Weekend post

"St. Paul's Police Protest the Press" (Michael Winship, Bill Moyers Journal):
Chronicling his life as a journalist in the colonial British Raj, a young Winston Churchill wrote that “nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.” Nor, I’d add, is there anything in life quite so discombobulating as to turn a corner and unexpectedly walk into a wall of tear gas.
It happened to me on a couple of occasions during the years of anti-Vietnam war protests, when I was a college student and young reporter in Washington, DC. One time I was gassed while filming a counterdemonstration on Honor America Day, a nationally televised celebration hosted by Bob Hope. As God is my witness, the gas hit just as Kate Smith was singing, “On a Clear Day You Can See Forever.”
The following year, 1971, demonstrators came from around the country to shut Washington down during morning rush hour. A photographer, another reporter and I were on the scene covering a failed attempt to close the Key Bridge crossing of the Potomac. Police in pursuit, we dashed uphill into the Georgetown neighborhood only to run smack into more police lobbing canister after canister of gas until it blanketed the streets. I remember then Rhode Island Senator Claiborne Pell standing at the top of his townhouse stoop in robe and slippers, bewildered at the scene unfolding below him, clutching his rolled up copy of the Washington Post for dear life. Momentarily blinded, students took us in hand and led us to a makeshift infirmary in the basement of a university building.
So, attending the Democratic National Convention in Denver and watching events at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul via television, the sights and sounds of police and protesters were familiar. And that scent, the heavy, cloying smell of gas and pepper spray, as evocative as, but far less delicate than a Proustian cookie.
In both cities, getting tickets to the big shindigs hosted by major corporations seeking to bend the ear of party VIP’s was a media challenge – they were blocked by sometimes heavy-handed attempts by police and private security to keep the press out. A very few, like ABC News’ Brian Ross got in, recording, for example, the bash thrown for Republicans by Lockheed Martin, the American Trucking Association and the NRA, featuring a band named Hookers and Blow. However, in Denver, one of Ross’ producers, Asa Eslocker, was arrested while trying to interview Democratic senators and donors leaving a private event at the Brown Palace Hotel.
What was different in St. Paul was that the police seemed especially intent on singling out independent journalists and activists covering the Republican convention for the Internet and other alternative forms of media. Over the weekend, police staged preemptive raids on several buildings where planning sessions for demonstrations were being held, one of them a meeting of various video bloggers, including I-Witness Video, a media group that monitors law enforcement. Later in the week, I-Witness’ temporary headquarters were entered by police, claiming they had received news of a possible hostage situation.
Why all this interest? One can only speculate, but footage that I-Witness shot at the Republican convention four years ago in Manhattan has helped exonerate hundreds who were arrested and detained by the New York Police Department, their cases either dismissed or resulting in acquittals at trial.
In St. Paul, two student photographers and their advisor from the University of Kentucky were held without charge for 36 hours. The ACLU of Minnesota ID’d several other journalists, bloggers and photographers from Rhode Island, California, Illinois, Florida, and other parts of the country who also were arrested. Many others were gassed or hit by pepper spray.
Perhaps the most prominent arrest was that of journalist Amy Goodman, anchor of the daily television and radio news program, “Democracy Now!” Police had taken two of her producers into custody as they were trying to cover the news. Goodman went out looking for them, but didn’t get very far. She was stopped, slapped into handcuffs, and hauled into a detention center, along with almost 200 hundred other people. They had come to demonstrate, she had come to report on them.
Goodman was released a few hours later and back on the job anchoring her daily radio and TV show, a favorite of listeners and viewers who go to her for news they won’t find in the mainstream or rightwing press.
What has those in control worried is that despite what the politicians tell us from inside their fortified compounds where the party line rules, more and more people outside have cameras and laptops, and they’re not afraid to use them.
Forty years ago, protestors in Chicago shouted, “The whole world is watching.” More and more, the whole world isn’t just watching. From Minnesota to China, citizen journalists are reporting what they see and hear, and the powers that be don’t like it.

Michael Winship writes very well. It's a pity I so often disagree with him.

