Monday, September 08, 2008

Sexism and bad journalism

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Barack Running Scared"



'




"TV: More sexism, more self-promotion" (Ava and C.I., The Third Estate Sunday Review):

All of her self-created drama left little time to fill two hours each day with coverage. (It should be noted that WBAI didn't play two hours of Democracy Now! last week or the week prior. They stuck with Goody's one hour on the schedule. All the other Pacifica stations dropped their programming to give the show two hours each day. WBAI, which knows Goody better than anyone and remember her past false cries of 'assault,' wasn't eager to turn their station over to her and that says a great deal.)

The biggest speech of the two conventions was Sarah Palin's. This was the first time she would be speaking (to the press or to the people) since the announcement was made that she was John McCain's running mate. So it's interesting to compare what Goody offered over the last two weeks. Palin's speech was reduced to 523 words. While her Democratic counter-part Joe Biden was only broadcast for 332 words by Goody, it's equally true that America well knows Biden who has been in the Senate forever, run for president more than once and chairs high profile committees. There was no excitement over Biden's speech. Palin's speech saw record ratings and was only a half-million short of Barack's ratings for the number of people watching at home. Equally true is that Goody didn't interject during Biden's speech but was happy to do so during Palin's. Barack? He got 888 words broadcast on Democracy Now! for his convention speech segment. (If you want to include headlines, the Dems get even more time.) John McCain? The party's presidential nominee saw his acceptance speech reduced to 332 words when Goody broadcast it. After the segment of Barack's speech, Goody chose to air a feel-good segment she dubbed "reactions" to Barack's speech. Last Friday, she offered no such segment for McCain. She didn't bother to speak to delegates to find out what they thought of McCain's speech. [All of that is in the first hour of each broadcast. On Friday's second hour, she played more of McCain's speech. The second hour is the one least carried by TV and radio stations, as Goody well knows.]Let's go to what else Pravda on the Hudson did with regards to Palin speech, an attempted 'fact check'. (Goody provided no fact check for Barack and wisely chose not to air his comments on "universal health care" because even her devoted audience isn't so stupid to swallow that garbage.) First up, Goody repeatedly mispronounced Palin's last name throughout the Thursday broadcast (the day after Palin spoke -- when any journalist should have known how to pronounce her not so difficult last name). Goody brought on Pacifica wanna be/reject Shannyn Moore for the alleged fact check which only reminded us that when Goody goes north, facts fly out the window.Moore got in this unsubstantiated smear, "Certainly, I can tell you that in small-town Alaska, rumors abound. And this isn't any other case from that. And I know people in the media in Alaska who have known of Bristol Palin's pregnancy for, you know, over a month and didn't bring it into the press, because they didn't think it was any of their business. And certainly there have been rumors abounding regarding Trig and his--whether it was a decision or avoidance of some sort of 'how to get out of trouble' card. You know, I don't have anything to verify that, but that's certainly the small-town rumor that's gone about." 'Trig' Palin, the governor's son who has signed up for military service, certainly doesn't deserve to be smeared by Moore or anyone else. If Moore thinks she has information, she might try producing it. Smearing someone who's joined the military with rumors? Not classy and not journalism. And it may remind some of how, when Barack was exposed by AP as having had his campaign tell Canada not to take his words on NAFTA seriously, The Nation's John Nichols showed up (from Canada!) to tell Goody that he was on the hot trail of a big scoop about how it was Hillary who was really talking to Canada. The big scoop went poop because there was never anything there. But when Goody goes north, she loves to air false rumors and try to pass it off as 'reporting' and 'fact.'

For the record, Trig Palin? A newborn infant (born this year). For the record, Track Palin is the son who is in the military. A huge mistake and one an 'expert' on the topic shouldn't make; however, for the record, Moore isn't a journalist, she's Alaska's version of Randi Rhodes -- and don't we all know how that story ends?

You probably already read Ava and C.I.'s latest but, in case you didn't, that's what I'm highlighting tonight. The above passage speaks to how little concern and care is put into 'reporting' on Democracy Now! and how embarrassed Amy Goodman should be.

It is awful enough that she allowed a young man's name to be smeared for no reason, a young man who has enlisted in the military. But she was so unconcerned with facts, and so eager for gossip and rumor, that she didn't even bother to get the young man's name right.

She really is a piece of work. Back to Ava and C.I.

Then there was The NewsHour and, as with last week, we aren't speaking of the hourly newscast proper, but of the special that provided live election coverage each night after the newscast finished airing. Like Goody, they weren't interested in women. It was so bad, we wondered if Margaret Warner had been detained in Denver. Judy Woodruff was there doing what she does so very well -- interviews. She does other things very well but PBS isn't interested because she's 'just' a woman.That point was driven home best on Thursday when the boys decided to again explore women. It was interesting to see so many speaking about women and notice that not one person speaking was, in fact, a woman. You had the three male 'historians' (will get back to them), you had Jim Lehrer, David Brooks and Mark Shields as 'analysts' and you had a man from PEW research plus Ray Suarez. Eight voices discussing women -- eight voices and all of the male. Don't count on the increasingly inept watchdogs to call it out. They didn't do a damn thing when women were sidelined by PBS in Denver and they're not going to do a damn thing now.

[. . .]

