Never Going To Leave

Dick Cheney wants the Iraqi government installed by the U.S. occupation to sign a “security pact” with Washington by the end of July. (The pact, including a status-of-forces agreement, would be signed by the U.S. president but not constitute a treaty requiring Congressional approval.)

U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker has been feverishly struggling to meet the deadline and to commit the next administration to the agreement’s terms. But that may be a tall order. Prime Minister Nour al-Maliki says negotiations are only in a beginning stage; public opinion is opposed to the pact based on leaked information about its content; and a majority of members of the Iraqi parliament have endorsed a letter to the U.S. government demanding U.S. withdrawal as the condition for “any commercial, agricultural, investment or political agreement with the United States.”

Few Americans are familiar with the proposed treaty. If they were, they might be shocked at its provisions, ashamed about its naked sadism.

It:

• grants the U.S. long-term rights to maintain over 50 military bases in their California-sized country
• allows the U.S. to strike any other country from within Iraqi territory without the permission of the Iraqi government
• allows the U.S. to conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting with the local government
• allows U.S. forces to arrest any Iraqi without consulting with Iraqi authorities
• extends to U.S. troops and contracters immunity from Iraqi law
• gives U.S. forces control of Iraqi airspace below 29,000ft.
• places the Iraqi Defense, Interior and National Security ministries, under American supervision for ten years
• gives the U.S. responsibility for Iraqi armament contracts for ten years

But Iranian political leader Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani hardly exaggerates in saying the proposed deal is designed “to turn the Iraqis into slaves of the Americans” and to create “a permanent occupation.” Many Iraqis use similar language. “The agreement wants to put an American in each house,” claimed a supporter of Shiite cleric and nationalist firebrand Mutada al-Sadr. “This agreement is poison mixed in poison, not poison in honey because there is no honey at all.” “Why,” he asks, “do they want to break the backbone of Iraq?”

The mainstream Shiite cleric and politician Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC; formerly the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq or SCIRI), agrees that the proposed agreement would “violate Iraq's national sovereignty.” He claims a “national consensus” against it has developed. (President Bush in December 2006 met with al-Hakim, calling his “one of the distinguished leaders of a free Iraq,” and he is sometimes mentioned as Washington’s first choice for prime minister if al-Maliki doesn’t adequately put out. So his opposition is especially significant.)

Al-Hakim is close to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the most widely respected Shiite cleric in 60% Shiite Iraq. The ayatollah is thought to oppose the pact but has not yet made a pronouncement about it. Meanwhile the Association of Muslim Scholars, the largest Sunni political group in the parliament, warns that the pact paves the way for "military, economic and cultural domination” by the Americans.

Al-Sadr’s followers staged rallies around the country after prayers last Friday and plan to continue weekly peaceful demonstrations demanding that the Baghdad government hold a national referendum on the security treaty issue. The U.S. opposes such a referendum, aware that pact opponents would surely win.

SOURCE

A National Call For Impeachment

The crimes of this administration are enormous: a widespread policy of torture and murder; a war that has killed a million Iraqis, 4,000 U.S. service members and devastated the lives of so many more; sophisticated programs for spying on U.S. citizens; lying to the public.

The future threats posed are ominous.

As Ramsey Clark recently wrote: "In his remaining eight months, bush will continue to threaten other nations in violation of international law and clearly intends to commit new aggressions in his belligerent presidency.

If not stopped by impeachment he may strike Iran's nuclear projects and immerse the United States in avoidable war for a generation far more exhausting than any we have known."

Today, Tuesday June 3, is the National Call-In Day for Impeachment.

Take a moment right now and call Rep. John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee at 202-225-5126, 202-224-3121, 202-225-3951, 313-961-5670, or 734-675-4084.

Demand that articles of impeachment be introduced by July 4.

Over one million people have voted to impeach bush, cheney and other high officials for high crimes and misdemeanors. It's time for Congressman Conyers to hear from you.

As Ramsey Clark wrote: "It is imperative that We, the People of the United States, demand of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and its Chairman John Conyers that they immediately commence consideration of the many allegations of impeachable offenses by bush, cheney and other civil Officers of the Untied States and present a comprehensive Bill of Impeachment for Committee consideration by July 4, 2008.

