PBS's NOW covers the Alaska scandal

On Friday, November 23 at 8:30 pm (check local listings) NOW shines a bright light on the scandalous connection between VECO Corporation -- an Alaska-based oil services company -- and Alaska's old-boy Republican network. Two state legislators have been convicted in Federal court for accepting bribes from VECO, while one more awaits trial. The FBI has video and audio evidence that reveal VECO executives shockingly handing out cash to those legislators in exchange for promises to roll back a tax on the oil industry. But that may only be the tip of the oily iceberg. NOW's Maria Hinojosa learns that dozens more lawmakers are being eyed in the growing scandal, including one of the country's most powerful politicians, Alaska U.S. Senator Ted Stevens. NOW investigates the bribes, the connections to big oil and the payoffs to obtain friendly tax policies. The NOW website at www.pbs.org/now offers a web-exclusive report detailing how the oil and gas industry navigated Washington power structures during the past eight years. Using campaign contribution and lobbying data, the article connects the dots between the industry's biggest spenders and the favorable policy outcomes they received. The report also exposes the connections between Big Oil and 2008 Presidential candidates.

The above is what will be on PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio tonight. This is a breezy post. Don't expect a great deal from me. However, there will be illustrations. First up, Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Lame Duck Turkey".



If you didn't already have something to be thankful for this week, Isaiah provides you with it. I had a very nice Thanksgiving with much to be thankful for. One thing this week that I was thankful for was "John Edwards (Ava and C.I.)" which went up here Wednesday. Ava and C.I. filled in and I thank them for that. They filled in for Mike as well and we both got the same post which Ava and C.I. then apologized for. No apology necessary. We had just arrived at C.I.'s when they pulled up and it was obvious they were extremely tired. That's why, in fact, they didn't go out to eat with all of us. They said they'd knock out something but weren't sure what. They'd been on the road Wednesday talking about the illegal war with various groups and you could tell they were exhausted. We got back and they said, "We put a disclosure in saying we were speaking only for ourselves." No need. I knew that before I heard about it (Mike read it and then read parts of it to us on Wednesday night, I read it in full a little while ago). It's a wonderful post.

Dropping back to Sunday, Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Canada in Distress" is below.



Remember you can use the link or click on the image for a larger version. If I post them "medium" here, it throws off the website. The illustration is of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey and I'm going to copy C.I.'s caption because Isaiah wanted it noted at The Common Ills:
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts 'Canada in Distress.' The illustration depicts the Canadian flag upside down dripping two tears. In the tears are US war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey whose appeal the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear. Isaiah wanted it noted that both the War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist have campaigns to lobby the Canadian Parliament to step up." He wanted to weigh in on Hinzman and Hughey and to be sure that everyone wasn't expecting a Sunday morning laugh, he asked C.I. to post it Sunday evening. I think it's a wonderful illustrated editorial.

Now I'm just going to go over some of C.I.'s entries from yesterday and today. Many people are off today (not a complaint, I had my two days off as well). Thursday morning, "The 'Great Return': Bussed in & bought" went up. It is amazing and the hard hitting and logical response we all expect from C.I. There has been no mass migration back to Iraq or back to homes in Iraq (the latter for the internally displaced) but the limited trickle? The Iraqi government has been bussing in Iraqi refugees from Syria and it's been paying them to return. That's reality and that's grossly offensive. Over four million refugees (internal and external) and the Iraqi government (which has oil revenues of at least $20 billion a year) won't do a damn thing for them. But now that they al-Maliki needs to hold on to his puppet-power, the government opens the pocket book to pay them to return. Syria and Jordan were two of the hardest hit countries in terms of refugees relocating outside of Iraq and the Iraqi government has offered the governments no assistance. al-Maliki needs the appearance of an accomplishment because he's achieved nothing and, before the latest spin, the US Congress was making strong noises about his lack of accomplishments.

C.I.'s "Other Items" mainly addressed US war resisters and also included a critique of All Things Media Big and Small. Thursday night, "And the war drags on . . ." noted Harry Belafonte has been awarded and, at Keesha's request, returned to Katrina vanden Heuvel's shameful attempt to get mileage out of attacking Belafonte. It also includes the news that The Nation has done away with their "IRAQ" folder/heading on the main page of their website and things such as Jeremy Scahill's latest on Blackwater are instead filed under "MORE POLITICS." Has a weekly ever done so little to call out an illegal war? It is doubtful. The magazine's shoddy performance coincides with the emergence of vanden Heuvel to the post of publisher. There is a reason for that. It's not limited to the fact that she doesn't give a damn about the illegal war. It also includes that she is like a mocking bird darting from topic to topic.

"NYT: The Fraterist Gordo" went up this morning and C.I.'s taking on the nonsense dripping off of Michael Gordon that the paper scoops up and places on the front page. Here's a question: why are they able to resell the illegal war? Here's your answer: (1) Disinterest in the illegal war in general on the part of the allegedly independent press. (2) Fraidy cats who lack the guts to stand up and that is due in part to the fact that they lack the knowledge base to call out the lies. So they ignore it or they repeat the spin. They never directly take it on. That means we can expect the illegal war to continue to drag on. "Other Items" went up this morning as well and C.I. was mainly attempting to read as many e-mails from community members and visitors as possible.

So that's it for me.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, November 23, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the mainstream press continues to issue spin, the so-called 'coalition of the willing' receives notice that one member is leaving the club, and more.


Starting with war resistance. Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey are US war resisters in Canada who have sought refugee status. That status was denied and Canada's Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals to that decision. Matt Mernagh (Canada's NOW magazine) reports the status on legislative efforts: the leaders of Canada's Liberal party are cowards. Instead of addressing the situation, they're attempting to buy time by scheduling a hearing. Mernagh notes that war resisters will be allowed to testify at the hearings and quotes war resister Phil McDowell declaring, "We'll give them an understanding of what we're doing here. I think we can make a great case." Dee Knight (Workers World) ties the refusal by the Canadian Supreme Court with other recent actions and decisions and notes, "In the U.S., the organization Courage to Resist has organized a letter-writing campaign to Canadian government officials. The letter asks them "to make a provisionfor sanctuary" for U.S. war resisters, and cites Vietnam-era Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's statement that "Canada should be a refuge from militarism." (To sign, go to Courage to Resist.)"


There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla 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, 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. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

On Thursday, NPR's Melissa Block and Guy Raz (All Things Considered) reported that the US military was saying that violence in Iraq had been reduced. Block and Raz are both self-effacing and not interested in giving credit to their peers. The reality is the US military said it and then the neutered and spaded press repeated it over and over -- including Block and Raz. Truth didn't matter. Actual reporting didn't matter. It only mattered that they all file the claim and then -- if they hadn't already strained themselves taking down dictation -- they grab onto some anectdotal 'evidence' (which Centcom has been happily supplying) and offer that as proof. From the Abbey of Non-think, St. Thomas filed in the New York Times this morning the absurd claim that, "It's clear that the surge by US troops has really dampened violence in Iraq." Never one to be left out on a misinformation campaign, the paper's own War pornographer Michael Gordon (Judith Miller's co-writer on several of the more fictious 'reports') was given room to prance around naked on the front page shreiking "violence in Iraq on the decline"! And I thought that was his career that was on the decline? Gordo and St. Thomas and all the other cowardly peers missed the fact that Thursday saw at least 54 deaths reported in Iraq with reports of over 29 injured. And that doesn't Cara Buckley (New York Times) reporting today on an attack on Hawr Rajab village that claimed the lives of "at least 11 people" with the attackers wearing the uniforms of either the Iraqi military or the US collaborating Awakening Council. That would take the 54 to 65 dead. However the number is higher and AFP's reporting suggests that Buckley's referring to one incident but using the numbers from another. AFP reports that there was an attack in Hawr Rajab but it killed 3 Iraqi soldiers and 10 citizens while 11 died in another attack -- an attack on the village of Al-Kulaiyah. Regardless of where the attacks took place, that's another thirteen bringing Thursday's total to 78 dead. At least 78 deaths that were reported. And the press organs sends their dancing monkeys out to entertain with lies of safety. Dance, little monkeys, dance, prove that training didn't go to waste.

