that the
possible effects of a law, established as a bench mark by the White
House, can't be discussed in an open session, it appears lying
continues. Though bad publicity has led to a sudden distancing from the
counter-insurgency program (which may be genuine or just words for show
to try to clamp down on further discussions of the unethical nature of
that program), counter-insurgency is turning a people against itself.
Is the policy out of the White House truly as incompetent as we're led
to believe? Or are the warring factions again being set up by the US
and, if so, to justify continued involvement in Iraq? At this point,
it's speculation as to why the US backed Shi'ite thugs from the start
and then decided Sunni thugs should be armed and trained. But the US
analysis of what de-de-Baathifcation, if implemented, will result in
Iraq is being kept from the public. The American people have a right to
know not only because they are footing the bill for the illegal war but
also because the White House has defined it as a benchmark to measure
success. Democrats in Congress should be insisting that this analysis
be made public because the law's been passed and if its implementation
takes place under the next president (regardless of whom that president
is) it could tie the US down in Iraq for many years to come. The
White House's desire for a longterm US presence in Iraq is not in
doubt. That's what lies behind attempting to circumvent the Senate by
calling a treaty a SOFA. The peace movement in the US has
largely collapsed/gone into hiding. It's been replaced with a dithering
Cult of Barack. It's a crew not known for their thinking abilities
(hence the reliance on hula hoops). But it does include Tom Hayden who
may still have enough common sense to grasp the implications for the
candidate he's supporting. If the White House knows that
de-de-Baathification will lead to increased violence and if they sense
that John McCain might lose the election (operating under the
assumption -- which the Cult of Barack believes -- that the White House
wants to see McCain elected), an "October Surprise" if McCain slips in
the polling might include ordering Nouri to implement a strategy they
know will result in chaos. A week or two of that in the lead up to the
election could change the dynamics of the discussion (and Barack can't
think on his feet) which could result in a strong move towards McCain.
Translation, you need to start addressing the fact that the White House
is hiding from the people an analysis of what happens if Baathists are
allowed back in the government before it happens and not hope that the
plan isn't implemented prior to the election. It's a lot easier to lay
out the basics before it takes place than to try to do damage control
after. From Team Nader, we'll note " Call Barack Obama, E-mail Janet Brown Now:" Okay, time for action. The first Presidential debate is Friday. And we're getting stonewalled. They won't let Ralph Nader into the Presidential debates. So,
here's what we're going to do. It's a two step process. Step one --
call Barack Obama. Tell Obama he should demand that Ralph Nader be
included in the debates. And step two -- e-mail the Commission on
Presidential Debates. And let them know you are onto their game. Here
are the details. Step one: Call Barack Obama at 866-675-2008. Hit 6 to speak with a campaign volunteer. Once connected, politely deliver the following message: Hi,
my name is ... I was wondering if Senator Obama, being a believer in
equal opportunity and equal rights, could insist that Ralph Nader and
other ballot qualified third party candidates be included in the
upcoming Presidential debates? After all, Nader is on 45 state ballots.
And he's polling well nationwide. And he could help Senator Obama
challenge the corporate Republicans. True, Ralph would critique Senator
Obama for his corporate ties also. But isn't that what democracy is
about? Could you please leave this message for the campaign manager?
Thank you. Step two: E-mail Janet Brown, the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates. Here's a sample e-mail: Dear
Janet Brown: Greetings. You must be busy. Preparing for the first
Presidential debate this Friday. So, I won't take much of your time.
Just wanted to let you know that the American people were not born
yesterday. We know the deal. Take that little private corporation that
you run. Controlled by the two corporate parties. And funded by big
business. For the purpose of excluding independent minded candidates.
Friday, two Wall Street candidates are scheduled to be in the ring.