"I ask every American who cares about the integrity of our nation and the welfare of our People and those we assault to immediately demand Chairman John Conyers and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives commence hearings on a Bill of Impeachment of bush, cheney and others by July 4, 2008."

We will not rest until bush and his cabal have been held accountable for war crimes, crimes against humanity and mass deprivation of civil rights and civil liberties.

This is an unstoppable movement for justice.

Make your call now!

www.impeachbush.org

Nothing But The Best

A spate of illnesses among US troops at several bases in Iraq may have been caused by untested and possibly tainted water supplied by a private contractor then owned by Halliburton, according to a Pentagon audit to be released today.

The inspector general of the US defence department found a rise in diarrhoea, cellulitis and skin infections reported by troops who used the polluted water for personal tasks such as shaving and laundry at US bases, including three serviced by the defence contractor KBR.

The audit said the military provided water of questionable quality at two further bases.

Until last year KBR had exclusive rights to provide food, shelter, laundry services and transport to US forces serving in Iraq. At the time of the outbreaks KBR was controlled by Halliburton, the former employer of vice president Dick Cheney.

Independent Pentagon auditors found that at camp Q-West, a base 40 miles south of Mosul, KBR added chlorine to wastewater before distributing it for personal hygiene. At another base, Camp Ar Ramadi in Anbar province, 45% of soldiers surveyed said their personal hygiene water had an unusual odour or colour.

A Plea For American's

Dear Fellow American who is living in this country as the neocons bring us to the brink of disaster,

Two weeks ago, the House took a bold step demanding accountability for the Bush/Cheney Administration by holding former White House Council Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in Contempt of Congress for blatantly ignoring congressional subpoenas for over 8 months.

Though it was not a surprise, Attorney General Michael Mukasey, wrote a letter to the House of Representatives stating that he refuses to call a Grand Jury to enforce those contempt citations.

The Attorney General’s letter, effectively claiming that members of the executive branch are immune from congressional subpoenas, calls for quick action.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Judiciary Chairman Conyers have smartly decided to pursue a civil lawsuit to force Bolton and Miers to appear before Congress. We should pursue a lawsuit – but I think we can do even more.

While a court may order – months from now –that Miers and Bolten must appear before Congress, by then George Bush and Dick Cheney will have largely accomplished their goal of running out the clock on the investigation into this Administration’s politicization of the Justice Department. Even a successful outcome in federal court might only mandate that they appear, at which time the witnesses are likely simply to continue their obfuscation by claiming executive privilege of the 5th Amendment in person.

The House of Representatives must re-establish its legitimate rights as a co-equal branch of government. Congress cannot allow its power to be summarily ignored and justice delayed.

The House was correct to hold these renegade White House officials in contempt, and much credit should be given to Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Conyers for pushing for that outcome. Now, we must go further: The House must immediately consider taking the following actions:

- Initiating impeachment hearings that would likely break through the reckless claims of executive privilege made by the Bush Administration.

- Approve a resolution that calls for an inherent contempt citation which would give the House Sergeant at Arms the power to bring Miers and Bolton before Congress.

As you may know, 17 of my colleagues, including four of my fellow members of the Judiciary Committee have joined my call for impeachment hearings. This is not an issue between Democrats and Republicans. As members of Congress, we have an absolute duty to enforce the checks and balances prescribed by our Constitution.

We have ceded too much for too long, enabling George W. Bush to assume a unitary imperial Presidency. It is long past time to secure accountability for those who have, by all appearances, committed significant breaches of our laws and trust.

Mukasey’s claims are simply the latest in a long line of outlandish legal arguments ranging from the idea that we can selectively cherry-pick from torture laws to the concept that the Vice President is no longer part of the Executive Branch (except, of course, when he needs to claim Executive Privilege).

Over the past months, I have received tens of thousands of emails and letters from you expressing your great support for my efforts. Your encouragement and activism on these causes are much appreciated. I continue to work hard on your behalf and hope you feel these updates are valuable.

With kind regards,

Congressman Robert Wexler
www.WexlerForCongress.com

Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young

I found this story and immediately thought of my most avid listener and rabid fan, Sue Cauler.

David Crosby is telling a George Bush joke.

