Saturday, January 07, 2006

Disminuye apoyo a Bush por parte de las Fuerzas Armadas

Maria: Hola. De parte de "Democracy Now!" once cosas que vale hacer notar este fin de semana. Paz.

Disminuye apoyo a Bush por parte de las Fuerzas Armadas
Mientras tanto, una nueva encuesta realizada por la revista "Military Times", indica que el apoyo al Presidente Bush por parte de las Fuerzas Armadas estadounidenses ha disminuido más de un diez por ciento en el último año. La encuesta descubrió que el apoyo a las políticas de Bush en general disminuyó de un 71 por ciento a un 60 por ciento. El apoyo a la guerra de Irak bajó de un 63 por ciento a un 54 por ciento. El "Times" dice que la encuesta descubrió un "optimismo disminuido de que las metas estadounidenses en Irak puedan ser alcanzadas, y una menor disminución en el apoyo a la decisión de comenzar la guerra en 2003".


Más de 120 personas mueren en el peor momento de violencia en Irak en los últimos cuatro meses
En Irak, más de 120 personas murieron el jueves en una ola de violencia que azotó a todo el país. Otras 200 personas resultaron heridas en lo que fue el día más sangriento que ha sufrido el país en los últimos cuatro meses. En Ramadi, un atacante suicida mató a por lo menos 67 personas e hirió a más de 100 en las inmediaciones de un centro de reclutamiento de la policía. Más temprano habían muerto al menos 44 personas en un atentado suicida a un santuario chiita en la ciudad sagrada de Karbala. Y 11 soldados estadounidenses fueron asesinados el jueves en Irak, incluidos cinco que murieron en un atentado con coche bomba al costado de una carretera cercana a Karbala.

Padilla comparece en Miami luego de que la Suprema Corte anulara fallo
En Estados Unidos, el detenido del Pentágono, José Padilla, compareció ante un tribunal de Miami el jueves luego de ser transferido desde una prisión militar. En 2002, Padilla fue arrestado cuando regresaba de Pakistán y declaró ser un "combatiente enemigo". El entonces Fiscal General, John Ashcroft, acusó a Padilla de estar involucrado en "una conspiración terrorista para atacar a Estados Unidos explotando una 'bomba sucia' radioactiva". Los cargos contra Padilla recién fueron presentados en noviembre, luego de más de tres años de detención en una celda solitaria de una prisión militar en Carolina del Sur. Dichos cargos no incluían las acusaciones más graves que se hicieron al momento de su arresto.
El mes pasado, un tribunal federal de apelaciones se negó a aprobar el traslado de Padilla al tribunal civil de Miami, y sugirió que el gobierno de Bush sólo formuló el pedido para frustrar la apelación pendiente de Padilla ante la Suprema Corte. Sin embargo, la Suprema Corte anuló el miércoles la decisión del tribunal inferior, posibilitando su trasladado a Miami.

Bush se reserva el derecho de ordenar tortura a prisioneros
Actualizamos una historia que hemos seguido de cerca. La semana pasada, el Presidente Bush firmó oficialmente un proyecto de ley que prohíbe la tortura a los detenidos. A pesar de que la firma del proyecto de ley tuvo importante cobertura de la prensa, lo que Bush hizo después de firmar no la tuvo. Según el "Boston Globe", Bush silenciosamente presentó la llamada declaración de firma, en donde explica su interpretación de la nueva ley. En este documento, Bush declaró que considerará los límites en los interrogatorios en el contexto de sus poderes más amplios para proteger la seguridad nacional. Juristas dicen que esto significa que Bush cree que puede evadir las restricciones en contra de la tortura. El Profesor de Derecho de la Universidad de Nueva York David Golove, criticó la maniobra de Bush. Golove dijo: "La declaración dice 'sólo obedeceré esta ley cuando quiera, y si surge algo en la guerra contra el terrorismo donde considere que es importante aplicar la tortura o conductas crueles, inhumanas y degradantes, tengo la autoridad para hacerlo y nada en esta ley me detendrá'".

Gobierno ofrecerá información clasificada sobre espionaje nacional a jueces de FISA
Mientras tanto, el "Washington Post" informa que funcionarios del Departamento de Justicia y de Inteligencia darán información clasificada el lunes a los integrantes del Tribunal secreto de Supervisión de Inteligencia Extranjera (FISC, por sus siglas en inglés). El Presidente Bush admitió que actuó sin el consentimiento del Poder Judicial y ordenó a la Agencia de Seguridad Nacional que llevara a cabo operaciones de espionaje a nivel nacional, sin las órdenes aprobadas por el Poder Judicial que exige la ley. La semana pasada, un juez del tribunal de la Ley de Vigilancia de Inteligencia en el Extranjero (FISA) renunció en protesta al programa secreto de espionaje.

Informe: Fiscales Generales retrasaron partes del programa de espionaje en 2004
Mientras tanto, el "New York Times" informa que un alto funcionario del Departamento de Justicia retrasó la aprobación del programa secreto de espionaje debido a que le preocupaba su legalidad y supervisión. En marzo de 2004, el Fiscal General actuante James Comey se negó a firmar para continuar la utilización del programa. Comey estaba reemplazando a el entonces Fiscal General John Aschroft, mientras Ashcroft estaba hospitalizado. La negativa de Comey provocó que los asistentes de alto rango del Presidente Bush, Andrew Card y Alberto Gonzales, visitaran a Aschroft en el hospital para asegurar la aprobación. El "Times" informa que Aschroft expresó su renuencia a firmar para aprobar el programa. No está claro si al final cedió. Según el "Times", las preocupaciones de Ashcroft y Comey aparentemente provocaron la suspensión temporal de partes del programa por varios meses.

HRW solicita Estados Unidos que deduzca costos de construcción de asentamientos y del muro de la ayuda a Israel
En otras noticias, la destacada organización estadounidense Human Rights Watch (HRW) exhortó al gobierno de Bush que disminuya la ayuda a Israel. En una reciente carta dirigida al presidente Bush, HRW le solicitó al presidente Bush que deduzca de la ayuda extranjera a Israel la cantidad que gasta en la expansión de los asentamientos y el muro de separación en Cisjordania. Israel es el mayor receptor anual de ayuda extranjera de Estados Unidos, con asistencia y préstamos directos que superaron los 5 mil millones de dólares en 2005. Funcionarios de HRW dijeron que su solicitud se trata de la primera vez que un importante grupo de derechos humanos le pide al gobierno una reducción de la ayuda directa a Israel.

Zapatistas lanzan gira nacional de seis meses en México
En México, el ejército rebelde zapatista lanzó una gira de seis meses de duración por las comunidades pobres e indígenas de todo el país. Los zapatistas nombraron la gira "La Otra Campaña", en referencia al período previo a las elecciones presidenciales que se realizarán en julio. El grupo dice que no participará en las elecciones, pero utiliza la gira para promover su distanciamiento de los conflictos armados y la formación de un movimiento político izquierdista en todo el país. Al comienzo de la gira, el líder zapatista Marcos, anunció que ya no sería el "Subcomandante" sino el "Delegado Zero", alegando que ya no quería tener un título militar.
El líder Zapatista Marcos, ex subcomandante, habló el martes en Palenque: "Los gobiernos que tenemos, aparte de mentirnos, de robarnos, de despojarnos de lo poco que tienen, de lo poco que tenemos, nos dan los precios muy caros de las cosas que compramos. Y las cosas que producimos como campesinos o como obreros nos los pagan con una miseria".

México reclama que se investigue asesinato en la frontera
En otras noticias, el gobierno mexicano está pidiendo que se investigue la muerte de un hombre desarmado que fue baleado hace una semana por un agente fronterizo estadounidense. Guillermo Martínez Rodríguez, de 18 años de edad, fue asesinado el viernes pasado del lado estadounidense de la frontera entre San Diego y Tijuana. Funcionarios de la frontera estadounidense dijeron que Rodríguez le había arrojado piedras a un agente. Pero una investigación realizada por el consulado mexicano encontró que a Rodríguez le habían disparado por la espalda desde por lo menos cuatro metros y medio de distancia. Rodríguez volvió corriendo a Tijuana donde murió más tarde en un hospital. Rodríguez habría cruzado presuntamente la frontera en busca de trabajo. El funcionario del consulado mexicano Alberto Lozano dijo: "Condenamos la utilización de la fuerza en este trágico caso... es un abuso de poder".

