In this morning's New York Times, Richard A. Oppel Jr. gets handed the task of writing about the Osama House Tape Club that Bully Boy signed the nation up for ("Qaeda Official Is Said to Taunt U.S. on Tape"). Oppel does about as well as anyone could with 'the release' which may or may not be genuine. He also notes that five deaths of US troops were announced on Friday:
The new deaths occurred in Baghdad and Anbar Prvince, where an overshelming majority of American deaths have occurred.
Christopher Bodeen (AP) noted yesterday that "At least 11 of the American deaths in November have been in Anbar, including a Marine who died Thursday from wound suffered in fighting there." The US military updated that on Friday to 13 killed in Al Anbar since the start of the month. Oppel notes that 26 deaths (US troops) have been announced so far this month. In addition, today it was announced that a Polish (Tomasz Murkowsi) and a Slavik (Rastislav Neplech) soldier were killed in Al Kut Friday by a roadside bomb (an American soldier and a Polish soldier were also wounded in the bombing).
Meanwhile Michael Gordon's is in war porn mode. There are no stats for him to finesse (his strong suit) so he just pants hot and heavy throughout "Military Team Undertakes a Broad Review of the Iraq War and the Campaign Against Terror" and creams his shorts probably around the time he types this laughable sentence: "In a closely held effort, Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has assembled a team of some of the military's brightest and most innovative officers and told them to take a fresh look at Iraq and Afghanistan, among other flashpoints."
"Brightest and most innovative" is offered as fact. What was the criteria? While you don't expect the US military to announce they've put together a team made up of the dregs, you also don't expect a reporter (not a columnist) to offer up as 'fact' something they can't back up. But Gordo does just that in his second paragraph because his War On is leaking and he mistakes reporting for sex in a chat room.
Gordo lists people meeting with the Iraq Study Group (Baker's cheesy joke, not Mike's group) --
Bully Boy, Condi, Rumsfled, Negroponte, Hayden and Zalmay (rumored to be leaving soon) -- but misses that Tony Blair will meet with them Tuesday -- you can be sure he's kicking himself for that. (Tuesday, Bully Boy will be in Vietnam -- no laughs, it's for real -- with John Howard and others.)
C.J. Chivers does what he did so 'well' in 2005. Make the reader believe they're getting something for their time. Of course that whole 2005 'revolution' turned out to be not all that and as soon as it had faded from the front page, Chivers was there with the little noted correction to the record. Not having the time to waste on that sort of thing (it's so 2003, Chivers) with regard to Iraq, we'll continue to ignore him here. (To be clear, the fact that he got it wrong wasn't the issue. The fact that his post-piece revealed that he knew things then but didn't print them is the issue. Printing them might have dampered the drama, but he's supposed to be a reporter not a dramatist.) (The most embarrassing story is the rah-rah tale of three vets -- Fox 'News'! Toby Keith! -- especially surprising since the paper, in the hideous article, claims that the tales of those who were in Iraq aren't told, claims that as they bend over backwards to avoid telling Kyle Snyder or Ivan Brobeck's story. To name but two who should have been in the paper this past week and werent'. On the topic of things not noted, they haven't noted the US military's decision to court-martial Ehren Watada, announced Thursday and not mentioned once in the paper -- not even in a "National Briefing" item.)
Today in Iraq, Reuters notes that, in Latifiyah, three mini-buses were stopped, their passengers hauled off, nine of which were killed and thirteen of which have been kidnapped. Reuters counts five bombings in Baghdad resulting in 12 deaths and at least 44 wounded, the shooting death of "an intelligence officer" and five bodies found while, outside Baghdad in Kirkuk, a roadside bomb wounded four police officers and, in Baquba, a man and a woman are dead from a bombing attack on a police station.
AP updates the bus story noting that ten were killed and at least fifty kidnapped. KUNA reports
"In other developments, unknown militants shot dead a mosque's cleric (Imam), Saeed Mahdi, as he came out of the mosque after Maghreb (sunset) prayers."
The following community sites have updated since yesterday morning:
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude;
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man;
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix;
Mike of Mikey Likes It!;
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz;
Wally of The Daily Jot
and Trina of Trina's Kitchen
At Kat's Korner, Betty filled in on Monday, Ruth filled in on Wednesday as did Rebecca (click here), and I filled in last night.
And it's the weekend which means RadioNation with Laura Flanders, on Air America radio, online, XM satellite radio, live at 7:00 pm EST till 10:00 pm EST Saturday and Sunday. Saturday's guests include Barbara Lee, Doug Troutman, John Nichols and, pay attention, Kate Taylor. Besides being a gifted artist, those who remember when Taylor was on last to discuss her new album (Live at the Cutting Room Floor) will also remember she was a very strong guest. Sunday will feature many including Sue Hyde, Paul Krugman and Lewis Lapham.
Rachel passes on an e-mail heads up to two programs on WBAI (times EST):
Sunday, November 12, 11am-noon
THE NEXT HOUR
Elizabeth Nunez, novelist and Chair of PEN's Open Book Committee, hosts this hour with poet Linda Susan Jackson, author of Tia Chucha Press' forthcoming collection "What Yellow Sounds Like"; journalist and novelist Eisa Nefertari Ulen, author of "Crystelle Mourning"; and poet Willie Perdomo.
Monday, November 13, 2-3pm
CAT RADIO CAFE
Jazz icon and peace activist Lorraine Gordon on her new memoir, "Alive at the Village Vanguard: My Life In and Out of Jazz Time"; renowned cartoonist and social satirist Jules Ffeiffer and his wife, comedienne Jenny Allen, discuss their collaboration on a book of illustrated satirical fables, "The Long Chalkboard and Other Stories," as well as the retrospective exhibit of Ffeiffer's 50-year career now on view at the School of Visual Arts; and UNIVERSES, the Bronx-based theatre/music ensemble with a new production, "Ameriville," at the Abroms Art Center. Hosted by Janet Coleman and David Dozer.
Elaine caught a few minutes of Cat Radio Cafe (between sessions) last Monday and mentioned a really strong book discussion with Heidi Julavits. She was hoping to catch the discussion of My Name is Rachel Corrie but didn't have the time. Reminder to everyone, if you're interested in listening and unable to listen live, WBAI does archive their broadcasts (WBAI archives).
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
the new york times
richard a. oppel jr.
michael r. gordon
radio
wbai
the next hour
cat radio cafe
radionation with laura flanders
laura flanders
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
trinas kitchen
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man
ruths report
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Ellen Willis
I'm late this morning. Going through the e-mails there were a number of people highlighting a piece at The Nation that I really didn't want to read. It's entitled "Ellen Willis, 1942-2006" and is various writers sharing their impressions of Willis. (The one that most jibes with my own memories is Richard Goldstein.) Our focus has become Iraq (as members wanted) and I've gone back and forth or what to write about Willis, if anything?
I really don't care for obits and, after my own health scare in 2005, have little interest in noting deaths. (Which is why we started relying on Democracy Now!'s headlines to note a passing in 2005.) But there are enough e-mails on this from members that I've decided we'll note it in some way.
I thought we could do a cutting of various things on Willis but, outside of The Nation piece, I'm not seeing much. So I'll share a few thoughts.
Willis was prickly, passionate and a pain in the ass. None of which is a bad thing. She had a very concrete set of principles that she stuck to and she could (and did) cut anyone out that didn't adhere to them. Not because she was a bad person, but because she was very committed to change and didn't have much use for those who kind-of, sort-of were.
Along with a very small group of women, Willis was there to chart the sixties music scene. Patricia Kennealy Morrison, someone I have tremendous respect and love for, was also present at that time and making a difference. The two had very different writing styles but if you wonder why music sucks so bad, so often, today, blame it on the bad critics.
Willis and Kennealy Morrison were among the women who made huge contributions. Not just in terms of our understanding but in terms of using their power to push music further. Even then, there were the male critics playing whose stats were bigger, trying to turn art into a sport.
When you read a really bad piece of supposed music criticism noting the yard-sticks (monetary) of an artist, it's because the other set of critics moved on. What you're largely left with are pieces by people who don't feel much or, if they do, can't share it. That reviews are now thumbnails in most publications is sad until you grasp that all the majority of writers today can offer really can be boiled down to one or two paragraphs.
For every Ellen Willis, there were ten to twenty Arnold Shaws -- determined to beat all the life out of music. It's not surprising that Willis or Kennealy Morrison (who is now known today for her books that make up The Keltiad) walked away from music criticism. Or that while every male who ever flashed the text equivalent of the back of a baseball card is the subject of attention while Willis and Kennealy Morrison (and Lillian Roxon to cite another) are largely overlooked for their own contributions.
It has to do with lifeless prose vs. writing on a subject you care about. Willis belonged to the latter group and had little use for the nostalgia that you still see so many males trot out today when one of their rock "gods" issues another generic release. The same stat keepers were nostalgic in real time as well.
I'm focusing on that period even though Willis left long ago (returning to the landscape to pen an essay for Janis -- the boxed set of Janis Joplin recordings that was issued in 1993, which also includes an essay by one of the best critics today, Ann Powers) because that was where she first utilized her voice and spoke to many. The 'rules' were already present but could be broken and Willis was one of the ones breaking them.
In 1968, in The New Yorker, she wrote:
What all this adds up to is an increaing tendency to judge pop music intrinsically, the way poetry or jazz is judged. Social context is still important, as it is for most art. But although social and economci factors were once an integral part of the rock aesthetic -- indeed defined that aesthetic -- they are now subordinate to the "music itself."
On balance, in spite of all the good music that would never have happened otherwise, I think this tendency is regrettable. What it means is that rock has been coopted by high culture, forced to adopt its standards -- chief of which is the integrity of the art object. It means the end of rock as a radical experiment in creating mass culture on its own terms, ignoring elite definitions of what is or is not intrinsic to aesthetic experience.
In the lines above, I think, you can find the basis for everything she wrote, before or after, regardless of the topic. (That's from memory. I believe the title is "Records: Rock, Etc." and it was summer of 1968.) (I've never been able to get my New Yorker set to work on the bedroom computer -- where I am unless I'm on the laptop most days. But if a member needs a citation, I'll get on another computer and look up the date of publication.)
All the issues that captured and concerned her over the years are in that highlight.
After I decided I didn't want to put myself through the process of writing obits here, a woman who had written for Rolling Stone died and I thought it would be noted somewhere (outside of the Times' obit which I found insulting) and we could note it that way. It really didn't get attention and that may have been due to the 'controversial' nature (to some) of the woman's life.
Hopefully, that won't be the case for Willis (who was more 'controversial' -- to some -- for thought as opposed to some supposed transgression).
Willis was a feminist and I'm sure that will be noted. It should be. But her writing was feminist long before the second wave took off. So, possibly assuming wrongly that aspect will be covered elsewhere, I wanted to note her contribution to the music scene which wasn't merely as an observer but as an active participant (on the page and off) that encouraged experimentation and adventure. Had Willis, Kennealy Morrison and others won out, you wouldn't have sappy pieces hailing Dylan doing a radio oldies show as a 'break through.' Their minds didn't go soggy and they didn't mistake flashing the back of sports trading card for critiques. They defined the critics role as something other than:
On __'s latest CD, s/he is returning to the sounds of ____ after the previous CD resulted in disappointing sales. "____" kicks things off with a slow jam that borrows heavily from the work of the Neptunes. S/he is in a playful mood on "___" which sounds like the mating of the Yardbirds and Abba. Thumbs up!
The groundbreaking pioneers, often overlooked today, championed independent thought and exploration. That was at the heart of all Willis' writing throughout her life.
Richard Goldstein can be on the money or dead wrong. That's probably why I recognized the Willis he wrote about. Like her, he searches and explores. He doesn't phone in it. (Neither does our own Kat.) But if you read Rolling Stone, for instance, today and often finish an issue feeling either insulted or robbed of the time, it has a lot to do with the fact that another school of 'criticism' won out -- the easy school, the insta-critic.
In 1986, I phoned a friend at Rolling Stone to find out how the hell a review made it into print? It was on a nothing (talent and sales wise) and fawned over the artist (who soon would be without a recording contract in the United States for good reason). How did that get into print? Why was the album even reviewed? Letters.
Letters had come in from readers who found the artist "hot." So a pedistrain critc was assigned to make sense of the album (which would bomb) and the critic compared the artist to a number of musicians known for their serious explorations of topics. (I'm biting my tongue so hard right now. But if I said, "They compared ____ to ____ and ____," everyone would burst out laughing with good reason. It was laughable at the time as well.)