Staying on the topic of lies there's The Myth of the Great Return. Things are so safe in Iraq, that people are eager to return. That's the lie anyway. BBC tried to enlist and do their part this week. Like a battered woman confronted by the stares of her neighbor, they repeated the lies they were told to, that a large number of Iraqis were returning to Iraq. They used the numbers the puppet government of Iraq fed them. They didn't try to verify the numbers. Maybe because the numbers can't be verified and they figured, "Why bother?" But buried in their own 'reporting' were certain uncomfortable realities. The Iraqi government is sending buses into Syria to bring Iraqis back and paying them to return. That explains the small trickle. But don't let the press off the hook because desperate though the refugees may be, if the media hadn't popularized the lie of 'safety' in Iraq, some might have elected not to return. The families of any who die should closely scrutinize the reports and columns to determine whether they have a case for litigation. The United Nations today issued a statement condemning the claims which noted, "UNHCR does not believe that the time has come to promote, organize or encourage returns. That would be possible only when proper return conditions are in place -- including material and legal support and physical safety. Presently, there is no sign of any large-scale return to Iraq as the security situation in many parts of the country remains volatile and unpredictable." Repeating from the statement "no sign of any large-scale return to Iraq".

Patrick Martin (WSWS) zooms in on the lies of the New York Times regarding the alleged 'Great Return': "A front-page report in Tuesday's New York Times gave the newspaper's stamp of approval to the Bush administration's policy in Iraq. The report, spread across four columns under the headline, 'Baghdad's Weary Start to Exhale as Security Improves,' described improving conditions of life and security in the war-torn Dora neighborhood in southern Baghdad, portraying it as the outcome of the massive US military buildup in the Iraqi capital. The Times report consists of a single anecdotal account--the story of one Shiite family who fled sectarian violence in Dora and has now returned--buttressed by figures supplied by the US military and the Iraqi regime, showing a decline in violent attacks from the highs recorded in the early part of this year. . . . After laying it on thick in this fashion, the Times is compelled to admit that the Shiite family profiled is more the exception than the rule. It describes the condition of a second Shiite family, the Nidhals, who fled violence in the west Baghdad neighborhood of Ghazaliya and have not returned because a Sunni family now occupies their home. . . . Why then the rose-colored portrayal of conditions in the Iraqi capital, prominently displayed in the most important American newspaper? Clearly what is involved here is a political adaptation by the Times, the most influential voice of official liberalism, to the Bush administration's policies in Iraq."
Operation Happy Talk never ends, it's just one wave after another. In the real world . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Salahuddin roadside bombing that left four police officers wounded, a Mosul truck bombing targeting an Al-Qayara bridge in which "[t]wo of the bridge pillars" were destroyed, 2 Mosul car bombings that claimed 9 lives and left twenty-one wounded and a Baghdad roadside bombing on a pet market that claimed the lives of at least 13 people with fifty-seven more wounded. CNN puts the wounded toll at fifty-eight. Stephen Farrell (New York Times) reports, "The explosion left headless bodies, dead birds and shattered fish tanks around the Ghazil animal market in east Baghdad, where many families of all sects visit one of the most popular attractions in the city on the Muslim day of prayer." Paul Tait (Reuters) calls it the worst attack in Baghdad since car bombings on September 26th and notes, "Body parts were strewn among bird carcasses as bystanders piled victims into carts and rushed them to ambulances after the blast at the crowded Ghazil pet market. Police said four policemen were among the wounded." Reuters notes a Jurf Al Sakhar car bombing that killed 2 people visiting a mosque and injured two others. That's at least 24 reported dead today with at least eight-five wounded.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that yesterday a "husband and wife" team of journalists for Al-Hayatt were shot at while traveling in their car but survived unharmed while today a boys school in Diyala was where a security "guard and his wife" were beheaded because "their two daughters are not following the Islamic laws." Reuters reports the beheadings differently: "Three suspected al Qaeda militans, including two sisters, beheaded their uncle and his wife forcing the couple's children to watch, Iraqi police said on Friday. The militans considered that school guard Youssef al-Hayali was an infidel because he did not pray and wore western-style trousers, they told police interrogators after being arrested in Diyala province northwest of Baghdad. The three cousnins executed Ayali and his wife Zeinab Kamel at the all-boys school in Jalawlah in Diyala province, village police chief Captain Ahmed Khalifa said." Reuters notes that yesterday "a doctor who was working with the US military" was shot dead in Kut.

That's two dead today (other reports were from yesterday but reported today).

Kidnappings?

Reuters notes "the manager of a grain company in Dhi Qar province" was kidnapped today.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 6 corpses were discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes 3 corpses discovered in Dhuluiya.

That's at least 9 corpses reported found today. Add it to the previous figures and you have 35 reported dead so far today.

Free Bilal Huessein -- the Pulitzer Prize award winning photo journalist who has been imprisoned by the US military since April 12, 2006. AP reports, "A media watchdog on Thursday urged the U.S. military to show good cause for the detention [of] an Associated Press photographer in Iraq, and described his incarceration as 'unjust.' Military officials have alleged that Bilal Hussein, who has been detained for 19 months, had links to terrorist groups but are refusing to disclose what evidence or accusations would be presented. An AP investigation of the case, made public Wednesday, shows no support for allegations that Hussein, 36, took part in insurgent activities or bomb-making, and few of the images he provided deal directly with Iraqi insurgents. In a statement, Johann P. Fritz, director of the Vienna-based International Press Institute, said that the only grounds for Hussein's detention appeared to be the suspicion that he committed an offense. The burden of proof lies with the U.S. military to prove Hussein's guilt, Fritz said, adding it was fundamental to any criminal system that those holding the accused show good cause as to why they arrested him. This, he added, should then be tested in an independent court." David Crary (AP) reported on the AP investigation noting that, "Evidence and testimony collected by the AP shows no support for allegations that Bilal Hussein took part in insurgent activities or bomb-making, and few of the images he provided dealt directly with Iraqi insurgents" and then quotes from the fifty-page investigative report, "compiled last spring by lawyer and former federal prosecutor Paul Gardephe," noting, "Despite the fact that Hussein has not been interrogated since May 2006, allegations have been dropped or modified over time, and new claims added, all without any explanation. . . . The best evidence of how Hussein conducted himself as a journalist working for AP is the extensive photographic record. There is no evidence -- in nearly a thousand photographs taken over the 20-month period -- that his activities ever strayed from those of a legitimate journalist." The fifty-page investigative report can be read in full here (and it's not PDF format so there shouldn't be any problems for anyone attempting to read it). Bilal's 'crime' was documenting reality at a time when other trained (or 'trained') journalists were happy to supply fluff and stenography.

Ali al-Fadhily (IPS) continues to report reality from Iraq and notes that the true escalation of the year was the money the US tossed around to thugs and militias creating the roots for warlords (similar to the 'success' that is Afghanistan) and quotes Iraqi historian Wayil Hikmet explaining, "It is said in the Arab world that if thieves were not seen while stealing, they would be seen while dividing the loot. That is what goes for the accelerating collapse of the Iraqi political system that was made in the USA. The thieves of the Green Zone are now giving me and my colleagues good material to write down for the coming generations." and
Lukman Jassim explaining why the American-imposed 'parternship' of Abdul Aziz Hakim's Supreme Islamic Council in Iraq and Mutqtada al-Sadr's Sadr Movement will not work, "Hakim and Muqtada were brought to the scene by the Americans who employed the two ambitious clerics in order to fight side by side against any Iraqi resistance. But it is well known in Iraq that the two groups cannot put up with each other because of the historic disputes between their fathers and grandfathers and the conflict between them over power in Iraq. It was another American mistake."


Meanwhile the 'alleged' coalition continues to shrink. Press TV reports Donald Tusk, new prime minister, has declared Poland will be withdrawing from Iraq: "In a year's time, I will tell you here in parliament that our military mission in Iraq is over."


iraq
dee knightjeremy hinzmanbrandon hugheyali al-fadhily
matt mernagh
patrick martinthe new york timesmichael gordoncara buckley

John Edwards (Ava and C.I.)

Ava and C.I. here filling in. We're going to talk politics and we're not endorsing anyone. We love to laugh at Obama but maybe even he could find a spine. Of all the Democratic contenders, we rank him the lowest. In addition, the Green Party will be running a primary as well. Neither of us is endorsing anyone. Nothing should be read as endorsement.

We spend our time focusing on the illegal war. This morning Kate Zernike did another drive-by in the New York Times. In 2006, she went after John Kerry, today it was John Edwards.

