Thursday, July 31, 2008

Bill Moyers Journal and more

The Wave of "Capitol Crimes" Continues
Bill Moyers and Michael Winship
Like the largesse he spread so bountifully to members of Congress and the White House staff -- countless fancy meals, skybox tickets to basketball games and U2 concerts, golfing sprees in Scotland -- Jack Abramoff is the gift that keeps on giving.The notorious lobbyist and his cohorts (including conservatives Tom Delay, Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed) shook down Native American tribal councils and other clients for tens of millions of dollars, buying influence via a coalition of equally corrupt government officials and cronies dedicated to dismantling government by selling it off, making massive profits as they tore the principles of a representative democracy to shreds.
A report earlier this summer from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform builds on an earlier committee investigation that detailed some 485 contacts between Abramoff and the Bush administration. According to the new report, "Senior White House officials told the Committee that White House officials held Mr. Abramoff and members of his lobbying team in high regard and solicited recommendations from Mr. Abramoff and his colleagues on policy matters." Now Abramoff's doing time in Maryland, at a minimum security Federal prison, serving five years and ten months for unrelated, fraudulent business practices involving a fake wire transfer he and a partner fabricated to secure a loan to buy SunCruz Casinos, a line of Florida cruise ships that ferried high and low rollers into international waters to gamble (its original owner, Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis, was gunned down, Mafia-style, in February 2001). But come September, Abramoff will be sentenced for his larger-than-life role in one of the biggest scandals in American history, a collection of outrages that has already sent one member of Congress to jail, others into retirement and dozens of accomplices running for cover.Over the last couple of years he has been singing to the authorities, which is why he has been kept in a detention facility close to DC and the reason his sentencing for tax evasion, the defrauding of Indians and the bribing of Washington officials has been delayed -- the FBI is thought to be using Abramoff's testimony to build an ever-expanding case that may continue to shake those who live within the Beltway bubble for months and years to come.
Bill Moyers Journal is airing an updated edition of "Capitol Crimes," a special that was first produced for public television two years ago, relating the entire sordid story of the Abramoff scandals. Produced by Sherry Jones, the rebroadcast comes at a moment of renewed interest, with not only Abramoff's sentencing imminent, but the most important national elections in decades little more than three months away and continuing, seemingly daily revelations of further, profligate abuses of power.
Monday saw the publication of a 140-page report from the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility, confirming that, as the Washington Post recounted, "For nearly two years, a young political aide sought to cultivate a 'farm system' for Republicans at the Justice Department, hiring scores of prosecutors and immigration judges who espoused conservative priorities and Christian lifestyle choices."
That aide, Monica M. Goodling, exercised what amounted to veto power over a wide range of critical jobs, asking candidates for their views on abortion and same-sex marriage and maneuvering around senior officials who outranked her, including the department's second-in-command... [The report] concluded yesterday that Goodling and others had broken civil service laws, run afoul of department policy and engaged in 'misconduct,' a finding that could expose them to further scrutiny and sanctions."
With the next day's sunrise came the indictment of Alaskan Republican Ted Stevens, the first sitting US Senator to face criminal charges in 15 years. Apparently, the senator was playing the home version of "The Price Is Right," for among the gifts a grand jury says were illegally rewarded him by the oil company VECO were a Viking gas grill, tool cabinet and a wraparound deck for his mountainside house in Anchorage. In fact, VECO allegedly gave the place an entire new first floor, with two bedrooms and a bath. How neighborly.
(By the way, just to round the circle, Senator Stevens received $1000 in campaign contributions from Jack Abramoff directly, which subsequently he donated to the Alaskan chapter of the Red Cross, and $16,500 from Native American tribes and others represented by Abramoff, which Stevens gave to other charities.)
Coincidentally, this week also marks the publication of a new book, The Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule, written by Thomas Frank, the author of What's the Matter with Kansas? In an essay in the August issue of Harper's magazine, adapted from the book, Frank adroitly weaves the actions of Abramoff and his pals into a vastly larger ideological framework.
"Fantastic misgovernment is not an accident," he writes, "nor is it the work of a few bad individuals. It is the consequence of triumph by a particular philosophy of government, by a movement that understands the liberal state as a perversion and considers the market the ideal nexus of human society. This movement is friendly to industry not just by force of campaign contributions but by conviction; it believes in entrepreneurship not merely in commerce but in politics; and the inevitable results of its ascendance are, first, the capture of the state by business and, second, what follows from that: incompetence, graft, and all the other wretched flotsam that we've come to expect from Washington.
"... The conservatism that speaks to us through its actions in Washington is institutionally opposed to those baseline good intentions we learned about in elementary school. Its leaders laugh off the idea of the public interest as airy-fairy nonsense; they caution against bringing top-notch talent into government service; they declare war on public workers. They have made a cult of outsourcing and privatizing, they have wrecked established federal operations because they disagree with them, and they have deliberately piled up an Everest of debt in order to force the government into crisis. The ruination they have wrought has been thorough; it has been a professional job. Repairing it will require years of political action."
Have we the stamina, commitment -- or even the attention span -- to take such action? Abramoff may be cooling his heels in minimum security but his pals Delay, Norquist and Reed appear on television and radio whose hosts treat them as political savants with nary a nod to their past nefarious association with Abramoff. Few in the audience seem to notice or care. Former House majority leader Delay's awaiting trial on money laundering charges, and the incorrigible Ralph Reed, who played Christian pastors in Texas for suckers in enlisting their unwitting help for Abramoff's gambling clients, even has a political potboiler of a novel out -- Dark Horse, the story of a failed Democratic presidential candidate who finds God, then runs as an independent, funded, presumably, by the supreme being's political action committee.
"Do we Americans really want good government?" That's a question asked, not by Thomas Frank, but the muckraking journalist Lincoln Steffens, writing more than a century ago in his book, The Shame of the Cities. He wrote, "We are a free and sovereign people, we govern ourselves and the government is ours. But that is the point. We are responsible, not our leaders, since we follow them. We let them divert our loyalty from the United States to some 'party;' we let them boss the party and turn our municipal democracies into autocracies and our republican nation into a plutocracy. We cheat our government and we let our leaders loot it, and we let them wheedle and bribe our sovereignty from us."
From more than a hundred years' distance, Steffens would recognize Abramoff & company for what they are. And we for who we are; a nation too easily distracted and looking the other way as everything rightfully ours is taken.


So that is a commentary from Bill Moyers Journal and it tells you what is coming up Friday on the PBS show. Speaking of commentary, "Other Items" contains an amazing commentary by C.I.

I have the backstory on that from Jess. They left late last night to be in D.C. for a hearing on food safety today. "They" is Dona, Jess, Ava, C.I., Wally and Mike. Ava and C.I. were going to be there (and are covering it for El Spirito). Wally is always up for a dash-in to D.C. Dona and Jess know that this is a big issue. Mainly due to the tremendous response to "No, you're not safe" which is the most popular feature at Third this year that was not an Ava and C.I. commentary, a piece on the illegal war or an article on feminism. Mike wanted to be there because he really advocated for that piece. But this is a huge issue. I think most of us can grasp that food safety is a big issue but it is also a huge with people. Because Ava and C.I. are on the road every week (this week was their 'break' and they still went around California speaking and, today, to D.C.), they really do have a firm grasp of what people are talking about and concerned with across the country. That is why they argued for the piece and, as I said earlier, it was very popular.

Jess explained C.I. was rushing to get those entries written this morning (and the first one includes a portion of Bully Boy's speech that he was about to deliver -- a phone call came in asking, "Do you want this?" and C.I. grabbed it) and the second entry had to include the nonsense from the misogynist rapper.

I thought C.I. handled that beautifully, calling out Barack Obama for not issuing his own statement. He will not do that. He has refused to do it the entire campaign. And, if you read the snapshot, you will see that Mr. Obama went hat in hand to the rapper nearly two months before he told the American people that he was running for the Democratic nomination.

This is not just some supporter of Mr. Obama's. This is someone whom the candidate sought out and brought in.

And women are sick of it. We are sick of being scapegoated by the Obama campaign. We are sick of being ripped apart and disrespected so that he can rise to the top. He could have called it out at any time but did not do that because it benefited him and, it appears, he agreed with it. He certainly used sexism himself. He set the tone for what went down in 2008 and he started setting that tone in 2007. He seeded it in the press long before it surfaced.

And C.I. is correct about the boycott. I have been present when that has been floated by women's group and C.I. does not take sides on it. But this really is getting out of hand and our 'leaders' are not calling it out.

Which is why it keeps getting worse. As C.I. points out, this is not even about Hillary at this point, it is about the way women are being trashed, disrespected, and used as kindling for the fire.

On the Nader-Gonzalez campaign, this is the update with additional incentives:

Join an invite-only call with Ralph and Matt
Posted by Jason Kafoury on Tuesday, July 29, 2008 at 01:51:00 PM
ShareThisShareThis
Dear supporter,
We've just finished another hectic day here in the D.C. office and I wanted to dash off a quick udpate about the "
Dinner with Ralph" e-mail contest. The whole team (including Ralph, who came up with the idea!) is blown away to see so many people sign-up as contestants, and even more as participants and supporters.
Over the last five days, over 200 of our supporters have reached out to more than 10,000 of their friends -- clearly there's nothing like a little of the good ol' competitive spirit!
So -- quickly -- I want to remind you that it's not to late to participate in the contest. The contest doesn't end until August 7th, so there's lots of time left to win dinner with Ralph, or Matt, or to win one of the many other
prizes that are available.
And, we've just added two new prizes:
For anyone who enters and
recruits at least five friends: take part in an invitation-only conference call with Ralph and Matt. That's right -- just recruit five friends to join our movement and you're in on the conference call, and a chance to ask your questions to Matt or Ralph.
And, if you
recruit 20 friends to join our "people fighting back" campaign: your choice of a t-shirt from our Web store (and we have lots of new designs on the way). People who reach 25 friends will get a t-shirt and a copy of the Declaration of Independence.
Reach out to friends. Win prizes. It's really that easy. And we make it even easier by providing a way for you to
invite up to 30 friends at a time from your address book -- you can go back and invite more friends as often as you'd like.
The people who are currently in the lead -- Ramy Mousa of Baton Rouge, LA; Anna Chambers of Fort Payne, AL; Scott Keddy of Cambridge, MA -- all got there in just five days. Not only is there enough time to catch up, but with over 10 days left in the contest, there's time to be queen (of king) of the hill. (The
contest leader board is one of the most popular pages on our site right now!)
We really need more people to get in on the competition. Why? Because this is our chance to reach out beyond "the choir" and to speak to the people you know who may not even be aware of the Nader/Gonzalez campaign. They may not realize that Nader/Gonzalez is ready to stand up for the issues that matter in this election; issues like single payer health care, reversal of U.S. policy in the Middle East, and military withdrawal from Iraq. These are issues that need to be on the table this year.
That's about it for today. Remember:
It's not too late to
enter the contest
Anyone who recruits at least five friends wins
There's lots of time left (contest ends on August 7th -- that's 10 days away!)
The current contest leaders got there in JUST FIVE DAYS
We want more people to participate so our message can reach beyond the choir
Onward,
Jason.
-- Jason Kafoury, National Coordinator Nader for President 2008 P.O. Box 34103 Washington, D.C. 20043
www.votenader.org
ShareThisShareThis

And because I am rushing tonight, let me borrow from Kat and note that I have mentioned the following in this post:


The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, and Ava,

C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,

Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),

Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,

Mike of Mikey Likes It!,

Wally of The Daily Jot.

