Tuesday,
November 4, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the illegal war is not
ending anytime soon judging by most signals, Talabani and Barzani
continue to have conflict, the treaty is said to be progressing . . .
to a national referendum (?) and more.
In the US voting takes place today. It does not mean life stops or that the entire world does. Gina Chon (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) writes
of "Samir Ahmed, a government employee, said he had also once assumed a
different U.S. administration would mean a different policy towards
Iraq. The presidential race he was thinking of was between Bill
Clinton and the first George Bush. Mr. Clinton won, but continue a
tough stance against Iraq. Today, he expects that no matter who wins
the current race, American policy toward Iraq will remain the same."
Mariam Toma agrees and tells Chon, "Both of them will not withdraw U.S.
forces. In contrast, maybe the will actually find another reason to
stay even longer in Iraq." Meanwhile Stephen Farrell, Mudhafer al-Husaini and Abeer Mohammed (Baghdad Bureau, New York Times) did a snap-poll,
"an informal snapshot of Iraqis living or working in the Green Zone.
Of 200 Iraqis spoken to after they streamed out of two Green Zone
exists into the 'real' Baghdad on Monday, just over a third of them
wanted the Americans to leave Iraq as soon as possile while just under
half wanted them to stay. The remainder offered options somewhere in
between." These are Green Zoners and they do fear the fall of the Green
Zone and the puppet government. They're protected while, everywhere
else, Iraqis aren't so lucky.
Meanwhile Germany's increasingly pathetic Der Speigel
(which has been justifying and supporting the illegal war for sometime
if you'd bothered to pay attention) runs the craked musings of Peter
Ross Range who just knows Barack will win the presidency and calls
for him to "revise" the 16-month 'plan' for 'withdrawal.' PeePee Ross
Range is a DLC-er (Der Spiegel calls him "moderate") and he cheerleader
the illegal war before it started and justified it for years and
years. As late as July 22, 2005, he was whining that 'liberals' and
'progressives' needed to praise Saddam being disposed and be less
criticisl ("Liberal's War" published in the DLC bible). January 8,
2004, he was writing that the US shouldn't withdraw or even "pull-back"
("Remembering the Middle Class," ibid). October 21, 2005 PeePee was
whining, "Many war opponents, often still traumatized by Vietnam, are
preoccupied with what invading Iraq says about America rather than what
it does for the Iraqis" ("War of Conscience"). Der Spiegel's
become an embarrassment but for those who know PeePee's work, it's
probably worth a chuckle -- September 30, 2002, he was wondering if
Germany was "Anti-American" or "Anti-Bush"? Translation, the two
deserve one another.
Barack's 'plan' for withdrawal? Are we actually back to that lie? Droping back to a Third editorial from June:
Stephen
Sackur: You said that he'll revisit it [the decision to pull troops]
when he goes to the White House. So what the American public thinks is
a commitment to get combat forces out within sixteen months, isn't a
commitment is it?
Samantha Power: You can't make a commitment in
whatever month we're in now, in March of 2008 about what circumstances
are going to be like in January 2009. We can'te ven tell what Bush is
up to in terms of troops pauses and so forth. He will of course not
rely upon some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or as
a US Senator.
When
Power gave that interview, she was still his foreign policy advisor.
And backing up her claims that promises weren't really promises, here's Barack speaking to Candy Crowley June 5th on CNN when asked about his 'promise' to withdraw (combat troops):
Well,
you know, I'd never say there's 'nothing' or 'never' or 'no way' in
which I'd change my mind." Obviously, I'm open to the facts and to
reason. And there's no doubt that we've seen significant improvements
in security on the ground in Iraq. And our troops, and Gen. Petraeus,
deserve enormous credit for that. I have to look at this issue from a
broader perspective, though.
In
April Power tells the BBC that Barack's 'pledges' and 'promises' on
Iraq are non-binding and, if elected, he'll decide what to do then.
June 5th, Barack echoes that to CNN. And Panhandle Media works overtime
to ignore reality. And if you like being played, you'll love what they
have planned.
--- End of excerpt. Get it. No
'plan,' no 'promise.' That's reality. So why is PeePee asking Barack
to rethink a non-pledge? Because PeePee's audience isn't Barack, it's
you. PeePee wants to soften the public up to the idea that Barack in
the White House doesn't have to mean an end to the illegal war. If
elected, Barack can't break what so many wrongly believe was a
'promise' on his own. He needs a lot of liars who can soften up public
opinion.
There's no rush to leave Iraq or
even a desire. That needs to be grasped. Iraqi General Nasier Abadi
made that pretty clear during Sunday's press conference in the Green
Zone. Questioned by the Washington Post's Mary Beth Sheridan
as to when the Iraqis would be able to handle "their own internal
security . . . how many years are you away from reaching that goal,"
Abadi tried to distract by listing duties before declaring, "We have no
duties or missions to protect the air on the borders of the country.
But in case we have this responsibility, there is a brief that -- to
the minister of defense, if he ask us to -- task us with that, a
reportw ent also to the Prime Minister, what are the capabilities and
the army's specifics to do those duties?" Asked how many years again,
he responded, "Building an aerial force, building an Army is not easy,
but it's still easier than building naval and air force. The naval
force, as I said before, that the first ship will come in 2009 and the
fourth will arrive in . . . at the end of 2011. In regard to 200- . .
. Air Force, the first aircraft we will receive in 2011 until 2015.
And that depends on the support and the help that the coalition forces
can secure to Iraq so we can be able to maintain and defend our
airspace and territories. Without that, there will be also agreements
with the neighboring countries on the security of Iraq. But it's
possible that we will go with those missions without having an air
force or naval force because this is a common battle, it's not just an
army's duty." Setting aside the naval force and focusing only on the
air, if the period they'll be taking possession of aircraft will last
from 2011 through 2015, how likely is it that they will be prepared to
handle their own airspaceby the end of 2011?
At
the Pentagon today, spokesperson Bryan Whitman informed reporters that
there was a plan in place for transition from the Bully Boy to the
winner of today's election. A comparison was rightly made between LBJ
and Tricky Dick. Nixon didn't end the illegal war, he only continued
it. Whitman declared, "One of the important components of this is
ensuring that we've identified and highlighted some of the key
department events, actions, milestones that a new administration will
face in its first 90 days."
Turning to the topic of the Status Of Forces Agreement masquerading as a treaty, CNN reports Sami al-Askari (Nouri al-Maliki adviser) states
that the White House "has signaled to Iraqi officials that it is
seriously considering proposed changes to an agreement that would set
the terms for U.S. troops in Iraq". Al Jazeera notes
that al-Askari has no official response from the White House and that
Iraq's Sunni vice president Tareq al-Hashemi is advocating that the
treaty be put up for approval to all Iraqis (not just the Parliament),
"This agreement is an important and sensitive subject . . . Iraqis
should have their say." Khalid al-Ansary, Missy Ryan and Kevin Liffey (Reuters) add
that al-Hashemi is indicateing that the agreement be placed on the
ballot with "provincial elections scheduled to take place by the end of
January." At which point, who would be in Iraq? The United Nations
mandate that governs the occupation expires December 31st at which
point, if no new agreement has been reached, there is no legal
authority for foreign forces to be on Iraqi soil. The White House has
attempted political blackmail insisting that they will cut off this and
that if Baghdad won't sign off on the treaty. Richard Tomkins (UPI) notes,
"Iraq, with no air control capability at present, nonetheless would
have to take over air traffic control and also assume total
responsibility for guarding its borders." Al Bawaba notes
that today's "Baghdad edition of the London-based newspaper Asharq
Al-Awsat said the Americans had agreed to three of the five latest
changes proposed by Iraq. It said, quoting unnamed sources, that
Washington had dropped the clause that authorises Baghdad and
Washington to seek an extension for retaining troops in the cities
beyond 2009 and in the country beyond 2011." Maria Appakova (UPI) explains:
However,
Americans are in no hurry to raise this question at the U.N. Security
Council. Staying in Iraq in accordance with an international mandate
is one thing, but having a strategic partnership treaty and receiving
dividends from it is quite another matter.
Yet
Washington has no choice -- it cannot take offense at Iraqis and pull
out its troops from Iraq. It won't be able to attach the blame for
withdrawal to Russia, since Moscow does not mind Americans continuing
their presence there for a while, and Russia is not in favor of an
upsurge of terror in the region, after all.
[. . .]
[US}
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton stated that he is
"deeply concerned" with what he heard. Skelton is referring to the
agreement's provisions that recently leaked to the press, which
include, for example, the Iraqi government's ability to put American
servicemen and private security companies' personnel on trial for
cirmes they committed while on leave and outside military bases.
It must be said that if this provision really has been included in the draft, it is quite a victory for the Iraqi government.
Meanwhile Gulf Daily News notes
continued conflict between the Baghdad government and the Kurdish one
with the country's President Jalal Talabani stating the US cannot set
up bases anywhere in Iraq "without the approval of the central
government" in Baghdad which was a strong rebuke to KRG president
Massud Barzani who stated last week that, should the US and Baghdad not
sign off on a treaty, the US could just set up bases in the Kurdish
region. The tensions between the Kurdish region and Iraq are never not
on display. Last Wednesday, at the White House, Barzani was being translated when he cut in to correct the translator:
Translator: And in terms of SOFA, we do believe that it is in the interest of the Iraqi government --
Massud Barzani: Iraqi people.
Translator:
-- it's in the interest of this country and we have been and we will
continue to support it and support its ratification.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid (Al Jazeera) notes
that the US popularity in the Kurdish region is sinking (after years of
sucking up) and quotes Barzan Mohamed stating, "America was not honest
with the Kurds. They've let them down in the past and they only follow
their interests. They can leave the Kurds any time and I don't trust
having an alliance with them or even friendship. Yes, they rid us of
dictatorship, but they came here to control the region and the Middle
East." Iran's Press TV states
that Talabani made a point to praise Iran Sunday for their help with
Iraq's security and that Talabani also cited Syria and that, on the
treaty, Talabani "said that Iraq is a unified country and no one has
the right to object the Iraqi government's decision, should it refuse
the security deal. Talabani was referring to a recent interview by
Massud Barzani, the president of the local government of Iraq's
Kurdistan during which he said that the Kurdistan region would provide
the U.S. with military bases if Baghdad refuses to sign the security
deal with Washington."
We've noted
the Iraqi Air Force twice in today's snapshot. 1) It's not due to be
ready until 2015 at the earliest and 2) the US is using the lack of one
to threaten Baghdad into signing off on the treaty. For those not
grasping how "shambles" is too mild a word to be applied to IAF, let's
drop back to October 24th. M-NF trumpeted "Iraqi Air Force celebrates another milestone."
Sounds good, right? Yeah, as long as you don't go beneath the
headline. If you do, you find: "The Iraqi Air Force surpassed another
milestone Oct. 22 when an all-Iraqi flight crew took to the air in the
King Air Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance aircraft for the
first time in support of an Iraqi Special Operations Forces training
exercise." Five years after the start of the illegal war (six this
March) and that's where the IAF is? They've just finished their first
"all-Iraqi flight crew" flight?
Moving on to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad sticky bomb wounded three people (all family members),
another Baghdad sticky bombing reulted 1 person being killed and seven
more wounded, a third Baghdad sticky bombing claimed 1 life and left
five wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing resulted in 4 deaths and eight
people being wounded and another Baghdad bombing claimed 7 lives with
eighteen people wounded. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) updates the seven dead by 4 for eleven and notes that the bomb was "hidden in a car at a bus stop" (wounded rose to twenty-one). Reuters notes
a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left one person
wounded and another Mosul roadside bombing resulted in five people
being injured and a Mosul "suicide car" bombing left four police
officers injured.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
1 Iraqi police officer was shot dead in Baghdad (three more wounded)
and 1 "Lieutenant Colonel working for the ministry of interior affairs"
was shot dead in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 police officers was shot dead in Mosul while 2 civilians were shot dead in different incidents.
Today Michael Birnbaum (Washington Post) reports
that DoD "announced yesterday the death of Pfc. Bradly Shane Colemn of
Mratinsville, VA, who had been serving in Iraq" and whose October 29th
death is under investigation. His death brings the toll to 14 for the month of October.
As Katharine Q. Seelye (New York Times) points out, "The
fact is, there is plent of mystery -- nad there is only one poll that
counts." It is election day and anything can happen. Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) will
live blog the election tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. EST. So check out
her site which will go beyond the D and R to include other letters in
the alphabet. Including "G" (Wilder is a Green.)