"Don't you think it'd be a good idea," he says, chuckling, "if we had a law that said you can't have control of nuclear weapons unless you can pronounce the word nuclear? I'm just asking."

Neil Young stares intensely at his jovial bandmate and—strangely for a guy who wrote a song called "Let's Impeach the President"—reprimands him.

"That comment is a polarizing comment," Young says harshly. "It doesn't have to do with the grass roots of the country in the Midwest. It takes people and separates them."

Despite assorted health scares and surgeries that come with passing 60 and decades of rocker excess, things are as they always were with Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young.

In a half-hour conversation, Graham Nash mostly sits quietly and listens. Stephen Stills, just a few weeks after having prostate cancer, laughs loudly and interjects with jokes. As in their music, Crosby and Young guide the discussion, alternating perspectives and sometimes clashing.

The four gathered at the recent Sundance Film Festival to promote a new movie, "CSNY Deja Vu," that tracks their 2006 tour playing songs from Young's "Living With War" album.

Young directed the documentary under the pseudonym Bernard Shakey. And as he does in jousting with Crosby, he seems to thrive on the rancor that resulted from the tour.

Fans entered arenas around the country apparently expecting "Our House" and "Teach Your Children." Instead, they got protest songs: "Lookin' For a Leader," "Living With War," and the aforementioned tune with a chorus that goes, "Let's impeach the president for lying ... abusing all the power that we gave him."

Fans are shown storming out mid-song, ripping up their tickets and threatening to punch Young's face in. This was post-Dixie Chicks, but before public opinion widely turned against the Iraq war. One of Young's stage props was a human-sized microphone that he leaned out over front rows.

"This movie is about when people started talking again, when people started taking the country back, when people started saying well, it is patriotic to have an opinion," Young said. "That's what the time of that movie is. ... We were riding a wave along with everyone else. It was bigger than anybody."

Young put together the "Living with War" album rapidly, and the result was a raw, ragged sound full of passion and anger. He felt he had to make it because no mainstream artists had spoken out against the war. It's an assertion that his bandmates were quick to correct.

"Imagine if one of these young pop stars had suddenly had an epiphany and started doing this," Young said. "That would've really been good. But that didn't happen."

Nash cut in, saying, "What about that great video ('Mosh') from Eminem?"




Young ignored his bandmate. He continued, "I was hoping something like that would happen. Because it wouldn't just be me, somebody from the '60s."

Crosby cut in, saying, "It does happen. It just doesn't happen enough. That girl Pink. That little pop girl Pink. That song 'Dear Mr. President,' that's a good song."



Young ignored him, too.

"Nobody except the pop mainstream has guaranteed airplay," Young said. "There are people that could've turned it around and forgotten about 'Shake Your Booty' for a few minutes. But nobody was moved to, and the people that were moved to were people that nobody would play."

After recording, Young got Crosby and Nash into a car and played his new album for them. They agreed instantly to tour with him. Stills found out later, and said he went along more reluctantly .

"I would've told them we'd get booed out of the building," Stills said. "We happened to catch the country in the first stages of the argument. And they'd have it on the way out of the building. The kids arguing with the parents."

Nash nodded, adding, "I would like to have taped maybe 1,000 car rides home from our concert."

"That's why we need the reverse radio," Young offered. "The radio that when it's off, it's recording. I got that idea from the Bush administration."

"A ninja team out in the parking lot sticking those in," Crosby said.

Young: "No, they'd just install them at GM."

Crosby and Nash, touring together, continue to open their sets with the Nash's 1971 anti-war song "Military Madness." But Young has moved on. He released a new CD last fall, "Chrome Dreams II," focused on love and relationships and with nary a mention of Iraq.

"The way I like to do it is if you're going to sing about war, sing the whole album about war. Just stay on that and drive it into peoples' heads. And that's what we did. But you can't do that over and over again or it's like television. It just completely bores you and numbs you."

Which brings us back to the band leader's takedown of Crosby's crack about Bush.

"A lot of people have problems pronouncing words and spelling things correctly. It doesn't mean that they're not intelligent," Young tells Crosby. "You've got to give the guy credit. Do I agree with him? No. Do I think he's stupid? No. Do I think he's a leader? Yes. He led. He took this country where he wanted to take it. And he steadfastly stuck with it all the way."

