Fascinating, isn’t it?
I guess we’ll be seeing another round of tax cuts for the well off. That’s just the sacrifice they’ll have to make. We all have to make sacrifices in these troubled times. But as we know that they’re all superior beings, much better than the worker classes, that they’ll shoulder the burden with their usual elan. –TM
US government warns it's running out of cash
Fri Dec 30, 2005
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051230/ts_afp/uspoliticseconomy_051230161316
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Treasury Secretary John Snow has warned that unless Congress raises the national debt limit, the US government will run out of cash to finance its daily work in two months.
In a letter to Senate leaders Thursday, Snow said the statutory debt limit imposed by Congress of 8.184 trillion dollars would be reached in mid-February and the government would then lose its borrowing power.
"At that time, unless the debt limit is raised or the Treasury Department takes authorized extraordinary actions, we will be unable to continue to finance government operations," said the letter, seen by AFP.
Snow warned that even if the Treasury took "all available prudent and legal actions" to avoid breaching the ceiling, "we anticipate that we can finance government operations no longer than mid-March".
"Accordingly, I am writing to request that Congress raise the statutory debt limit as soon as possible."
The Republican-led Congress last voted to increase the debt limit in mid-November 2004, despite opposition from Democrats who demanded the free-spending federal government tighten its belt instead.
The US debt limit sparked bitter partisan battles in the mid-1990s between a Republican-dominated Congress and the Democratic administration of president Bill Clinton, leading to shutdowns of the federal government.
Once the US government hits the ceiling, it comes under threat of defaulting on its debts and can lose the ability to raise future credit on the capital markets.
Snow underlined that the "full faith and credit of the United States" was a unique selling point on the markets.
"A failure to increase the debt limit in a timely manner would threaten this unique and important position," he wrote in his letter.
Friday, December 30, 2005
Blairwatch
12/30/05
Background:
The UK government has been quick to deny that we practice, or tolerate the practice of Torture. So it is perhaps not suprising that they are determined that you should not see the following documents:
http://users.pandora.be/quarsan/craig/telegrams.pdf
http://users.pandora.be/quarsan/craig/npaper.jpg
Craig Murray was the UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, untill his complaints and protest at the use of intelligence gained by torture got too much for Jack Straw and the Foreign Office, who set about attempting to unsuccessfully smear him, and to successfully remove him from office.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3750370.stm
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2005/04/timeline_of_cra.html
The Foreign Office has had the draft of Craig's book for clearance for over 3 months now, and they are doing everything they can to try and prevent him from publishing his side of the story. Their latest attempt to cover their own backs was to inform him, the night before Christmas Eve, that these two documents cannot be published, and that he was to return or destroy all copies immediately.
...
The obvious answer to this is to post these documents as widely on the web as possible. This is also potentially very valuable in establishing that I am not attempting to make money from these documents - you don't have to buy my book to see them, they are freely available. If you buy the book, you are only paying for the added value of my thoughts.
This will only work if we can get the [documents] very widely posted, including on sites in the US and elsewhere outside the UK …
***
I've downloaded the documents from the Blairwatch site [www.blairwatch.co.uk], and posted them at the Guerrilla Campaign in PDF format.
http://tmars.iwarp.com/guerrilla_campaign/blairwatch/051230-Blairwatch.html
Background:
The UK government has been quick to deny that we practice, or tolerate the practice of Torture. So it is perhaps not suprising that they are determined that you should not see the following documents:
http://users.pandora.be/quarsan/craig/telegrams.pdf
http://users.pandora.be/quarsan/craig/npaper.jpg
Craig Murray was the UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, untill his complaints and protest at the use of intelligence gained by torture got too much for Jack Straw and the Foreign Office, who set about attempting to unsuccessfully smear him, and to successfully remove him from office.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3750370.stm
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2005/04/timeline_of_cra.html
The Foreign Office has had the draft of Craig's book for clearance for over 3 months now, and they are doing everything they can to try and prevent him from publishing his side of the story. Their latest attempt to cover their own backs was to inform him, the night before Christmas Eve, that these two documents cannot be published, and that he was to return or destroy all copies immediately.
...
The obvious answer to this is to post these documents as widely on the web as possible. This is also potentially very valuable in establishing that I am not attempting to make money from these documents - you don't have to buy my book to see them, they are freely available. If you buy the book, you are only paying for the added value of my thoughts.
This will only work if we can get the [documents] very widely posted, including on sites in the US and elsewhere outside the UK …
***
I've downloaded the documents from the Blairwatch site [www.blairwatch.co.uk], and posted them at the Guerrilla Campaign in PDF format.
http://tmars.iwarp.com/guerrilla_campaign/blairwatch/051230-Blairwatch.html
Thursday, December 29, 2005
War Resister Jerry Texiero, the Marine Corps and Who Betrayed Whom?
By: Jack Dalton
12/29/05
“Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” Henry Kissinger as quoted in the book “Kiss the Boys Goodbye"
Just when was it we in this nation lost our ability to choose if and when we would be willing to kill another human being, or be killed ourselves? When was it that following the “rules” became more important than following what is right? Case in point: Jerry Texiero; who as an active duty Marine in 1965 refused to deploy to Vietnam and took off (For details see: Marine Refuser From 40 Years Ago Faces Court Martial). 40 years later the Marine Corps has Jerry incarcerated at the Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, N.C.
Why would the Marine Corps take so much interest in Jerry Texiero and want to court-martial him 40 years later, when we all know for absolute fact the ‘American War On Vietnam’ was contrived, a war crime on a grand scale, and a war in some ways that has never ended? After all, the Agent Orange we “salted” the earth with in Vietnam is still killing large numbers of people there, as well as here with veterans of that mess; thousands have been and still are being killed by all the unexploded ordinance and land mines all over the country, especially in Quang Tri Province.
The Marines want to court-martial Jerry to send a message to the growing number of active duty military, who are becoming resistive to their participation in this new war of choice in Iraq, that if they are unwilling to deploy to Iraq, they will suffer the same fate as Sgt Kevin Benderman, who is doing 15 months at the RCF (or Gulag if you prefer as do I); If they take off, they will be hunted for the rest of their lives, like Jerry Texiero.
The military, the Department of War and the Pentagon are in serious manpower trouble and they need to make examples of people for the purpose of intimidation and coercion—make them afraid to do anything but “follow orders”; to send a loud message to others so they will not follow the example of people of conscience. That’s why Sgt Benderman is in jail, and why the Marine Corps wants to court-martial Jerry Texiero.
Two different men separated by 40 years; two different created wars and both are being “beat up” by an out of control Pentagon and Military for their refusal to be used for rather nefarious purposes. And all due to the fact both men refused to be turned into mindless obedient killers—or dead in the process, in mind and spirit if not body. They have refused to used as the “pawns” as stated by Kissinger among many, many others.
Recruitment is down even with the lowered enlistment standards; officers are leaving in bigger numbers as are enlisted ranks’ divorces are soaring as a result of extended and repeated deployments to Iraq; thousands of active duty military have followed in the footsteps of the active duty war-resisters during the war on Vietnam and have left the country; suicides in just the Marine Corps alone since the invasion of Iraq has increased by over 29%, far above not only the national average but the increased overall military average as well.
I have received many emails behind the story about Jerry Texiero saying that while the War on Vietnam may have been wrong, Jerry still volunteered to join and due to that he had an obligation to follow the “rules” and go to Vietnam regardless of what he though or how he felt about the war he was being ordered to go into. My reply to that thinking is simply this—Hogwash!
When we enlist in the military, yes there are rules that must be obeyed and followed. No problem with that. Without that the military would simply fall apart, I realized that (after all, I did spend over 4 years in the Marine Corps myself). However, that all changes when it comes to being sent into a war that up front we know to be wrong, illegal, and by definition a war crime; A War Against the Peace.
When it comes to following orders to kill or be killed, every single human being has the inalienable right to choose whether or not they will be a participant in those killing fields! To tag or label someone as a “criminal” for making the conscience choice not to kill is absurd. Simply “following orders” does not relieve one of the responsibilities of their actions, period. That is all compounded when the war you are being ordered into has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the security or defense of this nation; which is what we all swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend—this nation. No oath was sworn to be of assistance to “Empire Building” period. Not 40 years ago and surely not today.
It was not Jerry Texiero who broke the faith, it was not Jerry Texiero who betrayed his oath; it was not Jerry Texiero who violated any trust; it was not Jerry Texiero who betrayed honor; it was not Jerry Texiero betrayed anything…it was those in command and control of the nation and the military who broke the faith, who broke trust, who betrayed everyone in uniform and the people of this nation as a whole.
It has been said that free speech does not give a person the right to walk into a crowded theater and yell “fire”. My answer to that has always been—but what if there is a fire? The same principle applies to Jerry and his supposed “rule” breaking; what if the rules are wrong?
The following report/essay, “War Resistance, Amnesty and Exile – Just the Facts” by Harold Jordan, explains in great detail the so-called Amnesty programs initiated in the 70’s by Ford and Carter. I strongly urge you to read it carefully and closely. Harold Jordan also goes into the tremendous numbers of people in uniform who opposed the War On Vietnam with up to 550,000 that went AWOL or deserted (those are the Pentagon’s own numbers).
Why does the Marine Corps want to prosecute Jerry Texiero?—what if the same numbers of people in uniform today do what those in uniform did during the War on Vietnam and start putting down their guns in large numbers? Interesting proposition is it not? Now with so many standing in opposition to this new imperialistic misadventure in Iraq, what if those involved in following the “rules” take their lead from Sgt Kevin Benderman or Jerry Texiero and say no, or just put down their gun and just leave?
No, it was not Jerry Texiero who betrayed anything. It is those who have been and are currently turning our Department of Defense into the Department of War; who for decades has been slowly turning this nation’s military into the U.S. Multinational Corporation’s enforcement arm. Or as Henry Kissinger who was quoted in the book, “Kiss the Boys Goodbye” stated, “Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.”..............Reference:
More info: Tod Ensign, Citizen Soldier (212) 679-2250: citizensoldier1@aol.com
War Resistance, Amnesty and Exile - Just the Factsby Harold Jordanhttp://www.afsc.org/youthmil/conscientious-objection/Vietnam-war-resisters.htm......................
Jack Dalton is a disabled veteran of the American War on Vietnam and writer that lives in Portland, OR. His blog is Jack’s Straight-Speak and his email address is jack_dalton@comcast.net. He is widely published on the internet and was a contributor to the book, “Neo-Conned! Again!”, Published by Light in the Darkness publications, IHS Press.
..................
"Never Again Will One Generation of Veterans Abandon Another" (Vietnam Veterans of America) "If they ask you why we died, tell them 'cause our fathers' lied" (Rudyard Kipling)
By: Jack Dalton
12/29/05
“Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” Henry Kissinger as quoted in the book “Kiss the Boys Goodbye"
Just when was it we in this nation lost our ability to choose if and when we would be willing to kill another human being, or be killed ourselves? When was it that following the “rules” became more important than following what is right? Case in point: Jerry Texiero; who as an active duty Marine in 1965 refused to deploy to Vietnam and took off (For details see: Marine Refuser From 40 Years Ago Faces Court Martial). 40 years later the Marine Corps has Jerry incarcerated at the Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, N.C.
Why would the Marine Corps take so much interest in Jerry Texiero and want to court-martial him 40 years later, when we all know for absolute fact the ‘American War On Vietnam’ was contrived, a war crime on a grand scale, and a war in some ways that has never ended? After all, the Agent Orange we “salted” the earth with in Vietnam is still killing large numbers of people there, as well as here with veterans of that mess; thousands have been and still are being killed by all the unexploded ordinance and land mines all over the country, especially in Quang Tri Province.
The Marines want to court-martial Jerry to send a message to the growing number of active duty military, who are becoming resistive to their participation in this new war of choice in Iraq, that if they are unwilling to deploy to Iraq, they will suffer the same fate as Sgt Kevin Benderman, who is doing 15 months at the RCF (or Gulag if you prefer as do I); If they take off, they will be hunted for the rest of their lives, like Jerry Texiero.
The military, the Department of War and the Pentagon are in serious manpower trouble and they need to make examples of people for the purpose of intimidation and coercion—make them afraid to do anything but “follow orders”; to send a loud message to others so they will not follow the example of people of conscience. That’s why Sgt Benderman is in jail, and why the Marine Corps wants to court-martial Jerry Texiero.
Two different men separated by 40 years; two different created wars and both are being “beat up” by an out of control Pentagon and Military for their refusal to be used for rather nefarious purposes. And all due to the fact both men refused to be turned into mindless obedient killers—or dead in the process, in mind and spirit if not body. They have refused to used as the “pawns” as stated by Kissinger among many, many others.
Recruitment is down even with the lowered enlistment standards; officers are leaving in bigger numbers as are enlisted ranks’ divorces are soaring as a result of extended and repeated deployments to Iraq; thousands of active duty military have followed in the footsteps of the active duty war-resisters during the war on Vietnam and have left the country; suicides in just the Marine Corps alone since the invasion of Iraq has increased by over 29%, far above not only the national average but the increased overall military average as well.