Including above. I know Ava and C.I. already had Goodman penciled in for Sunday. Last Sunday they covered PBS and Goodman's coverage of the DNC and this Sunday it's the RNC's turn. As a result, I'm sure they'll provide the missing context. The context is missing. For those of us old enough to remember real violence, this pathetic for show, attention-getting stunt by Goody is just laughable. I understand the usual back channels are pushing it as an assault on the press and blah, blah, blah. They embarrass themselves -- both due to historical ignorance and a lack of awareness. But have at it. Make yourself look foolish.

C.I. promoted the following online exclusive for NOW on PBS:

NOW on PBS Host David Brancaccio sits down with RedState's Erick
Erickson in a web-exclusive interview shown only at NOW Online. The two
talk about Obama's bounce, Palin rumors, and whether or not political
blogging really counts as journalism. I think you and your audiences
will find it very intriguing.

I haven't seen it yet. I'm still too busy trying to juggle my schedule. While I know C.I. can be more than fair and I know C.I. has a very high opinion of one person at NOW (I do as well) as well as knowing a few others, I was curious about why this got promoted? (The blogger above is a right-winger.) I just felt there was something more to it. So when we spoke on the phone Friday afternoon, I asked and sure enough there was. If you saw the program (I ended up watching after the heads up from C.I.), you saw Brancaccio offer a little more skepticism than many with Goody. So I will note the above too.

Three e-mailers (two are community members) wrote wondering why it was important for me to go visit C.I. next week? They were fearful I was sitting on some information. I'm not. As most members know, this happened in 2005. C.I. was not just fine with doing everything alone, but wanted it that way. May still. But due to Gutter Trash's making it public at Gutter Trash's site, the events are a little different this time. So I've got a week when I can be out there (if I can swing it on my end and I have) and I'm taking it.

C.I. is intensely private (which I respect because I am the same way) and doesn't ever want to be fussed over. I had asked repeatedly and basically wore C.I. down. I was told last Sunday night (after asking again) that if I wanted to come out to 'calm your nerves, fine' but don't come out to turn it into drama 'because I'm just trying to get through it.'

Rebecca's going to be out there for the fourth week of treatments and that's due to a speaking engagement. She's a part of that and was a part of that before she knew. I would honestly like to stay out there throughout the treatments but I know C.I. and know that being invited for one week was a big thing. Mike will not be going out with me. Mike is going out after Rebecca. C.I. will be further along in treatment and C.I. planned Mike's visit because Mike really is shocked and upset on a very different level. Any health news is very upsetting to Mike so it had been decided by C.I. back in August that when Mike had to be told, he would also be told that he could go out on the fifth week. C.I. calls Mike twice a day at a minimum right now to make sure Mike's okay. But he and Rebecca go into severe panics at news like this. I'm not minimizing my own reaction. I'm just saying that the two of them have a very difficult time handling news like this and C.I. knows that and had planned for it.

C.I. doesn't want a crowd around, an audience. This is upsetting enough without having to perform. Her plan was to make it very low-key but Gutter Trash ensured that couldn't happen. So C.I.'s kids are staying throughout the entire treatments and that wasn't part of C.I.'s plan. In terms of the first week, C.I.'s made all three planned speaking engagements and, as everyone knows, has continued posting entries as usual. They do go up a little later and that's due to the fact that C.I. feels very queasy after treatments (scheduled for the late morning because C.I.'s attitude is, "I'm not getting up at the break of dawn for this."). I am and remain highly optimistic. I'm sorry that three people read something into my visit.

This is just my asking and asking, pestering, and being waived through a visit. (To be clear, during good times, I would have only had to ask once. But C.I. has never enjoyed having people around with just a cold. Let alone something major.)

One of the three felt like the community online wasn't holding up their end and wondered if that added more pressure to C.I.? Yes, it does. But people are dealing with the news on their own as best they can. You should have been able to tell that Rebecca and Mike were trying to more than carry their end this week. Mike's going through the news online right now and attempting to find more Kwame news (and that's a topic that will most likely be carried over to Third because it has proven popular). He's carved out that as a topic to cover and Rebecca's focused on some issues she wouldn't normally.

