Monday, January 22, 2007

Jeff Cohen, Mike Whitney


That's Isaiah's latest comic to the left, "Bully Boy's Baby War Steps." Bully Boy, in a wet diaper, crawling around baby-talking, "I-ran, I-ran, I-ran." This is how it starts, with him chattering away. You can be sure "Iran" will figure into the State of the Union speech tomorrow. Please visit Mikey Likes It! for Mike's thoughts.

"Can Indy Media Stop the Corporate Media's Hillary Bandwagon?" (Jeff Cohen, Common Dreams):
Prominent pundits seem ecstatic over Hillary Clinton's entry into the presidential race just days after Barack Obama’s media-created candidacy became official. Media talking heads are having so much fun lately they don't seem to notice that our political system is failing to address ever-worsening problems' social, environmental, fiscal and imperial.
Indeed, our country's political decline in recent decades has been abetted by the decline in mainstream media. The same media outlets that were complicit in the disastrous Iraq war are bent on turning politics into an insular celebrity club in which only they get to anoint frontrunners.
If the torch of leadership passes from Bush I to Clinton I to Bush II to Clinton II, it will be a loss for our country -- but a victory for a corrupt Beltway press corps that abhors fresh ideas, especially those that challenge its power and privilege. It was a frightened national press corps that vilified the netroots supporters of Democratic outsider Ned Lamont in defense of pro-war warhorse Joe Lieberman.
For the coming election season to be fact-based and reality-based instead of just power-based, independent media (online and off) will have to play a bigger role in shaping the debate and correcting the record. For example, a recent San Francisco Chronicle news report (headlined "Obama Emerges as Clinton’s Rival for Dems' Left") asserted that Hillary Clinton was "widely regarded as the left's most influential voice inside the now-revered Clinton White House."
Widely regarded? Actually, progressives see Hillary Clinton as having been consistently wrong on the war and a host of other issues, especially trade. Her absurdly bureaucratic healthcare proposal in 1993 -- shaped by and for big insurance companies – was a slap in the face of unions, Congress members and grassroots forces who’d built a movement for simple, nonprofit national health insurance: in effect, enhanced Medicare for All. She helped set back the cause of universal coverage for years.
And far from being "revered," many Democratic activists see the Clinton era as one of decline in which Democrats lost their strong majorities in the U.S. Senate, U.S. House, governorships and state legislatures. It's simple math http://www.commondreams.org/views/040900-104.htm.
The 2008 presidential election is shaping up as a test of the power and capacity of new independent media vs. old conglomerate-dominated media. And a test of grassroots/netroots politics vs. corporatized Democratic politics.

To answer Cohen's question, "no." Indymedia can't stop Hillary Clinton because they can't be serious. They can gas bag as well as any chat & chewer, but they can't be serious. Hillary Clinton is defeatable but that would require more than what independent media offers -- they could, for instance, examine her health care efforts. They might pay special attention, for example, to an article in the New York Times by Robin Toner from 1992.

But instead of addressing the realities, they'll offer sexist language (kind of like was done by independent media when Katie Couric became the anchor of The CBS Evening News) and end up pulling everyone back into The Clinton Dramas that took up most of the nineties. Can they do anything? They'd have to be able to offer something and the reality is that they have little to offer. (If you doubt that, read "Phoning It In, Sailing Along.") The most they'll probably be able to do, if recent history is a clue, would be provide a top ten list -- a little wordier than David Letterman's top ten lists and lacking the humor.

For an alternative take you can read Bob Somerby's latest. Sunny saw it and said, "He's just pulled his own threads again." (He has. But in terms of tone, it's the sort of writing that made him someone worth reading.) "Alternative take" means Bob Somerby is providing an alternative take on Hillary Clinton.

There was an e-mail about The Third Estate Sunday Review's "Roundtable." It stated it understood why I wasn't speaking during parts but noted Mike wasn't and that Dona missed that fact. No, she didn't. Mike spoke more than in the transcript version up at the site. We were e-mailed the notes Ava and C.I. took and told to look at what we'd said and note what was most important to us. That's because Dona and Jim didn't want anyone to lose their most important point. Mike had a very long section that I asked him to remove.

I do work with vets and I wasn't going to address anything that might be one of their issues without their permission. I had one story that I thought was worth sharing but I wasn't sure if it was okay. I had called the man and left a message. I thought it would illustrate something perfectly; however, it wasn't mine to offer without his permission. I didn't offer it. When he did get my message and call, the roundtable was already finished.

Mike, in the section I asked him to pull, was dealing with three hypotheticals, offering examples. He came up with all three on his own. One, however, was similar to what I was sitting on. Because Mike and I are involved, I didn't want their to be any confusion -- I didn't want it to even appear that I had passed on something. I explained that I would prefer it if the hypotheticals went because one was similar to a patients. I wish I could have said, "Pull the ___ one." Doing that, however, would have revealed. So I just asked him if he could pull it. He pulled the entire section (and I thank him for that). I would've asked the same thing of Rebecca because people know we are best friends from way back and there might have been some suspicion. If C.I., who's a friend from way back, had thought up the hypothetical, or even shared a similar story (C.I. talks to many vets), it wouldn't have been a problem because the vets in my current group all know C.I. and would have known that C.I. was bringing up something else. But I have two new members in the current group and I'm especially careful about new members.

Mike had a wonderful, lengthy exchange in the roundtable. I told him that I felt bad for even asking but he was kind enough not to ask any questions and just pulled that entire section.


"A Fool's Errand in Baghdad" (Mike Whitney, CounterPunch):
Let's assume for a moment, that Dick Cheney is the driving force behind the plan to surge in Iraq. Does anyone really believe that the vice president is genuinely concerned about the safety of the Iraqi people?
And, yet, the media still insists that the purpose of the troop-increase is to improve security in Baghdad. Nothing could be further from the truth. The wellbeing of the Iraqi people has never been a factor in the administration's decision-making and it isn't now.
The real purpose of the surge is to pacify Baghdad in order to rebuild confidence among the supporters of the war. Bush needs to prove that he can restore security so the oil giants can make their move and begin developing the world's second largest reserves of petroleum. In a matter of weeks, the al-Maliki government will pass the new hydrocarbon laws which will "issue tenders and signing contracts" to the major American oil companies. This will allow the looting of Iraq's oil under internationally-recognized legal agreements. But if the fighting persists, it'll all be for nothing. No one is going to invest capital to develop oil fields if the country is in the throes of a civil war. So Bush needs to put more boots on the ground and make one last-ditch effort to crush the resistance. And, he needs to do it fast.
It's clearly an act of desperation and few believe he'll be able to succeed. In fact, last week, a number of retired generals appeared before a senate sub-committee on Capital Hill and blasted the strategy as shortsighted and ill conceived. Marine General Joseph Hoar growled that, "The addition of 21,000 troops is too little too lateIt won't work (The administration has shown) "a shocking failure to understand the social and political forces that influence events in the Middle East."

That outlines it perfectly. The war is lost. It has been obvious for some time that the war is lost. This is just an effort by Bully Boy to try to create a new photo op that will provide the desperate-to-believe crowd with a bit of hope.

Five suggested readings (I'm the worst about doing shout outs and usually only remember after I've posted): Ruth's "Ruth's Report," Trina's "Cajun Chicken Wings," Betty's "Thomas Friedman plays at being Chauncey Gardiner" and a joint-post, Cedric's "White House confessions (humor)" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! NEW POLLS WORRY THE WHITE HOUSE!".


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, January 22, 2007. Chaos and violence continue with over 100 Iraqis reported dead, Bully Boy tanks again in the polls (on a 'reality' show, we could vote him off the island by now), the people prove they don't need the approval of 'judge' to argue Ehren Watada's case in a citizen tribunal on the illegal war held this past weekend, Kurdish forces make like many Iraqis in the military and self-check out, and -- what do you know -- with an eye witness who talked to the press this weekend an unnamed US military flack finally grunts - yeah, maybe they do shoot down US helicopters in Iraq.


