"Winter Soldier" (Stan Goff, The Huffington Post):
Iraq Veterans Against the War continues to engage in thoughtful, sometimes provocative, and militant opposition to the war; and they are appealing to a group far more critical to the occupation than spineless Congresspersons and Senators: the members of the armed forces themselves. IVAW is calling for resistance from within the ranks; and though the Boeing-Serle-ADM press has refused to cover it, that resistance is growing.
This year, there will be several events marking the March anniversary of the terrible collective sin of this imperial occupation. There is one, in particular, that I would ask people to connect with, support, and assist with the reporting via a netroots media-bypass. Those are the upcoming Winter Soldier hearings from March 13-16 in Washington, DC.
From >a href="http://www.ivaw.org/wintersoldier ">IVAW's website:
This spring, Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) is revealing the reality of the U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. In what will be history's largest gathering of U.S. veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as Iraqi and Afghan survivors, eyewitnesses will share their experiences in a public investigation called Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan.
Winter Soldiers, according to founding father Thomas Paine, are those who stand up for the soul of their country, even in its darkest hours. With this spirit in mind, IVAW members are standing up to make their experiences available to all who are concerned about the direction of our country.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time America has needed its Winter Soldiers, 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.
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 an increasingly bloody occupation. 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.
From March 13-16, 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 ours is a story that every American needs to hear.
C.I. passed the above on by Stan Goff because it's one of those things that almost makes the snapshot over and over and it has yet to make the snapshot. Goff's written many strong commentaries on the illegal war and the above is about the Iraq Veterans Against the War upcoming action, one month to go.
This really is an important action. I know C.I. notes it every day at The Common Ills, not just in the snapshot and there's a reason for that -- two actually. First, the community is fully on board with supporting and getting the word out on this action. Second, this is one of the biggest events that will take place during the illegal war.
That is not hyperbole. That's not me hyping it. That is reality.
There will be marches and rallies throughout the illegal war and hopefully they will be well attended. But this is the biggest US action.
There have been similar actions in other countries, truth commissions, and it looked like an action in NYC was going to take off but it didn't and that might be have been due to the fact that in terms of Iraq experiences they were focusing on Abu Ghraib and Janis Karpinski's testimony.
During Vietnam, a Winter Soldiers Investigation took place. It got next to nothing from the mainstream press. But word got out from those who attended and the alternative press (we had one back then). It was huge. This will be as well.
People who have served in Iraq will be sharing their eye witness accounts. This is what the MSM has ignored. It's what Little Media lost interest in long ago. This is the reality that's been kept from the American people and it will be a very big deal.
"Have You Forgotten" (Evan M. Knappenberger, IVAW):
I hear people saying we need war
I say ain't nothin' worth killin' or dyin' for
What about your guilty blood-stained dirt?
What about your bloody star-stripped shirt?
They say that Iraq has wronged us
Before you start singing
Let me ask you this, Patriot:
Have you forgotten how things were before
droppin' shells, peddlin' death
on Beirut miles away from shore?
Have you forgotten our own shame in this?
Everything we got was took
all we brought was guns and fists.
And you say disregard moral calculus.
Have you forgotten?
They wave a picture in your eyes of death
And an Eagle with ribbons in his mouth
As if that will make a difference to someone
Or the ghosts of families' entire lives undone
Some say our country provoked this fight
After My Lai, God, I'd have to say their right.
When I told C.I., "Yes, thank you! I will use that and write about it," C.I. mentioned that community member Eddie had highlighted something and I might want to pair it as well. Eddie e-mailed C.I. about the above today but too late for it to go into the snapshot. So I gladly grab it for use here. We were talking about it and about Eddie's comments so consider this our three-person verdict: Yes, Evan is attempting to send up a song (a really bad song) but do you get how much is being put in? This isn't a parody. The excerpt above should be enough to demonstrate the talent Even Knappenberger has. You really need to read the entire thing in order to truly appreciate it but just the taste above should blow you away.
So that's going to be it for me tonight.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, Feburary 8, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Andy Sullivan loves John McCain and lies for him, will al-Sadr's cease-fire/truce hold when they're praying in some regions for it to end, Americans say "Save the economy by pulling out of Iraq," and more.
Starting with war resistance, Krystalline Kraus (The Rabble) traces the historical support Canada has provided to war resisters:
According to Lee Zaslofsky, a key organizer for the War Resisters Support Campaign and a Vietnam resister himself, he believes that Canada has a certain historical legacy to live up to by accepting war resisters.
It was Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and the Liberal Party who opened Canada's doors during the Vietnam war to thousands of Americans war resisters, who were often motivated by the same feeling of objection to an unjust and illegal war.
"Of course, Canada's legacy extends back further to the [American] Civil War and before that when slaves came north via the underground railroad, and even before that with the United Empire Loyalists, so there is sort of a Canadian tradition of welcoming dissenters from the United States and this is another part of that," Zaslofsky explains.
With the Canadian Supreme Court refusing to hear appeals on this issue in November, the country's Parliament remains the best hope for safe harbor war resisters may have. You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, 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).
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 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.
In the United States, a new poll may cause a stir. Jeannine Aversa (AP) reports that Americans surveyed by AP and Ipsos feel "The way to get the country out of recession -- and most people think we're in one -- is to get the country out of Iraq" and "Pulling out of the war ranked first among proposed remedies in the survey, followed by spending more on domestic programs, cutting taxes and, at the bottom end, giving rebates to poor people in hopes they'll spend the economy into recovery." The number saying ending the illegal war would pull the United States out a recession was 43% and included respondent Hilda Sanchez who declares, "Let's stop paying for this war. There are a lot of people who are struggling. We can use the money to pay for medical care and help people who were put out of their homes." [Marin of error on the poll was plus/minus 3/1%.]
In Iraq, a cease-fire/truce between the US military and Moqtada al-Sadr is close to expiring. Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) reports that yesterday a raid conducted by US soldiers, with Iraqi support, was conducted in "the Shia distrcit of Sadr City" utilizing Humvees and helicopters to arrest 16 (one of which would die in 'custody') and doing so over the objections of local Iraqis such as Abu Sajjad who declares that the US military "detained people who are neutral and educated people. They care only about religion. They will never be witht he military wing." al-Sadr has issued a statement for all followers to continue the truce/cease-fire at present. Lebanon's The Daily Star notes a "report by the International Crisis Group think tank said the respite offered by the cease-fire was 'exceedingly frail' and that Sadrists -- many of whom complain they are targeted by security forces -- remain extremely powerful" and offers this description of the US military incursion into a civilian neighborhood yesterday: "Police and residents said that US soldiers in humvees, backed by helicopters, sealed off a block of the neighborhood and raided four house. The front-door lock on one of the houses was shattered by gunfire, and 22-year-old Arkan Abid Ali was shot in the chest and wounded. Diaa Shakir, 20, said he heard gunfire coming from inside houses US soldiers had entered, as he watched the operation from the window of his home nearby." The paper also notes that the military assualt on a civilian area left two women injured as well as an elderly person. Though the 16 arrested (that's counting the one who was reported to have died in US 'custody') have not been identified by name, the BBC runs with the US military command's boast that one of the 16 may be "a suspected leader of a Shia militia group allegedly backed by Iran." AP notes the toll from the assualt as 1 Iraqi who died in US custody, 1 Iraqi woman shot (but "treated and released"), "two women and an elderly man also had been wounded and tkane to a hospital, where one of them had died." Lauren Frayer (AP) explains that in Kufa today, prayers included condemning "the recent arrests and accused Iraqi officials of sectarian bias" quoting Sheik Abdul Hadi al-Karbalaei who believes the truce/cease-fire is leaving them vulnerable, "For the past six months there have been non-stop detentions of al-Sadr followers, day and night." Those who would like or require audio can refer to Jim Lehrer's News Summary (PBS) from The NewsHour which briefly includes the incident and also notes:
In Iraq, the US military announced an American soldier died Wednesday in a roadside bombing. There have been eight U.S. deaths so far this month. More than 3,950 Americans have died in Iraq since the war began.
In the New York Times today, Alissa J. Rubin leaves out the total but makes a similar claim re: 1 death announced. Repeating from yesterday's snapshot:
Today the US military announced [PDF format warning]: "A Multi-National Division - Baghdad Soldier was killed when the Soldier's vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device in western Baghdad Feb. 6." As noted this morning: "The ICCC total since the start of the illegal war for US service members killed while serving in Iraq is 3950 with 6 for the month. 50 away from the 4,000 mark but since Ted Koppel stepped down from Nightline does the media -- big or small -- even bother to let those numbers register?" The numbers have gone up -- due to DoD namings, not M-NF announcements. Currently the total is 3952 since the start of the illegal war and 8 for the month thus far. On the 7th day of the month, the number of US service members who have died in the illegal war this month is 8.
The US military wasn't eager for the deaths to be widely noted (AEB the fact that M-NF didn't make the announcements) but they're eager for everyone to know something else. Amit R. Paley (Washington Post) notes the US military is stating that al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia is instructing its followers to 'play nice' out of concern that potential Sunni allies might be turned off and Paley speaks with a man named Riyadh al-Ogaidi whom is identified by the paper as a senior leader of the group who claims, "The Americans have not defeated us, but the turnaround of the Sunnis against us had made us lose a lot and suffer very painfully" and also asserts that the Iraqi membership accounted for 12,000 last year but has fallen "to about 3,500 today."
In political news, Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) reports that Thursday Iraq's "Parliament again deferred a vote on the budget of Thursday as political blocs argued about how to divide financing among the provinces, but legislators did make headway toward approving a law that would outline provincial powers. . . . The debate on Iraq's 2008 budget, which was supposed to have been resolved with a vote in December, has revolved around how much of the money to allocate to the Kurds and whether the central government will pay the costs of the pesh merga soldiers, the Kurdish militia. Lawmakers said Thursday that the Planning Ministry had collected date showing that Kurdistan had 14 percent to 15 percent of Iraq's population, and that it should get that share of the nonfederal part of the budget." Along with deferring a vote -- on the 2008 budget, the 2008 budget -- they also had a walk out. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times via San Francisco Chronicle) reports the walk out took place "to protest parts of a draft law that would lay out rules for provincial elections later this year, marking another potential setback for U.S.-backed proposals to ease Iraq's sectarian rifts. The walkout postponed a vote on the measure to redistribute power in Iraq."
"The delay in the budget is harming everyone," stated Adel Abdel-Mehdi, Iraq's Shi'ite vice president according to Lebanon's The Daily Star which also notes that legislation put on hold also included a bill "that would release thousands of mainly Sunni Arabs from Iraqi jails . . . The law that would free prisoners who have not been charged with or convicted of major crimes, like murder or treason, is also seen as a step toward reconciliation because most of the 23,000 people held in Iraqi jails are Sunni Arabs" and this is among the legislative demands that the Sunni Accordance Front made before walking out of puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki's cabinet.
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack. Reuters notes that yesterday people in police uniforms conducted a home invasion in Baquba, shot dead 5 people and then exploded the home and today a Hawija car bombing injured two police officers.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person and 1 police officer in Anbar Province following a clash with unknown assailants and, last night in Baghdad, the "Head of Sahwa," was shot dead in Baghdad (two bodyguards of the 'Awakening' Council chiefton were also injured). Reuters notes a college student was shot dead in Mosul.
Kidnappings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 Christian missionaries ("with the Norwegian Churches Organization") were kidnapped last night in Basra.
Corpses?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad.
Today the US State Department issued "Background Notes: Iraq" which contained many amusing 'interpretations' but we'll note this section:
The focus of United States policy in Iraq remains on helping the Iraqi people build a constitutional, representative government that respects the rights of all Iraqis and has security forces capable of maintaining order and preventing the country from becoming a safe haven for terrorists and foreign fighters. The ultimate goal is an Iraq that is peaceful, united, stable, democratic, and secure, with institutions capable of providing just governance and security for all Iraqis and is an ally in the war against terrorism. U.S. forces remain in Iraq (under a UN Security Council mandate) as part of the Multi-National Force-Iraq to assist the Government of Iraq in training its security forces, as well as to work in partnership with the Government of Iraq to combat forces that seek to derail Iraq's progression toward full democracy. The U.S. Government is carrying out a multibillion-dollar program to assist in the reconstruction of Iraq.
"Under a UN Security Council mandate" is a good time to again note the treaty that the Bully Boy is attempting to prepare with Nouri al-Maliki -- without US Congressional consent (a violation of the US Constitution) or the Iraqi Parliament's consent (ditto). As noted in Wednesday's snapshot, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Stafff Michael G. Mullen went before the US Senate's Armed Service Committee on Wednesday to beg for even more money and claimed that there was no interest in the permanent bases being established in Iraq or that the treaty (neither used that term) didn't call for them. Yesterday, Peter Spiegel (Los Angeles Times) covered the Wednesday hearing as well as the Wednesday House Armed Service Committee hearing, noting that "Gates denied Wednesday that the Bush administration was seeking a treaty with Iraq that would require long-term secuirty commitments forcing future U.S. presidents to continue sending troops. Instead, Gates told lawmakers, a new agreement with Baghdad would give the U.S. military continuing legal authority to operate in Iraq, much like the current United Nations resolutions, which expire at the end of the year." Why not simply renew the resolution isn't dealt with. At the end of 2006, al-Maliki by-passed the Parliament and the Iraqi Constitution by renewing it all on his own. Though the Constitution makes clear he does not have the power to do that, the Parliament passed legislation which they hoped would prevent that from taking place agian. Instead, al-Maliki went around them again. It needs to be noted that the United Nations was aware of that and should have rejected the renewal (which would legally mean US forces could not be in Iraq) . Because Parliament is even angrier at al-Maliki this time and because Bully Boy's reign at the White House will come to a close next January, the two are cooking up a scheme that by-passes the United Nations, both countries' Constitutions and both countries' legislative bodies. As Spiegel notes, "Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has made the proposed agreement an issue in her presidential campaign, accusing the administration of seeking to tie the hands of the next president by committing to Iraq's protection with U.S. forces" and that to Gates denial that this is a "treaty," "Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, has countered that the Iraqi foreign minister has termed the agreement a treaty and that, under the U.S. Constitution, Congress is required to ratify any treaty that provides such security guarantees." Charlie Savage (Boston Globe) interpreted the Senate Committee hearing to mean that the White House "is backing off its unprecedented plans to commit the US military to defending Iraq's security for years to come without submitting the agreement to a vote in Congress" citing Gates' testimony after Gates first attempted to debate what qualified for a treaty.
Staying with the US, Andy Sullivan (Reuters) reports that US Senator John McCain ("his victory as Republican nominee for the U.S. presidency virtually assured"????) has "turned his sights on his Democratic challengers" today claiming that "they were weak on national security and their Iraq stance would hand al Qaeda a victory." Senator Insane is a little slow on the draw -- possibly due to age? -- and Sullivan misses a lot himself. Sullivan goes on to quote a statement by US Senator Barack Obama (singing the same song he always sings and has it gotten old: "On the most important foreign policy decision in perhaps a generation, I strongly believe John McCain got it wrong") but seems to miss Hillary Clinton.
Sullivan forgets in his ENTIRE article is a sitting US senator and not just "former first lady" and a presidential contender. It's cute the way he also refuses to quote Clinton's statements. But Sullivan IS WRONG. Bambi may or may not have 'fired back' today. Hillary Clinton raised the issue yesterday.
Get it straight, McCain didn't lay down a 'marker' -- a mythical narrative to paint him as a 'leader.' Perry Bacon Jr. (Washington Post), Julie Bosman (New York Times) and, most important to this community, our own Kat noted that Hillary laid down the marker yesterday declaring, "I have the greatest respect for my friend and my colleague Senator McCain. But I believe that he offers more of the same, more of the same economic policies, more of the same military policies in Iraq." Reuters needs to figure out (A) how Sullivan is so grossly uninformed that he's not aware of that and today paints Hillary as responding to McCain's 'leadership' and how Sullivan manages to credit Barack Obama as a US Senator when he's only been that since Jan. 2005 but Hillary Clinton, a US Senator since Jan. 2001, is just "former first lady." Reuters really needs to figure that out -- especially since the press has a long history of bending over backwards in favor of Senator Crazy, the Showboat Express. Kat's finishing her explanation tonight (on the "She's boxed someone in" via the statemtns) tonight, just FYI. We (Kat, Ava and myself) heard that (Hillary's statement) on NPR yesterday evening but I'm not seeing any article of it online (and it may have been local news and not the national news feed). Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) takes a look at McCain's public statements and winds down noting, "Now he espouses the belief that the U.S. can stabilize regions -- with enough troops. The lesson of Vietnam and Iraq, he said in a May 2007 speech, is that 'we must never again launch a military operation with too few troops to complete the mission and build a secure, stable and democratic peace. When we fight a war, we must fight to win'." That is a revisionary take on Vietnam. And it's one that avoids issues such as legalities and treaties. Senator Crazy, despite Andy Sullivan's mad crush from him, is not yet the GOP presidential candidate and may not yet become it. Again, Reuters needs to take a serious look at how that nonsense ran to begin with.
Tonight on Bill Moyers Journal, the program looks at viewers recommendations for what book the next president of the United States should take to the White House. Among the books noted thus far by viewers at the show's blog are Anthony Arnove's IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal and Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise Of Disaster Capitalism.
Winding down, Angelina Jolie's visit to Iraq. Noted in yesterday's snapshot and we were supposed to continue it today. No time. Leila Fadel (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) shares what she thinks of the visit. This was addressed earlier today -- from that entry, among the coverage the Iraqi refugee crisis received as a result of Jolie's visit: Here's a gossip column in the Miami Herald that mentions Jolie's visit. Here it is in India's The Economic Times. Here's AP at MSNBC. Here's the British tabloid Hello! Here's a Seattle Post-Intelligencer gossip column. Here's Australia's Herald Sun. Here's AP in the Toronoto Star. Here's E! (gossip channel). Here's Reuters. And, of course, Fadel's write up.
Lastly. In DC today, at the US State Dept, this question was asked, "I wondered if you wanted to comment on a memo that was sent by a former contractor at the U.S. Embassy, Manuel Miranda, to Ambassador Crocker at the U.S. -- a former contractor at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. And he, in this memo, complains that the Foreign Service is not competent to do the job that they have undertaken in Iraq. He talks a lot about how Foreign Service officers do not have enough management experience so that they're not equipped to management programs, hundreds of millions of funds and the capital assets needed to help the Government of Iraq to stand up. So do you have any comment on that?"