I have received many emails behind the story about Jerry Texiero saying that while the War on Vietnam may have been wrong, Jerry still volunteered to join and due to that he had an obligation to follow the “rules” and go to Vietnam regardless of what he though or how he felt about the war he was being ordered to go into. My reply to that thinking is simply this—Hogwash!
When we enlist in the military, yes there are rules that must be obeyed and followed. No problem with that. Without that the military would simply fall apart, I realized that (after all, I did spend over 4 years in the Marine Corps myself). However, that all changes when it comes to being sent into a war that up front we know to be wrong, illegal, and by definition a war crime; A War Against the Peace.
When it comes to following orders to kill or be killed, every single human being has the inalienable right to choose whether or not they will be a participant in those killing fields! To tag or label someone as a “criminal” for making the conscience choice not to kill is absurd. Simply “following orders” does not relieve one of the responsibilities of their actions, period. That is all compounded when the war you are being ordered into has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the security or defense of this nation; which is what we all swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend—this nation. No oath was sworn to be of assistance to “Empire Building” period. Not 40 years ago and surely not today.
It was not Jerry Texiero who broke the faith, it was not Jerry Texiero who betrayed his oath; it was not Jerry Texiero who violated any trust; it was not Jerry Texiero who betrayed honor; it was not Jerry Texiero betrayed anything…it was those in command and control of the nation and the military who broke the faith, who broke trust, who betrayed everyone in uniform and the people of this nation as a whole.
It has been said that free speech does not give a person the right to walk into a crowded theater and yell “fire”. My answer to that has always been—but what if there is a fire? The same principle applies to Jerry and his supposed “rule” breaking; what if the rules are wrong?
The following report/essay, “War Resistance, Amnesty and Exile – Just the Facts” by Harold Jordan, explains in great detail the so-called Amnesty programs initiated in the 70’s by Ford and Carter. I strongly urge you to read it carefully and closely. Harold Jordan also goes into the tremendous numbers of people in uniform who opposed the War On Vietnam with up to 550,000 that went AWOL or deserted (those are the Pentagon’s own numbers).
Why does the Marine Corps want to prosecute Jerry Texiero?—what if the same numbers of people in uniform today do what those in uniform did during the War on Vietnam and start putting down their guns in large numbers? Interesting proposition is it not? Now with so many standing in opposition to this new imperialistic misadventure in Iraq, what if those involved in following the “rules” take their lead from Sgt Kevin Benderman or Jerry Texiero and say no, or just put down their gun and just leave?
No, it was not Jerry Texiero who betrayed anything. It is those who have been and are currently turning our Department of Defense into the Department of War; who for decades has been slowly turning this nation’s military into the U.S. Multinational Corporation’s enforcement arm. Or as Henry Kissinger who was quoted in the book, “Kiss the Boys Goodbye” stated, “Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.”..............Reference:
More info: Tod Ensign, Citizen Soldier (212) 679-2250: citizensoldier1@aol.com
War Resistance, Amnesty and Exile - Just the Factsby Harold Jordanhttp://www.afsc.org/youthmil/conscientious-objection/Vietnam-war-resisters.htm......................
Jack Dalton is a disabled veteran of the American War on Vietnam and writer that lives in Portland, OR. His blog is Jack’s Straight-Speak and his email address is jack_dalton@comcast.net. He is widely published on the internet and was a contributor to the book, “Neo-Conned! Again!”, Published by Light in the Darkness publications, IHS Press.
..................
"Never Again Will One Generation of Veterans Abandon Another" (Vietnam Veterans of America) "If they ask you why we died, tell them 'cause our fathers' lied" (Rudyard Kipling)
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
Another class warrior
Our Entitlement Paralysis
By Robert J. Samuelson
Wednesday, December 28, 2005; Page A21
Washington Post
[...]
Until we challenge this moral logic -- the crux of entitlement politics -- public opinion will resist change and our paralysis will continue. The responsibility for this failure is widespread: among liberals, who like massive government programs; among conservatives, who fantasize about "free market" alternatives to Social Security and Medicare; among pundits and "experts," who speak of the "entitlement crisis" in meaningless generalities or incomprehensible technicalities. Our resulting inaction compounds many future dangers of an aging society: higher taxes, slower economic growth, squeezed government spending for non-elderly programs and more conflict between younger taxpayers and older beneficiaries
[...]
Again, another clueless pundit writes about Social Security and Medicare. And again his solution is to cut benefits and raise the retirement age. Not a mention about the SocSec funds being spent to finance the government's deficits over the years. You know, I don't think that anyone who actually works for a living would be calling to raise the retirement age. Try it. Ask the next person you see actually doing physical labor what they think about jacking up the retirement age.
I also see he's too timid or stupid to realize that the bush tax cuts are one of the largest causes of today's deficit, that and the immoral war in Iraq.
Why none of these so-called intelligent people ever think about just raising the limit on payroll contributions to, say, $100,000. Many studies have shown that this alone will go a long way to "fixing" Social Security for the long-term (75 years) future. Oh yeah. I forgot. That would mean a "tax increase". It would actually be an insurance premium increase. And you can ask the residents of Florida and other Gulf Coast states about those.
As for Medicare. The republican solution has already increased costs to that program, with its drug benefit scam. And that's only getting started. But the drug companies are covered quite nicely, thank you.
As for any talk about private accounts and investment. The stock market is only now beginning to approach where it was on Jan 1, 2001. We have a contagion of insider trading (Frist, for one) that steals the resources of the small investor.
So. My opinion. just another shot in the class warfare being waged against the working people of this country. Until the working classes start to vote these assholes out of office, and find candidates who will look out for their concerns, we will continue to lose ground. And as for the clueless asshole pundits, tell them to grab a shovel or hammer for a few years, and then come back, and let us know.
By Robert J. Samuelson
Wednesday, December 28, 2005; Page A21
Washington Post
[...]
Until we challenge this moral logic -- the crux of entitlement politics -- public opinion will resist change and our paralysis will continue. The responsibility for this failure is widespread: among liberals, who like massive government programs; among conservatives, who fantasize about "free market" alternatives to Social Security and Medicare; among pundits and "experts," who speak of the "entitlement crisis" in meaningless generalities or incomprehensible technicalities. Our resulting inaction compounds many future dangers of an aging society: higher taxes, slower economic growth, squeezed government spending for non-elderly programs and more conflict between younger taxpayers and older beneficiaries
[...]
Again, another clueless pundit writes about Social Security and Medicare. And again his solution is to cut benefits and raise the retirement age. Not a mention about the SocSec funds being spent to finance the government's deficits over the years. You know, I don't think that anyone who actually works for a living would be calling to raise the retirement age. Try it. Ask the next person you see actually doing physical labor what they think about jacking up the retirement age.
I also see he's too timid or stupid to realize that the bush tax cuts are one of the largest causes of today's deficit, that and the immoral war in Iraq.
Why none of these so-called intelligent people ever think about just raising the limit on payroll contributions to, say, $100,000. Many studies have shown that this alone will go a long way to "fixing" Social Security for the long-term (75 years) future. Oh yeah. I forgot. That would mean a "tax increase". It would actually be an insurance premium increase. And you can ask the residents of Florida and other Gulf Coast states about those.
As for Medicare. The republican solution has already increased costs to that program, with its drug benefit scam. And that's only getting started. But the drug companies are covered quite nicely, thank you.
As for any talk about private accounts and investment. The stock market is only now beginning to approach where it was on Jan 1, 2001. We have a contagion of insider trading (Frist, for one) that steals the resources of the small investor.
So. My opinion. just another shot in the class warfare being waged against the working people of this country. Until the working classes start to vote these assholes out of office, and find candidates who will look out for their concerns, we will continue to lose ground. And as for the clueless asshole pundits, tell them to grab a shovel or hammer for a few years, and then come back, and let us know.
Friday, December 23, 2005
Incident of Intimidation of Military Families
Letter From Military Mom Robin Vaughan:
Domestic Spying & Incident of Intimidation of Military Families
12/23/05
It wasn’t that long ago that the military command in Iraq started pulling computer access to various units. Seems some of the troops were writing emails home to family, to friends, to various anti-war groups and the like, and the military was getting a bit disconcerted by that. After all, can’t have your own troops pretty much turning the “official news” on its head now can you? So what do you do? You shut them up and any way that you can. Let them know they are monitored works pretty good.
But, what about the “moms” back home that are writing on the internet? Moms like Robin Vaughan, whose letter detailing her recent experiences with the Department of Defense and the Army is below.
Moms writing back and forth to “sons and daughters” in Iraq, who might “slip” and tell “mom” what life is really like in Iraq; Can’t have that now, can we? What if the “moms” start telling others what their sons and daughters are telling them (at least the ones that are still able to access a computer). Can’t have that people might turn against the war ON Iraq. I guess we better threaten and intimidate the moms so they’ll keep their mouths shut, stay off the internet and just go home and be a mom. Doesn’t matter to the military these moms only wanted to do what moms do, especially military moms, worry and take advantage of the internet to chat with sons and daughters.
This is pretty much what has happened to Robin Vaughan, the mother of a young man who was in Iraq. We have a DoD and Pentagon (military) that has become the foreign policy ‘setter’, and enforcement arm for the Bush/Cheney cabal--(you know, the guy who said, with a smirk, that he broke the law then pretty much asked, what are you going to do about it?)--that is now attempting to eliminate the rights, the very speech of a group of mothers with sons and daughters in Iraq.
Read Robins letter. Write her. Give her your support—what has been done to her and the other mothers in her group cannot go unanswered! This will only get worse the longer we delay in taking this nation back from the crooks, thugs in whose hands it now is in. Too many Iraqi’s; too many of our own; just too many, period have been killed and maimed already! Now moms are being threatened…what next? (Definitely a rhetorical question)
Robin’s letter came to me thru VAIW (Veterans Against the Iraq War). I have since exchanged a couple of emails with Robin and phone calls, and plan on helping her get this story out—read her letter and join me. –- Jack Dalton........
Letter From A Military "Mom":
Domestic Spying & Incident of Intimidation of Military Families
Written by: Robin Vaughan
I am sending this letter to you in hope of finding a source to hear my concerns. It is something that has bothered me since the occurrence, and I know it is not something that should have happened, and I worry for my family's safety as I step out to speak about this.
During my son's deployment to Iraq, February 2004-February 2005: I created a small group website on MSN, for families and friends of our soldiers’ deployed unit. It was a membership only site, and we were a tight group of mostly "Moms", from all over the United States, just trying to make it through each day. The support and help we gave one another is a singular experience of grace, I will never forget.
During the first few months of our site, the Army decided to call every single family on the site, informing them, that the site was not to be used by any of the families. The Department of Defense called families in the middle of the night to notify them to not use the web site. Most of the families were near tears, thinking they were getting "THE" call telling them their child or loved one had been killed or injured.
The information received via the phone call was to inform the families that the base did not condone the site, nor [did] the Army, and that it was not to be used; the gist was, families were not allowed to use the site, or they could get into "trouble". Some members reported their soldier calling from Iraq, telling them to be careful about using the site as the Army was monitoring it.
As Web Mistress of the site, I needed to respond and qualify this information, as well as to educate this commanding officer as to the rights and liberties of a private web site; which I did. I was told I would have to let a commanding officer on the site to monitor the messages; I did allow this, but I also informed the officer that this was a courtesy, as there is no such law, or right of the military to monitor, shut down or exclude our web site.
I believe we received this order, and treatment for a couple of reasons.
Occasionally we would voice our concerns publicly over what our government was failing to do to help our soldiers, or we would share or argue political opinion as well. The second reason may be: the armed services all have a group of their own family type support (FRG); as we were not local to the base our soldiers deployed from, the site was a means to provide that support, as best as we could.
The support group at our base, tried to force the site to be given over to them, which I refused. At this time I was told, I might want to be careful, as the government was monitoring the site as well. Soldiers in our unit, while in Iraq, were telling their parents to stay off of the site, or to be very careful of what they wrote. This came from a rear detachment officer in charge, and members on the site.
I reminded the Army I am a private citizen, not on base, with a private site making no claims to have any affiliation with any branch of service, but clearly stating we were families and friends of our unit in support of one another. We were treated to power by intimidation. It isn't hard to make that work, when you have someone's child in a war zone.
We were a group of 77 families from all over the country, at the time of the call. Every single family was phoned and told not to use the site; and I believe some 150 other families were phoned as well, as it was an official order from a commanding officer.
I have waited to speak of this situation until my son was home safe and sound, and also after his transfer to another base. Yes, I was afraid of repercussions that could have harmed him, one way or another. I called my local senator's office, 4 months ago, following up every 10 days to 2 weeks, and still have no answers or support.