First, Dennis Kucinich's reaction (Kucinich is running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008):

Edwards' pro-war posture in '04 raises serious credibility questions
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
MANCHESTER, NH -- Revelations in today's New York Times regarding John Edwards' staunch pro-war stance as a Vice Presidential candidate in 2004 "raise serious questions about the credibility of his positions on every issue being debated in this Presidential campaign," Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today.
"Voters have every right to ask, 'Were you telling the truth then, John, or are you telling the truth now?' And Senator Edwards has a responsibility to answer," Kucinich said.
In a major story today about the relationship between Edwards and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry during the 2004 campaign, the Times reported, "Mr. Kerry had increasing doubts about the war. But Mr. Edwards argued that they should not renounce their votes -- they had to show conviction and consistency." Edwards was a co-sponsor of the 2002 war authorization resolution, along with Sen. Joseph Lieberman.
"Mr. Kerry yielded to his running mate," according to the Times story, and told reporters early in the 2004 campaign that he would still have voted for the 2002 war authorization even knowing that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction. Six weeks later, in a speech at New York University, he reversed himself, over the objections of Edwards, the Times reported. A year later, in an opinion piece published in The Washington Post, Edwards reversed his own position, a move that some Kerry aides described as "politically expedient" in the planned run-up to the 2008 Presidential campaign.
"John Kerry was hammered by the Republicans and by many in the media for changing his positions on the war and other issues in the 2004 campaign"” Kucinich noted. "The fact of the matter is that he wanted to come out against the war in 2004, and John Edwards argued against it."
"Now," Kucinich continued, "we have a candidate who voted for the war and voted to fund the war, but says he against it. He voted for the Patriot Act, and now he complains about its abuses. He voted for China Trade in 2000 knowing that Americans would be hurt, and now he's decrying the unsafe products pouring into this nation from China. He supported nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, now he's against it."
"Will the real John Edwards please stand up?" Kucinich said.


So that's Kucinich's point. We've got two points to make.

The first is something that's being brought up on campuses we visit. The second is our own observation.

Is John Edwards capable of strong leadership?

That's what students are wondering. Before the 'debate' where Edwards and Obama went after Hillary Clinton, Rebecca was saying that Edwards needed to take on Obama. She wasn't mistaken. Early on in the 'debate' cycle, Obama certainly had no problem attempting to 'score' on Edwards. Who took it.

So the issue students are raising is that (as Rebecca suspected would happen) there seems to be a line between Hillary and Edwards but Edwards' approach suggests no difference between himself and Obama since he refuses to "go postal" (a student in Arizona) on Obama the way he does Hillary.

If Edwards successfully "takes out" Hillary, he is aware where this leads, right? He's not the front runner. He's the angry guy that took out Hillary. He's the guy who had a problem with Hillary and Bambi's pure as the snow and voters turn to him.

That's the way Edwards' actions are setting this up for students.

So let's say his attacks peal off support for Hillary, that's not support he's going to gain. That's not how it's playing out to students.

Is the plan peal off support from Hillary, setting Bambi up as the lead and then going after him? Or is he bucking for the vice-presidential slot under Bambi? That's what students wonder.

(For the record, we don't bring up candidates. When students do, we let them speak and share. We're there to talk about Iraq. We make no comments on the Democratic primary. We do note our agreement that it's disgusting the three media created 'front runners' won't call for an end to the illegal war. If one of them speaks on Iraq -- any of the candidates -- we will weigh in on that. Iraq's the topic we're there to discuss.)

His strategy is not helping him at present. Our tip would be for him to go after both of the other two 'front runners' or lay off. Students are already asking -- because there is the same small difference between Edwards and Clinton that exists between Edwards and Obama -- also true that the same small difference exsits between Clinton and Obama -- is it just a problem with women? Is that what this anger is coming from?

Take that last point and pair it with the question of whether he's going for the vice-presidential nomination and see if you're not reminded of the drive-by article today.

He really didn't. He squeaked by.

Who won the debate? Democratic operatives and grassroots Democratic activists.


How did they do that?

Proving that Cheney lied. He had seen John Edwards before. Edwards blew that on air -- and blew a great deal. It was the operatives and the activists that provided the proof Edwards didn't (Edwards didn't even offer a loud objection).

His objective was to take out Cheney. Air America Radio hosts and guests were all on it during the leadup. Mike Papantonio was the only one the next day to state the truth: Edwards did a lousy job. But it was too much truth to bear. The hosts (Lizz Winstead and Rachel Maddow) couldn't tolerate it. Papantonio eventually allowed that maybe Edwards wasn't as bad as he originally thought.

But Edwards was bad.

That's over three years ago.

On the illegal war, Edwards, like some Americans, could have changed his mind. If he did, it seems like he could promise all troops out of Iraq but that's for you to ponder.

But setting Iraq aside, what has he learned in the three years?

He's generally considered number three in the polls -- slightly behind Obama, way behind Hillary. Why can't he call out Obama?

What is it that allows him to call out Hillary?

That's a question to ask because if he hasn't learned anything since 2004, there's no indication that he can win a debate. He couldn't take out Cheney.

Has he learned in three years?

He came off likeable in that debate. He didn't come off as a candidate determined to win.

The drive that seems to be coming from his campaign currently is all revolving around his critiques of Hillary Clinton. Well she's a popular target for many.

Is he able to stand up to anyone else?

That's what he needs to demonstrate right now. He needs to show people that he's able to (if he is able to) hit strong. He didn't in 2004 and his focus on Hillary in the last weeks hasn't done anything to prove he's able to except when the person is Hillary.

Hillary inspires rage in some men -- a few women as well like Peggy Noons. Is that what's fueling Edwards campaign?

John Kerry, the supposedly 'wooden' candidate, showed more in his debates with Bully Boy than Edwards showed in 2004 or -- Hillary excepted -- than Edwards shows currently.

The first issue of concern is brought up by students, the second by us. If Edwards wants to move up in the polls, he'll have to address them.

Note these are our opinions and may not reflect Elaine or Mike's -- we're just filling in for them, not speaking for them.

Vote for who you want. We don't care who that is. But since Edwards is the topic of the day and we're filling in for Elaine and Mike, we thought we'd grab the topic because Iowa is in the news!

Iowa's never news. The caucus (it's not a primary) is plagued with fraud. You win if you get the most feet on the ground (non-Iowan feet). It's why Iowa shouldn't lead the primaries. Setting aside the fraud (you don't have to prove you are a citizen of the state, etc. -- Dan Savage documented some of it for the New York Times last go round -- but it's the secret no one's ever supposed to talk about), the set up itself is like nothing the other states have. It is not a reflection of anything. Other states will vote. Iowa "caucuses." We agree with Wally and Cedric that it's long past time the states and the political parties began rotating who went first, second, etc. Supposedly, that topic is going to be addressed at The Third Estate Sunday Review; however, it's been on the topics before and nothing has ever gone online (one piece did run in the print edition). So we'll take tonight to say we stand firmly with Wally and Cedric on the issue of the primaries. Countries have to rotate the Olympics but for some reason Iowa and New Hampshire get the first two spots every four years? That's fair how? It's not fair. We applaud the states who have stood up this go round and said enough is enough.

Here's the "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday, November 21, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, more on yesterday's helicopter crash, CODEPINK thanks and ask others to show their thanks, students continue to be active and more.

Starting with war resistance. "I remember the day kids started throwing rocks," James Circello Iraq veteran and war resister explains to Sara Olson (CounterPunch) who provides an overview of Circello's decision to check himself out of the military, the reaction of his parents, and his decision and quotes Iraq Veterans Against the War chair Camilo Mejia, "How do we honor veterans and then send them to fight in an illegal war? How do we honor the veterans and then not speak out about their service? We don't want to hear their analysis or their questions, and we don't want to hear how their 'service' in Iraq has changed them. How can we go on waving the flag and talking about supporting the troops, when we ignore the thousands of veterans opposing this war?" Olson's article concludes, "Last week, James turned himself in to the military at Ft. Knox, in Tennessee. Rather than going to prison as he had feared, James was simply discharged with an other than honorable discharge which prevents him from accessing healthcare or the GI Bill, but at least for now, James seems OK with that. Now he says he's ready to start the rest of his life, much of which is likely to be shaped by his time in Iraq and his experiences as an AWOL soldier opposing the war."

