I remember very clearly the daily fearmongering led by FOX as they cheered for war with Iraq. The 24/7 images, sound effects, yelling and threatening were an ever-present drumbeat for war. We had to invade, and we had to invade now.. anyone who didn't see that was a traitor. They viciously attacked those of us who worked to get out the truth.
You'd think that with the complete failure in Iraq, those days would be behind us. Sadly, you'd be wrong.
FOX wants war with Iran.
It's almost too ridiculous to believe, but it's shockingly real. We've already compiled over 4 hours of FOX footage... the same images, sound effects, yelling and threatening that led the U.S. to invade Iraq is happening right now to sell a war with Iran. They are saying the exact same things!!
Here is the video evidence, side-by-side with what they said about Iraq.
This time is different though. We're prepared, and we have the means to alert people to what FOX is doing. Everyone has seen the terrible tragedy and the awful price paid by so many Iraqis and Americans. We know this is coming, and we can stop it.
It was about this time in the lead-up to the Iraq war when the other TV networks started following FOX's lead. As CNN's Christiane Amanpour says in the video, they were intimidated by FOX into cheerleading for the Iraq war.
WE CANNOT LET THIS HAPPEN AGAIN.
This is a critical moment, and we must send a message to the major television networks urging them to ask tough questions, be skeptical, and tell us what is really happening. They must not follow FOX down the road to another war.
We've put together an open letter to the networks.
Sign Here
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Faux News
Fed Up Americans Man Of The Week
Well, I got to tell you that I wish I started this last week when California Rep Pete Stark made his comments about kids dying for bush's amusement. He would have gotten the award HANDS DOWN...that is until he folded under pressure from Nancy Pelosi to apologize.
What that did though was to set the bar for saying, actually vocalizing, what the American people are thinking. Peraps our elected leaders are beginning to realize that the people are getting pissed. The people have the power to change leadership during ANY election.
But the very first Fed Up American Man (should be person) of the week title goes to Dennis Kucinich.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
More Political Incorrectness
I think I found my democratic candidate.
After being snubbed for some fifteen minutes in tonight’s Democratic Presidential Debate, Rep. Dennis Kucinch breaks his MSNBC-imposed silence by railing on the Bush administration’s war rhetoric on Iran.
Kucinich not only called for Democrats to reject any movement toward war with Iran, he went on to call for the impeachment of President Bush. If the media was looking for a candidate to set themselves apart from the “front runners,” Kucinich did just that.
Kucinich: ” Tim, we’re here in Philadelphia, the birthplace of democracy. I want to know when this Democratic Congress is going to stand up for the Constitution and hold the president accountable with Article 2, Section 4 an impeachment act. I think that our democracy is in peril and unless the Democrats and the Congress stand up for the Constitution, we are going to lose our country.”
Now THAT’S what I’m talkin’ about!
Its about time people said FUCK POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.
MY country is at stake.
MY rights are at stake.
MY very LIFE is at stake.
And so is yours.
Get pissed.
Speak your mind.
Become Fed Up.
Administration Controlled Media
This Sunday's Guest - Steve Adams
Steve Adams is another independent candidate for president and he will be my guest on my blogtalk radio show this weekend.
Here is his stance on some topics:
Abortion
Though I know many well intentioned people will disagree with me, I believe that life begins at conception. Therefore abortion should not be used for birth control, gender selection, or anything short of a life threatening emergency. Partial birth abortion is particularly horrible and should be banned.
Two comments or questions pop up whenever this topic is discussed.
First is the assumption that I do not support "women's rights". This is far from true. I recognize the agonizing decisions that can be involved and the struggles of life vs. life. I simply believe that the children too are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life..."*
Second is the question of appointing Supreme Court nominees. The answer is no, I will not have a "litmus test" of a pro-life judge. Overturning Roe v. Wade is not my goal. I will look for the best qualified judge who will interpret the constitution and not rewrite it.
*The Declaration of Independence
Balanced Budget / Deficit Spending / Taxes
Immediately balance the budget; stop deficit spending; and stop adding to the debt.
Reduce federal spending.
Replace federal income tax with national sales tax to fully pay for valid federal spending and pay down the debt.
I am required to keep my checkbook in balance; because if my bills did not get paid, there would be trouble. There is no reason that the United States Government should not be held to the same standard. Smart spending and smart taxation are required.
I believe in smaller government, not bigger; one that is fiscally responsible. We will have to take a hard look at what government spending is critical and beneficial, and what is not. I believe in letting Americans keep as much money from their paychecks as possible to drive the economy. I support a FairTax plan* such as the one currently being discussed in Congress (HR 25//S 1025) described here - a tax code that is so simple that my 13 year old son can explain it to you.
There are a dizzying amount of terms and concepts to be weighed in this discussion including national debt, public debt, taxation vs. borrowing (savings bonds and Treasury bills), and who owns what. Not being an economist, I can't answer every question now. But why not put the brilliant minds of American economists to work? Ask the experts to help find a solution to solve today's problems. That is what I will do.
*From www.FairTax.org:
What is the FairTax plan?
The FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll taxes with an integrated approach including a national retail sales tax, a rebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar revenue neutrality, and the repeal of the 16th Amendment. This non-partisan legislation (HR 25/S 1025) abolishes all federal personal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment, and corporate taxes and replaces them all with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax – collected by existing state sales tax authorities. The FairTax taxes us only on what we choose to spend, not on what we earn. It does not raise any more or less revenue; it is designed to be revenue neutral. So it is also cost neutral – the final cost for goods and services changes little under the FairTax. The FairTax is a fair, efficient, transparent, and intelligent solution to the frustration and inequity of our current tax system.
What is Americans For Fair Taxation (FairTax.org)?
FairTax.org is a non-profit, non-partisan, grassroots organization dedicated to replacing the current tax system. The organization has hundreds of thousands of members and volunteers nationwide. Its plan supports sound economic research, education of citizens and community leaders, and grassroots mobilization efforts. For more information visit their web page: www.fairtax.org or call 1-800-FAIRTAX.