I admit I am not comfortable writing this, as required to, as I am still concerned for my son and the other soldiers and families involved on the site. We didn't endanger them by means of displaying their photos with their names, giving up information about their location and actions. We were very careful to not breach Intel protocol, learning Ops protocol, as well as respecting and complying with it. We simply were at times, vocal about our displeasure with our president and government for how our military was being treated, or how the presidential election was being handled.
There are literally hundreds of military family, private support groups on the Internet. I truly believe we were singled out because of my refusal to hand the site over to the local F.R.G., as well as [my] outspoken political beliefs.
It's simply amazing that my son and others risk their lives for ”Freedom" in Iraq, when his own mother's civil liberties are threatened, and families are intimidated into silence, by the very same Army he is serving. I am hoping after reading this you may direct me as to where I can at least have this concern heard. Basically, are the following common practice, and legal?
**The Armed services can order families from communicating in a private forum?
**The Armed services can threaten private citizens’ first amendment rights?
I want to make sure this is not happening to other service member's families. We live in a hell everyday during the deployment of our loved ones; we don't need the added bullying or stripping away our means of helping one another.
Any idea or direction you can point me in would be greatly appreciated. Also, this problem can be corroborated by other families if need be.
Why did it take so long for me to step forward?
Originally I contacted my Senator’s office, with no reply for six months, and have also spoken with the A.C.L.U; (with little hope of action due to the length of time that has passed) but until now was not willing to come forward in a public way. It took until September for my son to be safely stationed at another base, and other family's service members to either be out of the service all together, or be transferred as well.
We were afraid for their safety, our own, our relationships with them and their future in the service, all of these things could have been affected, and we couldn’t chance one more problem or pressure being added to the already heavy load the families and soldiers live with. The intimidation worked. Is this just something silly I should let go?
It doesn't seems trivial to me, but I am learning unless it happens to someone personally, no one seems to care.
Thank you, for your time
Robin Vaughan
MomRobin7@msn.com
Domestic Spying & Incident of Intimidation of Military Families
12/23/05
It wasn’t that long ago that the military command in Iraq started pulling computer access to various units. Seems some of the troops were writing emails home to family, to friends, to various anti-war groups and the like, and the military was getting a bit disconcerted by that. After all, can’t have your own troops pretty much turning the “official news” on its head now can you? So what do you do? You shut them up and any way that you can. Let them know they are monitored works pretty good.
But, what about the “moms” back home that are writing on the internet? Moms like Robin Vaughan, whose letter detailing her recent experiences with the Department of Defense and the Army is below.
Moms writing back and forth to “sons and daughters” in Iraq, who might “slip” and tell “mom” what life is really like in Iraq; Can’t have that now, can we? What if the “moms” start telling others what their sons and daughters are telling them (at least the ones that are still able to access a computer). Can’t have that people might turn against the war ON Iraq. I guess we better threaten and intimidate the moms so they’ll keep their mouths shut, stay off the internet and just go home and be a mom. Doesn’t matter to the military these moms only wanted to do what moms do, especially military moms, worry and take advantage of the internet to chat with sons and daughters.
This is pretty much what has happened to Robin Vaughan, the mother of a young man who was in Iraq. We have a DoD and Pentagon (military) that has become the foreign policy ‘setter’, and enforcement arm for the Bush/Cheney cabal--(you know, the guy who said, with a smirk, that he broke the law then pretty much asked, what are you going to do about it?)--that is now attempting to eliminate the rights, the very speech of a group of mothers with sons and daughters in Iraq.
Read Robins letter. Write her. Give her your support—what has been done to her and the other mothers in her group cannot go unanswered! This will only get worse the longer we delay in taking this nation back from the crooks, thugs in whose hands it now is in. Too many Iraqi’s; too many of our own; just too many, period have been killed and maimed already! Now moms are being threatened…what next? (Definitely a rhetorical question)
Robin’s letter came to me thru VAIW (Veterans Against the Iraq War). I have since exchanged a couple of emails with Robin and phone calls, and plan on helping her get this story out—read her letter and join me. –- Jack Dalton........
Letter From A Military "Mom":
Domestic Spying & Incident of Intimidation of Military Families
Written by: Robin Vaughan
I am sending this letter to you in hope of finding a source to hear my concerns. It is something that has bothered me since the occurrence, and I know it is not something that should have happened, and I worry for my family's safety as I step out to speak about this.
During my son's deployment to Iraq, February 2004-February 2005: I created a small group website on MSN, for families and friends of our soldiers’ deployed unit. It was a membership only site, and we were a tight group of mostly "Moms", from all over the United States, just trying to make it through each day. The support and help we gave one another is a singular experience of grace, I will never forget.
During the first few months of our site, the Army decided to call every single family on the site, informing them, that the site was not to be used by any of the families. The Department of Defense called families in the middle of the night to notify them to not use the web site. Most of the families were near tears, thinking they were getting "THE" call telling them their child or loved one had been killed or injured.
The information received via the phone call was to inform the families that the base did not condone the site, nor [did] the Army, and that it was not to be used; the gist was, families were not allowed to use the site, or they could get into "trouble". Some members reported their soldier calling from Iraq, telling them to be careful about using the site as the Army was monitoring it.
As Web Mistress of the site, I needed to respond and qualify this information, as well as to educate this commanding officer as to the rights and liberties of a private web site; which I did. I was told I would have to let a commanding officer on the site to monitor the messages; I did allow this, but I also informed the officer that this was a courtesy, as there is no such law, or right of the military to monitor, shut down or exclude our web site.
I believe we received this order, and treatment for a couple of reasons.
Occasionally we would voice our concerns publicly over what our government was failing to do to help our soldiers, or we would share or argue political opinion as well. The second reason may be: the armed services all have a group of their own family type support (FRG); as we were not local to the base our soldiers deployed from, the site was a means to provide that support, as best as we could.
The support group at our base, tried to force the site to be given over to them, which I refused. At this time I was told, I might want to be careful, as the government was monitoring the site as well. Soldiers in our unit, while in Iraq, were telling their parents to stay off of the site, or to be very careful of what they wrote. This came from a rear detachment officer in charge, and members on the site.
I reminded the Army I am a private citizen, not on base, with a private site making no claims to have any affiliation with any branch of service, but clearly stating we were families and friends of our unit in support of one another. We were treated to power by intimidation. It isn't hard to make that work, when you have someone's child in a war zone.
We were a group of 77 families from all over the country, at the time of the call. Every single family was phoned and told not to use the site; and I believe some 150 other families were phoned as well, as it was an official order from a commanding officer.
I have waited to speak of this situation until my son was home safe and sound, and also after his transfer to another base. Yes, I was afraid of repercussions that could have harmed him, one way or another. I called my local senator's office, 4 months ago, following up every 10 days to 2 weeks, and still have no answers or support.
I admit I am not comfortable writing this, as required to, as I am still concerned for my son and the other soldiers and families involved on the site. We didn't endanger them by means of displaying their photos with their names, giving up information about their location and actions. We were very careful to not breach Intel protocol, learning Ops protocol, as well as respecting and complying with it. We simply were at times, vocal about our displeasure with our president and government for how our military was being treated, or how the presidential election was being handled.
There are literally hundreds of military family, private support groups on the Internet. I truly believe we were singled out because of my refusal to hand the site over to the local F.R.G., as well as [my] outspoken political beliefs.
It's simply amazing that my son and others risk their lives for ”Freedom" in Iraq, when his own mother's civil liberties are threatened, and families are intimidated into silence, by the very same Army he is serving. I am hoping after reading this you may direct me as to where I can at least have this concern heard. Basically, are the following common practice, and legal?
**The Armed services can order families from communicating in a private forum?
**The Armed services can threaten private citizens’ first amendment rights?
I want to make sure this is not happening to other service member's families. We live in a hell everyday during the deployment of our loved ones; we don't need the added bullying or stripping away our means of helping one another.
Any idea or direction you can point me in would be greatly appreciated. Also, this problem can be corroborated by other families if need be.
Why did it take so long for me to step forward?
Originally I contacted my Senator’s office, with no reply for six months, and have also spoken with the A.C.L.U; (with little hope of action due to the length of time that has passed) but until now was not willing to come forward in a public way. It took until September for my son to be safely stationed at another base, and other family's service members to either be out of the service all together, or be transferred as well.
We were afraid for their safety, our own, our relationships with them and their future in the service, all of these things could have been affected, and we couldn’t chance one more problem or pressure being added to the already heavy load the families and soldiers live with. The intimidation worked. Is this just something silly I should let go?
It doesn't seems trivial to me, but I am learning unless it happens to someone personally, no one seems to care.
Thank you, for your time
Robin Vaughan
MomRobin7@msn.com
Sunday, December 18, 2005
What's Changed
Iraq Elections: What's Changed?
Sunday, December 18, 2005
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2005/12/iraq-elections-whats-changed.html
Peshmerga and Badr Corps interfere with voting.
Dead Men Vote.
United Iraqi Alliance claims victory.
Baghdad Burning wrote some while back that many secular voters might back Iyad Allawi's list, despite his backing the atrocities in Fallujah, because "He who sees death, is content with a fever." I doubt the vote for Allawi will be very much more significant than it was in January. The LA Times indicates that Allawi has not done very well at all.
One thing that has changed however is the alignment within the Shi'ite voting bloc. It appears that the Sadrists did better than any other partner in the UIA coalition, and that the SCIRI did rather badly. (See Cole's caveats on this). Also, of course, the Sunni Arab voters who had largely boycotted the vote last time round voted in very large numbers this time. Adnan al-Dulaimi of the National Concord Front, an Islamist group, thanked the resistance for protecting voting booths, as they had during the constitutional referendum. He also indicated his willingness to join in a coalition with Shi'ites, Kurds, or indeed anyone who will reject "communal dispensations". The other major winner from the elections is Salih Mutlak, a secular Arab nationalist who has been doing the rounds on television denouncing the occupation.
There is an awful lot of talk, and rather too much of it, from Bush and his apologists to indicate that the US thinks the vote will now start to swing things its way. Sunnis (and, one might add, Sadrists) embracing 'the democratic process' is allegedly going to staunch the flow of violence, isolate the evildoers and allow the US to begin withdrawing troops. We've got to hear the last of this stupidity soon. The US resisted having any kind of elections to begin with, only ceding them when the SCIRI threatened to join the armed insurrection. Now that there have been elections, the US candidate has been creamed twice. The only question for the US is just how adamantly against the occupation the government is likely to be, how easily it can be bought off, how much they can temporise, how quickly their vast bases can be built and protected. For this much is transparent: the US has no intention of withdrawing. It may well wish to make some reduction in the open presence of troops in Iraqi towns and cities, diminish the exposure of soldiers to enemy fire and generally retreat to its bases. There may be some draw down in the numbers come March 2006. But then again, perhaps not. Either way, this will not be the beginning of the end of US troops in Iraq.
Nor, to tarry with the negative, do these elections signify the end of the resistance, armed or unarmed. There has been a clear shift in tactics by the resistance, which started well before the elections. I don't know whether suicide bombings will end as such - initially, much of this aspect of the resistance was driven by advice from Hamas, not by the Salafis. But there is a dual politico-military approach emerging. The new strategy is, as Juan Cole points out, much more like Irish Republicanism's bullet and the ballot box strategy than a farewell to arms. It is reported, in fact, that the nationalist resistance is about to "announce a Front for the Iraqi Resistance", to be led by a Consultative Council with the aim of ending attacks on civilians and expelling the occupiers. The Iraqi National Foundation Congress is, I am told, moving to fulfill its name and become a political front for all anti-occupation forces. The occupiers really aren't entitled to their unworldly confidence.
In other election news: The Democrats will not take a position on Iraq in 2006. The major opposition party not taking a stance on the most important foreign policy decision taken by the incumbent government - I don't think there is a word for just how gutless, venal and pathetic this is.
Sunday, December 18, 2005
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2005/12/iraq-elections-whats-changed.html
Peshmerga and Badr Corps interfere with voting.
Dead Men Vote.
United Iraqi Alliance claims victory.
Baghdad Burning wrote some while back that many secular voters might back Iyad Allawi's list, despite his backing the atrocities in Fallujah, because "He who sees death, is content with a fever." I doubt the vote for Allawi will be very much more significant than it was in January. The LA Times indicates that Allawi has not done very well at all.
One thing that has changed however is the alignment within the Shi'ite voting bloc. It appears that the Sadrists did better than any other partner in the UIA coalition, and that the SCIRI did rather badly. (See Cole's caveats on this). Also, of course, the Sunni Arab voters who had largely boycotted the vote last time round voted in very large numbers this time. Adnan al-Dulaimi of the National Concord Front, an Islamist group, thanked the resistance for protecting voting booths, as they had during the constitutional referendum. He also indicated his willingness to join in a coalition with Shi'ites, Kurds, or indeed anyone who will reject "communal dispensations". The other major winner from the elections is Salih Mutlak, a secular Arab nationalist who has been doing the rounds on television denouncing the occupation.