This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:


Thursday, July 31, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces two deaths, the White House fakes-out the press, Barack's support continues to be revealing, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Yovany Rivero ("Geo") is an Iraq War veteran who has been twice deployed to Iraq. While serving, his faith deepened and he applied for Conscientious Objector status -- please note, CO status does not depend on religious status (a fact noted in the US military's own written guidelines -- but one those 'determining' frequently ignore). June 14th, he received a peace prize from The Rheinland-Pfalz Peace Adovacty Group. Early this month,
John Vandiver (Stars and Stripes) reported on Rivero "who enlisted in the Army in 2001 when he was 18" and notes:

Michael Sharp, who works closely with Rivero as an adviser with the Germany-based
Military Counseling Network, said the soldier wants to keep a low profile and isn't looking to bring attention to his case. In particular, Rivero doesn't want his fellow soldiers, whom he respects, to misinterpret his position as a sign of disrespect, Sharp said.
Though Sharp also declined to discuss Rivero's case in detail, citing Rivero's desire to avoid publicity, MCN has been working closely with numerous soldiers since the start of the Iraq war.
Perhaps the best-known case connected with MCN was that of Agustin Aguayo, a combat medic who was found guilty in 2007 of deserting the Schweinfurt, Germany-based 2nd Brigade, 1st Infantry Division as it prepared to deploy to Iraq in 2006. Aguayo returned to California last year after serving a brief prison sentence. Others, however, have found their conscientious objector claims supported: In 2006, seven soldiers who worked with MCN had their requests approved.

Last month
Courage to Resist interviewed Iraq War veteran and war resister William Shearer. Shearer enlisted at 17-years in 2002 and ended up with a non-deployable unit ("teaching units what they needed to know before they went over to a combat area, we pretty much put them through a month long simulation of combat") but that changed in 2004. Asked about his time in Iraq, Sharer responded, "It was more of like -- There wasn't a lot of action. It was more of -- It's hard to explain down there. Action over there is like getting IED or maybe getting shot at a few times or a car bomb goes off. It's not exactly what you're expecting. It's more like hunting season, you're the deer."

While serving in Iraq, Shearer faced a number of problems, "In my case I had lost a lot while I was over there. And it just started -- The more you lose and the less they do for you the more you start to see how jacked up things really are." The problems included his new wife having a semi-public affair "with an MP on post" and he was hearing about it from his platoon sergeant who heard about it from his wife who lived across the street from Shearer's wife. "And the army did nothing," Shearer states. "And there's plenty they could do. And they just they did nothing. I lost a lot of money, I lost my family while I was there you know pretty much. And when I get back, I'd lost so much, it was like I needed to start over." He returned from Iraq "like two days later . . . I got served divorce papers".

William Shearer: And the more things that pile up, it would just start detiriorating me as a soldier. It would make me look worse and worse It would get harder and harder. They didn't care. That's what I'm trying to get across. They don't care. And if they don't care and nobody's helping you out, you start to not care. You start to -- you just look at everything as bad, you have no positive whatsoever coming in. And so me and the military is pretty much diminishing quick.

Courage to Resist: So you're saying that not only didn't you get support while you were in a combat zone, you didn't get any support when you were back home either?

William Shearer: No, not really. I was checked out for PTSD. I got -- when I got home -- They put you through all of these tests, talk to a bunch of doctors I was diagnosed with PTSD, depression and a couple like sleep disorders and other things. And pretty much all they did was just start throwing me pills. Kind of like to shut me up, put me in a I-don't-care vegetative state. Pretty much just to have me there.

His PTSD 'counseling' was completely lacking in targets, goals or medical supervision. It was pair him up with an over-sixty-years-old retired military person and 'rap.' Someone who had not served in Iraq.

William Shearer: They give you this idea they're going to take of you and things are just one big family you know So I was thinking to myself "Man, I got to have a reset. I got to find a way to get myself out of this and start over -- start my life over, you know. I have nothing to work with." So I pretty much started going through the things, asking around 'Hey, what happened to this guy for doing this?' when he -- you know -- did he get an article 15? I was mainly not so worried about the disciplinary actions but the discharge that's what I was really worried about. I was asking around and AWOL was one of the things, I heard a couple of things. But the one thing that came up for me was failing the urinalysis. I-I- I just couldn't fathom anybody you deploy with or anybody who says they care about you so much -- like your batallion commanders do -- would put you out with a bad discharge after you showing for four years all the honorable deeds you've done. So it seemed to me that that was the best route for me. I wasn't so sure about AWOL. So I knew -- I knew for a fact that if I failed the urinalysis, I would be able to get out and I was pretty confident that I wouldn't get anything less than a general discharge

Courage to Resist: And your concern about the type of discharge had to do with veterans' beneifts?

William Shearer: That and how am I going to live the rest of my life, you know, how am I going to have a career? I just -- I -- There was a lot of things going through my head. You know -- as a matter of fact -- the very reason I was worried is actually what I'm doing now. You know. I'm not -- There's nothing I have no options really. It's survival.

Courage to Resist: So you made a decision to fail a urinalysis test, is that right?

William Shearer: When I went home on leave I was just like "This is how I'm going to do it." Because as soon as you come back from leave you know that the very next day you're going to get a urinalysis test.

He no longer supports the war and his thoughts on it today are:

I feel like they're exploiting those healthy young bucks that are just getting out of high school or going to be getting out of high school, you know They're telling these guys all these things they want to hear about how glorious and how fun and how good the military is. Granted, there's something that are good about it but it's not going to last forever. It doesn't last forever. And when you do go in everything changes and one thing I can tell you, they tell you, you know you could end up in a war zone, okay? When you sign up, you know all this stuff. But what they don't tell you is that you're going to be driving around and you have rules on you that the people you're fighting don't use or go against -- They don't use any of those rules. They don't abide by any rules. So you're pretty much a pawn. You do what they need you to do regardless of how dangerous it is, you know? For instance, you're just driving up and down a road expecting to get blown up. We -- we covered a mile -- a good strip of highway -- it was the most used transport highway in Iraq. It linked the north and south together. And that's where all the supplies went up and down while we were there. And our job for about two weeks was to patrol that strip of highway and eliminate all threats of IEDs whether that be they be blow you up or you find them first . They just don't want IEDs there They don't tell you that you're going to be the person that they pick to walk up to a suspected IED and give it a little nudge to see if it's a bomb, you know? They don't tell you these things. And these aren't things that these kids are thinking about -- they don't know that this stuff's there, they don't know it's like this. They're thinking they're going to go into the army, they're going to get take care of, and they're going to get put into a huge combat situation when it's not. The only people that's getting to fire anything is the enemy.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Yovany Rivero, William Shearer, Michael Thurman, Andrei Hurancyk, Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel,
Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at
The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).

Yesterday in headlines on Democracy Now!,
Juan Gonzalez explained, "In other Iraq news, the British government has announced there will be no prosecutions over the death of journalist Terry Lloyd, despite an investigation that blamed US troops. Terry Lloyd was shot dead in Iraq in March 2003 along with a French cameraman and an Iraqi interpreter. Two years ago, a British coroner ruled that US troops should be prosecuted for the unlawful killing of Lloyd, who was a well-known foreign correspondent for the British television network ITN. The coroner ruled that Lloyd was shot in the back by Iraqi soldiers. Then, as he was being driven to a hospital in a civilian minivan, Lloyd was shot in the head by US troops." Jenny Booth (Times of London) quotes ITN's spokesperson stating, "Coroner Andrew Walker concluded just under two years ago that Terry Lloyd was unlawfully killed by American troops and ITN has done everything it could to try and ensure Terry's killer is brought to justice. We are disappointed that the CPS has decided they cannot take this matter further, and that despite the coroner's call on the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions to demand that the Americans bring the perpretator of a possible war crime before a British court of law, the US authorities remain unco-operative." Meanwhile, AP reports that journalist Ali al-Mashhadani is being held by the US military at Camp Cropper. al-Mashhadani works for Reuters, BBC and NPR. Dean Yates (Reuters) reports that (as usual) no charges have been brought against Ali and quotes David Schlesinger (Reuters Editor-in-Chief) explaining, "Any accusations against a journalist should be aired publicly and dealt with fairly and swiftly, with the journalist having the right to counsel and present a defense." From Monday's snapshot, "Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) reported . . . 'Also on Friday, the American military acknowledged that it unintentionally killed the son of an editor for an American-financed newspaper in the northern city of Kirkuk on Thursday. The military said soldiers had been fired at from a taxi and shot back, hitting Arkan al-Naiemi, 14, in the taxi'." Saturday, Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) wrote about Arkan at Baghdad Observer noting that he "often stayed late at his father's newsroom in Kirkuk. The editor-in-chief of the weekly Voice of Villages, Ali Taha, treated his son as a journalist in training. . . . The teen listened to pop music and was obsessed with computer games. He loved the weekly trips he took with his father to sites in the area. The most recent trip was to the Dokan Dam, the primary water source in Kirkuk. He loved to stay late into the night at the Voice of Villages newsroom, a U.S. supported weekly, and help in any way he could. Who knows what he would've been when he grew up. Who knows what life he would've lived. God had other plans, his father said."