The State Dept's deputy spokesperson Tom Casey responded by first attempting to make a joke of it ("Yeah, I guess he needs to tell us how he really feels") and then declaring, "Look, Mr. Miranda, was, as you note, a 3161 -- that's a contracting employee -- in Iraq, I guess, for about -- I guess for about a year. Obviously, he's expressing his own views and he's entitled to his opinions. What I can tell you is that you've heard from the President, Secretary Rice and many others about the job that Ryan Crocker is doing as the U.S. Ambassador to Baghdad. We think he and his team are doing a tremendous job" blah, blah, blah.
iraq
iraq veterans against the war
leila fadel
nancy a. youssefmcclatchy newspaperstina susmanthe los angeles times
alissa j. rubin the new york times
charlie savage
the los angeles times
the washington postamit r. paley
sudarsan raghavan
danny schechter
bill moyers journal
anthony arnove
naomi klein
kats korner
Friday, February 08, 2008
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Letter to an Old Sell Out
"Obama-Rezko link may be scrutinised by Republicans" (Daniel Nasaw, Guardian of London):
The details of Obama's house purchase certainly point to a close relationship between the pair. Obama bought the 94-year-old house in June 2005, shortly after his election to the Senate. The same day, the wife of real-estate developer and fast-food restaurateur Tony Rezko bought the adjacent lot from the same owner who was splitting a large lot in two.
Obama, the new senator for Illinois, and his wife Michelle, were flush after signing a $1.69m publishing deal on his book, "The Audacity of Hope". The couple paid $1.65m for the house - $300,000 less than the asking price, according to the Chicago Tribune. Rezko's wife Rita purchased the adjacent lot, formerly the yard of the house, for $625,000, the full price.
In a lengthy interview with the Chicago Sun-Times in 2006, Obama said the seller, a University of Chicago doctor, required that sales of the two properties close at the same time. He said the house had been on the market for months, the listed price was too high, and the sellers were anxious to move. He said he approached Rezko about the two properties.
After the purchases were completed, Rezko agreed to sell a 10-ft sliver of his land abutting Obama's, so the senator could build a fence separating their properties. The Chicago Tribune reported an appraiser valued the slice at $40,500, but Obama paid $104,500. The amount represented one sixth of Rezko's original purchase price, for one-sixth the land.
The Rezco story is not going away. Should Bambi get the nod from the Democratic Party it will be huge. The GOP will make sure it is. Bambi likes to play like he's electable but he's not. His 'support' is independent voters who don't the truth about him. "Slumlord" by Hillary they can dismiss (because the media's done such a poor job exploring Bambi). But the GOP is going to do a long, ugly campaign on many facets of Bambi's life. Rezco will be but one.
Bambi is not electable. He couldn't carry the big states last night. He's demonstrated he can win an a caucus but I'm unaware of any state that does a caucus on election day in November. He couldn't carry California or New York last night and, for the record, those are cornerstones for the Democratic Party in any election. Florida's thought to be up for grabs to the GOP or the Democratic Party this go-round. How did that work out again? Oh, right, Hillary won it.
Hillary has no skeletons. Hillary's been attacked steadily since 1992. She is now scandal proof. What are they going to say? She didn't sit around all day baking cookies? Oh, that will be a shocker! We know Bill and Hillary, there's no new development there.
"Now it gets really dirty" (Andrew Stephen, The New Statesman):
Just as McCain has benefited from a wildly supportive media -- the Project for Excellence in Journalism says that he won twice as much favourable publicity as either Huckabee or Romney -- so, too, Obama has received overwhelmingly positive coverage from a press that has yet to lay a finger on him -- probably, I suspect, because most reporters fear they will be labelled racist if they query his qualifications or suitability for the White House. Instead, the media has torn into Bill Clinton; it's gone down in political lore, possibly forever, that Bill Clinton began a poisonous injection of racism into the Democratic contest on behalf of his wife.
Yet ironically, if there is one good thing you can say about Clinton, it is that he is not a racist; he was actually brought up in rank poverty surrounded by African-Americans, while Obama spent his formative years surfing in Hawaii. Yet Obama is constantly described as an "African-American," a term used in the US to describe a black person whose ancestors were imported to be slaves from Africa. By that definition, Obama is not an African-American -- but it has all been part of Obama's cleverly crafted strategy to present himself as both black and white whenever it suits him most.
This became obvious in his first post-election victory speech at Iowa on 3 January, which he described as "this defining moment in history" and said, "you know, they said this day would never come". That a man in suit-and-tie would win a caucus in Iowa? Or because he was bi-racial? He has since used those same words in letters appealing for funds, one of which fluttered through my letterbox the other day -- but not one reporter, to the best of my knowledge, has dared asked him why his victory was so historic.
Andrew Stephen writes a delightfully funny column. The thing C.I.'s been pointing out is that Obama will be taken down via the British press. They'll do it and then the American press will pick up on it. That's where Bambi's vulnerable unless he plans to take a trip to England (wouldn't hurt and he's traveled so very little to Europe as it is) and attempts to charm the British press. Lots of luck there, they're already shaking their heads over the lack of scrutiny to Bambi.
By the way, David Swanson's "answer" (as evidenced by a thing he posted today written by an idiot) that the press is against Bambi -- it's not -- is to offer up the rants Bernie Goldberg put into print. That would be the right-winger Bernie Goldberg. The fool who cooked his own goose at CBS. But Swanson thinks Goldberg's a voice to be taken seriously. Ha. Laugh at him. Laugh at him for saying Naomi Wolf's not supporting impeachment enough. Or, maybe, not even! You may notice he hasn't called out his buddy Dennis Kucinich. As C.I. predicted, Dennis caved again. If you haven't heard, impeachment is not going forward. Read Ruth's "Dennis Kucinich puts impeachment off the table" for more on that.
Dennis said a lot of big words. Dennis swore, as he announced he was leaving the presidential race, that he was going to introduce a bill to impeach Bully Boy.
I don't link to David Swanson's site. I'm not 'keen' on people who foward my friend's e-mails and then lie when she confronts them. Yeah, I said it. So no link to a trash site and no link to a trash article. But Tom Hayden's decided that he hasn't embarrassed himself enough in one lifetime and has penned "After Super Tuesday" which is a laugh getter. (Mike and C.I. have delinked from Hayden. He's open game, in case you missed it.) In bold is Hayden (who can never be bold, just a suck up, all his life). My responses follow.
With Iraq a key issue and the Democratic primaries unresolved, isn't it time for the peace movement to get off the sidelines and become more engaged? Shouldn't we be doing everything possible to make the candidates compete for the peace vote?
Gee, golly, Tom, should we? How can "we"? Didn't you already endorse Barack Obama? Yes, you lousy piece of crap, you did. He pissed on the left and singled out "Tom Hayden Democrats" but you went along with it and you endorsed him. Now you want to tell the peace movement that we should listen to you? I haven't laughed so hard since your ass got kicked out of the commune in Berkeley. Remember those days, Tom? C.I. and I do. We remember them very well. Very, very well.
Tom goes on to write about how Obama is better than Hillary because of ___ and ___ and ___. But we need to get them to compete, right? What an idiot. You really have to wonder if his problem with Hillary could be that she shot him down? But I get ahead of myself.
If MoveOn, perhaps understandably, avoids direct engagement with the general, which peace advocates will step in?
Golly, Tom, will you step in? You're a go-getter, after all. I remember one 80s night, in Santa Monica, at your house -- excuse me, at the house your then-wife bought, where some brainiac was droning on about some policy wonking over and over and over. Finally Jane yawned and you snapped at her to go to sleep if she was tired. She did leave but, go-getter that you are, you weren't cooling your heels, were you? No, you weren't, Tom. That was obvious, a half hour later, to M and myself as we compared notes and asked each other: Did he just come on to me with Jane upstairs asleep? As we wondered if you really thought either of us were so low class that we'd find your offer 'enchanting'? That we had no class and would not only agree but agree in your wife's home? Trashy, Tom, trashy.
When we compared notes, we asked that and then we pointed out the obvious: your pock-marked face. Sorry, Tom, you were never the catch you thought you were. You were very lucky your then wife wasn't into looks. You were even luckier when you basically drove up a bank truck to your divorce hearing.
I myself never had any respect for a grown man that wanted alimony. Maybe it's sexism on my part? I don't think so because it's not like you were ever a home maker though maybe you thought so when you sat up your little love nest with VR? That really takes gall, doesn't it? Using your wife's money to set up a love nest. You certainly couldn't afford it on your state legislature salary. Maybe you kidded yourself that the money from Reunion paid for it? Is that how it worked? All the money she earned was "our" money and all the money you earned was "your" money?
You're still trying to suck up but you don't have her and no one listens to you. You're so pathetic that Obama insults you by name and you still endorse him. That's why we all knew you were dead in the water the second the divorce papers were signed, you had no guts and you had no spine. You'd kiss all the ass you could to try to get ahead. But, to steal from Goldie Hawn's character in Shampoo, "That won't make you a success, just a kiss ass."
All this time later that's still all you are. I imagine, as in Chicago (yes, I do remember), you're meeting with factions and telling them to do this or that and that you really can't be part of it. Back then, it was with young Bill Ayers, wasn't it? Who meets with you today? I can't imagine anyone who would but the very young who don't know better. Your name is mud in most circles and you have no one to blame for that but yourself.
So go write another cheerlead the Democrats piece. Throw out language like "This is life or death!" and maybe you'll fool some of the kiddies. But the grown ups? Tom, we know you, we know you too well for too long. We know there's nothing you won't sell out because, looking back, there's nothing you haven't.
Today you try to cast yourself as the voice against the war. But the voice against an illegal war would NEVER endorse a candidate who supported counter-insurgency. Forget the personal insult (which was also an insult to all of us active during that period), the counter-insurgency alone would give a real voice against the war pause.
We know that anyone who really cared about "life or death" wouldn't be jerking off over candidates but writing about something that matters such as war resisters in Canada. Tom, once upon a time you were kicked out of the left -- for good reasons -- but these days it's not even necessary because you are so far from the left. You're a little kiss ass still thinking you'll get to the White House somehow. Maybe not, as you used to hope, as president, and not as vice-president, but maybe a cabinet post. Maybe a diplomatic posting!
It's not happening. You have too many high placed enemies including myself.
I, like others, was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt when this illegal war started and you were opposed to it. Like most, I thought, "Maybe he'll remember what really mattered?" But what your life reflects today isn't the early work you did against that illegal war, it reflects all the selling out, all the backstabbing you did over and over throughout the 70s and 80s. Probably in the 90s as well but, by then, who gave a damn what you did?
You're like Joan Rivers thinking you're funny as you insult Diane Keaton's outfit while everyone just shakes their heads and wonders about your sanity? Rivers thinks she's still "in" too, doesn't she?
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, February 6, 2008. Chaos and violence continues, Bobby Gates begs the Senate for money, war resisters get attention (outside the US, always outside the US media), and more.
Starting with war resistance. Lauren Miele (The Eyeopener) reports on Kathryn Palmanteer's photo exhibit of US war resisters which is being exhibited at Ryerson University in Toronto which attempts to "relay the message that these Resisters should be welcomed in Canada" and Palmanteer explains, "I used these documentary portraits to give voice to the voiceless, allowing them to have the opportunity to tell their stories." "From Whisper to Roar" is displayed through Thursday at the Podium Building's Credit Union Lounge and "Each photograph is a portrait of a US soldier who has come to Canada seeking refugee status. Underneath each photograph is a quote that underlines why the subject is a resister of war. Along with the various marines and navy military that are featured, there are also wives of US War Resisters who are resisters themselves." Jennifer Prichett (The Whig Standard) also examines war resistance and starts by explaining how US navy chief petty officer Chuck Wiley came to Canada with his wife due to the illegal war: "Wearing jeans and a black T-shirt emblazoned with 'Say Yes to Soldiers Who Say No,' Wiley told the crowd that he would like to see Canada become 'a refugee for those who don't participate in an unjust war." The Wileys are class of 2007 -- translation, US media ignored them completely -- and entered Canada in February of last year after both had served many years in the military.
You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, 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).
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 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.
Dennis Rahkonen (Dissident Voice) writes of the upcoming IVAW action and notes, "Recently, not far from here, a young Iraq War veteran fatally shot himself. He'd returned from combat a fundamentally changed, deeply troubled person. Before taking his own life, he revealed how he'd been ordered to gun down an unarmed Iraqi man who was approaching a checkpoint, oblivious to shouted warnings to stop. The doomed individual turned out to be not just an innocent civilian -- probably unfamiliar with the foreign language of alien occupiers -- but a physician. Family and friends of the traumatized soldier urged that he seek professional help for his worsening stress disorder, but he refused, contending it would show 'weakness' that the military had inculcated in him was not manly to do. IVAW's upcoming testimony will show not only that the murder of unarmed noncombatants in Iraq and Afghanistan is pervasively prevalent, but that returning veterans are commonly so psychologically damaged by what they've experienced that suicide or dysfunction leading to disproportionate homelessness, for instance, is almost an expected consequence."
On the subject of innocent civilians, Solomon Moore and Khalid al-Ansary (New York Times) report that Ali Hamed Shihab (father), Naeema Sli (mother), Dhiaa Ali (son) were killed and he two daughters wounded (one of whom died in the hsopital) in Door after, according to an eye witness, "American soldiers kick open the door and fire their weapons without provocation." Garrett Therolf and Raheem Salman (Los Angeles Times) quote Muhannad Ismail Shihab (nephew of the parents killed) stating, "I was shocked when I saw their bodies, and I started to shiver. All of them were near their beds. The Americans are liars when they said my family was killed because the soldiers came under fire." The reporters note that the United Nation's estimate for civilians killed in air strikes from Mrach 2007 to June 2007 was 88. Last week, Saleh Mamon (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) reported on the air strikes increasing by 500% noting official US military reports that "in 2006 there were 229 US bombing missions. But last year this rose to 1,447 -- more than a 500 percent increase. . . . In 2006 over 111,000 pounds of bombs were dropped on targets in Iraq. Extrapolating for 2007, it can be estimated that 500,000 pounds have been dropped."
Today US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates testified to the US Senate Armed Services Committee to justify/argue for Bully Boy's huge budget wish list for the Pentagon. His prepared remarks included, "We have a moral obligation to see that the superb life-saving care that the wounded receive initially is matched by quality out-patient treatment. To provide world-class health care to all who are wounded, ill, or injured serving the nation, the Department is taking action on the recommendations made by the President's Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors." He also noted that Africa is the next big target and the desire to increase the size of the military. Also speaking to the committee was Michael G. Mullen who is the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In his prepared remarks he was loose with the truth but telling, "The surge of U.S. forces to Iraq, a well executed counter-insurgency strategy and an Iraqi population increasingly weary of violence, and willing to do something about it, have all combined to improve security conditions throughout much of the country." "A well executed counter-insurgency strategy and an Iraqi population increasingly weary of violence" -- almost makes it sound as if Iraqis have been targeted to shock them for disaster capitalism. [See Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise Of Disaster Capitalism.] Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) reported a similarly interesting quote today, when Iraqi Maj. Gen. Qassim Moussawi praised the cutting up of Baghdad and erecting Bremer walls and declared, "These walls will remain until we have imposed security in all of Baghdad." Imposed. Interesting terminology. Kristin Roberts (Reuters) notes that Gates stated to the committee that the treaty (the US White House is attempting to work out a treaty with the puppet government in Baghdad and circumvent the Congress) between the US and Iraq would not require permanent bases (doesn't the Embassy qualify?) and it wouldn't require that the US "defend Iraq". Gates was there to beg for money and the administration's record on honesty begs disbelief. Elana Schor (Guardian of London) noted Monday of the White House's request for more money, "The $3.1 trillion budget would increase US military spending for the 11th straight year while slicing about $200bn from the social security and Medicare programs that aid older Americans. The budget deficit under Bush's proposal would balloon to $410bn this year -- more than twice as much as 2007".
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports three people wounded by a Baghdad roadside bombing, a Diyala Province roadside bombing wounded "three women and one man," an Al Muqdiyah mortar attack wounded four people, a Baquba roadside bombing wounded six and a Diwaniya roadside bombing claimed the lives of 2 children and 2 adults with nine more people wounded. Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing that killed 2 police officers, a Mosul mortar attack that wounded two people, a Mosul roadside bombing that wounded three people and another Mosul roadside bombing that wounded three.
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that the Association of Muslims Scholars of Iraq's Essam Felaih was shot dead in Samara. Reuters notes 2 police officers shot dead in a Mosul drive-by that left three more injured and 2 Iraqi soldiers shot dead in Samarra.
Corpses?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad, 7 headless corpses were discovered in Tawakal and 3 headless corpses were discovered in Tal Al Aswad. Reuters notes 5 headless corpses discovered in Muqdadiya, the corpse of 16-year-old female and a male of unknown age discovered in Najaf, and a corpse discovered in Hilla.
Moving to US politics. The Illinois Green Party sent out the alert on voting problems yesterday noting, "In the early hours of voting, Green Party officials began receiving reports from frustrated voters across the statewho, in many cases, had been told by pollworkers that there are no Green Party ballots available at their polling places, or that they had to vote on suspect electronic voting machines, even while other parties use paper ballots.Some of the most outrageous incidents, however, occurred across the wards of Chicago, where Green Party ballots have been apparently tampered with so they can't be read and accepted by voting machines, voters are given Democratic ballots despite requesting Green ballots . . . Check ilgp.orgfor more reports as they are received." Kimberly Wilder, as always, tracks more than one person should be able to at On the Wilder Side. That includes that Massachusetts Green primary results are not expected to be in until the end of this month. Other states are noted here. The Green Party announces that, "Results from the four states where Green Parties participated in the February 5 Super Tuesday primaries show a landslide for Ralph Nader in California (61%) and a lead among candidates for Cynthia McKinney in Arkansas and Illinois. Cynthia McKinney is declared on her run, Ralph Nader is exploring whether to run or not.
Mike Gravel remains in the race for the Democratic Party nomination; however, that's not what today's e-mails are talking about. So let's address it (and seriously consider -- community wide -- ignoring Democracy Now! tomorrow so we can focus more on Iraq -- not that reproductive rights and LGBT issues aren't important, they are or we wouldn't be addressing it).
Amy Goodman appears to be in the running for an acting nod from this year's daytime Emmy's. On screen, she portrays a journalist. In reality? You be the judge. Today she had a roundtable on Democracy Now! with four guests. You know she slants but how badly does she slant?
Four guests. Bill Fletcher Jr. at least made some critiques of Bambi but having a supporter try to fill the role of critic is the same rigged game when Goodman wanted to talk about the split in the Jackson household with Jesse Jackson who supports Obama as opposed to with Jaqueline Jackson who supports Hillary Clinton. Or maybe Amy Goodman just values men's opinions more? That would explain why she published in skin magazine that targets women with violence.
Tim Carpenter was another guest and another Bambi supporter. Tim's with Pathetic Democrats of America and, on that, we need to ask that groups identifying themselves as "Democrats" have a rule that their membership is indeed Democrats. PDA has a 'loose' policy which no doubt explains why the go round and round in circles and never accomplish anything -- that and the fact that they are a group with a tiny membership. So was there a reason a struggling California Democratic PAC was brought on Democracy Now! to begin with? Oh, yeah, PDA endorsed Obama.