There is an awful lot of talk, and rather too much of it, from Bush and his apologists to indicate that the US thinks the vote will now start to swing things its way. Sunnis (and, one might add, Sadrists) embracing 'the democratic process' is allegedly going to staunch the flow of violence, isolate the evildoers and allow the US to begin withdrawing troops. We've got to hear the last of this stupidity soon. The US resisted having any kind of elections to begin with, only ceding them when the SCIRI threatened to join the armed insurrection. Now that there have been elections, the US candidate has been creamed twice. The only question for the US is just how adamantly against the occupation the government is likely to be, how easily it can be bought off, how much they can temporise, how quickly their vast bases can be built and protected. For this much is transparent: the US has no intention of withdrawing. It may well wish to make some reduction in the open presence of troops in Iraqi towns and cities, diminish the exposure of soldiers to enemy fire and generally retreat to its bases. There may be some draw down in the numbers come March 2006. But then again, perhaps not. Either way, this will not be the beginning of the end of US troops in Iraq.
Nor, to tarry with the negative, do these elections signify the end of the resistance, armed or unarmed. There has been a clear shift in tactics by the resistance, which started well before the elections. I don't know whether suicide bombings will end as such - initially, much of this aspect of the resistance was driven by advice from Hamas, not by the Salafis. But there is a dual politico-military approach emerging. The new strategy is, as Juan Cole points out, much more like Irish Republicanism's bullet and the ballot box strategy than a farewell to arms. It is reported, in fact, that the nationalist resistance is about to "announce a Front for the Iraqi Resistance", to be led by a Consultative Council with the aim of ending attacks on civilians and expelling the occupiers. The Iraqi National Foundation Congress is, I am told, moving to fulfill its name and become a political front for all anti-occupation forces. The occupiers really aren't entitled to their unworldly confidence.
In other election news: The Democrats will not take a position on Iraq in 2006. The major opposition party not taking a stance on the most important foreign policy decision taken by the incumbent government - I don't think there is a word for just how gutless, venal and pathetic this is.
Thursday, December 15, 2005
November In Iraq
November In Iraq
http://www.peacetakescourage.com/november.html
It’s Easier To Lie
http://www.peacetakescourage.com/easiertolie.html
Peace Takes Courage
thanks to Eric Blumrich at Bushflash.com
I was watching a video of my grandaughter toddling around the backyard. So cute. What am I going to tell her about this time of America? This is her century, hers and my grandson’s. And it is certainly not starting off real well.
There is no other way to put it. We have allowed a corrupt and venal administration to rob her future. Not something to be proud of.
And we have allowed this same administration destroy another country and people. And the American people, and the American media, and the American congress cheered on this obscenity. And still are. Sometimes the rage and sadness overcome me. The loss and waste caused by little georgie peorgie’s war is heartbreaking. And they send the dead home as freight.
The Iraq people are not going to forget what we did to them. The wanton use of DU munitions poisoning their environment for centuries made sure of that. Still proud? And the bush is seeking a compromise on language prohibiting torture, for christ’s sake. Happy holidays, indeed.
http://www.peacetakescourage.com/november.html
It’s Easier To Lie
http://www.peacetakescourage.com/easiertolie.html
Peace Takes Courage
thanks to Eric Blumrich at Bushflash.com
I was watching a video of my grandaughter toddling around the backyard. So cute. What am I going to tell her about this time of America? This is her century, hers and my grandson’s. And it is certainly not starting off real well.
There is no other way to put it. We have allowed a corrupt and venal administration to rob her future. Not something to be proud of.
And we have allowed this same administration destroy another country and people. And the American people, and the American media, and the American congress cheered on this obscenity. And still are. Sometimes the rage and sadness overcome me. The loss and waste caused by little georgie peorgie’s war is heartbreaking. And they send the dead home as freight.
The Iraq people are not going to forget what we did to them. The wanton use of DU munitions poisoning their environment for centuries made sure of that. Still proud? And the bush is seeking a compromise on language prohibiting torture, for christ’s sake. Happy holidays, indeed.
Sunday, December 11, 2005
December 12, 2000
That’s the day little georgie got the nod from the supreme court. And quite the criminal enterprise he’s got going for him now.
You can read None Dare Call It Treason by Vincent Bugliosi for more.
You can read None Dare Call It Treason by Vincent Bugliosi for more.
Monday, December 05, 2005
Happy Holidays
Rice defends unlimited detention of suspected terrorists
(AFP)
29 November 2005
Khaleej Times Online
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2005/November/theworld_November769.xml§ion=theworld&col=
WASHINGTON - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice defended the unlimited detention of suspected terrorists saying, ...
“You can’t allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them...
Rice defends detainee tactics before trip to Europe
By Saul Hudson
12/5/05
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051205/ts_nm/europe_rice_dc
ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE, Maryland (Reuters) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Monday defended U.S. treatment of terrorism suspects, telling European allies they should trust Washington and cooperate to prevent new attacks...
Bush seeking compromise on CIA torture ban -aide
04 Dec 2005 18:21:22 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Mohammad Zargham
WASHINGTON, Dec 4 (Reuters) - The White House is seeking a compromise with a leading Senate Republican over its efforts to exempt the CIA from a proposed ban on torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners, President George W. Bush's national security adviser said on Sunday...
If It Can Happen to Padilla, It Can Happen to You
by Cenk Uygur
11.22.2005
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/if-it-can-happen-to-padil_b_11075.html
Jose Padilla is a United States citizen. He was arrested over three years ago and he was finally indicted today. In the meantime, the government kept him in a Navy brig in South Carolina. They stripped him of all of his constitutional rights. No speedy trial, no access to a lawyer, no evidence presented against him, not even any formal charges.
They said they could strip him of his rights as a citizen because the President had labeled him an "enemy combatant."
Jose Padilla is a United States citizen. For three years, Padilla could not challenge why he was being held or even know what he was being held for. He could not take his case to court. He did not even know what his case was...
***
It's not going to be long before we start seeing large numbers of "the disappeared" in this country if we don't start taking steps to reclaim our country from the fascist corporatistas and the corrupt bushistas.
The laws and precedent allowing this to happen are on the books, passed by a craven congress and signed by an equally craven president.
While the bloggers and internet commentators were reporting this extreme loss of our Bill of Rights, the situation was ignored by the US media. Ignored. While this and countless other stories important to our country and our well-being were unfolding, we got untold hours, and untold hours of ink, about M. Jackson, the Luci Peterson case, some missing white girl in Aruba.
***
The Grave Threat of the Bush Administration
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
November 28, 2005
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts11282005.html
[...]
Americans need to understand that a police state has to produce results in order to justify its budget and its powers. It doesn't really care who it catches. Stalin's police state caught the wife of Stalin's foreign minister in one of its street sweeps.
The Bush administration justifies torture and threatens to veto congressional attempts to restrain its use. The Bush administration justifies indefinite detention of American citizens without charges.
It asserts the power of indefinite detention based on its subjective judgment about who is a threat. An American government that preaches "freedom and democracy" to the world claims the powers of tyrants as its own.
Americans need to wake up. The only danger to Americans in Iraq is the one Bush created by invading the country. The grave threat that Americans face is the Bush administration's police state mentality.
[...]
***
A note to Bill O'Reilly. That's some pretty lame-ass enemies list you published at your site. But then, you're pretty lame-ass yourself.
Well, anyhow, I'd like to wish you all a happy, and healthy, Holiday Season.
(AFP)
29 November 2005
Khaleej Times Online
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2005/November/theworld_November769.xml§ion=theworld&col=
WASHINGTON - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice defended the unlimited detention of suspected terrorists saying, ...
“You can’t allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them...
Rice defends detainee tactics before trip to Europe
By Saul Hudson
12/5/05
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051205/ts_nm/europe_rice_dc
ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE, Maryland (Reuters) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Monday defended U.S. treatment of terrorism suspects, telling European allies they should trust Washington and cooperate to prevent new attacks...
Bush seeking compromise on CIA torture ban -aide
04 Dec 2005 18:21:22 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Mohammad Zargham
WASHINGTON, Dec 4 (Reuters) - The White House is seeking a compromise with a leading Senate Republican over its efforts to exempt the CIA from a proposed ban on torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners, President George W. Bush's national security adviser said on Sunday...
If It Can Happen to Padilla, It Can Happen to You
by Cenk Uygur
11.22.2005
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/if-it-can-happen-to-padil_b_11075.html
Jose Padilla is a United States citizen. He was arrested over three years ago and he was finally indicted today. In the meantime, the government kept him in a Navy brig in South Carolina. They stripped him of all of his constitutional rights. No speedy trial, no access to a lawyer, no evidence presented against him, not even any formal charges.
They said they could strip him of his rights as a citizen because the President had labeled him an "enemy combatant."
Jose Padilla is a United States citizen. For three years, Padilla could not challenge why he was being held or even know what he was being held for. He could not take his case to court. He did not even know what his case was...
***
It's not going to be long before we start seeing large numbers of "the disappeared" in this country if we don't start taking steps to reclaim our country from the fascist corporatistas and the corrupt bushistas.
The laws and precedent allowing this to happen are on the books, passed by a craven congress and signed by an equally craven president.
While the bloggers and internet commentators were reporting this extreme loss of our Bill of Rights, the situation was ignored by the US media. Ignored. While this and countless other stories important to our country and our well-being were unfolding, we got untold hours, and untold hours of ink, about M. Jackson, the Luci Peterson case, some missing white girl in Aruba.
***
The Grave Threat of the Bush Administration
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
November 28, 2005
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts11282005.html
[...]
Americans need to understand that a police state has to produce results in order to justify its budget and its powers. It doesn't really care who it catches. Stalin's police state caught the wife of Stalin's foreign minister in one of its street sweeps.
The Bush administration justifies torture and threatens to veto congressional attempts to restrain its use. The Bush administration justifies indefinite detention of American citizens without charges.
It asserts the power of indefinite detention based on its subjective judgment about who is a threat. An American government that preaches "freedom and democracy" to the world claims the powers of tyrants as its own.
Americans need to wake up. The only danger to Americans in Iraq is the one Bush created by invading the country. The grave threat that Americans face is the Bush administration's police state mentality.
[...]
***
A note to Bill O'Reilly. That's some pretty lame-ass enemies list you published at your site. But then, you're pretty lame-ass yourself.
Well, anyhow, I'd like to wish you all a happy, and healthy, Holiday Season.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
A call to help
The Bendermans need our help!
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
- Jack Dalton
http://jack-dalton.blogspot.com/2005/11/bendermans-need-our-help.html
I need some folks to dig into their pockets. Here is what this is about and why. Kevin and Monica Benderman need our help. Monica has not asked me to do this; this I do on my own just becase it needs to be done. Here is what I am talking about:Kevin is in jail because, as a matter of conscience, he knew he could not participate in an on-going war crime—Iraq’s invasion and occupation. (See the Benderman Timeline for full details) The Army, when it sent Kevin to jail, sent him 3,000 miles away from the jail at his base in Georgia. The only way Kevin and Monica can talk is by phone. That is a $25 per 20 min call. 3 calls a week is over $300 a month. Add a couple of emergency calls and now its up to about $500 per month. They don’t have the money, period.For the past 4 months I have been paying their house note; I will not sit by and watch Kevin come out of jail to a repossed house! They have zero income right now and nothing at all, other than what I am sending, coming in. The only jobs available to Monica are minimun wage jobs that would throw them even further behind; plus it would eliminate Monica’s ability to keep up the fight to free Kevin…
(read more)
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
- Jack Dalton
http://jack-dalton.blogspot.com/2005/11/bendermans-need-our-help.html
I need some folks to dig into their pockets. Here is what this is about and why. Kevin and Monica Benderman need our help. Monica has not asked me to do this; this I do on my own just becase it needs to be done. Here is what I am talking about:Kevin is in jail because, as a matter of conscience, he knew he could not participate in an on-going war crime—Iraq’s invasion and occupation. (See the Benderman Timeline for full details) The Army, when it sent Kevin to jail, sent him 3,000 miles away from the jail at his base in Georgia. The only way Kevin and Monica can talk is by phone. That is a $25 per 20 min call. 3 calls a week is over $300 a month. Add a couple of emergency calls and now its up to about $500 per month. They don’t have the money, period.For the past 4 months I have been paying their house note; I will not sit by and watch Kevin come out of jail to a repossed house! They have zero income right now and nothing at all, other than what I am sending, coming in. The only jobs available to Monica are minimun wage jobs that would throw them even further behind; plus it would eliminate Monica’s ability to keep up the fight to free Kevin…
(read more)
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Ridin’ the Bus With Deborah
by Doris Colmes, MSW
11/29/05
When Deborah Davis hit the news, I got hit as well – right in the pit of my stomach where terror hides, and panic lurks.. “Oh God, I mumbled, “It’s happening again”
And just exactly what had Deborah done to get this emotionally detached old lady into such a replay of emotions left over from 1938 Nazi Germany? It was the gut-wrenching realization that the Nazi Police State in which I was raised has come back to roost – in the United States.