"This has been a month of encouraging news from Iraq," declared the delusional Bully Boy in DC today. He gave his usual lies and spin. Progress -- blah, blah, blah. He was most transparent when declaring, " This week, the Iraqi government is launching a new offensive in parts of the Diyala province that contain some of al Qaeda's few remaining safe havens in the country. This operation is Iraqi-led; our forces are playing a supporting role." Yes, it is a for-show effort. But first, reporters were led to believe that today's speech from Bully Boy would include something major and that it would include news of the treaty the White House wants with their puppet, Nouri al-Maliki, in Baghdad.
Alissa J. Rubin and Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) teased out whispers and gossip of a draft treaty about to be final so much in this morning's paper, it was practically a beehive. And they noted that the White House's "unofficial deadline for the deal has long been July 31. . . . Also, the White House announced late on Wednesday that President Bush would make a statement on Iraq on Thursday morning." The press got played. It was the first question in the US State Dept press briefing today (Dana Perino -- doing White House gaggles -- was peppered about a "staff wedding" -- way to work White House press corps). It was pointed out that the agreement was wanted by July 31st which is today and there is no agreement. State Dept spokesperson Sean McCormack immediately insisted he'd never said a deadline (no, he personally did not) and then had difficulty keeping a straight face. Still chuckling, he referred reporters to the morning speech and finally finishing with, "In terms of negotiations, those are ongoing and I won't go into detail on those." Asked again about this topic, he referred to the White House statements. From Iraq, Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) reports on Diyala Province. The for-show action goes on. Zavis goes with a number of 30,000 Iraqi troops in Diyala and yesterday, Jim Lehrer (PBS' NewsHour) worded it this way, "In Iraq today, a military offensive in Diyala province moved into a second day. Some 50,000 Iraqi troops backed by U.S. forces went door-to-door, hunting al-Qaida fighters. An Iraqi regional leader said the operation was expected to last about two weeks." Hint, when the numbers being given out do not match, it's a hype action. In the real world, violence continued . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Baghdad roadside bombings that left 2 Iraqi civilians wounded and 2 Iraqi soldiers wounded, a Mosul car bombing that killed the driver as well as 3 police officers with four others wounded, 2 other Mosul car bombings that left nine wounded.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad and three corpses (women) discovered in Mosul.

Today the
US military announced: "A U.S. Soldier died in a non-combat related incident while conducting operations in Ninewah Province July 31. Additionally, two other U.S. Soldiers were injured in the incident." And they announced: "The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. Sgt. James A. McHale, 31, of Fairfield, Mont., died July 30 at the National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Md., of wounds suffered July 22 in Taji, Iraq, when his vehicle encountered an improvised explosive device. He was assigned to the 40th Engineer Battalion, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division, Baumholder, Germany. "


Turning to the US race for president.
January 16, 2007 Barack Obama declared his intention to run for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. Interesting. Before Barack told the American people he was running, months before, he met with a rapper. Deanne Bellandi (Chicago Sun-Times) reported November 29, 2006 on Barack's meet up with "rapper Ludacris . . . Obama declined to comment after their meeting but walked with [Chris] Bridges [Ludacris' legal name] to the elevator as he left." Nearly two months before Barack would tell the American people that he had decided to run for president, he was sounding out Ludacris. By that time Ludacris was already gutter trash with a long history of misogny. It got him kicked from the Jackson County Fair in 2003 -- three years prior to Barack's first known 'counseling' with Ludacris. That wouldn't stop Barack from praising him to Rolling Stone and bragging that he had Ludacris on his iPod. Presumably the feminist manifesto "Move Bitch"? Ludacris is in the news and a complete reflection on the gutter trash campaign Barack has run. And Barack's praised him as among the "great talents and great businessmen." [See Cedric's "Gutter Trash you can smell" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! THE LEADER TRIES TO CONTROL THE CULT!"] The Guardian of London has long been in the tank for Barack. They're a laugh and not real journalism. It's only on this side of the ocean that they're taken seriously. In England they're seen as the party organ for the Labour Party. So let's see how they lie. Ewen MacAskill 'informs' that: "Obama, seeking to become the first African-American president, was not helped by a song by the Grammy award-winning rapper Ludacris endorsing him and abusing McCain, George Bush and Clinton." To be clear, Rev. Jesse Jackson is disrespected in the song. In a rap song, that's not surprising. In one attempting to help out Ludacris' lover-man Barack, it's appalling. Way to pimp that 'unity.' The remark about John McCain would have people screaming if anyone had said it about Barack. But what does Ewen Pig leave out? Hillary.
Laura Yao (Washington Post) explained it this way, "On YouTube yesterday, rapper Ludacris released a song called 'Politics,' in which he denigrates President Bush, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) -- all in the space of about two minutes. . . In the next line, the three-time Grammy Award winner calls Clinton an 'irreleveant [slur for female]'." It's a campaign song for Barack and it's recorded by the man Barack's not only praised but sought out for 'counsel' since November 2006. What was Barack's response? As usual NOT A DAMN WORD. His campaign flack was sent out. A detail Foon Rhee (Boston Globe) and many others fail to grasp. Barack's not condemned a thing. Feminist Wire Daily finally decides they can call out sexism. Of course, they fail to connect it to Bernie Mac's sexist routine at Barack's campaign event earlier this year which led to boos and heckling -- and to Barack finding it so delightful, he had to 'joke' too. WomenCount PAC (which FWD doesn't even think to link to) "is calling for an apology as well as a blanket condemnation by the Party leadership. . . . These lyrics are outrageous, offensive, and unacceptable. In an e-mail this afternoon to its membership, WomenCount states, 'It is another example of hateful, sexist language being used on the campaign trail, and now is our moment to make it clear: not on our watch! The leadership of both parties must step up to condemn such hateful speech and demand apologies. The Obama campaign has criticized the lyrics, but we call on the presumptive party nominee, who is the celebrated subject of the new song, to go even further: Publicly condemn the song. Demand an apology on behalf of the targets. Now." Now? And where our the little girls of NOW? The same useless 'leadership' that could insist The New Yorker DESTROY copies of their magazine bound for overseas (while ignoring the Bernie Mac event) can't seem to say a DAMN THING. Did Kim sleep in this morning? If you're missing it, check the news coverage and note how ha-ha and 'minor' this is being treated. CBS News online? Could Scott Conroy explain how calling Hillary a "bitch" doesn't strike him as "harsh"? Are our 'leaders' going to stay silent again? Are they going to betray women again? And when does CBS plan to public respond to what they allowed online? As Ava and I noted in "CBS 'cares' enough to promote sexism," the network's news site shut down comments on Barack stories when they felt racist comments were being left ("too many" was actually how it was worded -- apparently CBS will accept an undefined number of racist comments) but they didn't do a damn thing about the sexism and, in fact, their online policy does not even name sexism as being off limits. It does name comparisons to Hitler off limits (no surprise after CBS' problems with the mini-series earlier this decade) but they waived that rule repeatedly to allow Barack's gutter trash to post that Hillary was Hitler. Feminist leaders, if they're really leaders, will get off their asses and call this out because we don't need you as leaders if you don't. Women have been trashed -- this isn't just about Hillary -- non-stop for months now. Leaders either show they can lead or face the threats of boycotts that are already rumbling in the grassroots. (If a boycott is called, Ava and I will do our part to get the word out on it when we speak to women's groups.)

Ralph Nader is running for president.
Doug G. Ware (KUTV) notes that Nader speaks tonight to a group at the University of Utah and that the former mayor of Salt Lake City (and Nation magazine cover boy) Rocky Anderson will introduce him.

Team Nader notes:

We're up against it here in Ralph's home state --- Connecticut.
I'm Ken Krayeske, the state coordinator, and I promised Ralph I would get him on the ballot here.
We have only 7,000 signatures in hand. And we need to get to 15,000 in five days.
We have 30 to 40 people on the ground collecting in Connecticut and we need to pay for their gas, transportation, copying costs.
You get the picture.
To do that, we need your
donations now -- $10, $20, $50, $100 -- whatever you can afford.
Why are we busting it so hard every day to get Ralph on the ballot here?
Because it's not just about Ralph.
It's about you and me and a young man named Derek O'Kanos. (Check out Derek's short video here about why he likes Ralph ---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cfltpogno6c)
Last Friday, Derek phoned me.
"I want to help petition," he said.
"How old are you?" I asked.
"Sixteen," he said.
"Wow! That's fantastic, but you need an adult to help you out, because you have to be a registered voter," I said. "But before we get into logistics, I don't often get calls from 16-year-olds. Can you tell me how you know about Ralph?"
"Two years ago, Mr. Nader came to my high school," Derek said.
"What school is that?" I asked.
"Enrico Fermi in Enfield," Derek said.
"No way," I said. "I helped organize that. There was a standing room only crowd. What did you think of Ralph's speech?"
"I didn't see it," Derek said. "I was a freshman, and I was in World History class, and my class didn't go. I guess they thought that Ralph didn't fit with world history."
"Bummer," I said.
"Yeah, but I've been interested in Mr. Nader since then, reading about him, and I want to help him," Derek said.
So we discussed strategies for him to convince adults in his life to go out and petition with him.
Derek recruited his uncle's girlfriend to transport him and witness signatures at grocery stores.
Next, he corralled his grandfather to drive him around neighborhoods in suburban northern Connecticut. (Above is a photo of Derek and his grandfather)
Shortly after, I got this email from Derek:
"Today was truly amazing. No more than a few days ago I felt an overwhelming feeling of worthlessness. I felt that there was nothing that I could do due to my age and transportation issue. Then we talked and I went out and did something. I truly felt like I was a part of something, that I was making history. I could have volunteered for many other political campaigns, but it was the Nader/Gonzalez campaign that truly inspired me. I can openly support every policy of the campaign and sleep at night. This is a campaign that puts national interest before personal interest. We the people -- not for sale! Gives me chills. It is truly amazing to see an entire organization of everyday people working towards one beautiful common goal and putting power back into the hands of the people."
Let's not let Ralph, Derek and all our supporters down in Connecticut.
Donate now whatever you can afford.
Hit the contribute button.
Together, we are making a difference --- in Ralph's home state and beyond.
Onward

Other news. Republican US Senator Ted Stevens is in the news (due to his indictment).
NOW on PBS earlier probed the story of that corruption. BIll Moyers Journal have been exploring Capitol Crimes and this Friday on the program will explore the continuation of thes Capitol Crimes:

Like the largesse he spread so bountifully to members of Congress and the White House staff -- countless fancy meals, skybox tickets to basketball games and U2 concerts, golfing sprees in Scotland -- Jack Abramoff is the gift that keeps on giving.The notorious lobbyist and his cohorts (including conservatives Tom Delay, Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed) shook down Native American tribal councils and other clients for tens of millions of dollars, buying influence via a coalition of equally corrupt government officials and cronies dedicated to dismantling government by selling it off, making massive profits as they tore the principles of a representative democracy to shreds.



iraq
john vandiver
mcclatchy newspapersleila fadel
the new york times
sabrina tavernise
alexandra zavisthe los angeles timesthe new york timesalissa j. rubinsteve myers lee

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Dustin Hughes, John Murphy

What kind of a country (and democracy) would we have if we really believed in freedom? How about if we just believed in the freedom that anyone who wanted to should run for office?
This is from Dustin Hughes' "Choices everywhere but at poll" (Neighbor Newspapers):



In modern-day America, we have dozens of choices for anything we want, no matter how trivial.
But when we go to the ballot box, there's almost always only two: Republican and Democrat.
You'd think our state could realize that we ought to have the freedom to elect our lawmakers without being limited to two parties.
But it hasn't happened yet. In fact, Oklahoma has one of the most restrictive ballot access processes in the nation. In most any other state, you'd be able to pick from about five or more other parties. Greens, Libertarians, The Constitution Party, and others regularly appear on other states' ballots.
In Oklahoma, just the two: Republican and Democrat.