Willis never would have written such a piece. She wouldn't have fawned over sales (and would have pointed out that the 'sophomore slump' had taken hold previously and that the artist's sales were already in decline). But that's the mentality that won out. Not an attempt to cover music as if it was worth covering but a desire to fawn over something expected to sale. (You can still see that in RS' reviews today.) The convergence of supposed sales to come and bad music wouldn't result in a puff piece from Willis so, as that has become the state of music 'criticism,' it's probably best that many of the pioneers of rock criticism found other outlets.
To end on a things-to-do note (as opposed to leaving us all down), The Nation would be wise to stop farming out music reviews to really bad non-staff writers (who often don't know their facts -- the Courtney Love review contained 'facts' about Love's past albums that weren't 'facts' because they weren't true -- that includes the reference to song lengths) and instead offer the space to Goldstein to write essays (not reviews) that could engage and enrage the readership.
There's more than enough detachment and stats in the world of music 'criticism' today -- it could use some life. And the nation itself would be better off if we all brought even a little of the passion to our own lives that Willis brought to her own. She lived it like it mattered and that's why it did and why she (still) does.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
ellen willis
the nation
richard goldstein
patricia kennealy morrison
lillian roxon
ann powers
I really don't care for obits and, after my own health scare in 2005, have little interest in noting deaths. (Which is why we started relying on Democracy Now!'s headlines to note a passing in 2005.) But there are enough e-mails on this from members that I've decided we'll note it in some way.
I thought we could do a cutting of various things on Willis but, outside of The Nation piece, I'm not seeing much. So I'll share a few thoughts.
Willis was prickly, passionate and a pain in the ass. None of which is a bad thing. She had a very concrete set of principles that she stuck to and she could (and did) cut anyone out that didn't adhere to them. Not because she was a bad person, but because she was very committed to change and didn't have much use for those who kind-of, sort-of were.
Along with a very small group of women, Willis was there to chart the sixties music scene. Patricia Kennealy Morrison, someone I have tremendous respect and love for, was also present at that time and making a difference. The two had very different writing styles but if you wonder why music sucks so bad, so often, today, blame it on the bad critics.
Willis and Kennealy Morrison were among the women who made huge contributions. Not just in terms of our understanding but in terms of using their power to push music further. Even then, there were the male critics playing whose stats were bigger, trying to turn art into a sport.
When you read a really bad piece of supposed music criticism noting the yard-sticks (monetary) of an artist, it's because the other set of critics moved on. What you're largely left with are pieces by people who don't feel much or, if they do, can't share it. That reviews are now thumbnails in most publications is sad until you grasp that all the majority of writers today can offer really can be boiled down to one or two paragraphs.
For every Ellen Willis, there were ten to twenty Arnold Shaws -- determined to beat all the life out of music. It's not surprising that Willis or Kennealy Morrison (who is now known today for her books that make up The Keltiad) walked away from music criticism. Or that while every male who ever flashed the text equivalent of the back of a baseball card is the subject of attention while Willis and Kennealy Morrison (and Lillian Roxon to cite another) are largely overlooked for their own contributions.
It has to do with lifeless prose vs. writing on a subject you care about. Willis belonged to the latter group and had little use for the nostalgia that you still see so many males trot out today when one of their rock "gods" issues another generic release. The same stat keepers were nostalgic in real time as well.
I'm focusing on that period even though Willis left long ago (returning to the landscape to pen an essay for Janis -- the boxed set of Janis Joplin recordings that was issued in 1993, which also includes an essay by one of the best critics today, Ann Powers) because that was where she first utilized her voice and spoke to many. The 'rules' were already present but could be broken and Willis was one of the ones breaking them.
In 1968, in The New Yorker, she wrote:
What all this adds up to is an increaing tendency to judge pop music intrinsically, the way poetry or jazz is judged. Social context is still important, as it is for most art. But although social and economci factors were once an integral part of the rock aesthetic -- indeed defined that aesthetic -- they are now subordinate to the "music itself."
On balance, in spite of all the good music that would never have happened otherwise, I think this tendency is regrettable. What it means is that rock has been coopted by high culture, forced to adopt its standards -- chief of which is the integrity of the art object. It means the end of rock as a radical experiment in creating mass culture on its own terms, ignoring elite definitions of what is or is not intrinsic to aesthetic experience.
In the lines above, I think, you can find the basis for everything she wrote, before or after, regardless of the topic. (That's from memory. I believe the title is "Records: Rock, Etc." and it was summer of 1968.) (I've never been able to get my New Yorker set to work on the bedroom computer -- where I am unless I'm on the laptop most days. But if a member needs a citation, I'll get on another computer and look up the date of publication.)
All the issues that captured and concerned her over the years are in that highlight.
After I decided I didn't want to put myself through the process of writing obits here, a woman who had written for Rolling Stone died and I thought it would be noted somewhere (outside of the Times' obit which I found insulting) and we could note it that way. It really didn't get attention and that may have been due to the 'controversial' nature (to some) of the woman's life.
Hopefully, that won't be the case for Willis (who was more 'controversial' -- to some -- for thought as opposed to some supposed transgression).
Willis was a feminist and I'm sure that will be noted. It should be. But her writing was feminist long before the second wave took off. So, possibly assuming wrongly that aspect will be covered elsewhere, I wanted to note her contribution to the music scene which wasn't merely as an observer but as an active participant (on the page and off) that encouraged experimentation and adventure. Had Willis, Kennealy Morrison and others won out, you wouldn't have sappy pieces hailing Dylan doing a radio oldies show as a 'break through.' Their minds didn't go soggy and they didn't mistake flashing the back of sports trading card for critiques. They defined the critics role as something other than:
On __'s latest CD, s/he is returning to the sounds of ____ after the previous CD resulted in disappointing sales. "____" kicks things off with a slow jam that borrows heavily from the work of the Neptunes. S/he is in a playful mood on "___" which sounds like the mating of the Yardbirds and Abba. Thumbs up!
The groundbreaking pioneers, often overlooked today, championed independent thought and exploration. That was at the heart of all Willis' writing throughout her life.
Richard Goldstein can be on the money or dead wrong. That's probably why I recognized the Willis he wrote about. Like her, he searches and explores. He doesn't phone in it. (Neither does our own Kat.) But if you read Rolling Stone, for instance, today and often finish an issue feeling either insulted or robbed of the time, it has a lot to do with the fact that another school of 'criticism' won out -- the easy school, the insta-critic.
In 1986, I phoned a friend at Rolling Stone to find out how the hell a review made it into print? It was on a nothing (talent and sales wise) and fawned over the artist (who soon would be without a recording contract in the United States for good reason). How did that get into print? Why was the album even reviewed? Letters.
Letters had come in from readers who found the artist "hot." So a pedistrain critc was assigned to make sense of the album (which would bomb) and the critic compared the artist to a number of musicians known for their serious explorations of topics. (I'm biting my tongue so hard right now. But if I said, "They compared ____ to ____ and ____," everyone would burst out laughing with good reason. It was laughable at the time as well.)
Willis never would have written such a piece. She wouldn't have fawned over sales (and would have pointed out that the 'sophomore slump' had taken hold previously and that the artist's sales were already in decline). But that's the mentality that won out. Not an attempt to cover music as if it was worth covering but a desire to fawn over something expected to sale. (You can still see that in RS' reviews today.) The convergence of supposed sales to come and bad music wouldn't result in a puff piece from Willis so, as that has become the state of music 'criticism,' it's probably best that many of the pioneers of rock criticism found other outlets.
To end on a things-to-do note (as opposed to leaving us all down), The Nation would be wise to stop farming out music reviews to really bad non-staff writers (who often don't know their facts -- the Courtney Love review contained 'facts' about Love's past albums that weren't 'facts' because they weren't true -- that includes the reference to song lengths) and instead offer the space to Goldstein to write essays (not reviews) that could engage and enrage the readership.
There's more than enough detachment and stats in the world of music 'criticism' today -- it could use some life. And the nation itself would be better off if we all brought even a little of the passion to our own lives that Willis brought to her own. She lived it like it mattered and that's why it did and why she (still) does.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
ellen willis
the nation
richard goldstein
patricia kennealy morrison
lillian roxon
ann powers
Friday, November 10, 2006
Iraq snapshot
Friday, November 10th. Chaos and violence continue in Iraq, the US military announces they will court-martial Lt. Ehren Watada, the US military also announces the death of five more US troops in Iraq, John Howard makes Australians and the rest of the world glad that there's only one of him, and David Swanson explains what really happened in DC.
Starting with news on US war resister Ehren Watada. In June, Watada went public with his refusal to deploy to Iraq because the war is illegal and deploying would subject both himself and those serving under him to war crimes. In standing up, Watada became the first US commissioned officer to publicly refuse to serve in the illegal war. On August 17th, Article 32 hearing was held. [For details on Ann Wright's testimony, click here, Dennis Halliday click here, and here for Francis A. Boyle.] Following the hearing on the 17th, the US military announced August 24th that the presiding officer of the hearing, Lt. Colonel Mark Keith, had made a recommendation, court-martial. Yesterday, The KPFA Evening News reported that the US military had decided to court-martial Watada. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that "Lt. Gen. James Dubik, agreed with the recommended charges of missing a military movement and conduct unbecoming an officer." Gregg Kakesako (Honolulu Star-Bulletin) reports that conviction during the court-martial ("held next year") could result in "six years in jail and a dishonorable discharge." Honolulu's KITV spoke with Eric Seitz, attorney for Watada, who stated, "Unfortunately the army does want to make a martyr out of him. They have told us they will not enter into any agreement that doesn't include at least a year of incarceration, and that's just simply something we are unable to agree to." Rod Ohira (Honolulu Advertiser) notes the following statements by Watada after learning of the recommendation to court-martial him:
"I feel the referral of the charges was not unexpected and at this time, I'm moving forward as I always have with resilience and fortitude to face the challenges ahead. . . . I think as the recent elections show more and more Americans are opening their eyes, but we aren't there yet. It is my hope that actions such as my own continue to call for the truth behind the fundamental illegality and immorality of those who perpetrated this war."
Coverage of war resisters in the US independent media has been embarrassing and shameful. Rebecca checks in on several independent outlets only to find that none have anything on Watada this morning. He appears to getting the full-Brobeck from independent media. (CBS notes Watada here.) War resister Ivan Brobeck returned to the US from Canada to turn himself in Tuesday and he didn't even make the indy headlines. (Nora Barrows Friedman did interview him on Monday's Flashpoints.) It's not cutting it. Not for Brobeck, not for Kyle Snyder who's also been ignored after returning to the US and, on October 31st, turning himself in at Fort Knox only to self-check out again after discovering the military had lied yet again. Not for Joshua Key who learned that the Canadian government was denying him refugee status.
A list of war resisters within the military would include Watada, Key, Snyder, and Brobeck. It would also include many other names such as Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. That's just the ones who have gone public. (Over thirty US war resisters are currently in Canada attempting to be legally recognized.) It is a movement and should be covered as such. Ehren Watada's father and step-mother are currently on a speaking tour (tonight they're in NYC) and details on that will be at the end of the snapshot.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress in January.
Grabbing headlines is Ali al-Shemari. The Iraqi Health minister announced a number for the death toll of Iraqis due to the illegal war. AP notes that he places the death toll at 150,000. The KPFA Evening News pointed out on Thursday that is he was actually basing his 'count' on the United Nations estimate of at least 100 Iraqis dying each day "that calculation would be closer to 130,000." CBS and AP note that he rejects the number of approximately 655,000 in the Lancet Study but thinks his own number is "OK." Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) calls the number "an off-the-cuff estimate". Puppets can't go off-the-cuff or off-script which may be why AFP is reporting that the estimates being watered down (the Health Ministry is now saying between 100,000 and 150,000).
Meanwhile the US military has announced today "One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 5 died Thursday from wounds sustained due to enemy action while operating in Al Anbar Province" and also "Two 89th Military Police Brigade Soldiers were killed and one Soldier was wounded Thursday after their vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device at 12:48 p.m. Thursday in west Baghdad." Later in the day would come more announcements. This: "One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 7 died today from non-hostile causes while operating in Al Anbar Province," and this: "One Soldier assigned to the 13th Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) was killed and another wounded Nov. 10 during a combat logistics patrol when their truck was hit by an improvised explosive device west of Hadithah" for a total of five deaths announced today. ICCC currently lists 24 as the number of US troop deaths in Iraq for the month, thus far (2842 since the start of the illegal war). As the numbers continue to climb, Michael Luo and Michael Wilson (New York Times) report that funerals have become so common for the First Battalion, 22nd Infantry in Iraq that planning time for services have been cut from 45 minutes to five minutes.
While the numbers (on all sides) continue to mount, AP notes Donald Rumsfled stated (yesterday), "I will say this -- it is very clear that the major combat operations were an enormous success." Oh White Queen, get someone to help you a-dress quickly. Forgetting the illegal nature of the war for a moment, that's a bit like a drunk driver who plows into a car and kills an entire family stating, "I will say this -- I pulled away from the curb nicely."