Deborah, who commutes by bus in Denver, Colorado, had been asked to present her I.D. to a man in uniform. If she didn’t, she was told, it would mean walking several miles to her job. So, she complied, but, it rankled. Deborah knew that, unless she was being a danger to self or others, behaving irrationally, or drunk and disorderly, no one had the right to ask for her identification. As long as she was sitting quietly in her seat, she could not be arbitrarily asked for ID. (She’d learned that in her 8th grade Civics class, where she had also been taught about police states, and how casually they usurped the rights of their citizenry.)
And so it went. For several weeks, when asked to show ID, Deborah refused, and, when asked if she were getting off at the Denver Federal Center she said, “no” was left in peace, completing her bus trips right on schedule.
And then it happened: On September 26, 2005, when the bus reached its stop at the Federal Center, a guard got on the bus and confronted her. When Deborah insisted that she was under no obligation to show any ID whatsoever, the bus was halted, a supervisor climbed on, and demanded ID. This time, when she refused, a second cop arrived, and, when Deborah stuck to her guns, she was suddenly arrested.
And it was not a gentle arrest. As she relates on her website http://www.papersplease.org/davis/facts.html
" 'Grab her' was the shout, and with the police wrenching her arms behind her back, she was jerked out of her seat, handcuffed, thrown into a police cruiser, rushed off to the police station inside the Center, where cops had a bit of difficulty deciding with what to charge her. So they wrote up a couple of tickets (contents unknown) took off her cuffs, and told her that if she ever entered that Center again, she’d go to jail." No more bus commutes for Deborah!
Reading this, took me straight back to that living nightmare called Nazi Germany. There, if one didn’t show ID upon command, and/or if anything was even the slightest bit out of the ordinary on these papers, it was “Bye-Bye,” and – if one were a Jew, a Gypsy or seen as “gay” by the arresting officer – that was some long Goodbye, indeed (http://jack-dalton.blogspot.com/2005/05/papierebitte.html) Death camps were waiting, needing monthly quotas, and age was not an issue. Little kids zoomed off to extermination just as quickly as adults, and all for the sin of, perhaps, an inkblot on an identifying number, or the magic word “Jew” printed on the top.
And, now, it seems, we’ve come full circle. Not only do we now have the Patriot Act (a wonderfully modern up-date of Germany’s “Enabling Act,” (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info / http://jack-dalton.blogspot.com/2005/06/enabling-ptriot-act.html), right down to the last comma) but we also have a 82 billion dollar defense bill, which (with a vote of 100 to 0) had the Real ID Act hidden inside it. (S.1637, FSC-ETI. Passed May 11, 2004) This law allows a national identification process in which each and every person in the U.S.A. will be on computer. And, yes, you’d better show that ID upon command, or you’ll wind up like Deborah. And, as time goes by, much worse: Honorable, ethical, racially profiled, and dead.
Is this an exaggeration? Well, let’s look at the current administration expanding the power of a little-known Pentagon Agency called the Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA, which was created three years ago to protect military facilities from attack.. According to Washington Post writer Walter Pincus, (http://washingtoonnpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/26/AR2005112600857_pf.html ) a presidential commission will expand and transform the CIFA into an agency that has authority to investigate crimes within the USA, such as treason, foreign or terrorist sabotage or even economic espionage. And would allow it to label – at will – any person or activity of which it did not approve under these headings.
The Pentagon has pushed legislation that would create an intelligence exception to the Privacy Act, allowing the FBI and others to share information gathered about US citizens with the Pentagon, CIA and other agencies, as long as the data is deemed to be related to foreign intelligence (See CIFA).
This, of course, in addition to the Patriot Act revisions which give unlimited power and access to any and all governmental agents to anyone or anything they choose, without warrant or even “reasonable cause” (whatever that now means)
Alexander Solzhenitsyn once wrote: “If the least important soldier in the German Army had chosen not to comply with orders to execute innocent people, others would have followed his lead, and there would not have been a Holocaust.” Those words still ring true, right along with the actions of Mohandas Gandhi and Rosa Parks, and, today, with the action of Deborah Davis.
Sure, lots of folks protest that they have had enough and that “someone” needs to take action and then – at least in my experience – they say, “Oh this is such a shame,” shrug their shoulders and start talking about the newest TV Reality Show.
In Deborah’s case, why are there not crowds holding signs, protesting, outside the Denver Federal Center? Could it be because of current media censorship? Diversionary news, such as Michael Jackson and/or Scott Peterson get major coverage – to the point of insanity – but persons like Deborah, or, just as currently José Padilla, are shuffled off to the side-lines. My hunch is, that although Deborah faces arraignment in Denver on December 9, 2005, hardly anyone in that town is even aware of what just happened. As for media censorship and how it works, that’s a whole other article.
It takes someone with not only the courage of her/his convictions, but also with a deep sense of urgency, to actually do something concrete that graphically shows the rest of us what is actually happening here. And that is what Ms. Davis has accomplished. The same steely resolve needed for anyone to say, “I have had enough, and my answer is NO” is reminiscent of Rosa Parks, also on a bus, a half-century ago..
I love this country. It literally saved my life at a time when I was pretty convinced that there was nowhere left to go, except, perhaps, to the nearest oven. And, through the years, I’ve witnessed all that is so dear, so valuable, so much the essence of my entire existence, dissipate. Dissipate into a haze of hidden agendas, corruption and increasingly self-serving administrations.
Of necessity, what happened to Deborah Davis must be compared to what happened to so many people at the start of the fascist regime in Germany, when “compliance” was the daily hymn, and acquiescence to the German “Enabling Act” (Bona fide ancestor of our “Patriot Act”) was so absolutely expected, that anyone who protested disappeared immediately and permanently.
I thank Deborah Davis not only for being a role model, but also for setting an example that I, for one, will unconditionally follow.
In conclusion, let us all memorize and act upon together, this poem, written by Pastor Martin Niemöller in Nazi Germany:
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one leftto speak out for me.
- Pastor Martin Niemöller
Monday, November 28, 2005
Burdens of Proof
The bush administration lies. they've been lying from the moment bush took the Oath of office in January, 2001. We know they lie, because they've used lies on their people in the past.
Their lies have led to:
- the looting of the US Treasury;
- two wars where 100,000+ Afghans and Iraqis have been killed, and 2100+ American military have been killed;
- the rape of the Bill of Rights;
- false and illegal arrests and detention of American citizens;
- the destruction of the social safety net for American workers.
This is by no means an exhaustive list. It goes on and on. Now cheney's bitching because they're being called out for their lies. Well, that's too bad. His statements of innocence and outrage are just so much fluff. "They're lying. It's just false, not true, inaccurate and typical.", as rumsfeld has put it.
Well, to paraphrase cheney as he put it so elegantly regarding Saddam Hussein, "The burden of proof is entirely on the bush administration - not on the people of the United States or anyone else."
Show us the proof that you haven't been lying to us. If you can't, then, well....What can I say? We'll have to assume the worst, and we don't want the "smoking gun to be in the form of a mushroom cloud".
Saturday, November 19, 2005
To be or not to be...
To be or not to be…
How are you doing? Ready for the holidays? It's that time of year again, when we reflect on our nuclear families and express our affections for same. It is also the time of year to reflect on the past, take a moral inventory and begin anew in the coming year. Consider this: Many thousands of earthquake victims in Pakistan and Kashmir continue to be left to die. The refugee camps in Darfur in the Sudan continue to be attacked as hopes for peace fade. Malaria continues to kill children all over the globe and scientists are warning of an impending viral pandemic. Environmental degradation is increasing at an accelerated pace. And, of course, the war of terror in Iraq continues to claim lives every day. The congress in Washington needs more money in order to continue the war so it is cutting spending on programs like food stamps for the poor. They hope to stimulate the economy by extending the tax breaks for the wealthy… Am I getting through? These are just the headlines; the stories present an even darker picture.
I assert that in the face of these conditions we are misusing our resources. On a local level construction is mainly oriented toward larger and larger individual homes and away from affordable housing. Community growth rarely centers on establishing public transportation but instead continues to center on the individual automobile model. Encroachment continues on our watersheds and woodlands. Is your town different from mine? The singular argument for the propagation of this 'business as usual' form of development is unfettered capitalism. Well folks, the market will not solve your problems. The one thing that is true of unfettered capitalism is that capital will be used as those with capital choose to use it and they are using it to increase their own wealth. The new gilded era is less ostentatious than the last but more insipid because it is much more widespread. This is not a model for economic growth-- it is a model for wealth enhancement; e.g. the average pay for a CEO is 500 times the wage of the average laborer. Economic growth requires that everyone benefits from development and I see the opposite happening on a local, national and global scale.
Is the capitalist economic model an absolute good and the communist model an absolute evil? Our current model says that this is true. With this view, the cold war will continue even beyond the destruction of its antithesis--just because it has become 'business as usual'. This motion will continue, as Newton pointed out, "…until it is acted upon by an outside force."
Here is the choice that we face in this holiday season. Shall we follow the leaderless model over a cliff like the lemmings or will we "Rage against the dying of the light," as Dylan Thomas put it. Before you choose I ask that you think (if I can save a lemming or two with these words I will be elated): Beyond good and evil is reason. Is it reasonable to assume that our current economic model is improving our lives? With all the talk of cataclysm and the apocalyptic predictions it is hard for me to believe that this is so. How are you doing?
P.S.: You might consider actually reading something by Karl Marx. If so I have included a brief link: The Civil War in the United States. You might also consider reading Adam Smith and how he fails to foresee the advent of the global corporate entity and how his descriptions of stores and factories are quite quaint in retrospect.
How are you doing? Ready for the holidays? It's that time of year again, when we reflect on our nuclear families and express our affections for same. It is also the time of year to reflect on the past, take a moral inventory and begin anew in the coming year. Consider this: Many thousands of earthquake victims in Pakistan and Kashmir continue to be left to die. The refugee camps in Darfur in the Sudan continue to be attacked as hopes for peace fade. Malaria continues to kill children all over the globe and scientists are warning of an impending viral pandemic. Environmental degradation is increasing at an accelerated pace. And, of course, the war of terror in Iraq continues to claim lives every day. The congress in Washington needs more money in order to continue the war so it is cutting spending on programs like food stamps for the poor. They hope to stimulate the economy by extending the tax breaks for the wealthy… Am I getting through? These are just the headlines; the stories present an even darker picture.
I assert that in the face of these conditions we are misusing our resources. On a local level construction is mainly oriented toward larger and larger individual homes and away from affordable housing. Community growth rarely centers on establishing public transportation but instead continues to center on the individual automobile model. Encroachment continues on our watersheds and woodlands. Is your town different from mine? The singular argument for the propagation of this 'business as usual' form of development is unfettered capitalism. Well folks, the market will not solve your problems. The one thing that is true of unfettered capitalism is that capital will be used as those with capital choose to use it and they are using it to increase their own wealth. The new gilded era is less ostentatious than the last but more insipid because it is much more widespread. This is not a model for economic growth-- it is a model for wealth enhancement; e.g. the average pay for a CEO is 500 times the wage of the average laborer. Economic growth requires that everyone benefits from development and I see the opposite happening on a local, national and global scale.
Is the capitalist economic model an absolute good and the communist model an absolute evil? Our current model says that this is true. With this view, the cold war will continue even beyond the destruction of its antithesis--just because it has become 'business as usual'. This motion will continue, as Newton pointed out, "…until it is acted upon by an outside force."
Here is the choice that we face in this holiday season. Shall we follow the leaderless model over a cliff like the lemmings or will we "Rage against the dying of the light," as Dylan Thomas put it. Before you choose I ask that you think (if I can save a lemming or two with these words I will be elated): Beyond good and evil is reason. Is it reasonable to assume that our current economic model is improving our lives? With all the talk of cataclysm and the apocalyptic predictions it is hard for me to believe that this is so. How are you doing?
P.S.: You might consider actually reading something by Karl Marx. If so I have included a brief link: The Civil War in the United States. You might also consider reading Adam Smith and how he fails to foresee the advent of the global corporate entity and how his descriptions of stores and factories are quite quaint in retrospect.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Riding in Redneck City
Let’s see:
I sponsor a race car.
My job deals with construction.
I live on a little street out in Redneck City,
with the wife and my dogs.
I shop-drop every place I go.
I write letters to the editor
to tell them they’re wrong.
And I take no guff,
when I strut my stuff.
You might want to use your rights while you still got ‘em.
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Veterans Day 2005
Bush's War on VeteransNovember 9, 2005
By Mary Shaw
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/11/09_veterans.html
On Friday, November 11, Americans will observe Veteran's Day. This is a day set aside to honor our war veterans. I cannot think of a more worthy purpose for a holiday.
Now let me guess: this Veteran's Day, George W. Bush will strut his way into a specially choreographed photo opportunity and smirk and say some carefully crafted yet predictable and hollow-sounding words about how the American people appreciate the sacrifices that our veterans have made in the noble quest to defend freedom and democracy.