I am sorry that Oklahoma has restrictive ballot requirements; however, I am glad that someone like Mr. Hughes lives there and calls it out. That is one thing that runs by Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney and Bob Barr are highlighting this year. I think it is great that so many choices are available. (I am voting for Mr. Nader.) And I think it is really sad that it may take this year for people to think about it. I really think it will be after this year's election that people will think about it. Regradless of who you are voting for, when you do vote, make a point to not just look for your candidate but to look at all the names just to register who is on your ballot. I do not say that to change your vote, I just think you should be aware. In some states, people who want to vote for Mr. Nader, Ms. McKinney or Mr. Barr will have to write them in. But regardless of who you are voting for, make a point to examine who made the ballot in your state and ask yourself what that says about ballot access laws in your region?



I would love to tell you that I wrote the above to lead into this press release, but I just got lucky.

JOHN MURPHY FILES 5,000 SIGNATURES



INDEPENDENT CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE

SECURES POSITION ON NOVEMBER BALLOT



EGREGIOUS BALLOT ACCESS LAWS IN PENNSYLVANIA MUST BE ABOLISHED



For Immediate Release: July 28, 2008

For Further Information: John Murphy (610) 384-4460



HARRISBURG, PA – John Murphy the independent Congressional Candidate in the 16th district filed close to 5,000 signatures with the Department of the Commonwealth on Friday morning. Pennsylvania's egregious ballot access laws required Murphy to submit 2,300 signatures but, as the press has been reporting under the topic of "Bonus Gate", independent and third-party candidates have to collect at least twice as many signatures as required by law because the Democrat Party will even use state employees, on taxpayer time, to ensure that independent and third-party candidates never make it onto the ballot unchallenged or at all.



"While the Democrat and Republican candidates were able to spend the last four months campaigning and raising funds, our resources were completely absorbed in securing my position on the ballot" explained John Murphy. "It's bad enough that we have the most anti-democratic state in the union, singled out even by the Helsinki Accords Group, but the Democrat Party has taken these already draconian ballot access laws and exacerbated the situation by making use of the minutia embedded in those laws. It's one thing to remove the signature of a person who is clearly not a citizen of Pennsylvania, it is quite another to remove a signature because ‘Lucinda’ signed her name as ‘Cindy’ or somebody printed their name in the column where you're supposed to sign your name. That’s how the Democrats removed the independent Presidential candidate Ralph Nader in 2004 and the Green Party’s Senatorial candidate Carl Romanelli in 2006."



John Murphy further explained that there may be some good news on the horizon for the citizens of Pennsylvania. "There are two ways you can defeat democracy" said John Murphy. "One way is by preventing people from voting, the other is by preventing worthy candidates from ever appearing on the ballot. In Pennsylvania the Democrat Party has chosen the latter method. Fortunately State Senator Mike Folmer has introduced legislation into the Pennsylvania Senate entitled the ‘Voters’ Choice Act’ which would redefine minor party's requirements by lowering the threshold to .05% of the registered voters and then allowing the minor parties to nominate their candidates by convention and, like the candidates of the two older parties, have no signature collection requirements for the General Election.



"Independent candidates like me would simply have to collect the same number of signatures that candidates from the two older parties have to collect for their Primary Election ballot. I hope everyone urges their state senators and representatives to support this important piece of legislation by Senator Folmer. If we can accomplish this in Pennsylvania we will be at last in compliance with the Pennsylvania Constitution which mandates 'free and equal' elections and on our way to fighting for Instant Runoff Voting", concluded John Murphy.



###


Community member Martha e-mailed that to C.I. and asked that it be highlighted. It came in this afternoon so I am sure C.I. will highlight it tomorrow morning but I know Martha will not be upset with me for highlighting it here. John Murphy's "Something's Rotten in the State of Pennsylvania" (Dissident Voice) covered BonusGate and that is all I really know about him but I am happy to highlight his press release for Martha. If you are able to vote for him, make a point to check out his campaign and see if his issues match up with your own. And you can do that by visiting his website.


You should be visiting the Nader - Gonzalez '08 website because there is so much going up there days. Community member Lucy asked me if I could highlight something from Monday and, of course, so here is "Is Nader/Gonzalez for Real?" (Nader-Gonzalez '08):


Posted by The Nader Team on Monday, July 28, 2008 at 11:22:00 AM
ShareThisShareThis
Is Nader/Gonzalez for real?
The country wants to know.
Will Nader/Gonzalez be on enough ballots in November to make a run for it?
And to be seriously considered for the Presidential debates?
We're now on 18 state ballots, heading toward 30 by August 10 - on our way to our ultimate goal of 45 states by September 20.
And getting to thirty won't happen unless we hit our goal of $100,000 by August 10. (Which would give us $2 million for the entire campaign year to date.)
Thanks to you, we're at over $13,000 in just a few short days.
But we need to
jack it up this week.
Donate now and watch your contribution fuel our road-trippers all around the country.
On the ground, things are heating up and the press is starting to take notice.
In West Virginia, we
turned in more than 24,000 signatures (15,000 valid required).
In Montana, our road trip team
collected and turned in more than 10,000 signatures (5,000 required).
We've also collected enough signatures to get on the
ballot in Tennessee and New Jersey.
In Missouri, today we
will turn in more than 20,000 signatures (10,000 valid required).
This coming week, we're looking forward to ballot access victories in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Utah and Wyoming.
None of this would have been possible without your help.
Every time you
hit the contribute button, you fuel this historic ballot access drive.
During our last two fundraising drives, you came through with flying colors.
First, we asked for $60,000. You did it - on time.
Then we asked for $70,000, and you pushed us over the top with time to spare.
Right now, we need to hit $100,000 to get us to 30 states.
These are the most crucial two weeks of the campaign.
Whether Nader/Gonzalez is for real in November depends on whether we can raise the money to pay for ballot access over the next two weeks.
Plain and simple.
So, please.
Donate now whatever you can - $10, $20, $100, $500 - to help us give America a choice in November.
For peace.
For justice.
For a safe and healthy future.
For shifting the power from the corporations, back into the hands of the people.
Together, we are making a difference.
Onward
The Nader Team
P.S. Thanks to all who participated in Saturday's house parties. They were a great success.
Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.

ShareThisShareThis


As most of you know, I have a very large family. As a mother and a grandmother, I have a problem this time each year. I went into a panic today for a few seconds today when Cedric said, "You know summer's almost over." I do that every yearr the first time someone says it. Just a body stiffening thing. Cedric noticed and asked me if I was okay? I explained that I still panic thinking, "I have got to get the boys" I had all sons "to the store for their school clothes." And immediately after that thought, it becomes school supplies. My children now all have children. They no longer need Mommy to buy them clothes or glue and scissors. But to this day, when someone says that summer is almost over that is immediately where my mind (and body) go to.

I may be the only one. But I thought I would share that. This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:


Wednesday, July 30, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Parliament takes their summer recess, a war resister tells his story, for-show actions continue in Iraq, a new report on waste in Iraq is released, and more.

Starting with war resistance.
Alex Atamanenko is a Canadian MP from the New Democratic Party. He writes a letter to the editor of Arrow Lake News:

Tuesday, July 15th will go down as a black day in Canadian history. The first Iraqi War Resister from the American military was deported from Canada for refusing to fight in a war that Canada refused to get involved in, that the United Nations has called illegal, and that much of the world sees as an invasion of a sovereign country for oil resources. Robin Long, 25, was one of hundreds of U.S. men and women who have struggled with the decision to risk life-long separation from their families, friends and their country to stay in Canada. If they return to the U.S. they can face arrest, court martial, prison sentences, deployment to Iraq and being blacklisted from employment and education opportunities for the rest of their lives. Many of these youth have been targeted by an 'economic draft', a US recruitment effort that targets the poor with offers of employment, health care for family members, higher education and more if they sign up. These promises are not always kept. Our country has a history once known for peacekeeping, for the art of diplomatic negotiation, for refuge in times of war, for welcoming conscientious objectors like the Mennonites, the Quakers, the Doukhobors, and the Vietnam draft dodgers. These immigrants have made huge contributions to the life of their communities and to our country. Prime Minister Harper's Conservative government chose to direct the deportation of Mr. Long DESPITE the June 3rd House of Commons vote in favour of a resolution introduced by my colleague, Olivia Chow, Federal NDP Immigration Critic. This motion called on our Government to cease any removal or deportation actions against conscientious objectors who have refused or left military service related to a war not sanctioned by the UN. It called for the government to immediately set up programs to allow their application for permanent residency status, so that they can remain in Canada. Further, on June 27th Angus Reid released a poll showing that 64% of Canadians believe that US War Resisters should be allowed to stay in Canada, re-enforcing the fact that the vote in Parliament was reflecting the will of the Canadian people.On July 4th the Federal Court of Canada acted, and ruled that war resister Joshua Key should have his denied refugee claim reviewed by the Refugee Board of Canada. The court found that someone who refuses to take part in military action which "systematically degrades, abuses or humiliates" combatants or non-combatants might qualify as a refugee. On July 9th, the Federal Court further ruled that war resister Corey Glass's order for deportation the next day should be stayed for an indefinite period of time.The Canadian people and the Parliament of Canada have spoken. I call upon Minister Day, Minister Finley and Prime Minister Harper to respect the will of Parliament and the Canadian people and to stand up to President Bush to ensure that American soldiers who oppose that war receive a welcome in Canada.Alex Atamanenko, MP BC Southern Interior

And, of course, "draft dodgers" and "deserters" were both welcomed into Canada during Vietnam. On Robin Long, the
War Resisters Support Campaign states:

Against the wishes of Canadians and Canada's Parliament, the federal government deported U.S. Iraq war resister Robin Long to the United States, where he faces punishment for refusing to participate in the Iraq War. Robin is currently being held at Fort Carson, Colorado. People can send letters of support to Robin at the following address: Robin Long, CJC 2739 East Las Vegas Colorado Springs, Colorado USA 80906 Robin is allowed to receive hand or type-written letters. They must not include anything like drawings made with markers, lipstick, crayons, stickers etc. or print articles. There can be no enclosures, with the exception of standard size photographs (ie. up to 4x6 inches). These must be printed at a photo developing place (i.e. not photocopies, or from a home printer, or Polaroids), and there must be LESS than ten photos, otherwise they will get put in lockup with his personal belongings and he won't see them. The War Resisters Support Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see the
take action page for what you can do.