Education
Having two children in school and working with youth for years has shown me that the measurement of teachers and schools has become burdensome to the point of interfering with education. In some cases, children are taught to pass tests, not to learn. Teachers are instructed to improve test scores by doing "whatever it takes." We receive notes sent home during testing periods to encourage us to send snacks and make sure our kids get adequate rest during these testing times. The lack of emphasis on the rest of the school year is revealing.
Measurement must be a part of education, but we already have grades and graduation. These can be falsified, at the expense of our children, but some better way of measuring schools and their success must be put in place.
I do not have the entire answer today. I promised I would not claim to be an expert in every arena. But I will consult with educators at every level, from the teachers in the classrooms to principals, to city and state coordinators; and we will find a better solution.
Energy / Environment
My energy plan would be complete independence from foreign sources - mostly oil - and that will help the environment as well by reducing polution.
We must all do our part. My wife drives a gas/electric hybrid vehicle. I ride a gas efficient motorcycle when possible. I support the move to hybrid vehicles for those who can afford to, but you can not punish people who have no recourse.
One proposed alternative fuel is ethanol. The distribution of ethanol as well as steps to increase the majority of vehicles to handle more than 10% ethanol is not easy.
I prefer to support electric use. Electricity can be generated by wind, geothermal, nuclear or emerging technologies. Build electric or electric hybrid cars and we will be well suited for the future.
Convert houses/business to electric heat/energy use as well to wean them off oil or natural gas. Reduction of our dependence on foreign oil has the positive side effects of lessening the power of troubled Middle Eastern countries and lowering greenhouse gas emission as well.
Electoral College / Gerrymandering / Every Vote Must Count
People do not vote in our country because they feel disenfranchised. They feel like their vote doesn’t count. We have had a President not elected by the popular vote, but elected by the Electoral College. We have elected officials that win because their party is in power in a state and can draw voting districts to keep them winning.
Remove the outdated Electoral College which was put into place as a safeguard against the common man.
Prohibit gerrymandering - the drawing of voting district boundaries to unfairly aid one party. This gives the party that is in power, the ability to draw lines for voting districts so they will win.
Immigration
Every border and port must be made secure using a combination of fences/obstacles, technology, and manpower. No amnesty should be granted to those who chose to break the law, no matter how long they have broken it. Employers should be legally liable for illegal aliens working without proper documentation.
The FairTax has a nice side effect in that spending by illegal aliens would now be taxed where today their wages are not.
Marriage
Though many write this subject off as political maneuvering; I support any legislation, involving a constitutional amendment or otherwise, that continues to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The reasons are legal, reduction of confusion, and financial. To many, there are moral questions at hand, but we must understand that the basis of one’s morality is not shared by all Americans.
The discussion of the meaning of marriage must first be a legal one. There is beauty in marriage, but if we reduce marriage to its basics, it is not a right or entitlement, but a legal act. It is defined as, "the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a legal, consensual, and contractual relationship recognized and sanctioned by and dissolvable only by law." Redefining marriage to remove the “opposite sex” part would be a government decreed, morally based change which would effectively force all Americans to endorse a sexual behavior.
Next we need to reduce the confusion and congestion of our court system. States and even cities have passed laws that give certain rights or the title of marriage to same sex couples, but those rights may or may not transfer to other states. The number of court cases, ballot issues, and appeals on the topic is countless. I am a firm believer that courts should interpret laws and not make them, so we must remove this battle from the court system.
Financial ramifications must be considered. Some companies recognize domestic/same sex partners and give them equal benefits as compared to married couples. The IRS does not. How does such a company report that kind of support on their employees’ W2s? They either have to report that as additional "pay" to the employees (for the person that the IRS does not recognize as a dependent/spouse) or the companies are being dishonest in some way on their tax reporting.
It is difficult to separate the moral from the legal on this one, and everyone in the United States has an opinion. My stance is that the government should stay out of the moral and stick to the legal. As a Christian, I have strong personal views on this, but none of those should be shoved onto the country. Realize that the government today, to some degree, already tells you who you can sleep with. We have laws about prostitution, relations with under aged children, polygamy, etc. However they do not regulate every other aspect. You can legally pick up any consenting adult you want to in a bar/off the street and take them home... two or three of them if you want... same sex if you want. Live with them if you want. There are moral issues there, but the government has stayed out of those as they should.
National Defense / War
Some may claim the term pacifist in the name of faith or on principle, and expect me to claim the same. I would be a pacifist in a perfect world, but history has taught us that we do not live in such a world. As WW II martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, "If I see a madman driving a car into a group of innocent bystanders, then I can't, as a Christian, simply wait for the catastrophe and then comfort the wounded and bury the dead. I must try to wrestle the steering wheel out of the hands of the driver." Whether that madman is headed toward one of our children at home or abroad, America must act.
I have several friends, former students from my youth group, and church members in the military. I take seriously the responsibility of sending our children, spouses, or friends into harm's way. We must defend our nation, our allies, and others in that order. I favor proactive military action where necessary. Therefore a military force with the most modern and effective weapons must be maintained. It must be a priority in our balanced budget.
I favor a consolidation of US armed forces within our borders, protecting our homeland. Then at bases around the world that help us to react quickly. Lastly limited engagements with overwhelming force and decisiveness. At the same time our intelligence agencies and special forces units must be given the best training and assignments - then the government gets out of the way - political constraints must never prevent US forces from using their might to full advantage. In other words, after a decisioin is made to engage in military options by myself, Congress, and the leadership of the military; the plan and responsibility for the actions that follow are left up to those who have chosen the military as a profession. They will not then be sway to public opinion or selective reporting from the press.
I favor a comprehensive plan consisting of pieces of Eisenhower's Massive Retaliation (overwhelming force to strike back against any agression), Kennedy's Flexible Response (having multiple military options during a crisis), and the Powell doctrine (a clear exit strategy being required.) The end result being that the United States will use military action wherever necessary, in whatever form necessary. I also favor taking the military "off the radar screen." This does not mean that they are allowed to do whatever they want. Rather it means that you won't be able to find out where forces are by a simple internet search. Restrictions on military protection for the press must also be increased, allowing all our forces to do their job without looking good for or protecting a camera.