Listening to Peniel and the other boys slam women as "bitches" (being PBS, they went out of their way to avoid using that word) was really something to witness. "Even Nancy Reagan," gushed Jim, demonstrating that, in their minds, regardless of political party, every First Lady had been a 'ball buster.' Rosalyn Carter, Betty Ford, Barbara Bush, Hillary Clinton, Laura Bush, Pat Nixon . . . all 'ball busters.' It was an informative segment . . . only not in the way PBS might have hoped. What it informed was just how any woman with power (perceived or real) was a threat to these delicate male egos. It was unbelievable and hard to watch.

While Amy Goodman couldn't pronounce Sarah Palin's last name, Jim had his own problems. Carly Fiorina's last name was beyond his grasp even with David Brooks trying to help him. Most things (what some would call facts) were beyond's Jim grasp all week. Such as when he declared a speaker was talking about the Supreme Court being liberal and "that's the Supreme Court under Sam Roberts." Under who, Jim? Samuel Alito is a justice on the Court. John Roberts is the Chief Justice. Then there was this choice bit, "That narration was done by John Thompson. Fred Thompson! You recognize his name." You might, but Jim didn't.


That's correct, eight men discussing women. Not one damn woman on the panel. Not one woman invited to speak. Women's Media Center, where the hell are you? Exactly what do you do because this happened the week before in PBS' DNC coverage as well and the only ones I see calling it out are Ava and C.I. Apparently they have to do all the work the 'leaders' fail to.

Where was WMC? Oh, right, attacking Sarah Palin over and over. "The Palin effect" went up at Third Sunday. It is a very strong article; however, you've only got half of it up. When you read the last paragraph posted, you will see some gibberish that is computer code to italicize something ("BuzzFlash" is supposed to be italicized); there are about eight more paragraphs and, in posting, the last section was cut off.

There was so much to that article. Ty says everyone but Dee Dee enjoyed it. Dee Dee didn't not enjoy it but Jim's note mentions that a highlight she sent in is ued in the article so she wondered where it was in her e-mail today? Which had Ty (I'm at C.I.'s for the week) asking everyone what article Dee Dee's highlight was in. Everyone was going through the articles and reading them and no one could figure it out. C.I. was the one who said, "It's in 'The Palin effect'." So C.I. and Jim are re-reading that together (Jim's re-reading, C.I. for the first time) and C.I. points out the computer gibberish. C.I. knows the last paragraph but there are seven between them.

We had worked on that over and over. C.I. and Jim worked on punching up the ending and that was the two of them rewriting every sentence at the computer. There's no way to recreate it. C.I. knows what was highlighted in there (Shakespeare's Sister, among other things) and that credit went to them and one other site. But the other paragraphs, C.I. doesn't remember.

(C.I. remembers the final paragraph because C.I. composed it on the spot when Jim threw out the original 'final' draft concluding paragraph. So C.I. talked it off while Jim typed up what C.I. was saying.)

There is no time to rty and go back to it and the plan is to continue it in some form this Sunday. But what it's interesting is that the computer glitch, if it had to happen, couldn't have happened at a better place. It really does seem like the conclusion if you're not looking for Dee Dee's highlight.

That's it for me tonight. I arrived this afternoon and I'm staying for the week.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
September 8, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, cholera's back, the Iraqi Parliament is going to back into session, and more.

Cholera is back in the Iraq news. Sunday
Reuters reported that cholera has claimed 1 life and that six more Iraqis have been diagnosed with it ("More than 4,000 cases of cholera . . . were diagnosed in Iraq last year.") Babylon & Beyond (Los Angeles Times) notes of cholera: "The problem raises the question: How can a country with two major rivers -- the Tigris and the Euphrates -- not have sufficient clean water for its people? The problem stems from Iraq's aging water treatment facilities, which were damaged or destroyed during the war and have yet to be replaced or repaired." Mike Sergeant (BBC) reports that the cholera outbreak had claimed 6 lives earlier today (the total continued to rise) and that "Cholera is mainly transmitted through contaminated water and untreated sewage. It can spread quickly in hot weather." And it spread quickly last year. There's no reason for the puppet government in Baghdad to pretend what's happened is shocking or surprising. After last year, it was to be expected. The World Health Organization noted October 3, 2007: "Since the cholera outbreak was first detected in Kirkuk, Northern Iraq, on 14 August 2007, it has spread to 9 out of 18 provinces across Iraq. It is estimated that more than 30 000 people have fallen ill with acute watery diarrhoea, among which 3 315 were identified as positive for Vibrio cholerae, the bacterium causing the disease. A total of 14 people are known to have died of the disease. The case-fatality rate has remained low throughout the outbreak indicating that those who have become sick have been able to access adequate treatment on time." Reuters reports that Babil province is now under a state of emergy due to the outbreak and that 8 people have died "in the past three days in Babil" with at least twenty diagnosed as infected. Gulf News adds that 500 more people are suspected of already being infected. IRIN spoke with Ihssan Jaafar (speaking on behalf of the puppet government) yesterday and he stated, "The health ministry is trying to stop the disease from spreading by early diagnosis of infection and distribution of water sterilisation tablets and also through a pbulic awareness campaign, but with the dearth of safe drinking water the disease will stay around." Again it was completely predictable.