Meanwhile, in yesterday's snapshot we noted a Joanne Fischer, apparently Canada's answer to Mr. Richard Feder (see Roseanne Roseannadanna), and her 'logic' regarding war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today the Toronto Star is a buzz with responses to her illogical 'logic.' James Clark attempts to set her straight noting, "Many were soldiers who enlisted voluntarily, before they had the chance to be drafted, but quickly became opposed to the war after hearing from returning soldiers about what was really happening in Vietnam" and concluding, "Anyone who refuses to fight in an illegal and immoral war, whether in Vietnam or Iraq, should be welcomed to Canada as heroes, rather than jailed in the U.S. as criminals. It's time we let the resisters stay." Michael Gaspar notes, "Yet when Fisher argues that whether the Iraq war is just or unjust has no bearing on whether Hinzman and Hughey were justified in refusing their orders, she is really saying that an employment contract supercedes every other legal and moral responsibility. A soldier's right to refuse any order they believe would result in the commission of a war crime has been enshrined in the Geneva Conventions, as well as in the Nuremberg Principles. It is also set out in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (Article 92), which governs all U.S. military personnel. To argue the contrary, that a soldier must blindly follow all orders regardless of the consequences, takes us right back to the gates of Auschwitz." Matthew Swan also voices support for Hinzman and Hughey and notes, "The idea that soldiers should follow the orders of their superiors without question, or complete 'one's obligations,' as letter writer Joanne Fisher suggests, is repugnant. As she is familiar with the Vietnam War, she may remember the massacre at My Lai in 1968. A soldier who acts without thought is capable of acts against humanity." Also weighing in is Vietnam war resister Richard van Abbe who shares his own experience and concludes, "Perhaps it's true that Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey do not meet the stringent criteria to be considered refugees. And so what if they joined the military voluntarily? Surely they joined to help defend their country from attack -- not to fulfill the ambitions of an incompetent president in an invasion condemned around the world. In refusing further participation in this murderous fiasco, these two young men exemplify the humanity for which Canada is renowned. The government has the option of permitting them and others like them to stay on compassionate grounds, and it should do so without delay." Because asylum during that time period was never about the draft. The asylum was about the illegal war. The draft had been in place and utilized during the Korean War. Canada didn't feel the need to weigh in then. The issue was the war. Just as it is today.


There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla 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, 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. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

Free Bilal Huessein. Bilal is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who was taken into military 'custody' on April 12, 2006. He's remained in 'custody'. He's been imprisoned for over 19 months without a trial, with the US military making baseless charges in an attempt to try the matter in the court of public opinion and this week's news is that they've announced they'll turn Bilal over to the Iraqi (puppet) government for a trial. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press issued this statement:

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press today condemned the process being used by the U.S. military to prosecute an Associated Press photographer who has been held without charge in Baghdad since April 2006.
A Pentagon press spokesman said Monday that "new evidence has come to light" to prove the military's allegation that Bilal Hussein, 36, is "a terrorist operative who infiltrated the AP." He has been charged with unspecified crimes and U.S. military authorities in Iraq apparently will file a formal complaint against him in the Iraqi court system on Nov. 28.
While AP officials have said they believe it is possible for Hussein to get a fair trial in Iraq, they criticized the U.S. military's failure to provide AP with specific information or evidence related to charges, which could hamper efforts to mount a defense and ultimately free Hussein, whom AP contends is innocent.
AP officials have been working for 19 months to get the U.S. military to either charge Hussein with a crime or let him go. They have repeatedly criticized the government's failure to provide Hussein with basic due process protections found in the American court system.
Hussein is part of the AP team that won a Pulitzer Prize for photography in 2005 for coverage of the Iraq war.
"The U.S. government has exhibited complete indifference to basic due process rights in the way they have treated Bilal Hussein," said Reporters Committee Executive Director Lucy Dalglish. "Even if you actually consider the Pentagon's threadbare accusations credible, it is outrageous that they would suddenly inform the AP that Hussein will be in court facing charges they won't specify but that could carry a penalty of capital punishment, based on evidence they won't disclose, on a day that could be as early as Nov. 29 -- but they won't tell you which day until 6:30 a.m. on the day itself. Does that sound like justice to you?"

Someone who knows a great deal about Bilal's case is Scott Horton. At Harper's magazine today, Horton explains, "There is probably no journalist in Iraq who did more to provide dramatic coverage of the insurgency in Al-Anbar than Bilal Hussein. This why he was seized, and it is why he is now coming to face charges. But in the end, the facts couldn't be plainer. The Pentagon's real gripe has never been with journalists on the ground like Hussein: it has been with the editors who allow their reporting to creep into the American mainstream. It is in the end about freedom of the press, and the right of the American public to secure more comprehensive coverage of what is happening in a war zone." As AP's CEO and president Tom Curley explained to Charles Layton (American Journalism Review) last year, "This is about thwarting a journalist from reporting the news. We have seen no fact that diminishes our belief that Bilal Hussein is not guilty of anything except committing journalism." At the end of this summer, Layton reviewed the many charges the US military has repeatedly made and how those have not panned out (repeatedly). Joe Strupp (Editor & Publisher) reports on the concerns for Bilal's case by AP Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll who explains, "I have no reason to think the Iraqi court system will be anything but fair and impartial. But they can only be imparital about what is presented to them. If one side has evidence and the other side doesn't know what it is, how can we defend Bilal? They have told our lawyers they will find out specifics when the complaint is filed next week."

Meanwhile, Amy Branham (Amy's Head) has photos posted of the vandalization of Iraq veteran Alexander Scott Arredondo's tombstone. His parents Carlos and Melida Arredondo have spoken out against the illegal war and last September, in DC, a group of right-wingers attempted to deface a casket Carlos Arredondo had in honor of his son Alex. When Carlos insisted they stop, the thugs attacked him. Now, apparently, similar thugs have taken to defacing his son's tombstone. Thugs trolling grave yards, thugs in charge of the country -- obviously since Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reports today, "The Pentagon is forcing thousands of wounded veterans to return signing bonuses they received for joining the army. The military says the injured soldiers aren't entitled to the money because they didn't complete their full tour of duty. Jordan Fox of Pennsylvania left the military three months early after being hit by a roadside bomb in Iraq. He sustained back injuries and lost all vision in his right eye. Earlier this month he received a Pentagon letter asking him to return some three thousand dollars in sign-up bonuses. Fox and his mother had recently started a program to send thousands of care packages to servicemembers in Iraq."

Yesterday a helicopter crashed in Iraq and the US military announced deaths. "Presumably US soldiers/service members but the military isn't saying," as noted in yesterday's snapshot. This morning there was still confusion as to the incident and whether another crash being discussed was the same one? A British helicopter crashed. BBC reported: "The US military issued a statement on Tuesday saying two people had been killed and 12 injured when a coalition helicopter crashed near Salman Pak, on the outskirts of the Iraqi capital. But a spokesman for the UK defence ministry said he could not confirm whether this was the same incident but the details did appear to match." UK's Ministry of Defence released the following: "It is with great sadness that the Ministry of Defence must confirm the deaths of two military personnel near Baghdad, Iraq last night, Tuesday 20 November 2007. The two personnel were killed when the RAF Puma helicopter they were travelling in crashed." The statement also notes two British soldiers were seriously wounded. Robin Stringer (Bloomberg News) noted that this brings to 173 the number of British troops killed in the illegal war. The Times of London says it appears they were SAS troops. That would be Special Air Service Regiment. The most public SAS event in Iraq may have previously been the Basra September 2005 incident when two SAS members were caught dressed in disguise and with explosives in the back of their car leading to their arrests, leading the British military to destroy Iraqi property and leading to many suspicions about exactly who is attacking Iraqi civilians since the men's 'costumes' were clearly intended to allow them to pass themselves off as Muslims. Thomas Harding (Telegraph of London) reports they are SAS and that, "The soldiers were part of anti-terrorist mission flying low over the city at night." And AFP says there was only one crash yesterday and that it was the British helicopter.

At Inside Iraq (McClatchy Newspapers), an Iraqi correspondent, writes, "Within two months I lost two of my best friends without say goodbye because they dead alone and far. Sorrow breaks my heart and I need to blame some one for that but how I could blame? Why death happens in that difficult way in Iraq only? Have you ever experienced the feeling of losing dears of your heart while you can not be beside them, sharing them the last moment or say goodbye to them. Anwar was a jounalist who was kidnapped and killed by terrorist in Baghdad. I couldn't say goodbye to him he just disappeared suddenly. His body found in the street three days after the incident. Ahmad used to work with UN when the terrorist threatened him. He was forced to leave the country to protect his life. Yes to run from death that was waiting for him in his exile . . . unfortunately Ahmad infected with kidney cancer while he is in exile. Another time I couldn't say goodbye to my dear friend. He is dying alone and far from his lovely land, no friends round him to share him his last hours as if that our destiny . . . die alone by terrorist or abroad far from whom we love." Not the kind of feel good spin that the mainstream turns out but then the correspondents only duty is to tell the truth which he or she does very well in the entry. It's a shame the same can't be said for many of the US correspondents in Iraq. Or rather, in the Green Zone of Iraq.

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing wounded three police officers, a Ramadi car bombing that claimed 5 lives (plus the person in the car for 6) with at least thirty people were wounded, and a Baquba explosion wounded two and a a bombing in Ranya city tarteged "[t]he head of the political prisoners in Kurdistan region" leaving him wounded. Reuters notes a Mosul truck bombing that claimed 1 life and injured three.

Shootings?

Reuters notes that In "operations targeting al Qeada" the US military "killed six suspected insurgents and detained 10 others" -- suspected. (See this article by Robert Parry for the issue of killing 'suspects.').