In some of the reported violence today . . .
Bombings?
AFP reports: "In violence on the ground, a powerful blast killed an Iraqi army colonel and his five bodyguards in the northern town of Tall Afar. Reuters notes it was a car bombing and that 17 people were wounded while, in Kirkuk, a roadside bombing injured two Iraqi soldiers.
Reuters notes that, in Yusufiya, 14 people were kidnapped (by "gunmen") and then found dead and a man was shot dead in Diwaniya. Christopher Bodeen (AP) reports that three family members were shot dead in Baghdad (home invasion).
Corpses?
Reuters reports, "Police fished the body of a woman, bearing signs of torture and bullet wounds, from the Tigris river in Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad, police said." In addition, Christopher Bodeen (AP) informs that 33 corpses were discovered "in Baghdad and several nearby cities."
In Australia, War Hawk and prime minister John Howard's laughable comments yesterday have resulted in more punch lines. Gillian Bradford observered to Eleanor Hall (ABC's PM) that "Whatever the opinion polls here may say here about Australians' desire to get out of Iraq, the Prime Minister isn't swayed" and he intended to ring Tony Blair up just as soon as he (Howard) finished his cricket match. Give 'em Flair, Howie. AAP reports that: "Prime Minister John Howard should tell George W Bush that he's pulling Australian troops out of Iraq when the two leaders meet next week, Opposition Leader Kim Beazley says. Mr Howard will have lunch with the US president during next week's APEC meeting in Hanoi, Vietnam - their first meeting since Mr Bush's Republican party was thumped in US mid-term elections." Bully Boy gets to Vietnam a lot more today than when he 'served,' doesn't he? Meanwhile Xinhau reports: "Howard said he will commiserate with Bush in person at the APEC meeting in the second half of next week.
Howard said he had always accepted that the majority of the Australian public had been against the military commitment to Iraq." Howard 'accepts' the majority opinion, he just doesn't 'respect' it.
In peace news, yesterday's snapshot noted Cindy Sheehan was arrested outside the White House while attempting to deliver a petition (with over 80,000 signatures) calling for the US troops to be brought home. Not quite. David Swanson (Let's Try Democracy) reports she was arrested outside the White House long after the petition: "Late Wednesday afternoon Cindy decided to lead a sit-in right in front of the White House, and then -- finally -- the Park Service arrested her. The Associated Press changed the lede to its article to read as follows: 'Activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Wednesday as she led about 50 protesters to a White House gate to deliver anti-war petitions.' Not quite accurate. The petitions had been delivered several hours before the arrest. But what the heck, it probably got more editors to pick up the story. Thanks, again, Cindy!" Swasnon outlines the events as being stalled at the gates of the White House when attempting to deliver the petition leading activists to place pages in the fence and to send pages over the fence. Hours later, Cindy Sheehan staged the sit-down.
In other news of activists who refuse to hit the snooze button, Wendell Harper reported on yesterday's The KPFA Evening News and today on KPFA's The Morning Show that Medea Benjamin was among those activists participating in a rally outside the soon-to-be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco office calling for troops home now.
Finally, Ehren Watada's father, Bob Watada, and his step-mother, Rosa Sakanishi, continue their speaking tour to raise awareness on Ehren -- the first commissioned officer to refuse to deploy to Iraq. Due to increased interest there have been some date changes and a full schedule can be found here. Upcoming dates include:
Nov 10, Early PM, New York City, NY., Press Conference
Location: UN, 777 United Nations Plaza, First Avenue and E. 44th Street
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contact: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
George McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 10, 7:30PM, New York City, NY.
Location: St. Paul/St. Andrews Methodist Church -- West End Avenue and West 86th Streets,
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
Nov 11, 10AM-2:30PM, New York City, NY.,Veterans Day Parade
Sponsor: Veterans For Peace Chapters 34 & 138, IVAW, MFSO
Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
George McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 11, 3-5 PM, Flushing, NY.,
Location: Macedonia AME Church (718) 353-5870
37-22 Union St.
Sponsors: "United for Lt. Watada"
Contact: Gloria Lum 646-824-2710, lumgloria@yahoo.com
Nov 11, 7 PM, New York City, NY., Manhattan,
Location: Columbia University, Broadway and W 116 St., Bldg- Mathematics Rm 312
Sponsors: Asian American Alliance, "United for Lt. Watada",
Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contact: Gloria Lum 646-824-2710
Nov 12, 11AM-1PM, Providence, RI., Location: Brown University, The John Nicholas Brown Center, 357 Benefit Street at Williams
Sponsor: Veterans For Peace National
Contact: Naoko Shibusawa, 401-286-1908, Naoko_Shibusawa@brown.edu
Nov 12, 7PM, Rockland County, NY., Location: TBA
Sponsor: Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice, Veterans For Peace National and Veterans For Peace Chapter /Rockland County
Contact: Nancy Tsou, LYTHRN@aol.com
Barbara Greenhut
Nov 13 , TBA, Ann Arbor, MI, "The Ground Truth" and Bob Watada,
Location: University of Michigan, Angel Hall, Auditorium B,
Sponsors: Michigan Peace Works http://michiganpeaceworks.org,
Contact: Phillis Engelbert, work - 734-761-5922, home - 734-662-0818, cell- 734-660-489, philliseng@yahoo.com
Nov 14, TBA St. Louis, Mo. Location: Friends Meeting House, 1001 Park Avenue Sponsors: Veterans for Peace Chapter 161, 314-754-2651Contact: Chuc Smith, 314-721-1814, vfpch61@riseup.net
iraq
kyle snyder
ivan brobeck
flashpoints
nora barrows friedman
joshua key
cindy sheehan
ehren watada
bob watada
kpfa
the morning show
medea benjamin
codepink
the kpfa evening news
wendell harper
the new york times
michael luo
michael wilson
sabrina tavernise
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
Starting with news on US war resister Ehren Watada. In June, Watada went public with his refusal to deploy to Iraq because the war is illegal and deploying would subject both himself and those serving under him to war crimes. In standing up, Watada became the first US commissioned officer to publicly refuse to serve in the illegal war. On August 17th, Article 32 hearing was held. [For details on Ann Wright's testimony, click here, Dennis Halliday click here, and here for Francis A. Boyle.] Following the hearing on the 17th, the US military announced August 24th that the presiding officer of the hearing, Lt. Colonel Mark Keith, had made a recommendation, court-martial. Yesterday, The KPFA Evening News reported that the US military had decided to court-martial Watada. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that "Lt. Gen. James Dubik, agreed with the recommended charges of missing a military movement and conduct unbecoming an officer." Gregg Kakesako (Honolulu Star-Bulletin) reports that conviction during the court-martial ("held next year") could result in "six years in jail and a dishonorable discharge." Honolulu's KITV spoke with Eric Seitz, attorney for Watada, who stated, "Unfortunately the army does want to make a martyr out of him. They have told us they will not enter into any agreement that doesn't include at least a year of incarceration, and that's just simply something we are unable to agree to." Rod Ohira (Honolulu Advertiser) notes the following statements by Watada after learning of the recommendation to court-martial him:
"I feel the referral of the charges was not unexpected and at this time, I'm moving forward as I always have with resilience and fortitude to face the challenges ahead. . . . I think as the recent elections show more and more Americans are opening their eyes, but we aren't there yet. It is my hope that actions such as my own continue to call for the truth behind the fundamental illegality and immorality of those who perpetrated this war."
Coverage of war resisters in the US independent media has been embarrassing and shameful. Rebecca checks in on several independent outlets only to find that none have anything on Watada this morning. He appears to getting the full-Brobeck from independent media. (CBS notes Watada here.) War resister Ivan Brobeck returned to the US from Canada to turn himself in Tuesday and he didn't even make the indy headlines. (Nora Barrows Friedman did interview him on Monday's Flashpoints.) It's not cutting it. Not for Brobeck, not for Kyle Snyder who's also been ignored after returning to the US and, on October 31st, turning himself in at Fort Knox only to self-check out again after discovering the military had lied yet again. Not for Joshua Key who learned that the Canadian government was denying him refugee status.
A list of war resisters within the military would include Watada, Key, Snyder, and Brobeck. It would also include many other names such as Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. That's just the ones who have gone public. (Over thirty US war resisters are currently in Canada attempting to be legally recognized.) It is a movement and should be covered as such. Ehren Watada's father and step-mother are currently on a speaking tour (tonight they're in NYC) and details on that will be at the end of the snapshot.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress in January.
Grabbing headlines is Ali al-Shemari. The Iraqi Health minister announced a number for the death toll of Iraqis due to the illegal war. AP notes that he places the death toll at 150,000. The KPFA Evening News pointed out on Thursday that is he was actually basing his 'count' on the United Nations estimate of at least 100 Iraqis dying each day "that calculation would be closer to 130,000." CBS and AP note that he rejects the number of approximately 655,000 in the Lancet Study but thinks his own number is "OK." Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) calls the number "an off-the-cuff estimate". Puppets can't go off-the-cuff or off-script which may be why AFP is reporting that the estimates being watered down (the Health Ministry is now saying between 100,000 and 150,000).
Meanwhile the US military has announced today "One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 5 died Thursday from wounds sustained due to enemy action while operating in Al Anbar Province" and also "Two 89th Military Police Brigade Soldiers were killed and one Soldier was wounded Thursday after their vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device at 12:48 p.m. Thursday in west Baghdad." Later in the day would come more announcements. This: "One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 7 died today from non-hostile causes while operating in Al Anbar Province," and this: "One Soldier assigned to the 13th Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) was killed and another wounded Nov. 10 during a combat logistics patrol when their truck was hit by an improvised explosive device west of Hadithah" for a total of five deaths announced today. ICCC currently lists 24 as the number of US troop deaths in Iraq for the month, thus far (2842 since the start of the illegal war). As the numbers continue to climb, Michael Luo and Michael Wilson (New York Times) report that funerals have become so common for the First Battalion, 22nd Infantry in Iraq that planning time for services have been cut from 45 minutes to five minutes.
While the numbers (on all sides) continue to mount, AP notes Donald Rumsfled stated (yesterday), "I will say this -- it is very clear that the major combat operations were an enormous success." Oh White Queen, get someone to help you a-dress quickly. Forgetting the illegal nature of the war for a moment, that's a bit like a drunk driver who plows into a car and kills an entire family stating, "I will say this -- I pulled away from the curb nicely."
In some of the reported violence today . . .
Bombings?
AFP reports: "In violence on the ground, a powerful blast killed an Iraqi army colonel and his five bodyguards in the northern town of Tall Afar. Reuters notes it was a car bombing and that 17 people were wounded while, in Kirkuk, a roadside bombing injured two Iraqi soldiers.
Reuters notes that, in Yusufiya, 14 people were kidnapped (by "gunmen") and then found dead and a man was shot dead in Diwaniya. Christopher Bodeen (AP) reports that three family members were shot dead in Baghdad (home invasion).
Corpses?
Reuters reports, "Police fished the body of a woman, bearing signs of torture and bullet wounds, from the Tigris river in Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad, police said." In addition, Christopher Bodeen (AP) informs that 33 corpses were discovered "in Baghdad and several nearby cities."
In Australia, War Hawk and prime minister John Howard's laughable comments yesterday have resulted in more punch lines. Gillian Bradford observered to Eleanor Hall (ABC's PM) that "Whatever the opinion polls here may say here about Australians' desire to get out of Iraq, the Prime Minister isn't swayed" and he intended to ring Tony Blair up just as soon as he (Howard) finished his cricket match. Give 'em Flair, Howie. AAP reports that: "Prime Minister John Howard should tell George W Bush that he's pulling Australian troops out of Iraq when the two leaders meet next week, Opposition Leader Kim Beazley says. Mr Howard will have lunch with the US president during next week's APEC meeting in Hanoi, Vietnam - their first meeting since Mr Bush's Republican party was thumped in US mid-term elections." Bully Boy gets to Vietnam a lot more today than when he 'served,' doesn't he? Meanwhile Xinhau reports: "Howard said he will commiserate with Bush in person at the APEC meeting in the second half of next week.
Howard said he had always accepted that the majority of the Australian public had been against the military commitment to Iraq." Howard 'accepts' the majority opinion, he just doesn't 'respect' it.
In peace news, yesterday's snapshot noted Cindy Sheehan was arrested outside the White House while attempting to deliver a petition (with over 80,000 signatures) calling for the US troops to be brought home. Not quite. David Swanson (Let's Try Democracy) reports she was arrested outside the White House long after the petition: "Late Wednesday afternoon Cindy decided to lead a sit-in right in front of the White House, and then -- finally -- the Park Service arrested her. The Associated Press changed the lede to its article to read as follows: 'Activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Wednesday as she led about 50 protesters to a White House gate to deliver anti-war petitions.' Not quite accurate. The petitions had been delivered several hours before the arrest. But what the heck, it probably got more editors to pick up the story. Thanks, again, Cindy!" Swasnon outlines the events as being stalled at the gates of the White House when attempting to deliver the petition leading activists to place pages in the fence and to send pages over the fence. Hours later, Cindy Sheehan staged the sit-down.