AP corta relación con periodista vinculada con la Fundación Nacional para la Democracia
En otras noticias, "Associated Press" anunció que cortó vínculos con una periodista que descubireron que trabajaba para la Fundación Nacional para la Democracia (NED, por sus siglas en inglés), que cuenta con el apoyo del gobierno de Estados Unidos. La NED, que recibe financiamiento anual del Congreso y del Departamento de Estado, ha estado vinculada a grupos que apoyan a la oposición y que son partidarios del gobierno de Estados Unidos en países como Venezuela y Haití. La periodista, Regine Alexandre escribió al menos una docena de artículos para AP y al menos dos para el "New York Times". Sus vínculos con NED fueron expuestos por el periodista independiente Anthony Fenton y por Dennis Berstein, el conductor del programa de radio "Flashpoint", transmitido por KPFA, de Radio Pacifica.

Frank Wilkenson muere a los 91 años. Fue preso por el Comité de Actividades Antiamericanas durante el Terror Rojo
Y Frank Wilkenson murió a los 91 años de edad. Era conocido por haber sido uno de los últimos estadounidenses en haber ido a prisión por negarse a decirle al Comité de Actividades Antiamericanas si era comunista.

Maria: Now in English, here are eleven headlines fom Democracy Now! Remember that the headlines are provided daily in English and Spanish and please get the word out. Peace.


Bush Support Dropping Among Armed Forces
Meanwhile, a new poll by the magazine group Military Times shows support for President Bush among US armed forces has fallen over ten percent in the last year. The survey found support for Bush's overall policies at 60 percent, down from 71 percent. Support for the Iraq war for is at 54 percent - down from 63 percent. The Times says the poll found “diminished optimism that US goals in Iraq can be accomplished, and a somewhat smaller drop in support for the decision to go to war in 2003."

Over 120 Killed in Deadliest Iraq Violence in 4 Months
In Iraq, over 120 people were killed in violence across the country Thursday. Another 200 were wounded in the bloodiest day the country has seen in four months. In Ramadi, a suicide bomber killed at least 67 people and injured more than 100 outside of a police recruitment center. Earlier, at least 44 people died in a suicide bombing at a Shiite shrine in the holy city of Karbala. And 11 U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq Thursday, including five in a roadside bombing near Karbala.

Padilla Appears in Miami After Supreme Court Overturns Ruling
In this country, Pentagon detainee Jose Padilla appeared in a Miami court Thursday for after being transferred from a military prison. In 2002, Padilla was arrested on a return trip from Pakistan and declared an "enemy combatant." Then-Attorney General John accused Padilla of involvement in "a terrorist plot to attack the United States by exploding a radioactive 'dirty bomb.'" Padilla was only charged in November after over three years in solitary confinement on a military brig in South Carolina. None of his charges included the most serious of allegations made at the time of his arrest.
Last month, a federal appeals court refused to approve Padilla’s transfer to the Miami civilian court -- and suggested the Bush administration only made the request to thwart Padilla’s pending Supreme Court appeal. However, the Supreme Court on Wednesday overruled the lower court, clearing the way for his transfer to Miami.

Bush Reserves Right To Order Torture of Prisoners
This update on a story we have been tracking closely. Last week President Bush officially signed a bill outlawing torture of detainees. While the bill signing received significant press coverage, what Bush did following the signing has not. According to the Boston Globe, Bush quietly issued what is known as a signing statement in which he lays out his interpretation of the new law. In this document Bush declared that he will view the interrogation limits in the context of his broader powers to protect national security. Legal experts say this means Bush believes he can waive the anti-torture restrictions. New York University Law Professor David Golove criticized Bush's move. He said ''The signing statement is saying 'I will only comply with this law when I want to, and if something arises in the war on terrorism where I think it's important to torture or engage in cruel, inhuman, and degrading conduct, I have the authority to do so and nothing in this law is going to stop me,' "



Gov't To Give FISA Judges Classified Briefing on Domestic Spying
Meanwhile the Washington Post is reporting that Justice Department and intelligence officials will give a classified briefing on Monday to members of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. President Bush has admitted he has bypassed the court and ordered the National Security Agency to conduct domestic spy operations without the legally required court-approved warrants. Last week one judge on the FISA court resigned in protest over the secret spying program.

Report: AGs Held Up Parts of Spy Program in 2004
Meanwhile, the New York Times is reporting a top Justice Department official held up approval of the secret spy program over concerns about its legality and oversight In March 2004, acting Attorney General James Comey refused to sign on to the program's continued use. Comey was serving in place of then-Attorney General John Aschroft while Ashcroft was hospitalized. Comey's refusal prompted senior Presidential aides Andrew Card and Alberto Gonzales to visit Aschroft in his hospital room to grant the approval. The Times reports Ashcroft expressed reluctance to sign off on the program. It is unclear if he eventually relented. Both Ashcroft and Comey's concerns appear to have led to a temporary suspension of parts of the program for several months, the Times says.

HRW Calls on US To Deduct Settlement, Wall Costs From Aid to Israel
In other news, the prominent American organization Human Rights Watch has called on the Bush administration to cut back foreign aid to Israel. In a letter to President Bush, Human Rights asked President Bush to deduct from Israel’s foreign aid assistance the amount it spends on expansion of settlements and the separation wall in the West Bank. Israel is the largest annual recipient of US foreign aid, with direct assistance and loans exceeding $5 billion dollars in 2005. Human Rights Watch officials said their request marks the first time a major human-rights group has asked for an actual cut in direct aid to Israel.

Zapatistas Launch National Six-Month Tour in Mexico
In Mexico, the Zapatista rebel army has launched a six-month tour of poor and indigenous communities across the country. The Zapatistas have dubbed the tour "The Other Campaign", a reference to the run-up to the country’s presidential elections in July.
The group says it will not take part in the elections, but is using the tour to help promote a shift away from armed conflict and towards the formation of a nationwide leftist political movement. Zapatista leader Marcos also announced he was dropping "Subcomandante" from his name in favor of "Delegate Zero", saying he no longer wanted to take on a military title.
Zapatista leader Marcos, formerly Subcommande, in Palanque Tuesday: "The governments that we have, aside from lying to us and robbing from us, taking what little we have, they put high prices on what we buy. And the things we produce as farmers or as workers they pay a pittance."

Mexico Calls For Investigation Into Border Killing
In other news, the Mexican government is calling for an investigation into the death of an unarmed man shot by a U.S. border agent one week ago. 18-year-old Guillermo Martinez Rodriguez was killed last Friday on the US side of the San Diego-Tijuana border. American border officials said Rodriguez had been throwing rocks at an agent. But an investigation by the Mexican consulate found Rodriguez had been shot in the back from at least 15 feet way. Rodriguez ran back to Tijuana where he later died in a hospital. He had reportedly crossed the border looking for work. Mexican consular official Alberto Lozano said QUOTE: "We condemn the use of force in this tragic case…. It's an abuse of power."

AP Cuts Ties to NED-Funded Journalist
In other news, the Associated Press has announced its ended ties with a reporter found to have been working for the U.S. government-backed National Endowment for Democracy. The NED, which receives annual funding from the US Congress and State Department, has been linked to supporting opposition groups favorable to US government positions in countries such as Venezuela and Haiti. The reporter, Regine Alexandre had contributed at least one dozen articles for the AP and at least two for the New York Times. Her ties to the NED were exposed by independent journalist Anthony Fenton and radio host Dennis Bernstein on the radio program Flashpoints on Pacifica's KPFA.

Frank Wilkenson, 91, Dies; Jailed by HUAC During Red Scare
And Frank Wilkenson has died at the age of 91. He was well known for being one of the last Americans to be jailed for refusing to tell the House Un-American Activities Committee whether he was a Communist.







at

"A time comes when silence is a betrayal" (MLK)

We're on a brief break from working on the latest edition of The Third Estate Sunday Review.

Cedric just noted something by MLK and that reminded me that he hasn't been noted today here at this site. Doug was hoping that we'd make a point to note him each day leading up to January 16th (MLK Day). If you did note him in an e-mail, my apologies, because no one was able to get into the accounts.

So to note him for Saturday before it becomes Sunday, we'll note an excerpt from the speech he gave at the Riverside Church in NYC on April 4, 1967:

I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice. "A time comes when silence is betrayal." That time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.
[. . .]
Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our nation: The great initiative in this war is ours, the initiative to stop is must be ours.

True then. True today.

Other things to note. Ruth's entry will go up tomorrow (or later today depending upon the time when you read it). It's not going through. I assume it's in the accounts that can't be accessed; however, Ruth repeatedly sent it to my friend and it didn't show up. If it comes to it, Ruth's going to dictate it to me over the phone. (Though hopefully the e-mail issues will be resolved by tomorrow morning.) Maria's entry will go up in the early Sunday morning hours.