Starting with US war resister Ehren Watada, On February 5th, Watada faces a court-martial. "Judge" Head has 'ruled' that Ehren Watada cannot explain the reasons he reached his decision to deploy to Iraq, he cannot explain which orders he honored in his refusal to fight in an illegal war and he cannot really present his case. Saturday and Sunday, Citizens' Hearing on the Legality of U.S. Actions in Iraq was held in Tacoma, Washington and there, in a hearing by, for and of the people, the arguments could be made and were.

Among those testifying were Ann Wright (retired from the State Department, retired US army colonel) who was asked about the duty of Ehren Watada

Ann Wright: Now that's kind of the heart of it all, isn't it? The conduct becoming an officer? The ability to think. The ability to take care of your troops, to keep them out of harm's way, to explore with your chain of command what's going on, why are you having to do certain things? Trusting in your chain of command that you're asking questions that your seniors are asking, are asking, are asking . . .
And I think what we we see in the case of Lt. Watada is that the entire chain of command has failed starting with the four-star generals that were the advisors to the Secretary of Defense and the president, with General Myers, the chief of staff, [. . .] who was such a weak chairman of the Joint Chiefs that he did not question it, he was a toady of the Bush administration.
We did have one four-star general who spoke out -- General Shinseki, chief of staff of the army -- who questioned. He actually didn't question the war, he questioned the number of troops -- how the war was going to be prosecuted. Our generals in the chain of command have not acted as they should have and it's just kind of gone all the way down. The questioning that really goes up and down in the military because there is a dynamic part of the military it's just not one monolythic group there's a lot of debate going on in the scenes and behind the scenes. [. . .]
For the Lt. to be the one that is carrying the load on questioning the war is a little unfair. There should have been people much higher up that were questioning, as they are now, the retired generals are questioning, but that's a little late. [. . .]
It's hard to question sometimes even though you know it's your responsibility and your obligation to do it. But we see here that we've got very few people in the military who are openly questioning but then you look at the polls in newspapers that are being taken of the service members in Iraq and, what is it, 75% of them say we shouldn't be there. So there is an underground movement of the military itself. They're not the ones that can stop wars from beginning but they're the ones that ultimately are the ground fodder for it and what they start saying, "It's not worth my life anymore" that's when these things will start slowing down. And then it's up to us as civilians be going to our Congress to demand that the Congress stop funding the war. If you want to support the troops bring them home, stop the funding of the war.

Amy Rolph (Seattle Post-Intelligencer) reports that David Krieger ("chairman of the tribunal") opened Saturday's proceedings by noting, "We believe that Lt. Watada's contentions about the illegality of the war deserve a full and fair hearing." The Associated Press reported over 400 people were present on Saturday alone. Also appearing was Ehren Watada. Hal Bernton (Seattle Times) reports that Watada declared "Judge" Head's decision to disallow a defense in the court-martial to be "a travesty of justice. That it is a violation of our most sacred due process, and indeed it is un-American." Rolph notes that US war resister Darrell Anderson was also among those offering testimony about what he witnessed in Iraq and the "training that dehumanizes Iraqis". Though arguments can't be made in the court-martial, they were made in in Tacoma. John Nichols (The Nation) blogs at The Notion that: "It appears that the prosecutors do not want to provide Watada with an open and fair forum in which to explain his arguments against the war." Of course, what the prosecution wants or doesn't only matters if the "Judge" rules and he did so when he released his decision on Tuesday of last week.

In a speech given at the Church Center for the UN on December 8th by Watada's mother, Carolyn Ho, (broadcast on WBAI's Law and Disorder today) she explained how her son began researching Iraq in June of 2005 (one year prior to his going public), the basic research to get to know the country he was going to be deployed to, and, as he studied and studied, he came across the shaping of intelligence, the Downing Street Memos exposing that intel was being fixed, the phoney WMDs claims . . . In January of 2006, she received a call from her son who explained that he had decided he wouldn't deploy to Iraq when the time came. On June 7, 2006, Carolyn Ho recounted, "the day before his 28th birthday, he went public and announced his decision not to deploy when the unit went to Iraq." Key point: "I don't believe that my son has committed any crime and that he should be serving any time,"

Also on Saturday, Ehren Watada spoke at the Kitsap Unitarian Universalist Fellowship in Bremerton. David Vognar (Kitsap Sun) reports that over 70 people turned out to hear Watada explain how. in June, he came to be the first US officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq -- Watada threw the responsibility back to the people noting, "It is the American people who have the power to end this war, but only if they have the will to do so."

Watada is part of a movement of resistance within the military that also includes Kyle Snyder, Agustin Aguayo, Ivan Brobeck, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Robin Long, Ryan Johnson, Chris Teske, Tim Richard and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Saturday, Patricia Sullivan (Washington Post) reported on the January 15th death of Oliver V. Hirsh:

In 1968, Mr. Hirsch was a 22-year-old enlistee from Bethesda, stationed at Almaden Air Force Station in California, where he was a radar instructor and held the rank of sergeant. He joined eight other military men, representing the four branches of the services, who publicly refused to go to Vietnam and chained themselves to ministers at a chuch in Northern California. Their arrests for desertion were a media spectacle, with polic cutting their chains and removing them from a Communion service. The incident also served as one of the early indications that opposition to the war came not just from campuses but also from soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen who were serving in the ranks.

Hirsh was among the war resisters sharing their experiences in David Zeiger's Sir! No Sir! which is now available with bonus footage including Camilio Mejia, Cindy Sheehan and Jane Fonda discussing "the movement then and now." (Also note the DVD of the film is available free of charge to active duty and deployed soldiers.)

Yesterday was also a signifcant day for war resisters. Patrick Maloney (Canada's London Free Press) noted that Sunday was the thirty year anniversary of Jimmy Carter's pardoning of draft dodgers: "An estimated 50,000 came to Canada, of whom about half remain. Now, in a quiet echo of an earlier generation's anti-war sentiment, the War Resisters Support Campaign is noticing growing interest in Canada as a haven for U.S. soldiers destined for Iraq."

Today, Dan Balz and Jon Cohen (Washington Post) report on the latest Washington Post poll (Washington Post-ABC News) which finds "48 percent of Americans calling the war the single most important issue they want Bush and the Congress to deal with this year. No other issue rises out of the single digits. The poll also found that the public trust congressional Democrats over Bush to deal with the conflict by a margin of 60 percent to 33 percent." And symbolic measures won't build that trust for the Democratic Party, nor will doing nothing. Someone might also want to share those results with independent media -- it will no doubt be a surprise for a great many who ignored Iraq throughout 2006 -- as well as those who tried to sneak it into some fawning coverage of some politician.

In Iraq today . .

Bombings?

Assel Kami (Reuters) reports "[t]wo simultaneous car bombs" which struck "a busy market in central Baghdad." BBC reports 88 dead with 160 more injured. Some of those injured will not recover (die) and some of the dead have likely not been recovered which is why Kami earlier reported 67 dead and 142 injured bu noted "the death toll of 67 could rise." CBS and AP note the immediate aftermath: "body parts strewn on the bloodstained pavement, along with DVDs and compact discs as black smoke rose into the sky." AFP quotes one of their photographers: "There were so many victims they were piled up on wooden market carts, the wounded on top of the dead, and hauled to ambulances and police vehicles. Improvised rescue workers made their way through the carnage amid the cries of those wounded." Mohammed al Awsy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that an "interiro ministry source" states that one car involved was left running with the driver of the car telling "people nearby that he was just buying things and would return very soon."

Al Jazeera notes: "A few hours later at least 12 people were killed and more than 40 were wounded when a bomb exploded in a market in the village of Khalis, near Baquba." AFP reports it as a "bomb placed in a vegetable cart" combined with a mortar attack. Reuters notes that already the death toll on the Khalis bombing has risen -- 14 people dead. Sinan Salaheddin (AP) reports a mortar attack "on a primary school in the Sunni stronghold neighborhood of Dora in southern Baghdad, killing a woman waiting for her child and wounding eight students". Reuters notes a boming in Mosul that took the life of a woman left four people wounded (two were Iraqi soldiers and they note: "Two more soliders were killed when troops went to the scene to recover the casualties.") and they note a mortar attack "on a house in the Amil district in southwestern Baghdad" that claimed one life and left another wounded.