Staying with the medical and dropping back to the
August 4th snapshot for background:

Sunday in Baghdad a press conference took place on the state of health care in Iraq. Iraqis participating were Dr. Essan Namiq (Deputy Minister of Health for Grants and Loans) and Dr. Kahmees al-Sa'ad (Administrative Deputy Minister of Health). For some reason, a medical press conference required the participation of two American generals.We learned that, unlike the United States, Iraq has some form of universal health care (Dr. Essame: "Frankly, Ministry of Health has a heavy weight on the budget of the state for offering free treatment inside Iraq, for sending the patients outside Iraq. Very heavy budget that's affecting the budget of the state. There is no neighboring countries, or all over the world any country . . . there is not country like us that offers free treatment." ). Diyala Province has a shortage of medications (Dr. Essam: ". . . yeah, maybe we are facing a shortage") and there is a serious issue with the limited medications in Baghdad being smuggled out of the medical environments onto the black market (Dr. Essam stated that "we expect to see such problems" and "hope" that a plan to address the problem will emerge at some point by "the end of 2008 to 2009").In addition there have been problems with "spoiled blood" -- which Maj Gen Mohammed al-Askari (press spokesperson for the Ministry of Defense) intentionally avoided in his response. This was pinned on the people coming into Iraq. Though Iraq's borders are porous, Dr. Essam put forward the laughable claim that anyone crossing the border into Iraq is "going to be tested. This is especially in HIV. The . . . once the passport has been stamped, the person is being tested." Not only did al-Askari avoid that specific issue, he grabbed that question that was tossed to Dr. Essam.July ended and the press gave rah-rah coverage in their end of the month reports when the reality is that the medical conditions in Iraq are a nightmare. For example, Dr. Essam admitted that they did not have the necessary prosthetics for patients who have limbs amputated. Shortages of medication, shortages of prosthetics, shortage of beds and, yes, shortage of medical staff. Dr. Essam floated the laughable claim that "many" Iraqi doctors were about to return to the country -- any day now! -- and when pressed on it, put foward the dubious claim that "more than 80% of the Iraqi doctors, and even in the deterioration of the security situation, they were here in Iraq and working. It is a fact." No, it is not. They were among the first to flee, long before there was a refugee crisis. It was part of the 'brain drain' that first hit Iraq. The number fleeing only increased when they became kidnapping targets and were also targeted with violence. Any doctors that do return will neither be housed in the Green Zone, according to Dr. Essam, nor provided with government protection because, he explained, 2008 is not like 2007.It was revealed that nurses were selling medications and Dr. Essam wanted to remind everyone that "it is not within their job description." Asked about the huge increase in cancer rates in Basra and Najaf since the start of the illegal war, Dr. Essam claimed that was true "all over the world, the number of people afflicted with cancer is increasing." The issue of improving the hosptials (beyond exterior work) was raised (and it was noted that Shahad Adnan Hospital has over 13 floors and only two elevators as well as a bed shortage). Dr. Essam responded that, "It is good for their psychological health . . . it is good to take care of the appearance, to see the building a new, clean." Though that's of no comfort to someone climbing over 13 floors of stairs or doing without a hospital bed, Dr. Essan wanted the reporters to know, "We ourselves face problems with elevators."
CBS and AP offer an embarrassing (mis)report but they may be the only outlet that covered the press conference. To read their (mis)report is to grasp that the talking point about "doctors returning!" can be teased into several paragraphs with nothing to back it up and that all the very real and serious problems (brought up by reporters at the press conference) can easily be ignored.

80%? Today
Karin Laub (AP) notes that an estimated 8,000 Iraqi doctors have fled their country since the start of the illegal war and that 800 have returned. Both figures are flawed. It is over 8,000 and the exit of doctors (male and female) was not just part of the 'brain drain' it was also the result of doctors (especially females) being targeted. 800 is the puppet government's latest figure and is not independently verified. They say whatever they want and no one bothers to verify it. It's also not true that "Doctors are just a tiny group among Iraq's more than 4 million refugees and displaced" because the doctors (and others) who left during the 'brain drain' are not considered refugees, they had the money to start over and left earlier in the illegal war before the sect divisions became as fixed. Though the figures Laub uses are incorrect, they are supplied by the puppet government and, no, 700 is not 80% of 8,000.

The largely ignored August press conference also saw a reporter raise the issue of counterfeit medicine and today
Qatar's Peninsula reports that 90% of medicines in Iraq are imported and there are no tests of it leading the Ministry of Health's Inspector General Adel Muhsin to state, "It's not medicine. It's just boxes, and God knows what's in them."

On the legislative front,
Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports that the Iraqi Parliament resumes sessions this week and that they hope to address both the issue of provincial elections and the treaties with the US but that provincial elections have been discussed while the the Parliament was on break and trial ballons floated were not embraced ("But weeks of private meetings and contacts among Sunni Arab, Shiite and Kurdish lawmakers have failed to produce any breakthrough on the issue, and it was unclear whether the bill would win speedy approval."). Sunday Erica Goode (New York Times) reported that the UN's special envoy to Iraq, Staffan de Mistura, had met with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and that he "said later that in the meeting the two men discussed the problems that have blocked passage of a provincial election law by Iraq's Parliament." When the Parliament's regular session proved unable to pass a law for provinical elections, the United Nations announced they would study the issue, speak with various Iraqis and try to offer a proposal by the end of September of early October. Yet, as noted in the September 4th snapshot, Iraqi's Shi'ite vice president Adel Abdul-Mahdi has declared that provincial elections will take place regardless of whether a law is passed or not.