War resisters in Canada need your help. To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor
the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca"). Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote. Now they've started a new letter you can use online here. The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here. Long expulsion does not change the need for action and the War Resisters Support Campaign explains: "The War Resisters Support Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see the take action page for what you can do."

Thank goodness for The Canadian Press. Were it not for their article,
the CBC, the Welland Tribune, the Globe and Mail and the Buffalo News (among others) might have blank spaces. Instead, all work from the same TCP article to tell you that Deltona, Florida's 23-year-old Tyrone Pachauer was arrested by US Customs and Border officers as he attempted to enter the US following a self-checkout while on leave (December 19th through January 1st). He was reportedly living with relatives in Brampton, Ontario while AWOL. Precious Yutango (Toronto Star) is the only one filing a report and cites US Customs and Border Protection's Kevin Corsaro stating, "Supposedly, he had left boot camp in December for Christmas break. I guess he decided he didn't want to be in the army anymore so he fled to Brampton." Meanwhile AP reports Casey Anne Hardt (18-years-old, from Chiloquin, Oregon) was arrested in . . . Louisiana -- which may hold the record for the most arrests of AWOLs during the Iraq War. She was arrested at a traffic stop in Bossier City (right next to Shreveport). AP states she had a desertion warrant and was now awaiting "extradition to Fort Leonard Wood", MO.

Courage to Resist speaks with Michael Thurman (audio interview) about how he signed up, at seventeen-years-old, for the delayed entry program in 2005 while in high school, "I was really interested in aviation and having a career in aviation. . . . One day the air force recruiter came to school and I was talking to her about joining the military as an air force maintenance technician and eventually working to become a pilot." He described himself at that time as "indifferent," "young," "motivated by self-interests" and in "a conservative right-wing household."

In his senior year he "found some new friends" who provided him with "more of a liberal lean towards politics. So I started seeing it through those eyes and that's when I started becoming a little discontent with the war and the government. . . . But I was still ready to go."

Thurman was then sent to Lackland Air Force Base for basic training where, "I just questioned a lot of things I was being taught." In one class the training was videos of violence -- people being shot, people being blown up -- which led Thurman to questioning. As did "one of the chants was about killing people" which all indicated that "it just seemed like a really hateful, angry situation I didn't want to be in."

Michael Thurman: I didn't really want to be part of killing people but I was already in and I didn't really have a choice so I just advanced and kept telling myself it might get better. So I went through tech school with that . . . with that kind of -- I was a little bit angry about my situation and I got depressed about it a lot. And from there -- It was actually during tech school that I started studying a lot of Eastern philosophy and thought and Buddhism and Taoism and that kind of changed my perspective in a spiritual way towards humanity and towards existence. So . . . I guess I could say at that point I could say I was totally opposed to the situation I was in.

Eventually, he ended up at Beale Air Force Base:

Michael Thurman: I started working out on the flight lines. And every day I was out there I just thought of all the indirect killing I was contributing to and I just couldn't take it anymore. So one day I told my supervisor that I didn't agree with any of it and I didn't want to be in the military anymore. And I told him, if there was any way I could get out, I'd like to get out. They took me off of flight run. He's actually the one who told me about consientious objector. I actually didn't know about the term until I was introduced to it by him. So I looked into it and I read down the criteria and I thought, "Wow, yeah, this is what I am, this is what I'm going to apply for so I can get out of the military." So I applied for consientious. objector status and it took me a long time to it was a really arduous process. They put me in -- they put me in the office. They took me off of flight line and put me in an office. And I was just doing personnel work just pushing paper and filing. I was like a file clerk and that sort of stuff which I was still contributing to it. So every day that I was in, I was in constant turmoil about even the little, the little stuff -- like mopping or taking out the trash. It still contributed to this huge system that I was totally opposed to being.

Courage to Resist: So from the time you first asked to get out until you were discharged, how long was it?

Michael Thurman: It took a very long time, eight months for me to get discharged by the time I applied for conscientious objector status. What happened was, when I applied I had to write a huge paper about what I believe and how it came to be and why I couldn't contribute to war anymore. And at that point, I had to talk to a psychiatrist to make sure I was still sane. I guess they thought I might have been crazy . . . I talked to a lawyer at the legal office and she's actually the one that processed all my legal stuff and determined whether or not I was actually a cons obj and she recommended me to my base commander and it basically went up the chain of command so that's why it took a long time. Oh and I also had to talk to a chaplain and the chaplain gave me a report about my religious and spiritual beliefs. And, so yeah, from that, from those interviews it goes to legal office on base and then it just goes up the chain of command. And it went all the way up to the Secretary of the Air Force and it took eight months for that to happen.


There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Andrei Hurancyk, Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel,
Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at
The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).

In the US today, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstuction issued a report. Stuart Bowen Jr. issued a note to the report [
PDF format warning] explaining, "The United States has now appropriated more than $50 billion in taxpayer dollars for Iraq's reconstruction." The report notes its basis is "seven new audit products" between May 1st and June 30th of this year. The US has outsourced and done so badly if that's not redundant. As is well known, the US government has provided no oversight. Most recently, Dana Hedgpeth and Amit R. Paley (Washington Post) reported Monday on a finding from the Officie of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, "The U.S. government paid a California contractor $142 million to build prisons, fire stations and police facilities in Iraq that is has nver built or finished". The report released today notes these oversight problems on the part of the US government:

* Inappropriate payment of award fees.
* Insufficiently defined scope of work.
* Inadequate preparation of detailed and independent cost estimates.
* Not initiating timely action to close out task orders.

Of course a key problem was the awarding of no-bid contracts on what appears to be a crony system. Parsons is always in the news . . . when it comes to corruption. The report is not different and notes Parsons re: fire houses, "SIGIR reviewed the largest task order, Task Order 51, which called for Parsons to design and construct 21 fire stations in Anbar and Baghdad. Because of multiple delays and cost increases, the U.S. government reduced the number of stations to be constructed to 100. Later another fire station was eliminated before construction began because of land ownership issues, and a second was terminated for the convenience of the government after it was bombed twice during construction leaving nine. In 2006, Parsons completed the nine fire stations and transferred them to the GOI. The award fee paid to Parsons for wok on this tark order was $296,294 -- 23% of the total available award fee."

Parsons bills itself as "a leader in many diverse markets such as infrastructure, transportation, water, telecommunications, aviation, commerical, environmental, industrial manufacturing, education, healthcare, life scienes and homeland security." The company was formed in 1944 and moved to Pasadena in 1992 -- a move James F. McNulty instituted four years prior to be coming CEO and President of the company. McNulty is currently the Chair of the Board (and has been since 1998) and he joined Parsons upon retiring from the US army (Col.) in 1988. What a ride it's been for McNulty.
Griff Witte (Washington Post) reported at the end of the 2006 that Parsons and McNulty felt under attack from Congress and McNulty was blaming others and that he "suggested the government needed to rethink its heavy dependence on the private sector for reconstruction, security and support in a combat environment. The comments are unusual for the leader of a firm that makes much of its money doing work for the government. Then again, few have been battered as badly as Parsons, an employee-owned, California-base compnay with a six-decade track record. Since the spring, when news of the stumbling health clinic program first broke, the company's preformance has been derided in the press and upt under the microscope at congressional hearings. At a hearing in September, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) spoke of a $75 million police academy that Parsons was responsible for but that wend badly awry: 'This is the lens through which Iraqis will now see America. Incompetence. Profiteering. Arrogance. And human waste oozing out of ceilings as a result'." On a June 23, 2004 broadcast of PBS' NewsHour, Waxman called it what it was: "It is looked at as profiteering. And we shouldn't have that go on a time when we've got brave. American men and women who are facing the possibility of giving their lives to help the U.S. effort." McNulty rejected that and insisted that there was no way "we are somehow taking advantage of either the Iraqi people or our government." In January of last year, KCET's Life & Times was returning to the difference of opinions between Waxman and McNulty with Waxman arguing, "I don't think anybody ought to get paid and be able to keep the money if they didn't do what they were supposed to do. Then they found that the Iraqi subcontractors didn't do the work, so why should the United States taxpayers pay for that? We should get our money back." To which McNulty responded, "There is nothing wrong with our firm having made a profit on that work that we did over there in Iraq. It was legitimately earned. It was honestly earned and none of our employees nor our firm should feel the least bit bad about that." That 'honest' work that McNulty's so proud of is best evaluated by Jackie Northam (NPR) reporting in May of 2007: "Getting a definitive answer on the number of clinics completed by Parsons is not easy. Of the original 151 promised, the construction company says it handed over 20 fully equipped, completed health-care centers. The Army Corps of Engineers disputes that number, saying it received only six completed clinics. Some of those needed additional work, the Corps says."

The SIGIR report notes that "Iraq's oil revenues will crest $70 billion by the end of the year." meanwhile approximately $40 million in US tax dollars was wasted on a prison outside Baquba (Kahn Bani Sa'ad) which was turned over to the central government in Baghdad (to finish).This prison was a Parson's 'effort'. The report notes, "About $142 million was spent on various Parsons projects that were ultimately canceled or not completed, including Kahn Bani Sa'ad. The report notes Iraq's deputy prime minister (Barham Salih) stating, "Iraq does not need financial assistance."
BBC explains, "This . . . meant the government was capable of fundign reconstruction projects itself. The report also criticised the Iraqi authorities for failing to improve sewage and drainage facilities. . . . Roger Hardy, the BBC's Middle East analyst, said the report was the latest in a string of criticisms by the watchdog of the way in which American taxpayers' money is being spent in Iraq" Click here for HTML folder containing links to the -- PDF format warning -- sections of the report. Peter Spiegel (Los Angeles Times) points out, "Democratic leaders in Congress are pushing the administration to pressure the Iraqi government to fund its own infrastructure projects through rising oil revenue."