Lastly, but not leastly, community member Trina (also known to some as Mike's mother) has started her own site, Trina's Kitchen. Please make a point to visit Trina's Kitchen.

Oh, thanks to Kat for doing the entry on Laura Flanders today.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. (And members please use the backup e-mail address from the gina & krista round-robin until there's a note that the other two accounts are working.)







at

Laura Flanders leading the "RadioNation"

Kat here and you're minutes away from the live broadcast of The Laura Flanders Show. If you listen in an area that airs the program later, well your heads up is a little more ahead of everyone else. But for those who hear it live (over broadcast radio, satellite radio or via online streaming), you're minutes away from the live broadcast.

The Laura Flanders Show always provides excitement. That's due to a host, Laura, who's a radio professional doing making it sound so easy as she goes from commentary to interviews. That's due to a range of interesting topics and a desire to explore them.

It's also due to the people behind the scenes as Laura always notes. That's people like Rosenfeld
and Christabel Nsiah-Buadi. There's some new behind the scenes support:

RadioNation with Laura Flanders
7:00 to 10:00pm EST each Saturday and Sunday night
Air America RadioNetwork

On her last two shows of 2005, Laura had hinted at some new developments that would come in 2006, one of them is that her show now has the support of the country's oldest political magazine, The Nation. What does that mean?

Well, for one thing, that Katha Pollitt will be one of the guests Sunday. You know that will be worth listening to. But the conversations always are. To find out more about what this means, listen to RadioNation with Laura Flanders.

On the show about to air, there will be me the usual wide range of discussion (including singer-songwriter Rhiannon). What else? I'll assume at least some of you have been taking part in some activism today. You know Laura's cover the Out of Iraq events.

This is Flanders first broadcast in the year 2006 so listen in and welcome her back.

Stealing from C.I.:

Via podcast, via broadcast radio (if there's an AAR in your area), via XM Satellite Radio (channel 167) or listen online.






at

NYT: "Basis For Spying In U.S. Is Doubted" (Eric Lichtblau & Scott Shane)

One reason the adminstration has cited for not seeking to change the intelligence law and obtain specific approvals for eavesdropping was that it might "tip off" terrorists to the program. The Congressional research service found that unconvincing.
"No legal precedent appears to have been presented," the study said, "that would support the president's authority to bypass the statutory route when legislation is required" simply because of secrecy.

The above is from Eric Lichtblau and Scott Shane's "Basis For Syping In U.S. Is Doubted" in this morning's New York Times. The study was done by "the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan research arm of Congress." Let's note again that the study found no justification for the claim that seeking approval for the spying would "'tip off' terrorists." The article also states:

Congress "does not appear to have authorized or aqcuiesced in such surveillance," the report said, adding that the administration reading of some provisions of federal wiretap law could render them "meaingless."

Hopefully, this is an article that members noted as a spotlight entry from the paper this morning. I have no idea. When I attempted early this morning to go into the e-mail accounts (private and public), I had no luck. The person I'm dictating this to has had no luck either. Kat's doing the entry on The Laura Flanders Show today and that will go up later. Ruth's entry will go up later as well. (She's going to send it to my friend's e-mail account since we can't get into the ones for this site.) We'll also have an entry from Maria. But due to problems accessing the e-mails, two of those will be late. (And I'm guessing Kat will post late as well.)

Rebecca, Mike and Elaine posted entries at their sites late last night. Everyone participated in a roundtable for Monday's special edition of the gina & krista round-robin and Rebecca's entry has an updated schedule for the roundtables being run by Gina and Krista for next week's special round-robins. Also, heads up to a new site by a member. Who? Not saying right now. Time permitting this weekend, I'll be talking a member through how to set up at Blogger.
If not, it will go up on or by the 16th of January. I'm out of pocket today (which is why entries are dictated) and there's The Third Estate Sunday Review as well. So time isn't overflowing. I don't see having time to assist today, but if I do, we'll note the new site tomorrow. (I know there won't be time for even a head's up.)

But let me remind everyone that if you're a member of the community who wants to start your own site and need help, I will do my best to make time for that. (More voices, not less.) That said, until the hearings end, I'm not going to have a great deal of time so other than the person who has already asked, I won't be able to make time currently. (And Wally, it's not who you will think it is when you hear "new site." Put in because Wally's talking to a member who is considering starting a site and I don't have time to call him this morning and tell him that this isn't who it is.) The new site that will be going on will be done by a member who has expressed that they aren't interested in being part of the writing process for The Third Estate Sunday Review which is good because that's being closed off. Dona thinks anymore participants will only mean longer "overnights" for each edition. I'm jumping the gun by announcing that here (with Dona's permission) because we're speaking of member's starting sites. (The announcement will be in tomorrow's edition of The Third Estate Sunday Review. And I believe Cedric's already noted that possibility at his site.) The writing is collaborative and that's great because it allows for more viewpoints. But it also takes a great deal of time. This has been discussed during each edition for several weeks now and Dona handed down the decision last night in the roundtable. Members with new sites can contribute anything they write themselves and their sites will be noted (hopefully with an interview or article, due to Seth's schedule, though he's been highlighted there, there's be no interview with him or profile of him). The book discussion was created to be a quick feature (hence "Five Books, Five Minutes") but Dona feels its the perfect example of how each inclusion adds to the length of any feature they write due to the fact that it is collaborative writing. (One member of The Third Estate Sunday Review, as long as I'm jumping the gun, may have a solo piece tomorrow. I hope that comes to be because from what I've read of it, it's strong and I think additional people weighing in -- which includes me -- would only weaken it.)

When the member told me about wanting to start a new site, my first question, since it hadn't been announced, was whether or not they were interested in participating in The Third Estate Sunday Review writing process? I'm sure Dona would have made an exception had the person answered "yes" since there's been no announcement. So, with Dona's permission, I'm jumping the gun on the announcement. The fact that participants were wiped out (myself included) from the work put in on Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve weighed into that decision. Dona wanted it noted that this reflected only on time issues and that, were time more plentiful, they'd love to include every member in the process (regardless of whether or not they had their own site). Dona also asked that it be noted that if someone is wanting to participate, she'll try to work something out. Someone might want a break or the edition (like the Christmas Eve one) might be one with less participants.

This isn't a rejection of collaborative writing (which they support). Mike, Cedric, Rebecca, Dona, Elaine, Ty, Jess, Jim, Ava, Betty, Wally, Kat and myself already participate on each edition. That's thirteen (check my math, always) and the decision's been made that anymore than that will only lead to more time being spent on each article.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

















at

NYT: Dexy & John will never forget that summer when . . .

Dictated entry. Yesterday morning's entry -- "NYT: "Republican Senator Defends Briefings on Domestic Spying" (Jane Harman)" -- is something we'll address right away. First "(Jane Harman)"? I have no idea why she's in parenthesis. Normally the writer of the piece (credited writer) is in parenthesis. The entry's about Harman so that's fine but the article is credited to Scott Shane. (I wrote the entry yesterday, no dictation. Normally, I'd put Shane's name in the parenthesis. No clue as to why I didn't. It may be an error, I may have been trying to note that it was an entry focusing on Harman.) The Republican in the article (no, not Harman -- she's supposed to be a Democrat) is a representative in the House. Shane's article (and the excerpt reflects provided in the entry reflects this) was not a Senator. The New York Times offers a correction on the headline this morning.

While we're on yesterday morning's entries. Someone (I think it was Lloyd) e-mailed about "Other Items" asking what was wrong with McKinley calling Marcos "Subcommander." When
you are on the third or fourth time explaining how to pronouce "Padilla" (Jose Padilla), and you're dealing with the correspondent (McKinley) covering Mexico, you might want to use "Subcommandante" (the former preface to Marcos) and not offer an English version of it. You could also argue, and others have, that since it was a chosen name, and not a title bestowed officially, it's the same as changing "Francisco" to "Frank."

Now let's dive into this morning's Times. (Dumpster dive?)

Dexter Filkins pens another, this time with Sabrina Tevernise, article (and grabs first billing), this morning "Americans Said To Meet Rebels, Exploiting Rift." The article details the alleged efforts by the American government to exploit and enhance any potential divisions in the resitance in Iraq between those who may be acting out of a desire to expell American occupiers so that Iraqis can self-determine and those who may be acting as part of a movement (al Qaeda) against Americans for reasons that go beyond Iraq. Talks with the resistance have been noted before.