With regard to our current war in Iraq: First we must realize that no one who reads this site has the real facts. We hear the spin from the government and the media, but we don't know what's really happening over there. That said, we need to leave Iraq as soon as possible. Talk to the generals; speed up the timetable; but don’t set an arbitrary date just to make people happy. Stop the “cut and run” or “surrender” talk. We fought and won our war and the troops can come home proudly. They have done everything that we have asked them to and more. If a civil war is indeed raging, we are enabling it by protecting the borders from foreign invasion. Take away that protection and the Iraqi people must step up and deal with threats to their nations instead of fighting amongst themselves. Finally we must realize that this is a redeployment at best. The war on terror will continue, but on other battlefronts, in times and places of our own choosing.
Separation of Church and State
Some people may fear my Christian faith, while others may rejoice. To address both, my faith makes me a better person. It has shaped my life since my childhood. It does not however mean I will force America to be a Christian nation. Jesus Christ himself would not make such a decision because he prefers people come to God out of their own free will. It is the basics of grace and the core of Christianity. If God wanted to force a religion on you, He would have already done so.
Many people like to quote the phrase "separation of church and state", thinking that it comes from the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or some such document. In fact it comes from a letter (available from the Library of Congress) from Thomas Jefferson to three Baptist gentlemen in Connecticut in 1802 and is not part of our legal system.
The law that does apply is from the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Amendment I, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" What this means is the government can not say you have to be a Presbyterian or a Christian or a Jedi to be an American. It does not say the government should encourage or discourage school prayer or saying Happy Hanukkah in the hallways. It does not prevent the government from talking to faith based institutions to bring help and hope to those in need.
Monday, October 29, 2007
War Made Easy
War Made Easy reaches into the Orwellian memory hole to expose a 50-year pattern of government deception and media spin that has dragged the United States into one war after another from Vietnam to Iraq.
Narrated by actor and activist Sean Penn, the film exhumes remarkable archival footage of official distortion and exaggeration from LBJ to George W. Bush, revealing in stunning detail how the American news media have uncritically disseminated the pro-war messages of successive presidential administrations.
War Made Easy gives special attention to parallels between the Vietnam war and the war in Iraq. Guided by media critic Norman Solomon’s meticulous research and tough-minded analysis, the film presents disturbing examples of propaganda and media complicity from the present alongside rare footage of political leaders and leading journalists from the past, including Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, dissident Senator Wayne Morse, and news correspondents Walter Cronkite and Morley Safer.
Norman Solomon’s work has been praised by the Los Angeles Times as “brutally persuasive” and essential “for those who would like greater context with their bitter morning coffee.” This film now offers a chance to see that context on the screen.
Fear Of Right Wing Fear Itself
Today, many of the men who hope to be the next president - including all of the candidates with a significant chance of receiving the Republican nomination - have made unreasoning, unjustified terror the centerpiece of their campaigns.
Are You Fed Up?
The downward spiraling which has damaged every arena of our society and environment shot into warp speed when George W. Bush twice stole the title, 'President of the United States of America.'
We Americans have become accustomed and well trained through a deliberate reduction of educational opportunities, social services and individual rights, to fall for the well-organized, right wing rhetoric and diversions, designed to promote fear, anti-learning and apathy.
Such tactics have allowed these crimes to prevail.
It is the sad misfortune of the entire world, that these two acts have been forgiven and forgotten to such an extent that those of us who originally marched in defiance, now respectfully refer to this asshole as 'The President,' 'This President,' and 'President Bush.'
I have great regard for the power of language and I believe it is important for us to stop colluding with the lies.
We can begin with the small but symbolic act of refusing to refer to bush by any title he has not earned.
In consideration of his very "un-Christian" abuses of the power he stole, including waging a war under false pretenses, cronyism, immoral and unconstitutional proselytizing, defiance of the Constitution of the United States of America, and threats to veto the will of the people, I vow to never again collude with the Great Lie.
Let's call a spade a spade. Let's refer to this idiot for what he truly is.
How about 'Criminal bush'?
Asshole bush?
King George the Liar?
The worse president in history?
Criminal Family
Under the Trading with the Enemy Act, the U.S. government took over the Union Banking Corporation, in which Prescott Bush was a director. The U.S. Alien Property Custodian seized Union Banking Corporation stock shares, all of which were owned by E. Roland Harriman, Prescott Bush, three Nazi executives, and two other associates of Prescott Bush.
President Franklin Roosevelt's Alien Property Custodian, Leo T. Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 seizing the property of Prescott Bush under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The order, published in obscure government record books and kept out of the news, explained nothing about the Nazis involved; only that the Union Banking Corporation was run for the Thyssen family of Germany and/or Hungary, nationals of a designated enemy country.
This act by the U.S. government made it clear that Prescott Bush and the other directors of the Union Banking Corp. were in essence front men for the Nazis. By keeping news of this seizure quiet, the American government avoided the more important issue: in what way were Hitler and his Nazi cohorts set up, armed, and supported by the New York and London cartel of which Prescott Bush was an executive manager?
On Oct. 28, the government issued orders seizing two Nazi front organizations run by the Bush-Harriman bank: the Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation.
Nazi interests in the Silesian-American Corporation, long managed by Prescott Bush and his father-in-law, George Herbert Walker, were seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act on November 17, 1942. In this action, the government announced that it was seizing only the Nazi interests, leaving the Nazis' U.S. partners to carry on the business.
These were actions taken by the U.S. government during wartime, but Prescott Bush and his collaborators had already played a central role in financing and arming Adolf Hitler for his takeover of Germany. Harriman, Bush and the others in the cabal had financed the buildup of Nazi war industries for the conquest of Europe and war against the U.S.A. They had also helped in the development of Nazi genocide theories and racial propaganda, with the slave labor and extermination camps as the result.
Since he left office, ex-President and ex-CIA Director George Bush, working as a consultant, has been using his influence and contacts for the Washington-based Carlyle Group, a $12 billion private equity firm and eleventh largest defense contractor in the U.S. Carlyle's portfolio is heavily invested in defense and telecommunications firms.
Bush senior's Carlyle connection means he is on the payroll of corporate interests that receive defense contracts from the U.S. government while his son is president. Charles Lewis of the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity, indicated that "in a really peculiar way, George W. Bush could, some day, benefit financially from his own administration's decisions, through his father's investments."