Meanwhile, the pagentry of puppety . . . Diyala Province.
Campbell Robertson (New York Times) reports, "Military officers, both Iraqi and Americans, said the insurgents had probably fled the are after news media reports that the sweep was to begin soon, though officials had been saying publicly that it would be likely to begin in early August." Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) explained, "Iraqi soldiers and national police encountered no resistance as they knock in Baqubah and the town of Khan Bani Saad, about 15 miles south. But this is well-trod ground for the Iraqi forces and their U.S. counterparts, who have conducted repeated operations in the area since last year." It's a for-show effort that (a) props up the puppet Nouri al-Maliki and (b) makes the war seem 'winnable.' In the real world, Reuters reports that Moqtada al-Sadr has "called on Iraq's leaders not to sign a security deal with the United States, offering to throw his support behind the government if the talks were scrapped." Iraq's parliament is out of session now (for one month); however, Reuters reports that Parliament Speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani has called a special session for Sunday to address the electoral issues.

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and left three more wounded as well as "3 policemen and 4 civilians" injured.

Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 police officer shot dead in Mosul and 1 judge shot (wounded not killed) in Mosul (as well as the judge's bodyguard).

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Dora.

Turning to the US presidential race,
Jonathan Duckles of Team Nader notes:

Last Friday on Capitol Hill, the House Judiciary Committee weighed in on "executive power and its constitutional limits" in an inconsequential discussion of King George's imperial presidency.
There would be no vote on impeachment, no discussion of the dereliction of Congressional duty, and no Ralph Nader.
Ralph Nader, who has long championed the necessity of impeachment for W's repeated, defiant high crimes and misdemeanors, was not invited to testify at the Rayburn Building on Friday morning. Writer DC Larson summed the situation up, proclaiming that the "Democrat-led Congress are as unconcerned about political justice as is any neo-con in Rupert Murdoch's Rolodex."
The Nader campaign
was there to observe, along with hundreds of other concerned citizens, but couldn't crack the guest-list, despite a run-in with Ms. Kucinich . Only 16 individuals were granted admission into the hall to observe testimony from the following witnesses:
Panel I:
Hon. Dennis KucinichU.S. House of Representatives10th District, OH
Hon. Maurice HincheyU.S. House of Representatives22nd District, NY
Hon. Walter JonesU.S. House of Representatives3rd District, NC
Hon. Brad MillerU.S. House of Representatives13th District, NC
Panel II:
Hon. Elizabeth HoltzmanFormer U.S. House of Representatives16th District, NYDepartment of Justice
Hon. Bob BarrFormer U.S. House of RepresentativesU.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement7th District, GA
Hon. Ross C. "Rocky" AndersonFounder and PresidentHigh Roads for Human Rights
Stephen PresserRaoul Berer Professor of Legal HistoryNorthwestern University School of Law
Bruce FeinAssociate Deputy Attorney General, 1981-82Chairman, American Freedom Agenda
Vincent BugliosiAuthor and Former Los Angeles County Prosecutor
Jeremy A. RabkinProfessor of LawGeorge Mason University School of Law
Elliott AdamsPresident of the BoardVeterans for Peace
Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr.Senior CounselBrennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law
Said Chairman John Conyers with regard to his committee's inaction, "we are not done yet, and we do not intend to go away until we achieve the accountability that Congress is entitled to and the American people deserve."
Let's hold Congress to this.
Let's reclaim the Constitution.
Let's start now.
Onward.

iraqtyrone pachaueralex atamanenko
mcclatchy newspapersamit r. paleythe washington postdana hedgpeth
alexandra zavisthe los angeles timesthe new york timescampbell robertson

Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Micky Z, Timonthy Noah

It is being noticed that Panhandle Media is not providing coverage of independent and third-party candidates. This is from Kim Petersen's "Media Marginalization of 'Third' Parties, Interview with Mickey Z." (Dissident Voice):

KP: Why do you think it is that even the independent media excludes or marginalizes "third" party candidates and focuses so preponderantly on Barack Obama?
MZ: It's just so distracting to focus on more than two things at once. The media are us. The press is made up humans shaped by the same hypocritical and destructive culture as the rest of us. All of us lunatics trying to navigate the Space Age with Stone Age brains. If believing that Obama is living proof that American democracy works keeps things simple, then it’s just so much easier to believe that. More subtly, the unspoken reality is that those who look beyond the accepted parameters of discussion are excluded from all the (alleged) fun.
KP: Sometimes the focus is support for Obama since he is supposedly less evil than John McCain, or it can even be about revealing Obama's lack of progressivism. But the focus is on Obama and not the progressivist candidates out there. Given that Obama presents himself as a thoroughly unattractive presidential candidate for many progressives, why does one seldom encounter articles on more attractive presidential candidates in the independent media?
MZ: Ah, now we get to the dirty little secret of the so-called Left. A big chunk of them just wanna fit in. They wanna win... even if it means incredible compromise. Then there's some of them that are happiest when bitching and moaning and complaining. Give them a cartoon character to hate like Cheney or Guiliani and they're pacified. So once again in 2008, the independent (sic) press will buy the line of bullshit being sold by a corporate Democrat (sorry, I'm being redundant) and, by proxy, support the status quo and the subsequent global nightmare.

And, Mickey Z, they want to keep that foundation money and big donations coming in. I believe we all know about the attacks on organizations associated with Ralph Nader following the 2000 election. Democracy Now!, The Nation, et al pretend they are free of control but none of them have the guts to really cover the election out of fear that the Democratic money (think-tank, foundation or individuals) might dry up. They censor. They censor big time.

When I used to go to The Nation website or The Progressive's, I never read the comments. (I go to neither now. I do not tolerate sexism.) But I always love reading the comments at Dissident Voice and there are a few that are just too good not to share:

About the marginalization of Third Parties - about a week ago, the first governor’s debate of this election cycle was held in Vermont. The Liberty Union (Socialist) Candidate was not allowed to participate. He refused to leave the stage. The State Police came, forcibly removed him, and arrested him. Ain’t much democracy going around these days.

and:

Again let’s take 2003 when their was the potential of organizing around the anti-war movement. What happened? Was it the Democrats that induced the left to diffuse the movement? Was it the Democrats that twisted the arm of David Cobb and Medea Benjamin to sabotage the party? Was it the Democrats that induced Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, and Michael Albert to support the Anybody But Bush mantra?
The answer to the above is no. What I find tiresome is that it is easy to be against the Democrats but what is HARD is finding something to be FOR regarding the left. In other word no analysis from Mickey Z why the left fails to offer a REAL alternative. What end up happening is that Mickey Z engages in a “blame-the-victim” REACTIONARY accusations.

and:

I’ve been shocked at the alternative media’s almost total blackout of McKinney, Nader, and other altnerative party choices. The few times I have written articles they have been rejected (because I’m not saying what they want me to say).

and:

As I see it, Dennis Kucinich plays a key role as an Enabler. Did I say Talk Is Cheap? Tom Hayden and Norman Solomon also come to mind as topgrade layers of the Big Smokescreen.

There are many, many more, but I think you get the idea. There is a conversation going on at Dissident Voice. (We have some community members who post comments there, by the way.) You really don't get that elsewhere and that's a point one comment makes that if I could squeeze in one more, I would. But I worry about fair use.

So if you read the interview, make sure you read the comments at the end.

Mia asked me if I could put this in from Timothy Noah's "Ralph Can Run If He Wants To" (Slate):

I've never cast a presidential vote for Nader, and I never will. Nor do I agree with Nader that the similarities between the Republican and Democratic parties render superfluous any choice between the two. But as someone who has observed (and admired) Nader all my life, I don't doubt for a second that Nader sincerely believes that. He's never remained satisfied with Democratic politicians, even those with whom he enjoyed a warm working relationship before they entered politics. (The only possible exception is Mark Green, who may have maintained Nader's affections by losing a series of bids for high office: the House, the Senate, the New York mayoralty.) Nader doesn't believe in compromise, and, yes, that would be a problem if he ever really did become president. But his stubbornness has been only an asset in his long career as an advocate, and I'm not so sure it's a liability in his newer career as a perpetual candidate. In the current election, Nader is the sole presidential candidate you're likely to hear about (now that Dennis Kucinich has dropped out) who stands forthrightly for adopting a single-payer solution to the health-care crisis, a stance universally regarded as politically impractical. But single payer is the only solution of much practical value in the real world, as evidenced by the experience of nearly all advanced democracies. If Nader does no more in the 2008 election than oblige major-party candidates to consider that stubborn reality for five minutes, he'll have done us all a big favor.

No, it's not an endorsement of Ralph Nader. But considering the garbage that people like Matthew Rotschild have published, it is practically a valentine. While The Nation offers their garbage telling Mr. Nader not to run, Mr. Noah at least respects democracy. Now this from Team Nader:


Nader on Greider, Hightower and Kuttner
Posted by The Nader Team on Monday, July 28, 2008 at 09:47:00 AM
ShareThisShareThis
Dear Bill Greider, Jim Hightower, and Bob Kuttner:
I write this letter of inquiry out of respect and wonderment to my three friends whose progressive writings over the past generation have been second to none in the community of public intellectuals.
You write cogently - as if people matter first, as if responsive elections, politics and government are critical for a resourceful society that is functionally and institutionally dedicated to the pursuit of justice.
There is one exception to the above generalization with which I have direct familiarity.
In your recent writings and interviews, where you have had pertinent and relevant opportunity to inform your audiences, you declare your dissatisfaction with the two major parties and their leaders over specific issues and records of evasions and neglect.
But you make no mention of the Nader/Gonzalez campaign and its policies that are square on with your positions.
You ignore the areas of action and engagement we are representing or furthering and that McCain and Obama either oppose or ignore.
We're not inferring any endorsements here - just pointing out candidates who are reflecting your kind of political and economic advocacy.
My question is this:
If, year after year, the two major parties oppose or ignore our policy prescriptions, and often facilitate making conditions worse for the people, how do you propose to jump start or spark some movement inside the presidential electoral arena?
You and most of your policy colleagues, whether they write, speak, interview or conduct conferences, almost never choose to recognize or mention the positions and records very similar to yours that were taken, or are being taken, inside the presidential electoral arena by Nader/Camejo (2004) or Nader/Gonzalez (2008).
There are times during interviews on television or radio when the comment or question thrown out at you begs for some mention that someone out there, whom you have known for a long time, is contrasting and challenging the two party "elected" dictatorship that defiantly excludes or marginalizes competition - through state ballot laws and closed debates (a serious civil liberties issue, if nothing else).
The corporate Democrats who control the Party know that they will not be taken to task by the leading writers and polemicists of the progressive community in a way that will discomfort them - i.e. pointing out that their voters can avail themselves of other options on the ballot.
Is there any other language that they understand inside the electoral process?
It is as if your predecessors in the nineteenth century spoke out for abolition, suffrage, labor and farmer empowerment without mentioning or recognizing the existence of those small parties and independent candidates who pioneered, along with parallel civic movements, those great social justice advances we now take for granted.
None of these political candidates ever won a national election, but active speakers, writers, and conveners did not treat them as non-persons.
A very few of your colleagues are beginning to write about the number three presidential and vice presidential candidates in this race. (In Wimbledon or the NCAA tournament, the number 60th seed or team is given a chance to play.)
They realize what an effort it takes just to place one's candidacy on the playing field of a rigged system.
You should empathize enough to cover us on the road after Labor Day.
One journalist - Chris Hedges - found his breaking point and has written columns supporting our campaign.
What is your breaking point in this context?
Is that a valid question to ask as our country is being driven into the ground and its global corporations are tearing at its heart and soul?
Have you ever visited our websites in 2004 and 2008 - voternader.org?
I know about the uni-directional jackhammer nature of Washington's opinion oligopoly.
What I have difficulty understanding is what is its antonym in the progressive media when it comes to reporting and commenting about those who are contending inside the electoral arena?
I look forward to your considered response.
In the meantime, all of us at the Nader/Gonzalez campaign continue to absorb and value your insights and proposals but with a growing sense of puzzlement over the missing gap.
Sincerely yours,
Ralph Nader
P.S. Look at the near blackout nationally of the indictments this month brought by the Pennsylvania Attorney General against state Democratic legislators and legislative aides using government time and taxpayer money to move against electoral and political opponents, including removing Nader/Camejo from the ballot during the 2004 presidential campaign. It was headline news in Pennsylvania but nationally, even the civil liberties groups were not moved. Without candidate rights, how valuable are voter rights in a gerrymandered nation?
ShareThisShareThis