Tom Hayden had a column on reports of the talks awhile back; however, the column that comes to mind this morning is "Why the US Is Supporting Civil War" (Common Dreams) because that's what the paper's describing, whether they grasp it or not. (I think the paper sugar coats it, Dexter must have a sweet tooth.) It's always been about creating chaos (see Naomi Klein's "Baghdad Year Zero" from Harper's). "Few details of the talks were available" the Times' article maintains and for readers the name of what appears to be a single source article is unavailable as well -- "Western diplomat" is hardly helpful. We don't even know the single source's country of origin.

Now let's note the New York Observer's "Media Mensches of the Year," which is creative writing, to say the least, and focuses on Dexter Filkins and John Burns.

"John and I will be friends forever," Mr. Filkins [. . .]

Oh, how sweet. Doesn't it have a "I'll never forget the summer when . . ." ring to it? Let's note that section in full, in fact:

"John and I will be friends forever," Mr. Filkins said. "We've been through quite a bit together. I pretty much go where my curiosity takes me, and John encourages me to do that."
"Dexter is the most energized and questing reporter I know," Mr. Burns said. "He's the complete foreign correspondent--he is absolutely undaunted by risk and is tireless."

And where his curiousity usually takes him is straight to a military official who will provide one version which Filkins then prints without question and certainly without anything that might conflict with the military version. "John encourages me to do that," says Filkins. Burns calls him a "questing reporting" -- well he couldn't very well call him a "questioning" one, now could he?

He is alleged to be "undaunted by risk and is tireless" -- are we speaking of the go-go boy gone wild rumors that led to the Guild getting involved in what might have been a retaliation firing by the paper if the rumors are true. The go-go boys were "Living It Up" (Rickie Lee Jones) in the Green Zone. The article doesn't mention that. But a white wash couldn't, now could it?

And there are those at the New York Observer who object to the story in strong terms. Not just for what's left out but for what the article attempts to imply which is Dexy jogging (solo) through "the streets of Baghdad." In fact, for all the spin about Burns and Filkins being Butch & Sundance, it reads more like Karl and Michael transplanted from the Streets of San Francisco into Baghdad. But, unlike two friends at the Observer, I actually like the Butch & Sundance analogy because, unstated in the article, that tale ends with the freeze frame jump (younger readers should think of the freeze frame ending of Thelma & Louise). Certainly Burns, who was once highly regarded, and Filkins who never encountered an official military tale he couldn't stroke and wax on, jumped over the credibility cliff long ago. They've both been good foot soliders for the Times, pretending that they moved freely throughout Iraq when in fact they hid away in the Green Zone (which the rumors say they treated as just endless days in "Margaritaville") venturing out with their armed body guards or military escorts (or both).

While Burns tries to prop up Dexy's credibility, Dexy hops on the self-important soapbox Muffy Tupperman (Jamie Gertz on Square Pegs) once rode to comic effect. The difference is, Gertz and the writers were attempting to make you laugh at Tupperman.

Burns disgraces himself throughout. In his final days as a reporter, he seems determined to trash his own reputation. Which may be why he feels the need to state that it's important to filter the news through an American filter since the intended readership is "Americans who pay taxes." (And the Times, after strong arming the Washington Post out of the International Herald Tribune, wonders why the paper had to keep its name and not be dubbed the international version of the New York Times?) Burns disgraces himself further by never noting Iraqis in the article -- you know the people who inhabit the country he's allegedly reporting on?

Or maybe he feels referencing "a journey into shades of darkness" covers the "other" (which is how the Times has too often rendered Iraqis)?

It's a puff piece on two puff piece masters. Burns' fall has been little remarked upon by any of the watchdogs. (Official ones. Arianna Huffington may have remarked upon it.) But it's been an embarrassing slide for him. It's been an embarrassment for the paper which still thinks it may have pulled it off. The paper still hopes that readers aren't aware of the confined quarters their reporters occupied, that their reporters couldn't move freely, go down the list.

Dexter Filkins is another Judith Miller because, if you buy into the argument that Miller got us into Iraq, or helped to get us into Iraq, it's Dexter Filkins and his ilk that keep us there. He wants to reflect on his time in Iraq but not in any meaningful way. For instance, he doesn't want to talk about the limited realities he does see (from the Green Zone) or, for that matter, that his movements are limited. The ulitmate embed has promoted the myth that Iraq was a place where he could move freely in article after article. (And the Times has mainly relied on stringers, Iraqis, to explore the areas outside the Green Zone.)

Truth in advertising (because we won't call it "reporting") would have meant a lot more Americans would have grasper earlier what the reality was.

The puff piece tells you that they are "a real-life duo." Well it's nice to know that there were play dates in the Green Zone. I'd hate to think they just sat around drinking their juice boxes in solitude. The article gets one thing right, Filkins "came to define war correspondence in Iraq as it showed up on the American newsstand." The article fails to grasp that the defining isn't a good thing. (Fails to grasp intentionally.)

While correspondents such as Naomi Klein and Dahr Jamail have been telling truths about Iraq, Burns and Filkins haven't. That's what's made Filkins, in particular, the joke of the mainstream press. (Burns' name doesn't promote chuckles, only eye rolls and heavy sighs.) So the New York Observer comes along to puff up their battered egos. You see no mention of the (public and private) rumors that Filkins allowed the military to determine his coverage. You read no mention of the rumors (which again, led to the Guild becoming involved) that wives were contacted regarding go-go boy gone wild behaviors in the Green Zone.

What this is supposed to be is some sort of Brokeback Mountain tale of two cowboys who did it their way. But their actual "way" is never held up to scrutiny. At a time when the mention of Filkins name promotes titters and chuckles in even mainstream press circles, this bad attempt at p.r. only provides more. Filkins would be advised to make himself available only for puff pieces because there are those who are waiting to interview him and they're method won't be summed up in "All I Did Was Ask." Some will actually prepare for the interview.

Burns is such a sad case that he'll probably be treated more gingerly. But Filkins would be advised to prepare for the tough interviews because they're expected to be forthcoming. Some questions he might want to use that Green Zone time preparing for would include:

1) Why, when Iraq was in chaos outside the Green Zone early into the occupation, did your reports not reflect that?

2) Do you really think that readers didn't have a right to know that you were provided with body guards and your movement severly restricted?

3) A reporter stated publicly that you killed an intended interview with the resistance when the American military was displeased. How often did that happen?

4) Your "reporting" on the November slaughter of Falluja ran many days after the end of fighting. Why was that? Is it true that you allowed the military to read over and make suggestions on your copy?

5) If readers had known how severely restricted your movement was from the start and, later on, even in the Green Zone itself, do you think that would have mattered? Why or why not?

6) Since the government has now been forced to admit that white phosphorus was used in Falluja, can you explain why you didn't note that in your articles? (Including your "award winning" one?)

7) What was the deal you agreed to when the military offered to take you into Falluja with them? How did that impact your coverage?

8) As you traveled with bodyguards (wearing black T-shirts with "New York Times" on the front), do you think that effected the way anyone interacted with you?

9) Did you were your own black T-shirt? (Tell the truth on that Dexy, there are some photos floating around.)

10) Using data gathered by stringers was a hallmark of the paper's reporting. In terms of your own reporting, do you feel any regret that stringers weren't credited from the early days? What of those who were the victims of violence or lost a life? Looking back, do you feel that an "end credit" in the later days was really sufficient or, if you had it to do over again, would you insist that they receive a byline?

11) As you packed heat, even while protected by bodyguards, a lot of reporters felt you were "play acting" at war correspondent. How would you reply to your critics?

12) There are those who compare you to a little boy, high on a war, intent to prove your manhood. You say what?

13) You are on record saying that no one can predict what will happen in Iraq. Do you think that their hunches might be stronger if you'd accurately portrayed the conditions under which you were "reporting"?

14) Despite winning an award, does it bother you that Seymour Hersh broke the Abu Ghraib story? That others (including Amy Goodman) broke the white phosphorus story?

15) Exactly what story do you feel that you broke? As someone who spent so much time in the Green Zone, what story do you feel proud about and why?

Explore those questions because, believe it or not, those represent the "easy ones" that some of your supposed peers want to ask you. ("Supposed" because I personally don't believe that Filkins is on their level.) You'll have to offer a little more than "Everything changed that summer."

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.




at

Friday, January 06, 2006

Democracy Now: Sarah Leah Whitson, David Golove, Scott Horton; Center for Constitutional Rights, BuzzFlash, Danny Schechter, Bill Scher ...