UPDATE: Wexler Pushes For Impeachment

bush's Call To War

Daniel Ellsberg, perhaps the country's most famous whistleblower, fears that before the bush administration leaves office, it will try to attack Iran.

Indeed, Ellsberg's argument gained merit as bush increased his rhetoric against Iran when he delivered his final State of the Union Address. bush accused Iran of training militia extremists in Iraq and emphasized the United States will confront its enemies.

The recent announcement in December by the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) revealed, counter to the asshole president's claims, that Iran did not have an active nuclear program. This was unexpected, says Ellsberg.

The administration had said, weeks before this release, it had no intention of putting out NIE summaries, Ellsberg says. However, the information was released because, according to newspaper reports, there was a threat of leaks:

"As one news story put it, intelligence officials were lined up to go to jail if the administration did not release those findings," says Ellsberg, emphasizing his creed in the need to take risks for the sake of revealing truth.

"I wish I could say it made an attack on Iran zero, and it hasn't, but it has reduced it and confirms, in my opinion, the power of being willing to risk prosecution, willing to give up your career, your clearance, which these people would have done if they'd put that information out -- and the mere threat was enough to get it out in this case," emphasizes Ellsberg.

bush will simply find a different pretext from the nuclear program.

"After all, it was about a year ago that he really stopped pressing the nuclear program as the main reason to start attacking Iran and start talking about what they were doing against U.S. forces in Iraq," says Ellsberg, who claims people in the military have recently undercut this statement by saying there is no evidence of Iran's involvement against U.S. forces in Iraq.

bush could also use an incident that is blamed on Iran as a means to begin a war with them.

The recent incident involving Iran alleged serious threats were being made to U.S. ships by Iranian speedboats. Within days of the events in the Straight of Hormuz, information revealed the details of the entire event had been fabricated.

So Long

A video EVERY American NEEDS to see! Pass it along.

BUSTED!!!!!!!

From: Michael Moore's Website

Brattleboro residents will vote at town meeting on whether President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney should be indicted and arrested for war crimes, perjury or obstruction of justice if they ever step foot in Vermont.

The Brattleboro Select Board voted 3-2 Friday to put the controversial item on the Town Meeting Day warning.

According to Town Clerk Annette Cappy, organizers of the Bush-Cheney issue gathered enough signatures, and it was up to the Select Board whether Brattleboro voters would consider the issue in March.

Cappy said residents will get to vote on the matter by paper balloting March 4.

Kurt Daims, 54, of Brattleboro, the organizer of the petition drive, said Friday the debate to get the issue on the ballot was a good one. Opposition to the vote focused on whether the town had any power to endorse the matter.

"It is an advisory thing," said Daims, a retired prototype machinist and stay-at-home dad of three daughters.

So far, Vermont is the only state Bush hasn't visited since he became president in 2001.

Daims said the most grievous crime committed by Bush and Cheney was perjury — lying to Congress and U.S. citizens about the basis of a war in Iraq.

He said the latest count showed a total of 600,000 people have died in the war.

Daims also said he believed Bush and Cheney were also guilty of espionage for spying on American people and obstruction of justice, for the politically generated firings of U.S. attorneys.

Voting to put the matter on the town ballot were Chairwoman Audrey Garfield and board members Richard Garrant and Dora Boubalis.

Voting against the idea were board members Richard DeGray and Stephen Steidle.

Daims said the names submitted to the town clerk's office were the second wave of signatures the petition drive had to collect, because he had to rewrite the wording of the petition.

He said he gathered nearly 500 signatures in about three weeks, and he said most people he encountered were eager to sign it. He started the petition drive about three months ago.

"Everybody I talked to wanted Bush to go," he said, noting that even members of the local police department supported the drive.

"This is exactly what the charter envisioned as a citizen initiative," Daims said. "People want to express themselves and they want to say how they feel."

He said the idea is spreading: Activists in Louisville, Ky., are spearheading a similar drive, and he said activists were also working in Montague, Mass., a Berkshires town.

The article asked the town attorney to "draft indictments against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against our Constitution and publish said indictments for consideration by other authorities."

The article goes on to say the indictments would be the "law of the town of Brattleboro that the Brattleboro police ... arrest and detain George Bush and Richard Cheney in Brattleboro, if they are not duly impeached ..."