But everyone's still reacting to the personal news and the personal shock and doing the best they can.

But, yes, ideally, everyone finding a topic the way those two did and exploring it would be the way to go. However, they may have e-mails from readers and may need to address the personal topic as a result or they may just have their own fears and need to address it for that reason.

The community member noted that one topic is now in the trash dumpster and wrote he hoped that was the way it would be from now on in regard to that. That topic was the one C.I. led on. Covering that topic required a lot of work on C.I.'s part. It was always more information than ever made it into the snapshot.

I haven't raised that topic with C.I. Based on my knowledge of C.I., that topic is not covered currently because (a) it is too time consuming to do so, (b) community members have the attitude of 'those people are now on their own' and (c) if something is soured for C.I. it is usually soured for good. (Think of the Stevie Nicks' song which includes the line, "You were gone, you were gone from me, when I remember someone, I remember their dreams." The song is "Enchanted," by the way.) There was a music festival we went to in college and all we had was some chips Rebecca had brought. We had other food at the beginning. But by the end, just these chips -- that weren't that good -- and after eating them and eating them, C.I. never ate them again. (We'd been up all day and all night at the festival. We were headed home and C.I. was driving. C.I. was eating those chips to stay awake. C.I. never wanted to even see those chips after that weekend.)

Just to be clear, the topic is seen by the community as resulting in ingratitude. There was no, "Thank you!" There was no, "You have really helped us!" It was, however, something that led the unhinged Gutter Trash to attack. Why would C.I., in the middle of treatments, invite more attacks from that deranged woman by even mentioning the topic?

C.I. was attacked for covering it and for being right about it. What's the point in ever covering it again? C.I. may decide to. But right now, C.I.'s focus is her own health and she's not going to waste her time after what went beyond ingratitude into open hostility. None of the rest of us are going to help with that topic either. There is a good chance that C.I. might pick it up again but the rest of us will not.

It has to do with not just the attack but with why the attack was launched. It was not about ___ (what was focused on). It actually goes back to July. C.I. suspected that early on and it was confirmed by the investigators C.I.'s attorneys hired. I'll carry that over to the gina & krista round-robin in a column the last week of September. It was a petty grudge and it was very real hatred. By saying "July," I think most members will know exactly what I'm talking about. A few have been intent on waging a war against C.I. That's why Gutter Trash got involved, egged on. You always need a village idiot to pull off something like this and that's all Gutter Trash was.

So they're all on their own now. Lots of luck with that. Their helpers are inept and they aren't very bright. After what was done to my friend, I'll shed no tears for them. You would think that people who made stupid mistakes only a few years back would grasp that they're not all that smart. But the same stupidity that got them into their current situtations has never been acknowledged. Instead it's, "We know everything now!" No, you don't. Not only have you not awakened, you're still in denial. Now you've lost the support of a large number of people. You brought it on yourselves. At a time when you should have shown some gratitude, you started a petty war. Now you deal with the fall out.

All of that is on our end -- those of us who are not C.I. I've outlined the three reasons C.I. isn't tackling it currently and noted "currently." C.I. can focus on the work and put personal issues aside. I feel no ndeed to. C.I.'s going through a very difficult time and focusing on just getting entries up at The Common Ills throughout this. That's not easy. There's no reason for her to add to her burden by inviting more attacks. What was done to C.I. was offensive and I do not forget it. It showed a lack of gratitude and it showed bad manners. I don't tolerate bad manners.

It should also be noted that one chose to amplify the attacks on C.I. Yeah, he took them down. But knowing what C.I. was going through and choosing to pile on attack, I have no respect for him. I'm speaking for me, not C.I. C.I. has regularly cut people off before if they attacked me or Rebecca. What you're seeing is the rest of us standing by C.I. the same way she has always stood by us. Equally true is a great deal was done offline that is no longer being done offline. Support has dried up. They have antagonized a number of people including ones (I'm not speaking of myself or C.I.) that they couldn't afford to antagonize. I've gotten a number of calls from friends in that country in powerful positions who've asked exactly what they should do now. I'm very upfront about what they should do and always add "speaking for me."