 
AMY GOODMAN: It's also interesting that the head of the M.T.A., Peter Kalikow, has now said he never realized what an issue their pension demand, that the workers would have to go from giving 2% to 6% of their pay into their pension plan, would be such a lightning rod issue.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Right. Well, see, I think the big problem people don't understand is these claims of runaway pension costs are bogus, I mean, as I've been investigating them. There's no more worker benefit that can be more easily predicted for decades than a pension plan. You pay a certain amount of money, now, into a plan that will eventually be able to provide retirement 20-30 years down the line, so that it's a totally predictable expense for any company or government.
What happened, throughout the 1980s and the 1990s with the stock market booming as it was, is that companies, as well as local governments, got used to not paying anything, practically, into pension funds. They reduced their contributions, because the returns from the market were doing so well. Then comes the crash of 2000, 2001 and ’02, and suddenly, these companies now and governments are being forced to contribute more than they were in the last few years. But they got so used to not contributing virtually anything that they don't want to go back now to beginning to contribute 3% or 4% of an employee's pay into a pension fund. So they're basically trying to shift to the workers their failures in the past to properly fund these plans.
 
The above is from the third report on Democracy Now! today and Erika asked that we spotlight it to make sure everyone is aware of that point.  They address this and more in the third report.
 
 
 
Padilla Appears in Miami After Supreme Court Overturns Ruling
In this country, Pentagon detainee Jose Padilla appeared in a Miami court Thursday for after being transferred from a military prison. In 2002, Padilla was arrested on a return trip from Pakistan and declared an “enemy combatant.” Then-Attorney General John accused Padilla of involvement in “a terrorist plot to attack the United States by exploding a radioactive ‘dirty bomb.’" Padilla was only charged in November after over three years in solitary confinement on a military brig in South Carolina. None of his charges included the most serious of allegations made at the time of his arrest.
Last month, a federal appeals court refused to approve Padilla’s transfer to the Miami civilian court -- and suggested the Bush administration only made the request to thwart Padilla’s pending Supreme Court appeal. However, the Supreme Court on Wednesday overruled the lower court, clearing the way for his transfer to Miami.
 
Over 120 Killed in Deadliest Iraq Violence in 4 Months
In Iraq, over 120 people were killed in violence across the country Thursday. Another 200 were wounded in the bloodiest day the country has seen in four months. In Ramadi, a suicide bomber killed at least 67 people and injured more than 100 outside of a police recruitment center. Earlier, at least 44 people died in a suicide bombing at a Shiite shrine in the holy city of Karbala. And 11 U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq Thursday, including five in a roadside bombing near Karbala.
 
Report: Lt. Gen. Sanchez To Step Down By Year’s End
Meanwhile, the New York Times is reporting Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the American commander in Iraq during the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, will be stepping down by year’s end. One Army general told the Times General Sanchez’s departure is related to the Bush administration’s reluctance to nominate him for another position because of his link to Abu Ghraib. The general said: "It's a question of simply not being able to get by Senate confirmation," and that nominating General Sanchez for a new job would "stir up too much political bad news in an election year."
 
The above three items are from today's Democracy Now! Headlines and were selected by Nick, Julia and Liang.  Democracy Now! ("always informing you," as Marcia says):
 
Headlines for January 6, 2006

- Sharon Undergoes Second Emergency Brain Surgery
- Report: US Planning Gitmo-Style Prison in Afghanistan
- Suicide Bomber Kills 10 During US Ambassador Visit
- Over 120 Killed in Deadliest Iraq Violence in 4 Months
- Report: Lt. Gen. Sanchez To Step Down By Year’s End
- Virginia Governor Orders DNA Testing on Executed Convict
- Mexico Calls For Investigation Into Border Killing
- 9th Ward Residents Confront Planned Demolitions in New Orleans
 
Human Rights Watch Calls on Bush to Cut Aid To Israel Over Expansion of Illegal Settlements

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was rushed to the operating room Friday morning for his second emergency surgery after a medical scan revealed fresh bleeding in the brain. We speak with Human Rights Watch, which is calling for the United States to cut back its multi-billion dollar foreign aid to Israel. [includes rush transcript]
 
An Imperial President? Bush Claims Right To Ignore New Law Banning Torture

Five years after President Bush joked, "If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator,” we look at the growing controversy over presidential power and how it relates to many of today’s biggest stories: the Senate ban on torture, the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, domestic surveillance and the jailing of U.S. citizens as enemy combatants. Earlier this week three influential Republicans Senators condemned Bush for claiming he has the authority to ignore a new law banning the torture of prisoners during interrogations. [includes rush transcript -partial]
 
Juan Gonzalez Hails the New York City Transit Strike as Success; Union Fought Off City Attempts to Redo Pension Plan

Last month, 33,000 New York City transit workers went on strike, shutting down the country's largest public transportation system for the first time in 25 years. Pension plan demands were a central issue in the negotiations. Democracy Now! co-host Juan Gonzalez discusses the results of the negotiations and how they can impact workers nationwide. [includes rush transcript]
 
 
 
We have various highlights (including announcements & Alito) and we'll start with Jonah's pick because it's something that hasn't got a lot of attention yet.  From
 
One week before military tribunal proceedings are set to commence on January 11, 2006, for young Canadian citizen Omar Khadr, a detainee at Guantánamo Bay, his attorneys delivered a letter to United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan and Interim Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, Karin Sham Poo.  The letter urges the United Nations to appeal to the United States government and to unilaterally condemn Omar’s trial as inconsistent with international legal protections accorded to children in armed conflict. 
In the letter (attached), Khadr's U.S. attorneys, Richard Wilson and Muneer Ahmad, professors at American University Washington College of Law request that the U.N. "fully investigate, document and denounce this [trial] development, and ask that a representative from the U.N. attend hearings of the military commissions as an observer for the protection of this child victim of armed conflict, including the first session now scheduled for January 11, 2006."
Imprisoned by the United States since the age of 15 Omar Khadr has been held under strict security conditions, often in solitary confinement, and subject to interrogation and torture despite his status as a juvenile.
 
 
Now we'll note the first Alito-based highlight which goes further than just Alito.  Eddie noted  "Thank God our current Senate Democrats weren't at Lexington and Concord!" (BuzzFlash):
 
 
If the patriots had held their powder at Lexington and Concord, this nation might still be under a monarchy. (Well, in a way we do still have King George in power, but that's another story.)
This thought comes to mind because the Democrats in the senate are now thinking of "keeping their powder dry" and letting Sam Alito, who believes in unbridled executive branch power (aka, monarchy, dictatorship, etc.) get greenlighted to a seat on the Supreme Court. Forget, for a moment, that Alito is opposed to the fundamental principles of the Democratic Party platform; Alito is opposed to democracy.
Scalito, as he is called, believes in having a Republican president violate the Constitution by simply making a statement giving his interpretation of any law passed by Congress when he signs it. According to Scalito, this Republican presidential interpretation then becomes the law, not the "intent of Congress."
The man who Bush would have join the other absolute power of the Republican executive branch supporters on the Supreme Court came up with this idea while serving in the Reagan Administration. He urged adopting the "executive branch statement of interpretation" quietly and gradually, so it wouldn't draw much press or legal attention.
 
Strong editorial from and we're going to go from that to the FDR years via
Lynda's highlight.  From Danny Schechter's "Has The Horse Breathed Its Last?"
 
Sound the bugle. May we remember that it was on this very day, the 6th of January, back in l941 that a former President, the man they called FDR, proclaimed fidelity to "four freedoms" as the cornerstone of American life. Not one. Not Two--but four. Here they are:
1.Freedom of speech and expression
2.Freedom of every person to worship God in his own way
3. Freedom from want - individual economic security
4. Freedom from fear - world disarmament to the point that wars of aggression are impossible.
Gimme four, baby. How quickly we forget or are made to forget.
 
Or maybe, Janis Joplin ref for Susan, a combination of the two?  One thing we shouldn't forget (or be made to) is what's happening next week.  Ruth will note this in her report this weekend; however, she pointed out today that we have some members with online access at work only.  If you're someone who'll be out of pocket until Monday, please note the following (which begins Monday morning) from
 
 
Mon., Jan. 9 through Fri., Jan. 13
The Pacifica Radio Network is bringing you the Samuel Alito Senate Hearing for nomination to the United States Supreme Court live!
Verna Avery Brown teams with Mitch Jeserich from Free Speech Radio News and Pacifica National Affairs correspondent, Larry Bensky, to bring you the controversial nomination hearing of Samuel Alito for United States Supreme Court, live.
Anchors: Larry Bensky, KPFA; Verna Avery Brown, WPFW; Mitch Jesserich, FSRN.
The schedule of hearings includes a one hour pre-show on the opening day, and an half-hour wrap-up show each evening. Live analysts will join us in the booth and via telephone throughout the hearings.
 