And he will be right. We the people do appreciate the sacrifices that our veterans have made.
After all, our brave veterans made those sacrifices while Dubya's congressman dad pulled enough strings to get his boy out of harm's way and into the elite Texas Air National Guard to avoid Vietnam.
Our brave veterans made those sacrifices while Dick Cheney arranged for five separate deferrals because he had "other priorities."
Our brave veterans made those sacrifices while Congressman Tom DeLay managed to draw a high draft number and then orchestrate some convenient deferrals, while stating that he really wanted to serve, but that all the slots were taken by blacks and Hispanics.
Our brave veterans made those sacrifices while House Speaker Dennis Hastert avoided duty due to bad knees - the same knees that didn't stop his college wrestling career.
And so on.
Okay, so these guys don't have what it takes to earn the title of veteran. But they do seem to have what it takes to be hypocrites and punish those veterans who actually had the nerve to serve, while at the same time praising them for their selfless sacrifices.
Yes, these self-proclaimed "compassionate conservatives" are punishing our veterans.
Some examples:
Earlier this year, Republican leaders in Congress blocked $2 billion in emergency funding for veterans' health care from the $82 billion supplemental funding bill. They felt that the money would be better spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, where we're producing more and more injured soldiers for whom we cannot afford adequate medical care.
Then the Bush administration requested a mere 2.7 percent increase in Veterans Affairs (VA) spending, even though the VA's under-secretary testified last year that the VA health care system needs a 13 to 14 percent increase annually to maintain their current level of services.
Thousands of veterans of the first Gulf War are suffering the effects of exposure to depleted uranium, or have died from that exposure, yet the U.S. government denies the effects and continues to ship depleted uranium munitions for use in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Some wounded U.S. soldiers have returned home from the current war in Iraq only to learn that they are being referred to credit agencies who want the soldiers to pay for equipment they lost when they were injured; or for charges for military housing.
And about one-fourth of all homeless Americans are veterans. According to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, nearly 200,000 veterans are homeless on any given night. Two percent of them are female. Most of these cases are attributed to lingering effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and substance abuse, compounded by a lack of family and social support networks.
This is how our government treats those who have so bravely fought for their country. It's no wonder that the military recruiters are finding it so difficult to meet their quotas, even in the "red states."
The Bush administration would be wise to consider the words of George Washington, our first Commander-in-Chief, who said: "The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation."
Happy Veteran's Day.
Mary Shaw is a Philadelphia-based writer and activist. She currently serves as Philadelphia Area Coordinator for Amnesty International, and her views on politics, human rights, and social justice issues have appeared in numerous online forums and in newspapers and magazines worldwide. Note that the ideas expressed in this article are the author's own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Amnesty or any other organization with which she may be associated. E-mail mary@maryshawonline.com.
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
new evidence of the same old
Not that we really need anymore evidence of the criminality of the bush administration.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article325560.ece
Today's Independent (UK) reports on an Italian documentary about the atrocities committed by the US military in the Nov 2004 destruction of Fallujah. Many independent commentators and reporters at the time tried to bring this information to the American people, but, as usual, they were basically ignored by the CCMA*.
White phospherous bombs, and the new napalm (Mark 77), banned weapons by the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons of 1980, were used.
..."Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone ... I saw the burned bodies of women and children. Phosphorus explodes and forms a cloud. Anyone within a radius of 150 metres is done for."...
Think about that. Picture that. FEEL that. Is that what you want done in your name? And do you really think it's confined to just Fallujah? And what makes it even worse, is that this obscene war is illegal in the first fucking place.
We have an idiot coke-brain pretending to be president, a vice-president who's trying to make torture legal while he makes a fortune off this war, a secretary of defense who can't even count and doesn't care, and a whole administration full of cronies and relatives, draining the US treasury.
I don't know what it's going to take for the American people to wake up.
Remember that asshole roberts ruled it's ok for the president to imprison US citizens indefinitely without charges, and strip them of their citizenship. And cheney wants to torture anyone who's not a citizen somewhere in some foreign land. You want to be next? That's what you are allowing.
As for the 'opposition party', it's time to get off your fucking asses. If this is what you want, tell us now, you bastards, so we can find someone else. And it's time for the American people to get off their asses, and start demanding, that's right, DEMANDING, that bush and his administration exit the government. NOW.
*Consolidated Corporate Media of America
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article325560.ece
Today's Independent (UK) reports on an Italian documentary about the atrocities committed by the US military in the Nov 2004 destruction of Fallujah. Many independent commentators and reporters at the time tried to bring this information to the American people, but, as usual, they were basically ignored by the CCMA*.
White phospherous bombs, and the new napalm (Mark 77), banned weapons by the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons of 1980, were used.
..."Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone ... I saw the burned bodies of women and children. Phosphorus explodes and forms a cloud. Anyone within a radius of 150 metres is done for."...
Think about that. Picture that. FEEL that. Is that what you want done in your name? And do you really think it's confined to just Fallujah? And what makes it even worse, is that this obscene war is illegal in the first fucking place.
We have an idiot coke-brain pretending to be president, a vice-president who's trying to make torture legal while he makes a fortune off this war, a secretary of defense who can't even count and doesn't care, and a whole administration full of cronies and relatives, draining the US treasury.
I don't know what it's going to take for the American people to wake up.
Remember that asshole roberts ruled it's ok for the president to imprison US citizens indefinitely without charges, and strip them of their citizenship. And cheney wants to torture anyone who's not a citizen somewhere in some foreign land. You want to be next? That's what you are allowing.
As for the 'opposition party', it's time to get off your fucking asses. If this is what you want, tell us now, you bastards, so we can find someone else. And it's time for the American people to get off their asses, and start demanding, that's right, DEMANDING, that bush and his administration exit the government. NOW.
*Consolidated Corporate Media of America
Sunday, November 06, 2005
Incident at the Pinellas Trail
Source of impeachment banner remains unknown
County officials don't know who hung a political banner on the Pinellas Trail overpass, but they took it down as soon as they heard about it.
By NICOLE JOHNSON
Published November 6, 2005
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/11/06/Northpinellas/Source_of_impeachment.shtml
PALM HARBOR - Motorists and pedestrians passing the Pinellas Trail overpass just north of Curlew Road one morning last week were asked to take on a hefty task.
"Impeach Bush Now!" read a large white banner hanging from the overpass.
And so it seemed, a particularly politically contentious week had spilled out onto the Pinellas Trail.
It's not clear who posted the 19-foot-long vinyl banner, but Pinellas County officials said it was not sanctioned. The sign was likely put up Tuesday night or early Wednesday morning, said Paul Cozzie, county director of parks and recreation.
A local Democratic group denied responsibility for the message.
"That was not the work of the Democratic Party," said Carrie Wadlinger, chairwoman of the Pinellas County Democratic Executive Committee.
The overpass, on Alt. U.S. 19 just north of Curlew Road, is used by pedestrians and cyclists. It has also served as a community bulletin board of sorts for the past 10 years, said Monte Alfonso, county park program coordinator.
The space is reserved for banners and signs publicizing government entities or city sponsored events.
"It's to let people know about things going on in their parks or maybe a parade they want to publicize," Alfonso said.
There is no charge for posting on the overpass, but all signs must be approved by the county parks and recreation department. Signs can be no larger than 4 feet tall and 30 feet wide. The signs can be posted for only 30 days.
Currently, the Old Palm Harbor Main Street Association is using the overpass to publicize its weekly Sunset Bazaar and this year's Bike Fest.
"We're not an ad agency; we try to use those facilities to get out public messages," Alfonso said. "It's for government, not politics."
Around 8 a.m. Wednesday, park ranger Jerry Cumings' phone started ringing off the hook, he said. Numerous county employees on their way to work were calling to alert him of the large white banner.
The tarplike sign read: "America Can't Wait for 2008, Impeach Bush Now!" in red, black and yellow lettering.
An hour or so later, rangers removed the banner, Cumings said.
Renegade banners have found their way onto the overpass at least two other times, Alfonso said. Those were personal messages or advertisements for businesses.
"Three times in the last 10 years we've had them," Alfonso said. "I wouldn't consider that a big problem."
While Alfonso considers the sign an isolated incident, the head of the local Democratic Party says the banner is an indication that things in the traditionally Republican area may be changing.
"It sounds like we have some of the far left in north county," Wadlinger said.
County officials don't know who hung a political banner on the Pinellas Trail overpass, but they took it down as soon as they heard about it.
By NICOLE JOHNSON
Published November 6, 2005
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/11/06/Northpinellas/Source_of_impeachment.shtml
PALM HARBOR - Motorists and pedestrians passing the Pinellas Trail overpass just north of Curlew Road one morning last week were asked to take on a hefty task.
"Impeach Bush Now!" read a large white banner hanging from the overpass.
And so it seemed, a particularly politically contentious week had spilled out onto the Pinellas Trail.
It's not clear who posted the 19-foot-long vinyl banner, but Pinellas County officials said it was not sanctioned. The sign was likely put up Tuesday night or early Wednesday morning, said Paul Cozzie, county director of parks and recreation.
A local Democratic group denied responsibility for the message.
"That was not the work of the Democratic Party," said Carrie Wadlinger, chairwoman of the Pinellas County Democratic Executive Committee.
The overpass, on Alt. U.S. 19 just north of Curlew Road, is used by pedestrians and cyclists. It has also served as a community bulletin board of sorts for the past 10 years, said Monte Alfonso, county park program coordinator.
The space is reserved for banners and signs publicizing government entities or city sponsored events.
"It's to let people know about things going on in their parks or maybe a parade they want to publicize," Alfonso said.
There is no charge for posting on the overpass, but all signs must be approved by the county parks and recreation department. Signs can be no larger than 4 feet tall and 30 feet wide. The signs can be posted for only 30 days.
Currently, the Old Palm Harbor Main Street Association is using the overpass to publicize its weekly Sunset Bazaar and this year's Bike Fest.
"We're not an ad agency; we try to use those facilities to get out public messages," Alfonso said. "It's for government, not politics."
Around 8 a.m. Wednesday, park ranger Jerry Cumings' phone started ringing off the hook, he said. Numerous county employees on their way to work were calling to alert him of the large white banner.
The tarplike sign read: "America Can't Wait for 2008, Impeach Bush Now!" in red, black and yellow lettering.
An hour or so later, rangers removed the banner, Cumings said.
Renegade banners have found their way onto the overpass at least two other times, Alfonso said. Those were personal messages or advertisements for businesses.
"Three times in the last 10 years we've had them," Alfonso said. "I wouldn't consider that a big problem."
While Alfonso considers the sign an isolated incident, the head of the local Democratic Party says the banner is an indication that things in the traditionally Republican area may be changing.
"It sounds like we have some of the far left in north county," Wadlinger said.
Friday, November 04, 2005
Drifting towards a Police State
by Mike Whitney
November 04, 2005
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=43&ItemID=9048
Zmag.org
“Those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid the terrorists for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies and pause to America's friends” - Former Attorney General, John Ashcroft
Did you know that under the terms of the new Patriot Act prosecutors will be able to seek the death penalty in cases where “defendants gave financial support to umbrella organizations without realizing that some of its adherents might eventually commit violence”? (NY Times; editorial 10-30-05) So, if someone unknowingly gave money to a charity that was connected to a terrorist group, he could be executed.
Or, that the Senate Intelligence Committee is fine-tuning the details of a bill that will allow the FBI to secretly procure any of your personal records without “probable cause” or a court order giving them “unchecked authority to pry into personal and business matters”? (New York Times, “Republicans seek to widen FBI Powers, 10-19-05)
Or, that on June 29, President Bush put “a broad swath of the FBI” under his direct control by creating the National Security Service (aka; the “New SS”)? This is the first time we’ve had a “secret police” in our 200 year history. It will be run exclusively by the president and beyond the range of congressional oversight.
Or, that on October 27, 2005 president Bush created the National Clandestine Service, which will be headed by CIA Director Porter Goss and will “expand reporting of information and intelligence value from state, local and tribal law enforcement entities and private sector stakeholders"? This executive order gives the CIA the power to carry out covert operations, spying, propaganda, and “dirty tricks” within the United States and on the American public. (“The New National Intelligence Strategy of the US” by Larry Chin, Global Research)
Or, that Pentagon intelligence operatives are now permitted to collect information from US citizens without revealing their status as government spies? (“Bill would give Cover to Pentagon Spies”, Greg Miller, Times Staff writer, “The Nation”)
Or, that within 2 years every American license and passport will be made according to federal uniform standards including microchips (with biometric information) that will allow the government to trace every movement of its citizens?
Or, that recent rulings, the DC District Court unanimously decided in two different cases that foreign prisoners have no rights under international law to challenge their indefinite imprisonment by the United States and, (in Rumsfeld vs. Padilla) that the president can lock up an American citizen “without charges” if he believes he may be an “enemy combatant”? Both verdicts overturn the fundamental principles of “inalienable rights”, habeas corpus, and the presumption of innocence; replacing them with the arbitrary authority of the executive.