Daims said people in Brattleboro were willing to "think outside the box" and consider the issue.

Daims had no compunction in comparing Bush and Cheney with one of the most notorious people in history.

"If Hitler were still alive and walked through Brattleboro, I think the local police would arrest him for war crimes," Daims said.

A Legacy Of Failure

As bush prepares to deliver his final State of the Union address, it’s worth revisiting the first speech he gave to a joint session of Congress.

His lies tonight will provide an opportunity to reflect on the kind of president bush was.

The speech delivered seven years ago points to the very different sort of president he might have been.

bush began his February 2001 address by hailing the new spirit of cooperation he hoped would characterize his relations with Congress. “Together we are changing the tone in the nation’s capital,” he declared. The new president’s top priority would be education. He intended to marry the liberal desire for more federal money to the conservative demand for higher standards.

The rest of the speech was similarly moderate in tone and substance. bush planned to use part of the enormous fiscal surplus he inherited for a broad-based tax cut. But he also wanted to expand Medicare benefits, preserve Social Security, extend access to health care and protect the environment. He concluded with an exhortation to bipartisanship — in Spanish. “Juntos podemos,” he said. “Together we can.”

bush seemed genuinely to want to be the kind of president indicated by that first address.

He meant to build a broad coalition on the model of his governorship in Texas, where he worked closely with Democrats in the Legislature, made his chief cause correcting racial disparities in education, and was re-elected in 1998 by an almost 40 percentage point margin, including 27 percent of the black vote and at least a third of Latinos.

What happened to this bush???

bush never completely abandoned the compassionate conservatism we glimpsed that night seven years ago. His second speech to Congress, nine days after Sept. 11, 2001, reflected his instinctive response to the attacks, which was to appeal for national unity in a non-partisan manner. bush’s third speech to Congress (his first formal State of the Union address, in 2002) is remembered for its reference to the “axis of evil.” But the president also boasted about his cooperation with such Democrats as George Miller and Ted Kennedy on education policy. His strongest emphasis was on public service. He proposed doubling the size of the Peace Corps and called on every American to commit at least 4,000 hours — two full working years — to community service.

The following year, in 2003, bush pressed his case for invading Iraq and uttered the infamous 16 words (“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa”). But alongside that disingenuous indictment, bush presented Congress with a new raft of centrist-minded initiatives: $450 million to minister to the needs of children of prisoners, $600 million to treat drug addicts, $1.2 billion for hydrogen-powered cars, $10 billion in new money to fight AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean.

And so on, in each subsequent speech. In 2004, bush used weasel words to describe the missing Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. He claimed to have disrupted “dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities.” But when he turned to domestic matters, the president unveiled a new science and math program for low-income students and a program to help former prisoners re-enter society. He included an eloquent plea for the kind of immigration reform that would “reflect our values and benefit our economy.”

To this day, bush’s compassionate conservatism has never vanished completely. Some of bush’s signature programs, like his initiative to provide AIDS drugs to Africans, have had meaningful effects. But others haven’t lived up to their rhetorical promise.

What about that special training for defense lawyers in capital cases (pledged in his 2005 State of the Union address)?

The initiative to encourage mentoring for at-risk children (2006)?

The grants to extend health insurance coverage (2007)?

Such gestures tended to linger in the air only as long as it took bush to make them.

So often with bush, compassionate government began and ended with the heartfelt public empty promise. He was too distracted by war and foreign policy, and too bored by the processes of government to know what the American people want.

And of course, bush’s left hand acted as if it didn’t know what his right hand was doing. After his first year in office, Democrats burned by his political strategy of polarization were disinclined to work with him on shared goals.

The Compassionate Conservative will surely pay us a final visit tonight.

He remains an appealing character, but a largely fictional one. I wonder how the last seven years might have turned out if he had actually existed.

In this, the final year of a failed presidency, I bet bush does too.

The Time Is NOW!

As we all know, Nancy Pelosi's "Capitulation Congress" will do absolutely everything it can to avoid a battle with bush over his utter contempt for the Constitution, the rule of law and even Congress itself.

Remember Pelosi's 2006 campaign reason No. 1 for electing a Democratic Congress?