Pacifica will be bringing you live coverage (as they did during the Roberts' confirmation hearings).  That's great if you live in an area Pacifica broadcasts in, right?  Well, online access permitting, many people live in areas where Pacifica broadcasts because they provide live webcasts (as well as archived ones).  This isn't Renee and Steve yucking it up with Cokie on NPR Monday where maybe you'll get a (canned) story about the hearings that day.  This is live coverage.  No cutting to "cute" stories about a fisherman who . . . (fill in the anecdote, NPR loves their "cute" fisherman stories).  So this starts Monday (unless the hearings are postponed for some reason).  You can listen via webcast, live streaming (which you can use any day of the week, at any hour, to listen to Pacifica programming, live or archived programming).
 
Again, Ruth will note this in her report this weekend but she (rightly) remembered that some members won't be checking back in until Monday.  So that's a heads up.
 
Still on the topic of Alito, Sam steers us to "Bill at Liberal Oasis and his 'Executive Power Issue Gains Traction Before Alito Hearings' which gives a rundown of some issues going into the hearings:"
 
The issue of Alito's support for unchecked, unbalanced presidential power -- discussed here on Wed. -- is the issue gaining traction as we head into next week's hearings.
Yesterday's Wall Street Journal had a front page story about Alito's support of the "unitary executive" theory, which, as the paper reported, is "an expansive view of presidential powers that [Alito] and his colleagues set forth while working in ... the Reagan Justice Department."
(It is that theory which Bush cited when he claimed last week that no body could stop from mistreating detainees.)
MSNBC.com reports that Senate Dems plan to make Alito's record on presidential power a "dominant" issue next week.
Sen. Chuck Schumer led off with the issue in a sweeping speech before the Center for American Progress and the American Constitution Society on the Alito nomination.
 
Bonnie notes The Nation's editorial arguing "The Case Against Alito:"
 
With Judge Samuel Alito, the Senate Judiciary Committee faces its most consequential Supreme Court confirmation hearing in a generation. Not since Robert Bork has the Senate encountered a nominee whose long record and fully articulated views so consistently challenge decades of progress on privacy, civil rights and control of corporations. And never in memory has a single nomination so threatened to redirect the Court as Alito's, which would replace the pragmatically conservative swing-voter Sandra Day O'Connor. Alito's opening statement before the Judiciary Committee is January 9, but his true testimony consists of fifteen years of rulings on issues from abortion to school prayer to immigration. That record demonstrates that Alito is at odds with the interests of ordinary Americans.
Supreme Court nominees get, and usually deserve, much benefit of the doubt. But with Alito, the doubt is all of the nominee's making, and has only grown with revelations of his Reagan-era memos. As an ambitious Reagan Administration lawyer, he boasted in a now-famous 1985 job application of his conviction that Roe v. Wade should be overturned; opposed the historic one-person, one-vote decision of the Warren Court; and waved like a badge of honor his membership in a far-right Princeton alumni network notorious for its hostility to admitting women and African-Americans. Alito's defense of Nixon-era officials implicated in illegal wiretaps makes clear--in light of today's NSA wiretap scandal--that the Bush Administration's motives in Alito's nomination extend well beyond a token nod to social conservatives.
Nothing in Alito's hundreds of federal appeals court rulings in the years since suggests any mellowing of those fundamental commitments.
 
 
Final Alito-based highlight; however, as members who've checked their inboxes already know, next week Gina and Krista will put out a daily version of the round-robin.  This is their special coverage similar to what they did during the Roberts' confirmation hearing.  Here, at this site, the entries will be similar to during the Roberts' hearings (for the same reason).  So we will have entries up here each day but I will also be participating in roundtables Gina and Krista will be doing nightly.  The schedule for other members with sites is still to be determined.  Elaine thinks she can do every night ("provided the hearings don't cover over two weeks") and Ava and Jess are down for every night.  Gina and Krista hope to have the schedule down by this evening and, if so, we'll note it tomorrow morning here. Members not running sites will be participating as well.  If the hearings last five days, here are members who will be participating on those five evening. 
 
Monday: Francisco, Susan, Eli, Shirley and Martha
Tuesday: Marcia, Charlie, Keesha, Eli, Eddie, Billie, Rob, Kara, Brad, Beth, Keshawn and Liang
Wednesday: Bonnie, Eli, Joan, Maria
Thursday: Erika, Eli, Brady
Friday: Miguel, Eli, Lynda, Keesha
 
If the hearings end on Wednesday, the Thursday roundtable will still take place as a post-hearings discussion.  If you are a member interested in participating, contact Gina or Krista. Except for Tuesday, they're open to adding up to three members to each night.  And note that Eli's agreed to take part every night needed. And, "this just in," so have Ruth and her granddaughter Tracey.
 
The special round-robins will publish Monday through Friday for as long as the hearings last.  Friday's roundtable will appear the following Monday, not on Saturday.
 
Now for our last highlight.  Yesterday Doug asked if we would be noting MLK in some manner each day in the leadup to the 16?  Melissa likes that plan and "doing my part" steers everyone to Ida Brown's "Local MLK celebration to span four days" (Meridian Mississippi News):
 
During his lifetime, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. encouraged people of all races and walks of life to unite to make their community -- and America -- a better place to live.
On Jan. 16, as the country celebrates the 20th anniversary of the Martin Luther King Jr. federal holiday, organizers of the local observance hope not only to honor King's legacy, but more importantly, to continue the pursuit of his dream.
"When you think of how persistent and dedicated the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was in his pursuit for racial harmony and equality for all people, MLK Day is such an awesome way to celebrate peace in our world," said Sharon Smith, who, as Main Street director, also serves as a liaison for the city of Meridian on the Dr. Martin Luther King Parade and Celebration Committee.
This year marks Meridian's seventh annual MLK parade and celebration. The first, held in 1999, was the fulfillment of a dream by former Meridian resident Dr. Linda Wilson-Jones. In 2004, Wilson-Jones moved to South Carolina, and the dream was continued through the efforts of a committee currently chaired by Greg Lane.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
 





Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less
at

Other Items

Marcos, give it up. That's what James McKinley, Jr. advises in this morning's New York Times
("A Masked Marxist on the Stump") when he uses his, we're sure, keen observation skills to weigh in on Marcos' current campaign:

Yet the start of a six-month national tour led by the man known as Subcommander Marcos has all the earmarks of a run-of-the-mill campaign for political office: slogans, chants, partisan songs, rallies large and small, a campaign caravan making stops in towns and cities, jabs at other politicians, cute presentations from children and hugs from local community leaders, shaking hands with admirers over a line of bodyguards, and the occasional obligation to kiss, or at least hug, a baby or two.

Better coverage of the issue can be found in Andrew Kennis' "Zapatista 'Other Campaign' starts series of town-hall like meetings in San Cristobal . . ." (NYC Indymedia). McKinley continues to be obsessed with Marcos' "pipe smoking." He also continues to use " the man known as Subcommander Marcos" which isn't how Marcos is billed now (and really wasn't how he was ever billed -- a point that McKinley, filing and doing damage in Mexico for some time, should grasp. The Times may allow the convicted and disgraced certain honors (and have, indeed, rewritten their style manual for the likes of Agnew in the past), but it's not anything they apply with equality to all. From that attidue (the paper's) springs all the other problems with McKinley's article.

Ty passed on that Law & Disorder is now a weekly program (as Ruth wondered recently). On Pacifica's WBAI it airs every Monday. It also airs in additional markets and those can be found by visiting the Law & Disorder home page.


On something we noted repeatedly yesterday (because the e-mail entry posted three times), Brad wants everyone to take note of "Global Women Launch Campaign to End Iraq War: Alice Walker, Cindy Sheehan, Susan Sarandon, Margaret Cho, Barbara Lee and Others Join Iraqi Women to Urge the Withdrawal of Foreign Troops and Foreign Fighters from Iraq" (Common Dreams):

Women Say No to War Campaign
Initiated by the group CODEPINK: Women for Peace, this is the first campaign that brings women together across borders to demand an end to the bloodshed in Iraq. "The response to our initial call has been overwhelming--we have over 200 prominent endorsers, and more than 3,000 women have signed on before we even launched the campaign. We’re unleashing a global chorus of women’s voices shouting 'Enough!,'" said Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the groups CODEPINK: Women for Peace and Global Exchange.
Among the 200 high-profile women who endorsed the call are Gold Star mothers Cindy Sheehan of the US and Rose Gentle of Scotland; Actors/Performers Susan Sarandon, Eve Ensler, and Margaret Cho; Authors Alice Walker, Anne Lamott, Maxine Hong Kingston and Barbara Ehrenreich; and Congresswomen Barbara Lee, Cynthia McKinney and Lynn Woolsey of the US, Libby Davies of Canada, and Caroline Lucas of the UK. Iraqi women endorsers include Yanar Mohammed of the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq and Hana Ibrahim of Iraqi Women's Will.
"Iraqi women are devastated now, and it will take us decades of struggle to regain a peaceful and civilized life," said Yanar Mohammed. "The US occupation has planted seeds of ethno-sectarian division, preparing Iraq for a civil war, and has blessed religious supremacy over and against human and women’s rights."
The majority of people in Iraq, the US, the UK and around the world oppose the Iraq war, which has thus far cost the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqis (estimates range from 27,736 to 100,000); 2,182 US troops; 98 UK troops; and hundreds of humanitarian workers. As the three-year anniversary of the invasion of Iraq approaches, the country is still wracked by violence, Iraqi civilians are suffering from a lack of basic services, including electricity and clean water, and women’s rights are under attack.