I don't think any of them had the good sense to grasp how their attacks on C.I. would look. It didn't win them any points. It did the complete opposite. I'm referring to the offline world and to the people who can effect the change needed who aren't really interested in doing so now. Again, they brought it on themselves. Unless C.I.'s doing damage control offline (and she may very well be), you're going to see what's happened before happen now but at a quicker pace. That's because they've disgraced themselves publicly and there's no one to blame for that but themselves. They're very lucky Rebecca's followed C.I.'s request to not launch an offline and online attack or you would see it happening at a very accelerated pace.

They created a public relations nightmare for themselves and a lot of wells are drying up as a result. No one's fault but their own.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, September 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, no cutbacks (let alone withdrawals) is the word, al-Maliki pretends his feelings are hurt, Adam Kokesh shares his thoughts at a rally in Minn., and more.

Starting with the news of no 'cutback' (forget withdrawal). Tony Capaccio (Bloomberg News) explains, "Top U.S. military advisers have recommended that President George W. Bush delay futher combat-troop withdrawals from Iraq until early next year, according to two administration officials." Julian E. Barnes (Los Angeles Times) reveals, "Under the recommendation, the current level of about 140,000 troops would remain in Iraq through the end of Bush's presidency in January. Then a combat brigade of about 3,500 troops would be removed by February a senior Pentagon official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the recommendation has not been made public." Al Jazeera adds: "The recommendation that George Bush withdraw one combat brigade, or up to 5,000 soldiers, from Iraq only early next year was contrary to expectations that improved security in Iraq would allow for quicker cuts." At the White House today, Dana Perino declared, "I don't recall in the last few times when President Bush has worked with, or has gotten recommendations from General Petraeus, that we have gone too far outside. Of course we -- the President gets an update, as he did on Wednesday evening from Admiral Mullen and Secretary Gates. They took Secretary -- I'm sorry -- General Petraeus' recommendation and ran that through the chain of command. And then they presented it to the President. He's obviously talking to his national security team, and we'll be consulting with members of Congress before we move forward." US forces aren't leaving. Two presidential candidates (Barack Obama and John McCain) have no intention of withdrawing US troops. At what point does the Iraqi puppet face the wrath of the Iraqi people (many of whom have already figured out that Obama and McCain are the same on Iraq)?

UPI reports on yesterday's press conference held by Iraq's Sunni vice president Tariq al-Hashimi. The press conference focused on the proposed treaties between the puppet government and the White House and al-Hashimi declared, "I think that we are not in need of an agreement that does not guarantee sovereignty and brings Iraq out from under Chapter VII, and also guarantees Iraqi law as a whole." Which would seem to put al-Hashimi in a better position with the Iraqi people than the puppet Nouri al-Maliki. However, al-Maliki was handed a gift today with advance publicity for Bob Woodward's latest book due out Monday. The book asserts that the White House spied on the puppet. Not a shocking or surprising claim. (A) He is there puppet and they don't trust him (as well as see him as inept). (B) This is the same White House that spied on the United Nations in the lead up to the illegal war. But al-Maliki's trying to turn it into a national pride issue. BBC reports that the puppet government is making noises about being shocked and how, gosh darn it, they think they maybe plan to ask the White House if this is true! Maybe.

At the US State Dept today, Robert Wood (Deputy Spokesperson) handled the press briefing and was asked about the charges made in Woodward's forthcoming book. He stated originally, "I don't have anything to say other than, you know, I read books, but I don't do book reviews, basically." Pressed later, he would state he hadn't read the book and "I'm not going to give you a review of it." The most Wood would offer was, "Well, again, I'm not going to get into the substance of this book and, you know, our characterization of it, except to say that, look, we have a good working relationship, a strong working relationship, with the Government of Iraq. We've worked very closely with Prime Minister Maliki. We'll continue to do so and -- in our efforts to strengthen Iraq's democracy."