Tomorrow the Bully Boy is expected to announce the latest US troops 'plan' for Iraq.
Ann Scott Tyson and Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reported Saturday, "Senior military officials said the 'consensus' proposal incorporated the final recommendation of Petraeus. He called for withdrawing 7,500 to 8,000 troops from Iraq by the end of January, including an 1,100-man Marine Corps battalion and a Marine aviation squadron of several hundred strong to depart this fall, an Army combat brigade of up to 4,000 soldiers to depart in mid-January, and more than 1,000 support troops, such as logisticians and forces, assigned to handle detainees."

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

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that left eleven people wounded, a Baghdad bombing that claimed 1 life and left two wounded, another Baghdad bombing that wounded two people, a Baghdad grenade attack that wounded two people, a Nineveh car bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer and left four people wounded, a Salahuddin Province car bombing that claimed the lives of 2 civilians with four more wounded and a Basra roadside bombing left one person wounded and a home invasion of "Awakening" Council leader Raad Rasheed in Diyala Province in which Rasheed was kidnapped and, in the chase that followed, three Iraqi military members were wounded by a roadside bombing.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad attack on "a vehicle for the ministry of displace people" which left four employees wounded while (elswhere in Baghdad), the same ministry's guards "opened fire randomly" shooting 1 woman dead and leaving six more people wounded, 1 police officer was shot dead in Mosul and the US military shot dead 1 person whose 'crime' was driving his car in Baquba.

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse was discovered in Baghdad.


Turning to the US presidential race and starting with the pig holler Barack Obama.
Shailah Murray (Washington Post) noted his comment last week on GOP vice presidential nominee Gov Sarah Palin "I assume she wants to be treated the same way that guys want to be treated" -- do you assume that? How very 'forward' of you, pig face. What an insulting thing for him to even say. Palin's run a real campaign. She didn't sniff her opponents panties to put them out of the race -- a claim Barack can't make for himself (see Jack Ryan especially). Barack went on to declare that he'd been vetted for 19 months unlike Sarah. Brack Obama vetted? Oh, that's hilarious. The only thing funnier than his claim to have been vetted is watching him nosedive in poll after poll. CNN offers the most optimistic findings from their poll with Opinion Research Corp: 3% undecided, 48% for Barack - [Joe] Biden, 48% for [John] McCain.- Palin. CBS News reports, "Sarah Palin's addition to the ticket probably exceeded her running mate's wildest expectations: McCain has turned an eight-point deficit in the Gallup daily tracking poll into a three-point lead." Dan Balz and Jon Cohen (Washington Post) report the results of the Washington Post-ABC News poll which find the two in a dead heat. Todd Spangler (Detroit Free Press) zooms in on Michigan and studies Public Policy Polling to determine, "From the data, it appears that the Palin pick is clearly helping McCain in the race against Obama in Michigan -- a state the Republican hopes to pick up in order to beat the Democrat." Michigan is, of course, the state Barack refused to have his name listed on the primary ballot and somehow managed -- via the 'rules' committee -- to come out with more delegates than Hillary from the primary she won -- the one he refused to compete in. Scott Conroy (CBS News) repeats the usual dumb ass garbage that concludes with, "Sarah Palin, by contrast, has repeatedly pointed to her son Track's service in the National Guard when making the case that John McCain should be the next president. Track Palin is scheduled to deploy to the Middle East later this week to begin his training for a tour of duty in Iraq." Let's speak slowly for the dumb asses. 1) Joe Biden's children's military service is stated and stretched. 2) Military service is not a private issue. For one thing, you're required to take a public oath. Scott Conroy sounds as idiotic as Jeannie Cummings and that's his own damn fault. And it's that dumb ass 'reasoning' that's going to have a sizeable number of people dismissing any 'scoops' (real or false) the media may come up with on Palin because it still sounds like they're gunning for her. Military service is public service. It is not about anyone's private life and -- unless you get a parental waiver -- only adults can enlist in the US. There's a big difference and Conroy looks like a real ass pretending there's not.


PBS'
Independent Lens wrote of the now independent presidential candidate, "Ralph Nader was born on February 27, 1934 in Winsted, Connecticut. His parents, Nathra and Rose, were Lebanese immigrants. He received a B.A. from Princeton University in 1955 and graduated from Harvard Law School three years later. In 1963, he abandoned his Hartford, Connecticut law practice and hitchhiked to Washington, D.C. to embark on a lifelong career as a public citizen. He worked as a consultant to the U.S. Department of Labor and founded the Public Citizen research group." That was to promote their airing of the documentary An Unreasonable Man. And they also offered "Where's Nader?" as part of the promotion -- a photograph you could scroll across "to spot 18 things that can be attributed to his work."