In other news of activists who refuse to hit the snooze button, Wendell Harper reported on yesterday's The KPFA Evening News and today on KPFA's The Morning Show that Medea Benjamin was among those activists participating in a rally outside the soon-to-be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco office calling for troops home now.
Finally, Ehren Watada's father, Bob Watada, and his step-mother, Rosa Sakanishi, continue their speaking tour to raise awareness on Ehren -- the first commissioned officer to refuse to deploy to Iraq. Due to increased interest there have been some date changes and a full schedule can be found here. Upcoming dates include:
Nov 10, Early PM, New York City, NY., Press Conference
Location: UN, 777 United Nations Plaza, First Avenue and E. 44th Street
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contact: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
George McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 10, 7:30PM, New York City, NY.
Location: St. Paul/St. Andrews Methodist Church -- West End Avenue and West 86th Streets,
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
Nov 11, 10AM-2:30PM, New York City, NY.,Veterans Day Parade
Sponsor: Veterans For Peace Chapters 34 & 138, IVAW, MFSO
Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
George McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 11, 3-5 PM, Flushing, NY.,
Location: Macedonia AME Church (718) 353-5870
37-22 Union St.
Sponsors: "United for Lt. Watada"
Contact: Gloria Lum 646-824-2710, lumgloria@yahoo.com
Nov 11, 7 PM, New York City, NY., Manhattan,
Location: Columbia University, Broadway and W 116 St., Bldg- Mathematics Rm 312
Sponsors: Asian American Alliance, "United for Lt. Watada",
Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contact: Gloria Lum 646-824-2710
Nov 12, 11AM-1PM, Providence, RI., Location: Brown University, The John Nicholas Brown Center, 357 Benefit Street at Williams
Sponsor: Veterans For Peace National
Contact: Naoko Shibusawa, 401-286-1908, Naoko_Shibusawa@brown.edu
Nov 12, 7PM, Rockland County, NY., Location: TBA
Sponsor: Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice, Veterans For Peace National and Veterans For Peace Chapter /Rockland County
Contact: Nancy Tsou, LYTHRN@aol.com
Barbara Greenhut
Nov 13 , TBA, Ann Arbor, MI, "The Ground Truth" and Bob Watada,
Location: University of Michigan, Angel Hall, Auditorium B,
Sponsors: Michigan Peace Works http://michiganpeaceworks.org,
Contact: Phillis Engelbert, work - 734-761-5922, home - 734-662-0818, cell- 734-660-489, philliseng@yahoo.com
Nov 14, TBA St. Louis, Mo. Location: Friends Meeting House, 1001 Park Avenue Sponsors: Veterans for Peace Chapter 161, 314-754-2651Contact: Chuc Smith, 314-721-1814, vfpch61@riseup.net
iraq
kyle snyder
ivan brobeck
flashpoints
nora barrows friedman
joshua key
cindy sheehan
ehren watada
bob watada
kpfa
the morning show
medea benjamin
codepink
the kpfa evening news
wendell harper
the new york times
michael luo
michael wilson
sabrina tavernise
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
Other Items (Danny Schechter on KPFA's Living Room today)
One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 5 died Thursday from wounds sustained due to enemy action while operating in Al Anbar Province.
The above was noted today by the US military as was this:
Two 89th Military Police Brigade Soldiers were killed and one Soldier was wounded Thursday after their vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device at 12:48 p.m. Thursday in west Baghdad.
Those giving the occasional lip service to being opposed to the war but unable to cover it, war resisters or the peace movement should note the above and grasp that they prolong the illegal war by their silence. (Before some blogger takes offense, I'm not speaking of blogs.)
Memorial services honoring fallen soldiers from the First Battalion, 22nd Infantry in Iraq used to require planning meetings of as long as 45 minutes. But at this point, they take barely five.
"We're here again," said Chaplain John Hill. A roadside bomb had killed yet another soldier from the battalion the day before. He began to recite the unit's "memorial ceremony execution matrix," a 40-item checklist of tasks that includes everything from collecting personal effects to finding a singer.
The above is from Michael Luo and Michael Wilson's "When Soldiers Fall, Grief Binds a Unit’s 2 Worlds" in this morning's New York Times. Martha notes Ann Scott Tyson's "Rumsfeld Speaks on Iraq and Legacy" (Washington Post) and we're zooming in on this section, read carefully:
But some inside the Pentagon -- including senior military officials -- had stronger opinions on Rumsfeld and his departure.
"Rumsfeld is a distraction," said one senior military officer. "What did he do to help the president? What did he do to help the Republican Party?" he asked, suggesting that the defense secretary should have left months ago.
Shouldn't the question be about the war? "What did he do to help the Republican Party?" That's a concern for a "senior military officer" or a GOP operative? Martha also notes that for a humorous look at Rumsfled, refer to Wally's "THIS JUST IN! RUMSFELD TALKS!" and Cedric's "Rumsfled sits for an exclusive (humor)" from yesterday. Let me plug Rebecca who will be addressing a gas bag on Democracy Now! determined to push his own agenda and facts be damned. Cokie Roberts is alive and well and inhabiting gas bags across the nation. (You're clue to gas baggery, when someone is supposed to be discussing facts but is too busy offering that Barak Obama is a "rock star.") I'm on the phone with Rebecca right now and let me just note that one of the most idiotic statements the gas bag makes (and he makes many) is something she won't address because we're addressing it (Harold Ford Jr.) at The Third Estate Sunday Review. There's something that wasn't noted by the mainstream this week. It was run, but they didn't note it. We'll be noting it at The Third Estate Sunday Review and gas bags would do well to stop propping Ford up as a brave voice for race. If I heard the gas bag correctly on a "pin" one candidate wore, he might want to try gathering some information before gas bagging. Rebecca's sitting on it because NO ONE has noted it. Possibly it didn't run online? But she'll have a great deal to say on the topic. Look for it to go up after the snapshot goes up here today. (I'm going to attempt to get it up earlier than usual so that she can get her post up. I did tell her she could do her post without it but she wants to include the snapshot.) (And that's been addressed at other sites but, for anyone who missed it, Keesha and others requested that. I didn't.) I'll also add that after the gas baggery (and not everyone participating is a gas bag, I heard one woman who stuck to data and what it said), Elizabeth Holtzman and Daniel Ellsberg are guests on Democracy Now! today.
Sabrina Tavernise looks at the puppet/ruling class in Iraq (and notes they meet in the heavily fortified, heavily protected Green Zone) in "American Political Shift Linked to the War Is Met With a Shrug by Baghdad's Elite:"
The Shiites, for their part, were angry that the Sunnis were insisting on a bigger role in government. The Sunnis chose to boycott politics in the early months of the occupation, they said, a decision that cost them their say in the early efforts to form a new Iraqi government.
The anger was not helped by the 10 lethal mortar attacks across Baghdad since Sunday that have killed 15 people and wounded 87. Mortars shot by militants of both sects are an ever-more-popular way to carry out sectarian killings here.
In an off-the-cuff estimate of Iraqi civilian casualties, Iraq's health minister, Ali al-Shimari, said on an official visit to Vienna that 150,000 Iraqis had been killed in violence since the American invasion, according to The Associated Press. He did not say whether the figure included the deaths of Iraqi Army soldiers and police officers. The figure assumes a monthly death toll of 3,300, about the national toll given by the United Nations for July.
While al-Shemari didn't note whether police officers were included, someone else did. The AP report that we noted yesterday states:
No official count has ever been available, and Health Minister Ali al-Shemari did not detail how he arrived at the new estimate of 150,000, which he provided to reporters during a visit to the Austrian capital.
But later Thursday, Hassan Salem, of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, or SCIRI, said the 150,000 figure included civilians, police and the bodies of people who were abducted, later found dead and collected at morgues run by the Health Ministry. SCIRI is Iraq's largest Shiite political organization and holds the largest number of seats in parliament.
And today, Danny Schechter will be a guest on Kris Welch's Living Room on KPFA (noon Pacific, two Central, three p.m. Eastern -- you can listen online, no registration, no survey, no fee).
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
the new york times
michael luo
michael wilson
sabrina tavernise
the washington post
ann scott tyson
danny schechter
the third estate sunday review
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
The above was noted today by the US military as was this:
Two 89th Military Police Brigade Soldiers were killed and one Soldier was wounded Thursday after their vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device at 12:48 p.m. Thursday in west Baghdad.
Those giving the occasional lip service to being opposed to the war but unable to cover it, war resisters or the peace movement should note the above and grasp that they prolong the illegal war by their silence. (Before some blogger takes offense, I'm not speaking of blogs.)
Memorial services honoring fallen soldiers from the First Battalion, 22nd Infantry in Iraq used to require planning meetings of as long as 45 minutes. But at this point, they take barely five.
"We're here again," said Chaplain John Hill. A roadside bomb had killed yet another soldier from the battalion the day before. He began to recite the unit's "memorial ceremony execution matrix," a 40-item checklist of tasks that includes everything from collecting personal effects to finding a singer.
The above is from Michael Luo and Michael Wilson's "When Soldiers Fall, Grief Binds a Unit’s 2 Worlds" in this morning's New York Times. Martha notes Ann Scott Tyson's "Rumsfeld Speaks on Iraq and Legacy" (Washington Post) and we're zooming in on this section, read carefully:
But some inside the Pentagon -- including senior military officials -- had stronger opinions on Rumsfeld and his departure.
"Rumsfeld is a distraction," said one senior military officer. "What did he do to help the president? What did he do to help the Republican Party?" he asked, suggesting that the defense secretary should have left months ago.
Shouldn't the question be about the war? "What did he do to help the Republican Party?" That's a concern for a "senior military officer" or a GOP operative? Martha also notes that for a humorous look at Rumsfled, refer to Wally's "THIS JUST IN! RUMSFELD TALKS!" and Cedric's "Rumsfled sits for an exclusive (humor)" from yesterday. Let me plug Rebecca who will be addressing a gas bag on Democracy Now! determined to push his own agenda and facts be damned. Cokie Roberts is alive and well and inhabiting gas bags across the nation. (You're clue to gas baggery, when someone is supposed to be discussing facts but is too busy offering that Barak Obama is a "rock star.") I'm on the phone with Rebecca right now and let me just note that one of the most idiotic statements the gas bag makes (and he makes many) is something she won't address because we're addressing it (Harold Ford Jr.) at The Third Estate Sunday Review. There's something that wasn't noted by the mainstream this week. It was run, but they didn't note it. We'll be noting it at The Third Estate Sunday Review and gas bags would do well to stop propping Ford up as a brave voice for race. If I heard the gas bag correctly on a "pin" one candidate wore, he might want to try gathering some information before gas bagging. Rebecca's sitting on it because NO ONE has noted it. Possibly it didn't run online? But she'll have a great deal to say on the topic. Look for it to go up after the snapshot goes up here today. (I'm going to attempt to get it up earlier than usual so that she can get her post up. I did tell her she could do her post without it but she wants to include the snapshot.) (And that's been addressed at other sites but, for anyone who missed it, Keesha and others requested that. I didn't.) I'll also add that after the gas baggery (and not everyone participating is a gas bag, I heard one woman who stuck to data and what it said), Elizabeth Holtzman and Daniel Ellsberg are guests on Democracy Now! today.
Sabrina Tavernise looks at the puppet/ruling class in Iraq (and notes they meet in the heavily fortified, heavily protected Green Zone) in "American Political Shift Linked to the War Is Met With a Shrug by Baghdad's Elite:"
The Shiites, for their part, were angry that the Sunnis were insisting on a bigger role in government. The Sunnis chose to boycott politics in the early months of the occupation, they said, a decision that cost them their say in the early efforts to form a new Iraqi government.
The anger was not helped by the 10 lethal mortar attacks across Baghdad since Sunday that have killed 15 people and wounded 87. Mortars shot by militants of both sects are an ever-more-popular way to carry out sectarian killings here.
In an off-the-cuff estimate of Iraqi civilian casualties, Iraq's health minister, Ali al-Shimari, said on an official visit to Vienna that 150,000 Iraqis had been killed in violence since the American invasion, according to The Associated Press. He did not say whether the figure included the deaths of Iraqi Army soldiers and police officers. The figure assumes a monthly death toll of 3,300, about the national toll given by the United Nations for July.