Then we got Frances Fox Piven who talked about the need to do things for the "movement." What movement? Goodman never asked. Fox Piven wasn't speaking of the New Left of the sixties, she was speaking of a period prior to that. Again, if Bambi didn't have non-Democrats to speak for him, he might be doing even worse than he is. Franci's supporting Barack. Chalk it up to the 'movement' she never identified and Goodman knew not to ask her about. What is widely known is that Feminists for Peace and Barack Obama! (a faux group fronted by Chunky Katha Pollitt) features Frances Fox Piven at number 107. Yes, Franci of the unnamed 'movement' is a Bambi supporter and, no, audiences were never informed of that.
The fourth guest was Roberto Lovato who is not in love with either candidate. On his own website, Lovato bills today's show as "an out-of-the-corporate-media box discussion about race, empire and the primaries." Should we assume gender is a non-issue to him? Or is it just that he grasped it was to Amy Goodman? Yet again, another broadcast from Democracy Now! that featured a token woman -- we get a few tokens each week, don't we? -- and wasn't interested in exploring gender at all.
So you had three Bambi supporters in the roundtable and Lovato who's not thrilled with either. Fletcher deserves credit for noting who he supports on his own. Way, way, into the show, Goody will note, oh, yeah, PDA, endorsed Bambi! Franci keeps her own mouth shut about who she supports. It's been a career builder for her.
Now this was supposedly a roundtable on the Democratic primaries (and one caucus) on Super Duper Tuesday and issues like 'electability' were addressed. Presumably such a roundtable would require that all "Democrats" are in fact Democrats. Franci Fox Piven did vote for John Kerry in 2004. The majority on the left did to get Bully Boy out of the White House. So let's drop back to when a Democratic won a presidential election. Most recently, that would be 1996.
Franci, why don't you tell DN! audiences how you -- 'Democratic' Franci -- voted? I think many listeners and viewers would be surprised to know that you didn't vote for the Democrat. That would be Bill Clinton. Who did you vote for, Franci?
What's Amy Goodman doing bring on a non-Democrat to discuss a Democratic primary while posing as one? And since 'electabilty' was the subtext -- or was it's Franci's talk of an unspecified 'movement' she knew she was building? -- shouldn't she be required to explain what the hell she knows about electability since her 1996 vote didn't result in a presidential win for her candidate of choice?
When, on the program, Frances Fox Piven labels Lee Atwater one of "the key Democratic operatives" -- strange mistake for a Democrat, isn't it? It's also cute that she wasn't asked about 'welfare reform.' That was the cutting of the safety net for many Americans and went through the Congress and the Bill Clinton White House. Goodman's allowed Marian Wright Edelman -- mere months ago -- to play shocked and appalled by that legislation. I seem to recall, in real time, Franci raging against Wright Edelman and holding her responsible -- noting that MWE did nothing, noting that MWE did a Stand For Children action which Franci liked to snidely joke made it appear that the biggest threat to the poor was a drive-by shooting. Maybe I'm remembering wrong? (I'm not remembering wrong. Franci practically worked that up into a standup bit.)
Here's why "movement" talk matters. Franci's been talking about that undefined 'movement' for decades. And a media hype has allowed her and others to delude themselves into thinking Bambi has one behind him -- he doesn't -- so these people with their publicly undefined goals see him as a chance to grab onto a movement and merge it with their own. There's a need for honesty. There was none on Democracy Now! but there never would have been. Not when three Bambi supporters are invited on and no supporter of Hillary is. It's the way Goodman has slanted the show all along while wanting to lecture Big Media about what 'fairness' is and about the importance of 'diverse' voices. But she staged a roundtable where everyone sang from the same hymnal.
Let's turn to Tim Carpenter who at least defined the 'movement' he wants to be part of: a grassroots one. Carpenter appears seriously deranged and he makes that clear by declaring, "I think it's safe to say this morning that despite the corporate media's best attempt, and the inside-the-Beltway Democratic Party, that the Democratic primary is far from over." He's saying Bambi's 'in the race' and it's *not* because of support from "corporate media" and "inside-the-Beltway Democratic Party" members. Such as Ted Kennedy? Such as John Kerry? He appears deranged. It's some sort of sickness that allows some to refuse to see reality. Craig Crawford (The Huffington Post) explains it, "If I were Barack Obama I would tell my flaks in the news media to shut up in the final days before elections. The chattering crowd's frenzy for this man only raises expectations that he cannot meet. As a result, what was otherwise not too shabby a night for Obam on Super Tuesday came across like a public relations defeat because so much more had been expected. Still, those who predicted a bigger night for Obama are invested in downplaying what actually happened, and will surely gin him up for the next contests. Before Super Tuesday gushing pundtis predicted that the Kennedy family endorsements would, at a minimum, deliver Massachusetts. Didn't happen. Feverish news reports of rising momentum for Obama led to hints that he was winning New Jersey. Didn't happen." Crawford goes on to recount the Big media talk that Bambi would win California. Again, Tim Carpenter has serious problems and is highly estranged from reality.
Meanwhile, at The Huffington Post, it's time to set the record 'straight' on Obama's non-support for abortion and to trash NOW's Illinois chapter. Steve Trombley, still recovering from his own D&C, gathers together the back flaps of his hospital gown to explain that NOW is just lying. No, NOW is telling the truth. "Present" was not a NOW strategy. The lie that it ever was was started by a woman who presented herself as "president of the Chicago NOW chapter" but wasn't president at the time and wasn't even in NOW at the time. Steve, let me loan you a Midol. What's that? You're not a woman? Then what business is it of yours what NOW does? As Jill Zuckman (Chicago Tribune) noted, "Steve Trombley, CEO and president of Planned Parenthood/Chicago Action, said there's a reason his organization has endorsed Obama throughout his political career." Throughout his career.
Here is the statement by Illinois NOW's state president Bonnie Grabenhofer:
Much has been printed in both the mainstream and alternative media and many have watched videos of Lorna Brett's comments on important votes that occurred while Barack Obama was serving in the Illinois State Senate (see article below). Ms. Bret continues to present herself as the President of Chicago NOW when IL State Senator Barack Obama was making decision on votes that were critical for women and girls in Illinois. As the current Illinois NOW State President, it is essential that I clarify for the record that Ms. Brett's assertions are not correct. Lorna Brett was president of Chicago NOW from 1996-1998. She was not, as she represents, the president of Chicago NOW at the time IL NOW activists were meeting and talking with legislators about the abortion bills in the early 2000s. Five of those votes occured in the 92nd General Assembly session in 2001. Our records indicate that Ms. Brett has not been a member of NOW since 1999. Ms. Brett was not involved with either Chicago NOW or IL NOW when we were fighting to stop these bills. Ms. Brett is misleading people and using her very old affiliation with NOW to help distance Senator Obama from his vote of present on key bills and as a platform for her personal criticism of Senator Hillary Clinton. To be clear, voting "present" on those bills was a strategy that IL NOW did not support. At that time, we made it clear to the legislators that we disagreed with the strategy. We wanted legislators to take a stand against the harmful anti-choice bills being brought to the floor of the Illinois State Senate. Voting "present" does not demonstrate leadership and does not send the clarion signal that one is unwavering in their support of a woman's right to choose.
In real media, when you're caught telling a LIE -- as Lorna was -- you're out of the game. A man representing Planned Parenthood -- he serves on the board of their action fund and federation, calls NOW a liar. Planned Parenthood's allowing a man to smear NOW. It all leaves Lynn Harris (Salon) lost and she feels the need to include little Steve-o's claim that "only after years have passed" does NOW raise an objection. As Illinois NOW notes, "During Senator Obama's 2004 senate campaign, the Illinois NOW PAC did not recommend the endorsement of Obama for the U.S. Senate because he refused to stand up for a woman's right to choose and repeatedly voted 'present' on important legislation."
From abortion rights -- which Bambi didn't stand for -- to the LGBT communtiy. Rev. Irene Monroe (The Black Commentator) wonders, "Is it mere happenstance that once again, and seemingly unbeknownst to the Obama campaign, another anti-gay African American minister has endorsed the presidential hopeful? But with an Obama endorsement coming from the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, longtime spiritual adviser to President George W. Bush and senior pastor of one of Houston's black mega-churches, Windsor Village United Methodist Church, this isn't deja vu all over again. Why is Obama, a supposed healer and consensus builder, continuing to do this? One answer: Perhaps Obama was unaware of Rev. Caldwell's background and views regarding LGBT! folks? The real answer: how many sides are there to a politiican's mouth. Obama's cavoritng in a highly competitive field for black evengelical votes and is as calculated as when he had gospel mega-star, Pastor Donnie McClukin, poster boy for African-American ex-gay ministries, as part of his 'Embrace the Change!' Gospel Series in October 2007." You again didn't hear about that from Democracy Now!. Amy Goodman has never explored the issue of homophobia from the Bambi campaign. NEVER. Democracy for who, Amy, democracy for who?
Goodman wasn't able to mention what Andrew Stephen (The New Statesman) notes: "Exit polls, too confirmed that Obama is the candidate of the yuppies: practicially every voter earning less than $50,000 voted for Clinton rather than Obama, and those in the $150-200,000 range plumped for Obama." See, Frances Fox Piven likes to talk about the poor and working poor, she just doesn't like listening to them.
iraq
jennifer pritchettchuck wiley
lauren mielejon telvin
iraq veterans against the warsolomon moorethe new york times
charley keyeselise labott
saleh mamonthe socialist worker
naomi klein
The details of Obama's house purchase certainly point to a close relationship between the pair. Obama bought the 94-year-old house in June 2005, shortly after his election to the Senate. The same day, the wife of real-estate developer and fast-food restaurateur Tony Rezko bought the adjacent lot from the same owner who was splitting a large lot in two.
Obama, the new senator for Illinois, and his wife Michelle, were flush after signing a $1.69m publishing deal on his book, "The Audacity of Hope". The couple paid $1.65m for the house - $300,000 less than the asking price, according to the Chicago Tribune. Rezko's wife Rita purchased the adjacent lot, formerly the yard of the house, for $625,000, the full price.
In a lengthy interview with the Chicago Sun-Times in 2006, Obama said the seller, a University of Chicago doctor, required that sales of the two properties close at the same time. He said the house had been on the market for months, the listed price was too high, and the sellers were anxious to move. He said he approached Rezko about the two properties.
After the purchases were completed, Rezko agreed to sell a 10-ft sliver of his land abutting Obama's, so the senator could build a fence separating their properties. The Chicago Tribune reported an appraiser valued the slice at $40,500, but Obama paid $104,500. The amount represented one sixth of Rezko's original purchase price, for one-sixth the land.
The Rezco story is not going away. Should Bambi get the nod from the Democratic Party it will be huge. The GOP will make sure it is. Bambi likes to play like he's electable but he's not. His 'support' is independent voters who don't the truth about him. "Slumlord" by Hillary they can dismiss (because the media's done such a poor job exploring Bambi). But the GOP is going to do a long, ugly campaign on many facets of Bambi's life. Rezco will be but one.
Bambi is not electable. He couldn't carry the big states last night. He's demonstrated he can win an a caucus but I'm unaware of any state that does a caucus on election day in November. He couldn't carry California or New York last night and, for the record, those are cornerstones for the Democratic Party in any election. Florida's thought to be up for grabs to the GOP or the Democratic Party this go-round. How did that work out again? Oh, right, Hillary won it.
Hillary has no skeletons. Hillary's been attacked steadily since 1992. She is now scandal proof. What are they going to say? She didn't sit around all day baking cookies? Oh, that will be a shocker! We know Bill and Hillary, there's no new development there.
"Now it gets really dirty" (Andrew Stephen, The New Statesman):
Just as McCain has benefited from a wildly supportive media -- the Project for Excellence in Journalism says that he won twice as much favourable publicity as either Huckabee or Romney -- so, too, Obama has received overwhelmingly positive coverage from a press that has yet to lay a finger on him -- probably, I suspect, because most reporters fear they will be labelled racist if they query his qualifications or suitability for the White House. Instead, the media has torn into Bill Clinton; it's gone down in political lore, possibly forever, that Bill Clinton began a poisonous injection of racism into the Democratic contest on behalf of his wife.
Yet ironically, if there is one good thing you can say about Clinton, it is that he is not a racist; he was actually brought up in rank poverty surrounded by African-Americans, while Obama spent his formative years surfing in Hawaii. Yet Obama is constantly described as an "African-American," a term used in the US to describe a black person whose ancestors were imported to be slaves from Africa. By that definition, Obama is not an African-American -- but it has all been part of Obama's cleverly crafted strategy to present himself as both black and white whenever it suits him most.
This became obvious in his first post-election victory speech at Iowa on 3 January, which he described as "this defining moment in history" and said, "you know, they said this day would never come". That a man in suit-and-tie would win a caucus in Iowa? Or because he was bi-racial? He has since used those same words in letters appealing for funds, one of which fluttered through my letterbox the other day -- but not one reporter, to the best of my knowledge, has dared asked him why his victory was so historic.
Andrew Stephen writes a delightfully funny column. The thing C.I.'s been pointing out is that Obama will be taken down via the British press. They'll do it and then the American press will pick up on it. That's where Bambi's vulnerable unless he plans to take a trip to England (wouldn't hurt and he's traveled so very little to Europe as it is) and attempts to charm the British press. Lots of luck there, they're already shaking their heads over the lack of scrutiny to Bambi.
By the way, David Swanson's "answer" (as evidenced by a thing he posted today written by an idiot) that the press is against Bambi -- it's not -- is to offer up the rants Bernie Goldberg put into print. That would be the right-winger Bernie Goldberg. The fool who cooked his own goose at CBS. But Swanson thinks Goldberg's a voice to be taken seriously. Ha. Laugh at him. Laugh at him for saying Naomi Wolf's not supporting impeachment enough. Or, maybe, not even! You may notice he hasn't called out his buddy Dennis Kucinich. As C.I. predicted, Dennis caved again. If you haven't heard, impeachment is not going forward. Read Ruth's "Dennis Kucinich puts impeachment off the table" for more on that.
Dennis said a lot of big words. Dennis swore, as he announced he was leaving the presidential race, that he was going to introduce a bill to impeach Bully Boy.
I don't link to David Swanson's site. I'm not 'keen' on people who foward my friend's e-mails and then lie when she confronts them. Yeah, I said it. So no link to a trash site and no link to a trash article. But Tom Hayden's decided that he hasn't embarrassed himself enough in one lifetime and has penned "After Super Tuesday" which is a laugh getter. (Mike and C.I. have delinked from Hayden. He's open game, in case you missed it.) In bold is Hayden (who can never be bold, just a suck up, all his life). My responses follow.
With Iraq a key issue and the Democratic primaries unresolved, isn't it time for the peace movement to get off the sidelines and become more engaged? Shouldn't we be doing everything possible to make the candidates compete for the peace vote?
Gee, golly, Tom, should we? How can "we"? Didn't you already endorse Barack Obama? Yes, you lousy piece of crap, you did. He pissed on the left and singled out "Tom Hayden Democrats" but you went along with it and you endorsed him. Now you want to tell the peace movement that we should listen to you? I haven't laughed so hard since your ass got kicked out of the commune in Berkeley. Remember those days, Tom? C.I. and I do. We remember them very well. Very, very well.
Tom goes on to write about how Obama is better than Hillary because of ___ and ___ and ___. But we need to get them to compete, right? What an idiot. You really have to wonder if his problem with Hillary could be that she shot him down? But I get ahead of myself.
If MoveOn, perhaps understandably, avoids direct engagement with the general, which peace advocates will step in?
Golly, Tom, will you step in? You're a go-getter, after all. I remember one 80s night, in Santa Monica, at your house -- excuse me, at the house your then-wife bought, where some brainiac was droning on about some policy wonking over and over and over. Finally Jane yawned and you snapped at her to go to sleep if she was tired. She did leave but, go-getter that you are, you weren't cooling your heels, were you? No, you weren't, Tom. That was obvious, a half hour later, to M and myself as we compared notes and asked each other: Did he just come on to me with Jane upstairs asleep? As we wondered if you really thought either of us were so low class that we'd find your offer 'enchanting'? That we had no class and would not only agree but agree in your wife's home? Trashy, Tom, trashy.
When we compared notes, we asked that and then we pointed out the obvious: your pock-marked face. Sorry, Tom, you were never the catch you thought you were. You were very lucky your then wife wasn't into looks. You were even luckier when you basically drove up a bank truck to your divorce hearing.
I myself never had any respect for a grown man that wanted alimony. Maybe it's sexism on my part? I don't think so because it's not like you were ever a home maker though maybe you thought so when you sat up your little love nest with VR? That really takes gall, doesn't it? Using your wife's money to set up a love nest. You certainly couldn't afford it on your state legislature salary. Maybe you kidded yourself that the money from Reunion paid for it? Is that how it worked? All the money she earned was "our" money and all the money you earned was "your" money?
You're still trying to suck up but you don't have her and no one listens to you. You're so pathetic that Obama insults you by name and you still endorse him. That's why we all knew you were dead in the water the second the divorce papers were signed, you had no guts and you had no spine. You'd kiss all the ass you could to try to get ahead. But, to steal from Goldie Hawn's character in Shampoo, "That won't make you a success, just a kiss ass."
All this time later that's still all you are. I imagine, as in Chicago (yes, I do remember), you're meeting with factions and telling them to do this or that and that you really can't be part of it. Back then, it was with young Bill Ayers, wasn't it? Who meets with you today? I can't imagine anyone who would but the very young who don't know better. Your name is mud in most circles and you have no one to blame for that but yourself.
So go write another cheerlead the Democrats piece. Throw out language like "This is life or death!" and maybe you'll fool some of the kiddies. But the grown ups? Tom, we know you, we know you too well for too long. We know there's nothing you won't sell out because, looking back, there's nothing you haven't.
Today you try to cast yourself as the voice against the war. But the voice against an illegal war would NEVER endorse a candidate who supported counter-insurgency. Forget the personal insult (which was also an insult to all of us active during that period), the counter-insurgency alone would give a real voice against the war pause.
We know that anyone who really cared about "life or death" wouldn't be jerking off over candidates but writing about something that matters such as war resisters in Canada. Tom, once upon a time you were kicked out of the left -- for good reasons -- but these days it's not even necessary because you are so far from the left. You're a little kiss ass still thinking you'll get to the White House somehow. Maybe not, as you used to hope, as president, and not as vice-president, but maybe a cabinet post. Maybe a diplomatic posting!
It's not happening. You have too many high placed enemies including myself.
I, like others, was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt when this illegal war started and you were opposed to it. Like most, I thought, "Maybe he'll remember what really mattered?" But what your life reflects today isn't the early work you did against that illegal war, it reflects all the selling out, all the backstabbing you did over and over throughout the 70s and 80s. Probably in the 90s as well but, by then, who gave a damn what you did?
You're like Joan Rivers thinking you're funny as you insult Diane Keaton's outfit while everyone just shakes their heads and wonders about your sanity? Rivers thinks she's still "in" too, doesn't she?
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, February 6, 2008. Chaos and violence continues, Bobby Gates begs the Senate for money, war resisters get attention (outside the US, always outside the US media), and more.