Starting with independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader and his running mate Matt Gonzalez. Team Nader notes:
We're having a party!
A Nader/Gonzalez party!
Tonight, we celebrate.
If you are a skeptic, you might be asking -- what, pray tell, are you celebrating?
To which we answer --
The power of the people.
The power of you -- our loyal supporters.
Against all odds -- and in the face of a major media blackout -- together, we have given the American people a choice today.
For the Nader/Gonzalez shift the power agenda.
With eight months of hard work, we have put that agenda on the ballot in 45 states and the District of Columbia.
Ralph has campaigned in all 50 states.
And
together we have organized a network of American citizens to press
onward for single payer health insurance, a living wage, a cut in the
bloated, wasteful military budget, for a reversal of U.S. policy in the Middle East -- everything the Nader/Gonzalez campaign stands for.
So, today, if you haven't already done so, vote with pride for Nader/Gonzalez.
And then, no matter what the outcome tonight, celebrate!
Congratulations!
With the coming disintegration of two party domination of our politics, you have chosen to be on the winning side of history.
So, celebrate tonight!
And while celebrating, follow Ralph's results on the net or television.
(Unfortunately,
most of the major news outlets apparently will not include third party
and independent candidates in their result totals -- but Fox News' map
apparently will (fair and balanced?) -- county by county
and nationwide.
How much money did you raise for your campaign? "Insufficient."
Why do you keep running for president? "Justice."
Will you be elected president? "No."
When do you think you will win? "Sometime."
What should Bush do on his last day in office? "Surrender."
Will Obama be able to provide tax cuts to 95 percent of the population? "Impossible."
What is your opinion of the media? "Servile."
John
McCain is the Republican presidential candidate, Sarah Palin is his
running mate. John and Cindy McCain have four children and Meghan
McCain is the one who blogs online (at McCainBloggette.com and has also written a book for children about her father) and she notes today:
What
a long strange journey it's been. Dad I love you so much and am so
proud to be your daughter every day. If you need to know why you should
vote for Dad, click here.
Thank you to everyone for everything... And yes, we will be posting
about election night. You didn't think I would leave my loyal readers
hanging, did you? Now get out and vote!
After
campaigning coast to coast on Monday, Sarah Palin caught a few winks on
a red-eye flight to her home state, where fresh snow glistened in the
early-morning moonlight as the temperature hovered around 14 degrees.
Palin
voted early this morning inside the tiny City Hall building where just
six years ago she presided as mayor of this once unknown frontier town
outside Anchorage. Proudly donning her "I Voted Today" sticker, the
Alaska governor delivered a short statement to reporters and took a few
questions before she heads to Phoenix to find out whether she'll become
the first female vice president of the United States.
It's
been a whirlwind couple of months for Palin, who has fallen under
perhaps more scrutiny than any vice presidential candidate in the
nation's history. But as usual, she portrayed an almost mystifying
sense of calm, considering all that she has been through in such a
relatively short time.
And Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) notes,
"Green Party Presidential Candidate Cynthia McKinney will be spending
Election Night with California Congressional Candidate and Peace Mom
Cindy Sheehan. There will be live streaming here starting at 8pm."
Iraq? Find the coverage. It's not in the New York Times. Do you see it anywhere? Reuters runs an article
claiming that October had the lowest death toll for US service members.
Oh really? No, they're lying through their teeth. 13 is the death toll
for US service members. 13 was the death toll in July and when you
embarrass yourself by claiming you're referring to X-type of deaths,
you damn well better grasp that some deaths from October are still
under investigation. Translation, you don't know how the service
members died so stick with the data, don't go inventing.
Remember that? It's from Saturday's "Robin Morgan's homophobic candidate"
and we're starting with that because, golly goodness, M-NF sat on a
death. 13 wasn't the lowest (July also had 13) but the number was
actually 14
for the month of October. Why so many enjoy being punked by M-NF month
after month is anyone's guess. Maybe they believe it makes them Charlie
Brown attempting to kick that football? (Though why anyone would want
to be sad sack Charlie Brown . . . ) Staying with the issue of deaths
of service members, this is from Michael Birnbaum's "Va. Soldier's Death Under Investigation" (Washington Post)
The
Defense Department announced yesterday the death of Pfc. Bradley Shane
Coleman of Martinsville, Va., who had been serving in Iraq. Coleman,
24, died Oct. 29 of noncombat injuries, and the death is under
investigation, according to a department news release. He was assigned
to the 51st Transportation Company, based in Mannheim, Germany. Yolanda
Coleman, his stepmother, told the Martinsville Bulletin on Sunday that
he died of a gunshot wound. She declined to be interviewed yesterday.
From
electricity and health care to education and the economy, Iraq has many
needs, and safe drinking water is among the most urgent. "The
water situation in Iraq is a crisis," said Bushra Jabbar al Kinani, an
Iraqi lawmaker and a member of the parliament's services and public
works committee. "We see the consequences in the health of our people,
and they are very bad." Waterborne
diseases such as cholera and typhoid are endemic. A cholera outbreak
this summer sickened hundreds in Baghdad and Babil province. Diarrhea
is among the leading causes of childhood illness and death in Iraq,
according to the Iraqi Red Crescent Organization, a nonprofit aid
agency. "Everywhere there is
not clean water there is disease," said Jalil al Shimari, a doctor with
Baghdad's health directorate. "We see a steady number of people still
getting sick from the water problems."
"There
has been some improvement in recent months, both in terms of security
and essential services. More people now have access to health services
and clean water. But far too many Iraqis still have no choice but to
drink dirty water and live in insalubrious conditions," said Juan-Pedro
Schaerer, the ICRC's head of delegation for Iraq. "This leads to more
sick people seeking treatment in a health-care system already stretched
to the limit."
The ICRC is particularly concerned about people
living in households not connected to a water network (some 40 per cent
of the total, and mainly in the countryside and suburbs). They must
either buy water -- at an average cost of 50 US cents for 10 litres --
or, if they are too poor to do so, collect it from rivers and wells,
which are often polluted. Even households that do have piped water
regularly experience problems owing to a chronic lack of maintenance
and innumerable illegal connections to the network. Furthermore, many
Iraqis have to live with the health hazards of uncollected household
waste and untreated sewage.
As a result, many people contract
water-borne diseases, further straining hospitals and clinics already
struggling with a lack of resources. "My daughter is here because she
drank dirty water," said a mother at Abu Ghraib General Hospital, near
Baghdad. "We have no clean water at home. The only water we get is from
the river."
Medical staff are struggling with chronic shortages
of supplies and equipment. Dilapidated and sometimes outdated medical
facilities lack proper maintenance and sanitation. Electricity
shortages are common and many facilities have to rely on back-up
generators. Many Iraqis simply cannot afford the treatment they need.
Specialized surgery and treatment for diseases such as cancer are often
available only in certain hospitals in the main cities.
Imogen Foulkes (BBC) spoke
with the ICRC's Beatrice Megevand who noted the cholera outbreak (the
now yearly cholera outbreak) and "said she was especially concerned
about the lack of clean water supplies. Ms Megevand Roggo said even the
most basic infrastructure in Iraq is not functioning."
Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing today has claimed at least 13 lives.
A
masked gunman who was waving an American flag on a 101 Freeway overpass
in Santa Barbara was in police custody after an hours-long standoff
that shut down the freeway in both directions and caused a rush-hour
traffic snarl this morning, officials said. Edward
Van Tassel, a 28-year-old Army veteran who served in Iraq, first
surrendered his handgun to police, officials said. As part of the
negotiation, Van Tassel asked authorities for a Barack Obama sign,
which he posted on a chain-link fence on the overpass along with the
flag he was holding, said Sgt. Lorenzo Duarte of the Santa Barbara
Police Department.
Turning to the US presidential
race. It is election day. Finally. As Katharine Q. Seelye notes on the
front page of today's New York Times ["Election Night (Popcorn Included)"], "The fact is, there is plent of mystery -- nad there is only one poll that counts." Anything can happen. Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) will
live blog the election tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. EST. So check out
her site which will go beyond the D and R to include other letters in
the alphabet. Including "G" (Wilder is a Green.) The McKinney -
Clemente website remains down but we will note this from Rosa Clemente's personal website:
We are not the alternative ; we are the imperative.
M1 from dead prez speaks about Cynthia McKinney & Rosa Clemente
Rosa A. Clemente released the following statement:
"I
am honored and excited to accept this invitation to run with Cynthia
McKinney. Cynthia McKinney is a hero to me and many others across this
country and around the world for her courage in standing up to George
Bush while the Democratic Party establishment caved.
"This
campaign is the opportunity the Hip-Hop generation has been working
for. This is our time to address the issues affecting our communities –
rising unemployment, the high cost of food and housing, a lack of
quality public education and access to higher education, the
prison-industrial complex, and unaccountable corporate media. These
issues are not being addressed by either the Republican or Democratic
nominee.
"I choose to do this, not for me, but for my
generation, my community and my daughter. I don't see the Green Party
as an alternative; I see it as an imperative. I trust that my Vice
Presidential run will inspire all people, but especially young people
of color, to recognize that we have more then two choices. Together, we
can build the future we've been dreaming of."
Hip-Hop
artist M1 says, "I've never voted in the Presidential election; I've
never felt strongly enough about a candidate to. Knowing that Rosa
Clemente is down with Cynthia McKinney's run, I feel that now is the
greatest opportunity for the Hip-Hop community to put our collective
strength and power to the test and vote for someone who represents who
we are and what we stand for."
John McCain is the Republican Party presidential candidate, Sarah Palin is his running mate. Vernon notes this from McCain - Palin '08:
McCain-Palin Campaign Launches Honest and Open Election Hotline
ARLINGTON,
VA -- The McCain-Palin campaign launched the Honest and Open Election
hotline to help citizens learn the location of their polling place, as
well as report any instances of irregularities at the polls, including
voter fraud, intimidation, violence and electioneering. The hotline can
be accessed via phone at: 866-976-VOTE.
"With
the tomorrow's election, our Honest and Open Election hotline will
serve as an informative guide for all Americans participating in the
electoral process," said McCain-Palin National Political Director Mike
DuHaime. "The hotline will allow us to learn about and take steps
toward remedying any voter irregularities at polling places across the
country. While we are hopeful that Election Day will be free of any
wrongdoing, allies of the Democrat Party, such as ACORN, have shown a
willingness to commit fraud in both this election cycle and in 2004.
Given the tightness of the polls, all examples of fraud must be
addressed to preserve the integrity of the election."
In
2004, multiple forms of voter fraud occurred, including voter
intimidation, fraudulent registrations, multiple ballots cast and votes
bought for money. Already during the 2008 election cycle, a dead woman
in Missouri cast an absentee ballot, individuals were arrested for
voting twice in Florida and people in Ohio registered and voted on the
same day.
Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. Lewis notes this from Team Nader:
*Election Day - Nader to Hold One-Word Press Conference
Press Release FORIMMEDIATERELEASE Contact: Marc Abizeid, 202-471-5833, marcabizeid@votenader.org
TUESDAY, NOV. 4 - Nader to Hold One-Word Response Press Conference
*NOTECHANGEOFDATE
Special questioning/interview opportunities for members of the foreign media
In
deference to the sound bite journalism that dominates presidential
political media coverage, independent presidential candidate Ralph
Nader will host a press conference at which he will only issue one-word
responses to questions for the first 30 minutes.
Who: Ralph Nader
What:
Special One-hour Press Conference. For the first half of the Press
Conference, Mr. Nader will answer all questions with just a one-word
response. For the second half of the press conference, foreign press
credentialed media will be given priority.
Where: National Press Club, Murrow Room, 13th Floor - National Press Building, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC
The
Iraqi parliament approved legislation Monday that allocates six seats
in provinces to small ethnic and religious communities in the upcoming
provincial elections, but Christians, Yazidis and Shabaks asked for the
law to be overturned on the grounds that they remained underrepresented. A
similar provision guaranteeing minority representation in provincial
councils was taken out of the recent provincial elections law before it
passed. This time, the parliament chose from three proposals and passed
the one that gives religious or ethnic communities the least
representation: one seat for Christians in each of three provinces --
Baghdad, Nineveh and Basra -- and one seat each for Yazidis, Sabeans
and Shabaks in various provinces.