At the Super Rally last week, he noted "three polls that will tell you that the Nader - Gonzalez agenda is a majority agenda. Inferentially and item by item. 81% of the American people think the country's going in the wrong direction. That's the highest level ever registered. 75% of the people in this country think corporations have too much control over their lives. And 61% of the people in this country in a Gallup poll say that the two major parties are failing." In response to a question regarding impeaching Dick Cheney and the Bully Boy after they leave office, Ralph explained (
here for video):

Ralph Nader: Well you can't impeach them once they leave office but they're subject on January 21, 2009 for criminal prosecution under federal law and it's possible. One of the most experienced prosecutors in the country, whose now retired, Vincent Bugliosi wrote that bestseller recently on the prosecution of George W. Bush [
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder]. Any district attorney, he claims, where a US soldier resideded and lost his or her life in Iraq due to a criminal war based on false pretenses by Bush and Cheney could bring a criminal homicide action and impanel a grand jury to indict both Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. And it's often misunderstood that presidents and vice presidents do not escape the criminal laws after they leave office. When Nixon was accused of obstructing justice in the Watergate burglary back in the 70s, there was a Watergate task force of government attorneys that was just about to ask for his indictment and prosecute Nixon before [Gerald] Ford pardoned him. So for a one-time obstruction alleged in the Watergate burgalry, the arm of the criminal law was going to move forward. That is like tiny compared to the criminal behavior engendered day after day -- systemic torture, imprisoning thousands of people without charges and without lawyers, the signing statements, hundred of them, where George Bush would sign a bill and say "I will decide whether or not to obey it." Our Founding Fathers fought and got rid of King George III not to allow King George IV to take control of our country. And then of course there's spying in violation of the FISA Act without judicial warant on hundreds of thousands maybe millions of Americans. That's a first-class felony with a maximum penalty of a five-year jail term. And of course, there is the criminal war of aggression in Iraq -- probably the worst violation of international law other than genocide -- is a criminal war of aggression. So the question is: "Are there going to be any district attorneys in the country who are going to begin the process of holding presidents and vice presidents after they leave office accountable for their crimes or are Bush and Cheney going to set a precedent for their successors who then think that they can be above the law, beyond the law, violate the law with impunity?" That's the question that we all have to ask.

On Friday, Ralph spoke in Wisconsin and
Kevin Bargnes (The Badger Herald) reports, "Nader and his running mate Matt Gonzalez support the establishment of a date for troop withdrawal from Iraq and an end to the imprisonment of nonviolent drug offenders.
A large portion of the attendees were University of Wisconsin students, and Nader painted a bleak future for a generation he believes will be worse off economically than its parents.
'You've got to wonder about whether you can get affordable housing, affordable health insurance, whether your white-collar skilled job dealing with software is going to be outsourced to China or India,' Nader said. 'And then in the moments of anxiety you're smoking a joint and you can be arrested and thrown in jail'."
Michelle L. Quinn (Post-Tribune) reports on a sit-down interview with Nader and running mate Matt Gonzalez when they were in Indiana over the weekend, "Their platform includes items he says Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain have taken 'off the table,' such as a 6-month, comprehensive negotiated military and corporate withdrawal from Iraq; single-payer, Canadian style free-choice health insurance; a living-wage and repeal of the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act; and a no-nuke, solar-based energy policy supported by renewable and sustainable energy sources. Solar energy is a change he's touted for years, and many utility executives to whom he's spoken prefer wind power as the next energy source, he said." Ralph was also campaigning in Wisconsin over the weekend and among the speakers at Fighting Bob Fest. Matthew Ryno (Baraboo News Republic) reports he "gave a biting speech to kick off the morning's events. He targeted what he called, 'least, worst' voters, or voters who he says cannot tolerate another four years of a Republican as president. 'The question is whether or not we get a Republican in disguise,' Nader said, referring to Democrat Barack Obama. 'We're seeing similar parties.' Nader said. 'Measure the Democratic control of Congress and ask how much of Bush's legislature have they rolled back? Have they even tried to impeach?'"

Have they done anything? And what of Barack?
Chris Floyd (Baltimore Chronicle) tackled the issue of 'anti-war' Barack over the weekend, "In short, he continued his relentless campaign to purge himself of any of that weak-sister 'anti-war' taint that got attached to him in the early days of his campaign -- which was, of course, responsible for his phenomenal rise in the first place. He rode that wave to national prominence -- trading on the desperate hopes of millions of Americans that the ungodly criminal nightmare in Iraq might finally end -- but it was obvious long ago that he was never going to dance with the ones that brung him. Once it was clear that he might really make it all the way to the top of the greasy pole, he began a dogged campaign to prove to our ruling elite that he would be a 'safe pair of hands' for the imperial enterprise."

iraqkarin laubthe los angeles times
qassim abdul-zahramatthew rynomichelle l. quinnkevin bargnes
the new york timeserica goode
mcclatchy newspapers
the washington postann scott tysonkaren deyoung
dan balzlaith hammoudi
chris floyd

Saturday, September 06, 2008

Weekend post

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bombings?

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

Shootings?

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

Corpses?

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

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

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

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


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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

Thoughts on sour grapes from some 'leaders'

"I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities." That's a comment from Sarah Palin's speech (not delivered yet as I start typing). I laughed out loud at the remark.

I was talking to C.I. today to check and see how she was doing and to explain I'll probably be out next week. Somehow the topic got around to Palin. (I'm going to include this for the last time, I am not voting for McCain-Palin.) We were discussing how idiotic feminist 'leaders' are acting.

I seem to recall Mad Maddie Albright getting a gushing tribute in Ms. this decade. I seem to recall a number of women who were not feminists (and some of whom didn't believe in abortion) being celebrated.

But Palin?

Here's reality.

Sarah Palin is now the second women to be on a major party's ticket. She might end up the vice-president.

Does Feminist Wire Daily intend to ignore her if that happens as well?

Do they think they can, forty years from now, cut her out of the history books?