Starting with war resistance. Lauren Miele (The Eyeopener) reports on Kathryn Palmanteer's photo exhibit of US war resisters which is being exhibited at Ryerson University in Toronto which attempts to "relay the message that these Resisters should be welcomed in Canada" and Palmanteer explains, "I used these documentary portraits to give voice to the voiceless, allowing them to have the opportunity to tell their stories." "From Whisper to Roar" is displayed through Thursday at the Podium Building's Credit Union Lounge and "Each photograph is a portrait of a US soldier who has come to Canada seeking refugee status. Underneath each photograph is a quote that underlines why the subject is a resister of war. Along with the various marines and navy military that are featured, there are also wives of US War Resisters who are resisters themselves." Jennifer Prichett (The Whig Standard) also examines war resistance and starts by explaining how US navy chief petty officer Chuck Wiley came to Canada with his wife due to the illegal war: "Wearing jeans and a black T-shirt emblazoned with 'Say Yes to Soldiers Who Say No,' Wiley told the crowd that he would like to see Canada become 'a refugee for those who don't participate in an unjust war." The Wileys are class of 2007 -- translation, US media ignored them completely -- and entered Canada in February of last year after both had served many years in the military.
You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, 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).
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 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.
Dennis Rahkonen (Dissident Voice) writes of the upcoming IVAW action and notes, "Recently, not far from here, a young Iraq War veteran fatally shot himself. He'd returned from combat a fundamentally changed, deeply troubled person. Before taking his own life, he revealed how he'd been ordered to gun down an unarmed Iraqi man who was approaching a checkpoint, oblivious to shouted warnings to stop. The doomed individual turned out to be not just an innocent civilian -- probably unfamiliar with the foreign language of alien occupiers -- but a physician. Family and friends of the traumatized soldier urged that he seek professional help for his worsening stress disorder, but he refused, contending it would show 'weakness' that the military had inculcated in him was not manly to do. IVAW's upcoming testimony will show not only that the murder of unarmed noncombatants in Iraq and Afghanistan is pervasively prevalent, but that returning veterans are commonly so psychologically damaged by what they've experienced that suicide or dysfunction leading to disproportionate homelessness, for instance, is almost an expected consequence."
On the subject of innocent civilians, Solomon Moore and Khalid al-Ansary (New York Times) report that Ali Hamed Shihab (father), Naeema Sli (mother), Dhiaa Ali (son) were killed and he two daughters wounded (one of whom died in the hsopital) in Door after, according to an eye witness, "American soldiers kick open the door and fire their weapons without provocation." Garrett Therolf and Raheem Salman (Los Angeles Times) quote Muhannad Ismail Shihab (nephew of the parents killed) stating, "I was shocked when I saw their bodies, and I started to shiver. All of them were near their beds. The Americans are liars when they said my family was killed because the soldiers came under fire." The reporters note that the United Nation's estimate for civilians killed in air strikes from Mrach 2007 to June 2007 was 88. Last week, Saleh Mamon (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) reported on the air strikes increasing by 500% noting official US military reports that "in 2006 there were 229 US bombing missions. But last year this rose to 1,447 -- more than a 500 percent increase. . . . In 2006 over 111,000 pounds of bombs were dropped on targets in Iraq. Extrapolating for 2007, it can be estimated that 500,000 pounds have been dropped."
Today US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates testified to the US Senate Armed Services Committee to justify/argue for Bully Boy's huge budget wish list for the Pentagon. His prepared remarks included, "We have a moral obligation to see that the superb life-saving care that the wounded receive initially is matched by quality out-patient treatment. To provide world-class health care to all who are wounded, ill, or injured serving the nation, the Department is taking action on the recommendations made by the President's Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors." He also noted that Africa is the next big target and the desire to increase the size of the military. Also speaking to the committee was Michael G. Mullen who is the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In his prepared remarks he was loose with the truth but telling, "The surge of U.S. forces to Iraq, a well executed counter-insurgency strategy and an Iraqi population increasingly weary of violence, and willing to do something about it, have all combined to improve security conditions throughout much of the country." "A well executed counter-insurgency strategy and an Iraqi population increasingly weary of violence" -- almost makes it sound as if Iraqis have been targeted to shock them for disaster capitalism. [See Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise Of Disaster Capitalism.] Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) reported a similarly interesting quote today, when Iraqi Maj. Gen. Qassim Moussawi praised the cutting up of Baghdad and erecting Bremer walls and declared, "These walls will remain until we have imposed security in all of Baghdad." Imposed. Interesting terminology. Kristin Roberts (Reuters) notes that Gates stated to the committee that the treaty (the US White House is attempting to work out a treaty with the puppet government in Baghdad and circumvent the Congress) between the US and Iraq would not require permanent bases (doesn't the Embassy qualify?) and it wouldn't require that the US "defend Iraq". Gates was there to beg for money and the administration's record on honesty begs disbelief. Elana Schor (Guardian of London) noted Monday of the White House's request for more money, "The $3.1 trillion budget would increase US military spending for the 11th straight year while slicing about $200bn from the social security and Medicare programs that aid older Americans. The budget deficit under Bush's proposal would balloon to $410bn this year -- more than twice as much as 2007".
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports three people wounded by a Baghdad roadside bombing, a Diyala Province roadside bombing wounded "three women and one man," an Al Muqdiyah mortar attack wounded four people, a Baquba roadside bombing wounded six and a Diwaniya roadside bombing claimed the lives of 2 children and 2 adults with nine more people wounded. Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing that killed 2 police officers, a Mosul mortar attack that wounded two people, a Mosul roadside bombing that wounded three people and another Mosul roadside bombing that wounded three.
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that the Association of Muslims Scholars of Iraq's Essam Felaih was shot dead in Samara. Reuters notes 2 police officers shot dead in a Mosul drive-by that left three more injured and 2 Iraqi soldiers shot dead in Samarra.
Corpses?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad, 7 headless corpses were discovered in Tawakal and 3 headless corpses were discovered in Tal Al Aswad. Reuters notes 5 headless corpses discovered in Muqdadiya, the corpse of 16-year-old female and a male of unknown age discovered in Najaf, and a corpse discovered in Hilla.
Moving to US politics. The Illinois Green Party sent out the alert on voting problems yesterday noting, "In the early hours of voting, Green Party officials began receiving reports from frustrated voters across the statewho, in many cases, had been told by pollworkers that there are no Green Party ballots available at their polling places, or that they had to vote on suspect electronic voting machines, even while other parties use paper ballots.Some of the most outrageous incidents, however, occurred across the wards of Chicago, where Green Party ballots have been apparently tampered with so they can't be read and accepted by voting machines, voters are given Democratic ballots despite requesting Green ballots . . . Check ilgp.orgfor more reports as they are received." Kimberly Wilder, as always, tracks more than one person should be able to at On the Wilder Side. That includes that Massachusetts Green primary results are not expected to be in until the end of this month. Other states are noted here. The Green Party announces that, "Results from the four states where Green Parties participated in the February 5 Super Tuesday primaries show a landslide for Ralph Nader in California (61%) and a lead among candidates for Cynthia McKinney in Arkansas and Illinois. Cynthia McKinney is declared on her run, Ralph Nader is exploring whether to run or not.
Mike Gravel remains in the race for the Democratic Party nomination; however, that's not what today's e-mails are talking about. So let's address it (and seriously consider -- community wide -- ignoring Democracy Now! tomorrow so we can focus more on Iraq -- not that reproductive rights and LGBT issues aren't important, they are or we wouldn't be addressing it).
Amy Goodman appears to be in the running for an acting nod from this year's daytime Emmy's. On screen, she portrays a journalist. In reality? You be the judge. Today she had a roundtable on Democracy Now! with four guests. You know she slants but how badly does she slant?
Four guests. Bill Fletcher Jr. at least made some critiques of Bambi but having a supporter try to fill the role of critic is the same rigged game when Goodman wanted to talk about the split in the Jackson household with Jesse Jackson who supports Obama as opposed to with Jaqueline Jackson who supports Hillary Clinton. Or maybe Amy Goodman just values men's opinions more? That would explain why she published in skin magazine that targets women with violence.
Tim Carpenter was another guest and another Bambi supporter. Tim's with Pathetic Democrats of America and, on that, we need to ask that groups identifying themselves as "Democrats" have a rule that their membership is indeed Democrats. PDA has a 'loose' policy which no doubt explains why the go round and round in circles and never accomplish anything -- that and the fact that they are a group with a tiny membership. So was there a reason a struggling California Democratic PAC was brought on Democracy Now! to begin with? Oh, yeah, PDA endorsed Obama.
Then we got Frances Fox Piven who talked about the need to do things for the "movement." What movement? Goodman never asked. Fox Piven wasn't speaking of the New Left of the sixties, she was speaking of a period prior to that. Again, if Bambi didn't have non-Democrats to speak for him, he might be doing even worse than he is. Franci's supporting Barack. Chalk it up to the 'movement' she never identified and Goodman knew not to ask her about. What is widely known is that Feminists for Peace and Barack Obama! (a faux group fronted by Chunky Katha Pollitt) features Frances Fox Piven at number 107. Yes, Franci of the unnamed 'movement' is a Bambi supporter and, no, audiences were never informed of that.
The fourth guest was Roberto Lovato who is not in love with either candidate. On his own website, Lovato bills today's show as "an out-of-the-corporate-media box discussion about race, empire and the primaries." Should we assume gender is a non-issue to him? Or is it just that he grasped it was to Amy Goodman? Yet again, another broadcast from Democracy Now! that featured a token woman -- we get a few tokens each week, don't we? -- and wasn't interested in exploring gender at all.
So you had three Bambi supporters in the roundtable and Lovato who's not thrilled with either. Fletcher deserves credit for noting who he supports on his own. Way, way, into the show, Goody will note, oh, yeah, PDA, endorsed Bambi! Franci keeps her own mouth shut about who she supports. It's been a career builder for her.
Now this was supposedly a roundtable on the Democratic primaries (and one caucus) on Super Duper Tuesday and issues like 'electability' were addressed. Presumably such a roundtable would require that all "Democrats" are in fact Democrats. Franci Fox Piven did vote for John Kerry in 2004. The majority on the left did to get Bully Boy out of the White House. So let's drop back to when a Democratic won a presidential election. Most recently, that would be 1996.
Franci, why don't you tell DN! audiences how you -- 'Democratic' Franci -- voted? I think many listeners and viewers would be surprised to know that you didn't vote for the Democrat. That would be Bill Clinton. Who did you vote for, Franci?
What's Amy Goodman doing bring on a non-Democrat to discuss a Democratic primary while posing as one? And since 'electabilty' was the subtext -- or was it's Franci's talk of an unspecified 'movement' she knew she was building? -- shouldn't she be required to explain what the hell she knows about electability since her 1996 vote didn't result in a presidential win for her candidate of choice?
When, on the program, Frances Fox Piven labels Lee Atwater one of "the key Democratic operatives" -- strange mistake for a Democrat, isn't it? It's also cute that she wasn't asked about 'welfare reform.' That was the cutting of the safety net for many Americans and went through the Congress and the Bill Clinton White House. Goodman's allowed Marian Wright Edelman -- mere months ago -- to play shocked and appalled by that legislation. I seem to recall, in real time, Franci raging against Wright Edelman and holding her responsible -- noting that MWE did nothing, noting that MWE did a Stand For Children action which Franci liked to snidely joke made it appear that the biggest threat to the poor was a drive-by shooting. Maybe I'm remembering wrong? (I'm not remembering wrong. Franci practically worked that up into a standup bit.)
Here's why "movement" talk matters. Franci's been talking about that undefined 'movement' for decades. And a media hype has allowed her and others to delude themselves into thinking Bambi has one behind him -- he doesn't -- so these people with their publicly undefined goals see him as a chance to grab onto a movement and merge it with their own. There's a need for honesty. There was none on Democracy Now! but there never would have been. Not when three Bambi supporters are invited on and no supporter of Hillary is. It's the way Goodman has slanted the show all along while wanting to lecture Big Media about what 'fairness' is and about the importance of 'diverse' voices. But she staged a roundtable where everyone sang from the same hymnal.
Let's turn to Tim Carpenter who at least defined the 'movement' he wants to be part of: a grassroots one. Carpenter appears seriously deranged and he makes that clear by declaring, "I think it's safe to say this morning that despite the corporate media's best attempt, and the inside-the-Beltway Democratic Party, that the Democratic primary is far from over." He's saying Bambi's 'in the race' and it's *not* because of support from "corporate media" and "inside-the-Beltway Democratic Party" members. Such as Ted Kennedy? Such as John Kerry? He appears deranged. It's some sort of sickness that allows some to refuse to see reality. Craig Crawford (The Huffington Post) explains it, "If I were Barack Obama I would tell my flaks in the news media to shut up in the final days before elections. The chattering crowd's frenzy for this man only raises expectations that he cannot meet. As a result, what was otherwise not too shabby a night for Obam on Super Tuesday came across like a public relations defeat because so much more had been expected. Still, those who predicted a bigger night for Obama are invested in downplaying what actually happened, and will surely gin him up for the next contests. Before Super Tuesday gushing pundtis predicted that the Kennedy family endorsements would, at a minimum, deliver Massachusetts. Didn't happen. Feverish news reports of rising momentum for Obama led to hints that he was winning New Jersey. Didn't happen." Crawford goes on to recount the Big media talk that Bambi would win California. Again, Tim Carpenter has serious problems and is highly estranged from reality.
Meanwhile, at The Huffington Post, it's time to set the record 'straight' on Obama's non-support for abortion and to trash NOW's Illinois chapter. Steve Trombley, still recovering from his own D&C, gathers together the back flaps of his hospital gown to explain that NOW is just lying. No, NOW is telling the truth. "Present" was not a NOW strategy. The lie that it ever was was started by a woman who presented herself as "president of the Chicago NOW chapter" but wasn't president at the time and wasn't even in NOW at the time. Steve, let me loan you a Midol. What's that? You're not a woman? Then what business is it of yours what NOW does? As Jill Zuckman (Chicago Tribune) noted, "Steve Trombley, CEO and president of Planned Parenthood/Chicago Action, said there's a reason his organization has endorsed Obama throughout his political career." Throughout his career.
Here is the statement by Illinois NOW's state president Bonnie Grabenhofer:
Much has been printed in both the mainstream and alternative media and many have watched videos of Lorna Brett's comments on important votes that occurred while Barack Obama was serving in the Illinois State Senate (see article below). Ms. Bret continues to present herself as the President of Chicago NOW when IL State Senator Barack Obama was making decision on votes that were critical for women and girls in Illinois. As the current Illinois NOW State President, it is essential that I clarify for the record that Ms. Brett's assertions are not correct. Lorna Brett was president of Chicago NOW from 1996-1998. She was not, as she represents, the president of Chicago NOW at the time IL NOW activists were meeting and talking with legislators about the abortion bills in the early 2000s. Five of those votes occured in the 92nd General Assembly session in 2001. Our records indicate that Ms. Brett has not been a member of NOW since 1999. Ms. Brett was not involved with either Chicago NOW or IL NOW when we were fighting to stop these bills. Ms. Brett is misleading people and using her very old affiliation with NOW to help distance Senator Obama from his vote of present on key bills and as a platform for her personal criticism of Senator Hillary Clinton. To be clear, voting "present" on those bills was a strategy that IL NOW did not support. At that time, we made it clear to the legislators that we disagreed with the strategy. We wanted legislators to take a stand against the harmful anti-choice bills being brought to the floor of the Illinois State Senate. Voting "present" does not demonstrate leadership and does not send the clarion signal that one is unwavering in their support of a woman's right to choose.
In real media, when you're caught telling a LIE -- as Lorna was -- you're out of the game. A man representing Planned Parenthood -- he serves on the board of their action fund and federation, calls NOW a liar. Planned Parenthood's allowing a man to smear NOW. It all leaves Lynn Harris (Salon) lost and she feels the need to include little Steve-o's claim that "only after years have passed" does NOW raise an objection. As Illinois NOW notes, "During Senator Obama's 2004 senate campaign, the Illinois NOW PAC did not recommend the endorsement of Obama for the U.S. Senate because he refused to stand up for a woman's right to choose and repeatedly voted 'present' on important legislation."
From abortion rights -- which Bambi didn't stand for -- to the LGBT communtiy. Rev. Irene Monroe (The Black Commentator) wonders, "Is it mere happenstance that once again, and seemingly unbeknownst to the Obama campaign, another anti-gay African American minister has endorsed the presidential hopeful? But with an Obama endorsement coming from the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, longtime spiritual adviser to President George W. Bush and senior pastor of one of Houston's black mega-churches, Windsor Village United Methodist Church, this isn't deja vu all over again. Why is Obama, a supposed healer and consensus builder, continuing to do this? One answer: Perhaps Obama was unaware of Rev. Caldwell's background and views regarding LGBT! folks? The real answer: how many sides are there to a politiican's mouth. Obama's cavoritng in a highly competitive field for black evengelical votes and is as calculated as when he had gospel mega-star, Pastor Donnie McClukin, poster boy for African-American ex-gay ministries, as part of his 'Embrace the Change!' Gospel Series in October 2007." You again didn't hear about that from Democracy Now!. Amy Goodman has never explored the issue of homophobia from the Bambi campaign. NEVER. Democracy for who, Amy, democracy for who?
Goodman wasn't able to mention what Andrew Stephen (The New Statesman) notes: "Exit polls, too confirmed that Obama is the candidate of the yuppies: practicially every voter earning less than $50,000 voted for Clinton rather than Obama, and those in the $150-200,000 range plumped for Obama." See, Frances Fox Piven likes to talk about the poor and working poor, she just doesn't like listening to them.
iraq
jennifer pritchettchuck wiley
lauren mielejon telvin
iraq veterans against the warsolomon moorethe new york times
charley keyeselise labott
saleh mamonthe socialist worker
naomi klein
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Green Party, Robin Morgan
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, FEBRUARY 5, 2008
CONTACT:
Patrick Kelly ILGP Media Coordinator 773-203-9631 http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=media@ilgp.org
Phil Huckelberry Chair, ILGP Government & Elections Committee 309-268-9974 http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=phil.huckelberry@ilgp.org
GREEN PARTY FIELDS NUMEROUS REPORTS OF VOTING IRREGULARITIES IN CHICAGO, ELSEWHERE
Voters who hoped to participate in the Illinois' first ever statewide Green Party primary are receiving a very rude reception at many polling places, especially in Chicago.
In the early hours of voting, Green Party officials began receiving reports from frustrated voters across the statewho, in many cases, had been told by pollworkers that there are no Green Party ballots available at their polling places, or that they had to vote on suspect electronic voting machines, even while other parties use paper ballots.
Some of the most outrageous incidents, however, occurred across the wards of Chicago, where Green Party ballots have been apparently tampered with so they can't be read and accepted by voting machines, voters are given Democratic ballots despite requesting Green ballots.
What follows are a few examples of reports. Check ilgp.orgfor more reports as they are received. More information will also be available at the Green Party gathering tonight atDecima Musa Restaurant, 1901 S. Loomis, Chicago (in Pilsen).