While al-Shemari didn't note whether police officers were included, someone else did. The AP report that we noted yesterday states:
No official count has ever been available, and Health Minister Ali al-Shemari did not detail how he arrived at the new estimate of 150,000, which he provided to reporters during a visit to the Austrian capital.
But later Thursday, Hassan Salem, of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, or SCIRI, said the 150,000 figure included civilians, police and the bodies of people who were abducted, later found dead and collected at morgues run by the Health Ministry. SCIRI is Iraq's largest Shiite political organization and holds the largest number of seats in parliament.
And today, Danny Schechter will be a guest on Kris Welch's Living Room on KPFA (noon Pacific, two Central, three p.m. Eastern -- you can listen online, no registration, no survey, no fee).
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
the new york times
michael luo
michael wilson
sabrina tavernise
the washington post
ann scott tyson
danny schechter
the third estate sunday review
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
Ehren Watada and another issue that matters to the community
The stage is set for Honolulu-born Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada to be judged on his challenge to the legality of the war in Iraq.
Fort Lewis, Wash., commander Lt. Gen. James Dubik recommended yesterday that the Army proceed with a general court-martial against Watada for refusing to deploy to Iraq in June.
"This just reinforces my honest belief that from the very beginning my actions were right, according to conscience, and most importantly, by duty to the American people," Watada told reporters in Honolulu yesterday from Fort Lewis during a telephone news conference organized by his attorney, Eric Seitz.
"I feel the referral of the charges was not unexpected," Watada said, adding, "and at this time, I'm moving forward as I always have with resilience and fortitude to face the challenges ahead."
Watada, 28, said he is encouraged by the national support he has received and pointed to Tuesday's election results as a sign of the times.
"I think as the recent elections show more and more Americans are opening their eyes, but we aren't there yet," he said. "It is my hope that actions such as my own continue to call for the truth behind the fundamental illegality and immorality of those who perpetrated this war."
Watada and his attorney had been in negotiations with the Army since an Article 32 hearing on Aug. 17 to avert a trial, but talks broke down earlier this week, leading to Dubik's recommendation for general court-martial proceedings.
Seitz said Watada was willing to accept dismissal from the service and four months' incarceration, but the Army held firm on one-year confinement.
The above, noted by Joan, is from Rod Ohira's "Watada's case going to trial" (Honolulu Advertiser). There are links to other coverage in yesterday's "And the war drags on . . ."
Ehren Watada was the first commissioned officer to refuse to publicly deploy in the illegal war. To date, the only major left (or 'left') publication that's printed an article about this is LeftTurn.
Now the New York Times did an article, one, but our print independent media just couldn't be bothered.
Possibly if they spent less time in/with incestual cross-pollinating (no, the lesson of Lee Siegel was not learned), they could devote attention to this? Or possibly, some independent outlets have been waiting for the story to come to them? Congrats East Coast, today Bob Watada does just that:
Nov 10, Early PM, New York City, NY., Press Conference
Location: UN, 777 United Nations Plaza, First Avenue and E. 44th Street
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contact: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
George McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 10, 7:30PM, New York City, NY.
Location: St. Paul/St. Andrews Methodist Church -- West End Avenue and West 86th Streets,
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
New York is only one of the stops on his tour, a full schedule can be found here. I don't know what's sadder about The Nation right now: (a) the fact that they want to jaw bone about the war after exit polls find it was one of the deciding factors in the election (jaw bone now but go through the print editions in search of articles related to Iraq only if you want to be disappointed) or (b) the 'event' last night which could have been better received had they featured Nation staff as opposed to passing a person who is on the masthead of another publication off as one of their own. And the person in question is infamous for the early 2005 non-thought piece advocating the continuation of the illegal war.
The editorial, "Democrats and the War," included this: "There can no longer be any doubt: The American war in Iraq -- an unprovoked, unnecessary, unlawful invasion that has turned into a colonial-style occupation -- is a moral and political catastrophe. It has also become the single greatest threat to America's national security.... The Nation will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the American war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign." That position is called into question when someone who is on staff of another publication, and advocated the continuation of the illegal war when the 'left' wanted to turn their back on the issue of Iraq after the 2004 election, is presented as Nation staff.
Like most in America, we ignore the crap-style publication that the non-Nation writer works for. When Christopher Hitchens has a piece in The Nation, we don't make a big deal of it. We don't note it, don't refer to it and don't even question it. Though he's broken politically with the magazine, he does have a history with the magazine and if they want to run something by him, so be it. It's another thing altogether to bring on a writer who does not have a history like that with the magazine. And, for the crap-style magazine, it's rather sad that in twenty minutes of radio time the writer needed to pass themselves off as being associated with The Nation and never plugged the crap-style that pays the bill and puts them on the masthead. (But it's also rather sad to come on a program with a known topic and beg off a question with the lame, "I just woke up" excuse. If it's too much for you to think in the morning, spare listeners the torture of having to listen. -- Zach and Megan, I did read your e-mails on that.)
Most in this community dumped crap-style as soon as the writer in question came on board due the war issue. (Non-thought pieces on entertainment that got the facts wrong didn't help either. Nor, for one couple in the community, did an early version of Lee Siegel like behavior on the crap-style's blog. And no, that's not a full of list of the problems with that writer. I'm biting my tongue on several things including one that enraged the community, rightly so, some time ago.) But, as Natalie noted in an e-mail this morning, "I will not support any writer who does not make a speedy end to the American war in Iraq a major issue of his or her writing." Yes, she's using the The Nation's editorial and questioning why they're promoting crap-style writer?
It's a really good question. And the Lee Siegel lesson should have been learned by The Nation. Long before he humiliated himself publicly, he was able to write for The New Republic(an) and offering the same lame critiques in The Nation. From "4 Books, Many Minutes" (Third Estate Sunday Review), Decemeber 18, 2005:
Jess: A broader examination that goes beyond an individual or a party and deals with the press itself. Both the mainstream and a rag like The New Republic that wants to claim it's of the left. My parents are longterm subscribers of The Nation but they are very offended that New Republic writers are popping up. My mother says they're seriously questioning whether they will renew because she knows the comment Maria posted elsewhere about how C******* P***** won praise in The Nation and she read that and wondered about it, read the issue. Now that she knows that the writer of that piece works for The New Republic, she's started looking at other bylines. The New Republic is not a left magazine and The Nation shouldn't be propping it up.
C.I.: Just to clarify, the review, by Lee Siegel, I believe, was not praising P*****'s new book. It was, however, in panning the new book, offering kind words for the infamous book that deserves no praise and received none from The Nation in real time. Considering that Susan Faludi is listed on the masthead, that Gloria Steinem appears in ads for the magazine and that Katha Pollitt, among many other feminists, has been attacked by P******, I found Seigel's evaluation of the infamous book revisionist and insulting. They've added Dave Zirin to their online edition and hopefully they'll be addressing the issue of reviewers but I agree with your mother, Jess, The New Republic does not belong in The Nation. The magazines are too different, their readership is too different -- for one thing, The Nation has a readership -- and when you invite those people over, you end up with reviews that are offensive.
There was no reason for praise for P***** to ever appear in The Nation, certainly not for the laughable book that reactionaires got behind. But that's what cross-pollunation allowed to happen.
Pointing to the November 2005 editorial ("There can no longer be any doubt: The American war in Iraq -- an unprovoked, unnecessary, unlawful invasion that has turned into a colonial-style occupation -- is a moral and political catastrophe. It has also become the single greatest threat to America's national security.... The Nation will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the American war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign."), Natalie, rightly, observes that a magazine's "support" can be defined as whom they choose to run. There's no reason to add crap-style writer to The Nation. And if they're going to promote wobbly-on-Iraq crap-style as being part of the magazine, they really don't have any reason to criticize the Democratic Party for their own wobbly members.
We mentioned crap-style in the dictated portion of yesterday's last entry and that's mainly because I was eager to get to the Zinn & Arnove reading/performance. If I'd been sitting at a computer, I would've have grasped the entry would result in e-mails and it has. For a number of reasons (some listed above) that writer is a joke (at best). This community has no use for that writer. We've said about as much as I intend to say here. If someone else, Mike for instance, wants to weigh in with their thoughts, that's their right and they have my full support.
(Members grasp the full meaning of that sentence.) But there are enough well known problems with that writer. They are not and will not be promoted here. That includes if Laura Flanders does a three hour broadcast with the writer. Among the reasons for that is that this community "will not support" writers who not only don't call for "a speedy end" to the illegal war but also argue that the US needs to 'stay the course.' It wasn't just the Bully Boy promoting that nonsense.
If I'd been thinking (instead of rushing) while dictating the entry yesterday, I would've avoided the topic. But I have read the e-mails and we have addressed it.
Ending the war matters and we won't dilute our position or play patty-cakes and nice-nice with 'lefties' who want to argue for continued 'intervention.'
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
ehren watada
bob watada
mikey likes it
Fort Lewis, Wash., commander Lt. Gen. James Dubik recommended yesterday that the Army proceed with a general court-martial against Watada for refusing to deploy to Iraq in June.
"This just reinforces my honest belief that from the very beginning my actions were right, according to conscience, and most importantly, by duty to the American people," Watada told reporters in Honolulu yesterday from Fort Lewis during a telephone news conference organized by his attorney, Eric Seitz.
"I feel the referral of the charges was not unexpected," Watada said, adding, "and at this time, I'm moving forward as I always have with resilience and fortitude to face the challenges ahead."
Watada, 28, said he is encouraged by the national support he has received and pointed to Tuesday's election results as a sign of the times.
"I think as the recent elections show more and more Americans are opening their eyes, but we aren't there yet," he said. "It is my hope that actions such as my own continue to call for the truth behind the fundamental illegality and immorality of those who perpetrated this war."
Watada and his attorney had been in negotiations with the Army since an Article 32 hearing on Aug. 17 to avert a trial, but talks broke down earlier this week, leading to Dubik's recommendation for general court-martial proceedings.
Seitz said Watada was willing to accept dismissal from the service and four months' incarceration, but the Army held firm on one-year confinement.
The above, noted by Joan, is from Rod Ohira's "Watada's case going to trial" (Honolulu Advertiser). There are links to other coverage in yesterday's "And the war drags on . . ."
Ehren Watada was the first commissioned officer to refuse to publicly deploy in the illegal war. To date, the only major left (or 'left') publication that's printed an article about this is LeftTurn.
Now the New York Times did an article, one, but our print independent media just couldn't be bothered.
Possibly if they spent less time in/with incestual cross-pollinating (no, the lesson of Lee Siegel was not learned), they could devote attention to this? Or possibly, some independent outlets have been waiting for the story to come to them? Congrats East Coast, today Bob Watada does just that:
Nov 10, Early PM, New York City, NY., Press Conference
Location: UN, 777 United Nations Plaza, First Avenue and E. 44th Street
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contact: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
George McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 10, 7:30PM, New York City, NY.
Location: St. Paul/St. Andrews Methodist Church -- West End Avenue and West 86th Streets,
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
New York is only one of the stops on his tour, a full schedule can be found here. I don't know what's sadder about The Nation right now: (a) the fact that they want to jaw bone about the war after exit polls find it was one of the deciding factors in the election (jaw bone now but go through the print editions in search of articles related to Iraq only if you want to be disappointed) or (b) the 'event' last night which could have been better received had they featured Nation staff as opposed to passing a person who is on the masthead of another publication off as one of their own. And the person in question is infamous for the early 2005 non-thought piece advocating the continuation of the illegal war.
The editorial, "Democrats and the War," included this: "There can no longer be any doubt: The American war in Iraq -- an unprovoked, unnecessary, unlawful invasion that has turned into a colonial-style occupation -- is a moral and political catastrophe. It has also become the single greatest threat to America's national security.... The Nation will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the American war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign." That position is called into question when someone who is on staff of another publication, and advocated the continuation of the illegal war when the 'left' wanted to turn their back on the issue of Iraq after the 2004 election, is presented as Nation staff.
Like most in America, we ignore the crap-style publication that the non-Nation writer works for. When Christopher Hitchens has a piece in The Nation, we don't make a big deal of it. We don't note it, don't refer to it and don't even question it. Though he's broken politically with the magazine, he does have a history with the magazine and if they want to run something by him, so be it. It's another thing altogether to bring on a writer who does not have a history like that with the magazine. And, for the crap-style magazine, it's rather sad that in twenty minutes of radio time the writer needed to pass themselves off as being associated with The Nation and never plugged the crap-style that pays the bill and puts them on the masthead. (But it's also rather sad to come on a program with a known topic and beg off a question with the lame, "I just woke up" excuse. If it's too much for you to think in the morning, spare listeners the torture of having to listen. -- Zach and Megan, I did read your e-mails on that.)