Shootings?

CBS and AP report that a teacher "was on her way to work at a girls' school" in western Baghdad when she was shot dead and the man driving the car she was in was also wounded. Meanwhile, CNN reports that a police officer and a police acadmy lecturer were shot dead on their way "home in eastern Baghdad." Sinan Salaheddin (AP) reports three shootings -- in Baghdad a "Sunni tribal chieftain" was shot dead in one attack and an employee of a cell phone company was shot dead in another while, in Mosul, an attack left an oil employee dead. Mohammed al Awsy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "a liquor shop owner [Christian] in AL JAMAAIAT area 8km west of basra" was shot dead today "after some clerics in basra warned the liquor shop owners that they should stop selling liquor in basra."

Corpses?

CNN reports 29 corpses were discovered in Baghdad today.

In addition, Mohammed al Awsy (McClatchy Newspaper) reports that an attack or attempted kidnapping took place when "unknown gunmen tried to storm inside the house of the deputy governor of diyala ABDUL AZIZ AL JUBORI" -- two body guards were wounded "but the deputay governor was not inside the house." A kidnapping took place in Baqubua, Reuters reports: "Khaled al-Sanjari, a local government offical in Baquba," was kidnapped "while he was on his way to work" and the kidnappers "set the office on fire".

As Damien Cave (New York Times) and Borzou Daragahi (Los Angeles Times) reported this morning, at least 27 US troops died over the weekend in Iraq. The 27 number stops with the two marines who died Sunday in Al-Anbar Province. On Saturday, a US helicopter was shot dead. Everyone on board died, all were American soldiers. The BBC notes today that AFP and CNN have reported (today) that an anonymous US military official has stated it's possible that the helicopter was shot down by "a shoulder-fire missile". This after denying -- as they've done with every crash -- that anything was shot down (they've even insisted -- Willie Caldwell, the Giddiest Gabor in the Green Zone, has been especially insistant -- that only coalition forces have those capablities in Iraq -- so note that "a shoulder-fire missile" is possible, according to the US military). Ernesto London (Washington Post) reported Sunday (actually Saturday -- which is when the article first made it online, it was "20 dead" in the headline, now downgraded to 19) that Arkan al-Mujamai told the paper "that the helicopter was shot down by a group of Sunni Muslim insurgents, one of whom is his uncle." al-Mujamai stated that "a heavy machine gun" was used.

The 27 deaths include an attack in Karbala. Leila Fadel and Hussam Ali (McClatchy Newspapers) report: "On Saturday, a civil affairs team of American soldiers sat with local leaders in Karbala's provincial headquarters to discuss security . . . A convoy of seven white GMC Suburbans sped toward the building, breezing through checkpoints, with the men wearing American and Iraqi military uniforms and flashing American ID cards, Iraqi officials said. The force stopped at the police directorate in Karbala and took weapons but gave no reason, said police spokesman Capt. Muthana Ahmed in Babel province. A call was made to the provincial headquarters to inform them an American convoy was on its way, said the governnor of Karbala, Akeel al-Khazaali. But the Americans stationed inside the building . . . had not been informed" because this wasn't a military patrol and, in the attack that followed (grenades, mortars, gunfire), 5 US troops were killed and 3 more wounded. If you've forgotten, a tremendous amount of money was spent on new Iraqi uniforms and a huge publicity push came with that stating that no longer would the resistance or militias be able to impersonate -- that's disproven today and was always disproven because those uniforms don't come off some Mosul sewing machine, they're taken by people working within the forces. Today, the US military announced: "A Task Force Lightning Soldier assigned to 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, was killed Monday when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle while conducting combat operations in Ninewa province.


On WBAI's Law & Disorder, a discussion by Anthony Arnove and Michael Schwartz was also broadcast today. Many topics were covered. [Mike will be covering this tonight at Mikey Likes It!; Ruth and Rebecca passed on L&D and held the phone up for quotes included.] They spoke, in particular, about the racism at play -- which includes the attitude of those 'sorry' Iraqis who just don't appreciate the illegal invasion the US administration has 'gifted' them with, that those 'bad' and 'backward' Iraqis are just lacking abilities since they can't 'build' a 'democracy' in the midst of the US' illegal occupation, and the racism that forgets who created the secetarian divide (the US). The racism -- that urge to cast 'the other' -- is why they US administration believes that they can recruit more Iraqis to 'pacify' Baghdad and Al-Anbar Province. Schwartz noted that as soon as US troops aren't assinged with Iraqi troops, Iraqi troops melt into the area and disappear -- the desertion rate from the Iraqi army that's rarely noted, especially now when Bully Boy's escalation depends on believing the lie that more US troops on the ground will solve the trick. The admiinstration also believe they can bring the Kurds easily into the Iraqi military. Leila Fadel and Yaseen Taha (McClatchy Newspapers) reported at the end of last week that it wasn't working out quite that way: "Kurdish soldiers from northern Iraq, who are mostly Sunnis but not Arabs, are deserting the army to avoid the civil war in Baghdad, a conflict they consider someone else's problem" and they quote Anward Dolani ("former peshmerga commander who leads the brigade that's being tranferred to Baghdad") declaring: "The soldiers don't know the Arabic language, the Arab tradition, and they don't have any experience fighting terror." If the news of the Kurdish troops doesn't convey how no one wants to fight the illegal US war, Dahr Jamail and Ali al-Fadhily (IPS) report on the latest in souther Iraq where "Shia Arab tribes in the south" are joining the resistance. Jamail and al-Fadhily quote Jassim al-Assadi declaring: "People here have always hated the U.S. and British occupation of Iraq and remembered their grandfathers who fought the British troops with the simplest weapons."

Anthony Arnove, author most recently of IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal, will be speaking in DC this weekend:

*January 27, 5 pm, Washington, DC (with Kelly Dougherty) Busboys and Poets http://www.busboysandpoets.com/blog_events.htm

Arnove will be among many in DC on the 27th. From CODEPINK:

Bring the Peace Mandate to D.C. on J27!
On Election Day voters delivered an unmistakable mandate for peace. Now it's time for action. Join CODEPINK in a national march to D.C. on January 27-29, to send a strong, clear message to Congress and the Bush Administration: The people of this country want the war and occupation in Iraq to end and we want the troops home now! See our latest actions, and click here for details.
















mikey likes it
Posted by at

Friday, January 19, 2007

Alexander Cockburn

This is the Alexander Cockburn post. He's got an amazing piece up at CounterPunch that I'll provide an excerpt to in a bit but I want to start with CounterSpin. I'll add that C.I. called me this morning to say "It was last week and I'm not wasting time going into that post to change it." C.I. was asked by a friend at FAIR to note that CounterSpin has been doing some strong work and used that as an example. There was some confusion over when it aired and C.I. said, "I'm not taking the fall for that!"

It just made me laugh. (Still does.) (Watch though, C.I. will go in there and put in a correction.) So I did listen via an archived broadcast today and maybe it was the radio station's problem but Alexander Cockburn's voice quality was really poor. It didn't sound like they were in the studio together and that doesn't surprise me since Cockburn lives in California. But I was surprised that the call was such poor quality. Maybe it was the radio station that had a problem? Anyone who wants to check that out can listen at CounterSpin which I would assume would have the best quality broadcast. I have had problems in the past with Real Player playing when I try to listen at CounterSpin which is why I don't even bother anymore. I've also had a problem (my computer at work and at home) with The Progressive's website. There's a new square (orange?) they've added to the page where they note new content and I've gotten a solid square. I am trying to note that, or at least Matthew Rothschild, because C.I.'s very high on Rothschild's upcoming book.

Let me add quickly, I didn't listen to the new broadcast today. Sarah Olson really needs to stop speaking publicly. Her ever changing positions make her case weaker and weaker everytime she speaks. I'll leave it at that because I think Rebecca's tackling it tonight.