1st WARD, 26th PRECINCT
A voter reports that all of the Green Party ballots had been folded in half, causing them to not feed through the machine properly. The Republican and Democratic ballots were not folded. Because his first ballot kept getting rejected bythe machine, the voter was asked by pollworkers to fill outanother Green Party ballot, which also had been previouslyfolded. That ballot was not able to be read and was rejectedas well.
25th WARD, 8th PRECINCT
Pollworkers didn't have any green ballots available and were asking voters if they wanted a Democratic or Republican ballot (but not Green ballots).
25th WARD, 24th PRECINCT
A voter asked for a Green Party ballot three times, and wasgiven a Democratic paper ballot each time. Finally, on the fourth time, the voter was told only touch screen available for Greens.
31st WARD
Mary Ann Esler, Green Party Committeewoman in the 31st Ward, went in to vote in the Green Primary this morning. The election judges refused to give her a Green Party ballot. The Democratic Precinct Captain, who was supervising the judges told them that there were no ballots for the Green Primary because the Green candidates were running unopposed.
The confrontation ended when Mary found the ballots hidden under some papers on the judge's table. The judges then went into a big huddle with the Democratic Precinct Captain while Mary marked her ballot.
35th WARD
Jeremy Karpen, live blogging from the 35th Ward polling place, gives the following reports:
9:00am: After reporting an election judge for not orally offering Green Party ballots (when he is offering Dem and Rep) he was visited by the Board of Elections and then he called me [an expletive]. I asked him first to either list all three ballots or simply ask people what ballot they prefer, he said "I can if I want to."
9:09am: Craig (my committeeman and roommate) was just handed a "green" democratic ballot and got all the way to the little voting booth before he realized what had happened.Dear lord.
9:45am: The Election Judge, who now seems to have an attitude, when asked if Green is a real party, said "unfortunately" and stated that it "isn't a real party." The person he was talking to was an electioneer for Bradley's campaign and not a voter but there certainly were other voters in the room.
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=188400239&blogID=354973039
47th WARD
A voter was told there were no Green Party ballots. During a call to report the incident, the pollworkers told him that he could vote using an electronic voting machine, but they did not have any paper ballots available (although paper ballotswere available for the Republican and Democratic parties).
50th WARD, 5th PRECINCT
Green committeeman reports that the election judge is only offering Republican and Democratic ballots.
COOK COUNTY, NORTHBROOK
An election judge reports that judges were instructed to keep a tally of Green voters on a tally sheet that numbersup to 50. There is no such tally for the Democrats and Republicans.
COOK COUNTY, NORTHFIELD TOWNSHIP, 44th PRECINCT
A voter writes: "At approximately 11:30 am, at the polling place at 74 Park Drive, Glenview, Green Party ballots were still in shrink wrap, in the box, in the cabinet. Officials at the desk were indignant about my disappointment, andchallenged me to "have credentials" in order to register my complaint.
DUPAGE COUNTY, MILTON TOWNSHIP, 28th PRECINCT
A pollwatcher reports that and election judge asks voter "which parties' primary ballot do you want?" The voter seemed confused by the question and the judge clarified by stating "Republican or Democrat". The pollwatcher immediately interjected and corrected the judge and asked her to please state all three parties in the primary from now on.
DUPAGE COUNTY, MILTON TOWNSHIP, 44th PRECINCT
A voter writes: "A judge repeatedly tried to give me a Democratic ballot, which I refused. The Green ballots were still wrapped up and semi-out of sight. As I approached the tables, I could hear only "Republican or Democrat?" over and over.
JACKSON COUNTY, MURPHYSBORO, 12th PRECINCT
A voter writes: "As I was leaving, the head lady was making a call about getting more Green ballots because they had onlybeen sent three and at 7:30a they had already used 2 of them and she was worried about a run on Green voters."
MORE REPORTS AVAILABLE ON ILGP.ORG AS THEY COME IN.
Imagine that. Even in the primaries, the 'two' parties would work together to shut out the Greens. You're only surprised if you don't grasp how sick those in charge are. It's why the League of Women Voters is no longer over the debates, it's why we do not have campaign finance reform. It goes to the heart of a dead and dying system desperate to hold on to what isn't their's to hold on to.
We need publicly financed elections, we need the people's airwaves to be open to all and we need instant run-off voting. Until those arrive, we don't have a democracy. What we have instead is two tired, overstuffed parties, pretending they have a tiny difference long enough to trick voters in election cycle after election cycle. Instant run-off is what they fear most because when you know, for instance, that no one can scream at you for "wasting your vote" if you voted Nader in 2000 and ranked Gore as your second choice, then a lot more people will vote for the candidate they believe in. The two parties depend upon the myth that votes are wasted to maintain their percentages of the vote. Instant run-off would mean they'd actually have to compete for votes and not take citizens for granted with a "Where else you going to go?" attitude.
I voted for Mike Gravel today. My vote was not wasted. I voted for the candidate I believed in. "Electability" wasn't the basis for my vote. I did not hold my nose to vote for the candidate of my choice. I voted as I believed and I am very proud to have had the honor of voting for former Senator Gravel.
I hope, whomever you voted for, you are proud of your vote. I'm not suggesting you shouldn't be. I am saying I hope you believe in your vote. If you voted, if you are totally sick of the whole rigged process and didn't vote, that is your right.
Oprah's going to tell people "how to get the love you want" tomorrow. I've got the TV on because I'm trying to catch the results and they just showed a commercial for Oprah. That's interesting. Oprah, who sold the illegal war on her own show by booking Liar Judith Miller, wants to sell Barack Obama as a must-vote because he was against the 'dumb' war (he really wasn't). Now Oprah, whom everyone believes is romantically involved with her friend Gail, wants to counsel on how to find love. That is Oprah for you.
The whole process, as I was saying, is perverted and screwed up and not meant to up the turnout or the involvement. The two parties want the system we have because they can game it and shut out third parties.
It only works for so long. What happens is a party falls out of touch and a third party sweeps past it. However, then the third party becomes just like what it replaced over time which is why it's important to reform the system (or change it) and not just elevate a third party up to one of the two majors.
"Goodbye To All That (#2)" (Robin Morgan, Women's Media Center)
"Goodbye To All That" was my (in)famous 1970 essay breaking free from a politics of accommodation especially affecting women (for an online version, see http://blog.fair-use.org/category/chicago/).
During my decades in civil-rights, anti-war, and contemporary women's movements, I've avoided writing another specific "Goodbye . . ." But not since the suffrage struggle have two communities--joint conscience-keepers of this country--been so set in competition, as the contest between Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC) and Barack Obama (BO) unfurls. So.
Goodbye to the double standard . . .
--Hillary is too ballsy but too womanly, a Snow Maiden who’s emotional, and so much a politician as to be unfit for politics.
--She's "ambitious" but he shows "fire in the belly." (Ever had labor pains?)
--When a sexist idiot screamed "Iron my shirt!" at HRC, it was considered amusing; if a racist idiot shouted "Shine my shoes!" at BO, it would’ve inspired hours of airtime and pages of newsprint analyzing our national dishonor.
--Young political Kennedys—Kathleen, Kerry, and Bobby Jr.--all endorsed Hillary. Senator Ted, age 76, endorsed Obama. If the situation were reversed, pundits would snort "See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him." (Personally, I'm unimpressed with Caroline's longing for the Return of the Fathers. Unlike the rest of the world, Americans have short memories. Me, I still recall Marilyn Monroe's suicide, and a dead girl named Mary Jo Kopechne in Chappaquiddick.)
Goodbye to the toxic viciousness . . .
Carl Bernstein's disgust at Hillary's "thick ankles." Nixon-trickster Roger Stone's new Hillary-hating 527 group, "Citizens United Not Timid" (check the capital letters). John McCain answering “How do we beat the bitch?" with “Excellent question!” Would he have dared reply similarly to “How do we beat the black bastard?” For shame.
Goodbye to the HRC nutcracker with metal spikes between splayed thighs. If it was a tap-dancing blackface doll, we would be righteously outraged--and they would not be selling it in airports. Shame.
Goodbye to the most intimately violent T-shirts in election history, including one with the murderous slogan "If Only Hillary had married O.J. Instead!" Shame.
Goodbye to Comedy Central's "Southpark" featuring a storyline in which terrorists secrete a bomb in HRC’s vagina. I refuse to wrench my brain down into the gutter far enough to find a race-based comparison. For shame.
Goodbye to the sick, malicious idea that this is funny. This is not "Clinton hating," not "Hillary hating." This is sociopathic woman-hating. If it were about Jews, we would recognize it instantly as anti-Semitic propaganda; if about race, as KKK poison. Hell, PETA would go ballistic if such vomitous spew were directed at animals. Where is our sense of outrage--as citizens, voters, Americans?
Goodbye to the news-coverage target-practice . . .
The women's movement and Media Matters wrung an apology from MSNBC's Chris Matthews for relentless misogynistic comments (http://www.womensmediacenter.com/). But what about NBC’s Tim Russert's continual sexist asides and his all-white-male panels pontificating on race and gender? Or CNN’s Tony Harris chuckling at "the chromosome thing" while interviewing a woman from The White House Project? And that’s not even mentioning Fox News.
Goodbye to pretending the black community is entirely male and all women are white . . .
Surprise! Women exist in all opinions, pigmentations, ethnicities, abilities, sexual preferences, and ages--not only African American and European American but Latina and Native American, Asian American and Pacific Islanders, Arab American and--hey, every group, because a group wouldn’t exist if we hadn’t given birth to it. A few non-racist countries may exist--but sexism is everywhere. No matter how many ways a woman breaks free from other discriminations, she remains a female human being in a world still so patriarchal that it’s the "norm."
So why should all women not be as justly proud of our womanhood and the centuries, even millennia, of struggle that got us this far, as black Americans, women and men, are justly proud of their struggles?
Goodbye to a campaign where he has to pass as white (which whites--especially wealthy ones--adore), while she has to pass as male (which both men and women demanded of her, and then found unforgivable). If she were blackor he were female we wouldn’t be having such problems, and I for one would be in heaven. But at present such a candidate wouldn’t stand a chance--even if she shared Condi Rice's Bush-defending politics.
I was celebrating the pivotal power at last focused on African American women deciding on which of two candidates to bestow their vote--until a number of Hillary-supporting black feminists told me they're being called "race traitors."
So goodbye to conversations about this nation’s deepest scar--slavery--which fail to acknowledge that labor- and sexual-slavery exist today in the U.S. and elsewhere on this planet, and the majority of those enslaved are women.
Women have endured sex/race/ethnic/religious hatred, rape and battery, invasion of spirit and flesh, forced pregnancy; being the majority of the poor, the illiterate, the disabled, of refugees, caregivers, the HIV/AIDS afflicted, the powerless. We have survived invisibility, ridicule, religious fundamentalisms, polygamy, teargas, forced feedings, jails, asylums, sati, purdah, female genital mutilation, witch burnings, stonings, and attempted gynocides. We have tried reason, persuasion, reassurances, and being extra-qualified, only to learn it never was about qualifications after all. We know that at this historical moment women experience the world differently from men—though not all the same as one another--and can govern differently, from Elizabeth Tudor to Michele Bachelet and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.
We remember when Shirley Chisholm and Patricia Schroeder ran for this high office and barely got past the gate--they showed too much passion, raised too little cash, were joke fodder. Goodbye to all that. (And goodbye to some feminists so famished for a female president they were even willing to abandon women's rights in backing Elizabeth Dole.)
I didn't vote for Hillary. Good for those who did and shame on those who attacked her just for being a woman. Shame on those who built up a difference between her and Obama that didn't exist. As I noted last week, if I had to choose between the two, I would've gone with Hillary because she is a fighter. The only real differences between Hillary and Bambi were: (a) Hillary's got a plan for health care (see Paul Krugman), (b) Hillary is on record as a supporter of women (Laura Flanders is a cheap, tacky liar) while Bambi's 'record' is one of 'present' not support, (c) Hillary's a fighter who's worked, (d) Hillary's not a homophobe. I have no respect for Laura Flanders after her latest crap.
I didn't have that much left to begin with. Sunny yelled today in the office. No one was there, it was lunch time. I thought, "Oh no." I rushed out to her desk to check on her. She was happy because Laura Flanders had shot off her dumb mouth about Robin Morgan.
C.I. wasn't including Morgan (or the woman at The Chicago Tribune) in the snapshot. After the way Gloria Steinem was wrongly ripped apart, C.I. was noting women in the newsletters (and had noted Morgan in the column for Hilda's Mix). With The Chicago Tribune writer, she flew under the radar and didn't get attacked. (Notice how I'm not even noting her name.) When Laura Flanders tried to go after Robin Morgan today, it meant Robin Morgan was going into the snapshot.
I think community wide, we've been supportive of Laura Flanders. I'm sorry she can't stand up to Katrina vanden Heuvel, I'm sorry that she can't fight for her own show. But those are her problems and she's no friend of women or of LGBTs. She can whine about how bad things are with her show now all she wants (and has) but the reality is she destroys her own show because she's so damn weak. It takes a real weak woman to do that 'sly' bit of trashing of Robin Morgan. She probably thought she'd get away with it. The real question now is how much further she has to go to piss C.I. off?
See, Blue Grit can't stand up to a real critique. C.I. knows that. C.I. pulled comments about Flanders' idiotic writing on Lupe Valdez in that book -- a commentary that ended with something like, "Of course, if she'd actually gone to the area and not just read clippings, she might know what she's talking about. As it is, if you asked her to run down Oak Lawn and Oak Cliff, she'd probably say, 'Huh?'" That's because C.I. was already covering what Flanders writes about. That's because C.I. has been all over the country (except Alaska) over and over since the start of the illegal war. What did Flanders do? A brief promo tour for her radio show. Then she grabbed some clippings and wrote about places she'd never visited.
C.I. was kind and pulled it but I was one of the ones saying, "Don't pull that comment. She's writing about it like she knows what she's talking about and you've just outlined how she doesn't know what she's talking about." She didn't. That was the only problem in the book. But we focused on the positives. Hopefully, Flanders will churn out another book before the sites go dark or, possibly, we can review Blue Grit again now that it has come out in paper back and now that she's using the terms "reddest of red" to describe some states -- a term that is totally against her book. But that's Laura Flanders, a little huckster who changes her tune based on her mood.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
February 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the Iraqi refugee crisis gets little attention, Super Duper Tuesday takes place, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Bruce Elder (Sydney Morning Herald via The Canberra Times) reviews Joshua Key's book The Deserter's Tale (written with Lawrence Hill) and notes, "Most nights on SBS's NewsHour With Jim Lehrer there's a silent roll call of American soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are, with few exceptions, teenagers or young men in their twenties. Who are these casualties of war? What is their background?" and concludes, "This is the raw, front-line story of America at war and it makes ugly, deeply disturbing but essential reading. Key's final line -- 'I owe one apology and one apology only, and that is to the people of Iraq' -- neatly sums up the tragedy of the war." Joshua Key recognized what he saw on the ground in Iraq: an illegal war. Today, he and his family lives in Canada and are among the ones hoping to be granted safe harbor status. Stuart Netbydrou Oja Jay (The Dominion) reviews the month of January and notes this, "Three hundred supporters of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey, the first two war resisters to cross into Canada after refusing to deploy to Iraq with the US military, gathered in Toronto calling upon the Canadian parliament to pass a motion allowing them to remain in Canada. The rally was attended by Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae, as well as Toronto NDP MP Olivia Chow. Similar rallies and actions were held in 11 cities across the country. Days before, a rally of 50 Iraq veterans gathered at the Canadian Embassy in Washington urging the Canadian government to provide sanctuary to all military service personnel looking to escape deployments with the US military. In November the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the cases of Hinzman and Hughey, on the grounds that they had previously been turned down by the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board, which considered the illegality of the Iraq war under international law inadmissible."
You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, 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).
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 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.
Yesterday, Refugee International released a statement declaring, "The number of Iraqi refugees resettled in the United States remained low last month with only 375 Iraqis resettled in January 2008. In response to the latest numbers released today, Refugees International expressed disappointment at the U.S. administration's continual failure to meet its resettlement targets. In September of 2007, the State Department announced its goal of resettling 12,000 Iraqi refugees by the end of the fiscal year. Thus far, the U.S. has only resettled 1,432 Iraqi refugees in FY 2008. In 2007, the U.S. government only resetteled 1,608 Iraqi refugees, despite the fact that the UN Refugee Agency referred 15,477 Iraqis to the U.S." The UNHCR places the number of Iraqis who are refugees at 4.2 million with 2 million displaced externally and 2.2 million displace within Iraq. Last month, the UNHCR's William Spindler noted a study on Iraqi refugees in Syria, "The survey . . . showed that every single person interviewed reported experiencing at least one traumatic event (as defined by the Harvard Trauma Survey) in Iraq, prior to their arrival in Syria. One in five of those registered with UNHCR since January 2007 -- more than 19,000 individuals -- are registered as 'victims of torture and/or violence' in Iraq. . . . Seventy-seven percent of the Iraqi refugees who were interviewed reported being affected by air bombardments and shelling or rocket attacks. Eighty percent reported witnessing a shooting. Sixty-eight percent said they experienced interrogation or harassment by militias or other groups, including receiving death threats, while sixteen percent had been tortured. Seventy-two percent were eye witnesses to a car bombing and seventy-five percent know someone who has been killed." The International Red Cross and Red Crescent states, "In 2008, Iraq is the ICRC's biggest humanitarian operation worldwide, with increased emergency assistance for the civilian population affected by the conflict."
And yet the US State Department's not overly concerned about not meeting their announced goals -- announced when not only were Jordan and Syria embarrassing the US by taking in refugees but so were European countries who were seen as part of some-sort war 'coalition' at one point. Yesterday the State Dept held a press briefing in DC with Homeland Security's Senior Advisor to the Secretary on Iraqi Refugee Issues Lori Scialabba, The State Dept's Deputy Assistant for Consular Affairs Tony Edson, and the Senior Coordinator on Iraqi Refugee Issues Ambassador James Folely. Scialabba vouched for Homeland Security by maintaining, "DHS is committed to working closely with State Department and we have worked closely with State Department to meet the goal of 12,000 admissions. Our role in the process, as Jim described, is to interview and adjudicate the cases, perform certain security checks, not all of them but certain ones, and make sure that the cases get finally approved once all the necessary steps have been completed. We've been doing this on a timely basis in coordination with the other program partners and we'll continue to do so." As Scialabba insisted any hold up or slow-down wasn't the fault of Homeland Security, there was also the issue of numbers which, Scialabba claimed, were 7,700 individuals interviewed by the department out of 17,000 referred. The briefing was a pass-the-buck joke. Bloomberg New's Janine Zacharia attempted to pin down the speakers on general numbers and practices and the best that can said is that the US has set the total number of refugees which is 70,000. The total number of Iraqi refugees the US is stating it will admit is 12,000. The 12,000 is not in addition to the 70,000 (all refugees admitted) but coming out of the 70,000. Scialabba gave this as the qualifications required, "You have to have a well-founded fear of persecution based on one of the five grounds: race, nationality, membership in a particular social group, religion, political opinion. Any number of stories can fit that definition. I mean, if you lost your house because of your political opinion and you can't find anyplace else to live, you don't have anywhere else youc an go, you could be a refugge based on that." Rusch added, quickly, that the refugees are mainly "referred by UNHCR" and "They determine when, in their dealings with individual cases, who are most in need of this particular durable solution, resettlement in a third country." CNN's Elise Labott pressed the State Dept on their previous promise to settle 7,000 last year and Foley stated it didn't happen. Labott pointed out that, yes, it did ("Ellen Sauerbrey stood up -- stood in front of all of us and said the U.S. hopes to resettle 7,000 this year.") while Foley then hid behind "I came on board in September". That's the kind of press briefing it was -- reporters asking for accountability and a lot of refusal to answer questions by the designated spokespeople. But Foley says he can be held to 12,000 for this year.