Wood was more expansive on the issue of the "Awakening" Council members, stating, ". . . we believe transitioning some members of the Sons of Iraq into the Iraqi security forces, while providing the others with vocational training and other employment opportunities, will be key to sustaining the security gains that have been realized in Anbar and elsewhere in 2007. But I don't have anything beyond that." In other words, "Thank goodness the puppet government might soon start paying the thugs so we don't have to. Liability concerns, you understand." They certainly have the money to pay it since al-Maliki sits on millions and millions while Iraqis suffer. At Inside Iraq, one of McClatchy's Iraqi correspondents contributes "Why Does Iraq Need This Loan" which notes the central government in Baghdad issued a press release Wednesday proclaiming the Italian ambassador and Iraq's Minister of Finance addressed the topic of the "400 million euro" loan:

Until now, everything seems normal and logical. A third world country takes loan money from an industrial country. That would be completely acceptable if this third world country is a poor country but is it acceptable for a country that gained 32 billions dollars only as supplementary budget from the increasing of oil prices?Why does Iraq need this loan? Our government wastes millions of dollar everyday in putting more blast walls, renewing pavements and of course in buying new armored vehicles for the enormous and increasing number of Iraqi officials. We can buy thousands of agricultural machines with the millions that have been wasted for the faked projects. Of course I'm not talking about the millions that had been stolen by the former ministers or even by the contractors.

Puppet al-Maliki better hope he can get some traction with his mock outrage of "The White House Spied On Me! Who Could Have Guessed!" James Denselow (Guardian of London) contemplates al-Maliki, "So how has this situation come to pass and how are things likely to develop? Is Maliki going to detach from his perceived political masters in Washington and be allowed to show independence? Or will such posturing result in Maliki suffering a similar fate to his predecessor, who was replaced when he became too independent?"

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Reuters notes Ahmed Chalabi was the target of an assassination in Baghdad today via a car bombing that claimed the lives of 2 and left seventeen injured (Chalabi was not among the dead or injured).

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Dbdulameer Hasen Abbas ("Advisor to the Ministry of Defence") was assassinated in Baghdad.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse was discovered in Nineveh Province today (a police officer who was kidnapped yesterday).

Today the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division – Center Soldier died of non-combat related injuries in Baghdad Sept. 5." The announcement brought to 4154 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.

This as Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) reports, "Suicides among active-duty soldiers this year are on pace to exceed both last year's all-time record and, for the first time since the Vietnam War, the rate among the general U.S. population, Army officials said yesterday. Ninety-three active-duty soldiers had killed themselves through the end of August, the latest data show. A third of those cases are under investigation by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner's Office. In 2007, 115 soldiers committed suicide." Pauline Jelinek (AP) adds, "As officials have said before, [Brig. Gen. Rhonda L.] Cornum said the main factors in soldier suicides continues to be problems with their personal relationships, legal and financial issues, work problems and the repeated deployments and longer tour lengths prompted by an Afghan war entering its eighth year and Iraq campaign in its sixth."
While the military does keep saying the same thing over and over, it really doesn't hold up. Take the case of Dustin Mark Tucker whom Mary Callahan (The Press Democrat) reported on Thursday. The doctors can't explain the death (kidney failure is suspected -- the cause, no one knows) and his family can't either:

"He has no family history or personal history of any kind of medical issues," said his mother, Cindy Tucker. "He didn't complain of not feeling well . . . He was happy. He was busy. He was excited for his vacation. He was on top of the world."Tucker, 22, was home for an 18-day leave, his first since his March deployment as a gunner with the Army's 7th Squadron, 10th Cavalry Regiment, 4th Infantry Division out of Fort Hood, Texas. He was thrilled to be home, where his family had planned plenty of free time for golf, fishing and other activities. He was fatigued and jet-lagged after days of traveling from Baghdad to Kuwait, then Ireland, Atlanta and Los Angeles before finally flying into San Francisco and the embrace of his family. Despite the lengthy trip, he seemed ready for some fun, they said. Since arriving home Aug. 25, he had visited family and friends, played golf, bought a motorcycle and was looking forward to a family fishing trip at Clear Lake this week. He complained of no pain, discomfort or illness, but did mention being tired Aug. 27 when he decided to hang out with his two brothers rather than go out with friends, Cindy Tucker said.