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 8 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 3 found in Baquba. Reuters raises the count by 1 to note nine corpses have been discovered.

Today the US military has announced: " An explosively-formed penetrator detonated near a combat patrol in eastern Baghdad, killing one Multi-National Division – Baghdad Soldier and wounding three others Nov. 20. An Iraqi interpreter was also killed. The patrol was returning to base after conducting an escort mission at the time of the attack."


Turning to news of student activism. As Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted today, US students let former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales know just how a torture czar should be greeted, "In Florida, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was greeted with a hostile reception Monday at his first public lecture since stepping down. Speaking at the University of Florida, Gonzales was repeatedly heckled with calls of "liar" and "criminal".' Just minutes into his talk, two students climbed the stage dressed in Guantanamo Bay prison jumpsuits and hooded masks. The students were led away and arrested. At least a dozen audience members stood with their backs to Gonzales during his hour-long speech. He did not take questions from the audience. Gonzales was paid forty-thousand dollars for the appearance." And Sam Beaton (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) reports, "Glasgow and Strathclyde university Stop the War groups mobilised to oppose US ambassador Robert Tuttle's visit to Glasgow University last Wednesday. Tuttle has lied about rendition flights of prisoners and the use of chemical weapons in Iraq. He was met by a group of 60 demonstrators. After his meeting, activists blocked the building and prevented him from leaving for over an hour. The demonstration showed Tuttle and other war criminals that our movement will hold them to account for their actions." ["Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place. If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by making a donation."]

On the topic of activism, CODEPINK has a new action and also gives thanks to all who have participated in previous ones:


Over 4 million Iraqis are currently displaced and impoverished as a result of war and sectarian violence. This week, as we give thanks for all the blessings in our lives, we need also to remember those who are suffering because of our disastrous military policy in Iraq. We wanted to share with you a message we received from our friends in Iraq who are providing aid to Iraqi orphans, widows and internally displaced people. They work under the radar so we need to keep them anonymous, but here are their words:
"Our organization has succeeded in opening a new branch in the north in Nineveh Province. We now have five branches. We also have arranged a special medical clinic that provides free services for widows & orphans in Abu-Ghraib. We have enough funds to run this clinic for three months and hope to receive more financial assistance to keep it going. We are walking a long and difficult road in Iraq and try to focus on the good we can do for people here so we don't feel hopeless. Thank you to the women of CODEPINK for your continuous work to bring freedom and peace to my country."
When you donate to CODEPINK this week, half the proceeds will go toward assisting Iraqi women and children, and half will go toward funding our continuing actions on Capitol Hill. Your donation will work to end the occupation and help repair the awful damage this military misadventure has wrought. Click here and scroll down for more information on the dire humanitarian crisis in Iraq.
On this Thanksgiving, we want to thank YOU for your continuing support -- thank you for joining our vigils and marches, for making phone calls to Congress, for signing petitions and coming up with new and creative ways to raise your voice for peace. We couldn't do this important work without you.

Coming up on Democracy Now! 1) Thursday, November 22, 2007: On this 75th Anniversary of "Brother Can You Spare a Dime" and the 60th Anniversary of "Finnian's Rainbow," A Tribute to the Blacklisted Lyricist Yip Harburg: The Man Who Put the Rainbow in theWizard of Oz. (This is one of the two favorite holiday specials in the community. If you're able to catch it -- watch, listen or read -- take the time to share it with someone.) 2) Friday, November 23, 2007: Leading Australian Scientist Tim Flannery on Global Warming and the Worsening Dangers of Climate Change Denial. We play a speech he gave in Santa Fe, NM.
(The second is a new special. Goodman interviewed Flannery during the last pledge drive cycle.) If you want to share it over the holidays, remember Democracy Now! streams online (live and also after the live broadcast) and you can also check the site to see which stations in your area or the area you may be in for the holidays broadcast DN! on TV or radio. Goodman will be taking part in the Pacifica Radio Archives special next Tuesday which will raise money to preserve the rich audio history that Pacifica has offered throughout its history. The 24 hour special will include many programs looking at the Black Panthers, feminism and much more. Goodman will be contributing to the specials on war resisters -- historical and current. Aimee Allison, who co-wrote with David Solnit Army Of None and now co-hosts KPFA's The Morning Show, will be on with Goodman for one special (Allison is a war resister of the Gulf War).

PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio offers:

On Friday, November 23 at 8:30 pm (check local listings) NOW shines a bright light on the scandalous connection between VECO Corporation -- an Alaska-based oil services company -- and Alaska's old-boy Republican network. Two state legislators have been convicted in Federal court for accepting bribes from VECO, while one more awaits trial. The FBI has video and audio evidence that reveal VECO executives shockingly handing out cash to those legislators in exchange for promises to roll back a tax on the oil industry. But that may only be the tip of the oily iceberg. NOW's Maria Hinojosa learns that dozens more lawmakers are being eyed in the growing scandal, including one of the country's most powerful politicians, Alaska U.S. Senator Ted Stevens. NOW investigates the bribes, the connections to big oil and the payoffs to obtain friendly tax policies. The NOW website at www.pbs.org/now offers a web-exclusive report detailing how the oil and gas industry navigated Washington power structures during the past eight years. Using campaign contribution and lobbying data, the article connects the dots between the industry's biggest spenders and the favorable policy outcomes they received. The report also exposes the connections between Big Oil and 2008 Presidential candidates.

And today on KPFK's Uprising Nezua (The Unapologetic Mexican) outlined why Brian De Palma's Redacted is a must-see film. The film opened today in:

San Diego, CA: Hillcrest Cinemas Denver, CO: Mayan Theatre Minneapolis, MN: Lagoon Cinema Seattle, WA: Metro Cinemas

jeremy hinzmanbrandon hugheythe toronto stardemocracy nowamy goodman
anthony arnovehoward zinnrobin stringerbloomberg
pbs
now with david branccacio
army of noneaimeee allisondavid solnit
codepink

Students & the peace movement

There's a really bad article up at Common Dreams about the state of student activism where the writer raises a few good points but fails to realize that she is part of the problem.

She rightly notes that when things are institutionalized, they go pathetic. (See any of Katrina vanden Heuvel's student 'action' funded groups.) That's not specific to students. As organizations have moved to tax-free status, we've seen similar things take place in the "non-student" world.

But the reason the piece is bad (and I wasted 30 minutes asking myself if I wanted to admit it was "bad" before finally starting writing, it's bad) has a great deal to do with the writer. First of all, she's cast herself in the role of observer. So it's up to her to select what she observes.

Is she even aware that SDS is forming chapters on campus around the country? She mentions SDS in relation to the 60s but seems to have no idea that it is becoming one of the emerging organizations on campus.

She fails to recognize what C.I. has noted for over 2 years now.

1) In the '60s,' we were building on previous movements. The Civil Rights movements produced many leaders -- many of whom were also involved in ending the tragedy that was US intervention in Vietnam -- and it also produced a recent pattern. What can we do? Never a question that didn't prompt a reply. The Civil Rights movement marched, sat-in, stood up, boycotted and much more. The peace movement from that period owes a HUGE debt to the Civil Rights movement.

2) Where were today's non-student leaders? Students waited and they got nothing. They got a bunch of supposed peace activists telling them to vote Democratic. As the current Congress -- elected to end the illegal war -- demonstrates, voting Democratic has nothing to do with ending the illegal war.

3) Where were students? They were expected to show up for rallies and marches as participants, as bodies to take orders. They were not elevated to key leadership. When the faces of the peace movement are not reflective, you have a problem.

4) A lot of lies hurt the peace movement. Again, C.I. has written about all of this, for over 2 years now, at The Common Ills. C.I. started speaking on campuses in February 2003. I immediately started getting calls from the road. C.I.'s biggest concern was the hyping. Students were told -- and many didn't have the historical background to grasp that it was hype -- if we all turn out for the big protest against a potential war on Iraq, there will be no war!

Speaking about the illegal war before it started was easier than speaking after it started. Not because of the media's lie that once it starts we all have to enlist. The reason was because the students were hyped and it was a crushing blow. There were so many dejected and/or angry students. The last letter I got from C.I. (C.I.'s too busy to write letters these days) was written late in the night/early morning after the illegal war started. It was noting the disbelief of students that they and the whole world had spoken loudly but it didn't stop the illegal war from starting. It was noting their feeling that they'd done what was asked. They'd been told this would end the illegal war. Those months after the illegal war started were the hardest to speak on campus. C.I. would go into a scene filled with a dejected, angry or apathetic group of students. They weren't suddenly for the illegal war. They were, however, betrayed. There's no other word for it. Someone my age is used to a thousand betrayals a week. These were young people believing voices of 'truth' telling them that if enough people said "NO!" the illegal war wouldn't start. That was a huge blow to them. It made action building all the harder because what was the point? Hadn't they done what they were asked and hadn't it -- despite the hype -- not stopped a war?