This is not a new problem. In January of 2007, Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) was reporting on a Senate hearing on this issue and the reality is nothing's been accomplished since that hearing and the Senate needs to demand a hearing to determine what's going on in the State Dept. AP notes that the US needs to "accept 10,568 Iraqi refugees in the next eight months if it is to reach 12,00 the number the administration has pledged to resettle in the current budget year, which began in October 2007 and runs until Sept. 30." While Congress is figuring out the State Dept's problem with refugees, they might also try to figure out why the Pentagon needs, according to the White House, $515.4 billion for fiscal year 2009 as Josh White (Washington Post) reported today.
In Iraq today, CNN reports that the Iraqi flag "flew for the first time in Baghdad". It's not the "new" flag so much as it's the latest one, the latest temporary one. As Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) observed last month, "The latest version of the Iraq flag . . . is temporary . . . another band-aid solution. The constitution requires that the parliament pass a new law to pick a flag for Iraq and a national anthem. . . . In technical terms Iraq still has no flag and no anthem. Little has been decided that lasts in Iraq." AFP notes, "In northern Iraq, the autonomous Kurdish minority rarely allows the Iraqi flag to fly over official buildings, perferring its own national banner with its golden sunburst motif. But for many Arabs in the rest of Iraq, the traditional national banner, with its stars, had become a rallying point for an often divided people in the difficult and violent years since the US invasion. . . . So far, the new banner can only be seen over the prime minister's office." They also note that this is the second "new" flag for Iraq since the illegal war started.
Meanwhile the theft of Iraqi oil hits a snag. Roula Khalaf and Dino Mahtani (Financial Times of London) report that the central (puppet) government in Baghdad is telling Big Oil to come on board, don't worry about the lack of oil laws and, "In a sign that the oil law the US has been pressing for is unlikely to be agreed by parliament any time soon, Hussain Shahristani, Iraq's oil minister, said in an interview with the Financial Times that Iraq was now determined to push ahead with plans to raise production from a current 2.5 m barrels per day to 6M bpd in five years." This comes as Reuters reports that Hussain al-Shahristani also declared today that the bpd on Iraqi oil was "the highest since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003". al-Shahristani was in London for the big meet up with Big Oil. Dow Jones reports, "Iraqi oil officials and oil company executives were greeted by demonstrators in London Tuesday protesting long-term oil contracts being signed in Iraq, which they say are handing control of the country's oil wealth to private foreign enterprise." Protestor Greg Muttitt is quoted as stating, "They give control of Iraq's oil to multinationals for 20-30 years. It's like giving my house to a decorator and renting a room back from him." Also speaking in London today was BP PLC's chief exec Tony Hayward who stated that BP is registered and ready to go into Iraq. Yesterday, Robin Pagnamenta (Times of London) reported that a deal was in the works where "ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Shell would be paid in oil rather than cash to help develop the fields."
Following yesterday's reports that the US military had stated they accidentally killed 9 Iraqi civilians, Reuters writes today of the admission by US command that US forces "killed an innocent woman during a raid in Iraq on Tuesday".
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing that left two people wounded while a bombing in Al Anbar Province claimed the lives of 3 'Awakening' Council members and left five more wounded.. Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing near an internet cafe claimed the lives of 1 "member of a neighborhood police unit and a civilian".
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed crash in Misan led to three Iraqi military officers being shot dead. Reuters notes that US forces in Tirkit state that they accidentally killed 2 men and one woman while wounding a young girl. Al Bawaba reports that the toll was higher and that the men were father and son and that there were two young girls wounded and one of them has alreday died. Al Bawaba reports a roadside bombing outside Taji in which a bomber killed himself and 8 people who were members of the 'Awakening' council.
Corpse?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Meanwhile, Michael Holden and Paul Tait (Reuters) report that a mass grave with at least 50 corpses was discovered today outside of Baghdad
Turning to US political campaigns. Mike Gravel is running for the Democratic Party nomination for president. Tomorrow he will be on the UC Berkeley campus, at the IGS Library (Moses Hall) speaking from five to six p.m. Today he will also be in Berkley for an open house sponsored by World Can't Wait at Spud's Pizza, 3290 Adeline. Gravel's Deputy Campaign Manager Jonathan Kraus explains at American Chronicle, "He would cut the defense budget by 60%, and give us a stronger, more efficient military. He would institute a carbon tax right at the source (the lump of coal and barrel of oil), which would filter through the system and shift our infrastructure to carbon-free, zero-emissions technology very rapidly. He has said 'we can get off of gasoline in 5 years, and off of carbon in 10.' He has accurately pointed out that in 1940, the United States had no military capacity, and within 3 years, they were producing a Liberty Ship every day. This was over 60 years ago." Gravel is the only Democratic in the race calling for an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq -- and not a withdraw of only "combat" troops: "Senator Gravel's position on Iraq remains clear and consistent to commence an immediate and orderly withdrawal of all U.S. troops that will have them home within 120 days. The sooner U.S. troops are withdrawn, the sooner we can pursue aggressive diplomacy to bring an end to the civil war that currently consumes Iraq. Senator Gravel seeks to work with neighboring countries to lead a collective effort to bring peace to Iraq. One of the leading opponents of the Vietnam War, Senator Gravel was one of the first current or former elected officials to publicly oppose the planned invasion of Iraq in 2002. He appeared on MSNBC prior to the invasion insisting that intelligence showed that there were indeed no weapons of mass destruction, that Iraq posed no threat to the United States and that invading Iraq was against America's national interests and would result in a disaster of epic proportions for both the Unitd States and the Iraqi people. . . . As President, Senator Gravel will call for a U.S. corporate withdrawal from Iraq and hand over reconstruction contracts to Iraqi businesses which will empower Iraqi nationals to reconstruct their own country."
At The Wilder Side, it's noted, "I think most Americans are tired of the war. I know I am passionately against it. We may disagree on who is exactly the best peace candidate, or what is exactly the best strategy. But, whichever candidate or strategy you believe in, please keep peace at the forefront of your thinking tomorrow. Peace is the biggie. It is the issue that the corporate parties want us to forget." Kimberly Wilder is a Green and the Green Party's candidates vary. We'll start with the Illinois Green Party. Kent Mesplay, Cynthia McKinney and Howie Hawkins as a stand in for Ralph Nader. (Jared Ball has dropped out the race.) That's one of five states with a Green primary today. The Green Party notes that the others are Arkansas where McKinney, Mesplay and Kat Swift are running; California where Jesse Johnson, McKinney, Mesplay, Nader and Swift are running and Massachusetts where McKinney, Mesplay, Swift and Nader are still in the race -- Hawkins is a placeholder for Nader on those ballots. Streaming interview with McKinney here. Sarah Terry-Cobo (Contra Costa Times) spoke with a number of voters including James Achee who "said he will most likely vote for Ralph Nader, but was not aware that Cynthia McKinney . . . was on the Green ballot." Laura Norton (The Press Democrat) spoke to some voters in California -- one of whom was Coral Becker who stated, "I wanted to stay green and make a point. I voted for Ralph Nader." Kevin Zeese (writing at Al Jazeera Magazine), notes, of voters attempting to figure out who is the 'peace vote,' "Others, will look to the Green Party which has two strong peace candidates in Ralph Nader and former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney or other third parties like the Libertarians and Constitution Parties which also are running anti-war candidates. Nader has questioned whether Obama has the backbone to stand up to the special interests on the issue of militarism and points out how Bush justified the war based on Clinton policies, McKinney seeks to lead a 'peace slate' to end the war and, like Nader, opposes the bloated military and intelligence budgets."
Meanwhile out lesbian Laura Flanders writes at The Nation (no link to trash), "I wish I felt what Robin Morgan feels. 'Our President Ourselves!' she cheers, in a rousing pitch for Hillary Clinton." Laura, we all just wish you'd have the self-respect to call out the homophobia by the Barack Obama campaign instead of writing that ridiculous "please, Bambi, break with Richard Daley" whimper. It was stupid because Michelle Obama was assistant to who? Richard Daley, that's right. Information is power and lack of it is weakness -- thereby explaining RadioNation with Laura Flanders (again, no links to trash). It was disgusting because when a gay woman won't call out homophobia, what will she call out? Nothing.
Flanders likes to talk about "people power" and used to enjoy rocking out to Patti Smith's "People Have the Power" but Laura herself has none because she refused to call out of homophobia. It was more important to her to 'fit in' and be 'one of the gang' than it was to stand up for justice, to stand up for what was right. If you haven't already, be sure to read Marcia's "Laura Flanders the self-hating, disrespecting lesbian." Apparently having a girl-crush on Michelle Obama, Laura Flanders concludes, "Today, with fingers crossed, I'm voting for Barack and Michelle Obama. At least we can call their community organizers' bluff." What? Flanders has never called Barack or Michelle out on anything. Homophobia was okay with little Laura when it was blasted onstage in South Carolina. Not a peep. Can't speak up when it matters then maybe you shouldn't have a voice.
But this is the woman who wanted to get up in arms that Obama's campaign was using a song by a child molestor (yes, that was over a year ago, she fell in line because she knows who signs her checks and keeps her on air) but had no problem booking Pig-Boy who was twice busted for online predatory activities with younger women. It's a funny kind of 'strength,' a temporary one. She's weak. And that may be the worst we can say about someone who's tried to self-present as strong.
She might try to argue that she's applauded the 'movement' and not the candidate previously. When the 'movement' utilizes homophobia, applauding it and refusing to call it out makes Flanders the Andrew Sullivan of the 'left.' She was once a strong voice. The Nation cut her great radio program down from six hours a week to one. It took Flanders to cut herself down from greatness which she has. And all these people using their 'name' and 'image' this campaign cycle don't seem aware of the damage they've done to themselves. These things will not be forgotten, regardless of today's outcome. They have trashed their own nests and, for chuckles, picture ten years on down the line when it's, "Ms. Flanders, clean up an aisle twelve." Hopefully, someone other than Bambi -- and of course Flanders herself -- will have stood up for the rights of LGBT so she'll have some work place protections left.
Robin Morgan, the one and only Robin Morgan, puts it into perpsective, puts it on the table, in "Goodbye To All That (#2)" (Women's Media Center) and that's because it takes a woman not afraid to be called a woman -- or any of the slurs on women -- to speak the truth. A woman who hides, who says, "I'm gay but if I call out Bambi's homophobia they might cancel my radio show and no one listens to it anymore and I can't get a real job so I have to make nice . . ." can't speak for any woman because she can't even speak for herself. Morgan's never been a Flanders. Morgan explains the double standard in place that exists to knock down a female candidate no matter what.
-- Young political Kennedys -- Kathleen, Kerry, and Bobby Jr. -- all endorsed Hillary. Senator Ted, age 76, endorsed Obama. If the situation were reversed, pundits would snort "See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him." (Personally, I'm unimpressed with Caroline's longing for the Return of the Fathers. Unlike the rest of the world, Americans have short memories. Me, I still recall Marilyn Monroe's suicide and a dead girl named Mary Jo Kopechne in Chappaquiddick.)
[. . .]
Goodbye to pretending the black community is entirely male and all women are white . . .
Surprise! Women exist in all opinions, pigmentations, ethnicities, abilities, sexual preferences, and ages -- not only African American and European American but Latina and Native American, Asian American and Pacific Islanders, Arab American and -- hey, every group, because a group wouldn't exist if we hadn't given birth to it. A few non-racist countries may exist -- but sexism is everywhere. No matter how many ways a woman breaks free from other discriminiations, she remains a female human being in a world still so patriarchal that it's the "norm."
[. . .]
Goodby to some women letting history pass by while wringing their hands, because Hillary isn't as "likeable" as they've been warned they must be, or because she didn't leave him, couldn't "control" him, kept her family together and raised a smart, sane daughter. (Think of the blame if Chelsea had ever acted in the alcoholic, neurotic manner of the Bush twins!) Godbye to some women pouting because she didn't bake cookies or she did, sniping because she learned the rules and then bent or broke them. Grow the hell up. She is not running for Ms.-perfect-pure-queen-icon of the feminist movement. She's running to be president of the United States.
[. . .]
Goodbye to some young women eager to win male approval by showing they're not feminists (at least not the kind who actually threaten the status quo), who can't indentify with a woman candidate because she is unafraid of eeueweeeu yucky power, who fear their boyfriends might look at them funny if they say something good about her. Goodbye to women of any age again feeling unworthy, sulking "what if she's not electable?" or "maybe it's post-feminism and whooosh we're already free." Let a statement by the magnificent Harriet Tubman stand as reply. When asked how she managed to save hundreds of enslaved African Americans via the Underground Railroad during the Civil War, she replied bitterly, "I could have saved thousands -- if only I'd been able to convince them they were slaves."
I'd rather say a joyful Hello to all the glorious young women who do identify with Hillary and all the brave, smart men -- of all ethnicities and age -- who get that it's in their self-interest, too. She's better qualified. (D'uh.) She's a high-profile candidate with an enormous grasp of foreign- and domestic-policy nuance, dedication to detail, ability to absorb staggering insult and personal pain while retaining dignity, resolve, even humor, and keep on keeping on. (Also, yes, dammit, let's hear it for her connections and funding and party-building background, too. Obama was awfully glad about those when she raised dough and campaigned for him to get to the Senate in the first place.)
I'd rather look foward to what a good president he might make in eight years, when his vision and spirit are seasoned by practical know-how -- and he'll be all of 54. Meanwhile, goodbye to turning him into a shining knight when actually he's an astute, smooth pol with speechwriters who've worked with the Kennedys' own speechwriter-courtier Ted Sorenson. If it's only about ringing rhetoric, let speechwriters run. But isn't it about getting the policies we want enacted?
That's a lengthy excerpt but not even the entire piece. Take a moment to grasp how much the Womens Media Center is needed. It's not going to be cross-posted at Common Dreams -- just, as Jess pointed out, they refused to cross-post Gloria Steinem's "Women Are Never Front-Runners" but were happy to post a 'rebuttal.'
Jess: What is known is that Common Dreams posted an idiot's response to Gloria Steinem but failed to have posted, before or since, Gloria Steinem's column "Women Are Never Front-Runners." And for anyone trying to give Common Dreams a pass on that by saying, "It was a New York Times column," Common Dreams regularly reposts NYT columns and editorials in full with their "fair use" tag at the end. They made a decision on Tuesday, when the column ran, not to post it. On Thursday, they made a decision to post a Bambi's groupies' trashing of Gloria Steinem.
What the election cycle has demonstrated on the Democratic side is how much women are still devalued and hated. Don't kid that it's not so. Like Laura Flanders has no problem bringing the Pig (twice busted for attempting to set up sex with an underage female online) onto her radio program, Common Dreams has no problem posting him. They've got him up today. But they didn't post Steinem and they didn't post Morgan. With Pig, we're supposed to overlook the busts. It's more important that his 'voice' be heard than that he's a predator and, thing is, women know that argument because we've heard it over and over, decade after decade. Gender is the greatest barrier. All women are told to wait -- over and over. Ask Flanders why she was so offended about Gary Glitter but thought nothing of repeatedly booking Pig on her program? Ask her to explain that. Ask Amy Goodman to. Ask Katrina vanden Heuvel why she, the mother of a teenage daughter, thinks his rambles are worth carrying at The Nation? Big media had the sense to wash their hands of him when the arrests came out. Not little media. Because you've got a lot of queen bees who won't use their voices, they don't want to look 'bitchy' or 'assertive' or 'demanding.' How's that working out for you?
So let's not pretend that the alleged "Progressive Community" is at all interested in women. They're not. If women say what they want to hear, they can't wait to post. Rosa Brooks, for instance, says exactly what Common Dreams wants and they post her like crazy. But let a woman write from a position of self-respect and not rush to play the boys' game and suddenly there is just silence. Go to their "about" section and you'll see praise and shout outs . . . from man after man . . . plus self-loathing Flanders. Or go to the stench of all slime, BuzzFlash, where bashing women is the norm and you'll find one attack on Hillary after another and the only authors are women who praise Bambi -- many described as 'feminist' which is a shock to those of us who are feminists.
On the Democratic side this election has demonstrated that Little Media isn't objective, isn't interested in a full exchange, isn't interested in truth. Women were tossed under the bus, the bi and multi-racial community was tossed under the bus, the LGBT community was tossed under the bus, the Palestinian people were tossed under the bus . . . And a whole lot more. Little Media signed up to do p.r. for Bambi and wanted to pass it off as journalism. In the process, they twisted every fact possible to villify Hillary for . . . being so similar in positions to Obama. Then they want to show up and argue about the 'movement' -- the one their spin created -- and claim it's proof of something. It's proof of nothing.
We're including a photo. It's at Larry Johnson's No Quarter. Yesterday, Amy Goodman was schilling for Bambi again in the headlines and it was rah-rah-rah, people turn out! Here's a photo of the Los Angeles speech -- not the tight shot Goodman offered on the TV version of her program
Oops! The Obama and Orpah Show didn't exactly pack them in, did it? UCLA. Isn't that a 'youth' paradise? But it was billed as rah-rah, pack 'em in. Those lies should remind you of another photo-op -- the pulling down of Saddam's statue in Baghdad which -- in a tight shot -- had tons of cheering Iraqis but -- in a wide shot -- demonstrated there was no crowd. Goodman pointed the first one out, you may remember, and called it out. The second? Oh, cookie, journalistic standards get tossed aside for the Bambi standard.
iraq
david ovallejoshua key
iraq veterans against the war
leila fadelmcclatchy newspapers
robin morgan
josh whitethe washington post
ann scott tyson
CONTACT:
Patrick Kelly ILGP Media Coordinator 773-203-9631 http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=media@ilgp.org
Phil Huckelberry Chair, ILGP Government & Elections Committee 309-268-9974 http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=phil.huckelberry@ilgp.org
GREEN PARTY FIELDS NUMEROUS REPORTS OF VOTING IRREGULARITIES IN CHICAGO, ELSEWHERE
Voters who hoped to participate in the Illinois' first ever statewide Green Party primary are receiving a very rude reception at many polling places, especially in Chicago.