Most in this community dumped crap-style as soon as the writer in question came on board due the war issue. (Non-thought pieces on entertainment that got the facts wrong didn't help either. Nor, for one couple in the community, did an early version of Lee Siegel like behavior on the crap-style's blog. And no, that's not a full of list of the problems with that writer. I'm biting my tongue on several things including one that enraged the community, rightly so, some time ago.) But, as Natalie noted in an e-mail this morning, "I will not support any writer who does not make a speedy end to the American war in Iraq a major issue of his or her writing." Yes, she's using the The Nation's editorial and questioning why they're promoting crap-style writer?
It's a really good question. And the Lee Siegel lesson should have been learned by The Nation. Long before he humiliated himself publicly, he was able to write for The New Republic(an) and offering the same lame critiques in The Nation. From "4 Books, Many Minutes" (Third Estate Sunday Review), Decemeber 18, 2005:
Jess: A broader examination that goes beyond an individual or a party and deals with the press itself. Both the mainstream and a rag like The New Republic that wants to claim it's of the left. My parents are longterm subscribers of The Nation but they are very offended that New Republic writers are popping up. My mother says they're seriously questioning whether they will renew because she knows the comment Maria posted elsewhere about how C******* P***** won praise in The Nation and she read that and wondered about it, read the issue. Now that she knows that the writer of that piece works for The New Republic, she's started looking at other bylines. The New Republic is not a left magazine and The Nation shouldn't be propping it up.
C.I.: Just to clarify, the review, by Lee Siegel, I believe, was not praising P*****'s new book. It was, however, in panning the new book, offering kind words for the infamous book that deserves no praise and received none from The Nation in real time. Considering that Susan Faludi is listed on the masthead, that Gloria Steinem appears in ads for the magazine and that Katha Pollitt, among many other feminists, has been attacked by P******, I found Seigel's evaluation of the infamous book revisionist and insulting. They've added Dave Zirin to their online edition and hopefully they'll be addressing the issue of reviewers but I agree with your mother, Jess, The New Republic does not belong in The Nation. The magazines are too different, their readership is too different -- for one thing, The Nation has a readership -- and when you invite those people over, you end up with reviews that are offensive.
There was no reason for praise for P***** to ever appear in The Nation, certainly not for the laughable book that reactionaires got behind. But that's what cross-pollunation allowed to happen.
Pointing to the November 2005 editorial ("There can no longer be any doubt: The American war in Iraq -- an unprovoked, unnecessary, unlawful invasion that has turned into a colonial-style occupation -- is a moral and political catastrophe. It has also become the single greatest threat to America's national security.... The Nation will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the American war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign."), Natalie, rightly, observes that a magazine's "support" can be defined as whom they choose to run. There's no reason to add crap-style writer to The Nation. And if they're going to promote wobbly-on-Iraq crap-style as being part of the magazine, they really don't have any reason to criticize the Democratic Party for their own wobbly members.
We mentioned crap-style in the dictated portion of yesterday's last entry and that's mainly because I was eager to get to the Zinn & Arnove reading/performance. If I'd been sitting at a computer, I would've have grasped the entry would result in e-mails and it has. For a number of reasons (some listed above) that writer is a joke (at best). This community has no use for that writer. We've said about as much as I intend to say here. If someone else, Mike for instance, wants to weigh in with their thoughts, that's their right and they have my full support.
(Members grasp the full meaning of that sentence.) But there are enough well known problems with that writer. They are not and will not be promoted here. That includes if Laura Flanders does a three hour broadcast with the writer. Among the reasons for that is that this community "will not support" writers who not only don't call for "a speedy end" to the illegal war but also argue that the US needs to 'stay the course.' It wasn't just the Bully Boy promoting that nonsense.
If I'd been thinking (instead of rushing) while dictating the entry yesterday, I would've avoided the topic. But I have read the e-mails and we have addressed it.
Ending the war matters and we won't dilute our position or play patty-cakes and nice-nice with 'lefties' who want to argue for continued 'intervention.'
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
ehren watada
bob watada
mikey likes it
Thursday, November 09, 2006
And the war drags on . . .
"The longer we stayed there, the more I opposed the war. The more I know, the easier it is to support withdrawal." US Marine speaks to Socialist Worker
Pru has a highlight and offered that it could hold until Sunday but we'll note it today. First, we're going to note the latest on Ehren Watada. (Those who need or would like an audio version can access the KPFA archives for today's The KPFA Evening News.) The military has decided to move to a court-martial. Keesha notes "Watada to face court martial for refusing to go to Iraq" (Seattle Post-Intelligencer):
The Army says it will court martial Lt. Ehren Watada, the Fort Lewis officer who refused to go to Iraq because he believes the war is illegal.
The base commander, Lt. Gen. James Dubik, agreed with the recommended charges of missing a military movement and conduct unbecoming an officer. But in referring the case today for a court martial, Dubik dismissed a charge of contempt toward officials.
Also highlighting this story, Fred notes Melanthia Mitchell's "Army says Lt. Watada will face court-martial" (AP via Seattle Times):
No date has been set for the trial to begin, Fort Lewis officials said.
Watada was charged with missing troop movement, conduct unbecoming an officer and contempt toward officials for comments he made about President Bush.
The Army later added another specification of conduct unbecoming an officer based on his comments in Seattle during the national convention of Veterans for Peace in August.
Dubik referred only the charges of missing movement and conduct unbecoming an officer, the Army said.
Joan has two highlights. First up, from someone who's been covering the story all along,
Gregg Kakesako's "Army plans 2007 court martial for Watada: They drop one charge but two remain" (Honolulu Star-Bulletin):
Eric Seitz, Watada's attorney, said Watada's court martial will be held next year.
Besides being charged with missing a movement, Watada, who is from Honolulu, is also accused of conduct unbecoming an officer. If convicted, Watada could face up to six years in jail and a dishonorable discharge.
The recommendation to hold a court martial at Fort Lewis was made by Lt. Gen. James Dubik, who commands the Washington Army base. Dubik's decision was based on a recommendation by Lt. Col. Mark Keith, who held the pretrial Article 32 hearing in August.
And what's Ehren Watada thinking? Joan also notes "Army Orders Court-Martial For Hawaii Soldier" (Honolulu's KITV):
"I'm moving forward as I've always had with resilience and fortitude to face the challenges ahead," Watada said.
[. . .]
"Unfortunately the army does want to make a martyr out of him. They have told us they will not enter into any agreement that doesn't include at least a year of incarceration, and that's just simply something we are unable to agree to," Watada's attorney Eric Seitz said.
The maximum penalty for the charges is six years in confinement and dismissal from the service, according to Army officials.
Ehren Watada's family have kept the issue alive by speaking out to the public. Carolyn Ho, his mother, has spoken to many groups. His father Bob Watada, and his step-mother, Rosa Sakanishi, are in the middle of another speaking tour. When they were on their first tour (which concentrated on the West coast), the word came out from the Article 32 hearing. On this tour, all this time later (the Article 32 hearing was in August) comes the news of a court-martial. For a report on a speaking engagement earlier this week, Bonnie notes Beth Brogan's "Father: My son's right not to fight in Iraq war" (The Times Record):
Watada's father, Robert Watada, was in Yarmouth as part of a 24-day speaking tour he hopes will garner public support for his son's case, and shine light on "the true story about what is going on in Iraq today."
While not timed to coincide with the national elections, Tuesday's visit to Maine brought Watada to Yarmouth at the invitation of independent congressional candidate Dexter Kamilewicz of Harpswell. After speaking at the University of Southern Maine, Watada spent Tuesday evening with Kamilewicz at the First Unitarian Church in Yarmouth.
During his campaign, Kamilewicz called for a joint resolution to demand an immediate cease-fire in Iraq and the recall of all U.S. troops. His son, Ben, a member of the Vermont National Guard, was injured while serving in Iraq.
"You've got to stand up in the bright light of day and say things," Kamilewicz said Tuesday night. "Risking an enormous amount to do that is an enormous courage." Robert Watada said Tuesday that his son joined the Army in March 2003 after graduating from college "because Bush said there were terrorists all over the country, so for patriotic reasons he joined the military to join the government's war on terror."
Before he deployed, Ehren's commander told him that as an officer, "he should know everything about the battles he's going to take his men into, and he should be able to explain to them why they're going to be dying for their country," Robert Watada said. "He began to study Iraq and came upon the truth that the president had been lying to the American people and to the military commanders about why we're over there. There were no weapons of mass destruction; there were no chemical or biological weapons, and were no terrorists in Iraq."
Ehren tried to resign several times, his father said, but was refused without reason. When his Stryker Brigade combat team was scheduled to deploy from Fort Lewis in Seattle on June 22, Ehren Watada refused get on the bus.
The tour is raising awareness, a full schedule can be found here, and the issue didn't die. Even when the media wasn't there, his family was. It does make a difference. And you can make a difference by keeping the stories of war resisters active in your own circles. Mark Wilkerson is someone the US military hasn't decided whether to court-martial or not. Agustin Aguayo was taken to Germany which removes him from his wife and kids (and don't think that wasn't a factor in the decision by the military). Kyle Snyder returned from Canada and turned himself in at Fort Knox (Oct. 31st) only to discover that the military that lied to him before was still lying -- at which point he self-checked out again. At this point, he remains underground. Ivan Brobeck turned himself in Tuesday. He is expected to be court-martialed. Joshua Key found out this week that, like Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey before him, the Canadian government was refusing to grant asylum. (He is appealing that. Hinzman and Hughey have been appealing the decision -- the latest which came earlier this year -- and a decision is supposed to made shortly.) Darrell Anderson (whose family kept his case front and center) is departing the military (officially, not a self-check out). Ricky Clousing has been sentenced. Among those sentenced earlier were Camilio Mejia, Stephen Funk, Pablo Paredes, Kevin Benderman and Katherine Jashinski.
It matters. Stopping the war matters. Everyone needs to say their "no" to the war. For those serving the "no" is all the more difficult because they face the prospects of legal punishments and not just angry words. (They also face a dishonorable discharge that will follow them around for the rest of their lives. Those who chose to go to Canada or elsewhere face the prospects of never returning to the US unless they want to face prosecution.) Refusing to cover their brave stands doesn't honor them or their stands, nor does the silence demonstrate a committment to ending the war.
They're just there to try and make the people free,
But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me.
Just more blood-letting and misery and tears
That this poor country's known for the last twenty years,
And the war drags on.
-- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)
Last Thursday, the total number of US troop fatalities stood at 2826. Right now? 2839. Thirteen more. The number doesn't reset, it doesn't start moving backwards. Those 2839 are gone as are the 650,000 Iraqis. On the number of Iraqis who have died during the war, The KPFA Evening News noted that the Iraqi Ministry of Health has now released a number: 150,000. The figure is far higher than anything the United States government has offered. (For public consumption, Bully Boy offered the Iraq Body Count number which is based on daily deaths reported by the western, mainstream press that get reported in several mainstream outlets). Unlike the AP story, the broadcast noted the figure was based upon the estimate of 100 bodies brought to morgues and hospitals each day but "that calculation would be closer to 130,000." It's also true, as Dahr Jamail and Riverbend have noted, that not every death results in a trip to the hospital or a morgue. The AP story does note this on the health minister:
"The army of America didn't do its job. . . . They tie the hands of my government," said [Ali] al-Shemari, a Shiite."They should hand us the power. We are a sovereign country," he said, adding that the first step would be for American forces to leave population centres.
An interview today was the most disorganized mess I've ever heard in some time. There are at least seven e-mails on that already. The issue isn't the interviewer, the issue is the grab bag of topics the guest is attempting to squeeze in. At one point he pairs Congress members and generals and then goes into a whine about Congress members. Whether he's attempting to put generals on a higher pedestal or not, that's how it came off to those who heard it and e-mailed about it. Civilian control of the military. That's the principle in this country. If you can't grasp that, you probably need to just throw in the towel. Whether the guest could or couldn't grasp it, who knows? Then it was (and this upset Mia, Megan and Zach especially) that it didn't matter what Congress wanted or what Americans wanted. Uh, yeah, it does.
Advocating listening to Iraqis is one thing and worth supporting. But to be discussing the elections and to offer that Americans wants or desires don't matter is to come off like an insufferable prig who has no concept of democracy. I enjoy the guest most times. But he did appear to be advocating the 'Pottery Barn policy' (which isn't the store's policy) and he was useless. He hit on too many points without developing any of them. He left listeners thinking that he felt the military was higher than the elected officials. (He also failed to note the role of the military, but no one brought that up, so I'll table it.) It was useless nonsense that could have been developed to strong points but instead left people surprised considering whom it was coming from.