Though it was difficult to hear Alexander Cockburn at times, what he was saying was worth hearing. He was addressing War pornographer Michael Gordon and how he continues to sell the illegal war from the pages of the New York Times (which marched in double time, in step with the administration, to sell the war before it even started). Let me add something in here that C.I.'s been pointed out in the last week or two, for those who doubt the paper is selling the war. How often does the paper do polls? Every few months. Where is the poll on the people's reaction to Bully Boy's intended escalation?

There hasn't been one. Not in November when it was being tossed around, not in December and not in January. As C.I.'s noted, CNN, the Washington Post, ABC, CBS, etc. have all done polls, where is the New York Times' poll? Usually, they do a joint-poll with CBS. Did they take their name of any of CBS' recent polls because they didn't want to front page another of their poll stories if it meant telling readers how unpopular the illegal war and escalation actually were?

Cockburn brought up that Gordo was Judith Miller's writing partner on questionable pre-war stories (including aluminum tubes) and that seems to not be remarked upon when it should be because he has continued to sell the war. He was referring to "White House Lists Iraq Steps to Build Banned Weapons" which Gordo wrote with Miller and ran in the September 13, 2002 edition of the New York Times. (They probably cursed themselves that they didn't have a special scare piece for September 11th itself. However, they did write a piece right before September 11th, C.I. would know the exact date, falsely claiming that Saddam Hussein was pursuing atomic bomb parts.) (I know the date of the other piece for personal reasons. I was attending a planned event that day and hadn't had time to return C.I.'s call so, at a dinner, I went into the lobby to call and got an earful about that nonsense.)

Cockburn wasn't singing the oldies, he was talking about how Gordo continues to sell the war. There are so few people that will call Gordo out. There's Cockburn, there's Norman Solomon and there's C.I. (I'm sure there are others online who do but I'm not a web surfer. I know that few media critics will call Gordo out although they're happy to trot out, again and again, Judith Miller.) (I love music and I loved it last April when C.I. rewrote the Supremes "Love Is Like An Itching In My Heart" for Gordo.) He also touched on the conflicts at the New York Times and I'll echo C.I. on the fact that they need to have him back on to speak more of that topic.

He was noting the decision to endorse (editorially, but in 'reporting' as well) Patrick Moynihan who was the uber Joe Lieberman. He, Cockburn, may see that as selling out (by the paper) or as proof of how right-wing it really is. I think arguments can be made for both but I think the real story of the paper is similar to that of the Democratic Party -- a group of 'good sports' who think people will play fair so they go along and grasp too late the realities. (I'm not referring to anyone with a byline or listed on the masthead.) At the very heart of it, there is a very real war and if and when the better natures decide to fight, the paper could be worth reading. As long as the Cro-Magnum set lead, the paper is worthless.

I would have been very interested in hearing Cockburn expand on that point, which came almost at the very end, because . . . Let's just say personal reasons. But there were any number of ways that could have pursued and I would have enjoyed hearing where Cockburn would take it. He also has a book coming out (with Jeffery St. Clair) and I'm very eager to read that (End Times). He mentioned Patrick Cockburn (who reports for the Independent of London and whose pieces often get republished at CounterPunch) and I was thinking about how different the conversation would be without that family. There's Patrick Cockburn and, hopefully, many are familiar with his writing. But there's also Laura Flanders. I've more than had it with political dynasties in elected office but I am thankful for the policital dynasty that the three of them represent. That must have made for very interesting family get togethers.

That's also the only family biography I'd be interested in reading.

"First Bomb Carter; Then Nuke Iran!" (Alexander Cockburn, CounterPunch):
Suppose the movers and shakers in the Israel lobby here -- Abe Foxman, Alan Dershowitz and the rest of the crew -- had simply decided to leave Jimmy Carter’s Palestine Peace Not Apartheid alone. How long before the book would have been gathering dust on the remainder shelves? Suppose even that Dershowitz had rounded up his unacknowledged co-authors in all their tens of thousands and sallied forth to buy up every copy of Carter’s book and toss each one into the Charles River, would not that have been a more successful suppressor than the blitzkrieg strategy they did adopt?
Of course it would. For weeks now the lobby has hurled its legions into battle against Carter. He has been stigmatized as an anti-Semite, a Holocaust denier, a patron of former concentration camp killers, a Christian madman, a pawn of the Arabs who "flatly condones mass murder" of Israeli Jews. (This last was from Murdoch's New York Post editorial, relayed to its mailing list by the Zionist Organization of America.)
Any day now I expect some janitors at the Carter Center to resign, declaring that they can no longer in all conscience mop bathrooms that might have been used by the former President, their letter of protest duly front-paged by the New York Times, just like the famous fourteen members of the Carter Center's Board of Councilors. Actually there were, at the time of resignations, 224 people on this board, where membership is mostly a thank you for a financial donation to the center. So the headlines could be saying, "Nearly 95 per cent of Carter Center Board Members Back Former President."


That's an excerpt, you need to read the whole thing. There's an queally interesting article on the press narratives, Gail Dines' "I Was Ambushed by Paula Zahn." I hope you visit CounterPunch even if you're not reading the periodical. Web traffic is as important as circulation and if you see something up there, you should e-mail it. You can e-mail it to me, certainly, but you can also share it with friends. I don't believe it has an "e-mail this" option but you can search "e-mail this" on Google and find something to add to your browser that allows you to mail web pages. Or you can copy and paste and excert (like I did) and provide the link in an e-mail. I really think in the face of the endless rah-rah Dems, CounterPunch is the cold water of reality and that following it will keep the pressure on for change. If 2007 could be the year CounterPunch becomes one of the highest ranked websites, I'd be happy. I think it would lead to some real change in the country. We certainly need some and puff pieces on Democrats aren't going to bring it about. With more on that note, please read Mike's "Help Wanted: The Nation's in need of direction."

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, January 19. 2006. Chaos and violence continue, but speculation is so much more fun for the mainstream press; war resisters stand up and some stand with them; General Casey uses weasel words;



Starting with news of US war resister Ehren Watada who, in June 2006, became the first commissioned officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq. Watada faces a court-martial February 5th and the 'judge' has stripped him of the right to present a strong defense. Arguments that can't be made in a kangroo court can be made by in the real world at Citizens' Hearing on the Legality of U.S. Actions in Iraq which starts tomorrow and concludes Sunday at the Evergreen State College Tacoma Campus (10:00 am to 4:00 pm each day). As Michael Gilbert (The News Tribune) reports "a lineup of speakers will make the case that the war and the ongoing occupation are illegal under international and U.S. law, and that an officer such as Watada has a duty to disobey orders to take part in it." Zoltan Grossman tells Gilbert that "the event will take the shape of a congressional hearing" and notes that those participating include the following: Denis Halliday, Ann Wright, Francis Boyle, Daniel Ellsberg, Darrell Anderson, Harvey Tharp and Nadia McCaffrey.

While some stay silent (The Nation) Peter Michaelson (BuzzFlash) steps up, "The world is upside down, and one brave first lieutenant tries to set it right. The U.S. war in Iraq is illegal and immoral, says 1st Lt. Ehren Watada. In thus choosing reality over fallacy, and refusing to deploy to Iraq with his Stryker brigade, the 28-year-old Honolulu native faces six years in the brig when his court-martial begins next month at Ft. Lewis near Seattle." Peter Michaelson and BuzzFlash stood up. FYI, BuzzFlash is offering Peace buttons and Howard Zinn's A Power Governments Cannot Suppress.

Also standing up, of course, in support of Watada is Iraq Veterans Against the War have set up Camp Resistance and Portland IMC has audio of Dennis Kyne and Darrell Anderson speaking about Camp Resistance. Anderson spoke of how they were camping outside Fort Lewis, "That bus is parked right there and it's not leaving until the trial is over, not till February." Anderson noted the positive reaction from soldiers at Fort Lewis, "They see the bus, they know who we area. After six days, we had soldiers honking, soldiers rolling by in their civilian clothes and screaming out the window. And I remember like, wow, I was just coming up here for Watada and Suzanne Swift and I didn't think the soldiers were going to . . . I never heard of soldiers power fisting anti-war guys. And that's when it hit me, that they're done. They're not going back for a third time. 'Cause that's where I'd be if I didn't go AWOL, I'd be at my third tour right now. Three years in Iraq, three years. Could you imagine Vietnam vets, could you imagine going back to Vietnam three times? Three years and you don't come back from that. You go to Iraq, but you don't come back."