"Subpoena power."

So what about all those subpoenas bush flagrantly and illegally defied in 2007?

Never mind, says Pelosi.

House Democrats will postpone votes on criminal contempt citations against White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, while congressional leaders work with bush on a bipartisan stimulus package to fend off an economic downturn, according to party leaders and leadership aides.

Yet another bush smoke screen.

Senior Democrats have decided that holding a controversial vote on the contempt citations, which have already been approved by the House Judiciary Committee as part of its investigation into the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, would "step on their message" of bipartisan unity in the midst of the stimulus package talks.

Ah, "bipartisan unity." If that phrase means anything, doesn't it require compromise by both parties? So why is it that since Reagan came to Washington in 1981 -- including the eight years of President Clinton -- "bipartisan unity" has always meant Democratic capitulation to Republicans?

Every progressive knows what Republican Grover Norquist famously said: "Bipartisanship is another name for date rape."

At the moment, the Washington establishment -- and Democratic "leaders" -- believe the slightest hint of constitutional conflict would terrify financial markets and trigger a depression. (ANOTHER bush smoke screen)

So if "bipartisan unity" is the issue above all other issues, why doesn't the Washington establishment demand that bush show some bipartisanship by respecting lawful and entirely justified congressional subpoenas?

American business leaders arrogantly tell foreign leaders that economic growth is impossible without the "rule of law." Well, without the basic legal tool of subpoenas, there is no rule of law.

Just imagine what bush would say if Vladimir Putin defied subpoenas from his parliament. By refusing to hold bush in contempt, Congress is allowing bush to be more of a dictator than Putin.

Personally, I believe the single most important thing Congress could do to prevent a depression and restore the pillars of our legal-economic system is to get to the source of all White House legal obstruction by starting impeachment hearings for Dick Cheney as advocated by Rep. Robert Wexler.

Why?

First, consider the alternatives.

Financial markets around the world think a $150 billion economic stimulus is utterly useless in the context of the massive collapse of the U.S. mortgage industry and the banks that tried to milk it. That's precisely why global markets plunged 5 percent to 10 percent on Monday.

Why did the mortage industry collapse?

Simple: bush's government stopped regulating it and let the banks create a gigantic bubble by offering reckless and even criminal mortgages to people who could not afford them.

Who in the White House waged war against all forms of economic regulation?

Dick Cheney, of course.

And speaking of war, another major reason for our profound economic problems is Iraq. After predicting a cost-free war, bush's disastrous occupation has already forced him to borrow $500 billion from China and the Arab oil monarchies, driving down the dollar and discouraging foreign investment.

Who demanded the war in Iraq?

Dick Cheney, of course.

Speaking of oil, the indirect economic costs of Iraq have dwarfed the direct budget costs. Oil was under $30 per barrel before bush's invasion, but the political instability caused by the invasion has helped drive oil near $100 per barrel. This has driven up costs throughout the economy, cut business profits and slashed consumer spending power.

Another drag on the U.S. economy is hard to measure but still large -- corruption.

bush and his huge donor "Rangers" brought crony capitalism to Washington and killed competitive bidding in favor of corrupt no-bid contracts. The result was predictable -- massive waste and cost overruns.

Who was the driving force behind bush's crony capitalism?

Dick Cheney, of course.

bush's disastrous and failed policies in all three areas -- economic regulation, foreign/military policy and government waste -- have driven the U.S. economy to the verge of another Great Depression.

Kucinich Makes It Official

Is Kucinich the only one of the presidential candidates that actually is doing the job he's being paid for?

It's a shame the Hillary and Obama think that the paycheck they are receiving is for campaigning.

Is that the change they keep singing about?

Bring Out Your Dead

As of wednesday, 3,915 U.S. service members had been killed in Iraq. You may not have heard about this, because it isn't a nice, round, milestone-type figure -- unlike, say, 2,000, a number that inspired headlines across the country when that body count was reached in 2005.

Another thing you probably haven't seen lately is images like the front-page photograph in Wednesday's Times, which showed the flag-draped coffin of Army Sgt. David J. Hart of Lake View Terrace as it arrived on an airport tarmac. Such images are rare, partly because of a media tendency to see the commonplace as unworthy of coverage and partly because of a calculated effort by the Bush administration to prevent the American people from seeing them.