Bush Senior specializes in Saudi Arabia and therefore has a personal interest in the corrupt Saudi regime's survival and continued profitability. The public-interest law firm Judicial Watch earlier this year strongly criticized Bush senior for his ties with the Bin Laden family, pointing out in a March 5 statement that it is a "conflict of interest [which] could cause problems for America's foreign policy in the Middle East and Asia."
In a Sept. 29 statement, Judicial Watch added that, "This conflict of interest has now turned into a scandal. The idea of the president's father, an ex-president himself, doing business with a company under investigation by the FBI in the terror attacks of September 11 is horrible." Judicial Watch demanded that President Bush make his father pull out of the Carlyle Group.
The New York Times on October 26, 2001 reported that, "The Saudi family of Osama bin Laden is severing its financial ties with the Carlyle Group, a private investment firm known for its connections to influential Washington political figures, executives who have been briefed on the decision said today." Some of those influential figures include George H.W. Bush and his son, President Bush.
George junior is no slouch when it comes to shady deals with the Bin Laden family and other crooked interests such as drugs.
"In 1979, Bush’s first business, Arbusto Energy, obtained financing from James Bath, a Houstonian and close family friend. One of many investors, Bath gave Bush $50,000 for a 5 percent stake in Arbusto. At the time, Bath was the sole U.S. business representative for Salem bin Laden, head of the wealthy Saudi Arabian family and a brother (one of 17) to Osama bin Laden. It has long been suspected, but never proven, that the Arbusto money came directly from Salem bin Laden. In a statement issued shortly after the September 11 attacks, the White House vehemently denied the connection, insisting that Bath invested his own money, not Salem bin Laden’s, in Arbusto.
"In conflicting statements, Bush at first denied ever knowing Bath, then acknowledged his stake in Arbusto and that he was aware Bath represented Saudi interests. In fact, Bath has extensive ties, both to the bin Laden family and major players in the scandal-ridden Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) who have gone on to fund Osama bin Laden. BCCI defrauded depositors of $10 billion in the ’80s in what has been called the 'largest bank fraud in world financial history' by former Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. During the ’80s, BCCI also acted as a main conduit for laundering money intended for clandestine CIA activities, ranging from financial support to the Afghan mujahedin to paying intermediaries in the Iran-Contra affair."
America Has Spoken
Over 100,000 people took to the streets in coordinated regional and local protests to demand an immediate end to the war in Iraq. The October 27 demonstrations took place just six weeks after the September 15 National March and Die-In in Washington, D.C. that was led by Iraq War Veterans and family members of soldiers and marines.
ImpeachBush and hundreds of other groups organized for the October 27 protests. What is needed now is to intensify the mass organization of the people.
The ImpeachBush movement should be proud of its role in the mobilization of the people. We could not have succeeded in bringing the message of impeachment and an end to the war without the active support of thousands of people who volunteered their time. Others made an urgently needed financial donation.
In the next two months, ImpeachBush will organize more demonstrations, street protests, take out ImpeachBush ads, and collect petitions in every state in the country. You can help sustain this movement by making an important and generous financial contribution. The reason the movement has spread is because we have been able to generate the resources from the people who believe that Bush and Cheney must be held accountable for their criminal conduct. Please donate today by clicking this link.
Everyday, the corporate-dominated media tries to convince people that the anti-war movement is shrinking and that impeachment is "off the table." That is a lie, as you can see from the reports below. The same media lies to the people about the so-called progress made by the “surge” in Iraq. The truth is that the U.S. military occupation of Iraq cannot succeed. The Iraqi people insist on their right to determine their own destiny. The people of the United States, who have no voice in either the Republican or Democratic Parties or in the big business media, are determined to find a way to end the war, which has taken hundreds of thousands of lives and costs $3 billion each week.
San Francisco
More than 30,000 people marched in San Francisco in a demonstration sponsored by the October 27 Coalition. The demonstration was endorsed by over 150 political, religious, labor and community organizations, including all seven Bay Area Central Labor Councils. Speakers included Cindy Sheehan, leaders of the Arab American and Muslim community, American Indian Movement co-founder Dennis Banks, Episcopal Bishop of California Mark Handley Andrus, and prominent labor union leaders from the Bay Area. The march included a dramatic Die-In on Market Street where the crowd lay down to symbolize the almost 3,900 U.S. and over 1 million Iraqi deaths in the war. The march included a strong labor contingent numbering nearly 1,000 and including banners from many different unions.
Los Angeles
In Los Angeles, nearly 20,000 people marched through downtown to the federal building for a mass rally and Die-In. The California fire catastrophe did not keep people from registering their opposition to the Iraq war in a major way. The demonstration was overwhelmingly youthful, with students pouring into the march from hundreds of Southern California schools. More than 250 people joined the youth and student contingent organized by Youth & Student ANSWER. Others lined the front banners, chanting "Iraq for Iraqis, troops out now!" and "Alto a la guerra, stop the war!"
After the march, almost everyone present participated in a mass symbolic Die-In. Thundering sound effects of air raids and bombs exploding punctuated the action, followed by a solemn minute of silence for the Iraqis and U.S. soldiers killed in the war. As protesters rose up after the Die-In, all chanted "Stop the war!" Many carried impeachment signs with them. Other speakers included actors Martin Sheen ("The West Wing"), Mike Farrell ("MASH") and Mark Ruffalo ("Zodiac").
Seattle
In Seattle, at least 7,000 people marched. Buses and carpools came from the entire Northwest Region - from Eugene and Portland, Oregon; Olympia, Tacoma, Everett, Mt. Vernon, Bellingham and elsewhere in Washington State. There was a youth-and-community-oriented opening program, followed by a march and lively rally. Speakers included Fatimah Magsombol, Mindanao Bagsomoro Caucus; Michael Dixon, community activist; Chanan Suarez Diaz, President, Seattle IVAW; Jeff Johnson, research director, Washington State Labor Council, speaking on behalf of WSLC chairman Rick Bender; Aracely Hernandez, Committee for General Amnesty and Social Justice; Wally Cuddeford and Caitlyn Esworthy, Port Militarization Resistance; Dr. Goudarz Eghtedari, American Iranian Friendship Council; MCs Cedric Walker, Jane Cutter of Seattle ANSWER and Marie Marchand of Whatcom Peace and Justice Center in Bellingham.