As Ehren Watada's February 5th court-martial approaches, this week the US military announced their decision to charge Agustin Aguayo with desertion and missing movement which carry a maximum sentence of seven years in prison. Watada, Aguayo, and Anderson are part of a movement of resistance within the military that also includes Kyle Snyder, Agustin Aguayo, Ivan Brobeck, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.

From CODEPINK:
Bring the Peace Mandate to D.C. on J27! On Election Day voters delivered an unmistakable mandate for peace. Now it's time for action. Join CODEPINK in a national march to D.C. on January 27-29, to send a strong, clear message to Congress and the Bush Administration: The people of this country want the war and occupation in Iraq to end and we want the troops home now! See our latest actions, and click here for details.


In Iraq today?

Bombings?

Reuters reports a bombing of a butcher's shop that killed the butcher in Hilla. Mohammed al Awsy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing ("at AL ELLWIAH intersection in KARDA") that killed a police officer and left another dead, a mortar attack ("near haifa street") that killed 2 and left 3 more wounded, another martar attack ("bayaa area western Baghdad") that left one person injured and a mortar attack that killed a woman and wounded 3 more people. Kim Gamel (AP) reports that a Shi'ite mosque was bombed "in sourthern Baghdad" (before the bombing, two guards of the mosque were killed).



Shootings?

CBS and AP report that "a man working for the Ministry of Tourism and Archaeology Affairs . . . was shot to death near his home in a predominantly Sunni neighborhood in western Baghdad." Reuters reports three shot dead in Falluja (Iraqi soldier and two ex-police officers), a Sunni preacher was shot dead in Kirkuk, and an attack on a minibus left two wounded in Hilla. Mohammed al Awsy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that, in Tikrit, a vehichle was stopped an official checkpoint, the car contained 4 family members and began accusing one ("OMAR") of having fake identification but they waived them on only for them to be stopped by "unknown gunmen" immediately after who wanted to know which one was Omar "and killed him immediately and stabbed his other brother" leaving his sister and mother to drive to the hospital in Tikrit.

Corpses?

Mohammed al Awsy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 17 corpses were discovered in Baghdad today ("1 yarmouk, 2 amil, 1 aour, 2 zaafaraniyah, 1 selakh, 1 kamaliyah, 4 rahmaniyah, 1 bayaa, 1 shurta khamsa and 3 in dora. some were tortured and handcuffed").


In addition to the above, today US military announced today: " A Multi-National Division - Baghdad Soldier died when an improvised explosive device detonated on a patrol in a northwest section of the Iraqi capital Jan. 18" and the BBC reports that six British oldiers were wounded following an attack utilizing rockets and mortars ("on the Basra Palace camp").

In legal news, on Thursday, three US troops confessed and to review that:

*Hashim Ibrahim Awad who was the grandfather kidnapped and then murdered last year (April). Eight US service members were charged. They are known as the Pendleton Eight. Four had already confessed to their involvement. Yesterday, Trent Thomas became the fifth with his plea agreement.
*Three Iraqis, on May 9th, were detained by US troops, placed in plastic handcuffs, released (handcuffs cut off) with the intent to kill them ("Kill them all" is what some defense lawyers argued their clients were told). Four US troops were charged with this. William B. Hunsaker confessed (and was sentenced) earlier this month, Juston R. Graber also confessed to his involvment this month. Raymond L. Girouard maintains his innocence. Yesterday, Core Clagett entered a plea agreement. (It should be noted his attorney, Paul Bergin, has his own problems these days.) So that's three out of four having admitted guilt.
*Abeer is the one Megan says she can follow but just to recap for anyone who is confused -- three admissions of guilt in three different war crimes took place yesterday -- Abeer Qasim Hamza (14-years-old), Hadeel Qassim Hamza (five-years-old, Abeer's sister), Qassim Hamza Raheem and Fakhriya Taha Muhasen (her parents) were all killed on March 12, 2006. In addition Abeer was gang raped before being killed. Those charged in the incident were Steven D. Green (to be tried in a civilian court because he had left the military before the war crimes were learned of), Jesse Spielman, Bryan Howard, James P. Barker and Paul Cortez. (Anthony W. Yribe was not charged with participating -- he was charged with failure to report the crimes, dereliction of duty.) Green has entered a plea of not guilty in a federal court. James P. Barker confessed in court in November (and named Cortez as a co-gang rapist). Paul Cortez confessed yesterday but his attorney maintains Cortez was an 'oberserver.' Was he an observer in rape?
Barker's testimony was that it appeared Cortez was raping Abeer but, from his statements, he wasn't able to determine penetration. (Wasn't able to determine it from his angle. Whether Cortez penetrated or not, he took part in the gang rape, according to Barker, because Barker confessed to how they took turns holding Abeer down during the gang rape.)

Meanwhile Robert Gates visits Iraq and calls the current climate a "pivotal moment." Meeting up with the outgoing George Casey ("top American commander in Iraq"), CBS and AP report that Casey declares: "I think it's probably going to be the summer, late summer, before you get to the point where people in Baghdad feel safe in their neighborhoods." Is that what you think? Casey's not done with feelings checks or predictions, Robert Burns (AP) reports that escalated troops (the 21,500 Bully Boy wants to send into Iraq) COULD be back "home by late summer". COULD. A weasel word.

"Casey, didn't you say US troops would be back home by late summer?"

"No, I said could."

Meaningless weasel words meant to comfort and lull a public that's enraged by an illegal war with no apparent end. AP reports that Nancy Pelois (US House Speaker) has declared Bully Boy "has dug a hole so deep he can't even see the light on this. It's a tragedy. It's a stark blunder."

CBS, CNN and the whole mainstream press report that Muqtada al-Sadr's top aide was arrested, this following yesterday's reported arrest of Shi'ite fighters, and that al-Sadr is now in hiding fearing for his life and moving his family around while stating that a holy period of Muharram (the new year -- short answer). al-Sadr is quoted stating that no attacks will be initiated by him during the holy period (however, a response would be another issue) but when it is over, "we'll see." How much of this is true, how much of this is the sort of jerk-around we were once supposed to believe during Vietnam (remember Henry Kissinger really, really wanting to have those Paris Peace Talks -- at least publicly?), who knows.

More importantly, what Nouri al-Maliki is willing to go along with (not order, he doesn't have the power to order) at this minute and after more troops are on the ground is also a question mark.


Most importantly, Baghdad is a city.

Al-Anbar Province and Baghdad are where Bully Boy wants to send the bulk of esclation. As Webster Tarpley and Bonnie Faulkiner discussed Wednesday on KPFA's Guns and Butter, house-to-house, blah, blah, blah (the kind of nonsense that makes Michael Gordon light headed) creates a flank, you have less power to move in a city (tanks, et al). Tarpley compared it to the desperation measures of Hitler when commander-in-chief of the Eastern Front against Russia.


As people get exicted over who may have gotten arrested and who may not have, what al-Sadr might have said or not, what al-Maliki might do or not, what COULD happen this summer, it seems (yet again) some basic realities are being ignored. Noting one reality is Warren P. Strobel (McClatchy Newspapers): the illegal war "hasn't turned out the way advocates of the Iraq invasion had hoped or the way Bush and [U.S. Secretary of State] Condi Rice had predicted." Nor the way the New York Times and many others predicted either.