The story many outlets
who make some time to cover Iraq are offering today is the issue of
religious minority representation. The above is from Leila Fadel's "Iraqi minorities 'insulted' by new provincial assemblies law" (McClatchy Newspapers) and it's the place to start since it was among the earliest filed yesterday. Sam Dagher and Mohammed al-Obaidi's "Iraq Attacks Include One on Oil Official" (New York Times) notes that we're speaking of bill and not a law:
In
passing legislation that could stoke further tensions between Iraq’s
fractious ethnic and sectarian groups, Parliament voted to guarantee
minorities significantly fewer seats on provincial councils than had
been recommended by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq. The
bill would give Christians a single seat on councils in Baghdad, Basra
and Nineveh, instead of the three seats in Baghdad, three in Nineveh
and one in Basra that were proposed by the United Nations mission. The
Yazidis, a Kurdish-speaking minority who, like Christians, have been
reeling from attacks and displacement since the start of the war in
2003, would get one seat in Nineveh, instead of the three proposed. Two
other minorities, the Shabaks and the Sabeans, would get one seat
apiece. The new bill is
supposed to be a compromise following the controversy that erupted in
late September when Parliament passed the elections bill but deleted an
article that had provided 13 seats in six provinces for Iraqi
Christians, Yazidis and other minorities. The new bill would grant only
six seats. The United Nations mission had proposed 12.
The
article stripped out of the provincial election law was Article 50.
Parliament removed it, supposedly due to the fact that a census was
never done. Nothing was said by Parliament. Protests began after
Parliament sent it on up the chain. At which point Nouri al-Maliki made
some for-show noises that only demonstrated hos uninformed/ignorant he
remains about the parliamentary process. President Jalal Talabani also
objected to it but that didn't prevent him from approving it as a law.
But
Christian lawmaker Younadam Kanna denounced the vote as an "insult" and
said it showed the "fanaticism and racism" of Arabs fearful of Kurdish
influence. He said Arabs had feared that Christians would ally
themselves with the Kurds and sabotaged this possibility by blocking
the larger quotas. Kurdish
lawmakers said they had opposed the bill because it did not give
Christians more guaranteed seats. "The voting of today showed who is
fighting the Christians and who is supporting them," said Arif Tayfur,
a Kurdish political leader and legislator. The
deal must be approved by the nation's three-person presidency council,
and Kanna said he would demand a veto. Kurds succeeded in putting plans
for provincial elections on hold when President Jalal Talabani vetoed
an election bill that had been passed over Kurdish objections. That
forced a renegotiation of the law and led to the version passed in
September and tweaked in Monday's voting. There
was no indication that the Christians could force another veto,
although their bitter objections raise the specter of heightened
tensions in the north, which is at this point the country's most
violent region. The rest of Iraq has seen a sharp decline in bloodshed
in recent months, but Monday's attacks showed the lingering instability.
Related, France 24 offers a video report on the situation for Iraqi Christians in Baghdad by Lucas Menget and Guillaume Martin.
Republican
John McCain's presidential campaign sued the Virginia election board
Monday, claiming absentee ballots weren't mailed on time to military
members serving overseas. The
complaint asks the U.S. District Court in Richmond to order the state
to count absentee ballots postmarked by Tuesday and received by Nov.
14. It contends that thousands of troops' ballots -- many of which
would go to McCain -- will not be counted. The deadline for ballots to be received is 7 p.m. Election Day, which is Tuesday.
John McCain is the Republican Party's presidential nominee, Sarah Palin is his running mate. Becky notes this from McCain - Palin '08:
The Case for John McCain
The Maverick We Need Now: George Pataki Makes The Case For John McCain By George Pataki New York Daily News November 3, 2008 NY Daily News
Today our country stands at a critical juncture. Our economy is in
turmoil, we have thousands of our brave men and women fighting abroad
and America's confidence has been eroded.
In Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, we have two candidates with very different visions for the future of our nation.
To me the clear choice to guide us through the challenges we face is John McCain.
Over and over again, in times of crisis and on the issues that matter most to Americans, McCain has been there.
It's no secret that our economy today is in trouble.
To recover from this economic crisis we are going to need the right
policies. If Obama is elected the question isn't if he is going to
raise taxes - the question is how much he will raise taxes.
Obama believes in raising taxes so Washington has more of our money to "spread the wealth around."
For John McCain, working hard, paying your own way and keeping your hard earned money is the right policy.
On the front page of today's New York Times
(bottom of the front page) is the news that Governor Palin was cleared
in the firing scandal. William Yardley and Serge F. Kovaleski's "Palin Proper in Firing of Official, Report Says" documents the Alaska Personnel Board's findings.
Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate, Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. Micah notes this from Team Nader:
In case you missed it: The Real VP Debate
Posted by The Nader Team on Monday, November 3, 2008 at 10:30:00 PM
Monday,
November 3, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the treaty is still
iffy, Syria still wants answers, Article 50 comes back . . . maybe, a
Democrat 'explains' Barack's mentor, and more.
Starting with the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement. Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) quotes Iraqi
news editors Ahmed Abdul-Majid ("Out coverage of the U.S. election is
not heavy because we believe that the result of the elections will not
have a direct impact on the future of Iraq") and Adbul-Halim Saleh ("In
the end, strategic policies made in the United States will not
be affected by the changing of the administrations") on the US election
and explains, "The agreement, under negotiation for months, would keep
American troops in Iraq for three more years but give Iraqis a greater
role in deciding U.S. military operations." China's Xinhau notes
al-Sabah (Baghdad newspaper) is reporting three of the five amendments
have been agreed to by DC. Among the rejected are supposedly the issue
of immunity for US troops and among the agreed to changes is that US
forces would leave in 36 months and that the treaty will be called
"agreement on withdrawal of US forces." Indo-Asian News Service adds, "British
Ambassador in Iraq Christopher Prentice told the Kurdish newspaper
al-Taakhi that Britain was keen on reaching an agreement with the Iraqi
government since 'very little time remains until the end of this year'." The United
Nations mandate allowing foreign forces to be on Iraqi soil expires
December 31st. Without something in place, there is no legal
authorization for foreign forces on Iraqi soil. This mandate covers
the occupation, there was no mandate that allowed for the illegal
invasion. The UN Wire notes the Washington Times
story that "American officials are looking to the UN Security Council
to extend the mandate for U.S. troops to remain in Iraq beyond Dec. 31
as direct negotiations with Iraqi officials on a deal remain plagued by
'numerous' differences." At the White House today, spokesperson Dana
Perino addressed the negotiations and talk of seeking an extension on
the UN mandate:
We are working
towards responding to the Iraqis. Our negotiating team, led by
Ambassador Crocker, is finalizing that and we expect to be talking with
the Iraqis over the next week. And I think that their parliament is
back in session starting next Tuesday, so hopefully we'll make some
progress soon. And I think reports about us looking at an alternative
are overwritten. We are focused on getting this agreement done. I
think the Iraqis recognize that it is their interest, and it's
certainly in America's national security interest for us to finalize
it. So we're working through all the requested changes that they had,
and there might be some that we can support, there might be some that
we won't be able to support. I'll just let the negotiators work that
out with them privately.
At the US
State Dept today, spokesperson Robert Wood said of the SOFA, "Nothing
new to report. We're taking a look at the material we got from the
Iraqis last week, and we'll be replying in due course. But I don't
have anything further than that." Iran's Press TV maintains
the treaty allows for attacks on foreign countries: "Under the US
-sought agreement, American military and civilians planes will be able
to use Iraqi airspace without Baghdad's oversight." The treaty faces
more hurdles as a result of the US creating a crisis two Sundays ago by attacking Syria, AP reports
that Walid al-Moualem, Syria's Foreign Minister, has used the word
"painful" to describe the responses from Syria to the US should the
White House and its agencies continue to stonewall regarding the
attack. Iran's Press TV quotes
al-Moualem stating: "Syria may resort to more painful measures if the
United States does not give an official explanation for the attack."
Meanwhile AKI reports
that the US Embassy in Syria reopened yesterday (it was closed Thursday
due to protests and closed Friday as well although the State Dept
maintained that was due to a holiday). The US school has been closed
and Sami Moubayed (Asia Times) explains,
"A belated victim of the United States raid on Syira on October 27 was
the American school in Damascus. The institution has been a
controversial satellite of US interests in Syria since its founding
more than a half-century ago, and it has often been featured as
political football during the two nations' turbulent, often bitter
relationship." In the US, the White House, Defense Dept and State Dept
have refused to speak publicly about the attack -- despite the fact
that the US is supposed to be a democracy with leadership answerable to
the people -- and Phil Sands (UAE's The National) explains that the stonewalling has taken place in Baghdad as well:
US
officials would stand in the safety of the Green Zone and lecture
journalists -- lecture Iraqis -- about all the progress that was being
made even as, out there beyond the concrete barriers, the country
collapsed and descended into a sectarian chaos that has claimed tens of
thousands of lives. Regardless of what was actually said,
however, the Americans were at least willing to stand up and publicly
answer questions. It was something. Last week, however, they finally
made a mockery of even that basic principle.
The
usual press conference was held, as planned, on Wednesday afternoon and
was attended, as always, by the dwindling Baghdad press corps. Brig Gen
David Perkins, the US military spokesman for Iraq, sat down in front of
an American flag and read out a bland statement. It mentioned the
Status of Forces Agreement negotiations, interference by Iran and
progress in training Iraq's security agencies. He failed to address
just one small issue: the cross-border attack into Syria by US forces
that took place on the Sunday before.
Given
that the airborne assault, which left at least eight people dead, was
carried out from Iraqi soil and supposedly targeted an al Qa'eda figure
who was helping launch attacks inside Iraq, you might consider it worth
talking about. In light of the fact that it was technically an act of
war by both the US and Iraq on Syria and made international headlines,
you might imagine something would be said. Instead, there was a
deafening silence.
After reading his
opening statement, Brig Gen Perkins asked if there were any questions.
One of the Iraqi reporters duly asked about the attack on Syria. The
officer's response was brief and to the point: "Umm," he said, "I've
nothing to add on that." A few minutes later, another reporter,
this time an American, asked about the poor quality of water supplies
in Iraq and the US attack on Syria. Brig Gen Perkins entered into a
lengthy treatise on the improving security situation and reconstruction
efforts, before stating: "I have nothing to add on any other
subjects."
In the course of the press
conference, two more reporters asked about the raid inside Syria and
Brig Gen Perkins simply pretended as if the questions had not been
asked. He did not so much as acknowledge them.
The
US Embassy in Syria remains the only US outlet issuing statements. Last
week, it announced the Embassy would be closed due to protests (and
later that day the State Dept refused to confirm that announcment).
Today the Embassy's website
displayed: "Public Announcement, November 3, 2008 In response to the
Syrian government's request, the American Cultural Center is
unavailable to the Syrian public as of October 30, 2008 until further
notice, and classes at the American Language Center have been cancelled
until further notice." Asked about it and if that meant that the
Cultural and Language centers were only closed to Syrians, Robert Wood
declared, "Well, that's right. It is closed to the Syrian public. But
we still -- we have, you know, officers, officials there." Associated
Press' Matthew Lee pursued this.
Matthew
Lee: What if you're not Syrian? What if you're -- if you're not a
Syrian citizen and you happen to be living in Damascus, can you still
go to the American Cultural Center?
Robert A. Wood: Well, if -- it's closed to the general -- the Syrian general public and so --
Matthew
Lee: Yeah, but I -- you know, I'm sorry. When the Syrian government
came to you, they didn't just say to close it to the Syrian public, did
they? They said to close it down.
Robert
A. Wood: Well, it's -- let me just say, Matt, it is closed to the
Syrian general public, as far as I know, to the general public at
large. But our work continues. We have people who are there who work
at the Cultural Center, and they'll continue to do their business. But
it is closed to the public.
Matthew
Lee: So your interpretation of their request is not that they told you
to close the thing down, but rather they just told you to close it to
the public.
Robert A. Wood: THe only thing I can say, Matt, is it is closed to the public.