Wednesday's photograph was possible because Hart's body was flown into Long Beach Airport rather than a military facility, where media photographers are forbidden from chronicling the ongoing human cost of the Iraq war. A lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act forced the Pentagon in 2005 to release more than 700 pictures of coffins and honor guard ceremonies that were taken by military photographers, but it did nothing to ease the 1991 ban on media coverage of returning casualties.

You also may not have heard that 2007 was the deadliest year yet for U.S. troops in Iraq: 899 lost their lives, surpassing the previous high of 850 in 2004. A few newspaper and TV websites continue to list casualties, but these have nowhere near the effect of "Nightline" anchor Ted Koppel's 2004 recitation of the names of the then-721 dead.

The Tyndall Report, which monitors network news broadcasts, shows that less time was devoted to Iraq coverage in 2007 than in any previous year of the conflict. bush, like Hitler (another fascist dictator) is controlling the media.

As politicians posture themselves, the C-17s keep delivering a steady cargo of coffins. The vast majority of them are seen only by military personnel and the families of the dead.

Supporters of the war charge that media images of the fallen are inherently political statements. But suppressing those images in defense of a war policy is no less a political act.

Rep. Robert Wexler

A REAL American Patriot



Could these elected officials, America's public servants FINALLY be hearing the voices of We The people?

Are they FINALLY realizing we are Fed Up Americans?

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who previously stated that "impeachment is off the table," has recently begun accepting calls from citizens interested in the impeachment of Bush and/or Cheney.

If you think that Bush and/or Cheney should be impeached, CALL NANCY PELOSI @ 202-225-0100.

In our efforts to push for hearings on Kucinich’s Articles of Impeachment for Dick Cheney, we have run into a number of different obstacles. Some of them , naturally, relate to the debate within my party as to the need for Impeachment and/or its effect on the agenda.

While I have been making my case for impeachment hearings to my colleagues (and will do so on the House floor this evening) and disagree with those opposing them, there is at least a rationale for the debate on either side.

The virtual media blackout, however, has no rationale. I am perplexed and dismayed at the fact that - with so much at stake - the mainstream media still largely continues to ignore this movement. Few papers in the country have reported on it. Few columnists have acknowledged it.

I understand that some in the media feel this movement will fail - but when three, and now four, Judiciary Committee members call for impeachment… that should at least warrant space at some point over four weeks.

Without public reaction, however, there is little incentive for the media to change its ways. I urge all of you to continue to put pressure on national and local media alike to give attention to this movement. The Netroots has been critical in the outreach effort. I hope that continues over the coming days.

If you haven’t already signed on to www.WexlerWantsHearings.com, please do so.

I Told You So

I have been called all kinds of things as a Fed Up American, saying that bush and republicunts in general were the REAL terrorist threat to American citizens.

Not the Taliban.

Not Al Queada.

Not Saddam.

Not the insurgency.

I have been called anti-American for my beliefs. I have been told that if I don't like America I should move to another country.

To which I respond FUCK YOU!

This is MY country and I will not allow it to be held hostage by a criminal element like the republicunts. I AM a patriot. I LOVE America and I WILL fight until my last breath to return it to its former greatness.

Then I see this story out of Washington:

A former congressman and delegate to the United Nations was indicted Wednesday as part of a terrorist fundraising ring that allegedly sent more than $130,000 to an al-Qaida and Taliban supporter who has threatened U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.

Mark Deli Siljander, a Michigan Republican (what else) when he was in the House, was charged with money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists.

A 42-count indictment, unsealed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., accuses the Islamic American Relief Agency of paying Siljander $50,000 for the lobbying — money that turned out to be stolen from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Siljander, who served in the House from 1981-1987, was appointed by President Reagan to serve as a U.S. delegate to the United Nations for one year in 1987.

Now I'm quite sure that this is in NO WAY an isolated case and I bet that there will be more "discoveries" coming in the future, where the names of bush and cheney, as well as Rumsfeld and other bush henchmen will come out.

And REMEMBER that I told you so.

These traitors to America should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for the crimes they perpetrated against America, the Constitution and the world.

They need to swing from a rope as Saddam did.