The thing that C.I. and I were talking about was how many Republican feminists held on throughout the 80s and 90s thinking they could change their party. We can probably come up with six names between us, but there are surely more. Six names who are still Republicans.

So is the feminist movement now the Democratic Party?

That would explain the celebrating of Mad Maddie.

That would explain the silence on Palin.

Here's the reality feminist 'leaders' are ignoring: An eight-year-old girl just knows a woman got to do something. She doesn't know the woman's life story. Abortion? I'd be surprised if she had an opinion, let alone knew what anyone else thought.

So this idea that the feminist movement can sit on the sidelines right now is really depressing.

No one has to vote for Palin to be happy she got the nomination.

The Democratic Party could have made history this year by making Hillary Clinton the nominee. She got the most votes.

But they didn't want to do that.

Barack didn't want to make Hillary his running mate.

The Democratic Party made their choices.

Too damn bad.

I grew up aware of the women who came before. I didn't know everything they did and how. But I am aware that the first woman to go after the nomination of one of the two major parties was a Republican and, shocker, she got a roll call vote.

Whatever happens in the election, Palin's earned her place in women's history. She might not be my favorite person. She might not agree with what I do. But it's really funny to watch and read all the boos and hisses from 'leaders' who are also telling you that you have to get on board with Barack.

I could understand if the women were saying, "Get on board with Cynthia." I could respect that. I'm voting for Nader but I don't begrudge Cynthia a single vote she earns. (Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential nominee.) It's amazing how our 'leaders' render Cynthia invisible as well.

I guess the only woman that matters to certain feminists is the woman who will sell her own interests out to act like Barack is a real candidate.

Keep dreaming.

He's no friend to women.

Feminists who have sold out the movement to the Democratic Party need to be held accountable after this election.

Feminists who think other feminists are so stupid that information must be kept from them, need to be replaced. The inability to say, "Good for her," about Cynthia McKinney or Sarah Palin, demonstrates some real problems in the movement.

It's not about either woman or what we want. It's about our daughters having the right to dream. Good for Cynthia. Good for Sarah.

Doesn't mean I'll vote for either. But both women are knocking down barriers to all women by running. I never expected the entire world to agree with me. Maybe that's the difference between myself and some 'leaders'? Maybe that's why I figure you're smart enough to decide who to vote for. I assume you're old enough to know who you want to vote for and why.

It's amazing I have more faith in women thatn do some of our 'leaders' in the feminist movement.





"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, September 3, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, China gets a windfall, US forces and Iraqi forces clash, reporters remain targeted and more.

Starting with Monday's 'handover' of Al Anbar Province. The Los Angeles Times filed an interesting report . . . at the paper's blog Babylon & Beyond. The byline-less article (16 paragraphs) talks about the very clear tensions evident in the for-show ceremony itself with Abdul-Salam Ani ("head of the Anbar provincial council") stating the tribal leaders were "trying to stir up sedition with their claims that the Islamic Party leaders ar corrupt" and Sheik Ahmed B. Abu Risha, a tribal leader and "Awakening" Movement 'fellow' who claimed it was the other way around. The article reminds, "The sharp words at the podium highlight the reason that the original handover date, in late June, was delayed. There are concerns among locals and officials that the political animosity could lead to an unraveling of the security here. Despite the tribes' actions since 2006, they remain politically disadvantaged in Anbar because they did not take part in provincial elections in 2005. Hence, the Islamic Party holds 36 of the provincial council's 41 seats."

The provincial elections will most likely not take place in 2008. Time is running out to put them in place in what remains of this year. Over the weekend Leila Fadel (McClathy Newspapers) reported that puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki was said to be "on a roll, and American officials are getting worried." al-Maliki is the White House puppet. He wasn't the choice of Iraq. (He wasn't even the first-round pick in the puppet pageant.) But most puppets have some form of brain. Bully Boy's on the way out. Bully Boy can't protect him. The puppet does not the "Awakening" Council members in the Iraqi military or the Iraqi police. He controls both and has staffed them with Shi'ite thugs so he doesn't want to allow in Sunni thugs. Since the start of the illegal war the US has repeatedly sided with thugs within Iraq because it was hoped that a thug could 'snap' the people into 'order' quickly. So they leaned towards Shia extremists early on and the Sunni extremists came into play only after reports on the Interior Ministry's 'security' guards' actions and other issues became news. That leaves the "Awakening" Council as a very real threat to al-Maliki. They may be more of a threat currently than the White House. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) reported over the weekend that al-Maliki had tossed out the "negotiating team" that was representing his interests in the treaty with the US. So al-Maliki has a new team advising him? B-b-but we were told it was all taken care of! (Told by the press rushing to create a story where there was none and ignoring repeated remarks by the US State Dept that no agreement had been reached).