Meanwhile IranVNC reports
that country's Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, visited Syria
today for a meet up with Bashar al-Assad (Syrian President) and Faroq
al-Shar'a (vice president) during which he declared, "Instead of being
a show of American strength aiming to weaken Syria, this action
demonstrates Washington's own weakness and desperation." Yesterday
Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced:
"Syrian Foreign Minister Waleed Al Moallem, made a phone call with His
Excellency Foreign Hoshyar Zebari on Saturday 1st November, 2008. Both
sides discussed the ways to encircle and contain the repercussions of
U.S. military raid against the Syrian region Albu Kamal. The two sides
stressed their joint keenness to support and strengthen the bilateral
relations between both brotherly countries and peoples and the need to
pass the tension on the relations after the raid. The understanding
between both sides was discussed on the practical measures to correct
the path of Syrian-Iraqi relations and placing those relations in its
proper frame to serve the interests of both brotherly countries."
The
unrest comes at a time when the puppet government tightens the economic
belt (around the neck of the average Iraqi) and when the security
situation grows more iffy internatlly. Yesterday the New York Times finds Suadad al-Salhy and Katherine Zoepf explained
the price of oil per barrel going up and slightly down has Iraq's
concerned about their budget for next year and have cut it by $13
billion dollars. And what do they plan on cutting? It's not detailed;
however, Liz Sly (Chicago Tribune) reported:
"The Iraqi government plans to cut salaries for the estimated 100,000
members of the Awakening movement whose revolt against Al Qaeda in Iraq
played a key role in bringing about the sharp fall in violence in
Iraq. The move is certain to aggravate building tensions between the
Sunni volunteer force and the Shiite-led government, which assumed
responsibility for the Awakening movement from the U.S. military
earlier this month."
Sly notes $300 is how much members were
paid but leaders were paid $400 to $500 a month and that both are being
cut. Gen David Petraeus (now over Centcom but until recently the top US
commander in Iraq) has credited the "Awakening" movement with the fall
in violence as has US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker. October 1st, the
central government in Baghdad took over payment of approximately 50,000
"Awakening"members and one month later (next checks go out November
10th), they can't even maintain the payment level. It's not as if they
didn't know how much the US was spending. So obvioulsy, just as they
never planned to absorb the "Awakening" into police, military and
security forces, they never intended to pay them. Sly notes the hopes
of one "Awakening" who believes the US will pick up the difference.
However, that's not going to be the case according to the article.
That, however, was supposed to be the case when the handover was made.
That was one of the promises the US made to the "Awakenings." Not even
a month later and the handpicked and handtrained "Awakenings" are
seeing the US go back on their word.
Now
might not be the best time for Iraq to monkey around with it's internal
security. Iraqi Christians have been under attack since they protested
the dropping of Article 50 in the provincial elections law. Hurriyet reports:
"Iraq's parliament voted on Monday to guarantee religious minorities
seats on provincial councils to be selected next year, but drew ire
from Iraqi Christians by setting aside fewer spots than a U.N. proposal
had urged." China's Xinhau provides
the breakdown the vote (106 out of 150 MPs voted for it) and notes that
it's six seats: "A seat will give to each Christians and Sabeans in
Baghdad, and a seat for each Christians, Yazidies and Shabak in
Nineveh, and a single seat for Christians in Basra." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
that the religious minorities say the number is too small and quotes
Yonadem Kanna (Assyrian Democratic Movement) stating, "They failed in
the examination of democracy. . . . Getting nothing is better than
this insult." On the topic of Iraq's Christians, CNN reports
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has promised $900,000 (US
equivalent)will be spent in some manner on protecting Iraqi Christians
and that the distribution of the money will be supervised. Saturday in
London, there was a demonstration in support of Iraqi Christians. Independent Catholic News reports protestors
marched to No 10 Downing St on behalf of Iraqi Christians. A petition
was presented and citizens and residents of Great Britain who wish to
sign the petition can click here.
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad bombing not far from Sahib Salman ("under secretary of the
oil ministry") which wounded Salman and "one of his guards," 4 Baghdad
roadside bombings that claimed 6 lives and left twenty-nine people
wounded, 2 Baghdad sticky bombings that wounded five people, 2 Mosul
roadside bombings that claimed 2 lives and left four wounded and a
Baquba roadside bombing that wounded nine people.
Turning to the US presidential election. To The Contrary's Bonnie Erbe (US News & World Reports) notes, "The only prediction I have made, and with which I shall stick, is that Tuesday is going to be a long, long night." Erbe also notes, "If nothing else is obscene about this presidential election (and plenty is IMHO), then the fact that together the candidates will be spending $8 per vote
to win the White House clearly meets and exceeds the obscenity
descriptor." Erbe's referring to the Democratic presidential ticket
and the Republican ticket only. There are other candidates. But
starting with the Republican presidential ticket, John McCain is the
nominee and Sarah Palin is his running mate. Scott Conroy (CBS News) reports
Palin's agenda today was "six cities in five states" and that she flies
late tonight back to Alaska to vote Tuesday morning only to fly to
Phoenix later Tuesday. At the McCain - Palin '08 blog, Matt Lira offers:
This
is a historic election and, because of your activism and support, we
will achieve victory on Election Day. Our campaign has defied
expectations, not because of beltway pundits, but because of people
like you who have always been there when it mattered most.
"America
is worth fighting for" is my favorite line of my father's speech. I
think it is so poignant, and essentially, it captures the reason why I
have always loved, supported and believed in my father. It is why I
believe he would be the best President for our country now, at a point
where we face many challenges abroad and also at home, where so many of
our fellow Americans are going through difficult times. The fact that
our country is and always will be worth for fighting for is the essence
of why I have been so inspired to participate in this campaign, and
throughout this process I have been even more inspired by the people
and the places I have encountered along the way, around our great
country.
We
are truly the luckiest people in the world, and I have been very
fortunate to be a part of this experience on the campaign, and to be
able to share it with so many of you. The next three days will fly by
and no doubt be pretty crazy, so let me just say thanks right now for
getting involved too. This is what was at the heart of what I hoped to
achieve with my blog, and it has gone beyond my expectations. Stay
tuned for more from the trail tomorrow!
John and Cindy McCain issued a statement today:
"We offer our deepest condolences to Barack Obama and his family as
they grieve the loss of their beloved grandmother. Our thoughts and
prayers go out to them as they remember and celebrate the life of
someone who had such a profound impact in their lives." Meanwhile
Brian Montopoli (CBS News) reports that Democratic Party presidential
candidate Barack Obama finally found an 'issue' he could sink his teeth
into: "Having said that, brothers should pull up their pants. You are
walking by your mother, your grandmother, your underwear showing.
What's wrong with that? Come on." Come on, indeed. Barack with an
issue that matters to him and finally a concrete plan for an issue. It
only took until the day before the election for the fashionista and Men's Vogue cover boy to find an issue.
But
the press bias towards Obama doesn't represent a simple revulsion for
the Republican party. It was on display in the Democratic primaries
with the persecution of Hillary Clinton. Worst of all, in the
primaries, the press let the Obama campaign get away with continuous
insinuations below the radar that the Clintons were race-baiters.
Instead of exposing that absurd defamation for what it was - a nasty
smear - the media sedulously propagated it.
Clinton
made the historically correct and uncontroversial remark that civil
rights legislation came about from a fusion of the dreams of Dr Martin
Luther King and the legislative follow-through by President Lyndon
Johnson. The New York Times misrepresented that as a disparagement of
King, twisting her remarks to imply that "a black man needed the help
of a white man to effect change". This was one of a number of
manipulations on race by the Obama campaign, amply documented by the
leading Democratic historian, Princeton's Sean Wilentz. Clinton came
close to tears in a coffee shop in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, which
many thought helped her to win an upset victory there. MSNBC television
gave a platform to the Chicago congressmen, Jesse Jackson Jr, where he
questioned her tears and claimed that she'd not shed any tears for the
black victims of Katrina, and that she'd pay for that in the South
Carolina primary, where 45% of the electorate would be
African-Americans.
In fact, MSNBC ran a
non-stop campaign for Obama propelled by the misogyny of its anchors,
Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and David Shuster. Chelsea Clinton
joining Clinton's campaign prompted Shuster to report she was "pimping"
for her mother.
Meanwhile Democrat Jerry Nadler raised the issue of Jeremiah Wright in Florida. Jake Tapper (ABC News -- link has video) quotes
Nadler stating, "Think of the history here. You have a guy who's
half-white, half-black. He goes to an Ivy League school, comes to
Chicago . . . to start a political career. Doesn't know anybody. Gets
involved with community organizing -- why? Because that's how you form
a base. OK. Joins the largest church in the neighborhood. About
8,000 members. . . . Why did he join the church? . . . Because that's
how you get to know people. Now maybe it takes a couple years [before
Barack's thinking] 'Jesus, the guy's a nut, the guy's a lunatic.' But
you don't walk out of a church with 8,000 members in your district. .
. He didn't have the political courage to make the statement of
walking out."
FORIMMEDIATERELEASE Contact: Marc Abizeid, 202-471-5833, marcabizeid@votenader.org
TUESDAY, NOV. 4 - Nader to Hold One-Word Response Press Conference
*NOTECHANGEOFDATE
Special questioning/interview opportunities for members of the foreign media
In
deference to the sound bite journalism that dominates presidential
political media coverage, independent presidential candidate Ralph
Nader will host a press conference at which he will only issue one-word
responses to questions for the first 30 minutes.
Who: Ralph Nader
What:
Special One-hour Press Conference. For the first half of the Press
Conference, Mr. Nader will answer all questions with just a one-word
response. For the second half of the press conference, foreign press
credentialed media will be given priority.
Where: National Press Club, Murrow Room, 13th Floor - National Press Building, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC
My name is Pat and I am a resident in Nutley, N.J.
Today, I took my ten year old son to the Nutley Public Library, where a
mock election was being held for all elementary school students. Over
the last two weeks, flyers came home with my son's homework about the
event. The flyer promoted the event to kids and told them they could
have their photos taken with their favorite candidate.
My
son, who is aware of my support for Mr. Nader, said me "Dad, I bet they
don't have a picture of Mr. Nader there at the library." I agreed with
him and he deceided he wanted to participate in the mock election on
November first.
We left for the library
with our camera in hope of seeing Mr. Nader. Upon arrival, we were
directed to the Stockton Room, where the election was being held. As we
entered the room, two life sized cardboard cutouts of Sen, Obama and
Sen, McCain were in the center of the room. I laughed to myself when I
saw that Sen. McCain was standing on the left and Sen. Obama on the
right. Mr. Nader's cardboard cutout was nowhere to be found. We were
greeted by two women and a young girl, who were poll workers.
They
greeted us and asked my son his name. They had him sign his name in a
book and proceeded to give him a ballot. This ballot contained only two
names: John McCain and Barack Obama. Again, Mr. Nader's name was not on
the ballot. The children were not even given a place for write in
candidate. After giving my son the ballot , he was directed to one of
three voting booths, where he could make his selection. From behind the
cutrtain my son called to me, "Hey Dad, how do you spell independent."
I told him I-N-D-E-P-E-N-D-E-N-T. He told me he wrote that below the
other choices and placed a large check mark next to the word. He also
wrote down Mr. Nader's name and placed his ballot in a collection box.
Upon
emerging from the voting booth, my son was asked if he would like to
have his picture taken with his candidate. He said he would and he
stood off to the far left away from the two cardboard cutouts, next to
an American flag standing in the corner. As, I flashed the picture, the
two women said, "No, stand next to your candidate and take the picture"
With that my son said, "But my candidate is not here" All we heard from
the women was a puzzled "Oh!!"
Obama's
job is to present a benign, even progressive face that will revive
America's democratic pretensions, internationally and domestically,
while ensuring nothing of substance changes. Among
ordinary Americans desperate for a secure life, his skin colour may
help him regain this unjustified "trust", even though it is of a
similar hue to that of Colin Powell, who lied to the United Nations for
Bush and now endorses Obama. As for the rest of us, is it not time we
opened our eyes and exercised our right not to be lied to, yet again?