5) Students waited for direction. Not because they were "stupid" or didn't "care" but because didn't we have a ton of people my age (and older) who'd fought for an end to a previous illegal war? These people would reach out, right? No, they didn't. Having been provided no models, having been provided no examples, students finally had enough and started becoming their own leaders. Good for them. They will help end the illegal war.

Now I have seen that shift because I have gone on the road with C.I. a few times. But the column is a 'snap-answer' to a complex issue.

The writer also fails to note the very real facts that Ava, C.I. and Jess have noted repeatedly: students today are more likely to work. Funds have been cut. Just going to DC for a scheduled 'big action' is a hassle. "It's on the weekend!" cries a geezer or know nothing. Weekends are when a lot of students end up working due to their class schedules. It's not just that they have to come up with money for travel, it's that they have to also miss out on income because they are working.

Now students worked in my day as well. But the percentage is higher today. Tuition is higher. A college degree is now seen as a high school degree once was: you have to have it in order to hope you'll have any sort of a paying job.

The writer isn't as old as I am, I'm guessing based on the fact that she states she was in college five years ago. That would be what, 2001? I'm not remembering a student movement shaking up the nation then. Outside of the anti-globalization movement (which I'm doubting she was a part of since she writes for American Prospect; however, I could be wrong), what was out there?

As I noted last night, that movement was demonized. Prior to 9-11 it was already demonized. The government and pundit response to 9-11 only demonized it further.

I appreciate that, unlike so many of her peers in the opinion set, she is attempting to find an answer and not just penning a "Students today are apathetic!" screed from her desk. But she's missing so much and the reasons are because of who she selected and because of her lack of knowledge.

Those turning out to hear an author (feminist or not) speak about body image are not going to be represenative of a student movement to end the illegal war. However, that is what she has encountered. She is also woefully unaware of the very real actions students have been taking part in. It's shocking that she makes no mention of last Friday's walk-outs across the country when she's writing about "youth activism."

The one good thing about the column is maybe it will force C.I. to take my recommendation. I've stated over and over, "You need to write a book about this." That's because C.I.'s been on campuses in 49 of the 50 states (and in Puerto Rico) speaking out against the illegal war since February 2003. C.I. knows this topic. The bulk of those writing about it do not.

I am so happy that Ava is able to go on the road each week with C.I. I told her that when she made the decision (back in April) to put her own life on hold after graduation. I was considering closing up my practice (which I could afford to do but would hate to do) because it's been really easy for me to do my work with vets and tell myself, "C.I.'s out there every month speaking with students. It's taken care of." Ava, like C.I. before her, made a very brave decision to put everything on hold. Like the two of them, I have the money to afford to do that. So don't think I'm attacking those who don't have the resources. Most people do not have the option. They can afford it. But the fact that they don't have to worry about money does not make hitting the road each week any easier. The fact that they don't have to worry about money does not make speaking in Tacoma or wherever any easier when you really just want to wake up in your own bed and spend some time with your friends. Putting your life on hold for the illegal war does not mean that when it's over the clock gets turned back and you get bonus time.

I did the road trips with C.I. during Vietnam. I had the stamina for it. I doubt I would today. (I marvel over C.I.'s ability to do the road even before I factor in the writing online.) I've shared before that C.I. ended a promising relationship when the war started because "This is where my focus has to be." It wouldn't have been fair to be on the road all the time and trying to maintain a relationship. (Rebecca would kick me if I didn't point out that C.I.'s not celibate. But there's no relationship and hasn't been due to energy being poured into ending the illegal war.) As I saw those sacrifices and thought about how comfy my own life was, I was asking questions that I'm still asking but Ava's decision buys me time.

When I learned of Ava's decision, I called her and stated, "I'm going to give you the reasons not to because I'm not sure you've heard it from someone who did it before." I wanted to be sure she knew the down side. Afterwards, she was still determined to put everything on hold following graduation. I told her I was proud of her and I am. Jess is going to law school (I'm proud of him as well), Jim and Dona are in grad school and Ty's taken a film industry internship and turned it into a career. I'm proud of all of them. In some ways, they will be further along in their professional and academic careers than Ava will be due to her decision to put everything on hold and work towards ending the illegal war. That was the big negative I wanted to stress to her. I shared that, with my degree, I had a number of hopes and when I was able to return to my own life, my options were limited and my peers in college had passed me by and then some.

I don't look back and say, "Damn it!" I made a choice and I'd make it again if it was presented to me. Ending the illegal war of my generation mattered. I also had tremendous fun on the road. But there is a price to pay and I didn't want Ava to get ready to leave the table and be shocked by the bill that got presented. The only regret I had was in assuming that I could do both the road and a relationship. Only to learn later that I was cheated on the whole time, which included the man sleeping with many of female friends who thought I was so "noble" to do what I was doing. Apparently you show your good thoughts for someone by sleeping with their boyfriend? (That's not letting him off. However, he would have been just another failed young romance. The 'friends' who elected to sleep with him behind my back -- I hadn't wanted to have an 'exclusive' relationship, that was his call -- were lost for good.) Ava has Jess who is so much more together than any man I was with at her age.

Maybe Ava and C.I. can write the book on student activism? (C.I. always says that students will document this story because it is their story to tell.) I don't know. But I do know that the continued distortions and ignorance on this subject mean someone will have to address reality.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, November 20, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, a US military helicopter crashes, the damage today from the "It was the draft that ended a war!" lie, Bilal Hussein tried in the court of public opinion (because the military can't win in a court of law), and more.

Starting with war resistance. And we'll start with an educational tool. Click here for Canada's CBC audio and video archives on war resisters during Vietnam. Such information won't necessarily help because there's a lot of Dumb Ass out there. Some of which knows better because they lived through the period. South Carolin's Daily Gamecock can honestly plead youth when they argue US war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey have no right to remain Canada because they enlisted so it's somehow different than those avoiding the draft during Vietnam. What The Daily Gamecock can be forgiven for, others can't. Take Canada's National Post (a conservative rag, to be sure) which argues for Hinzman and Hughey to be sent back to the US because this is different than during Vietnam and goodness, "the United States is a democratic ally whose respect for the rule of law matches our own." First, I had no idea Canada's respect for the rule of law had fallen so greatly. Second, does the National Post believe that Canada was engaged with a war during the 60s and 70s? The US and Canada were 'democratic allies' then as well. "Send Them Home" cries the editorial board of the National Post. "Send your editors somewhere to get an education," is the response back. A Joanne R. Fisher writes the Toronto Star that Hinzman and Hughey had a choice. She doesn't make the mistake the South Carolina student paper does but then she's older. So she knows it was not just "draft dodgers" it was also "deserters." She even uses the terms herself. Possibly she greeted them all upon entry with open arms as a sort of Miss Canadian Borders?

No, she didn't. Nor was she involved in the war resistance then. But to accept the 'logic' of her argument you have to assume she did or thinks she did. She says the difference is Hinzman and Hughey volunteered. Sorry to shock her -- and she's old enough to know better -- but war resisters going to Canada during Vietnam included those deserting after they'd enlisted. It didn't matter. It wasn't an issue. And no one in the Canadian government was saying, "Well you showed up for your draft board, live with it." Or, "Well you weren't even drafted! You enlisted on your own!" Or any other of the faux-talking points that get ginned up by the likes of Dumb Asses today. War resisters who sought refuge in Canada during Vietnam did so in opposition to the illegal war going on. Those of us old enough to know better remember should know better. Sadly some of the worst offenders of the "Glories of the Draft" are, yes, some men on the left who continue to trot that lie out even though none of the ones trotting it out were ever drafted. You really think Canada gave a damn if the US drafted or not? The issue was an illegal war.

Can you be sent to fight in an illegal war was the issue and the government of Canada provided refuge to those resisting. The issue was not, "Can you be drafted? Should governments draft?" Those were not issues that mattered in terms of what was going on then. There was not a motion to support those resisters who were drafted but not the ones who enlisted. For those late to the party a draft resister or 'draft dodger' had not been inducted but received notice, a deserter was someone who had begun serving and self-checked out.

So let's all drop the nonsense that Canada provided asylum because there was "A DRAFT!!!" Those lies are hurting today's movement.