Dustin Mark Tucker, apparently healthy, got on the couch and died there. And there are no answers. And there doesn't appear to be a great deal of interest in finding out what happened -- the same way they're not all that interested in the suicides. It's a pattern of pass-the-buck that hasn't been deal with despite the scandals of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center.


Turning to the US presidential race. Yesterday's financial goal for the Ralph Nader campaign was to reach $100,000 in the donations for the Nader Media Fund which led to some mocking in the press. Not only did they reach $100,000, the campaign surpassed it, hitting $104,500 via donaors from around the country -- Texas, Wisconsin, Arizona, California, Oregon, Illinois, Colorado, Hawaii and elsewhere. Meanwhile Richard Winger's Ballot Access News reports Ralph Nader is currently on the ballot in 38 states (the Green Party in 31, the Constitution Party in 33 and the Libertarian Party in 42 -- see chart at the top of the page). Hamza Shaban (The Cavalier Daily) observes, "What Democrats have failed to realize is this: Nader is most dangerous when he is ignored. As a politician on the fringe, he does not seek the broadest coalition but makes new ones. If his platform is not integrated into the Democratic party's, then he will relentlessly go after the disaffected and carve out his own demographic. What loyal Democrats call "spoiling," Nader calls a systemic and deliberate boycott." Team Nader notes:

The Invisible Man, song by 98 Degrees - Justin Jeffre and Jeff Timmons.
WATCH THE VIDEO

The revolution will not be televised - but thanks to your help, it will be on youtube.
We passed our media fund goal of $100,000 and brought in over $20,000 yesterday alone!
This video is our highlight reel from the "Open the Debates" super rally in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The rally took place on September 4, at the same time as the Republican National Convention in neighboring St. Paul. I flew to Minnesota to shoot video of this exciting event, then stayed up all night editing - I hope you enjoy the result. Also, because of your generous support, you will see much more coverage of future events.
Please forward this video to your friends & family. Also please help us - subscribe to our youtube channel and rate our videos and comments!
Haven't had a chance to help our media fund grow? There's still time...contribute to our campaign today.
Onward

The RNC wrapped up their convention last night. John McCain is the Republican nominee. Governor Sarah Palin will be his running mate. CBS Evening News' Cynthia Bowers reported on Palin (link has video and text) today. CBS Evening News with Katie Couric found the anchor interviewing Cindy McCain on Wednesday (link has text and video). Barack supporter Hillary Rosen (CNN) shows a stronger grasp of feminism than a number of leaders when she compiles her reasons for not supporting the John McCain-Sarah Palin ticket but first calls out rank sexism, "I am a woman who someone took a chance on several years ago when they gave me a job that had only previously been done by old white guys. Experience? How do you get any if no one takes a chance on you? And the decision to take a chance can be instinctive, as John McCain said. And what about the argument that she is a negligent mother who will be distracted from her important role? I am a mother who constantly feels the pressure from others about whether I am fit to be a parent, whether I put my kids first often enough and whether my children get enough of my attention. Who has the right to judge my family? My grandmother always said, 'You can't tell time on someone else's clock.' Judgments about people's personal lives are better left unsaid and unrealized."

Tuesday night in Minneapolis, IVAW's Adam Kokesh participated in the Rally For The Republic. Kokesh has posted a video of his speech at his website and below is transcription of the remarks he delivered:

Adam Kokesh: Thanks to a few neocon, chicken-hawk draft dodgers I was sent to Falluja in 2004 with the Marine Corps Civil Affairs Team and I found out the hard way that the greatest enemies of the Constitution of the United States of America are not to be found in the sands of some far off land but rather right here at home. It's not enough to understand that the war in Iraq is simply unjust, illegal, unconstitutional, costing us a horrendous amount of money and destroying our military. The issues before us today are a matter of life and death. I continue to serve my country today as a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, Veterans for Peace and the Campaign for Liberty. It is through the Campaign for Liberty that we will take Ron Paul's message, we will take the torch of freedom that he has borne so well for us, we will take it back to our communities and set brushfires of freedom in the mind of every liberty loving man, woman and child in this great country. I'd like to take a second to recognize the veterans in the room -- if you would please stand -- and any active duty service members please stand. These are the brave men and women who swore an oath with their lives to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. And while it is our responsibility now to resist tyranny civily while we still can, there may come a time when we will say to the powers that be "With your blood or ours, we have come to water the tree of liberty." And it is those veterans and myself, we will be on the frontlines. Who will stand with us? Thank you for taking that stand. To all of you loyal soldiers in this new revolutionary army, it is an honor to count myself among your ranks and I salute you. You want a revolution? You better be ready to fight for it. Now I want you all to get back on your feet, take that stance for liberty with me, with all the veterans in this room, make for yourself the same committment with your lives, your fortunes and your sacred honor to our cause and make that pledge from your hearts where the fire of liberty burns that we will not rest 'till we achieve our goals and we get this new revolution in America. Now I want you to stay on your feet for just for just another minute -- you're going to want to stay on your feet for this -- because now I have the great pleaure of introducing on behalf of the Campaign for Liberty, someone you have all been waiting to see, Aimee Allen.

Note, Adam is co-chair of IVAW. He was speaking for himself at the Ron Paul rally as do all IVAW members participating in political campaigns for candidates. IVAW does not endorse any single candidate, they do not belong to or serve one party. IVAW is a diverse group in all ways including politically. Their shared beliefs include an end to the illegal war, reperations for the Iraqi people and that US veterans' service is honored (and promises kept) by the US government.

Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney has held multiple events in Wisconsin today and has more planned for tomorrow: Today she held a lunch (10:30 a.m.), a town hall (Walden III School, Racine) at one p.m., and a Park Six meet and greet starting at 4:30. Saturday she will be speaking at the Fighting Bob Festival (Baraboo, Wisconsin at 10:20 in the morning and will be hosting another meet and greet this time at High Noon Salloon in Madison beginning at 5:30 p.m.).


NOW on PBS begins airing tonight in most markets. (Check local listings.) On the program this weekend (the above is a web exclusive and not a part of the show), Brancaccio interviews Christine Todd Whitman (billed as a moderate Republican) about the state of the GOP. Bill Moyers Journal brings back Dr. Kathy -- no doubt because America doesn't have enough worthless gas bagging on TV. The program moves into reality with a look at the National Guard members serving in Iraq. Gwen and the gas bags reteam to scare America on the latest installment of Washington Week. The Washington Post's David Broder and Vanity Fair's Todd S. Purdum are the two names that can be mentioned with minimal shudders. The others would produce screaming. In terms of radio, The Next Hour airs on WBAI Sunday (eleven to noon EST) and this week Janet Coleman and David Dozer "appear with yarrow sticks and The Book of Changes." Bill Moyers Journal tackles protests (and, some would say attention getting) so we'll include this section:

Perhaps the most prominent arrest was that of journalist Amy Goodman, anchor of the daily television and radio news program, "Democracy Now!" Police had taken two of her producers into custody as they were trying to cover the news. Goodman went out looking for them, but didn't get very far. She was stopped, slapped into handcuffs, and hauled into a detention center, along with almost 200 hundred other people. They had come to demonstrate, she had come to report on them. Goodman was released a few hours later and back on the job anchoring her daily radio and TV show, a favorite of listeners and viewers who go to her for news they won't find in the mainstream or rightwing press.

Winship is very kind to attention seeking Goody and what she actually offers. The essay is available in full online at Bill Moyers Journal.

iraq
adam kokesh
iraq veterans against the warmcclatchy newspapersthe los angeles timesjulian e. barnes
the washington postann scott tysonmary callahan
the next hourjanet colemandavid dozerwbaiwashington weekbill moyers journalpbsnow on pbs
michael winship