And
finally, Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and
Rosa Clemente is her running mate. We'll again note Kimberly and Ian
Wilder's "Vote Green Party On Tuesday!" (On The Wilder Side):
November 1, 2008 This is an exciting time for us! The Green Party has never been as relevant as it is today. As Congress offers trillion-dollar bailouts to Wall Street, people living on Main Street struggle to stay in their homes and pay for basic needs. Why is Congress bailing out corporations while the public slides into economic insecurity? Because the industries that will benefit from the bailout are some of the largest campaign contributors to political campaigns. But never fear because you can VOTE GREEN on Tuesday and choose People Power over corporate power. Support Cynthia McKinney for President and Rosa Clemente for Vice President; and, support other Green candidates running in your community. Greens are running for office across the country for 60 types of office. Check them out! To find out who's running in your community, click here. Once elected, Greens will not betray the public interest for corporate cash. We accept no corporate money because we believe corporate influence is what's wrong with politics. If you believe healthcare is a right for all, not to be governed by the profit motive of insurance companies, support the Green Party and our campaign for Single Payer Healthcare. If you believe offshore drilling furthers our national addiction to fossil fuels;
and want to see positive solutions like renewable energy, local food
production, local businesses and better public transportation- Help elect Greens who will make it a reality. If you believe every vote must be counted, that higher education should be available to everyone, that climate change is real, that the war on drugs is racist, and that the privatization of public goods and services is wrong and that we need to BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW stand up and support the party that will stand up for you The Green Party. If you want to see a clean, healthy future for our children, make sure we have a strong Green Party today
In
the past year, Khudaer Muhammad Abdullah, 49, endured the loss of his
two older sons. On Sunday he lost his last son, and his 4-year-old
daughter is now hospitalized with serious wounds. His last son,
Muhammad Khudaer Muhammad, 7, was killed when part of a
rocket-propelled grenade exploded on a vacant lot where he was playing
soccer with three other children, according to police reports. Muhammad
was killed instantly in the blast. His friend, Ahmed Hamid Jelu, 9,
lost both his legs and died at a hospital shortly afterward. Two other children -- Hassan Dhaya, 7, and Muhammad's sister, Ahlan Khudaer Muhammad -- were seriously wounded.
The above is from Katherine Zoepf and Sam Dagher's "A Decline in Deaths in Iraq Is Not Enough for a Family" (New York Times)
underscoring the realities of "decreased" violence in a country torn by
violence. The provincial elections are hoped to take place in Iraq at
some point near the end of January. Whether the much delayed elections
take place or not, Article 50 has been addressed. Hurriyet reports:
"Iraq's parliament voted on Monday to guarantee religious minorities
seats on provincial councils to be selected next year, but drew ire
from Iraqi Christians by setting aside fewer spots than a U.N. proposal
had urged." China's Xinhau provides
the breakdown the vote (106 out of 150 MPs voted for it) and notes that
it's six seats: "A seat will give to each Christians and Sabeans in
Baghdad, and a seat for each Christians, Yazidies and Shabak in
Nineveh, and a single seat for Christians in Basra." On the topic of
Iraq's Christians, CNN reports
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has promised $900,000 (US
equivalent)will be spent in some manner on protecting Iraqi Christians:
A
committee of Christian leaders and representatives from Talabani's
office will supervise the distribution of the money, the statement said. More
than half of Mosul's Christian population -- an estimated 13,000
people, or 2,300 families -- fled the city last month, though the
departures tapered toward the month's end, Nineveh province's Deputy
Gov. Khasro Goran told CNN on Tuesday.
Independent Catholic News reports
that London saw a demonstration in the form of a Saturday march to No
10 Downing St on behalf of Iraqi Christians. A petition was presented
and citizens and residents of Great Britain who wish to sign the
petition can click here.
Bonnie notes Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Ms. Troll" went up Sunday. And we'll note Investing For The Soul which is investment news with an emphasis on green.
Turning
to the US presidential race. Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party
presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente is her running mate. (No link
to their website because it has been down since Wednesday. It may up
come up before tomorrow but I doubt it.) The Green Party notes:
Greens appeal to progressive, independent, antiwar voters: invest your vote in McKinney & Clemente on Election Day
Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, cell 202-904-7614, mclarty@greens.org Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene@gp.org
Greens
promote ten videos of McKinney speaking on major issues; Green leaders
stress 'Green Imperative' of building a progressive US party
Obama
doesn't represent the views of millions of his own supporters who want
real change in US politics; voters who seek a permanent alternative to
two-party politics should vote for Green McKinney instead of
independent Nader
WASHINGTON, DC -- Green Party leaders are urging progressive,
independent, and antiwar voters to invest their votes in a growing
progressive, antiwar party on Election Day 2008 by voting for the Green
Party presidential ticket: Cynthia McKinney for President, Rosa
Clemente for Vice President.
Greens are making a special appeal to Obama and Nader supporters to
vote for the 'Green Imperative' on November 4. Ms. McKinney is
currently featured in ten online videos in which she details her
positions on major issues, including corporate bailouts, foreign
policy, health care, the rights of Katrina survivors, and the Green
challenge to two-party dominance. Links to the clips are listed below.
"Millions of Americans who favor the Green Party's positions on the
wars, health care, global warming, and other important issues plan to
vote for Barack Obama, who doesn't share their views. It's not enough
just to defeat John McCain and the GOP agenda," said Green vice
presidential candidate Rosa Clemente.
"Democrats have retreated over and over and voted for Bush-Cheney
policies -- war funding, the unconstitutional US Patriotic Act,
telecomm immunity, corporate handouts and taxbreaks, the death penalty,
record incarceration rates, and a $700 billion Wall Street bailout that
doesn't help working Americans. The only way to reverse the dangerous
direction of US politics is to build a real opposition party. Voting
for Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente will strengthen a party that's
dedicated to ecological, antiwar, and truly democratic values and
doesn't take money and orders from corporations," Ms. Clemente added.
Greens stressed that votes for the Green presidential candidates, as
well as for Green candidates for state and local office, will also help
some state Green Parties achieve or keep official party status in their
states. For example, Iowa requires 2% in a presidential race to
maintain a party's ballot line, Arkansas requires 3%, and Minnesota and
Rhode Island each require 5%.
Green Party leaders praised Ralph Nader for his strong political
positions and have argued for his inclusion in the presidential debates
(along with Ms. McKinney and other excluded candidates). But they said
that votes for Mr. Nader would have no effect after Election Day, since
he's running as an independent. Mr. Nader's Green run in 2000 helped
put the Green Party on the political map, but his independent campaigns
in 2004 and 2008 leave no lasting legacy.
"A vote for the McKinney-Clemente ticket is an investment that will
continue to pay off as the Green Party grows and challenges bipartisan
corporate-money politics in the years to come. A vote for an
independent like Ralph Nader is a valid protest vote, but does nothing
to establish a permanent political alternative. The Nader campaign will
be over after Election Day, while the Green Party is a permanent
political fixture with the hope of achieving major party status in the
coming years," said Sanda Everette, co-chair of the Green Party of the
United States.
Now
that the election is approaching, everybody is coming down from the
hype to ask: what will happen after? They are referring, of course, to
how we will pressure whoever becomes president. But the question
becomes relevant in a more disconcerting way when we look at the
advisers backing both candidates, who are—from the looks of
things—going to take us down the same paths as before. If Colin
Powell’s recent endorsement of Obama isn’t enough to convince you of
executive continuity, these articles should shed some light on the
issue. Both are from several months ago, but what they lack in currency
they make up for in clairvoyance: their warnings about the connections
between advisers and abdicating on the issues has proved prescient.
Both invite us to remember that whatever organizing we do after the
elections can be outdone by a few people who have the president’s ear.
Press Release FORIMMEDIATERELEASE Contact: Marc Abizeid, 202-471-5833, marcabizeid@votenader.org
TUESDAY, NOV. 4 - Nader to Hold One-Word Response Press Conference
*NOTECHANGEOFDATE
Special questioning/interview opportunities for members of the foreign media
In
deference to the sound bite journalism that dominates presidential
political media coverage, independent presidential candidate Ralph
Nader will host a press conference at which he will only issue one-word
responses to questions for the first 30 minutes.
Who: Ralph Nader
What:
Special One-hour Press Conference. For the first half of the Press
Conference, Mr. Nader will answer all questions with just a one-word
response. For the second half of the press conference, foreign press
credentialed media will be given priority.
Where: National Press Club, Murrow Room, 13th Floor - National Press Building, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC
The
Nader campaign has a new video. I'm not linking to it (or posting it
here) and the only one bringing it up is a visitor e-mailing the public
account. If it gets the campaign votes or attention, good for them;
however, we have no interest in it and never would. Guts and strength
are not gender based and we've called out that thinking before. In
fact, the only version of that term used here was done byIsaiah in a comic that made fun of the notion and, even then, he used the Spanish term.
"America
is worth fighting for" is my favorite line of my father's speech. I
think it is so poignant, and essentially, it captures the reason why I
have always loved, supported and believed in my father. It is why I
believe he would be the best President for our country now, at a point
where we face many challenges abroad and also at home, where so many of
our fellow Americans are going through difficult times. The fact that
our country is and always will be worth for fighting for is the essence
of why I have been so inspired to participate in this campaign, and
throughout this process I have been even more inspired by the people
and the places I have encountered along the way, around our great
country.
We
are truly the luckiest people in the world, and I have been very
fortunate to be a part of this experience on the campaign, and to be
able to share it with so many of you. The next three days will fly by
and no doubt be pretty crazy, so let me just say thanks right now for
getting involved too. This is what was at the heart of what I hoped to
achieve with my blog, and it has gone beyond my expectations. Stay
tuned for more from the trail tomorrow!
I noted that. I have not endorsed and am not endorsing. (I have stated I'm not voting for McCain or Obama.) The Albuquerque Journal has endorsed and Sofia notes this from McCain - Palin '08:
Weekly
town hall meeting-style debates for the last two months, as proposed by
Sen. John McCain, would have done much to inform the public about the
issues -- and about McCain's long, clear record as a moderate who works
across party lines. Sen. Barack Obama, whose record is very thin,
shrewdly rejected the joint tour that could have given swing voters a
more substantial comparison of the candidates.
The
Republican hasn't fared well in the traditional campaign that ensued,
though voters caught a glimpse of the real McCain when he firmly told a
supporter there was no reason to "fear" his rival, publicly squelching
the notion that Obama is anything other than a patriotic American who
has run a masterful campaign.
We
encourage those who are still uncommitted and those who vote on the
basis of a candidate's qualifications instead of party label to give
McCain's experience a closer look and to consider the consequences of
concentrating too much political and economic power in the hands of one
party.
11/3/2008 10:45:00 AM - Moon Township , PA Road to Victory Rally in Moon Township, PA Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Moon Township, PA on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 10:45 a.m.
11/3/2008 12:00:00 PM - Dubuque , IA Road to Victory Rally in Dubuque, IA Please join Governor Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally in Dubuque, IA on Monday November 3rd.
11/3/2008 1:00:00 PM - Indianapolis , IN Road to Victory Rally in Indianapolis, IN Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Indianapolis, IN on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 1:00 p.m.
11/3/2008 3:00:00 PM - Roswell , NM Road to Victory Rally in Roswell, NM Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Roswell, NM on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 3:00 p.m.
11/3/2008 3:30:00 PM - Colorado Springs , CO Road to Victory Rally in Colorado Springs, CO Please
join Governor Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally in Colorado
Springs, CO on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 3:30 p.m.
11/3/2008 4:00:00 PM - Henderson , NV Road to Victory Rally in Henderson, NV Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Henderson, NV on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 4:00 p.m.
11/3/2008 5:30:00 PM - Reno , NV Road to Victory Rally in Reno, NV Please join Governor Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally in Reno, NV on Monday November 3rd.
11/3/2008 8:30:00 PM - Elko, NV Road to Victory Rally in Elko, NV Please join Govenor Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally on Monday November 3rd in Elko, NV.
11/3/2008 9:00:00 PM - Prescott , AZ Midnight Road to Victory Rally in Prescott, AZ Please
join Senator John McCain & Cindy McCain for a Midnight Road to
Victory Rally in Prescott, AZ on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at
9:00 p.m.
11/4/2008 8:30:00 AM - Grand Junction , CO Election Day Road to Victory Rally in Grand Junction, CO Please
join Senator John McCain for an Election Day Road to Victory Rally in
Grand Junction, CO on Tuesday November 4th. Doors open at 8:30 a.m.