Barack Obama and John McCain. The one candidate who represents the
American people, Main Street, if you will, will be on the outside
looking in. So, here's a simple request. Drop your exclusionary
restrictions. And let Ralph Nader into the debates. It will be good for
your conscience. Good for the American people. (I believe it was The
League of Women Voters that called your corporatized debates
"campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity, and honest
answers to tough questions.") And good for democracy. Let the American
people have a real debate for once. Main Street vs. Wall Street. Thank
you. Signed your name. Onward to November The Nader TeamThe e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqmichael barnesagustin aguayostephen fortunatogeorge brysonmcclatchy newspapersthe los angeles timestina susmanthe new york timesmichael gordonerica goode
Posted at 10:17 am by thecommonills
Permalink
War, what is it good for? Shell Oil
Gulf Daily News quotes
UK Defense Secretary Des Browne stating, "The Iraqi armed forces,
supported by British and US forces, have taken on and defeated the
militia in Basra. We have reached a turning point in our involvement."
The Gulf Daily News sees this as an indication that British troops (approximately 4,000) might be leaving Iraq shortly. Meanwhile BBC notes
the deal between the 'government' of Iraq and Royal Dutch Shell ("the
second between the government and a foreign firm since the US-led
invasion of Iraq in 2003") that was Hussein al-Shahristanti (Minister
of Oil) signed off on yesterday. In this morning's New York Times, Sam
Dagher's "Shell Opens an Office in Baghdad After a 36-Year Absence"
observes: The company described its decision to open an
office here as a milestone that partly reflected the vast improvement
in Iraq's stability compared with conditions during the worst years of
the war. But in a sobering reminder of the underlying dangers of doing
business here, the company would not disclose the location of its
office, and the senior Shell official who announced the gas deal was
accompanied by a phalanx of armed guards.
"We are ready to establish
a presence," the official, Linda Cook, executive director of the
company's gas and power unit, said during a news conference in
Baghdad's heavily guarded Green Zone. Turning to US
presidential politics, we're noting one new item from Team Nader in
both entries. Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate. In
case anyone's missed the debate issue, we'll first again note " 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 PrzekwasThe Nader Team
ShareThisShareThis And with that, we'll note " Call Barack Obama, E-mail Janet Brown Now:" Okay,
time for action. The first Presidential debate is Friday. And we're
getting stonewalled. They won't let Ralph Nader into the Presidential
debates. So, here's what we're going to do. It's a two step process. Step one -- call Barack Obama. Tell
Obama he should demand that Ralph Nader be included in the debates. And
step two -- e-mail the Commission on Presidential Debates. And let them
know you are onto their game. Here are the details. Step one: Call Barack Obama at 866-675-2008. Hit 6 to speak with a campaign volunteer. Once connected, politely deliver the following message: Hi,
my name is ... I was wondering if Senator Obama, being a believer in
equal opportunity and equal rights, could insist that Ralph Nader and
other ballot qualified third party candidates be included in the
upcoming Presidential debates? After all, Nader is on 45 state ballots.
And he's polling well nationwide. And he could help Senator Obama
challenge the corporate Republicans. True, Ralph would critique Senator
Obama for his corporate ties also. But isn't that what democracy is
about? Could you please leave this message for the campaign manager?
Thank you. Step two: E-mail Janet Brown, the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates. Here's a sample e-mail: Dear
Janet Brown: Greetings. You must be busy. Preparing for the first
Presidential debate this Friday. So, I won't take much of your time.
Just wanted to let you know that the American people were not born
yesterday. We know the deal. Take that little private corporation that
you run. Controlled by the two corporate parties. And funded by big
business. For the purpose of excluding independent minded candidates.
Friday, two Wall Street candidates are scheduled to be in the ring.
Barack Obama and John McCain. The one candidate who represents the
American people, Main Street, if you will, will be on the outside
looking in. So, here's a simple request. Drop your exclusionary
restrictions. And let Ralph Nader into the debates. It will be good for
your conscience. Good for the American people. (I believe it was The
League of Women Voters that called your corporatized debates
"campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity, and honest
answers to tough questions.") And good for democracy. Let the American
people have a real debate for once. Main Street vs. Wall Street. Thank you. Signed your name. Onward to November The Nader TeamThe e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqthe new york timessam dagher
Posted at 10:15 am by thecommonills
Permalink
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
mohammed al dulaimy
the cbs evening news
the new york times
alissa j. rubin