For more reality, Anthony Arnove, author of Iraq: The Logic of Withdrawal, will be speaking tomorrow as well as next Saturday:

*January 20, 7 pm, Chicago, IL (with Jeff Engelhardt) University of Illinois-ChicagoContact: Adam Turl, 773-567-0936, adamcturl@yahoo.com
*January 27, 5 pm, Washington, DC (with Kelly Dougherty) Busboys and Poetshttp://www.busboysandpoets.com/blog_events.htm
Posted by at

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Joshua Frank, Medea Benjmain

Mike often says, when C.I. posts something especially powerful, "I don't even know how I can post something after that." I always reply, "It's not a competition." Which it isn't. Which C.I. would point out (and C.I. hates competition). (C.I. had announced ahead of time that there might or might not be a snapshot on Monday. When Trina's "Lemon & Rice Soup in the Kitchen" went up, I knew there wouldn't be. Trina's noting the importance of the snapshot and I happen to agree 100% with her but I also know it was just a little too much praise for C.I.'s comfort so I knew Monday wouldn't have a snapshot as soon as I read Trina's post Saturday.)

I get to work and can't even grab a cup of coffee. Sunny's beat to me work and telling me to sit at her computer and read "Judge rules Ehren Watada cannot present a defense in court-martial" and "Other Items." So I do and . . . What do you say? Really, what can I write after both of those. Especially the sentence where C.I. is just firing on all cylinders and making the (hopefully not obscure) reference to the Homestead Strike? I could not stop laughing. I kept going back to that one section in my head throughout the day because it is so funny and it is so cutting. (A professor once told C.I., in college, in front of the entire class, "You have a very cutting sense of humor" -- to which C.I. replied, "Yes, but some feel the blade a little deeper than others.") (The professor was attempting to save face after his string of 'jokes' -- sexist and racist, which back then were a lot more prevalent than some may realize -- were met with rejoinders by C.I. that, joke by joke, turned the entire class against the professor.)

Then there are the final paragraphs in the snapshot today. I was about to go into my last session today and Sunny knew I didn't have time right then for the entire snapshot. She read that last part to me. I ended up having to take five minutes to compose myself before going into the session because you don't want someone thinking you're laughing at them while they're sharing.

The snapshot was dictated and I couldn't have typed that up. If C.I. was dictating that to me over the phone, I would've been laughing so hard at some portions I would've missed what was being said.

Tonight, I'm in agreement with Mike, "What do you write after something like that?" Making matters worse, my brother called during lunch to tell me when he'd be arriving next month and, in the middle of our conversation, he starts quoting funny sections of C.I.'s "2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)" and following up with, "Remember back when . . .?" He has circulated print copies of "2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)" to just about everyone he knows and says it is a "huge" crowd pleaser in Europe. He was talking about those moments when you just know it's coming, even though the one about to '"beaned" has no idea and he was making these comments about how it was like watching Sandy Koufax pitch.

So, point, don't expect anything from me tonight. In fact, expect even less than usual.

"Obama and the Middle East: The Next Big Bamboozler" (Joshua Frank, CounterPunch):
So I guess we know what the buzz is going to be for the next, ah, year or so. It looks like Barack Obama, the rookie Senator from Illinois, is going to run for president. He has received a plethora of accolades from key primary states in recent weeks for his (alleged) tenacity and willingness to shoot it straight -- not unlike the great bamboozler before him, Bill Clinton, who seemed to fool most everyone into believing his words actually meant something.
The gift Obama has is unique but potentially dangerous. A taste of his personal appeal: "Politics has become so bitter and partisan, so gummed up by money and influence, that we can't tackle the big problems that demand solutions," he said in a video on his website. "And that's what we have to change first."
What are the problems the Senator plans on tackling? Certainly not the big one: U.S. policy in the Middle East. While assuring us that he supports the troops in Iraq, he's made it quite clear he won't bring them home, and instead has pressured the White House to come up with a plan on the matter of their own. How Obama, or anyone, can possibly believe that the Bushites could come up with a worthwhile strategy for Iraq is beyond me.
On Iran Obama also serves the status-quo with the kind of hawkish zeal we are used to seeing in most Republicans. He's admitted he may favor surgical missile strikes on Iran and Pakistan if that’s what it takes to fight the war on terror. And Obama even boasts that Bush hasn’t taken a hard enough line on the foreign menaces.

Joshua Frank, pointing out what others stay silent on. Anybody remember how the press made such a big deal in the 2006 elections trying to pin Hillary Clinton down on how if she won the election (which she did) would she serve out her full term or run in 2008 for president? Doesn't appear to be a concern for Obama, does it? He has served two years in the Senate and will now be announcing he's running for president. Does that bother anyone? He has no positions. Betty got to the heart of that in the December "Roundtable." Speaking of Betty, be sure to check out her latest chapter, "The Force Majora Friedman"

"The Shame of Guantanamo Exposed in Cuba" (Medea Benjamin, Common Dreams):
"This is the closest I have been to my son in almost 5 years," said Zohra Zewawi, the mother of Guantanamo prisoner Omar Deghayes, as she stood in front of the gates of the prison on the Cuban side. "On the one hand I feel incredibly sad that I am so close but can’t see or hold him; on the other hand I am happy because focusing the world’s attention on this shameful place might help get my son out of prison."
While protests were happening all over the world to commemorate the 5th anniversary of the first prisoners taken to Guantanamo on January 11, 2002, a group of us traveled to the city of Guantanamo to bring our protest close to the gates of the US prison. The group, organized by CODEPINK and Global Exchange, included U.S. activists such as retired US Colonel Ann Wright, peace mom Cindy Sheehan, mother of 9/11 victim Adele Welty, and constitutional lawyer Bill Goodman. But the most compelling members of the delegation were three people most directly affected by the prison: Zohra Zewawi and Taher Deghayes, the mother and brother of a current prisoner; and Asif Iqbal, a former prisoner who spent 2 ½ years locked up in the cages of Guantanamo.
Zohra Zewawi and her son Taher Deghayes traveled all the way from Dubai to shine light on the plight of Omar Deghayes. Omar had been captured in Pakistan in September 2002, accused of being an enemy combatant. While his family is convinced that Omar never committed any crimes and was picked up merely for the $5,000 bounty the US military was offering, they were not in Cuba to plead his innocence. "We are simply asking for due process and fair trials for my son and all detainees at Guantanamo," said Zohra.
This is not the first time tragedy has befallen the Deghayes family. Zohra's husband, a labor lawyer in Libya, was killed by the government of Col. Omar Qaddafi. Zohra fled to England to raise her five children. "The dictator Qaddafi tortured and imprisoned my husband; now the U.S., a country I thought was civilized, is doing the same thing to my son," she said.
The other member of the delegation most directly is Asif Iqbal, who was captured in Afghanistan when he was 20 years old. Asif and the two friends imprisoned with him, all from Tipton, England, became known as the Tipton 3 and their plight became the subject of the powerful docu-drama Road to Guantanamo.