A visitor wanted a highlight. We'll gladly note it and thank you to ____ for sending it. This is from William H. Willimon's "Electing Not to Vote: Christian Reflections on Reasons for Not Voting" (The Christian Century): If
there is one idea that unites Jim Wallis and Pat Robertson, it is the
idea that voting is a good idea. American Christians of both the right
and the left have been so thoroughly indoctrinated into thinking that
democracy is an unarguable good and that voting is the price we pay for
the privilege of life in a constitutional democracy that there's nobody
left among us to question the practice. Voting has been inflated from a
democratic right to a Christian responsibility, and we have been so
accustomed to thinking positively about voting that it's difficult for
us to think like Christians. Here is a wonderful little book that
answers a big question that most of us American Christians have lost
the theological resources even to ask: Why vote? Each of these nine
essays defends Christian refusal to vote—"conscientious
abstention"—with a variety of reasons, all of which (with the possible
exception of those offered by a Catholic author) seem indebted to the
ecclesiology of John Howard Yoder. American Christians have succumbed
to a state-as-savior mentality in which voting has assumed
religious-like trappings. Registering, showing up on the appointed day,
entering the curtained booth and secretly voting has become an
unquestioned, sacred "confession of faith," says Andy Alexis-Baker;
it's the little pinch of incense we offer to Caesar. All of the essays
argue that though voting doesn't make much difference one way or the
other, Christians ought to take care in their worship because the pinch
of incense may not be inconsequential.
I haven't read the
book but it's a point worth noting: You have the right not to vote.
We've noted that many times but we'll note it again. This is a
democracy and your vote is your business and no one else's. That
includes who you vote for, who you don't vote for or whether you vote
at all. You should vote (or not vote) as is comfortable and feels right
to you. Non-voters are stereotyped as lazy, ignorant and apathetic.
Some may be. Some are making a decision and doing so for various
reasons. They owe no explanations. Your vote is your vote. Use it as
wisely -- by your definition of wisely.
And we'll go out with
this from independent journalist John Pilger -- one of the few who can
make that claim and one of the few who can hold their head high. For
those who've forgotten how embarrassing Panhandle Media has been in
2008, flash back on Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Wheel of Greed"
Pilger never sold out and this is from his "The Diplomacy Of Lying" (Information Clearing House):
The
beatification of President Barack Obama is already under way; for it is
he who "challenges America to rise up [and] summon 'the better angels
of our nature'", says Rolling Stone magazine, reminiscent of the mating
calls of Guardian writers to the "mystical" Blair. As ever, the Orwell
Inversion Test is necessary. Obama claims that his vast campaign wealth
comes from small individual donors, yet he has also received funds from
some of the most notorious looters on Wall Street. Moreover, the "dove"
and "candidate of change" has voted repeatedly to fund George W Bush's
rapacious wars, and now demands more war in Afghanistan while he
threatens to bomb Pakistan. Dismissing
the popular democracies in Latin America as a "vacuum" to be filled by
the United States, he has endorsed Colombia's "right to strike
terrorists who seek safe havens across its borders". Translated, this
means the "right" of the criminal regime in that country to invade its
neighbours, notably uppity Venezuela, on Washington's behalf. The
British human rights group Justice for Colombia has just published a
study concerning Anglo-American backing for the Colombian regime of
Álvaro Uribe, which is responsible for more than 90 per cent of all
cases of torture. The principal torturers, the "security forces", are
trained by the Americans and the British. The Foreign Office replies
that it is "improving the human rights record of the military and
combating drug trafficking". The study finds not a shred of evidence to
support this. Colombian officers with barbaric records, such as those
implicated in the murder of a trade union leader, are welcomed to
Britain for "seminars". As
in many parts of the world, the British role is that of subcontractor
to Washington. The bloody "Plan Colombia" was the design of Bill
Clinton, the last Democratic president and inspiration for Blair's and
Brown's new Labour. Clinton's administration was at least as violent as
Bush's – see Unicef's report that 500,000 Iraqi children died as a
result of the Anglo-American blockade in the 1990s. The
lesson learned is that no presidential candidate, least of all a
Democrat awash with money from America's "banksters", as Franklin
Roosevelt called them, can or will challenge a militarised system that
controls and rewards him. Obama's job is to present a benign, even
progressive face that will revive America's democratic pretensions,
internationally and domestically, while ensuring nothing of substance
changes. Among ordinary
Americans desperate for a secure life, his skin colour may help him
regain this unjustified "trust", even though it is of a similar hue to
that of Colin Powell, who lied to the United Nations for Bush and now
endorses Obama. As for the rest of us, is it not time we opened our
eyes and exercised our right not to be lied to, yet again?
"Our
coverage of the U.S. election is not heavy because we believe that the
result of the elections will not have a direct impact on the future of
Iraq," said Ahmed Abdul-Majid, chief editor of Azzaman, a major Baghdad
newspaper. "There is no difference between McCain and, Obama because
both of them will follow the strategic policies drawn up by
decision-making circles," he said. Abdul-Halim Saleh, senior editor
at the government-owned newspaper Al-Sabah, offered a similar view: "In
the end, strategic policies made in the United States will not be
affected by the changing of the administrations." The idea that
institutions and not presidents determine U.S. policy helps explain why
the security agreement commands so much attention. The agreement, under
negotiation for months, would keep American troops in Iraq for three
more years but give Iraqis a greater role in deciding U.S. military
operations.
The above is from Sameer N. Yacoub's "Iraqis keep an eye on US vote, but security pact has full attention" (AP) and on the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement, China's Xinhau notes
al-Sabah (Baghdad newspaper) is reporting three of the five amendments
have been agreed to by DC. Among the rejected are supposedly the issue
of immunity for US troops and among the agreed to changes is that US
forces would leave in 36 months and that the treaty will be called
"agreement on withdrawal of US forces."
Moving from the treaty to the continuing crisis created by the White House when it decided to attack Syria two Sundays ago, AP reports
that Walid al-Moualem, Syria's Foreign Minister, has used the word
"painful" to describe the responses from Syria to the US should the
White House and its agencies continue to stonewall regarding the
attack. Meanwhile AKI reports
that the US Embassy in Syria reopened yesterday (it was closed Thursday
due to protests and closed Friday as well although the State Dept
maintained that was due to a holiday). The US school has been closed
and Sami Moubayed's "American dream expelled from Syria" (Asia Times) addresses that:
A
belated victim of the United States raid into Syria on October 27 was
the American school in Damascus. The institution has been a
controversial satellite of US interests in Syria since its founding
more than a half-century ago, and it has often been featured as
political football during the two nations' turbulent, often bitter
relationship. The American school in Damascus, known as the Damascus
Community School (DCS), was one among many US academic institutes that
started appearing in the Middle East in the mid-20th century. Unlike
the American University of Beirut (AUB), a missionary school, or the
American College in Aleppo, northern Syria, DCS was part of American
initiative fostered by then-US secretary of state John Foster Dulles
during the Cold War in 1956. There was no US ambassador in Syria at
the time of its founding - as is the case today - and relations were
tense. The White House, under president Dwight D Eisenhower, had
accused the Syrian government of transforming Syria into a Soviet
satellite. Yet a key architect of the school's opening was Syria's
ex-foreign minister Salah al-Din al-Bitar, ironically also one of the
two founders of the Baath Party.
Bonnie notes that Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Ms. Troll"
went up last night. Turning to the US presidential election, Ralph
Nader is in the independent presidential candidate and Matt Gonzalez is
his running mate. Sarita notes this from Team Nader:
Breaking Point: The Real McCoy
Posted by Loralynne Krobetzky on Sunday, November 2, 2008 at 08:51:00 PM
I’m
39 years old; I have never voted in my life. There are many reasons as
to why, none of which I will bore you with. I saw Mr. Nader on C-Span
the other day, he will get my first vote as an American citizen. That
is all.
—Todd
Mr. Nader, Congratulations
for standing up and supporting the American Taxpayer for all these
years. As a registered(conservative)Democrat for 38 years, I have
decided to change my party affiliation to Independent. I certainly
admire your tenacity and want thank you on behalf of all Americans that
have come to understand often, as a result of your irrepressible
energies that the current two party system has become untenable and
that it is crucial for our country to have a viable third party choice. Stay well. Sincerely,
—Jonathan Galin Anchorage, Alaska
I just saw you (Ralph Nader) on CNN
which prompted me to visit your website. As I read through your stance
on the issues I realized you stand for everything I do. Prior to today
I was going to vote for Obama. Not anymore.
Ralph Nader has my vote now.
Thank you for explaining your agenda in a clear, concise manner. This is the kind of straight talk and ACTION that will make America great once again, and restore our good reputation in the world.
Thank you!
—Joel Nethery Redding, CA
Dear Mr. Nader, On
October 21st, I attended your Seattle rally along with my husband and
brother. Two days have passed since then and I just wanted to say that
your words are still buzzing in our house! My husband, who was until
then an Obama supporter, has been watching your videos on youtube
non-stop, and has also starting reading your books that I’ve had on my
shelf for years! I am proud to say that you have our whole family
hooked now! My husband and I have been very moved by your message and
will pledge our support to you as long as you are running. Never again
will we vote for the "least worst". Our first child is due in the next
three weeks, and we hope that someday he will get to see a president
like you or Mr. Gonzalez in office. Please know that our hearts are
with you, our votes have been cast to you, and our lives have been so
inspired by your cause. Much luck to you and your running mate! Be well,
—Jamie Kostek
Photo above provided by a supporter.
If you haven’t reached your breaking point, visit www.breakingpoint08.com. Send me your Breaking Point story to share at loralynne@votenader.org, so the growing numbers of independent voters can join our voices, and together, we can change the system.
Loralynne Krobetzky Communications Director Nader for President 2008
John
McCain is the Republican presidential nominee and Sarah Palin is his
running mate. The campaign picked up another endorsement and Robertnoted this:
This
presidential election comes down, as they often do, to trust. We must
trust the person's competence, courage and ability to defend us from
our enemies and to fight for the best economic conditions possible.
In
both areas, John McCain stands head and shoulders above his rival.
McCain has been tested as few men ever have, and he has never been
found wanting. Barack Obama has no experience -- none. He may be the
most unprepared major-party candidate ever. His own vice presidential
pick says our enemies will test him quickly and severely. There is no
good reason to take that chance.
Cynthia McKinney is the
Green Party presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente is her running
mate. We'll again note Kimberly and Ian Wilder's "Vote Green Party On Tuesday!" (On The Wilder Side):
November 1, 2008 This is an exciting time for us! The Green Party has never been as relevant as it is today. As Congress offers trillion-dollar bailouts to Wall Street, people living on Main Street struggle to stay in their homes and pay for basic needs. Why is Congress bailing out corporations while the public slides into economic insecurity? Because the industries that will benefit from the bailout are some of the largest campaign contributors to political campaigns. But never fear because you can VOTE GREEN on Tuesday and choose People Power over corporate power. Support Cynthia McKinney for President and Rosa Clemente for Vice President; and, support other Green candidates running in your community. Greens are running for office across the country for 60 types of office. Check them out! To find out who’s running in your community, click here. Once elected, Greens will not betray the public interest for corporate cash. We accept no corporate money because we believe corporate influence is what’s wrong with politics. If you believe healthcare is a right for all, not to be governed by the profit motive of insurance companies, support the Green Party and our campaign for Single Payer Healthcare. If you believe offshore drilling furthers our national addiction to fossil fuels;
and want to see positive solutions like renewable energy, local food
production, local businesses and better public transportation- Help elect Greens who will make it a reality. If you believe every vote must be counted, that higher education should be available to everyone, that climate change is real, that the war on drugs is racist, and that the privatization of public goods and services is wrong and that we need to BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW stand up and support the party that will stand up for you The Green Party. If you want to see a clean, healthy future for our children, make sure we have a strong Green Party today
Today's New York Times finds Suadad al-Salhy and Katherine Zoepf offering "Iraq and U.S. Confer on Iraqi Economy." With the price of oil per barrel going up and slightly down, Iraq's concerned about their budget for next year and have cut it by $13 billion dollars. And what do they plan on cutting? It's not detailed; however, Liz Sly (Chicago Tribune) reports:
The Iraqi government plans to cut salaries for the estimated 100,000 members of the Awakening movement whose revolt against Al Qaeda in Iraq played a key role in bringing about the sharp fall in violence in Iraq. The move is certain to aggravate building tensions between the Sunni volunteer force and the Shiite-led government, which assumed responsibility for the Awakening movement from the U.S. military earlier this month.