In the early hours of voting, Green Party officials began receiving reports from frustrated voters across the statewho, in many cases, had been told by pollworkers that there are no Green Party ballots available at their polling places, or that they had to vote on suspect electronic voting machines, even while other parties use paper ballots.
Some of the most outrageous incidents, however, occurred across the wards of Chicago, where Green Party ballots have been apparently tampered with so they can't be read and accepted by voting machines, voters are given Democratic ballots despite requesting Green ballots.
What follows are a few examples of reports. Check ilgp.orgfor more reports as they are received. More information will also be available at the Green Party gathering tonight atDecima Musa Restaurant, 1901 S. Loomis, Chicago (in Pilsen).
1st WARD, 26th PRECINCT
A voter reports that all of the Green Party ballots had been folded in half, causing them to not feed through the machine properly. The Republican and Democratic ballots were not folded. Because his first ballot kept getting rejected bythe machine, the voter was asked by pollworkers to fill outanother Green Party ballot, which also had been previouslyfolded. That ballot was not able to be read and was rejectedas well.
25th WARD, 8th PRECINCT
Pollworkers didn't have any green ballots available and were asking voters if they wanted a Democratic or Republican ballot (but not Green ballots).
25th WARD, 24th PRECINCT
A voter asked for a Green Party ballot three times, and wasgiven a Democratic paper ballot each time. Finally, on the fourth time, the voter was told only touch screen available for Greens.
31st WARD
Mary Ann Esler, Green Party Committeewoman in the 31st Ward, went in to vote in the Green Primary this morning. The election judges refused to give her a Green Party ballot. The Democratic Precinct Captain, who was supervising the judges told them that there were no ballots for the Green Primary because the Green candidates were running unopposed.
The confrontation ended when Mary found the ballots hidden under some papers on the judge's table. The judges then went into a big huddle with the Democratic Precinct Captain while Mary marked her ballot.
35th WARD
Jeremy Karpen, live blogging from the 35th Ward polling place, gives the following reports:
9:00am: After reporting an election judge for not orally offering Green Party ballots (when he is offering Dem and Rep) he was visited by the Board of Elections and then he called me [an expletive]. I asked him first to either list all three ballots or simply ask people what ballot they prefer, he said "I can if I want to."
9:09am: Craig (my committeeman and roommate) was just handed a "green" democratic ballot and got all the way to the little voting booth before he realized what had happened.Dear lord.
9:45am: The Election Judge, who now seems to have an attitude, when asked if Green is a real party, said "unfortunately" and stated that it "isn't a real party." The person he was talking to was an electioneer for Bradley's campaign and not a voter but there certainly were other voters in the room.
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=188400239&blogID=354973039
47th WARD
A voter was told there were no Green Party ballots. During a call to report the incident, the pollworkers told him that he could vote using an electronic voting machine, but they did not have any paper ballots available (although paper ballotswere available for the Republican and Democratic parties).
50th WARD, 5th PRECINCT
Green committeeman reports that the election judge is only offering Republican and Democratic ballots.
COOK COUNTY, NORTHBROOK
An election judge reports that judges were instructed to keep a tally of Green voters on a tally sheet that numbersup to 50. There is no such tally for the Democrats and Republicans.
COOK COUNTY, NORTHFIELD TOWNSHIP, 44th PRECINCT
A voter writes: "At approximately 11:30 am, at the polling place at 74 Park Drive, Glenview, Green Party ballots were still in shrink wrap, in the box, in the cabinet. Officials at the desk were indignant about my disappointment, andchallenged me to "have credentials" in order to register my complaint.
DUPAGE COUNTY, MILTON TOWNSHIP, 28th PRECINCT
A pollwatcher reports that and election judge asks voter "which parties' primary ballot do you want?" The voter seemed confused by the question and the judge clarified by stating "Republican or Democrat". The pollwatcher immediately interjected and corrected the judge and asked her to please state all three parties in the primary from now on.
DUPAGE COUNTY, MILTON TOWNSHIP, 44th PRECINCT
A voter writes: "A judge repeatedly tried to give me a Democratic ballot, which I refused. The Green ballots were still wrapped up and semi-out of sight. As I approached the tables, I could hear only "Republican or Democrat?" over and over.
JACKSON COUNTY, MURPHYSBORO, 12th PRECINCT
A voter writes: "As I was leaving, the head lady was making a call about getting more Green ballots because they had onlybeen sent three and at 7:30a they had already used 2 of them and she was worried about a run on Green voters."
MORE REPORTS AVAILABLE ON ILGP.ORG AS THEY COME IN.
Imagine that. Even in the primaries, the 'two' parties would work together to shut out the Greens. You're only surprised if you don't grasp how sick those in charge are. It's why the League of Women Voters is no longer over the debates, it's why we do not have campaign finance reform. It goes to the heart of a dead and dying system desperate to hold on to what isn't their's to hold on to.
We need publicly financed elections, we need the people's airwaves to be open to all and we need instant run-off voting. Until those arrive, we don't have a democracy. What we have instead is two tired, overstuffed parties, pretending they have a tiny difference long enough to trick voters in election cycle after election cycle. Instant run-off is what they fear most because when you know, for instance, that no one can scream at you for "wasting your vote" if you voted Nader in 2000 and ranked Gore as your second choice, then a lot more people will vote for the candidate they believe in. The two parties depend upon the myth that votes are wasted to maintain their percentages of the vote. Instant run-off would mean they'd actually have to compete for votes and not take citizens for granted with a "Where else you going to go?" attitude.
I voted for Mike Gravel today. My vote was not wasted. I voted for the candidate I believed in. "Electability" wasn't the basis for my vote. I did not hold my nose to vote for the candidate of my choice. I voted as I believed and I am very proud to have had the honor of voting for former Senator Gravel.
I hope, whomever you voted for, you are proud of your vote. I'm not suggesting you shouldn't be. I am saying I hope you believe in your vote. If you voted, if you are totally sick of the whole rigged process and didn't vote, that is your right.
Oprah's going to tell people "how to get the love you want" tomorrow. I've got the TV on because I'm trying to catch the results and they just showed a commercial for Oprah. That's interesting. Oprah, who sold the illegal war on her own show by booking Liar Judith Miller, wants to sell Barack Obama as a must-vote because he was against the 'dumb' war (he really wasn't). Now Oprah, whom everyone believes is romantically involved with her friend Gail, wants to counsel on how to find love. That is Oprah for you.
The whole process, as I was saying, is perverted and screwed up and not meant to up the turnout or the involvement. The two parties want the system we have because they can game it and shut out third parties.
It only works for so long. What happens is a party falls out of touch and a third party sweeps past it. However, then the third party becomes just like what it replaced over time which is why it's important to reform the system (or change it) and not just elevate a third party up to one of the two majors.
"Goodbye To All That (#2)" (Robin Morgan, Women's Media Center)
"Goodbye To All That" was my (in)famous 1970 essay breaking free from a politics of accommodation especially affecting women (for an online version, see http://blog.fair-use.org/category/chicago/).
During my decades in civil-rights, anti-war, and contemporary women's movements, I've avoided writing another specific "Goodbye . . ." But not since the suffrage struggle have two communities--joint conscience-keepers of this country--been so set in competition, as the contest between Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC) and Barack Obama (BO) unfurls. So.
Goodbye to the double standard . . .
--Hillary is too ballsy but too womanly, a Snow Maiden who’s emotional, and so much a politician as to be unfit for politics.
--She's "ambitious" but he shows "fire in the belly." (Ever had labor pains?)
--When a sexist idiot screamed "Iron my shirt!" at HRC, it was considered amusing; if a racist idiot shouted "Shine my shoes!" at BO, it would’ve inspired hours of airtime and pages of newsprint analyzing our national dishonor.
--Young political Kennedys—Kathleen, Kerry, and Bobby Jr.--all endorsed Hillary. Senator Ted, age 76, endorsed Obama. If the situation were reversed, pundits would snort "See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him." (Personally, I'm unimpressed with Caroline's longing for the Return of the Fathers. Unlike the rest of the world, Americans have short memories. Me, I still recall Marilyn Monroe's suicide, and a dead girl named Mary Jo Kopechne in Chappaquiddick.)
Goodbye to the toxic viciousness . . .
Carl Bernstein's disgust at Hillary's "thick ankles." Nixon-trickster Roger Stone's new Hillary-hating 527 group, "Citizens United Not Timid" (check the capital letters). John McCain answering “How do we beat the bitch?" with “Excellent question!” Would he have dared reply similarly to “How do we beat the black bastard?” For shame.
Goodbye to the HRC nutcracker with metal spikes between splayed thighs. If it was a tap-dancing blackface doll, we would be righteously outraged--and they would not be selling it in airports. Shame.
Goodbye to the most intimately violent T-shirts in election history, including one with the murderous slogan "If Only Hillary had married O.J. Instead!" Shame.
Goodbye to Comedy Central's "Southpark" featuring a storyline in which terrorists secrete a bomb in HRC’s vagina. I refuse to wrench my brain down into the gutter far enough to find a race-based comparison. For shame.
Goodbye to the sick, malicious idea that this is funny. This is not "Clinton hating," not "Hillary hating." This is sociopathic woman-hating. If it were about Jews, we would recognize it instantly as anti-Semitic propaganda; if about race, as KKK poison. Hell, PETA would go ballistic if such vomitous spew were directed at animals. Where is our sense of outrage--as citizens, voters, Americans?
Goodbye to the news-coverage target-practice . . .
The women's movement and Media Matters wrung an apology from MSNBC's Chris Matthews for relentless misogynistic comments (http://www.womensmediacenter.com/). But what about NBC’s Tim Russert's continual sexist asides and his all-white-male panels pontificating on race and gender? Or CNN’s Tony Harris chuckling at "the chromosome thing" while interviewing a woman from The White House Project? And that’s not even mentioning Fox News.
Goodbye to pretending the black community is entirely male and all women are white . . .
Surprise! Women exist in all opinions, pigmentations, ethnicities, abilities, sexual preferences, and ages--not only African American and European American but Latina and Native American, Asian American and Pacific Islanders, Arab American and--hey, every group, because a group wouldn’t exist if we hadn’t given birth to it. A few non-racist countries may exist--but sexism is everywhere. No matter how many ways a woman breaks free from other discriminations, she remains a female human being in a world still so patriarchal that it’s the "norm."
So why should all women not be as justly proud of our womanhood and the centuries, even millennia, of struggle that got us this far, as black Americans, women and men, are justly proud of their struggles?
Goodbye to a campaign where he has to pass as white (which whites--especially wealthy ones--adore), while she has to pass as male (which both men and women demanded of her, and then found unforgivable). If she were blackor he were female we wouldn’t be having such problems, and I for one would be in heaven. But at present such a candidate wouldn’t stand a chance--even if she shared Condi Rice's Bush-defending politics.
I was celebrating the pivotal power at last focused on African American women deciding on which of two candidates to bestow their vote--until a number of Hillary-supporting black feminists told me they're being called "race traitors."
So goodbye to conversations about this nation’s deepest scar--slavery--which fail to acknowledge that labor- and sexual-slavery exist today in the U.S. and elsewhere on this planet, and the majority of those enslaved are women.
Women have endured sex/race/ethnic/religious hatred, rape and battery, invasion of spirit and flesh, forced pregnancy; being the majority of the poor, the illiterate, the disabled, of refugees, caregivers, the HIV/AIDS afflicted, the powerless. We have survived invisibility, ridicule, religious fundamentalisms, polygamy, teargas, forced feedings, jails, asylums, sati, purdah, female genital mutilation, witch burnings, stonings, and attempted gynocides. We have tried reason, persuasion, reassurances, and being extra-qualified, only to learn it never was about qualifications after all. We know that at this historical moment women experience the world differently from men—though not all the same as one another--and can govern differently, from Elizabeth Tudor to Michele Bachelet and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.
We remember when Shirley Chisholm and Patricia Schroeder ran for this high office and barely got past the gate--they showed too much passion, raised too little cash, were joke fodder. Goodbye to all that. (And goodbye to some feminists so famished for a female president they were even willing to abandon women's rights in backing Elizabeth Dole.)
I didn't vote for Hillary. Good for those who did and shame on those who attacked her just for being a woman. Shame on those who built up a difference between her and Obama that didn't exist. As I noted last week, if I had to choose between the two, I would've gone with Hillary because she is a fighter. The only real differences between Hillary and Bambi were: (a) Hillary's got a plan for health care (see Paul Krugman), (b) Hillary is on record as a supporter of women (Laura Flanders is a cheap, tacky liar) while Bambi's 'record' is one of 'present' not support, (c) Hillary's a fighter who's worked, (d) Hillary's not a homophobe. I have no respect for Laura Flanders after her latest crap.
I didn't have that much left to begin with. Sunny yelled today in the office. No one was there, it was lunch time. I thought, "Oh no." I rushed out to her desk to check on her. She was happy because Laura Flanders had shot off her dumb mouth about Robin Morgan.
C.I. wasn't including Morgan (or the woman at The Chicago Tribune) in the snapshot. After the way Gloria Steinem was wrongly ripped apart, C.I. was noting women in the newsletters (and had noted Morgan in the column for Hilda's Mix). With The Chicago Tribune writer, she flew under the radar and didn't get attacked. (Notice how I'm not even noting her name.) When Laura Flanders tried to go after Robin Morgan today, it meant Robin Morgan was going into the snapshot.
I think community wide, we've been supportive of Laura Flanders. I'm sorry she can't stand up to Katrina vanden Heuvel, I'm sorry that she can't fight for her own show. But those are her problems and she's no friend of women or of LGBTs. She can whine about how bad things are with her show now all she wants (and has) but the reality is she destroys her own show because she's so damn weak. It takes a real weak woman to do that 'sly' bit of trashing of Robin Morgan. She probably thought she'd get away with it. The real question now is how much further she has to go to piss C.I. off?
See, Blue Grit can't stand up to a real critique. C.I. knows that. C.I. pulled comments about Flanders' idiotic writing on Lupe Valdez in that book -- a commentary that ended with something like, "Of course, if she'd actually gone to the area and not just read clippings, she might know what she's talking about. As it is, if you asked her to run down Oak Lawn and Oak Cliff, she'd probably say, 'Huh?'" That's because C.I. was already covering what Flanders writes about. That's because C.I. has been all over the country (except Alaska) over and over since the start of the illegal war. What did Flanders do? A brief promo tour for her radio show. Then she grabbed some clippings and wrote about places she'd never visited.
C.I. was kind and pulled it but I was one of the ones saying, "Don't pull that comment. She's writing about it like she knows what she's talking about and you've just outlined how she doesn't know what she's talking about." She didn't. That was the only problem in the book. But we focused on the positives. Hopefully, Flanders will churn out another book before the sites go dark or, possibly, we can review Blue Grit again now that it has come out in paper back and now that she's using the terms "reddest of red" to describe some states -- a term that is totally against her book. But that's Laura Flanders, a little huckster who changes her tune based on her mood.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
February 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the Iraqi refugee crisis gets little attention, Super Duper Tuesday takes place, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Bruce Elder (Sydney Morning Herald via The Canberra Times) reviews Joshua Key's book The Deserter's Tale (written with Lawrence Hill) and notes, "Most nights on SBS's NewsHour With Jim Lehrer there's a silent roll call of American soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are, with few exceptions, teenagers or young men in their twenties. Who are these casualties of war? What is their background?" and concludes, "This is the raw, front-line story of America at war and it makes ugly, deeply disturbing but essential reading. Key's final line -- 'I owe one apology and one apology only, and that is to the people of Iraq' -- neatly sums up the tragedy of the war." Joshua Key recognized what he saw on the ground in Iraq: an illegal war. Today, he and his family lives in Canada and are among the ones hoping to be granted safe harbor status. Stuart Netbydrou Oja Jay (The Dominion) reviews the month of January and notes this, "Three hundred supporters of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey, the first two war resisters to cross into Canada after refusing to deploy to Iraq with the US military, gathered in Toronto calling upon the Canadian parliament to pass a motion allowing them to remain in Canada. The rally was attended by Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae, as well as Toronto NDP MP Olivia Chow. Similar rallies and actions were held in 11 cities across the country. Days before, a rally of 50 Iraq veterans gathered at the Canadian Embassy in Washington urging the Canadian government to provide sanctuary to all military service personnel looking to escape deployments with the US military. In November the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the cases of Hinzman and Hughey, on the grounds that they had previously been turned down by the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board, which considered the illegality of the Iraq war under international law inadmissible."
You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, 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).
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 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.
Yesterday, Refugee International released a statement declaring, "The number of Iraqi refugees resettled in the United States remained low last month with only 375 Iraqis resettled in January 2008. In response to the latest numbers released today, Refugees International expressed disappointment at the U.S. administration's continual failure to meet its resettlement targets. In September of 2007, the State Department announced its goal of resettling 12,000 Iraqi refugees by the end of the fiscal year. Thus far, the U.S. has only resettled 1,432 Iraqi refugees in FY 2008. In 2007, the U.S. government only resetteled 1,608 Iraqi refugees, despite the fact that the UN Refugee Agency referred 15,477 Iraqis to the U.S." The UNHCR places the number of Iraqis who are refugees at 4.2 million with 2 million displaced externally and 2.2 million displace within Iraq. Last month, the UNHCR's William Spindler noted a study on Iraqi refugees in Syria, "The survey . . . showed that every single person interviewed reported experiencing at least one traumatic event (as defined by the Harvard Trauma Survey) in Iraq, prior to their arrival in Syria. One in five of those registered with UNHCR since January 2007 -- more than 19,000 individuals -- are registered as 'victims of torture and/or violence' in Iraq. . . . Seventy-seven percent of the Iraqi refugees who were interviewed reported being affected by air bombardments and shelling or rocket attacks. Eighty percent reported witnessing a shooting. Sixty-eight percent said they experienced interrogation or harassment by militias or other groups, including receiving death threats, while sixteen percent had been tortured. Seventy-two percent were eye witnesses to a car bombing and seventy-five percent know someone who has been killed." The International Red Cross and Red Crescent states, "In 2008, Iraq is the ICRC's biggest humanitarian operation worldwide, with increased emergency assistance for the civilian population affected by the conflict."