That's Medea Benjamin reporting on the trip she and others took this month to demand justice for those imprisoned without trial at Guantamo. The five year mark was passed last week, January 11th.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, January 17, 2007. Chaos and violence continue in Iraq; two more US troops are announced dead; Mad Maddie sticks up for her daddy's favorite pupil; Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters stand strong in the US Congress; the US military is accused of again breaking diplomatic policies and flouting the law in Iraq; and US war resister Ehren Watada learns just how hollow 'justice' can be.
Starting with the latest news of Ehren Watada who, in June of last year, became the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq. A strong stand that took tremendous courage (even his parents, Bob Watada and Carolyn Ho, have spoken of how they attempted to talk him out of it because of the scorn, silence and hostility he'd be greeted with). He faces a court-martial on February 5th and Lt. Col. John Head -- the so-called judge -- has issued a decision based on arguments presented in the pre-trial hearing earlier this month. As Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) summarized it today: "The judge in the case has ruled Watada's defense won't be able to present evidence challenging the legality of the war nor explain Watada's motive to resist deploying to Iraq." Hal Bernton (Seattle Times) notes it is "a major blow to the court-martial defense," which is putting it mildly, and quotes Watada's attorney Eric Seitz who declares, "We have been stripped of every defense. This is a disciplinary system, not a justice system. Otherwise, we would have been entitled to defend ourselves."
Which they are not. Ehren Watada was just stripped of any defense. As noted on January 4th when the prosecution presented their pre-trial arguments: "What the military would like to do in today's pre-trial hearing is reduce everything to whether or not Watada deployed with his unit? The answer, of course, is that he did not. The military does not want the issue of the legality of the war addressed. By closing off this discussion, they not only would destroy Watada's right to defend himself, they would be able, as the Bully Boy long has been able to, set the terms of the discussion and control what is and is not discussed."
Political Affairs offers a survey of the travesty and notes that Head's ruling reads: "The defense motion for a hearin gon the 'Nuremberg defense' is DENIED. The government motion to prevent the defense from presenting evidence on the legality of the war is GRANTED." Of the political prosecution (let's be honest, Watada's being politically prosecuted), Political Affairs notes that, in the pre-trial hearing, "Kueker replied that there are two separate prosecutions going on. The first is for Lt. Watada missing movement to Iraq -- a prosecution where his MOTIVE is so irrelevant that it needs to be barred from the military jury. The second prosecution will be for Lt. Watada publicly explaining his MOTIVE! Apparently this Orwellian formulation passes for military justice."
Apparently and sadly it does. It's complete nonsense. It's doesn't remotely resemble justice. It's a political prosecution of Ehren Watada where he is silenced to the point of being gagged. (Shades of the Chicago Eight.) He can be charged with crimes that, if convicted, carry six years of prison time, the prosecution can do whatever they want in the court-martial, but Ehren Watada cannot make the best defense he is entitled to. Not only can his attorney not put forth the best defense, the reasons for the actions he is now being persecuted for, those reasons cannot be discussed by the defense.
The prosectution can discuss it. They'll be discussing what Ehren Watada said here or there and why it is supposedly so objectionable but Ehren Watada will not be allowed to explain why he acted as he did, why he said what he did.
That's not justice. It's railroading him. It's denying him the right to offer any response to a government case against him. But the Coward's Silence will continue to cause many in independent media to ignore Ehren Watada. Follow that closley and note who stays silent. Those that stay silent are useless. They'd stay silent if you needed them as well.
Ehren Watada has been prevented from arguing any kind of defense. His court-martial now consists of nothing more than "yes" and "no" answers from him. That's not a defense. He took a stand. He's shown bravery. There is no hemming or hawwing, there is only standing up on his part. And for doing that, for saying no to an illegal war, he faces six years in prison -- all the more likely when he's not allowed to make his case.
To repeat, during the Article 32 hearing, Watada's defense called three witnesses, Francis A. Boyle of the University of Illinois' College of Law, Champagne; Denis Halliday, the former Assistant Secretary General of the UN; and retired Colonel Ann Wright. These three witnesses addressed the issue of the war, it's legality, and the responsibilities of a service member to disobey any order that they believed was unlawful. The testimony was necessary because Watada's refusing to participate in the illegal war due to the fact that he feels it is (a) illegal and (b) immoral. That will not happen now, 'judge' Head has denied that, has denied Watada the right to argue any sort of defense.
While the military attempts to throw the book at him (and asks that he stand still and repeat, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?") and independent media plays dumb (with few exceptions) the people react differently. On Saturday, Ehren Watada spoke at the Coupeville Recreation Center in Washington. Paul Boring (Whidbey News-Times) reports that over a 100 people showed up to hear him and burst into applause at various intervals. Watada asked: "Do we wanta a military that without hesistation, will turn on people simply because they ordered to do so? . . . What I have embarked upon and what I sacrifice today is for those who have lost their lives and for those still struggling to stay alive. . . . I do have the power to make you aware of why soldiers are dying and why this war is unjust. I do have the power to compel you to care. It is the American people who have the power to end this war. . . . They can try me, convict me or acquit me. My life does not matter. The lives of thousands of soldiers do . . . it is one thing to end a war. It is another to ensure it never happens again. We have the power to change history."
We do have that power. But only if we use it. Mark Taylor-Canfield reported for Free Speech Radio News and The KPFA Evening News yesterday on a speech Ehren Watada
gave as part of Seattle's MLK celebration where, no surprise, he received a standing ovation. The people are hearing him (which no doubts scares the military to death). Taylor-Canfield also noted Camp Resistance had set up "just outside the gates of Fort Lewis where Watada's hearing is being held." So that's two independent media outlets that have noted Camp Resistance -- will anyone be next? In a show of support for Ehren Watada, Iraq Veterans Against the War started Camp Resistance and intend to maintain it through the court-martial. They need money, volunteers and press attention.
Yesterday, we noted that Agustin Aguayo has received not the expected charge of being AWOL but the charge of "desertion." With Aguayo the US military is attempting to send a message both due to Aguayo's standing up and saying "no" and due to the fact that (as Mike pointed out last night) Aguayo didn't just sue the US military, he's made it up all the way up to the DC Court of Appeals. With Ehren Watada the US military is also attempting to send a message, to initmidate and frighten others from following in Watada or Aguayo's footsteps. Guess what? It's too late. It's already happening. (About the only one scared at this point is a healthy chunk of independent media.) Watada and Aguayo are part of a movement of resistance within the military that also includes Kyle Snyder, Ivan Brobeck, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.
Today on KPFA's The Morning Show, US Congress member Barbara Lee discussed the Bring the Troops Home and Iraq Sovereignty Restoration Act. Which is? Legislation proposed by Lee and fellow Congress members Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters calling for the start of troop withdrawal and the start of "work with the regional countries in the Middle East to come up with a multilateral solution," Lee explained. Repeatedly, Representative Barbara Lee noted that the presence of US troops was fueling the violence. In addition, she noted that the violence "is only going to escalate as long as US troops are there," that "there is no 'win'" and that Bully Boy mentions mistakes but "whether than talk about to rectify it, he's talking about escalating the war." Andrea Lewis asked what everyone could do to support Lee, Waters and Woolsey's proposal and Lee responded that "the bill needs co-sponsors, the more co-sponsors you build, the more chance the bill will get a fair hearing" so start contacting your Congressional reps (especially the House because this is a House proposal) -- get on the phone, on the fax, on your feet, into your e-mail account . . . and tell them you want to see some support for Waters, Woolsey and Lee's bill -- Bring the Troops Home and Iraq Sovereignty Restoration Act.
Also appearing on The Morning Show was Matthew Rothschild (The Progressive) stated, "I hope she gets a whole lot more signers on that" and that "This is what we need. This is what we must from our leadership, we must have courageous leadership." He then discussed how when the talk of escalation was first being floated, US Senator Harry Reid (Majority Leader) was all ready to go along publicly but public outrage changed that. "The Democratic Leadership, if left to their own devices will go along with Bush on that". Rothschild stated he is for all avenues ("Bascially, I'm for everything") including phone calls and e-mails (which he believes are counted -- they are, a tally is kept by your rep) but it's time to get "past the passive protests." He shared how he was speaking with an activist about the events to note the 3,000 mark for number of US troops killed in Bully Boy's illegal war. The activist stated, "We got to do more than candle light vigils 'cause they're fine with candle light vigils" and that until the actions turn to massive civil disobedience ("until we start interrupting Wall St.," his friend told him) "this war's going to go on" -- instead "the volume needs to go up, needs to increase and just passive resistance to this war" will not change anything.