Chicago
In Chicago, tens of thousands marched. Organizers for the October 27 Mobilization Committee, the sponsoring group, estimated the crowd at 30,000. The demonstration was the largest demonstration yet protesting the U.S. war and occupation of Iraq to take place in Chicago. ANSWER organizers said at least half of the participants were students and other young people. The demonstration was very multinational with strong representation from the African American community. There was a labor contingent from Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and a smaller contingent from the Teamsters Union. The ANSWER Coalition in Chicago had distributed tens of thousands of flyers and posters to help mobilize for the demonstration.
New York City
The New York City demonstration received a strong turnout despite a steady downpour. March organizers estimated the crowd at 45,000. ImpeachBush.org mobilized people from around the East Coast, and throngs of attendees were seen with impeachment signs.
Boston
The heart of Boston was filled with anti-war energy on Saturday afternoon, as some 7,500 took to the streets in protest of the war in Iraq. Braving inclement New England weather, veterans, students, seasoned activists and many first-time protesters from throughout the region rallied in Boston Commons. Led by veterans organizations and military families, thousands later marched to Copley Square, demanding "Bring all the troops home now!" one of five principal demands. Speakers at the rally included Melida and Carlos Arrendondo, historian Howard Zinn and Liam Madden of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW). New England United, a coalition of local and regional organizations, organized the demonstration and march. Throughout the crowd were people wearing ImpeachBush sweatshirts, and carrying our trademark black-and-yellow signs.
Top 10 Larry Craig/Matt Lauer Moments
In honor of the House’s re-consideration next week of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) including an amendment on gender identity, we give you the Top 10 Moments for the right’s very own ENDA poster child:
Sen. Larry Craig
Sunday, October 28, 2007
War Monger Conservative Asswipe's At It Again
Earlier this week, the Bush administration ratcheted up its rhetoric towards Iran, imposing unilateral sanctions that are considered the “broadest set of punitive measures imposed on Tehran since 1979.” The White House also requested $88 million to equip B-2 “stealth” bombers with a new 30,000-pound bunker buster, which is being seen by members of Congress as a “sign of plans for an attack on Iran.”
On Fox News Sunday today, Fox’s Brit Hume and the Weekly Standard’s William Kristol enthusiasticly endorsed the new pro-war posturing, calling it “useful for Iran to believe that this administration will stop at nothing to keep it from getting a nuclear weapon.”
Hume claimed that it “make[s] sense” to threaten Iran with “a devastating military strike,” adding that Iran probably wants Democrats to be “in charge” because they look “terribly weak” in criticizing the “alleged saber rattling”:
Doesn’t it make sense that you want Iran to believe that if you keep this up, they might be the subject of a devastating military strike of the kind that only the United States of America can mount. I would think so. And it seems to me when you have Democrats running around, wringing their hands about alleged saber rattling that it makes them look terribly weak, and in the end if you’re the head of Iran, you think, “well, we want those people in charge.”
Discussing the bunker buster, Kristol said it was “ludicrous” and “ridiculous” for the administration to explain why it wants the new bomb because “there might be others that we want to bomb, not just in Iran.” Watch it:
Hume and Kristol’s bellicose rhetoric is actually counterproductive to finding a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The increasing talk of bombing Iran is thwarting U.N. efforts to forge international consensus, as other nations worry their vote could be “exploited” to support military action. The inability to find common ground then precipitates unilateral actions by the U.S. and sets the stage for military confrontation.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
30,000+ Strong In Chicago
Leonore Lee was among the thousands rallying in Chicago on Saturday to protest the war in Iraq.
Amid the crowd carrying signs marching down Ashland Avenue, the 65-year-old from Milwaukee called the event "the most powerful expression of power to the people.""It shows our solidarity and makes me love this country even more," she said.The day of speeches and demonstrations was part of a national day of action demanding an end to the five-year-old conflict.
Police estimated about 5,000 people attended the event, which began in Chicago's Union Park before winding through the Loop and ending at Federal Plaza. ( OK this is where Fed Up needs to step in. There CLEARLY were more than 5,000 people in attendence as evidenced by the picture above. Now admittedly, I didn't count every person in the picture but anyone that is a small step up from retarded can see that there is more than 5,000 protestors.)
The Chicago rally, one of 11 planned nationwide, drew protesters from eight Midwestern states and included local political figures such as U.S. Reps. Danny Davis, Luis Gutierrez and Jan Schakowsky.
Police arrested three protesters, who were charged with disobeying an officer and resisting arrest while on their way to join the rally, said Chicago police spokesman Pat Camden. One of the arrests involved damage to property and another involved battery to a police officer, Camden said.
During the rally in Union Park, where about 2,000 protesters assembled, Schakowsky called for cutting off funding for the war and an immediate decrease in the number of American troops stationed in Iraq."The American people have had it with this war," she said. "We've given war a chance. Now let's give peace and negotiation a chance."
After turning on Jackson Boulevard, protesters marched into the Loop and descended on Federal Plaza, where they were met by more than 20 counterprotesters waving American flags and holdings signs that read, "You keep fighting there, we've got your back here.
"Counterprotester Beverly Perlson, 50, of Oak Lawn, said her son was on his fourth deployment in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne Division."I'm proud of my son's service," she said. "Just in case he sees this on TV, I want him to know that we still love him and support him."
James Redden, 31, a former soldier from Oak Park, sided with the anti-war protesters, saying he was against the Iraq war from its inception because he didn't believe the Bush administration's link between Al Qaeda and Iraq."The whole idea that we can establish democracy there through the barrel of an M-16 is just bogus," said Redden, who said he served in Kuwait during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003.
Among the other protests nationally, the one in San Francisco appeared to draw the largest crowd, as more than 10,000 labor union members, anti-war activists, clergy and others rallied near City Hall before marching to Dolores Park.