And yet the US State Department's not overly concerned about not meeting their announced goals -- announced when not only were Jordan and Syria embarrassing the US by taking in refugees but so were European countries who were seen as part of some-sort war 'coalition' at one point. Yesterday the State Dept held a press briefing in DC with Homeland Security's Senior Advisor to the Secretary on Iraqi Refugee Issues Lori Scialabba, The State Dept's Deputy Assistant for Consular Affairs Tony Edson, and the Senior Coordinator on Iraqi Refugee Issues Ambassador James Folely. Scialabba vouched for Homeland Security by maintaining, "DHS is committed to working closely with State Department and we have worked closely with State Department to meet the goal of 12,000 admissions. Our role in the process, as Jim described, is to interview and adjudicate the cases, perform certain security checks, not all of them but certain ones, and make sure that the cases get finally approved once all the necessary steps have been completed. We've been doing this on a timely basis in coordination with the other program partners and we'll continue to do so." As Scialabba insisted any hold up or slow-down wasn't the fault of Homeland Security, there was also the issue of numbers which, Scialabba claimed, were 7,700 individuals interviewed by the department out of 17,000 referred. The briefing was a pass-the-buck joke. Bloomberg New's Janine Zacharia attempted to pin down the speakers on general numbers and practices and the best that can said is that the US has set the total number of refugees which is 70,000. The total number of Iraqi refugees the US is stating it will admit is 12,000. The 12,000 is not in addition to the 70,000 (all refugees admitted) but coming out of the 70,000. Scialabba gave this as the qualifications required, "You have to have a well-founded fear of persecution based on one of the five grounds: race, nationality, membership in a particular social group, religion, political opinion. Any number of stories can fit that definition. I mean, if you lost your house because of your political opinion and you can't find anyplace else to live, you don't have anywhere else youc an go, you could be a refugge based on that." Rusch added, quickly, that the refugees are mainly "referred by UNHCR" and "They determine when, in their dealings with individual cases, who are most in need of this particular durable solution, resettlement in a third country." CNN's Elise Labott pressed the State Dept on their previous promise to settle 7,000 last year and Foley stated it didn't happen. Labott pointed out that, yes, it did ("Ellen Sauerbrey stood up -- stood in front of all of us and said the U.S. hopes to resettle 7,000 this year.") while Foley then hid behind "I came on board in September". That's the kind of press briefing it was -- reporters asking for accountability and a lot of refusal to answer questions by the designated spokespeople. But Foley says he can be held to 12,000 for this year.
This is not a new problem. In January of 2007, Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) was reporting on a Senate hearing on this issue and the reality is nothing's been accomplished since that hearing and the Senate needs to demand a hearing to determine what's going on in the State Dept. AP notes that the US needs to "accept 10,568 Iraqi refugees in the next eight months if it is to reach 12,00 the number the administration has pledged to resettle in the current budget year, which began in October 2007 and runs until Sept. 30." While Congress is figuring out the State Dept's problem with refugees, they might also try to figure out why the Pentagon needs, according to the White House, $515.4 billion for fiscal year 2009 as Josh White (Washington Post) reported today.
In Iraq today, CNN reports that the Iraqi flag "flew for the first time in Baghdad". It's not the "new" flag so much as it's the latest one, the latest temporary one. As Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) observed last month, "The latest version of the Iraq flag . . . is temporary . . . another band-aid solution. The constitution requires that the parliament pass a new law to pick a flag for Iraq and a national anthem. . . . In technical terms Iraq still has no flag and no anthem. Little has been decided that lasts in Iraq." AFP notes, "In northern Iraq, the autonomous Kurdish minority rarely allows the Iraqi flag to fly over official buildings, perferring its own national banner with its golden sunburst motif. But for many Arabs in the rest of Iraq, the traditional national banner, with its stars, had become a rallying point for an often divided people in the difficult and violent years since the US invasion. . . . So far, the new banner can only be seen over the prime minister's office." They also note that this is the second "new" flag for Iraq since the illegal war started.
Meanwhile the theft of Iraqi oil hits a snag. Roula Khalaf and Dino Mahtani (Financial Times of London) report that the central (puppet) government in Baghdad is telling Big Oil to come on board, don't worry about the lack of oil laws and, "In a sign that the oil law the US has been pressing for is unlikely to be agreed by parliament any time soon, Hussain Shahristani, Iraq's oil minister, said in an interview with the Financial Times that Iraq was now determined to push ahead with plans to raise production from a current 2.5 m barrels per day to 6M bpd in five years." This comes as Reuters reports that Hussain al-Shahristani also declared today that the bpd on Iraqi oil was "the highest since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003". al-Shahristani was in London for the big meet up with Big Oil. Dow Jones reports, "Iraqi oil officials and oil company executives were greeted by demonstrators in London Tuesday protesting long-term oil contracts being signed in Iraq, which they say are handing control of the country's oil wealth to private foreign enterprise." Protestor Greg Muttitt is quoted as stating, "They give control of Iraq's oil to multinationals for 20-30 years. It's like giving my house to a decorator and renting a room back from him." Also speaking in London today was BP PLC's chief exec Tony Hayward who stated that BP is registered and ready to go into Iraq. Yesterday, Robin Pagnamenta (Times of London) reported that a deal was in the works where "ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Shell would be paid in oil rather than cash to help develop the fields."
Following yesterday's reports that the US military had stated they accidentally killed 9 Iraqi civilians, Reuters writes today of the admission by US command that US forces "killed an innocent woman during a raid in Iraq on Tuesday".
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing that left two people wounded while a bombing in Al Anbar Province claimed the lives of 3 'Awakening' Council members and left five more wounded.. Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing near an internet cafe claimed the lives of 1 "member of a neighborhood police unit and a civilian".
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed crash in Misan led to three Iraqi military officers being shot dead. Reuters notes that US forces in Tirkit state that they accidentally killed 2 men and one woman while wounding a young girl. Al Bawaba reports that the toll was higher and that the men were father and son and that there were two young girls wounded and one of them has alreday died. Al Bawaba reports a roadside bombing outside Taji in which a bomber killed himself and 8 people who were members of the 'Awakening' council.
Corpse?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Meanwhile, Michael Holden and Paul Tait (Reuters) report that a mass grave with at least 50 corpses was discovered today outside of Baghdad
Turning to US political campaigns. Mike Gravel is running for the Democratic Party nomination for president. Tomorrow he will be on the UC Berkeley campus, at the IGS Library (Moses Hall) speaking from five to six p.m. Today he will also be in Berkley for an open house sponsored by World Can't Wait at Spud's Pizza, 3290 Adeline. Gravel's Deputy Campaign Manager Jonathan Kraus explains at American Chronicle, "He would cut the defense budget by 60%, and give us a stronger, more efficient military. He would institute a carbon tax right at the source (the lump of coal and barrel of oil), which would filter through the system and shift our infrastructure to carbon-free, zero-emissions technology very rapidly. He has said 'we can get off of gasoline in 5 years, and off of carbon in 10.' He has accurately pointed out that in 1940, the United States had no military capacity, and within 3 years, they were producing a Liberty Ship every day. This was over 60 years ago." Gravel is the only Democratic in the race calling for an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq -- and not a withdraw of only "combat" troops: "Senator Gravel's position on Iraq remains clear and consistent to commence an immediate and orderly withdrawal of all U.S. troops that will have them home within 120 days. The sooner U.S. troops are withdrawn, the sooner we can pursue aggressive diplomacy to bring an end to the civil war that currently consumes Iraq. Senator Gravel seeks to work with neighboring countries to lead a collective effort to bring peace to Iraq. One of the leading opponents of the Vietnam War, Senator Gravel was one of the first current or former elected officials to publicly oppose the planned invasion of Iraq in 2002. He appeared on MSNBC prior to the invasion insisting that intelligence showed that there were indeed no weapons of mass destruction, that Iraq posed no threat to the United States and that invading Iraq was against America's national interests and would result in a disaster of epic proportions for both the Unitd States and the Iraqi people. . . . As President, Senator Gravel will call for a U.S. corporate withdrawal from Iraq and hand over reconstruction contracts to Iraqi businesses which will empower Iraqi nationals to reconstruct their own country."
At The Wilder Side, it's noted, "I think most Americans are tired of the war. I know I am passionately against it. We may disagree on who is exactly the best peace candidate, or what is exactly the best strategy. But, whichever candidate or strategy you believe in, please keep peace at the forefront of your thinking tomorrow. Peace is the biggie. It is the issue that the corporate parties want us to forget." Kimberly Wilder is a Green and the Green Party's candidates vary. We'll start with the Illinois Green Party. Kent Mesplay, Cynthia McKinney and Howie Hawkins as a stand in for Ralph Nader. (Jared Ball has dropped out the race.) That's one of five states with a Green primary today. The Green Party notes that the others are Arkansas where McKinney, Mesplay and Kat Swift are running; California where Jesse Johnson, McKinney, Mesplay, Nader and Swift are running and Massachusetts where McKinney, Mesplay, Swift and Nader are still in the race -- Hawkins is a placeholder for Nader on those ballots. Streaming interview with McKinney here. Sarah Terry-Cobo (Contra Costa Times) spoke with a number of voters including James Achee who "said he will most likely vote for Ralph Nader, but was not aware that Cynthia McKinney . . . was on the Green ballot." Laura Norton (The Press Democrat) spoke to some voters in California -- one of whom was Coral Becker who stated, "I wanted to stay green and make a point. I voted for Ralph Nader." Kevin Zeese (writing at Al Jazeera Magazine), notes, of voters attempting to figure out who is the 'peace vote,' "Others, will look to the Green Party which has two strong peace candidates in Ralph Nader and former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney or other third parties like the Libertarians and Constitution Parties which also are running anti-war candidates. Nader has questioned whether Obama has the backbone to stand up to the special interests on the issue of militarism and points out how Bush justified the war based on Clinton policies, McKinney seeks to lead a 'peace slate' to end the war and, like Nader, opposes the bloated military and intelligence budgets."
Meanwhile out lesbian Laura Flanders writes at The Nation (no link to trash), "I wish I felt what Robin Morgan feels. 'Our President Ourselves!' she cheers, in a rousing pitch for Hillary Clinton." Laura, we all just wish you'd have the self-respect to call out the homophobia by the Barack Obama campaign instead of writing that ridiculous "please, Bambi, break with Richard Daley" whimper. It was stupid because Michelle Obama was assistant to who? Richard Daley, that's right. Information is power and lack of it is weakness -- thereby explaining RadioNation with Laura Flanders (again, no links to trash). It was disgusting because when a gay woman won't call out homophobia, what will she call out? Nothing.
Flanders likes to talk about "people power" and used to enjoy rocking out to Patti Smith's "People Have the Power" but Laura herself has none because she refused to call out of homophobia. It was more important to her to 'fit in' and be 'one of the gang' than it was to stand up for justice, to stand up for what was right. If you haven't already, be sure to read Marcia's "Laura Flanders the self-hating, disrespecting lesbian." Apparently having a girl-crush on Michelle Obama, Laura Flanders concludes, "Today, with fingers crossed, I'm voting for Barack and Michelle Obama. At least we can call their community organizers' bluff." What? Flanders has never called Barack or Michelle out on anything. Homophobia was okay with little Laura when it was blasted onstage in South Carolina. Not a peep. Can't speak up when it matters then maybe you shouldn't have a voice.
But this is the woman who wanted to get up in arms that Obama's campaign was using a song by a child molestor (yes, that was over a year ago, she fell in line because she knows who signs her checks and keeps her on air) but had no problem booking Pig-Boy who was twice busted for online predatory activities with younger women. It's a funny kind of 'strength,' a temporary one. She's weak. And that may be the worst we can say about someone who's tried to self-present as strong.
She might try to argue that she's applauded the 'movement' and not the candidate previously. When the 'movement' utilizes homophobia, applauding it and refusing to call it out makes Flanders the Andrew Sullivan of the 'left.' She was once a strong voice. The Nation cut her great radio program down from six hours a week to one. It took Flanders to cut herself down from greatness which she has. And all these people using their 'name' and 'image' this campaign cycle don't seem aware of the damage they've done to themselves. These things will not be forgotten, regardless of today's outcome. They have trashed their own nests and, for chuckles, picture ten years on down the line when it's, "Ms. Flanders, clean up an aisle twelve." Hopefully, someone other than Bambi -- and of course Flanders herself -- will have stood up for the rights of LGBT so she'll have some work place protections left.
Robin Morgan, the one and only Robin Morgan, puts it into perpsective, puts it on the table, in "Goodbye To All That (#2)" (Women's Media Center) and that's because it takes a woman not afraid to be called a woman -- or any of the slurs on women -- to speak the truth. A woman who hides, who says, "I'm gay but if I call out Bambi's homophobia they might cancel my radio show and no one listens to it anymore and I can't get a real job so I have to make nice . . ." can't speak for any woman because she can't even speak for herself. Morgan's never been a Flanders. Morgan explains the double standard in place that exists to knock down a female candidate no matter what.
-- Young political Kennedys -- Kathleen, Kerry, and Bobby Jr. -- all endorsed Hillary. Senator Ted, age 76, endorsed Obama. If the situation were reversed, pundits would snort "See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him." (Personally, I'm unimpressed with Caroline's longing for the Return of the Fathers. Unlike the rest of the world, Americans have short memories. Me, I still recall Marilyn Monroe's suicide and a dead girl named Mary Jo Kopechne in Chappaquiddick.)
[. . .]
Goodbye to pretending the black community is entirely male and all women are white . . .
Surprise! Women exist in all opinions, pigmentations, ethnicities, abilities, sexual preferences, and ages -- not only African American and European American but Latina and Native American, Asian American and Pacific Islanders, Arab American and -- hey, every group, because a group wouldn't exist if we hadn't given birth to it. A few non-racist countries may exist -- but sexism is everywhere. No matter how many ways a woman breaks free from other discriminiations, she remains a female human being in a world still so patriarchal that it's the "norm."
[. . .]
Goodby to some women letting history pass by while wringing their hands, because Hillary isn't as "likeable" as they've been warned they must be, or because she didn't leave him, couldn't "control" him, kept her family together and raised a smart, sane daughter. (Think of the blame if Chelsea had ever acted in the alcoholic, neurotic manner of the Bush twins!) Godbye to some women pouting because she didn't bake cookies or she did, sniping because she learned the rules and then bent or broke them. Grow the hell up. She is not running for Ms.-perfect-pure-queen-icon of the feminist movement. She's running to be president of the United States.
[. . .]
Goodbye to some young women eager to win male approval by showing they're not feminists (at least not the kind who actually threaten the status quo), who can't indentify with a woman candidate because she is unafraid of eeueweeeu yucky power, who fear their boyfriends might look at them funny if they say something good about her. Goodbye to women of any age again feeling unworthy, sulking "what if she's not electable?" or "maybe it's post-feminism and whooosh we're already free." Let a statement by the magnificent Harriet Tubman stand as reply. When asked how she managed to save hundreds of enslaved African Americans via the Underground Railroad during the Civil War, she replied bitterly, "I could have saved thousands -- if only I'd been able to convince them they were slaves."
I'd rather say a joyful Hello to all the glorious young women who do identify with Hillary and all the brave, smart men -- of all ethnicities and age -- who get that it's in their self-interest, too. She's better qualified. (D'uh.) She's a high-profile candidate with an enormous grasp of foreign- and domestic-policy nuance, dedication to detail, ability to absorb staggering insult and personal pain while retaining dignity, resolve, even humor, and keep on keeping on. (Also, yes, dammit, let's hear it for her connections and funding and party-building background, too. Obama was awfully glad about those when she raised dough and campaigned for him to get to the Senate in the first place.)
I'd rather look foward to what a good president he might make in eight years, when his vision and spirit are seasoned by practical know-how -- and he'll be all of 54. Meanwhile, goodbye to turning him into a shining knight when actually he's an astute, smooth pol with speechwriters who've worked with the Kennedys' own speechwriter-courtier Ted Sorenson. If it's only about ringing rhetoric, let speechwriters run. But isn't it about getting the policies we want enacted?
That's a lengthy excerpt but not even the entire piece. Take a moment to grasp how much the Womens Media Center is needed. It's not going to be cross-posted at Common Dreams -- just, as Jess pointed out, they refused to cross-post Gloria Steinem's "Women Are Never Front-Runners" but were happy to post a 'rebuttal.'
Jess: What is known is that Common Dreams posted an idiot's response to Gloria Steinem but failed to have posted, before or since, Gloria Steinem's column "Women Are Never Front-Runners." And for anyone trying to give Common Dreams a pass on that by saying, "It was a New York Times column," Common Dreams regularly reposts NYT columns and editorials in full with their "fair use" tag at the end. They made a decision on Tuesday, when the column ran, not to post it. On Thursday, they made a decision to post a Bambi's groupies' trashing of Gloria Steinem.
What the election cycle has demonstrated on the Democratic side is how much women are still devalued and hated. Don't kid that it's not so. Like Laura Flanders has no problem bringing the Pig (twice busted for attempting to set up sex with an underage female online) onto her radio program, Common Dreams has no problem posting him. They've got him up today. But they didn't post Steinem and they didn't post Morgan. With Pig, we're supposed to overlook the busts. It's more important that his 'voice' be heard than that he's a predator and, thing is, women know that argument because we've heard it over and over, decade after decade. Gender is the greatest barrier. All women are told to wait -- over and over. Ask Flanders why she was so offended about Gary Glitter but thought nothing of repeatedly booking Pig on her program? Ask her to explain that. Ask Amy Goodman to. Ask Katrina vanden Heuvel why she, the mother of a teenage daughter, thinks his rambles are worth carrying at The Nation? Big media had the sense to wash their hands of him when the arrests came out. Not little media. Because you've got a lot of queen bees who won't use their voices, they don't want to look 'bitchy' or 'assertive' or 'demanding.' How's that working out for you?
So let's not pretend that the alleged "Progressive Community" is at all interested in women. They're not. If women say what they want to hear, they can't wait to post. Rosa Brooks, for instance, says exactly what Common Dreams wants and they post her like crazy. But let a woman write from a position of self-respect and not rush to play the boys' game and suddenly there is just silence. Go to their "about" section and you'll see praise and shout outs . . . from man after man . . . plus self-loathing Flanders. Or go to the stench of all slime, BuzzFlash, where bashing women is the norm and you'll find one attack on Hillary after another and the only authors are women who praise Bambi -- many described as 'feminist' which is a shock to those of us who are feminists.
On the Democratic side this election has demonstrated that Little Media isn't objective, isn't interested in a full exchange, isn't interested in truth. Women were tossed under the bus, the bi and multi-racial community was tossed under the bus, the LGBT community was tossed under the bus, the Palestinian people were tossed under the bus . . . And a whole lot more. Little Media signed up to do p.r. for Bambi and wanted to pass it off as journalism. In the process, they twisted every fact possible to villify Hillary for . . . being so similar in positions to Obama. Then they want to show up and argue about the 'movement' -- the one their spin created -- and claim it's proof of something. It's proof of nothing.
We're including a photo. It's at Larry Johnson's No Quarter. Yesterday, Amy Goodman was schilling for Bambi again in the headlines and it was rah-rah-rah, people turn out! Here's a photo of the Los Angeles speech -- not the tight shot Goodman offered on the TV version of her program
Oops! The Obama and Orpah Show didn't exactly pack them in, did it? UCLA. Isn't that a 'youth' paradise? But it was billed as rah-rah, pack 'em in. Those lies should remind you of another photo-op -- the pulling down of Saddam's statue in Baghdad which -- in a tight shot -- had tons of cheering Iraqis but -- in a wide shot -- demonstrated there was no crowd. Goodman pointed the first one out, you may remember, and called it out. The second? Oh, cookie, journalistic standards get tossed aside for the Bambi standard.
iraq
david ovallejoshua key
iraq veterans against the war
leila fadelmcclatchy newspapers
robin morgan
josh whitethe washington post
ann scott tyson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)