We are all having a great time on vacation. This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot" for today:

Tuesday July 29, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, is Diyala being used for for-show purposes, all-they-need-now-is-a-locust-plague news, Iraqi unions have a victory?, and more.

Starting with war resistance. James Burmeister was a class of 2007 war resister which we all know means they got NO attention from
Panhandle Media. His story was compelling -- as are the stories of all war resisters -- and it was also news breaking. Mark Larabee's "Soldiers still go over the hill even in an all-volunteer Army" (The Oregonian, July 16, 2007) would break the news of James Burmeister and of the kill-teams targeting Iraqi civilians. And Panhandle Media would respond with . . . silence and indiferrence. Maybe they just found it all 'tedious'? Dee Knight never saw the job of indpendent media to render war resisters (or the Iraq War) invisible. Knight (Workers World) reports that Erich Burmeister (rightly) considers his son a hero, "I think my son is a hero. There are many Iraqis who were not killed because of what he did, and many GIs whose lives were saved because of it. He made a tremendous service to his country by standing up and bearing witness to the 'bait-and-kill' war crimes." Erich Burmeister discusses the court-martial as well as the lead up and feels the military played "'good cop-bad cop' . . . to perfection" in convincing James to enter a guilty plea ("We took the bait and got our butts kicked"). Of the court-martial, he notes, "I feel like the case was used as an example to other soldiers. Not only will you get punished, but your loved ones will be too." James Burmeister can receive letters "at Box A, Fort Knox, KY 40121." Earlier this month, Helen Burmeister explained to Rachel McDonald (OPB), "I'm very disappointed in the way they feel they can treat veterans of war. I think the reason my son went AWOL was for a good reason. I don't think he deserved the punishment he got." James Burmeister was court-martialed July 16th, Dee Knight covered the court-martial here and noted the military came down hard on James because he was a whistle-blower.

Burmeister self-checked out and went to Canada. He decided to return to the US in March and turn himself in. Robin Long self-checked out and went to Canada as well; however, he did not make the decision to return. Judge Anne Mctavish made the decision to
extradite him and tried to pass it off as deportation. Courage to Resist notes:

On July 15, 2008 U.S. Army PFC Robin Long became the first war resister since the Vietnam War forced to leave Canada and to be turned over to the U.S. military. Robin is currently being held in the El Paso County Jail, in Colorado, awaiting his Courts Martial. He will be present for his Courts Martial at Fort Carson, Co. He will likely be charged for AWOL, desertion, and possibly speech-related violations of military discipline; he is facing a General Courts Martial, the maximum penalty of such a trial is 20 years confinement. Support Robin Long and all troops with the courage to resist!
1.
Donate to Robin's legal expenses 2. Send Robin letters of support 3. Send Robin commissary money 4. Send Robin a book 5. Sign the public statement of support – coming soon

War resisters in Canada need your help. To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor
the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/mc/compose?to=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca"). Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote. Now they've started a new letter you can use online here. The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here. Long expulsion does not change the need for action and the War Resisters Support Campaign explains: "The War Resisters Support Campaign is calling on supporters across Canada to urgently continue to put pressure on the minority conservative government to immediately cease deportation proceedings against other US war resisters and to respect the will of Canadians and their elected representatives by implementing the motion adopted by Parliament on June 3rd. Please see the take action page for what you can do."

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Andrei Hurancyk, Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel,
Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at
The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).

In Iraq yesterday, bombings took place in Baghdad and another in Kirkuk. Following the Kirkuk violence,
Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) report, violence broke out in the form of mob attacks on Turkmen, buildings were burned, guns were fired, rocks were thrown ("at least 25 Turkmen guards" were injured) leading Iraqi MP Saadeddin Arkej to declare, "I can't practice democracy at the Parliament while the dictatorship is attacking and burning the headquarters of the Turkmen Front in Kirkuk and burning and looting other Turkmen establishments." Caesar Ahmed and Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) observe, "The bombing and reprisals provided a glimpse of the passions among Kurds, Turkmens and Arabs over the future boundaries of Iraq's Arab north and its Kurdistan region." Meanwhile AFP reports Turkey flew planes over northern Iraq in an air strike which they state "completely destroyed" a cave used by PKK members but Kurdish spokesperson Sinksar Abudllah states the bombings took place "where there are only families who earn their living raising sheep. This is the first time that Turkish planes have attacked during the day. We have not received any information about casualties."

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Diyala Province bombing that claimed 1 life. Diyala Province is where the assault began today -- despite last week's leaks that it would start August 1st. Khalid al-Ansary (Reuters) reports that 14,000 to 18,000 Iraqi soldiers should be in the province now and notes, "A Reuters witness said large numbers of Iraqi police and army personnel had deployed in Baquba, where they were searching homes. The U.S. military was present in small numbers backed by helicopters, the witness said." AFP notes the US military's attempts to hard-sell it as an Iraqi operation (and ntoes they once claimed it would involved 30,000 Iraqi soldiers). AP quotes Ahmed Kadhim ("35-year-old businessman") who criticizes the loose lips, "I think this allowed armed groups to flee outside the province." Deborah Haynes (Times of London) appears to back that up, noting that a serach in Fatamia found "only three or four families remained. Six months ago there were 30 to 40 families. This eerie scene has been played out repeatedly in other villages across the southeastern corner of Diyala province, one of the country's most notorious areas." Which should lead to questions of -- remember this was leaked well in advance -- whether or not this is a for-show measure intended to make it appear that things are improving? In another report, Deborah Haynes (Times of London) notes that Iraqi military is "backed by small US military teams". China's Xinhua points out that Diyala Province is now under curfew. UPI reveals the assault's name "Omens of Prosperity." BBC adds, "Apart from the deployment in Baquba, Iraqi and US forces conducted raids in several outlying areas."

Alex Spillius (Telegraph of London) reports US Gen David Petraeus is estimating Iraqis could be in (security) control of their country by the middle of 2010. Considering Petraeus' past estimates, don't hold your breath. Gordon Lubold (Christian Science Monitor) tosses a damp blanket on Petraeus -- the GAO says that after all this time, Iraq is still not responsible (in full -- or puppet) for 8 provinces, most forces aren't at any level of readiness, benchmarks remain unreached.

Turning to oil and labor,
Great Britain's Socialist Worker reports:

The Iraqi government has withdrawn an order banning eight key union organisers belonging to the powerful Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions (IFOU). The union leaders were ordered out of the southern city of Basra after the Western backed government of Nuri al-Maliki said they were memebers of "militias" and helped in the smuggling of oil. The union denied these charges. Hassan Juma'a Awad, the head of the IFOU, called on unions around the world to rally to the oil workers. In a statement he said, "This act is a clear evidence that the Iraqi state seeks to liquidate trade unions in this important Iraqi economic sector. It is important to note that the south is the main source of oil in Iraq." Sabah Jawad, the spokesman for the Naftana, the organisation that campaigns for Iraqi oil rights, told Socialist Worker that the government reversed the order following mounting pressure from Iraqi unions and the international anti-war movement. Jawad said, "We told Hussain al-Shahristani, the Iraqi oil minister, that this was not acceptable, and informed him that we were aware of the measures being taken by the oil ministry." US and European oil multinationals are scrambling to grasp Iraq's vast oil reserves. George Bush made the take-over of oil one of his key "indicators" that the "surge" is succeeding. The return of the multinationals, 36 years after Iraq nationalised its oil, has been greeted with widespread anger. The oil workers have been at the head of the movement resisting the hand over of the industry to western comanies. "The withdrawal of the order is a victory for international solidarity and Iraqi trade unions," Jawad said.

The above is spaced out better
at the link but has to be run as a single paragraph to fit into this snapshot. "© Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place." and they recommend you read "US troops have Iran in their sights" with the above article. US Labor Against the War is attempting "to hold an International Labor Conference in Iraq in February 2009. This is an important and urgent step toward strengthening and unifying the labor movement in Iraq. Only through increased solidarity in Iraq, and with workers in the region and around the world can we hope to impact the fate not only of workers but of all Iraqis. [Learn more.] We call upon all unions and other labor organizations, and individual union members and others around the world to support this conference morally and financially." David Bacon explained the basics at Foreign Policy In Focus in 2004: "Once the U.S. occupation of Iraq began over a year ago, Iraqi workers lost no time in reorganizing their country's labor movement. Labor activity spread from Baghdad to the Kurdish north, with the center of the storm in the south, in the oil and electrical installations around Basra, and the port of Um Qasr. Workers quickly discovered that the occupation authorities had little respect for labor rights, however." And the puppet government in Baghdad apes the White House. Meanwhile a country already facing severe malnutrition gets more bad news. Deborah Haynes (Times of London) reports, "Iraq is in the grip of a water crisis after this year's seasonal rains failed, wiping out crops in some parts of the country and causing an unusually high number of sandstorms because the land is so dry. Dams and reservoirs in neighbouring Turkey and Syria have made the problem worse. The level of water in the Tigris and the Euphrates, the rivers that flow from the two countries into Iraq, has fallen by more than 60 per cent over the past 20 years."