Other rallies were planned for New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Salt Lake City Seattle, and Los Angeles.In Chicago, the protesters spanned generations, ranging from 11 Oak Park and River Forest High School students to more than a dozen members of the activist group "Raging Grannies." One member, Nancy Guenther, 62, of Pardeeville, Wis., feared the Bush administration planned to invade Iran next."It's the same rhetoric as Iraq," she said.
"They're playing their war games behind closed doors."During the Vietnam War, George Reeber of Ludington, Mich., took his daughter, Beth Valone, 44, to protests in Washington and Detroit. On Saturday, he stood with Valone and her 13-year-old son Connor, who wore a bandanna that said, "Where's the rage?"
"Why aren't more people mad about the war?" Connor said.
"Some people just don't seem to care."Marsda Conner, 72, of Oak Park, held a sign saying "Billions for War: No More!" Conner complained that Democratic lawmakers were ignoring voters who gave them a majority in Congress with the hope that they would bring a swift end to the war.
"We're here to provide them with some backbone so they'll deny funds for this war and start negotiating with Iran and Syria," said Conner, who is a member of the anti-war group Code Pink.Also attending the rally was Iraqi Raed Jarrar, 29, who fled the violence in Baghdad two years ago and now works as a Middle East consultant in Washington.Jarrar, whose father is Sunni and mother is Shiite, said the conflict in Iraq is more political than sectarian, and that most Iraqis are in favor of a timetable for an American troop withdrawal.
Debbie Volonec, 54, who arrived at the rally with 50 other protesters from West Lafayette, Ind., said such events needed to be more frequent if they were going to have an impact."We are going to keep it up until we get the guys home and get out of this mess," she said.
GOP Who?
Air America Radio’s Rachel Maddow looks at the problem Republican presidential candidates are having with name recognition. A recent Pew Research Center poll revealed a large number of American voters are unable to name even one Republican candidate running for President.
In order to fix this little problem, GOP hopefuls are trying their best to bolster their images in hopes of helping people remember them, even trying to attach themselves to Ronald Reagan - the guy everyone’s heard of. Rachel pays special attention to the self-financing Mitt “Little Mittens” Romney approach.
Common People
More "Phony Soldiers?"
But more and more, one need not look too hard to find ample evidence to the contrary. The WaPo’s Joshua Partlow has a chilling front-page piece on soldiers from the 1st Battalion, 18th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division, who arrived in southwestern Baghdad 14 months ago — now leaving bitter and downtrodden.
Next month, the U.S. soldiers will complete their tour in Iraq. Their experience in Sadiyah has left many of them deeply discouraged, by both the unabated hatred between rival sectarian fighters and the questionable will of the Iraqi government to work toward peaceful solutions.
Asked if the American endeavor here was worth their sacrifice — 20 soldiers from the battalion have been killed in Baghdad — [Sgt. Victor Alarcon] said no: “I don’t think this place is worth another soldier’s life.” (emphasis added)
While top U.S. commanders say the statistics of violence have registered a steep drop in Baghdad and elsewhere, the soldiers’ experience in Sadiyah shows that numbers alone do not describe the sense of aborted normalcy — the fear, the disrupted lives — that still hangs over the city.
The troops who spoke to Partlow described a scene far more distressing than the talk you’ll find in the Weekly Standard or Joe Lieberman’s press releases. The article quotes Maj. Eric Timmerman, the battalion’s operations officer, describing the descent of Sadiyah: “It’s just a slow, somewhat government-supported sectarian cleansing.”
Sounds like another troop for Limbaugh and the right to smear.And what does government-supported sectarian cleansing look like?
The focus of the battalion’s efforts in Sadiyah was to develop the Iraqi security forces into an organized, fair and proficient force — but the American soldiers soon realized this goal was unattainable. The sectarian warfare in Sadiyah was helped along by the Wolf Brigade, a predominantly Shiite unit of the Iraqi National Police that tolerated, and at times encouraged, Mahdi Army attacks against Sunnis, according to U.S. soldiers and residents. The soldiers endured repeated bombings of their convoys within view of police checkpoints. During their time here, they have arrested 70 members of the national police for collaboration in such attacks and other crimes.
The Interior Ministry, which oversees the national police, has said that officials are working hard to root out militiamen from the force and denied that officers have any intention of participating in sectarian violence.
But in one instance about two months ago, the American soldiers heard that the Wolf Brigade planned to help resettle more than 100 Shiite families in abandoned houses in the neighborhood. When platoon leader Lt. Brian Bifulco arrived on the scene, he noticed that “abandoned houses to them meant houses that had Sunnis in them.”
“What we later found out is they weren’t really moving anyone in, it was a cover for the INP to go in and evict what Sunni families were left there,” recalled Bifulco, 23, a West Point graduate from Huntsville, Ala. “We showed up, and there were a bunch of Sunni families just wandering around the streets with their bags, taking up refuge in a couple Sunni mosques in the area.”
Staff Sgt. Richard McClary, a section leader from Buffalo said the American people don’t fully realize what’s going on — it’s worse than we’re led to believe.
“They just know back there what the higher-ups here tell them. But the higher-ups don’t go anywhere, and actually they only go to the safe places, places with a little bit of gunfire,” he said. “They don’t ever fucking see what we see on the ground.”
Bill O's Laugh Factor
Billy's floundering ratings are prompting him to now pick on fictional characters
Friday, October 26, 2007
Gore Update
CBS News Poll - 456 interviews were conducted with Democratic primary voters. The margin of error for this subgroup is plus or minus 5 percentage points.
When former Vice President Al Gore, who has not entered the race, is added as a choice for the Democratic nomination, he emerges as a serious contender. Gore garners support of 32 percent of Democratic primary voters, while Clinton gets 37 percent, Obama 16 percent, and Edwards 7 percent.Given that the MOE is 5% and Gore and Clinton differ by only 5%, then this poll does not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in support for Gore v. Clinton.
IMO, if he declared his candidacy, his numbers would rise drawing voters from Clinton, Obama, and Edwards.
Why?
If he declares now or early next year, then his views on all issues - climate crisis, war, health care, etcetera - would get exposure and he would attract more voters. Right now most people aren't aware of his views. Also, if he declared his candidacy and announced up front that Obama or Edwards would be his VP - his ratings would rise dramatically.