Sly notes $300 is how much members were paid but leaders were paid $400 to $500 a month and that both are being cut. Gen David Petraeus (now over Centcom but until recently the top US commander in Iraq) has credited the "Awakening" movement with the fall in violence as has US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker. October 1st, the central government in Baghdad took over payment of approximately 50,000 "Awakening"members and one month later (next checks go out November 10th), they can't even maintain the payment level. It's not as if they didn't know how much the US was spending. So obvioulsy, just as they never planned to absorb the "Awakening" into police, military and security forces, they never intended to pay them. Sly notes the hopes of one "Awakening" who believes the US will pick up the difference. However, that's not going to be the case according to the article. That, however, was supposed to be the case when the handover was made. That was one of the promises the US made to the "Awakenings."
When people find their pay cut, are they going to say, "Great!"? Are they going to go on strike? Will the "Awakenings" again take up arms against the puppet government and the US?
They're just there to try and make the people free, But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me. Just more blood-letting and misery and tears That this poor country's known for the last twenty years, And the war drags on. -- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)
Last Sunday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4,188. And tonight? 4189 is ICCC's count. Just Foreign Policy's counter estimates the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the illegal war to be 1,284,105 finally up from 1,273,378 where it remained without updating week after week.
Turning to some of the reported violence today . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 Baghdad roadside bombings which resulted in 1 police officer being killed and seven people being wounded and a Diyala Province roadside bombing targeting an "Awakening" Council leader that resulted in his death along with 2 women and 3 childrenm a Hawija roadside bombing that wounded three people. Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Diyala Province home invasion (by unknown persons "wearing the Iraqi army uniform") that resulted in 3 deaths (a woman and 2 daughters) and two more people being wounded (two of the women's other daughters), a Kirkuk sticky bombing that wounded one person and another Kirkuk bombing that claimed the lives of 2 children and left two more wounded. Reuters notes 1 person shot dead in Mosul.
Kidnappings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Iraqi army uniforms were also worn by the persons who "kidnapped three Kurdish truck drivers" outside of Kirkuk, no word on what the kidnappers of a 14-year-old girl were wearing (she was also kidnapped outside Kirkuk).
Turning to the US presidential race. Becky, Vernon, Robert, Sofia and Stuart note a number of things for the John McCain - Sarah Palin campaign. McCain is the Republican Party's presidential nominee and Palin is his running mate.
With so much to offer, we'll note the links above and note this one in full:
What They're Saying On Barack Obama's Attack on Agriculture "This incident reveals a true anti-farming slant to the Obama campaign" Gov. Tim Pawlenty on ABC's Good Morning America: Obama Not Offering "Positive Vision" for Iowa Farmers. BILL WEIR: "People want to follow hopeful, optimistic, civil, decent leaders. Are those qualities what has him so far ahead in the polls, do you think? And how would you relate those qualities to the McCain campaign?" GOV. TIM PAWLENTY: "Well, I think whether its Barack Obama or anyone else, people want to see a hopeful, positive vision for the future of the country, but that's not what Barack Obama's been offering. For example, here in Iowa, he said recently to Joel Klein of Time magazine, that agriculture is to blame for the nation's health problems partly, including diabetes and heart disease and others. You can imagine what Iowa farmers are going to think of that." WEIR: "Well, I think he was talking about corn syrup in soda and fast food. That's a little bit out of context. I won't ask --" GOV. PAWLENTY: "But Bill, farmers don't grow soda, they grow corn." (ABC's "Good Morning America," 11/1/08) Commentary Magazine's Jennifer Rubin: Obama's Rural "Condescension" Slips Out. "In loose moments, Obama's lack of understanding of and condescension toward rural and small-town America always slips out. And really, is his point that if farmers grew less food, Americans would be thinner? The mind reels." (Jennifer Rubin, "Obama to Farmers: Stop Growing Food," Commentary Magazine Contentions blog," http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/40941, 11/1/08) Bemidji (MN) Pioneer: Sen. Grassley: "It Is Ludicrous to Blame Farmers for Obesity." "'It is ludicrous to blame farmers for obesity and pollution,' Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, told reporters during a Friday conference call. 'I think he really doesn't understand agriculture.'" (Don Davis and Scott Wente, "CAMPAIGN NOTEBOOK: Obama comments upset GOP farmers," Bemidji Pioneer, 11/1/08) St. Paul Pioneer Press: Sen. Grassley: Obama "Doesn't Have a Very Good Foundation." "In a conference call arranged by the McCain campaign, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, called it 'ludicrous to blame farmers for obesity and pollution.' Said Grassley: 'It shows that Sen. Obama doesn't have a very good foundation in American agriculture.'" (Tom Webb, "McCain faults Obama's comments on farming," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 11/1/08) St. Paul Pioneer Press: Sen. Grassley: Obama Gets Ag Ideas From "Professor At Cal-Berkeley." "(P)eople in agriculture need to know that if Sen. Obama is going to get his ideas on agriculture from a professor at Cal-Berkeley, they should think twice about what they are voting for." (Tom Webb, "McCain faults Obama's comments on farming," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 11/1/08)Des Moines Register: Farmer Ron Litterer: "No Question About" Obama' s Conflicting Message to Farmers. "But Ron Litterer, a Greene farmer who is chairman of the National Corn Growers Association, said Obama's comments in the Time interview were 'in conflict with what he's been saying about agriculture, no question about it.'" (Philip Brasher, "Obama links health issues to farming, then backs off," Des Moines Register, 10/31/08) Hoosier Ag Today's Gary Truitt: Obama's "True Anti-Farming Slant." "In my view this incident reveals a true anti-farming slant to the Obama campaign and demonstrates a fundamental lack of support for farmers." (Gary Truitt, "Obama, Open Mouth-Insert Foot," HAT CHAT, the official blog of Hoosier Ag Today, http://hatchat.net/, 10/31/08) · Truitt: "Major Blunder" "Obama, however, has made a major blunder by quoting (Michael) Pollan, an outspoken critic of agriculture and an environmental radical." (Gary Truitt, "Obama, Open Mouth-Insert Foot," HAT CHAT, the official blog of Hoosier Ag Today, http://hatchat.net/, 10/31/08) · Truitt: "Unlike Obama, McCain Stuck to His Position" "Early in the campaign John McCain was criticized by the ag community, and this blog, for his comments on the ethanol subsidy. Unlike Obama, McCain stuck to his position and explained he was against all subsidies and had nothing against ethanol." (Gary Truitt, "Obama, Open Mouth-Insert Foot," HAT CHAT, the official blog of Hoosier Ag Today, http://hatchat.net/, 10/31/08) ###
Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. Brenda notes this from Team Nader:
He Can't Win Posted by The Nader Team on Sunday, November 2, 2008 at 04:25:00 PM ShareThis "He Can’t Win" The biggest threat to our democracy and our way of life today are those three words. Bigger than terrorism? Bigger than losing our homes, our jobs, our healthcare, our education? Yes, for the very simple reason that once we believe these three words we will refuse to even consider, let alone support, the candidates for office that may well have, not simply the best, but perhaps the only, solutions to all of these threats. I wish I had a nickel for every time I have heard someone who, after having heard so called "minor” candidates said, "Yes I agree with this person, I would like to vote for him, but I won’t because HE CAN’T WIN”. But I don’t have those nickels and neither do they or they would be able to buy all the "air time” they needed so that no one could say the other thing I hear so often, "Who’s he, I never heard of him?” And they don’t have those nickels for the simple reason that the people like you and me that these candidates represent are running out of them and have to spend them on other things like food, clothing, housing, education and healthcare. I have been around long enough to have seen how far down both "major” parties have brought us, and, although I am a "registered” member of one of them, try as I might I cannot believe in their candidates anymore. This country was founded on principles not parties, on ideas not ideology. When the parties have abandoned their principles and their ideology trumps our ideas, in short, when they have abandoned us, it’s time to abandon them. There was a time the ‘law of nature” was perverted in order to physically subjugate one group of human beings to another based on the color of one’s skin. Now it is the "law of markets’ that is being perverted to financially subjugate an even bigger group of all colors to another much smaller one based on the size of one’s purse. But the end result of both perversions is the very real loss not only of freedom but of the ability to make our and our children’s lives better. And the way this travesty is being foisted upon us is very simple – just convince folks that "there is no alternative” and that anyone who suggests there is "can’t win”. Astonishing, isn’t it, that such a simple idea can be so destructive. Amazing that we can be so easily convinced to not "spoil” the chances of either of the "major” parties that have both done so much in the last few decades to spoil OUR chances for a better life. Have our ideals become so shriveled that we use the ballot box, won for us by the blood, sweat and tears of so many, to vote, not for what we need and aspire to, but only for the table scraps the media tells us is the most we can hope for, or just to "beat the other guy”. 150 years ago we had to fight an actual war to free victims of that first perversion. This time we don’t have to use guns, we CAN use the ballot box to reclaim that heritage and defy the establishment once again to free ourselves from that second perversion, but only if we truly understand that we can. It is time, past time, for us to do so. If we do not believe in the power of the ballot to achieve a revolution, then what is democracy for? And to remind yourself to "never doubt that a….group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world…”, every time you hear or are tempted to think those three words of mass destruction, silently say a prayer of thanks for those men and women of the Revolution who refused to say, "I like Washington’s ideas, he’s right, but I won’t support him because HE CAN’T WIN.” (I apologize if this is not so very eloquent; I am not a professional writer. But I wrote it because I believe it and I would post it on every tree I could find (instead of at your door), but there aren’t so many of those anymore, either….) --Sue Hammond
The relative calm that has descended on Baghdad over the past year has helped keep Iraq mostly off center stage as an issue in the U.S. presidential race. But the violence is still at a level that would be intolerable in any other society. Take the sniper of Mansour, who has killed at least six Iraqi soldiers in recent weeks in this upscale neighborhood, shooting from a distance across crowded shopping streets and a busy traffic circle. The U.S. military says the sniper is operating as part of a sophisticated, highly trained team affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq, the down-but-not-yet-out terrorist group that stubbornly persists in its efforts to stage a comeback.
The above is from Liz Sly's "Iraq smolders even as it cools as voter issue" (Chicago Tribune) and Iraq fell off the radar sometime ago. Those who think they can pick it up after the election (I'm not speaking of the MSM) and be listened to have kidded themselves. They have no credibility. Maybe they can write another Hurricane Katrina column? Or maybe a "War coming on Iran!" feature? In Iraq, Corinne Reilly (McClatchy Newspapers) reports on Sumer FM, an Iraqi radio station which went on air in November 2004. In terms of violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Barsa bombing (landmine) that claimed the life of 1 boy and left another wounded, and a Mosul roadside bombing that wounded two police officer while a Mosul car bombing wounded two more police officers and an Al Anbar Province bombing wounded two Iraqi soldiers.