Philip Maldari raised the issue of the way Bully Boy continues to attempt to sell the escalation on every and any outlet that will have him. Maldari noted that Bully Boy was on the NewsHour as part of the push and "he says he has faith in generals -- well, he just changed the generals." Rothschild responded that "The reason they can't defend the policy is its indefenseable" but Bully Boy "views himself as The Great Liberator -- he thinks he's got God talking to him in one ear and Cheney in the other" which is why he can drop the number of Iraqis killed into a speech (Rothschild was referring to last year when Bully Boy decided to use the Iraqi Body Count figure) and "it didn't have an impact on him . . . he just dropped it off . . . At what point will these catostrophic casualty figures coming out of Iraq really make an impact on Bush?"
In Iraq, the chaos and violence continue following what Leila Fadel and Zaineb Obeid (McClatchy Newspapers) term the "worst day of carnage in more than a month".
Bombings?
Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) reports that 17 people have died from a car bombing "in the Shiite district of Sadr City". Mariam Karouny and Claudia Parsons (Reuters) report that the bombing left a "mangled wreckage of a white and orange taxi and blood on the street". The BBC notes that this took place "near the outdoor Mereidi market, one of the neighbourhood's most popular commerical centres" and that "[t]he force of the blast shattered windows of nearby stores and restaurants."
Al Jazeera notes a truck bomb which claimed 10 lives in Kirkuk with at least 42 wounded and "[r]escuers are still searching for bodies." CNN notes that the truck bomb was "detonated remotely, police said. The blast heavily damaged the station, leaving a number of people trapped under the rubble and causing structural damage to other buildings."
Reuters notes a roadsidebomb in Basra has left "two coalition force soldiers" wounded in Basra and it is presumed those are British soldiers, while, in Baghdad, one roadside bomb killed a police officer and left three more wounded, another roadside bomb ("near a minibus") left six people wounded and mortar rounds are being used in the continued assault on Haifa Street.
Shootings?
Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) reports in an attack on two brothers who were construction workers, one was killed and the other wounded in Mahaweel,
Corpses?
Reuters reports a corpse was discovered (police officer) in Iskandariya. Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) notes five corpses were discovered in Baghdad.
In addition, Reuters reports that a "local government official in Mansour district of Baghdad was kidnapped" along with four his body guards.
Today, the US military has announced: "One Soldier assigned to Regimental Combat Team 5 died Monday and one Soldier assigned to 1st Brigade, 1st Armored Division died today from wounds sustained due to enemy action while operating in Al Anbar Province." The two deaths bring the ICCC count to 3028 (3028 is the AP count today as well).
Returning to the bill Barbara Lee spoke of, The Bring the Troops Home and Iraq Sovereignty Restoration Act, AFP reports that it is "calling for a full withdrawal of US forces from Iraq within six months" and that it "would repeal congressional authorization for the use of force in Iraq . . . [,] would also force the withdrawl from Iraq of US military contractors, and would prohibit permanent US military bases there, while continuing economic and political aid to the country."
From legal news to diplomatic news, the US military stands accused of raiding another diplomatic mission in Iraq. Al Jazeera reports that: "Sudan has summoned the senior US diplomat in Khartoum after it said American troops raided the Sudanese embassy in Baghdad, violating diplomatic conventions, a foreign ministry spokesmen has said." Last week, an Iranian consulate was stormed by US forces and diplomatic staff rounded up. Five still remain in US custody.
Staying with the topic of bully diplomacy, Mad Maddie Albright, the Sanctions Queen whose policies under Bill Clinton led to the unnecessary deaths of many Iraqis, marches her bald spot into the US House's Foreign Relations Committee today and, as KUNA's report demonstrates, proceeds to prop up Condi Rice (who studied with Mad Maddie's Daddy) and to boo and hiss the idea of cutting off funding for the illegal war. Cut off funds? Never says Mad Maddie who cut off medicine and a great deal more while once famously bragging, in an interview with Lesley Stahl (60 Minutes) that a half-million dead Iraqi children was "a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it."
When asked about that by Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, Mad Maddie showed her churlish side as she snapped and attempted to avoid making eye contact with Goodman. The neo-liberal is here to sell the war and while she may present herself as a disinterested party, Naomi Klein's groundbreaking reporting as 2004 wound down was not just on James Baker's efforts to make a quick buck in Iraq, Mad Maddie was a part of the effort as well. It should also be noted that Mad Maddie argued, immediately prior to the war, for Iraq to be broken up into three regions. She's hardly the disinterested diplomat she attempts to present herself as. But she's never been a honest broker.
While Mad Maddie laughably attempts to portray Condi Rice's Middle East trip as proof the Condi understands the importance of "a meaningful peace process," the reality of the trip? Paul Richter (Los Angeles Times) observes that "Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and five other neighboring states" have issued a statement "warning against foreign interference in Iraq" (excluding the US, of course) and that Rice was "traveling the region this week to build support for President Bush's new Iraq policy." That's why Rice has been traveling to the areas, to drum up support for Bully Boy's desired escalation, it's not about peace in the region. Mad Maddie also burped and growled about NATO.
Turning to true diplomacy, yesterday we noted the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq's report and this statement was included: "Well they have the option of 'honour killings' which, the UN report tells us, led to, in the first months of 2006, 239 women attempting to kill themselves -- burning yourself to death may be among the most popular 'roles' for Iraqi women in the public sphere" -- first eight months of 2006 -- it was the first eight months. We'll pick back up on the topic of Iraqi women in a moment. But, if you missed it, the reports states that 34,452 Iraqis died in 2006 and 36,685 were wounded and that the US led forces "restrict the enjoyment of human rights and . . . cause severe suffering to the local population." As Borzou Daragahi (Los Angels Times) notes: "The report paints a harrowing picture of life in Iraq. At least 470,000 Iraqis have become refugees in their own country" and that "Baghdad accounted for about 75% of all deaths in the last two months of 2006".
The report is harrowing and Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) interviewed Um Qasim (who lives on Haifa Street in Baghdad) whose life demonstrates the realities -- since the illegal war began, Qasim has seen three brothers die, a sister-in-law die, a nephew, a step-son a son . . . while two of her own sons are imprisoned and her 16-year-old son was just shot dead.
So we've noted that. When will the press get serious about the report and note its findings on honor killings and sucides among Iraqi women? The rapes, the kidnappings, the attacks on women and the destruction of women's rights?
December 9th, on RadioNation with Laura Flanders, Flanders and MADRE's Yanar Mohammed spoke about these killings. Mohammed described an 'honor' killing in November where a woman was taken from her home by fundamentalists and then beaten and flogged "in the middle of the street. Then they brought a cable and wrapped it around her neck" and used that cable to pull her to the "nearest football field and they hanged her". That's not isolated. Yanar Mohammed could speak of two other 'honor' killings in November as well.
While grateful that Flanders and Mohammed can discuss it, when will the mainstream media? These crimes are in the UN report.
Finally. Ehren Watada is on trial, not Sarah Olson. Matthew Rothschild (The Progressive) writes about Olson today (that's not a slap at Rothschild) and let's note this, while remembering Rothschild is not a 'creative' journalist (meaning he doesn't invent facts): "Olson says she is not in a position to discuss what she is ultimately going to do or 'what kind of legal strategy I will employ,' she says. But she appears to give a hint when she adds: 'My duty as a journalist is to the public and to their right to know, and not to the government."
Okay, are we all confused again?
She can't support her sources one moment, then the next she's telling Aaron Glantz she has always supported Ehren Watada and doesn't know why anyone would suggest otherwise. Rothchild writes today and Olson's doing what? Saying she can't declare what she intends to do. And yet . . . Olson goes on RadioNation with Laura Flanders and declares she will not testify. (This page takes you to archives where you can listen or just note "Journalist Sarah Olson on why she won't testify against Lieut. Ehren Watada.")
After we're all over the what-mixed-message-is-she-sending-now moment, it bears repeating that Olson is NOT the story. She is a reporter. Her public drama is boring, tiring and embarrassing. She needs to take herself off the public stage because Ehren Watada is facing six years in prison, not Sarah Olson. Or as Dolly Parton says in Straight Talk, "Climb down off the cross, honey. Somebody needs the wood."
Olson tells Rothschild, she's 'holding up' "just fine." Good. Good to know she's maintaining. Now how about remembering that reporters are not the story? Gregg Kakesako, also subpoenaed, told Rothschild "no comment" -- two words Olson would do well to learn unless "Naval Gazer" is the new occupation she intends to list on her passport. All journalists, say it together, "We are not the story. We are not the story. We are not . . ."
Programming note, tomorrow KPFA presents LIVE, gavel-to-gavel coverage of the US Senate's Judiciary Committee meeting entitled "Oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice." Larry Bensky will host the KPFA coverage which will begin at 6:00 am PST. Alberto Gonzales is scheduled to testify before the committee.










amy goodmandemocracy now


Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)