The draft was not the issue. The issue was the illegal war. Pierre Trudeau said what in 1969? "Those who make the conscientious judgement that they must not participate in this war . . . have my complete sympathy, and indeed our political approach has been to give them access to Canada. . . . Canada should be a refuge from militarism." He said nothing about "Those who make the conscientious judgement -- because they are drafted . .." Flashing back to October 2nd, US House Rep Christopher Shays insisted, "I was a conscientious objector. I was in the Peace Corp!" Point being, the draft could be got around by White men -- as a number of men of a certain age damn well should know -- and was. Nearly half of the US men seeking refuge in Canada during Vietnam were deserters. There was no Q & A they had to participate in asking, "Well, did you enlist or join after you got a draft notice? Oh, you enlisted? Sorry, you'll need to return to the US." The concern was the illegal war -- which Canada's government sat out and the people of Canada overwhelming opposed -- same as today.

The illegal war. The abuses that were taking place. The crimes that were taking place. The lies about the war, about how it could be won, how it was being 'won,' lie, lie, lie while more Vietnamese and US service members died. The "DRAFT DID IT" lie not only erases the involvement of women in the peace movement and the work done, it not only reduces a generation that had beliefs and values into something much more shallow than the right-wing could imagine. The issue was the illegal war then and it's the issue today.

Attempting to make it the draft -- as some on the left encourage with their talk and some on the right sieze on -- is ridiculous. The issue was the war and is the war. Which is why we don't waste time making arguments like, "Okay, Hughey should be sent back because he knew the Iraq War was going on but Hinzman enlisted before that happened!" In fairness to all above, at least they are writing about it. Whatever mistakes, whatever right-wing rants, they are covering it. You can't say the same for the 'left' and left which goes a long way towards explaining why the illegal war drags on.

Nick Jamison (University of Maryland's The Retriever Weekly) does step up noting:

Back in August 2006, the number of deserters from all branches of the U.S. Military was reported at 40,000 service men and women since the year 2000; most deserting at the break of the Iraq War. Because no one would ever abandon a branch of the military just to return, I can only assume this number has increased over the past year. Even with the thousands of cases of delinquent soldiers, the story of two deserters, Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey, is making the front pages.
After realizing that they could not bring themselves to kill another human being, Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey deserted the U.S. Army and crossed our northern border into Canada. Rather than find a remote area and hide, they decided to fight their deportation in the public sector. The two soldiers openly and publicly placed a bid with the Canadian government to receive refugee status. On Thursday, November 15, their refugee submission, which had already been denied by the Supreme Court of Canada, was officially terminated when they declined to preside over subsequent appeals. The Canadian Minister of Citizenship and Immigration believes refugee status should only be given to persons in true need of it.


Good so far. But what does Jamison -- who didn't live through Vietnam -- do next? Go to the draft. That's not Jamison's fault. That's the fault of his elders. Repeating, your useless memories of a time gone by (distorted memories at that) are not doing today's war resisters or today's young adults any good. BBC's Lee Carter offers a report (text and audio) which concludes, "In response to the latest rebuff by the Supreme Court, the men's lawyer and a political support group are appealing to Canada's Conservative government to issue a special permit that would allow men to stay in Canada." The War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are two of the ogranizations with campaigns to lobby the Canadian Parliament to step up. Reflecting on the refusal by the Canadian Supreme Court, Heather Mallick (CBC) offers: "The Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by American war resisters that they not be sent back to the U.S. for prosecution and has thrown the matter back to Parliament. The principle is 'refugee asylum' and it's odd that the court suddenly won't recognize the nature of the dispute. Here's what Pierre Elliott Trudeau said during the Vietnam War: 'Those who make the conscientious judgment that they must not participate in this war … have my complete sympathy, and indeed our political approach has been to give them access to Canada. Canada should be a refuge from militarism.' Look at us now.In the 1960s, those fine young Americans brought energy, drive, and decency to Canada; they did good things here. But suddenly it isn't fashionable for justices to take a stand against the bullying of these boxed-in people. True, the court has accurately taken Canada's moral measure. The House of Commons is not going to tell the absurd Bush that we'll offer refuge to those who don't want to fight his wretched war, even if most American citizens would admire us for it." Judith Siers-Poisson (PR Watch) notes the November 14th preview in Madison of Kimberly Peirce's new film Stop-Loss [Peirce directed Boys Don't Cry for which Hillary Swank won her first Academy Award as Best Actress; among those appearing in Peirce's new film are Channing Tatum, Ryan Phillippe, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Laurie Metcalf, etc.] and notes the climbing desertion rates for the US army as well as Hinzman and Hughey and she cites Elizabeth May (leader of Canada's Green Party) explains that her adopted country of Canada should not "facilitate the persecution of American war objectors by deporting them to the United States."


There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla 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, 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. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters.


The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Zinn will take part in the November 18th presentation (the official opening night -- but performances are already taking place) and musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

Meanwhile, the US military continues tracking down those who self-check out although they continue to deny they do. AP reported this morning on Justin Faulkner who suffers from PTSD already from his first time stationed in Iraq and who checked into Lexington's VA hospital on Thursday "and doctors there told him they wanted to keep him until Monday for observation" which ended when police barged into the hospital Saturday moring (2:00 a.m.), handcuffed him and hauled him off to jail. Faulkner tells Jeffrey McMurray (AP) that he repeatedly used the Fort Campbell base resources but they did not work while his wife Brandy (due to give birth to the couple's second child in March) explains that "in the past few weeks, he has been constantly walking and talking in his sleep. She found about about her husband's arrest when she got a call early Saturday from somebody at the VA hospital." Numerous reports note that Fort Campbell's flack Cathy Gramling refuses to comment -- of course she does, this is appalling. There's no pleasing public relations move that can cover this shameful action. It may, however, remind some of Brad Gaskins who self-checked out of the military to get treatement for his PTSD and was enroute to Fort Drum with attorney and activist Tod Ensign when police came into the Different Drummer Cafe to arrest him -- despite the fact that they had notified Fort Drum that Gaskins was turning himself in. In Sunday's New York Times, Fernanda Santos updates her earlier reporting on Gaskins to note that his PTSD has resulted in previous hospitalization and that he "could be discharged from the Army for medical reasons. He could be court-martialed, which could land him in prison and prevent him from receiving veterans' benefits." Speaking with Gaskins, his family and those who have treated him, Santos attempts to trace when he began exhibiting signs of PSTD and notes that by a two-week pass in August 2006, he was "biting his nails compulsively," had difficult sleeping and woke with night sweats and screaming, retreated to "a darkened room at his grandmother's apartment in Newark whenever her friends stopped by," took a knife to the throat of his wife and more. Prior to that pass, the military had in Samaritan Medical Center where he was heavily dozed.

Turning to Australia. On Sunday, INN reported: that Professor Hugh White ("One of Australia's top defence experts) declared that "the United States-led coalition cannot win the conflicts in either Iraq or Afghanistan." Graeme Dobell (Australia's ABC) reports that White appeared on the network's Correspondents Report program amd dec;ared that despite the fact that there is no 'win' in Iraq for the US, there will not be a withdrawal and White states, "I think that's the tragedy of the American position." Dobell interviewed White for Correspondents Report (link is multi-media -- read, listen, watch):

Graeme Dobell: Whoever becomes president in Washington in January 2009, will they be prepared, Republican or Democrat, to stay in Iraq for another four years to keep taking hundreds and hundreds of casualties?

Hugh White: Yes, I think they probably will and I think you can already see that in the way in which the debate over Iraq is evolving in the run-up to the US presidential election in next year. I think one could say that 2006 was the year in which American realised that they couldn't win in Iraq. 2007 has been the year in which they've realised they can't get out. Even the Democrat candidates are acknowledging that there'll need to be substantial US forces in Iraq for many years to come.