Turning to the US presidential race.
Ronn Cantu (Iraq Veterans Against the War) writes an open letter to Barack Obama, presumed Democratic Party presidential candidate, explaining:

I read an article in the July 12 edition of the New York Times titled "Obama Won't Commit to Event at Military Base." The article confused me, because in a recent Army Times article titled "If Obama Wins," you were quoted as saying "Precisely because I have not served in uniform, I am somebody who strongly believes I have to earn the trust of men and women in uniform."
The NY Times article mentioned, and it bears repeating, that Fort Hood is the largest active-duty military installation in the country. Our post is so large and our commitment to Iraq so great that the Killeen Daily Herald published an article on July 13, 2008 about our sister division titled "4th ID Association Looking to Expand Soldier Memorial."
Since speaking out against the war, I've had to take great precautions to ensure that I'm never perceived to be speaking on behalf of the United States Army nor the Armed Services as a whole, so I hope this letter isn't perceived as such. But I have to say that I think it would be a huge step toward earning the trust of men and women in uniform if you and your campaign work with Carissa Picard and the Presidential Town Hall Consortium, and commit to appearing at this meeting the way Senator McCain has.

The full letter is here. Meanwhile John Pilger (New Statesman) calls out Barack's rah-rah on Afghanistan slaughter, "Having declared Afghanistan a 'good war', the complicit enablers are now anointing Barack Obama as he tours the bloodfests in Afghanistan and Iraq. What they never say is that Obama is a bomber. In the New York Times on 14 July, in an article spun to appear as if he is ending the war in Iraq, Obama demanded more war in Afghanistan and, in effect, an invasion of Pakistan. He wants more combat troops, more helicopters, more bombs. Bush may be on his way out, but the Republicans have built an ideological machine that transcends the loss of electoral power -- because their collaborators are, as the American writer Mike Whitney put it succinctly, 'bait-and-switch' Democrats, of whom Obama is the prince." Meanwhile, look what happens when Gary Younge lets his Socialist roots hang free: He can tell the truth the way he so rarely does in The Nation or the Guardian of London. Writing for the UK's Socialist Review, Young's Obama-devotion is not rushed to maximum high and includes the following:

"[Obama] is being consumed as the embodiment of colour blindness," Angela Davis, professor of history of consciousness at the University of California, Santa Cruz, told me last year. "It's the notion that we have moved beyond racism by not taking race into account. That's what makes him conceivable as a presidential candidate. He's become the model of diversity in this period... a model of diversity as the difference that makes no difference. The change that brings no change." Finally, he did not build a multi-racial coalition but a bi-racial one. Clinton's base has been erroneously portrayed as simply the white working class and older white women. But in California Latinos and Asian-Americans went much more heavily for Clinton than whites did and made her victory possible. The same was true with Latinos in Texas. Indeed the only state where Obama won the Latino vote was his home state of Illinois. And even then by just 1 percent.

Gary Younge, has it been erroneously reported? Yeah and you certainly did your part to PUSH THE LIE in your other two outlets. In fact, he has been nothing but a s**t stirrer and a LIAR throughout this election cycle as he pretended he was 'one of us' (he's British, he will not be voting in this election) and posed as a Democrat to make his lies just a little more forceful to Americans. Either tell the truth or beg for Americans to start asking, "Exactly who is Gary Younge?" (He's already lied again this week and the misogynist Common Dreams was happy to repost it.) For the record, Angela Y. Davis speaks the truth. [On truth,
Michael D. Shear and Dan Balz (Washington Post) try to track down the story of Barack's skipping out on wounded US soldiers.] Patrick Martin (WSWS) points today to a Newsweek interview with Barach where he "emphasized" "phased withdrawal" and Martin observes this is "support for an open-ended US military presence in Iraq". It's the 'residual forces' aspect that Barack will never be clear on -- but any paying attention should have grasped he's not calling for withdrawal. Last week Katie Couric (CBS Evening News -- video and text at link) interviewed Barack and attempted to press him to get specific about this "residual force" -- noting that "some of your advisors have said it could be tens of thousands of troops. Why can't you be more specific as to what you envision?" Barack's response included, "As I've said before . . . I am not interested in a false choice between either perfect inflexibility in which the next 16 months or the next two years I ignore anything that's happening in Iraq. Or, alternatively, that I just have an open-ended, indefinite occupation of Iraq in which we're not putting any pressure on the Iraqis to stand up . . . take this burden on. What I'm gonna do is to set a vision of where we need to go, a clear and specific timeframe within which we're gonna pull our combat forces out." He would never answer the question. [Ava and I covered the interview here.] And unlike his remarks on Sunday, he did agree the 'surge' was a success in that interview. (The 'surge' has not been a success.) He's not supporting withdrawal. Which is why Patrick Martin (WSWS) concludes "The Amrican people thus will be given the choice on November 4 of voting for War #1 or War #2, Iraq or Afghanistan. In fact, they will be saddled with both wars, with only slight differences between the Democrats and Republicans over which war should receive the largest proportion of US military resources. Those who oppose American militarism, who want to bring an end to the oppression and violence wrought by imperialist aggression throughout the Middle East and Central Asia, have been disenfrancised by the two big business parties." And voters have other choice (including write-in, staying home, voting for other offices but not for president) which includes other candidates because it is not a two-person race. Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate, Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and Bob Barr is the Libertarian Party candidate. Last week the Nader - Gonzalez (Matt Gonzalez) began a series of campaign stops that found local and regional media more receptive to covering the presidential race than is the national media. Jim Galloway (AJC) quoted Nader speaking at the University of Georgia, "[Obama is] always talking about his past as a community organizer. But again and again, day after day, he's back-tracking, surrendering, flip-flopping -- and appointing the worst corporatist advisors you can imagine." John O'Connor (The State) covered Ralph's appearance in South Carolina where Ralph explained of Barack and presumed GOP nominee John McCain, "They represent a minority viewpoint. We represent a majority of the American people." Yvonne Wenger (Post and Courier) reported on the South Carolina stop as well quoting Ralp stating, "If you don't resist, the situation gets worse. The alternative is surrender. . . . The stands McCain and Obama have taken again and again do not have the support of the majority of the American people." Sebastian Kitchen (Montgomery Advertiser) reported on his stop in Montgomery at the Rosa Parks Library and Museum and how he noted "Rosa Parks challenged the system" and wondered of the Iraq War, corporate control of the country, minimum wage and healthcare, "Why aren't these issues talked about by the major parties?" Marshall Griffin (KWMU) reported yesterday, "Ralph Nader is a step closer to getting his name on Missouri's presidential ballot. Robert Dalaviras, State Coordinator for the Nader campaign, delivered two boxes of petitions to the Secretary of State's office in Jefferson City this morning." KXAN reported on his Austin stop noting that he called for a number of issues:

"A comprehensive, negotiated military and corporate withdrawal date from Iraq""A single-payer, Canadian-style, private delivery, free-choice public health insurance system for all""A living wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act""A no nuke solar-based energy policy supported by renewable, sustainable, energy-efficient sources""A carbon tax to deter global warming"An end to corporate welfare and corporate crime that has resulted in millions losing pensions, savings and jobs and squandered tax dollars""More direct democracy reflecting the preamble to our constitution which starts with 'we the people,' and not 'we the corporations"

Jennifer Latson (Houston Chronicle) reported on Ralph and Matt Gonzalez' stop in Houston and how they received $7,000 in donations -- in a state that as a result of restrictive (to put it mildly) ballot access laws, they won't even be on the ballot for. (Texas voters can write-in Nader-Gonzalez.) Nader declared in Houston, "This is the worst state in the country in terms of denying voters their own choice of candidates." Prior to the Austin stop, David Shieh (Austin American-Statesman) did a Q&A with Nader:

American-Statesman: So why are you running for the presidency? Ralph Nader: Strong labor laws facilitating unions, strong consumer protections, environmental, foreign, military policy -- all these are not being addressed in a way that a majority of people in this country want them addressed. The majority of people in this country want single-payer health insurance. They want a living wage. They want to get out of Iraq. They want a lot of things that we stand for, and the other side -- (Sens. John) McCain and (Barack) Obama -- are either against it or ignore it. They don't want to talk about it.

Austin Cassidy (Austin Cassidy's Independent Political Report) explains that August 2nd and 34d will find Ralph, Cynthia McKinney, Brian Moore an Gloria La Riva competing in Sacramento for the Peace and Freedom Party's nomination which would allow the candidate to be on the ballot in California. (Cynthia's already on the ballot as the Green nominee). La Riva was part of a woman of color presidential ticket in both 1996 and 2000 (with Monica Moorhead). Team Nader notes:

Is Nader/Gonzalez for real?
The country wants to know.
Will Nader/Gonzalez be on enough ballots in November to make a run for it?
And to be seriously considered for the Presidential debates?
We're now on 18 state ballots, heading toward 30 by August 10 - on our way to our ultimate goal of 45 states by September 20.
And getting to thirty won't happen unless we hit our goal of $100,000 by August 10. (Which would give us $2 million for the entire campaign year to date.)
Thanks to you, we're at over $13,000 in just a few short days.
But we need to
jack it up this week.
Donate now and watch your contribution fuel our road-trippers all around the country.
On the ground, things are heating up and the press is starting to take notice.
In West Virginia, we
turned in more than 24,000 signatures (15,000 valid required).
In Montana, our road trip team
collected and turned in more than 10,000 signatures (5,000 required).
We've also collected enough signatures to get on the
ballot in Tennessee and New Jersey.
In Missouri, today we
will turn in more than 20,000 signatures (10,000 valid required).
This coming week, we're looking forward to ballot access victories in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Utah and Wyoming.
None of this would have been possible without your help.
Every time you
hit the contribute button, you fuel this historic ballot access drive.
During our last two fundraising drives, you came through with flying colors.
First, we asked for $60,000. You did it - on time.
Then we asked for $70,000, and you pushed us over the top with time to spare.
Right now, we need to hit $100,000 to get us to 30 states.
These are the most crucial two weeks of the campaign.
Whether Nader/Gonzalez is for real in November depends on whether we can raise the money to pay for ballot access over the next two weeks.
Plain and simple.
So, please.
Donate now whatever you can - $10, $20, $100, $500 - to help us give America a choice in November.
For peace.
For justice.
For a safe and healthy future.
For shifting the power from the corporations, back into the hands of the people.
Together, we are making a difference.
Onward

iraqjames burmeister
robin long
dee knight
workers worldmark larabee
opb
yvonne wengerdavid shieh
cbs evening newskatie couric
jennifer latsonsebastian kitchen
the new york timesrichard a. oppel jr.sabrina tavernisened parkerthe los angeles timescaesar ahmed
john pilger
mcclatchy newspapers