So al-Maliki has a new team. Where's the team fighting for Iraqis. Sarmad Ali (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) observes the US concerns over oil prices but has "a harder time understanding why Iraqis -- with their oases of crude oil reserves and untapped oilfields in the south and the north -- have had to put up with high oil prices and severe shortages of gasoline, diesel and cooking gas." Ali explains that "ordinary Iraqis still face fueld shortage and high rates . . . three-hour lines of cars queued up for gas . . ." Nouri al-Maliki (my point, not Ali's) sits on millions and refuses to use them to make life better for the Iraqis. And the money just keeps rolling in. Eric Watkins (Oil & Gas Journal) states the oil contract to China National Petroleum Co (CNPC) has been approved by the Iraqi Oil Ministry today. Today's Azzaman sees an exclusion of the US from the oil deals and insists this is due to pressure from Iran. David Berman (Globe & Mail) dismisses "the concern about China cornering Iraqi oil, it's nonsense". BBC via redOrbit documents the press conference in Baghdad today, presided over by Husayn al-Shahrastani

Reuters new photographer Ibrahim Jassam Mohammed has been held by the US since the first of the month. Reporters Without Borders is calling for Ibrahim's immediate release and notes: "Ibrahim Jassam was picked up from his home in the capital and soldiers took him to an unknown location after checking the ID of members of his family and seizing four cameras along with his phone and laptop computer. His family still do not know why he was arrested. Jassam had worked for Reuters for four years and had received a number of anonymous death threats. More than 20 journalists have been arrested in Iraq in similar circumstances since 1st January 2008, all of whom have been released after spending days or even months in custody without any charges being made against them." Reuters quotes their Editor-in-Chief David Schlesinger, "We are concerned to hear about Jassam's detention, and urge the U.S. military to either charge or release him once an initial investigatory stage is concluded. Any accusation against a journalist should be aired publicly and dealt with fairly and swiftly, with the journalist having the right to counsel and present a defense. Iraqi journalists llike Jassam play a vital role in telling this story in the world."


Anna Johnson (AP) reports on a shootout between the US and Iraqi forces -- yes, "between" the two -- that resulted in the deaths of at least 6 Iraqis and involved US boats, US helicopters (two) and who knows what else. Johnson reports the dead includes 2 Iraqi police officers, 2 Iraqi soldiers and 2 "Awakening" Council members. Reuters reports 10 more Iraqis were wounded. Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) contacted M-NF and received this comment, "We have initial reports that while coalition forces were conducting operations against suspected AQI there was an incident involving weapons fire between Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces north of Tarmiyah, Baghdad. Reports indicate ISF sustained casualties. Coalition aircraft were involved in this incident. It is always regrettable when incidents of mistaken fire occur on the battlefield; a review of the circumstances is under way."

In other of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that left two people wounded, a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 Iraqi solider with four more wounded, 2 Mosul roadside bombings which claimed 1 life and left seven wounded and a Tikrit roadside bombing that left "[s]ome policemen injured".

Shootings?

Reuters reports 1 Iraqi soldier shot dead in Mosul yesterday (as well as 1 civilian shot dead in Mosul). Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a US house raid in Salahuddin province that resulted in student Tahseen Mikhlif being shot dead.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.


Turning to two journalists. John Pilger will tale questions at an event this Friday in London (Institute of Education). For ticket prices and other details click here for the notice by the UK Socialist Worker. (Click here for Pilger's most recent article at The New Statesman.) Second, independent journalist David Bacon details (at Truth Out) an immigration raid in Mississippi and quotes the National Immigration Law Center's Marielena Hincapie stating that "raids drive down wages because they intimidate workers, even citizens and legal residents. The employer brings in another batch of employees and continues business as usual, while people who protest get targeted and workers get deported. Raids really demonstrate the employer's power." Bacon's latest book has just been released: Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press).

Ralph's Daily Audio is a segment of the Nader-Gonzalez presidential campaign that offers audio commentaries. This is "Nixon and Ford Now Seem Progressive:"

This is Ralph Nader. In recent weeks, I've been making the point that if voters don't condition their vote on some response by the candidates to the priority issues on the voter's minds, every four years both parties will become worse. Because, twenty-four seven, the corporate lobbies are pulling on both parties and if voters who are liberal or progressive are not pulling in the other way to make the least worse candidate accord with the important priorities favored by a majority of the American people, then the corporate interests have a pull without any pull in the other direction and you know where that leads. I was reading the other day some of the policies by Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford in the 1970s. Richard Nixon, for example, besides signing into law with enthusiastic statements, the EPA Bill, the OSHA Bill, the Product Safety Bill, among other legislation we pressed through Congress in those heady days. He offered a policy on drugs in the streets and addiction that emphasized rehabilitation of drug addicts, not incarceration and imprisonment. He proposed a health insurance plan that observers say was better than the Clinton plan, He supported and articulated a minimum income plan to move the country toward abolishing poverty No other president has done that since. And he favored vocally the voting rights for the disenfranchised citizens of the District of Columbia.
Can you imagine a president today demanding an excess profit tax on the oil companies and demanding higher fuel efficiency for motor vehicles in no uncertain terms? Well that's what President Gerald Ford did following Richard Nixon in the 1970s.
See what I mean about both parties getting worse when we as voters freak out, vote for the least worst and let the least worst be pulled by the corporate interest closer to the worst every four years? This is Ralph Nader.