Lyle notes that Patricia J. Williams' "Pandora's Box" (Diary of a Mad Law Professor, The Nation):

Some years ago, when "identity politics" first raised its contentious, snappish little head, the furor seemed almost entirely focused on African-Americans. The true complexity and importance of that debate, deemed largely academic at first, is perhaps increasingly clear. In recent times the world has shuddered with violent realignments unleashed by global challenges to line up with "them" or with "us," or with "truth" or with "treason." Identity is battered by varied appeals to conformity: Say it! prove it! swear allegiance to this or that nation, party, religion, bloodline of the moment--good or bad, for or against, red or blue, blue or gray, black or white, or many shades of other.
A deep planetary insecurity has fostered a rush to build boundaries around ourselves--psychic green zones, mental walls, panic rooms, little protective groupings--no matter how irrational. There's a Boondocks cartoon that captures the absurd tension of this moment, where young Huey excitedly tells his grandfather that there's good news abroad in the land. African-Americans are now only the third most hated group in America, he says, right after Muslims and the French. It is a bizarre phenomenon, this free-floating sense of well-being that derives comfort from being less hated rather than more loved.
As recent riots around the globe have made so clear, identities and their attendant prejudice are essentially malleable; they vary with time, trauma, culture and economics. In Australia Lebanese seem to have overtaken Aborigines as the hated minority du jour. In America Lebanese are still gilded with a stereotype of heroic middle classness--I heard someone say that "they're Arab but, um, more Christianized, you know?" In France Algerians used to be the most disfavored, now less so than Senegalese and Malians. In England it was always the Irish, but now that the Irish have become prosperous, Afro-Caribbeans and South Asians are, as one commentator put it, "the new Irish."

Williams' writing isn't always available online to nonsubscribers of the magazine, so take note of this column, as Lyle advises.

Micah passes on that today's scheduled topics for Democracy Now! are:

An update on Ariel Sharon's situation. Sarah Whitson, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch's Mid-East and North African Division, on Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine. And the issues of torture and presidential power.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.














at

NYT: "Republican Senator Defends Briefings on Domestic Spying" (Jane Harman)

In a sign of growing partisan division over domestic eavesdropping, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday defended the Bush administration's limited briefings for Congress on the secret program and accused the committee's top Democrat of changing her position on the issue.
Also Thursday, 27 House Democrats sent a letter to President Bush asking for information about the National Security Agency eavesdropping program, including whether communications from or to members of Congress and journalists were intercepted.
The Intelligence Committee chairman, Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, was responding to a statement Wednesday by Representative Jane Harman, Democrat of California, that the law requires that the full House and Senate Intelligence Committees be informed of the N.S.A. program. By briefing only the Republican and Democratic leaders of both houses and of the committees, the administration violated the law, Ms. Harman wrote in a letter to the president.

The above is from Scott Shane's "Republican Senator Defends Briefings on Domestic Spying" in this morning's New York Times. So then the Republican's have decided to go through with their pregnancy? (See yesterday's entry.)

On this topic, yesterday Media Matters had an entry entitled "NY Times selectively quoted Harman to falsely report she defended Bush's domestic spying program" in which they took issue with Scott Shane's article (noted here yesterday) due to the fact that he wrote that she had stated the NSA spying program (without warrants) was "essential" and that disclosing it had "damaged critical intelligence capabilities."

Media Matters feels that Shane's quote doesn't convey the full range of Harman's public statements. They offer this from the public record (and I've italicized the portion that Shane referred to yesterady):

"As the Ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, I have been briefed since 2003 on a highly classified NSA foreign collection program that targeted Al Qaeda. I believe the program is essential to US national security and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities.
"Due to its sensitive nature, I have been barred from discussing any aspect of this program, and until the President described certain parts of it on Saturday, I have made no comment whatsoever.
"Like many Americans, I am deeply concerned by reports that this program in fact goes far beyond the measures to target Al Qaeda about which I was briefed.
[...]
"We must use all lawful tools to detect and disrupt the plans of our enemies; signals intelligence and the work of the NSA are vital to that mission. But in doing so, it is also vital that we protect the American people's constitutional rights."

This is, my opinion, a matter of opinion. Harman did say it. She is bothered by rumors of other things that may have occurred (which, my opinion, obviously did occur). The program itself she supported and thinks revealing of the program was harmful.

I'm not losing any sleep of Harman and don't really believe that she's the issue. Other's may feel differently. Bernado e-mailed the item and asked what the problem was, what had the Times done? Media Matters is arguging that that Harman's position is more complex. They feel that the quote from Harman did not include the fact that she has concerns (if rumors are true).

Which, in Madonna terms, means they too are "keeping my baby, I'm going to keep my baby" ("Papa Don't Preach"). Myself, I'm not really concerned with the complexity of Harman's feelings. She was for the program in what she thought was a limited forum. New reports have 'disturbed' her. She doesn't feel that select members of Congress were not informed. She does have problems with reports that the program reached beyond the scope conveyed to her. She feels that Risen, Lichtblau and the Times' reporting on the program (when they broke the news) has harmed national security.

So we've got a custody battle over the fetus. Here, we call the pregnancy itself into question. That's not, "Media Matters is wrong!" They're opinion is that more time and space were needed to convey Harman's complex feelings. It's a point true of any news report and more power to them on arguing that point and any other they feel. But this is the talking point that was due to be birthed yesterday. The Republicans argued she felt differently at an earlier time. Which she did. Media Matters argues that she is on record being opposed to reports that the program was larger then she was informed, which she did.

The issue of the program itself isn't addressed in those points. Yesterday, I think I referred to this argument as a spouse caught cheating focusing on who told on them. The cheating, my opinion, is the issue. The program itself was a violation. I'm not concerned about Harman's complexity. Those who are, should refer to Media Matters' item.

If I cared for Harman's "belief" or her "approach," I might feel differently and that probably colors my opinion. But to me she's the perfect "Fox Democrat" accepting the basic terms and then wanting to argue over fine tuning. If the scope was larger than she was told, she has a problem. I have a problem with an illegal activity that was illegal from the start. I also have a problem with Harman's initial support of that activity. They are correct that any article could provide more background. Harman has some fine tuning she wants to do (as her own statements reveal). I have no sympathy for Harman and her clucking that the press doing its job harmed national security when the harm comes not from the disclosure but from the very act itself. I feel she's trying to focus on who told that she was cheating (the public) and not on the fact that when it counted, by her own admission, she was supportive of the program and takes strides to maintain the 'importance' of the program to this day.

Media Matters has the patience to explore the depth of Harman's position (good for them) but I'm not concerned with her fine tunings. (Though I'm sure they'll be a "hit" in her next Fox "News" apperance -- probably this Sunday, in fact -- and that Harman will further muddy the issue and give Republicans and the Bully Boy additional cover to hide beneath.) But they are arguing for increased understanding of Harman's remarks which are part of the public record and that's never a minor point when it comes to press coverage. (It's obviously not one I'm concerned with regards to Harman and the reasons why are in the previous paragraph. But it's a noble battle and one worth noting. More power to them.)