CBS Poll: Majority Of Dems Back Clinton - if you don't understand how to interpret the MOE...
Meanwhile, the petition at Draft Gore is nearing 220,000 signatures... Sign It!
And over at the DFA pulse poll - Al has 27% of 92,330+ votes cast - Cast a write in vote for Al!
Bush Bitch Slap To Big Easy
But that apparently hasn’t stopped Bush from taking a cheap shot.
“There is no hill he’s not willing to charge, no problem he’s not willing to solve,” bush said of the California governor. “It makes a significant difference when you have somebody in the statehouse willing to take the lead.”
Unlike, say, Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco, who was faulted perhaps as much as the Federal Emergency Management Agency was for inadequate preparation and response for Hurricane Katrina’s assault on New Orleans and the Gulf Coast?
You think? Two years later, and the president is still trying pass the buck.
For her part, Blanco said in a press statement that it took federal forces nearly a week to arrive in Louisiana after the storm. “I was the only game in town, leading for nearly a week without the president’s help,” Blanco said. “Of all the lessons learned from Katrina now being put into place in California, I would hope the one he would remember is that politics has no place in any disaster.”
So much for that idea.
The World Is Waking Up
Today, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) along with the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), and the French League for Human Rights (LDH) filed a complaint with the Paris Prosecutor before the “Court of First Instance” (Tribunal de Grande Instance) charging former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld with ordering and authorizing torture.
Rumsfeld was in Paris for a talk sponsored by Foreign Policy magazine.
“The filing of this French case against Rumsfeld demonstrates that we will not rest until those U.S. officials involved in the torture program are brought to justice. Rumsfeld must understand that he has no place to hide. A torturer is an enemy of all humankind,” said CCR President Michael Ratner.
“France is under the obligation to investigate and prosecute Rumsfeld’s accountability for crimes of torture in Guantanamo and Iraq. France has no choice but to open an investigation if an alleged torturer is on its territory. I hope that the fight against impunity will not be sacrificed in the name of politics. We call on France to refuse to be a safe haven for criminals.” said FIDH President Souhayr Belhassen.
“We want to combat impunity and therefore demand a judicial investigation and a criminal prosecution wherever there is jurisdiction over the torture incidents,” said ECCHR General Secretary Wolfgang Kaleck.
"The impunity of a criminal government is always intolerable. That the US is the hyperpower of the moment and especially that it is a democracy makes the impunity of Donald Rumsfield even more unbearable than that of an Hissène Habré or a Radovan Karadzic" announced Jean-Pierre Dubois, LDH President.
The criminal complaint states that because of the failure of authorities in the United States and Iraq to launch any independent investigation into the responsibility of Rumsfeld and other high-level U.S. officials for torture despite a documented paper trail and government memos implicating them in direct as well as command responsibility for torture – and because the U.S. has refused to join the International Criminal Court – it is the legal obligation of states such as France to take up the case.
In this case, charges are brought under the 1984 Convention against Torture, ratified by both the United States and France, which has been used in France in previous torture cases.
French courts therefore have an obligation under the Convention against Torture to prosecute individuals responsible for acts of torture if they are present on French territory [1] . This will be the only case filed while he is in the country, which makes the obligations to investigate and prosecute under international law extremely strong.
Rumsfeld’s presence on French territory gives French courts jurisdiction to prosecute him for having ordered and authorized torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere.
In addition, having resigned from his position of U.S. Secretary of Defense a year ago, Rumsfeld can no longer try to claim immunity as a head of state or government official. Nor can he claim immunity as former state official, as international law does not recognize such immunity in the case of international crimes including the crime of torture.
Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, former commander of Abu Ghraib and other U.S.-run prisons in Iraq, submitted written testimony to the Paris Prosecutor for the plaintiffs’ case on Rumsfeld’s responsibility for the abuse of detainees.
This is the fifth time Rumsfeld has been charged with direct involvement in torture stemming from his role in the Bush administration’s program of torture post-9/11.
Two previous criminal complaints were filed in Germany under its universal jurisdiction statute, which allows Germany to prosecute serious international crimes regardless of where they occurred or the nationality of the perpetrators or victims. One case was filed in fall 2004 by CCR, FIDH, and Berlin attorney Wolfgang Kaleck; that case was dismissed in February 2005 in response to official pressure from the U.S., in particular from the Pentagon.
The second case was filed in fall 2006 by the same groups as well as dozens of national and international human rights groups, Nobel Peace Prize winners and the United Nations former Special Rapporteur on Torture. The 2006 complaint was presented on behalf of 12 Iraqi citizens who had been held and abused in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and one Saudi citizen still held at Guantánamo. This case was dismissed in April 2007, and an appeal will be filed against this decision next week.
Two other cases were filed against Rumsfeld in Argentina in 2005 and in Sweden in 2007.
I Know bush Is Boring But.......
It seems "Dead Eye" Dick really cares about those California wildfires.
This is hardly the first time he’s been caught doing that either.
April 21, 2006br>
May 12, 2006
,br>
July 14, 2007
You know, I don’t think it’s setting the bar too high to expect the man to stay awake during normal business hours…then again, maybe this is a good thing. Harder to order another illegal invasion on another sovereign nation if you’re unconscious.
The Art Of The Republican Hissy Fit
But they did it, oh how they did it, and it often succeeded in changing the dialogue and tittilating the media into a frenzy of breathless tabloid coverage.
In fact, they became so good at the tactic that they now rely on it as their first choice to control the political dialogue when it becomes uncomfortable and put the Democrats on the defensive whenever they are winning the day. Perhaps the best example during the Bush years would be the completely cynical and over-the-top reaction to Senator Paul Wellstone's memorial rally in 2002 in the last couple of weeks leading up to the election.
With the exception of the bizarre Jesse Ventura, those in attendance, including the Republicans, were non-plussed by the nature of the event at the time. It was not, as the chatterers insisted, a funeral, but rather more like an Irish wake for Wellstone supporters — a celebration of Wellstone's life, which included, naturally, politics. (He died campaigning, after all.) But Vin Weber, one of the Republican party's most sophisticated operatives, immediately saw the opportunity for a faux outrage fest that was more successful than even he could have ever dreamed.