Listening to Iraqis didn't appear to include listening to the ones calling for foreign troops to leave -- the group that is in the majority. The war is illegal. Now you can George Packer it and try to wash away guilt (collective or individual) all you want (or pretend to) but you can't circumvent the desires of the Americans and Iraqis -- or ignore the fact that what Bully Boy has done is illegal. It can't be prettied up. It can't be made 'right.' In the end, each country is responsible to its own people. Bully Boy, while giving lip service to 'democracy,' has no respect for it which is why the feelings and safety of the Iraqis didn't enter into the picture when he wanted to wage his illegal war.
This George Packer nonsense (Packer wasn't the guest) that the illegal war can be made 'good' by the outcome is ludicrous. The war was illegal and nothing's going to change that. US presence only inflames tensions and that's been true since the start of the war. To think it can be 'beautified' at this point doesn't make you anymore of a voice for the left than Lady Bird Johnson.
Iraqis are going to have to take control of their own country. It will be messy and that's because there were no steps towards democracy. A puppet government isn't democracy. A puppet government taking orders does not enstill democratic concepts in a society. If the guest wasn't advocating a position of "We can fix it!" then he needs to choose his words more carefully and he needs to narrow down his talking points because he was all over the map. I've never heard of so many e-mails complaining about a guest they liked (in other appearances) before. (Heard of because portions of this entry -- including this -- are dictated. A friend's going through the e-mails to see if anything has come in that needs to be noted in this entry.)
Listening to a puppet government, sheltered from reality in the fortified Green Zone, isn't listening to the Iraqi people. Possibly the guest just had too many points he wanted to make so he was all over the map? I heard it and thought, "Well we won't be noting that." But members wanted it noted so it's noted. 'Strategy' is not the answer and will not change the fact the war is illegal. Attempting to 'help' by dictating and controlling the situation (hence the creation of a puppet government) makes things worse and anyone who can't grasp that an occupation doesn't go pretty calls into question their entire knowledge of the region. Occupation isn't 'pretty' for Palestinians. That no one drew the obvious comparison is rather sad. To think that the US government has any 'moral' ground on which to mediate the mess the Bully Boy caused is crazy. This is a matter for Iraqis. It's their country. The US government's responsibility for the years and years of horrors that Palestinians have lived under (and will continue to) comes from the belief of "We know best" (that's the nice version) and continues because of the belief that the cause of the problem can now mediate it.
If Iraq wants to divide into three sections, that'll have to come from Iraqis, not from Joe Biden or any other American. That's not something that should be imposed from outside. It's not going to be pretty, the situation in Iraq, but the US staying there (and dictating) only makes it worse and only postpones the business of the Iraqi people. They're not children. They need to be allowed to chart their own destiny without foreign interference (foreign aid is owed and then some). The illegal war has been a bloodbath and the withdrawal of foreign forces will more than likely lead to more deaths. In the immediate future. Prolonging the departure only increases the numbers of victims (both while it's prolonged and in the immediate time after the departures). There is no 'moral' leadership that the US government can provide. As Zalmay prepares to leave like Bremer before him, as Rumsfled follows Powell out the door, that's an option Iraqis don't have unless they leave their own country. And that's why the US shouldn't attempt to lead, they always have the leave option because it's a foreign country. That's why a foreign country can't create 'democracy.'
The foolish belief that it can is why we're at the Zinn event and not the other. Though the other has one guest who will no doubt make many strong and insightful points. But we weren't in the mood for "I'm against the war. Now let me tell you why the U.S. can't leave." As for what magazine that nonsense is coming from, I'm confused as well. The person works for another magazine -- is on the masthead of another magazine -- is not on the masthead of the magazine the person was speaking for. Did Lee Siegel teach the magazine nothing? There doesn't need to be cross pollunation. Each magazine should have its own voice. Treating staff as though they're interchangeable doesn't demonstrate that there's any individuality. We didn't note that event because of that person who is loathed by the community for a wide variety of reasons. Ty, Dona, Jim, Jess, Ava and I skipped the event tonight because we have no interest in hearing that drippy voice. Scared by the 2004 conventional 'wisdom' of the 2004 election, the person waded in to announce that the left needed to realize the US needed to stay in Iraq. That person's never had any moral authority but, were that ever in doubt, the 2004 non-thought piece made it quite clear. Since the person works for another magazine -- in an editorial postion -- there's no reason for the person to be at an event for a magazine that stated they'd support no candidate who didn't call for an end to the war. Earlier this year, Voices of a People's History of the United States was presented in NYC. If it travels to your area, please make a point to see it. (Jim says: "See it!")
Now for Pru's highlight, Simon Assaf's "US troops revolt against Iraq war" (Great Britain's Socialist Worker):
"The longer we stayed there, the more I opposed the war. The more I know, the easier it is to support withdrawal."
US Marine speaks to Socialist Worker
The growing crisis faced by the US occupation of Iraq was the key issue in midterm elections, taking place in the US as Socialist Worker went to press.
The rising toll of human suffering and violence has led millions of Americans to question the reasons for the invasion - and many now believe that the US is losing the war.
This shift in attitude has penetrated into the US army. Serving soldiers have found an unlikely spokesperson in Liam Madden, a 22 year old Marine Corps sergeant.
Madden considers himself a patriot, but faced with the disaster in Iraq he has begun campaigning openly for the withdrawal of US troops.
"We should not be in Iraq. The war has been badly conducted and poorly executed. The war is not winnable and can no longer be justified," he told Socialist Worker by telephone.
Madden served in the Anbar province of Iraq from September 2004 until February 2005.
The mainly Sunni Muslim region is one of the heartlands of resistance to the occupation, encompassing the restive towns of Fallujah and Ramadi. In November 2004 Marines spearheaded the assault on Fallujah in a battle that sparked a general rebellion against the occupation.
During his deployment in Iraq, "we only really cared about coming home and helping our friends to come home, all other opinions were put on the back burner," said Madden.
"However there is a growing, if silent, anti-war sentiment among the troops. But as professionals we felt we had a job to do and just wanted to get home in one piece.
"Some marines began to oppose the war through personal experience, often the tragic circumstances that you face in Iraq. Others, like myself, questioned the political reasons for the war from the beginning and I became more convinced during my time there.
"I was infuriated at how long we have been in Iraq, and how much longer we were going to stay in a country where people don't want us.
"I am grateful that I survived with no physical or psychological harm."
His opposition to the war grew on his return to the US. Madden and a fellow soldier launched their campaign after they went to a meeting on resistance among US troops during the Vietnam War.
Madden made public his opposition to the war. He spoke to the army newspaper, local press and national news.
For a serving soldier to openly campaign for an end to the war carries enormous risks.
"I was expecting hostility, but I have received overwhelming praise from friends and families, and more support than criticism from my fellow Marines," he said.
"Some things are worth fighting for, I just don’t feel Iraq is one of them.
"The more people who die there, and the longer we stayed there, the more I opposed the war. The more I know, the easier it is to support withdrawal."
Madden took his campaign, Appeal for Redress, to the anti-war GI Special, a daily newsletter for soldiers.
He wrote, "How long can either the incompetence of our policy makers or, possibly worse, their deceit be tolerated?
"When will we decide to do what we do best, stand up and defend our principles?"
He feels the only option is to withdraw.
"If our staying makes the situation worse, and provokes more anti-US sentiment, then it is undoubtedly justified and logical for service members to advocate the withdrawal of US forces."
The following should be read alongside this article: » Bush and the neocons: rats leave sinking ship» Army newspaper says Rumsfeld must go» Statistics show the growing strength of the resistance in Iraq» The '‘war on terror' and the US on the web
For more on the campaign go to http://www.appealforredress.org/
© Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by supporting our » appeal.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
and the war drags on
donovan
kyle snyder
ivan brobeck
joshua key
ehren watada
bob watada
simon assaf
the socialist worker
Pru has a highlight and offered that it could hold until Sunday but we'll note it today. First, we're going to note the latest on Ehren Watada. (Those who need or would like an audio version can access the KPFA archives for today's The KPFA Evening News.) The military has decided to move to a court-martial. Keesha notes "Watada to face court martial for refusing to go to Iraq" (Seattle Post-Intelligencer):
The Army says it will court martial Lt. Ehren Watada, the Fort Lewis officer who refused to go to Iraq because he believes the war is illegal.
The base commander, Lt. Gen. James Dubik, agreed with the recommended charges of missing a military movement and conduct unbecoming an officer. But in referring the case today for a court martial, Dubik dismissed a charge of contempt toward officials.
Also highlighting this story, Fred notes Melanthia Mitchell's "Army says Lt. Watada will face court-martial" (AP via Seattle Times):
No date has been set for the trial to begin, Fort Lewis officials said.
Watada was charged with missing troop movement, conduct unbecoming an officer and contempt toward officials for comments he made about President Bush.
The Army later added another specification of conduct unbecoming an officer based on his comments in Seattle during the national convention of Veterans for Peace in August.
Dubik referred only the charges of missing movement and conduct unbecoming an officer, the Army said.
Joan has two highlights. First up, from someone who's been covering the story all along,
Gregg Kakesako's "Army plans 2007 court martial for Watada: They drop one charge but two remain" (Honolulu Star-Bulletin):
Eric Seitz, Watada's attorney, said Watada's court martial will be held next year.
Besides being charged with missing a movement, Watada, who is from Honolulu, is also accused of conduct unbecoming an officer. If convicted, Watada could face up to six years in jail and a dishonorable discharge.
The recommendation to hold a court martial at Fort Lewis was made by Lt. Gen. James Dubik, who commands the Washington Army base. Dubik's decision was based on a recommendation by Lt. Col. Mark Keith, who held the pretrial Article 32 hearing in August.
And what's Ehren Watada thinking? Joan also notes "Army Orders Court-Martial For Hawaii Soldier" (Honolulu's KITV):
"I'm moving forward as I've always had with resilience and fortitude to face the challenges ahead," Watada said.
[. . .]
"Unfortunately the army does want to make a martyr out of him. They have told us they will not enter into any agreement that doesn't include at least a year of incarceration, and that's just simply something we are unable to agree to," Watada's attorney Eric Seitz said.
The maximum penalty for the charges is six years in confinement and dismissal from the service, according to Army officials.
Ehren Watada's family have kept the issue alive by speaking out to the public. Carolyn Ho, his mother, has spoken to many groups. His father Bob Watada, and his step-mother, Rosa Sakanishi, are in the middle of another speaking tour. When they were on their first tour (which concentrated on the West coast), the word came out from the Article 32 hearing. On this tour, all this time later (the Article 32 hearing was in August) comes the news of a court-martial. For a report on a speaking engagement earlier this week, Bonnie notes Beth Brogan's "Father: My son's right not to fight in Iraq war" (The Times Record):
Watada's father, Robert Watada, was in Yarmouth as part of a 24-day speaking tour he hopes will garner public support for his son's case, and shine light on "the true story about what is going on in Iraq today."
While not timed to coincide with the national elections, Tuesday's visit to Maine brought Watada to Yarmouth at the invitation of independent congressional candidate Dexter Kamilewicz of Harpswell. After speaking at the University of Southern Maine, Watada spent Tuesday evening with Kamilewicz at the First Unitarian Church in Yarmouth.
During his campaign, Kamilewicz called for a joint resolution to demand an immediate cease-fire in Iraq and the recall of all U.S. troops. His son, Ben, a member of the Vermont National Guard, was injured while serving in Iraq.
"You've got to stand up in the bright light of day and say things," Kamilewicz said Tuesday night. "Risking an enormous amount to do that is an enormous courage." Robert Watada said Tuesday that his son joined the Army in March 2003 after graduating from college "because Bush said there were terrorists all over the country, so for patriotic reasons he joined the military to join the government's war on terror."
Before he deployed, Ehren's commander told him that as an officer, "he should know everything about the battles he's going to take his men into, and he should be able to explain to them why they're going to be dying for their country," Robert Watada said. "He began to study Iraq and came upon the truth that the president had been lying to the American people and to the military commanders about why we're over there. There were no weapons of mass destruction; there were no chemical or biological weapons, and were no terrorists in Iraq."
Ehren tried to resign several times, his father said, but was refused without reason. When his Stryker Brigade combat team was scheduled to deploy from Fort Lewis in Seattle on June 22, Ehren Watada refused get on the bus.
The tour is raising awareness, a full schedule can be found here, and the issue didn't die. Even when the media wasn't there, his family was. It does make a difference. And you can make a difference by keeping the stories of war resisters active in your own circles. Mark Wilkerson is someone the US military hasn't decided whether to court-martial or not. Agustin Aguayo was taken to Germany which removes him from his wife and kids (and don't think that wasn't a factor in the decision by the military). Kyle Snyder returned from Canada and turned himself in at Fort Knox (Oct. 31st) only to discover that the military that lied to him before was still lying -- at which point he self-checked out again. At this point, he remains underground. Ivan Brobeck turned himself in Tuesday. He is expected to be court-martialed. Joshua Key found out this week that, like Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey before him, the Canadian government was refusing to grant asylum. (He is appealing that. Hinzman and Hughey have been appealing the decision -- the latest which came earlier this year -- and a decision is supposed to made shortly.) Darrell Anderson (whose family kept his case front and center) is departing the military (officially, not a self-check out). Ricky Clousing has been sentenced. Among those sentenced earlier were Camilio Mejia, Stephen Funk, Pablo Paredes, Kevin Benderman and Katherine Jashinski.