The American people have no idea of the amount of energy that has been devoted to stripping them of their constitutional protections and how stealthily that plan has been carried out. It has required the concerted efforts of the political establishment, the corporate elite, and the collaborative media. For all practical purposes, the government is no longer constrained in its conduct towards its citizens; it can do as it pleases.
The campaign to dismantle the Bill of Rights has focused primarily on the key amendments; the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and 14th. These are the cornerstones of American liberty and they encompass everything from due process to equal protection to free speech to a ban on the “cruel and unusual” treatment of prisoners. Freedom has little tangible meaning apart from the safety provided by these amendments.
At present, there’s no reason for the administration to assert its new powers. That would only dispel the widely-held illusion of personal freedom. But, the existing climate of “well being” will not last forever. The poisonous effects of war, tax cuts, burgeoning budget deficits, and inflation indicate that darker days lie ahead. The middle class is stretched paper-thin and disaster could be as close as a hike in interest rates. The new repressive legislation anticipates the massive political unrest that naturally follows a tenuous and volatile economic situation.
Is this why Congress has rubber stamped so many of the administration’s autocratic laws, or does Bush simply “hate our freedoms”?
The members of America’s ruling elite carefully follow the shifting of policy in Washington. They have the power to access the mainstream media and dispute the changes in the law that they oppose. Regrettably, there’s been no sign of protest from the bastions of the corporate, financial and political oligarchy; just an ominous silence.
Does this mean that American Brahmins have abandoned their support for personal liberty and the rights of man?
America is undergoing its greatest metamorphosis. It has been severed from its constitutional moorings and is drifting towards a police state. If Samuel Alito is appointed to the Supreme Court then Bush will be able to solidify his “unchecked” power as executive and 50 years of progressive legislation will be up for review. Everything from abortion to Miranda will be reconsidered through the hard-right lens of the new majority.
Americans still seem blissfully unaware of the fundamental changes to the political system. The cloak of disinformation and diversion has successfully obscured the perils of our present course. Freedom is no longer guaranteed in Bush’s America nor is liberty everyman’s birthright. The rickety scaffolding that supports the rule of law has been replaced by the unbridled authority of the supreme presidency. The country is slipping inexorably towards the Orwellian nightmare; the National Security State.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Everybody knows the dice are loaded
Everybody knows the dice are loaded
everybody rolls with their finger crossed
Everybody knows the war is over
everybody knows the good guys lost
Everybody knows the fight was fixed
the poor stay poor the rich get rich
That's how it goes
everybody knows
Everybody knows the boat is leaking
everybody knows the captain lied......
-Leonard Cohen
Powerful Government Accounting Office report confirms key 2004 stolen election findings
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
October 26, 2005
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1529
As a legal noose appears to be tightening around the Bush/Cheney/Rove inner circle, a shocking government report shows the floor under the legitimacy of their alleged election to the White House is crumbling.
The latest critical confirmation of key indicators that the election of 2004 was stolen comes in an extremely powerful, penetrating report from the General Accounting Office that has gotten virtually no mainstream media coverage.
The government's lead investigative agency is known for its general incorruptibility and its through, in-depth analyses. Its concurrence with assertions widely dismissed as "conspiracy theories" adds crucial new weight to the case that Team Bush has no legitimate business being in the White House.
Nearly a year ago, senior Judiciary Committee Democrat John Conyers (D-MI) asked the GAO to investigate electronic voting machines as they were used during the November 2, 2004 presidential election. The request came amidst widespread complaints in Ohio and elsewhere that often shocking irregularities defined their performance.
According to CNN, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee received "more than 57,000 complaints" following Bush's alleged re-election. Many such concerns were memorialized under oath in a series of sworn statements and affidavits in public hearings and investigations conducted in Ohio by the Free Press and other election protection organizations.
The non-partisan GAO report has now found that, "some of [the] concerns about electronic voting machines have been realized and have caused problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of votes."
The United States is the only major democracy that allows private partisan corporations to secretly count and tabulate the votes with proprietary non-transparent software. Rev. Jesse Jackson, among others, has asserted that "public elections must not be conducted on privately-owned machines." The CEO of one of the most crucial suppliers of electronic voting machines, Warren O'Dell of Diebold, pledged before the 2004 campaign to deliver Ohio and thus the presidency to George W. Bush.
Bush's official margin of victory in Ohio was just 118,775 votes out of more than 5.6 million cast. Election protection advocates argue that O'Dell's statement still stands as a clear sign of an effort, apparently successful, to steal the White House. […](full article)
everybody rolls with their finger crossed
Everybody knows the war is over
everybody knows the good guys lost
Everybody knows the fight was fixed
the poor stay poor the rich get rich
That's how it goes
everybody knows
Everybody knows the boat is leaking
everybody knows the captain lied......
-Leonard Cohen
Powerful Government Accounting Office report confirms key 2004 stolen election findings
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
October 26, 2005
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1529
As a legal noose appears to be tightening around the Bush/Cheney/Rove inner circle, a shocking government report shows the floor under the legitimacy of their alleged election to the White House is crumbling.
The latest critical confirmation of key indicators that the election of 2004 was stolen comes in an extremely powerful, penetrating report from the General Accounting Office that has gotten virtually no mainstream media coverage.
The government's lead investigative agency is known for its general incorruptibility and its through, in-depth analyses. Its concurrence with assertions widely dismissed as "conspiracy theories" adds crucial new weight to the case that Team Bush has no legitimate business being in the White House.
Nearly a year ago, senior Judiciary Committee Democrat John Conyers (D-MI) asked the GAO to investigate electronic voting machines as they were used during the November 2, 2004 presidential election. The request came amidst widespread complaints in Ohio and elsewhere that often shocking irregularities defined their performance.
According to CNN, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee received "more than 57,000 complaints" following Bush's alleged re-election. Many such concerns were memorialized under oath in a series of sworn statements and affidavits in public hearings and investigations conducted in Ohio by the Free Press and other election protection organizations.
The non-partisan GAO report has now found that, "some of [the] concerns about electronic voting machines have been realized and have caused problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of votes."
The United States is the only major democracy that allows private partisan corporations to secretly count and tabulate the votes with proprietary non-transparent software. Rev. Jesse Jackson, among others, has asserted that "public elections must not be conducted on privately-owned machines." The CEO of one of the most crucial suppliers of electronic voting machines, Warren O'Dell of Diebold, pledged before the 2004 campaign to deliver Ohio and thus the presidency to George W. Bush.
Bush's official margin of victory in Ohio was just 118,775 votes out of more than 5.6 million cast. Election protection advocates argue that O'Dell's statement still stands as a clear sign of an effort, apparently successful, to steal the White House. […](full article)
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Supporting the Troops?
Woman Sees Husband Off to Iraq, Gets Fired
10/26/05
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/ap_on_re_us/soldier_s_wife_fired
CALEDONIA, Mich. - A woman who took an unpaid leave of absence from work to see her husband off to war with an Indiana National Guard unit has been fired after failing to show up for her part-time receptionist job the day following his departure.
"It was a shock," said Suzette Boler, a 40-year-old mother of three and grandmother of three. "I was hurt. I felt abandoned by people I thought cared for me. I sat down on the floor and cried for probably two hours."
Officials at her former workplace, Benefit Management Administrators Inc., a Caledonia employee-benefits company, confirmed that Boler was dismissed when she didn't report to work the day after she said goodbye to her husband of 22 years.
"We gave her sufficient time to get back to work," Clark Galloway, vice president of operations for Benefit Management, told The Grand Rapids Press for a story Wednesday.
He added that other factors were involved in the decision, but he declined to elaborate.
On Oct. 16, Boler went with her husband, Army Spc. Jerry Boler, 45, to an Indianapolis-area airfield, where he and others in his National Guard unit gathered to be transported to Fort Dix, N.J. The unit will soon be deployed to Iraq, where he will help guard convoys from insurgent attacks.
Although the Bolers moved to western Michigan 14 years ago, Jerry Boler, a diesel mechanic, decided to remain with his Bloomington, Ind.-based Guard unit, the 150th Field Artillery Regiment.
Suzette Boler had received permission to take off work the week leading up to her husband's departure. As a part-time employee at Benefit Management, she did not receive vacation pay and was not compensated for her time off.
She usually worked Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays answering telephones, entering claims information and greeting visitors and clients. Boler, who said she considers herself a reliable employee with good work habits, was employed at the company for 14 months and earned $9 per hour.
Boler recalled being asked, not ordered, to start back at her job Oct. 17, the day after her husband left. She told her bosses that she would try to return that day but if she could not, she would definitely be back Oct. 18, she said.
When Boler returned home from Indiana on the night of Oct. 16, a few hours after leaving her husband at the airfield, she said she felt drained by the emotional ordeal and decided to return to work Oct. 18.
But on the afternoon of Oct. 17, she received a call from work telling her to come in the following day and get her things because she was being fired. Her pink slip said the reason was she failed to show up for work Oct. 17, a Monday.
"If I had even an inkling that I would be fired for not coming in Monday, I would have been there," she said.
10/26/05
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/ap_on_re_us/soldier_s_wife_fired
CALEDONIA, Mich. - A woman who took an unpaid leave of absence from work to see her husband off to war with an Indiana National Guard unit has been fired after failing to show up for her part-time receptionist job the day following his departure.
"It was a shock," said Suzette Boler, a 40-year-old mother of three and grandmother of three. "I was hurt. I felt abandoned by people I thought cared for me. I sat down on the floor and cried for probably two hours."
Officials at her former workplace, Benefit Management Administrators Inc., a Caledonia employee-benefits company, confirmed that Boler was dismissed when she didn't report to work the day after she said goodbye to her husband of 22 years.
"We gave her sufficient time to get back to work," Clark Galloway, vice president of operations for Benefit Management, told The Grand Rapids Press for a story Wednesday.
He added that other factors were involved in the decision, but he declined to elaborate.
On Oct. 16, Boler went with her husband, Army Spc. Jerry Boler, 45, to an Indianapolis-area airfield, where he and others in his National Guard unit gathered to be transported to Fort Dix, N.J. The unit will soon be deployed to Iraq, where he will help guard convoys from insurgent attacks.
Although the Bolers moved to western Michigan 14 years ago, Jerry Boler, a diesel mechanic, decided to remain with his Bloomington, Ind.-based Guard unit, the 150th Field Artillery Regiment.
Suzette Boler had received permission to take off work the week leading up to her husband's departure. As a part-time employee at Benefit Management, she did not receive vacation pay and was not compensated for her time off.
She usually worked Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays answering telephones, entering claims information and greeting visitors and clients. Boler, who said she considers herself a reliable employee with good work habits, was employed at the company for 14 months and earned $9 per hour.
Boler recalled being asked, not ordered, to start back at her job Oct. 17, the day after her husband left. She told her bosses that she would try to return that day but if she could not, she would definitely be back Oct. 18, she said.
When Boler returned home from Indiana on the night of Oct. 16, a few hours after leaving her husband at the airfield, she said she felt drained by the emotional ordeal and decided to return to work Oct. 18.
But on the afternoon of Oct. 17, she received a call from work telling her to come in the following day and get her things because she was being fired. Her pink slip said the reason was she failed to show up for work Oct. 17, a Monday.
"If I had even an inkling that I would be fired for not coming in Monday, I would have been there," she said.
Saturday, October 22, 2005
End Pentagon’s Youth Database
the following news release describes a new effort by a national grassroots coalition to stop yet ANOTHER nefarious grab of our kids by the pentagon. the release was sent to toledo press and has an ohio quote, but also explains the national issue. if you want more information from the national group organizing this, their contact information is included below.
from Mike Ferner
10/18/05
****************************
For more information: www.epic.org/privacy/student/doddatabase.html
Coalition Of 75 Groups Demand End To Pentagon’s Youth Database
Toledo -- More than seventy-five local, state, and national organizations sent a letter today to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and the Congressional oversight and appropriations committees for the Department of Defense (DOD), seeking an end to a data collecting project called the Joint Advertising and Market Research Studies (JAMRS) Recruiting Database.
Toledo's Student and Family Rights and Privacy Committee, the group now pressuring Toledo Public Schools to restrict military recruiters, is in full support of this effort to end the JAMRS recruitment database because it violates the Privacy Act while collecting data on 30 million people ages 16 to 25 from a vast array of sources such as drivers license or selective service registrations. Other organizations from the Toledo area that have joined this nationwide effort include the Northwest Ohio Peace Coalition, Sylvania Franciscan Sisters, the Interfaith Justice and Peace Center, and the Toledo League of Pissed Off Voters.
Nationally, coalition members include the American Civil Liberties Union, Mothers Against the Draft, Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors, Republican Liberty Caucus, Rock the Vote, and the Student Peace Action Network. Sue Carter, President of the Ohio ACLU and a member of the Student and Family Rights and Privacy Committee, said “The U.S. has become a surveillance society. The government, according to privacy laws, should be protecting our citizens especially children. Instead, the Department of Defense has been collecting data on 16 to 25 year-olds and turning it over to the military and private companies that target students. The JAMRS Recruiting Database must be dismantled to protect the privacy rights and civil liberties of this generation of young people.”