By the time they were through, the Democrats were prostrating themselves at the feet of anyone who would listen, begging for forgiveness for something they didn't do, just to stop the shrieking. The Republicans could barely keep the smirks off their faces as they sternly lectured the Democrats on how to properly honor the dead — the same Republicans who had relentlessly tortured poor Vince Foster's family for years.
It's an excellent technique and one they continue to employ with great success, most recently with the entirely fake Move-On and Pete Stark "controversies." (The Democrats try their own versions but rarely achieve the kind of full blown hissy fit the Republicans can conjure with a mere blast fax to Drudge and their talk radio minions.)
But it's about more than simple political distraction or savvy public relations. It's actually a very well developed form of social control called Ritual Defamation (or Ritual Humiliation) as this well trafficked internet article defines it:
Defamation is the destruction or attempted destruction of the reputation, status, character or standing in the community of a person or group of persons by unfair, wrongful, or malicious speech or publication. For the purposes of this essay, the central element is defamation in retaliation for the real or imagined attitudes, opinions or beliefs of the victim, with the intention of silencing or neutralizing his or her influence, and/or making an example of them so as to discourage similar independence and "insensitivity" or non-observance of taboos. It is different in nature and degree from simple criticism or disagreement in that it is aggressive, organized and skillfully applied, often by an organization or representative of a special interest group, and in that it consists of several characteristic elements.
The article goes on to lay out several defining characteristics of ritual defamation such as "the method of attack in a ritual defamation is to assail the character of the victim, and never to offer more than a perfunctory challenge to the particular attitudes, opinions or beliefs expressed or implied. Character assassination is its primary tool." Perhaps its most intriguing insight is this:
The power of ritual defamation lies entirely in its capacity to intimidate and terrorize. It embraces some elements of primitive superstitious belief, as in a "curse" or "hex." It plays into the subconscious fear most people have of being abandoned or rejected by the tribe or by society and being cut off from social and psychological support systems.
In a political context this translates to a fear by liberal politicians that they will be rejected by the American people --- and a subconscious dulling of passion and inspiration in the mistaken belief that they can spare themselves further humiliation if only they control their rhetoric. The social order these fearsome conservative rituals pretend to "protect," however, are not those of the nation at large, but rather the conservative political establishment which is perhaps best exemplified by this famous article about how Washington perceived the Lewinsky scandal. The "scandal" is moved into the national conversation through the political media which has its own uses for such entertaining spectacles and expends a great deal of energy promoting these shaming exercises for commercial purposes.
The political cost to progressives and liberals for their inability to properly deal with this tactic is greater than they realize. Just as Newt Gingrich was not truly offended by Bill Clinton's behavior (which mirrored his own) neither were conservative congressmen and Rush Limbaugh truly upset by the Move On ad --- and everyone knew it, which was the point. It is a potent demonstration of pure power to force others to insincerely condemn or apologize for something, particularly when the person who is forcing it is also insincerely outraged. For a political party that suffers from a reputation for weakness, it is extremely damaging to be so publicly cowed over and over again. It separates them from their most ardent supporters and makes them appear guilty and unprincipled to the public at large.
Ritual defamation and humiliation are designed to make the group feel contempt for the victim and over time it's extremely hard to resist feeling it when the victims fail to stand up for themselves.
There is the possibility that the Republicans will overplay this particular gambit. Their exposure over the past few years for incompetence, immorality and corruption, both personal and institutional, makes them extremely imperfect messengers for sanctimony, faux or otherwise. But they are still effectively wielding the flag, (or at least the Democratic congress is allowing them to) and until liberals and progressives find a way to thwart this successful tactic, it will continue. At this point the conservatives have little else.
What do you suppose today's enforcers of proper decorum would say to this?
Americans too often teach their children to despise those who hold unpopular opinions. We teach them to regard as traitors, and hold in aversion and contempt, such as do not shout with the crowd, and so here in our democracy we are cheering a thing which of all things is most foreign to it and out of place - the delivery of our political conscience into somebody else's keeping. This is patriotism on the Russian plan. — Mark Twain
At What Cost?
When dealing with the cost of the president’s policies in the Middle East, at the top of the priority list is the human cost, with Americans who’ve lost their lives, and thousands more who have suffered serious injuries.
But there are also financial costs to consider, and they are staggering.
The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade, or nearly $8,000 per man, woman and child in the country, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate scheduled for release today.
A previous CBO estimate put the wars’ costs at more than $1.6 trillion. This one adds $705 billion in interest, taking into account that the conflicts are being funded with borrowed money.
Assuming that Iraq accounts for about 80% of that total, the Iraq war would cost $1.9 trillion, including $564 million in interest, said Thomas Kahn, Spratt’s staff director. The committee holds a hearing on war costs this morning.
The White House budget office said Congress was trying to “artificially inflate war funding levels.” Asked how much the administration thinks the war actually costs, the White House budget office refused to say.
What a surprise.
Two other quick angles to consider. First, let’s not forget that the Bush gang was asked how much they estimated the war in Iraq would cost. Administration officials said it would be no more than $50 billion.
Oops.
Second, the House Budget Committee held a hearing today to discuss the $2.4 trillion price tag. Republican lawmakers on the committee didn’t show up.
"The number is so big, it boggles the mind," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill.
Sean Kevelighan, a spokesman for the White House budget office, said, "Congress should stop playing politics with our troops by trying to artificially inflate war funding levels." He declined to provide a White House estimate.
The CBO estimates assume that 75,000 troops will remain in both countries through 2017, including roughly 50,000 in Iraq. That is a "very speculative" projection, though it's not entirely unreasonable, said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst at the non-partisan Lexington Institute.
As of Sept. 30, the two wars have cost $604 billion, the CBO says. Adjusted for inflation, that is higher than the costs of the Korea and Vietnam conflicts, according to the Washington-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
Defense spending during those two wars accounted for a far larger share of the American economy.
In the months before the March 2003 Iraq invasion, the Bush administration estimated the Iraq war would cost no more than $50 billion.
Posts