Matt Gonzalez on NPR's Latino USA Posted by The Nader Team on Saturday, November 1, 2008 at 03:37:00 PM ShareThis Listen to our Vice Presidential Candidate, Matt Gonzalez, on National Public Radio’s program, Latino USA, in a conversation with host Maria Hinojosa: [here]
Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate, Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. John McCain is the GOP presidential candidate and Sarah Palin is his running mate. Becky notes this from McCain - Palin :
JUST WORDS: Barack Obama And Business Taxes ARLINGTON, VA -- This afternoon, Barack Obama told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that there was an argument for cutting business tax rates -- despite attacking the very same tax cuts earlier today. Once again, the American people are left with a tax plan that changes by the day and is little more than just words. Check out the facts below: "By Barack Obama's own measure, Obama now supports billions in 'tax cuts for big oil companies' and corporations that are sending American jobs overseas. The truth: Barack Obama has a difficult time coming to terms with the devastating effects of his own economic plan, is learning as he goes and just isn't ready yet." -- Tucker Bounds, McCain-Palin 2008 spokesman Today, Barack Obama Remained Open To Cutting The Business Tax RateBarack Obama: "And, In Fact, You Can Make An Argument For Lowering The Corporate Tax Rate." CNN'S WOLF BLITZER: "At a time of economic distress, is it wise to increase the corporate tax rate?" OBAMA: "We're not increasing the corporate tax rate." BLITZER: "I know, but there's some talk that you want to increase it, it's 35% right now. you talked about --" OBAMA: "Where is that talk coming from?" BLITZER: "I don't know, you tell me. You want to keep it at 35%?" OBAMA: "I have no plans for increasing the corporate tax rate. And, in fact, you can make an argument for lowering the corporate tax rate, but only if you, at the same time, close all the corporate loopholes. The problem we have right now, on paper we've got a high corporate tax rate; in actual terms, corporations aren't paying their fair share." (CNN's "Situation Roo m," 10/31/08) Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehT82CXU3Bw
But Even Today, Barack Obama Decried These Very Same Business Tax Cuts Just Today, Barack Obama Decried Giving Tax Cuts To American Businesses. OBAMA: "At a moment like this, the last thing we can afford is four more years of the tired, old theory that says we should give more to billionaires and big corporations and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else." (Barack Obama, Remarks, Des Moines, IA, 10/31/08) Barack Obama: "It's Not Change When He Wants To Give $200 Billion To The Biggest Corporations Or $4 Billion To The Oil Companies." (CNN's "American Morning," 10/29/08) Barack Obama Criticized John McCain For Proposing "Another Huge And Permanent Corporate Tax Cut." OBAMA: "Senator McCain used the crisis as an excuse to push a so-called stimulus plan that offered another huge and permanent corporate tax cut, including $4 billion to the big oil companies, but no immediate help for workers." (MSNBC's "Countdown," 9/16/08) In Addition To Changing His Position On Business Tax Cuts, The Obama-Biden Campaign Has Changed Their Tax Plan Numerous Times In The Past Week CHANGE #1 ($250,000): In July 2008, Barack Obama Said: "If You Make $250,000 A Year Or Less, We Will Not Raise Your Taxes. We Will Cut Your Taxes." (Barack Obama, Remarks, Powder Springs, GA, 7/8/08) CHANGE #2 ($200,000): In New Obama Ad "Defining Moment" The Threshold For The Obama Tax Plan For Families Seeing A Tax Cut Is Lowered From $250,000 To $200,000. OBAMA AD: "The Obama Plan: Families Making Less Than $200,000 Get Tax Cut." (Obama Ad, "Defining Moment," 10/25/08) CHANGE #3: In An Interview With A Scranton, PA, News Station, Joe Biden Said That Only Families Making Under $150,000 Would Get A Tax Cut. BIDEN: "Spreading the wealth was not--he was talking about is all of the tax breaks have gone to the very, very wealthy. For example you have right now, this year, under the old tax policy that was just -- that was put in by George Bush, people making an average 1.4 million a year, good people, decent people, patriotic -- they're going to get an $87 billion tax break. What we're saying is that $87 billion tax break doesn't need to go to people making an average of 1.4 million, it should go like it used to. It should go to middle class people -- people making under $150,000 a year." (Joe Biden, Interview With WNEP Scranton, 10/27/08) Watch it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAEE1_IUycs
CHANGE #4: Obama-Biden Campaign Aides Said That Those Making Between $150,000 And $250,000 Will Actually Not See A Tax Increase Or A Tax Cut. "Biden aides say his comments were actually consistent with Obama's tax plan -- people under $150,000 get a cut, and people making up to $250,000 stay the same." (Mark Murray and Mike Memoli, "$150,000 Vs. $250,000," MSNBC's "First Read" Blog, http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com, Posted 10/28/08) CHANGE #5: Obama Surrogate Governor Richardson Said Only Those Making Less Than $120,000 Would Get A Tax Cut. GOVERNOR RICHARDSON: "What Obama wants to do is he is basically looking at $120,000 and under among those that are in the middle class and there is a tax cut for those." (Governor Richardson, Interview On KOA-AM, 10/31/08) Listen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G88ebXY2uaI
Board of Elections gives Spanish Speakers the WRONG DATE for Election! I now heard this from two sources: A person from the League of Women Voters and this Long Island immigrant support organization.
By Patrick Young CARECEN October 31, 2008 2:44 PM On Fridays I work at the Westchester Hispanic Coalition in White Plains. This afternoon Grace Heyman, the director of the Coalition, showed me a letter that had been received by one of the group's supporters. It was from the Board of Elections and it contained some disturbingly misleading information.
November 1, 2008 This is an exciting time for us! The Green Party has never been as relevant as it is today. As Congress offers trillion-dollar bailouts to Wall Street, people living on Main Street struggle to stay in their homes and pay for basic needs. Why is Congress bailing out corporations while the public slides into economic insecurity? Because the industries that will benefit from the bailout are some of the largest campaign contributors to political campaigns. But never fear because you can VOTE GREEN on Tuesday and choose People Power over corporate power. Support Cynthia McKinney for President and Rosa Clemente for Vice President; and, support other Green candidates running in your community. Greens are running for office across the country for 60 types of office. Check them out! To find out who’s running in your community, click here. Once elected, Greens will not betray the public interest for corporate cash. We accept no corporate money because we believe corporate influence is what’s wrong with politics. If you believe healthcare is a right for all, not to be governed by the profit motive of insurance companies, support the Green Party and our campaign for Single Payer Healthcare. If you believe offshore drilling furthers our national addiction to fossil fuels; and want to see positive solutions like renewable energy, local food production, local businesses and better public transportation- Help elect Greens who will make it a reality. If you believe every vote must be counted, that higher education should be available to everyone, that climate change is real, that the war on drugs is racist, and that the privatization of public goods and services is wrong and that we need to BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW stand up and support the party that will stand up for you The Green Party. If you want to see a clean, healthy future for our children, make sure we have a strong Green Party today
The following community sites have updated since Friday morning:
McPeak drew a parallel between racially integrating the armed forces after World War II and trying to sell the ranks on accepting openly gay colleagues. "We've only had mixed races in combat units for 50 years or so," says McPeak, who led the Air Force during Desert Storm. "The first mixing of races was by the Army in Korea in 1950. It was done because service leaders, generals, chiefs of staff, were able to get ahead of it, were able to go to the lunch at black history week and talk about American values that include equal opportunity for everybody no matter what color their skin is. So the service leadership made a commitment to racial equality and made it happen. Otherwise it wouldn't have happened." Says McPeak, "If you want to do something like racial integration or the integration of openly homosexual soldiers, sailors and marines, airmen, the service leadership will have to get ahead of it. Service leadership will have to go to the gay and lesbian annual ball and lead the first dance. I've spoken many, many times at black history week and am proud to do it. . . . But I couldn't see how I could become an advocate for open homosexuality in Air Force combat units. I don't see how people can do it today."
That's the disgusting Merrill McPeak and probably naming a boy "Merrill" led to the non-stop sexual panic McPeak has long found himself in. The above is from Paul Bedard's "Barack Obama's Military Adviser Says to Stick With Gay Ban" (US News & World Reports). McPeak's the liar who's covered for Barry all through the campaign and you need to grasp how offensive what Merry's saying is. For African-American advancement, Merry says, people just needed to attend a lunch but for equality for all, Merry thinks (or maybe hopes) he'll have to "lead the first dance" at "the gay and lesbian annual ball."
We'll get back to that phrase but for African-Americans to be integrated with Whites, et al, Merry tells us a bit of history was needed. Okay, let's play.
Frank McCarthy. Gay. Awarded the Distinguished Service Medal. Brig General. Took part in the Allied confrences. Attempted to become an assistant secretary in the State Dept (nominated by then president Harry Truman) and that's when he had to hightail it out of DC because the witchhunt was for 'subversives' and, as usual, 'victims' rush to leave the LGBT community out of history. Brig Gen McCarthy isn't the only gay man who has severed in the military by any means. But look at who he knew: FDR, Truman, Eisenhower. And his service was never in question. Had he gone for a Defense Dept appointment, he would have been waived through. (The State Dept was the original focus for the witchhunt -- another detail often left out of the 'history' of that era,)
We can do that over and over because gay men and women have served in the US military -- have always served. But that requires knowing history and actual knowledge and, goodness knows, you can't get that dispensed in Pat Healy's EZBake Reporting.
"The gay and lesbian annual ball." You need to grasp how much homophobia is oozing out in that condescending phrase. This is the man that homphobic Barack Obama selected. The same as he selected Jeremiah Wright who, on PBS, compared gays and lesbians to murderers. You need to grasp that (and remember that Bill Moyers just sat there grinning like an idiot -- apparently you can't take the boy out of Backwater, Texas -- and that's an insult to a state of mind, not to Marshall, TX). This is the man who put homophobes on stage in South Carolina last November to scare up the vote. This is the man who put a homophobe onstage during the 'values' swing-state tour that only just wrapped up.
This is the man that Robin Morgan has pledged her limited intellectual powers to, the man she's hitched her wagon to in an act of desperation that rivals any fix-up Laura and Rob attempted on behalf of Sally (The Dick Van Dyke Show). Here's Patrick Healy in today's New York Times explaining Robin Morgan's Dream Date:
Several gay friends and wealthy gay donors to Senator Barack Obama have asked him over the years why, as a matter of logic and fairness, he opposes same-sex marriage even though he has condemned old miscegenation laws that would have barred his black father from marrying his white mother. The difference, Mr. Obama has told them, is religion. As a Christian -- he is a member of the United Church of Christ -- Mr. Obama believes that marriage is a sacred union, a blessing from God, and one that is intended for a man and a woman exclusively, according to these supporters and Obama campaign advisers. While he does not favor laws that ban same-sex marriage, and has said he is "open to the possibility" that his views may be "misguided," he does not support it and is not inclined to fight for it, his advisers say.
"As a Christian," yeah, that's funny. But Healy's a dumb ass, he's always been a dumb ass and if his topics weren't so 'pleasing' and so easy for the paper to syndicate to other papers around the country, his tired byline would have been retired long, long ago.
Loving v. Virginia is not about religion nor is same-sex marriage. Ava and I addressed this lie from Barack as far back as January but Healy just waives it through.
But let's go over the issue again and let's start with the fact that Churches really do not marry in the US. Churches can be a place where a ceremony takes place.
But if you show up at a church today (with no paperwork) and convince a member of the clergy to marry you, you're really not married in any legal sense other than common law.
That's because Churches do not control marriage. The state issues a marriage license -- not a church. Marriage is an issue to the state, it is an issue controlled by the state. Were marriage about churches, Loving v. Virginia would have been Loving v. [insert Church's name]. The state of Virginia was sued, not a church. The state of Viriginia was refusing to allow inter-racial couples to marry.
It's not a religious issue, it's not a church issue. States determine whom they will issue marriage licenses too. Now you can get married in a church and by a your clergy of choice, but only with the state's permission, only with the state's approval.
So that's the legal realities that Barack continues to dance around and ignore. It's all so strange, not unlike his claim, prior to visiting Africa in 2006, that he would be getting an AIDs test because he wanted to be sure that a stigma was removed and yet, in 2007, he's on stage offending many as he cracks 'wise' about the same AIDs test.
Barack can't hide behind religion to deny rights. He needs to admit that he surrounds himself with homophobes because that is who he is. Who he's always been. And Robin Morgan needs to ask herself when feminism became about endorsing homophobia and homophobes? Our Modern Day Rose Marie is getting on everyone's last damn nerve.
And to be really clear -- remember Barack didn't grow in the United States, he suffers from a failed education (which explains why he thinks there are 57 states in the US) -- religious objection was the basis for opposition to inter-racial marriage. The same way it's used by freaks and zealots to oppose same-sex marriage today.
The plan is to do another entry today. That may or may not happen. Right now, Ava, Dona, Jim and I are going over possible topics for Third.
Iraq? Find the coverage. It's not in the New York Times. Do you see it anywhere? Reuters runs an article claiming that October had the lowest death toll for US service members. Oh really? No, they're lying through their teeth. 13 is the death toll for US service members. 13 was the death toll in July and when you embarrass yourself by claiming you're referring to X-type of deaths, you damn well better grasp that some deaths from October are still under investigation. Translation, you don't know how the service members died so stick with the data, don't go inventing.
The pact, which would allow U.S. troops to stay until 2011, has been held up after Baghdad asked for amendments, including tightening the wording on the withdrawal deadline and a stronger pledge not to use Iraqi territory to attack neighbouring states. Maliki made the pledge in a phone call with Turkish President Abdullah Gul, his office said in a statement. "The prime minister confirmed that he will send delegations to neighbouring countries to show them the security pact after receiving a response from the United States to the amendments which the Iraqi government proposed," the statement said.
gina chon
the wall street journal
the new york times
stephen farrell
abeer mohammed
katharine q. seelye
michael birnbaum
the washington post
the los angeles times
ned parker
scott conroy
cbs news
victoria kim
corinne reilly
mcclatchy newspapers
sameer n. yacoub
sami moubayed
cnn
leila fadel
brian montopoli
john pilger
sam dagher
independent catholic reporter
william h. willimon