And this is "Corporate Hands in Your Pockets:"

This is Ralph Nader. I was watching the CBS national Evening News with Katie Couric on Friday. And she came on with an interesting segment about how people are charged for services they never receive. She highlighted one woman who had a back operation and She was billed about $60,000 and it turned out $40,000 of that $60,000 were for phantom charges -- things she never received, were never treated with. Well that's just the tip of the iceberg. The General Accounting Office years ago estimated that billing fraud in the health care industry is 10% the entire health care bill of the whole nation. This year that would mean $230 billion.
Imagine $230 billion dollars. Malcom Sparrow the applied mathametician at Harvard who specialises in health care billing fraud thinks that that is the most conservative estimate. Have you ever heard any of the presidential candidates talk about billing fraud phenomena year after year that costs more than the war in Iraq?
Have you ever heard any of the presidential candidates -- John McCain, Barack Obama, or the primary candidates for that matter in the Republican-Democratic Party ever mention or pay attention to a rip-off phenomon that is costing more than the Iraq War at least in dollas --
Well that's why the Nader - Gonzales is so necessary to provide the contrast, the alternative to focus on the need to crack down on corporate crime, fraud and abuse that is looting or draining trillions of dollars from consumers, worker-pensions, savers, mutual funds
It's all reported in the mainstream press except this billing fraud that I just mentioned from Enron to Wall St. and yet John McCain and Barack Obama have no program to engage in the necessary resources and willpower to crack down and prevent corporate crime fraud and abuse including corporate crime ripping off Medicare in the billions of dollars.
Just another difference between Nader-Gonzalez and McCain-Obama the corporate candidate. Thank you.

Ralph Nader in the independent presidential candidate. Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party's presidential candidate. Cynthia willl be on C-Span1's Road to the White House this Sunday (September 7th) which will air at 6:30 p.m. EST (repeating at 9:30 p.m. EST the same night). Among those supporting Cynthia's run are the one and only Roseanne, Black Agenda Report and Carolyn of MakeThemAccountable. In the August 26th snapshot, we noted her interview with Gabriel San Roman (Uprising Radio). Gabriel San Roman provides a text version of that audio interview at Black Agenda Report this week:

GSR: How do you seek to redefine sources of electoral power come November?CM: My political career started in the state of Georgia as a member of the Georgia Legislature. When I ran for that particular position, the corporate press all touted the fact that I was not going to win and yet we were able to win. We won because of people power. We went outside the existing electorate. We brought new people in. That is, of course, one of the hopes that we have with this campaign. We hope we are going to bring new people into the political process and let them see the efficacy of their vote. Now how is it that we can do that? We have to talk about the fact that we are operating in a political environment that lacks election integrity. One of the things I have been able to say quite convincingly because of the precedent set four years ago by the Green Party and David Cobb is that the day after the election when there are reports of disfranchisement and fraud, the Green Party is going to be there when the Democratic Party capitulates. It was in 2000 that we know that the voters of this country gave the Democrats the White House and instead they didn't even fight for the victory that the voters gave them. They capitulated to the Republicans and allowed George W. Bush to assume the presidency. Again in 2004, John Kerry promised that we would not see this kind of action on behalf of the Democratic Party that took place in 2000. In 2004, on the very next day, even as the reports were coming in from Ohio, John Kerry conceded. He gave up once again. He gave up the White House, so that George W. Bush could continue this reign of terror on people inside of this country and outside this country.
So now comes 2008. We understand that there are already efforts afoot to disenfranchise certain populations through the Voter ID laws that have been passed in various legislatures as well as with voter caging. Voter caging is just a fancy way of saying you show up at the polls on election day and you find out that your name is not on the voter list. What is your recourse? You have none. You don't get to vote. If you have the opportunity to cast a provisional ballot, there's no guarantee that the provisional ballot will be counted. We still have to deal with the electronic voting machines. The ills of the 2000 election remain with us. The ills of the 2004 election remain with us. New ills have been placed on top of those ills for the 2008 election. It will be the Green Party and activists across this country who will demand election integrity and who will move from protest to resistance. That is what we have to do now.

GSR: You mentioned protest. Define a vote for Cynthia McKinney in this election. Is it a protest vote or something more substantive?CM: It's a values vote. What we are asking people to do is vote their values. I am so proud to say that at a recent meeting with Rosanne Barr she said, "I'm sick and tired of being put in a box. I'm going to vote my values. I'm going to vote Green." We invite people to join the Power to the People campaign. This is a campaign that seeks to include everyone. We want to draw from every population that feels that somehow their values are not represented by the powers that be. They are not represented by the two corporate parties. They are not represented by any other way, shape, fashion or form. And so perhaps the Power to the People campaign and the Green Party can express the views and the values of people who want peace for a change. They want ecological wisdom for a change. They want social justice for a change. They want real democracy for a change. That's what the Green Party vote represents and so I invite everyone to vote your values and vote Green.
Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report) explains, "Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente are running for president and vice-president on the Green Party ticket, but their larger goal is to reignite a mass movement based on principles that are anathema to the financiers that call the shots in the Obama campaign. They are among the voices that have not been silenced in this deformed election cycle." Meanwhile Chris Hedges encourages people to examine the health care plan Barack is proposing and to show spine, "We on the left, those who should be out there fighting for universal health care and total and immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, sit like lap dogs on the short leashes of our Democratic (read corporate) masters. We yap now and then, but we have forgotten how to snarl and bite. We have been domesticated. And until we punish the two main parties the way big corporations do, by withdrawing support and funding when our issues are ignored, we will remain irrelevant and impotent. I detest Bill O'Reilly, but he is right on one thing-we liberals are a spineless lot. . . . We need to throw our support behind alternative candidates who champion what we care about, whether Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader."

iraq
david bacon
john pilger
glen fordblack agenda report
uprising radio
chris hedges
mcclatchy newspapers
hussein kadhim
leila fadel
the los angeles timesned parker
sarmad ali
the wall st. journal
cbs evening newskatie couric