The Coalition claims the DoD violated the Privacy Act because it failed to provide notice 30 days before beginning its work on the JAMRS Recruiting Database in 2002. The Pentagon did not give public notice of the project until May 23, 2005 in the Federal Register.
The sources of information for JAMRS include the High School Master File and the College Students Files, which are compiled for purposes that are unrelated to an interest in military service or recruitment. The High School Master File is created from information provided by state motor vehicle departments, and two private companies that target students, American Student List, L.L.C., and Student Marketing Group Corp.
American Student List Company sells databases of children's names in grades K-12 overlaid with data on sex, age, whether they own a telephone, income, religion, and their race or ethnicity. This information is often obtained from surveys that are administered while children are at school under the pretense of college admissions and other education-related purposes.
Friday, October 21, 2005
And so...
Rice calls war part of post-9/11 plan
By Nicholas Kralev
The Washington Times
October 20, 2005
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20051019-095906-4805r.htm
[…]
The testimony, during which Miss Rice was interrupted several times by senators on both sides because they did not feel she was answering their questions, culminated in objections by three Democrats to the administration's mission to rebuild the Middle East.
"Unless we commit to changing the nature of the Middle East, and if we tire and decide that we are going to withdraw and leave the people of the Middle East to despair, I can assure you that the people of the United States are going to live in insecurity and fear for many, many decades to come," Miss Rice said.
Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Barack Obama of Illinois and Bill Nelson of Florida said that was not the reason the administration had given Congress for the Iraq war; rather, it was the threat dictator Saddam Hussein was said to have posed with his weapons of mass destruction, which were never found.
"Now, in an unbelievable rewriting of history, you talk about this bolder mission we undertook in response to 9/11 to transform the Middle East with Iraq as an anchor," Mrs. Boxer said, adding that the administration "didn't tell the American people that at the time."
"This broadening of the mission is disturbing and difficult for us in the Senate to deal with as it requires a leap of faith on our part that a mission of that breadth can be accomplished in a reasonable time frame," Mr. Obama said.
Miss Rice, while conceding that the Senate's war resolutions regarding Afghanistan and Iraq were limited to action against the Taliban, al Qaeda and Saddam, argued that killing Osama bin Laden and other terrorists will not secure a victory over extremism.
"We had to make a decision that we were going to go after the root cause of what caused September 11," she said. "So what I'm describing to you, Senator, is not what you voted for in the war resolution, but the broader strategy of the administration."
[…]
****
And so.
There we have it. From the conservative Washington Times owned by the Rev Moon, the rice cake told the Senate that bush lied, and that the administration has gone far beyond what the Congress authorized.
So how much more do we need?
By Nicholas Kralev
The Washington Times
October 20, 2005
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20051019-095906-4805r.htm
[…]
The testimony, during which Miss Rice was interrupted several times by senators on both sides because they did not feel she was answering their questions, culminated in objections by three Democrats to the administration's mission to rebuild the Middle East.
"Unless we commit to changing the nature of the Middle East, and if we tire and decide that we are going to withdraw and leave the people of the Middle East to despair, I can assure you that the people of the United States are going to live in insecurity and fear for many, many decades to come," Miss Rice said.
Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Barack Obama of Illinois and Bill Nelson of Florida said that was not the reason the administration had given Congress for the Iraq war; rather, it was the threat dictator Saddam Hussein was said to have posed with his weapons of mass destruction, which were never found.
"Now, in an unbelievable rewriting of history, you talk about this bolder mission we undertook in response to 9/11 to transform the Middle East with Iraq as an anchor," Mrs. Boxer said, adding that the administration "didn't tell the American people that at the time."
"This broadening of the mission is disturbing and difficult for us in the Senate to deal with as it requires a leap of faith on our part that a mission of that breadth can be accomplished in a reasonable time frame," Mr. Obama said.
Miss Rice, while conceding that the Senate's war resolutions regarding Afghanistan and Iraq were limited to action against the Taliban, al Qaeda and Saddam, argued that killing Osama bin Laden and other terrorists will not secure a victory over extremism.
"We had to make a decision that we were going to go after the root cause of what caused September 11," she said. "So what I'm describing to you, Senator, is not what you voted for in the war resolution, but the broader strategy of the administration."
[…]
****
And so.
There we have it. From the conservative Washington Times owned by the Rev Moon, the rice cake told the Senate that bush lied, and that the administration has gone far beyond what the Congress authorized.
So how much more do we need?
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Friday, October 14, 2005
Torture and Misery in the Name of Freedom
posted at http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1014-27.htm
Published on Friday, October 14, 2005 by the Independent/UK
by Harold Pinter
The following remarks were adapted during Mr. Pinter's acceptance speech on winning the Wilfred Owen Award earlier this year.
The great poet Wilfred Owen articulated the tragedy, the horror - and indeed the pity - of war in a way no other poet has. Yet we have learnt nothing. Nearly 100 years after his death the world has become more savage, more brutal, more pitiless.
But the "free world" we are told, as embodied in the United States and Great Britain, is different to the rest of the world since our actions are dictated and sanctioned by a moral authority and a moral passion condoned by someone called God. Some people may find this difficult to comprehend but Osama Bin Laden finds it easy.
What would Wilfred Owen make of the invasion of Iraq? A bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of International Law. An arbitrary military action inspired by a series of lies upon lies and gross manipulation of the media and therefore of the public. An act intended to consolidate American military and economic control of the Middle East masquerading - as a last resort (all other justifications having failed to justify themselves) - as liberation. A formidable assertion of military force responsible for the death and mutilation of thousands upon thousands of innocent people.
An independent and totally objective account of the Iraqi civilian dead in the medical magazine The Lancet estimates that the figure approaches 100,000. But neither the US or the UK bother to count the Iraqi dead. As General Tommy Franks of US Central Command memorably said: "We don't do body counts".
We have brought torture, cluster bombs, depleted uranium, innumerable acts of random murder, misery and degradation to the Iraqi people and call it " bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East". But, as we all know, we have not been welcomed with the predicted flowers. What we have unleashed is a ferocious and unremitting resistance, mayhem and chaos.
You may say at this point: what about the Iraqi elections? Well, President Bush himself answered this question when he said: "We cannot accept that there can be free democratic elections in a country under foreign military occupation". I had to read that statement twice before I realised that he was talking about Lebanon and Syria.
What do Bush and Blair actually see when they look at themselves in the mirror?
I believe Wilfred Owen would share our contempt, our revulsion, our nausea and our shame at both the language and the actions of the American and British governments.
Harold Pinter recently won the 2005 Nobel Prize for Literature.
Published on Friday, October 14, 2005 by the Independent/UK
by Harold Pinter
The following remarks were adapted during Mr. Pinter's acceptance speech on winning the Wilfred Owen Award earlier this year.
The great poet Wilfred Owen articulated the tragedy, the horror - and indeed the pity - of war in a way no other poet has. Yet we have learnt nothing. Nearly 100 years after his death the world has become more savage, more brutal, more pitiless.
But the "free world" we are told, as embodied in the United States and Great Britain, is different to the rest of the world since our actions are dictated and sanctioned by a moral authority and a moral passion condoned by someone called God. Some people may find this difficult to comprehend but Osama Bin Laden finds it easy.
What would Wilfred Owen make of the invasion of Iraq? A bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of International Law. An arbitrary military action inspired by a series of lies upon lies and gross manipulation of the media and therefore of the public. An act intended to consolidate American military and economic control of the Middle East masquerading - as a last resort (all other justifications having failed to justify themselves) - as liberation. A formidable assertion of military force responsible for the death and mutilation of thousands upon thousands of innocent people.
An independent and totally objective account of the Iraqi civilian dead in the medical magazine The Lancet estimates that the figure approaches 100,000. But neither the US or the UK bother to count the Iraqi dead. As General Tommy Franks of US Central Command memorably said: "We don't do body counts".
We have brought torture, cluster bombs, depleted uranium, innumerable acts of random murder, misery and degradation to the Iraqi people and call it " bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East". But, as we all know, we have not been welcomed with the predicted flowers. What we have unleashed is a ferocious and unremitting resistance, mayhem and chaos.
You may say at this point: what about the Iraqi elections? Well, President Bush himself answered this question when he said: "We cannot accept that there can be free democratic elections in a country under foreign military occupation". I had to read that statement twice before I realised that he was talking about Lebanon and Syria.
What do Bush and Blair actually see when they look at themselves in the mirror?
I believe Wilfred Owen would share our contempt, our revulsion, our nausea and our shame at both the language and the actions of the American and British governments.
Harold Pinter recently won the 2005 Nobel Prize for Literature.
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Showdown at Chuck E Cheese
By Mitchel Cohen
October 11, 2005
http://www.counterpunch.org/cohen10112005.html
For about 1 hour beginning at 5 pm Monday afternoon, members of the Brooklyn Greens leafletted at the front entrance of the Atlantic Terminal against Chuck E. Cheese's showing of military videos to their 4-11 year-old clientele.
We were joined by activists from Times Up! (one of whom had ridden his bike all the way from Queens to be there), Bay Ridge Greens, and an IndyKids photographer -- with a special guest appearance by the legendary Yippie Pieman Aron Kay. Three of the young kids had earlier leafletted inside the inner sanctum of Chuck E. Cheese itself.
All of the 13 leafletters (including 4 children) reported they received an excellent response by everyone visiting the mall, including several relatives of soldiers who are currently stationed in Iraq. No negative incidents occurred, despite the presence of 4 U.S. soldiers with machineguns at the entrance to the Long Island Railroad 100 feet up the block.
As we were running out of flyers, a mall security guard came outside and instructed us to move out of the area, claiming that the City sidewalk on which we were standing was actually private property owned by billionaire Bruce Ratner's Atlanic Terminal. We of course refused to move and the security guard called for the police -- 20 minutes later the police hadn't shown up, and we packed up our signs and said our goodbyes.
We will check with Chuck E Cheese management during the week to find out if they will remove the military videos. If not, we may return on a weekly basis, so stay tuned for further announcements.
Anyone who would like to have emailed to them a copy of the flyer we distributed, please drop me a line and I'll send it to you as a WORD attachment.
Send letters of protest to: investor@cecentertainment.com and media@cecentertainment.com or go online to http://chuckecheese.com/investors and fill in the form.
Also, call (972) 258-8507 and (972) 257-3056, and voice your opposition to the showing of prowar military videos to children at Chuck E Cheese establishments.
Chuck E. Cheese is owned and run by CEC Entertainment, 4441 W. Airport Freeway, Irving, TX 75062; Fax (972) 258-5524.
Mitchel Cohen is co-editor of "G", the newspaper of the NY State Greens. He can be reached at: mitchelcohen@mindspring.com
October 11, 2005
http://www.counterpunch.org/cohen10112005.html
For about 1 hour beginning at 5 pm Monday afternoon, members of the Brooklyn Greens leafletted at the front entrance of the Atlantic Terminal against Chuck E. Cheese's showing of military videos to their 4-11 year-old clientele.
We were joined by activists from Times Up! (one of whom had ridden his bike all the way from Queens to be there), Bay Ridge Greens, and an IndyKids photographer -- with a special guest appearance by the legendary Yippie Pieman Aron Kay. Three of the young kids had earlier leafletted inside the inner sanctum of Chuck E. Cheese itself.
All of the 13 leafletters (including 4 children) reported they received an excellent response by everyone visiting the mall, including several relatives of soldiers who are currently stationed in Iraq. No negative incidents occurred, despite the presence of 4 U.S. soldiers with machineguns at the entrance to the Long Island Railroad 100 feet up the block.
As we were running out of flyers, a mall security guard came outside and instructed us to move out of the area, claiming that the City sidewalk on which we were standing was actually private property owned by billionaire Bruce Ratner's Atlanic Terminal. We of course refused to move and the security guard called for the police -- 20 minutes later the police hadn't shown up, and we packed up our signs and said our goodbyes.
We will check with Chuck E Cheese management during the week to find out if they will remove the military videos. If not, we may return on a weekly basis, so stay tuned for further announcements.
Anyone who would like to have emailed to them a copy of the flyer we distributed, please drop me a line and I'll send it to you as a WORD attachment.
Send letters of protest to: investor@cecentertainment.com and media@cecentertainment.com or go online to http://chuckecheese.com/investors and fill in the form.
Also, call (972) 258-8507 and (972) 257-3056, and voice your opposition to the showing of prowar military videos to children at Chuck E Cheese establishments.
Chuck E. Cheese is owned and run by CEC Entertainment, 4441 W. Airport Freeway, Irving, TX 75062; Fax (972) 258-5524.
Mitchel Cohen is co-editor of "G", the newspaper of the NY State Greens. He can be reached at: mitchelcohen@mindspring.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)