Say what? White goes on to declare that that "for Americans, terrible though it seems, the costs, including the costs in lives of staying in Iraq are known and understood and are bearable". As Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted today, "A new study by the watchdog group Media Matters has found that Democratic and Republican candidates have been asked few questions about their views on executive power, the Constitution, torture, wiretapping, or other civil liberties concerns during the first 17 presidential debates. According to Media Matters there has been only one question about wiretapping. Not a single question about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or renditions. The words 'habeas corpus' have not once been spoken by a debate moderator. Candidates have also not been asked about whether telecoms should be granted immunity over their role in domestic spying. Last week's debate ended with Senator Hillary Clinton being asked whether she preferred diamonds or pearls. The question was asked by a UNLV student who has since said that she was forced by CNN to ask that question instead of a pre-approved query about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository." The Media Matters report can be found here and while those are issues are important so is the illegal war which the debates have increasing moved away from despite the fact that the public hasn't moved on the illegal war in terms of public opinion. On the subject of the press: Free Bilal. Bilal Hussein is an AP photographer, a Pulitzer Prize award winning journalist whom the US military has held for over 19 months since grabbing him off the streets of Ramadi where he was doing his job. BBC notes that after all this time of imprisonment, the US military is now saying they have new evidence against him and want to try him. However, CNN points out, "Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell and other U.S. military officials would not say directly what charges he faced." Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) provided this overview today: "The U.S. military has decided to turn over an Associated Press photographer to an Iraqi court for criminal prosecution. The U.S. has held the journalist, Bilal Hussein, without charge for 19 months. Military officials accuse him of having links to terrorist groups operating inside Iraq. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said: 'This case does not hinge on a single piece of evidence but rather a range of evidence that makes it clearer than before that Bilal Hussein is a terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP.' AP officials have vigorously protested Hussein's detention. The news agency conducted its own investigation and determined that Hussein had no ties to militants. Attorneys for the Associated Press say they have been denied access to Hussein and the evidence against him, making it impossible to build a defense. In 2005, the Iraqi born journalist was part of a team of AP photographers that won the Pulitzer Prize. Bilal Hussein is not the only journalist being held by the U.S. military. Al Jazeera camera man Sami Al Haj has been imprisoned at Guantanamo for over five years." Journalism organizations are rightly raising objections. Reporters Without Borders announces it has "called on the US authorities to act transparently in the case of Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein after the US defence department announced yesterday that it has finally brought criminal charges against him before an Iraqi court after holding him without charges since 12 April 2006. It has taken more than a year and a half for the US military to initiate judicial proceedings against this journalist and yet they still have not revealed the charges. The judicial vagueness surrounding this case is distrubing and unacceptable. Hussein's lawyers will have to appear in court without being able to prepare their client's defence as the US authorities refuse to say in advance what evidence they have." The Committee to Protect Journalists quotes their executive director Joel Simon stating, "That Bilal Hussein has been held for more than 19 months without charge and on the pretext of unsubstantiated, shifting allegations is deeply alarming. While we welcome the military's belated attempt to give him his day in court, we are equally alarmed that he continues to be denied due process and that his legal team has no idea what the evidence is against him so they can prepare a proper defense." Associated Press' General Counsel Dave Tomlin observes this to be "a sham of due process" and states of the latest claims by the US military, "That's what the military has been saying for 19 months, but whenever we ask to see what's so convincing we get back something that isn't convincing at all." AP's president and CEO Tom Curley declares that there are "grave concerns that his right under the law continue to be ignored and even abused. The steps the U.S. military is now taking continue to deny Bilal his right to due process and, in turn, may deny him a chance at fair trial. The treatment of Bilal represents a miscarriage of the very justice and rule of law that the United States is claiming to help Iraq achieve. At this point, we believe the correct recourse is the immediate release of Bilal." On the one year anniversary of Bilal's imprisonment (April 12, 2007), Scott Horton (Harper's magazine) shared, "I was involved with Bilal Hussein's case through the end of last year and I personally conducted investigations that disproved many of the contentions advanced -- and then quickly withdrawn -- by U.S. Forces in Iraq. From my own examination of the case and discussions with U.S. representatives, I was convinced that Bilal Hussein was seized and has been held in captivity for the last year for one reason: the Pentagon was embarrassed by the photographs he took of the fighting in Al-Anbar province. They contradicted the message the Pentagon was putting out about the nature and scope of fighting in Al-Anbar and senior figures in the Bush Administration were particularly galled that the AP won the Pulitzer Prize for its photographic coverage of the war. The Pentagon wanted to send a message to the entire press community in Iraq: Cross us, and we can just lock you up. And we don't need reasons. This is justice in the style of the Bush administration." That other news outlets aren't loudly insisting Bilal be released is why he's been held for over 19 months. But what do you expect from a mainstream press which (this week) files an Iraq report of first hand observations by a reported . . . not in Iraq, or that regularly grabs when the military shops 'human interest' angles including whom to talk to?

At the start of this year, US helicopters didn't 'crash' in Iraq according to the military. They had 'emergency landings,' they had 'hard landings,' they might even have 'crash landings,' but never a 'crash.' Ignoring brass spin, the press started reporting reality with regards to those crashes. Today, CBS and AP report that another US helicopter has crashed and claimed the lives of "two soldiers" while leaving 12 more service members wounded -- presumably US soldiers/service members but the military isn't saying. Reuters notes that Major Brad Leighton delivered the announcement that the crash took place "near the town of Salman Pak" and stated it "was not the result of enemy fire." It never is, is it? All these helicopters just fall on their own. If true, Congress would need to seriously investigate that safety hazard. Over sixty US helicopters have crashed in the illegal war. The last known crash was August 22nd and it claimed the lives of 14 US soldiers on board. The spin the day of that crash was that it was "mechanical malfunction" and "under investigation". Salman Pak, by the US military's own statements, such as in March of this year, is an area where items such as "rocket-propelled launchers" are regularly found.

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 mortars were "lobbed on the green zone" today, a Baghdad car bombing claimed 2 lives and left seven more wounded and two Baghdad roadside bombs left six people wounded.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the latest in the targeting of officials in Iraq is Dr. Musa Ja'afar who was "the head of the Geological survey" until he was shot dead today in Uttaifiyah, while in Zighania a home invasion resulted in 3 brothers being shot dead and a sister wounded, in Diyala Province an 18-year-old woman was shot dead in her home while dropping back to Monday, Kadhim notes that police officer Jamal Falij was targeted with a bomb inside his car which took his life and left two other police officers wounded. Reuters notes a 15-year-old male shot 2 men dead in Baghdad.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 6 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 2 corpses discovered in Basra. Reuters notes "police major Saad Jumaa" was discovered dead outside Samarra today after being kidnapped yesterday and, also today, 3 corpses were discovered in Dhuluiya while 4 corpses (Iraqi soldiers) were discovered in Samarra yesterday and 4 in Suwayra.
Yesterday's snapshot noted an 18-year-old woman shot in the leg that resulted in 43 arrests including 1 American contractor. Today Cara Buckley (New York Times) reports that "Maj. Brad Leighton, a spokesman for the military, said none of those arrested were Americans. The military said the episode involved Almco, a Dubai-based company under contract to the military." Buckley says 43 were arrested and that Almco "has a construction contract with the Department of Defense's Joint Contracting Command Iraq and another contract to provide food, water and other basic services with the Multi-National Security Tranistion Command". Mariam Karouny and Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) note Brig.-Gen. Qassim ("Baghdad security" spokesperson) declared today, "We demand that all security companies obey the law and orders released by the Iraqi government, otherwise the security forces will be obliged to deal firmly with these companies."

Ali al-Fahily (IPS) is not bound to the Green Zone and he reports on the reality with Falluja which is still treated like a prison ("completely closed and surrounded by military checkpoints to make it look like an isolated island") and the isolation has destroyed the local economy, how speaking to the media results in US detention, how the city still hs a minimum of public services (water and electricity). But the mainstream press is going to ride the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk until they wipe out. Which is why you have to go to Robert Parry (Consortium News) to find how Bully Boy "is turning Iraq into a test tube for modern techniques of repression, from sophisticated biometrics that track populations to devastating weapons systems that combine night-vision optics from drone aircraft, heat resonance imaging and deadly firepower from the sky to kill suspected insurgents." It's why it's John Pilger (New Stateman) noting the Lancet's findings of over 655,000 Iraqis killed (that was the summer 2006, the number is now past one million) was not only correct, the British government knew it was but lied and spun and attacked the study because the findings were uncomfortable for Tony Blair, the refugee crisis, the looting, the failure of the BBC and more:

Standing outside 10 Downing Street on 9 April 2003, the BBC's then political editor, Andrew Marr, reported the fall of Baghdad as a victory speech. Tony Blair, he told viewers, "said they would be able to take Baghdad without a bloodbath, and that in the end the Iraqis would be celebrating. And on both of those points he has been proved conclusively right. And it would be entirely ungracious, even for his critics, not to acknowledge that tonight he stands as a larger man and a stronger prime minister as a result." In the United States, similar travesties passed as journalism. The difference was that leading American journalists began to consider the consequences of the role they had played in the build-up to the invasion. Several told me they believed that had the media challenged and investigated Bush's and Blair's lies, instead of echoing and amplifying them, the invasion might not have happened. A European study found that, of the major western television networks, the BBC permitted less coverage of dissent than all of them. A second study found that the BBC consistently gave credence to government propaganda that weapons of mass destruction existed. Unlike the Sun, the BBC has credibility - as does, or did, the Observer.

iraq
jeremy hinzmanbrandon hugheyheather mallickjudith siers-poisson
the new york timescara buckley
democracy nowamy goodman
blackwater usa
anthony arnovehoward zinn
fernanda santosthe new york times
john pilger
robert parry