Micah passes on the scheduled topic for Democracy Now! today:

An update on Ariel Sharon's situation. Sarah Whitson, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch's Mid-East and North African Division, on Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine. And the issues of torture and presidential power.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.



at

Thursday, January 05, 2006

Indymedia

When not on duty, Josh dressed in black and shared Tabbie's love of shopping at Hot Topic.
"He was the hot 'goth' guy," she recalled. The two attended the same high school. Before long, they were fast friends who liked to spend time together talking, listening to music and making art. While in high school, Josh won awards for computer-animation projects. His future seemed bright.
After graduation, Josh joined the U.S. Army. He was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 8th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Hood, Texas. He'd only been in Iraq a couple of weeks when he and another soldier encountered what the military calls an "improvised explosive device," or IED, while on patrol in Baghdad.
My daughter, 18, learned of Josh's death via a message left on her cell phone. She asked to leave her job at Barnes & Noble in mid-shift and went home to tell her roommates.
Hysteria was followed by silence, then action. Tabbie set up a memorial to her friend on a coffee table in the apartment shared with other young adults who like to strum guitars, surf the Internet and play "Halo 2."
She propped up a photograph of Josh and arranged candles around it. She played a CD she's owned since high school, sinking into the couch as Ozzy sang:
"I'm not the kind of person you think I am / I'm not the Antichrist or the iron man / I have a vision that I just can't control / I feel I've lost my spirit and sold my soul / Got no control."
As I listened, I couldn't help thinking that if we'd all worked harder to hold this administration accountable, Josh might not have been shipped to Iraq the week before Christmas.
I realized I've been overly complacent, an anti-war passivist, not an activist. This needs to change. Before more mothers lose sons, more sisters lose brothers and more children lose parents. Before more teenage girls lose best friends.

The above, sent in by Karen, is from Deidre Pike's "An improvised explosive device: on the death of a young soldier and best friend" (Tucson Weekly). Karen wrote that reading about
Joshua Morberg touched her.

Karen: It made me cry and I think Ms. Pike really brought him to her article. He really came to life and was a real person as she told the story and that's not usually the case. I'm sure it took something out of her to write it but she did a wonderful job and she really made you feel the loss. I've never met Army Private Joshua Morberg but I feel like I know some of what made him unqiue.

Which is more than reason enough to start with Pike's item. (Thanks to Karen for finding it and sharing it.) It's Thursday and we do the indymedia roundup. We're doing one entry tonight and I belive we've got five entries. We have something on Iraq, something on activism, and something on Bully Boy spying. It's a nice cross-section. My apologies for only doing one entry but I'm really tired. As for the post worked on (all night) last night, I don't even want to look at it right now. So we'll have it up on Friday, after I can review it.


Gareth e-mailed to note news on Iraq. From Kim Sengupta's "Suicide attacks put Iraq's political future in doubt" (The Independent of London):

More than 120 people were killed in one of the bloodiest days of the Iraq conflict yesterday in a series of attacks, including two devastating suicide bombings.
The violence, which also claimed the lives of seven American soldiers, brought the number of deaths to 170 in 48 hours and prompted further doubts about the fiture political stability of Iraq following the elections last month.
The suicide blasts were in the Shia holy city of Karbala and at Ramadi, 70 miles west of Baghdad. Another three explosions took place in Baghdad and a massive fire started after an oil pipeline was blown up near Kirkuk in the north.
Iraq's Prime Minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, and other prominent politicians condemned the attacks, saying they were intended to sabotage progress being made towards forming a broad-based coalition government. But the country's largest Shia party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Sciri) bitterly denounced Sunni Arab groups for inciting sectarian violence after faring poorly at the polls. Reinforcing fears of further descent into civil war, they warned some factions may take direct action because the American-led coalition was allegedly hampering attempts by government forces to combat the insurgents.

Callie felt that Steve Sebelius' "Impeach the administration" (Las Vegas City Life) "walks you through slowly, in case anyone's confused about the laws broken":

President George W. Bush, to our knowledge, has not received oral sex from an intern in the White House.
But he ought to be impeached anyway.
Bush's crimes may not be as sexy as those that led a partisan House of Representatives to impeach former President Bill Clinton, but they are of so much greater importance to the fabric of the Republic that Clinton seems a choirboy by comparison.
Bush has admitted authorizing the warrantless eavesdropping on American citizens' overseas telephone calls by the National Security Agency, in violation of the Fourth Amendment. And he's pledged to continue the program, even as his Justice Department hunts for the person who leaked word of it to the New York Times. (It's doubtful this patriot, if discovered, is in line for the Presidential Medal of Freedom reserved for the likes of George "Slam Dunk" Tenet, who helped sell Bush on the case for war.)
As justification, Bush cites his authority as commander-in-chief of U.S. armed forces, found in Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution. But that section doesn't explicitly or implicitly grant the president any special powers to suspend the Constitution. Moreover, it must be read consistently with the Bill of Rights, the framers of which intended to specifically limit the powers of the government.
The Fourth Amendment, specifically, reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized." Under this amendment, the government must first have probable cause to believe a crime has been or may be committed, and second must present its evidence to a judge and swear that it's true, and third the judge must find probable cause and only then may a search be conducted.

So much going on. What can you do? News on the World Can't Wait was spotted by Stan, "Bush Step Down- Massive Protests Jan.31 and Feb.4th" (DC Indymedia):

BUSH: STEP DOWN And Take Your Program With You!
1. Jan. 31, on The Night of President Bush’s State of the Union Address:
Bring the Noise!
Drown Out Bush’s Lies!
In large cities and small towns all across the country, join in rallies one hour before Bush's address as we make our determination to "Drive Out the Bush Regime" the political message of the day.
At 9:00 PM EST, just as Bush starts to speak, everywhere we will BRING THE NOISE. In a cacophony of sound, we will drown out his address with music: from drums to violins, from hip hop and classical; and with noise: banging pots and ringing church bells, sound car horns and lifting our voices.
2. DEMONSTRATE on SATURDAY, FEB. 4
(following the State of the Union)
Washington D.C.
The Saturday after the State of the Union address, massive numbers will protest at the seat of government. Prominent voices of conscience will help deliver the people’s verdict on Bush's criminal regime with our demand:
Bush Step Down And Take Your Program with You!
Start Organizing Now! Flier now available:
Find a rally in your city on Jan. 31, or organize one yourself.
January 31 Convergences
Jan. 31, on The Night of President Bush's State of the Union Address:
Bring the Noise! Drown Out Bush's Lies!
In large cities and small towns all across the country, join in rallies one hour before Bush's address as we make our determination to "Drive Out the Bush Regime" the political message of the day. At 9:00 PM EST, just as Bush starts to speak, everywhere we will BRING THE NOISE. In a cacophony of sound, we will drown out his address with music: from drums to violins, from hip hop and classical; and with noise: banging pots and ringing church bells, sound car horns and lifting our voices.To organize a rally in your area, email info (at) worldcantwait.org
Beginning list of convergences accross the country (more to come):
(all rallies begin at 8pm EST unless otherwise noted)
California:
LA:
5pm KTLA TV, Van Ness & Sunset Blvd.
6pm march to CNN, Cahuenga & Sunset Blvd.
7pm rally
San Diego:
Horton Plaza Fountain. Fourth and Broadway. 4:30pm
Georgia:
Atlanta:
CNN Center
Illinois:
Chicago:
5pm Pioneer Plaza(Tribune Plaza) on N. Michigan Ave. near Chicago Tribune and NBC TV affiliate. Neigborhood Drownouts also planned.
Michigan:
Detroit:
Fourth and Main, Royal Oak,
MI
Kalamazoo: The Ravenwood Coffee, 773 W. Michigan Ave.
New Jersey:
Bergen County: Van Neste Square in Ridgewood, NJ
New York:
NYC:
Times Square, 42nd and Broadway
Rhode Island:
Westerley: March and demonstration downtown


And in case you're wondering about participating, people collectively can make a difference. Melinda notes Patrick O'Neill's "Raleigh activists march to Guantánamo" (Raleigh-Durham Independent):

Cubans were amazed last month to see a group of 25 U.S. citizens marching with banners along roads on the eastern end of the island leading to the U.S. Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay, where the United States has been holding suspected terrorists, some for more than four years without due process.
For four days, a group of Catholic Workers and Christian activists from around the country walked more than 60 miles from Santiago to within five miles of Guantánamo to protest the detention and torture of suspected terrorists. The march coincided with the Dec. 10 observance of International Human Rights Day.
Scott Langley and Sheila Stumph, co-founders in 2004 of the Raleigh Catholic Worker House near Central Prison, which offers a place to stay for families visiting loved ones on death row, were among the 25 marchers who had hoped to be permitted to enter the prison. Instead, the marchers were stopped at a Cuban checkpoint about five miles from Guantánamo and about nine miles from the prison.
After their arrival Dec. 5, the marchers began a series of what became ongoing meetings with officials, Stumph said. They were initially threatened with deportation by Cuban authorities, who clearly did not want the efforts of the 25 to provoke a U.S. government reaction.
"When they said, 'This is impossible to do in Cuba,' we said, 'Well, we're a group that believes in the impossible, and that's what faith is for us,'" Stumph said.
He wasn't just another number in Bully Boy's war of choice.

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.






at