It matters. Stopping the war matters. Everyone needs to say their "no" to the war. For those serving the "no" is all the more difficult because they face the prospects of legal punishments and not just angry words. (They also face a dishonorable discharge that will follow them around for the rest of their lives. Those who chose to go to Canada or elsewhere face the prospects of never returning to the US unless they want to face prosecution.) Refusing to cover their brave stands doesn't honor them or their stands, nor does the silence demonstrate a committment to ending the war.
They're just there to try and make the people free,
But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me.
Just more blood-letting and misery and tears
That this poor country's known for the last twenty years,
And the war drags on.
-- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)
Last Thursday, the total number of US troop fatalities stood at 2826. Right now? 2839. Thirteen more. The number doesn't reset, it doesn't start moving backwards. Those 2839 are gone as are the 650,000 Iraqis. On the number of Iraqis who have died during the war, The KPFA Evening News noted that the Iraqi Ministry of Health has now released a number: 150,000. The figure is far higher than anything the United States government has offered. (For public consumption, Bully Boy offered the Iraq Body Count number which is based on daily deaths reported by the western, mainstream press that get reported in several mainstream outlets). Unlike the AP story, the broadcast noted the figure was based upon the estimate of 100 bodies brought to morgues and hospitals each day but "that calculation would be closer to 130,000." It's also true, as Dahr Jamail and Riverbend have noted, that not every death results in a trip to the hospital or a morgue. The AP story does note this on the health minister:
"The army of America didn't do its job. . . . They tie the hands of my government," said [Ali] al-Shemari, a Shiite."They should hand us the power. We are a sovereign country," he said, adding that the first step would be for American forces to leave population centres.
An interview today was the most disorganized mess I've ever heard in some time. There are at least seven e-mails on that already. The issue isn't the interviewer, the issue is the grab bag of topics the guest is attempting to squeeze in. At one point he pairs Congress members and generals and then goes into a whine about Congress members. Whether he's attempting to put generals on a higher pedestal or not, that's how it came off to those who heard it and e-mailed about it. Civilian control of the military. That's the principle in this country. If you can't grasp that, you probably need to just throw in the towel. Whether the guest could or couldn't grasp it, who knows? Then it was (and this upset Mia, Megan and Zach especially) that it didn't matter what Congress wanted or what Americans wanted. Uh, yeah, it does.
Advocating listening to Iraqis is one thing and worth supporting. But to be discussing the elections and to offer that Americans wants or desires don't matter is to come off like an insufferable prig who has no concept of democracy. I enjoy the guest most times. But he did appear to be advocating the 'Pottery Barn policy' (which isn't the store's policy) and he was useless. He hit on too many points without developing any of them. He left listeners thinking that he felt the military was higher than the elected officials. (He also failed to note the role of the military, but no one brought that up, so I'll table it.) It was useless nonsense that could have been developed to strong points but instead left people surprised considering whom it was coming from.
Listening to Iraqis didn't appear to include listening to the ones calling for foreign troops to leave -- the group that is in the majority. The war is illegal. Now you can George Packer it and try to wash away guilt (collective or individual) all you want (or pretend to) but you can't circumvent the desires of the Americans and Iraqis -- or ignore the fact that what Bully Boy has done is illegal. It can't be prettied up. It can't be made 'right.' In the end, each country is responsible to its own people. Bully Boy, while giving lip service to 'democracy,' has no respect for it which is why the feelings and safety of the Iraqis didn't enter into the picture when he wanted to wage his illegal war.
This George Packer nonsense (Packer wasn't the guest) that the illegal war can be made 'good' by the outcome is ludicrous. The war was illegal and nothing's going to change that. US presence only inflames tensions and that's been true since the start of the war. To think it can be 'beautified' at this point doesn't make you anymore of a voice for the left than Lady Bird Johnson.
Iraqis are going to have to take control of their own country. It will be messy and that's because there were no steps towards democracy. A puppet government isn't democracy. A puppet government taking orders does not enstill democratic concepts in a society. If the guest wasn't advocating a position of "We can fix it!" then he needs to choose his words more carefully and he needs to narrow down his talking points because he was all over the map. I've never heard of so many e-mails complaining about a guest they liked (in other appearances) before. (Heard of because portions of this entry -- including this -- are dictated. A friend's going through the e-mails to see if anything has come in that needs to be noted in this entry.)
Listening to a puppet government, sheltered from reality in the fortified Green Zone, isn't listening to the Iraqi people. Possibly the guest just had too many points he wanted to make so he was all over the map? I heard it and thought, "Well we won't be noting that." But members wanted it noted so it's noted. 'Strategy' is not the answer and will not change the fact the war is illegal. Attempting to 'help' by dictating and controlling the situation (hence the creation of a puppet government) makes things worse and anyone who can't grasp that an occupation doesn't go pretty calls into question their entire knowledge of the region. Occupation isn't 'pretty' for Palestinians. That no one drew the obvious comparison is rather sad. To think that the US government has any 'moral' ground on which to mediate the mess the Bully Boy caused is crazy. This is a matter for Iraqis. It's their country. The US government's responsibility for the years and years of horrors that Palestinians have lived under (and will continue to) comes from the belief of "We know best" (that's the nice version) and continues because of the belief that the cause of the problem can now mediate it.
If Iraq wants to divide into three sections, that'll have to come from Iraqis, not from Joe Biden or any other American. That's not something that should be imposed from outside. It's not going to be pretty, the situation in Iraq, but the US staying there (and dictating) only makes it worse and only postpones the business of the Iraqi people. They're not children. They need to be allowed to chart their own destiny without foreign interference (foreign aid is owed and then some). The illegal war has been a bloodbath and the withdrawal of foreign forces will more than likely lead to more deaths. In the immediate future. Prolonging the departure only increases the numbers of victims (both while it's prolonged and in the immediate time after the departures). There is no 'moral' leadership that the US government can provide. As Zalmay prepares to leave like Bremer before him, as Rumsfled follows Powell out the door, that's an option Iraqis don't have unless they leave their own country. And that's why the US shouldn't attempt to lead, they always have the leave option because it's a foreign country. That's why a foreign country can't create 'democracy.'
The foolish belief that it can is why we're at the Zinn event and not the other. Though the other has one guest who will no doubt make many strong and insightful points. But we weren't in the mood for "I'm against the war. Now let me tell you why the U.S. can't leave." As for what magazine that nonsense is coming from, I'm confused as well. The person works for another magazine -- is on the masthead of another magazine -- is not on the masthead of the magazine the person was speaking for. Did Lee Siegel teach the magazine nothing? There doesn't need to be cross pollunation. Each magazine should have its own voice. Treating staff as though they're interchangeable doesn't demonstrate that there's any individuality. We didn't note that event because of that person who is loathed by the community for a wide variety of reasons. Ty, Dona, Jim, Jess, Ava and I skipped the event tonight because we have no interest in hearing that drippy voice. Scared by the 2004 conventional 'wisdom' of the 2004 election, the person waded in to announce that the left needed to realize the US needed to stay in Iraq. That person's never had any moral authority but, were that ever in doubt, the 2004 non-thought piece made it quite clear. Since the person works for another magazine -- in an editorial postion -- there's no reason for the person to be at an event for a magazine that stated they'd support no candidate who didn't call for an end to the war. Earlier this year, Voices of a People's History of the United States was presented in NYC. If it travels to your area, please make a point to see it. (Jim says: "See it!")
Now for Pru's highlight, Simon Assaf's "US troops revolt against Iraq war" (Great Britain's Socialist Worker):
"The longer we stayed there, the more I opposed the war. The more I know, the easier it is to support withdrawal."
US Marine speaks to Socialist Worker
The growing crisis faced by the US occupation of Iraq was the key issue in midterm elections, taking place in the US as Socialist Worker went to press.
The rising toll of human suffering and violence has led millions of Americans to question the reasons for the invasion - and many now believe that the US is losing the war.
This shift in attitude has penetrated into the US army. Serving soldiers have found an unlikely spokesperson in Liam Madden, a 22 year old Marine Corps sergeant.
Madden considers himself a patriot, but faced with the disaster in Iraq he has begun campaigning openly for the withdrawal of US troops.
"We should not be in Iraq. The war has been badly conducted and poorly executed. The war is not winnable and can no longer be justified," he told Socialist Worker by telephone.
Madden served in the Anbar province of Iraq from September 2004 until February 2005.
The mainly Sunni Muslim region is one of the heartlands of resistance to the occupation, encompassing the restive towns of Fallujah and Ramadi. In November 2004 Marines spearheaded the assault on Fallujah in a battle that sparked a general rebellion against the occupation.
During his deployment in Iraq, "we only really cared about coming home and helping our friends to come home, all other opinions were put on the back burner," said Madden.
"However there is a growing, if silent, anti-war sentiment among the troops. But as professionals we felt we had a job to do and just wanted to get home in one piece.
"Some marines began to oppose the war through personal experience, often the tragic circumstances that you face in Iraq. Others, like myself, questioned the political reasons for the war from the beginning and I became more convinced during my time there.
"I was infuriated at how long we have been in Iraq, and how much longer we were going to stay in a country where people don't want us.
"I am grateful that I survived with no physical or psychological harm."
His opposition to the war grew on his return to the US. Madden and a fellow soldier launched their campaign after they went to a meeting on resistance among US troops during the Vietnam War.
Madden made public his opposition to the war. He spoke to the army newspaper, local press and national news.
For a serving soldier to openly campaign for an end to the war carries enormous risks.
"I was expecting hostility, but I have received overwhelming praise from friends and families, and more support than criticism from my fellow Marines," he said.
"Some things are worth fighting for, I just don’t feel Iraq is one of them.
"The more people who die there, and the longer we stayed there, the more I opposed the war. The more I know, the easier it is to support withdrawal."
Madden took his campaign, Appeal for Redress, to the anti-war GI Special, a daily newsletter for soldiers.
He wrote, "How long can either the incompetence of our policy makers or, possibly worse, their deceit be tolerated?
"When will we decide to do what we do best, stand up and defend our principles?"
He feels the only option is to withdraw.
"If our staying makes the situation worse, and provokes more anti-US sentiment, then it is undoubtedly justified and logical for service members to advocate the withdrawal of US forces."
The following should be read alongside this article: » Bush and the neocons: rats leave sinking ship» Army newspaper says Rumsfeld must go» Statistics show the growing strength of the resistance in Iraq» The '‘war on terror' and the US on the web
For more on the campaign go to http://www.appealforredress.org/
© Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by supporting our » appeal.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
iraq
and the war drags on
donovan
kyle snyder
ivan brobeck
joshua key
ehren watada
bob watada
simon assaf
the socialist worker
Iraq snapshot
Thursday, November 9, 2006. Chaos and violence continue in Iraq, War Hawk down Donald Rumsfleld continues to collect professional obits but not many mourners, Cindy Sheehan continues to demonstrate more life and spirit than the media, Tom Hayden looks to what needs to be done now, and some data on the US elections is now known (even if not noted by gas bags).
Starting with War Hawk Down, Rumsfeld is Rumsfled and though the obits continue to pile up where are the mourners for his professional demise? Has even the U of Minnesota drop-out lost her gift for hagiography? Some say it's lonely at the top, Rumsfled discovers it's lonely at the bottom as well. Around the world, the feedback comes in. Mussab Al-Khairalla (Reuters) reports on the Iraqi consensus and the AP notes that a similar consensus around the world while John F. Burns and Michael Lou (New York Times) note Iraqi Sadoon al-Zubaidi response: "The Americans came to Iraq three and a half years ago to do something good for Iraqis, to free them from dictatorship. That has failed. The Americans helped, encouraged and planted civil disorder and sectarianism. Now, I would like to see all American troops taken out. I’d like to see all the reins of power placed in Iraqi hands."
Philippe Naughton (Times of London) notes that the next US Secretary of Defense will have "the clearest missions: get American troops out of Iraq as quickly and cleanly as possible."
Bully Boy has nominated Robert Gates for that position. Speaking with Nora Barrows Friedman yesterday on Flashpoints, Robert Parry noted Gates' involvement in Iran-Contra. Today on Democracy Now!, Parry also noted the involvement and the questions that had never been answered including, as Amy Goodman noted, his role in providing weapons to Saddam Hussein which he was just convicted for using. Online, Parry (Consortium News) delves into the world of Gates, his Bush family connections and concludes that "whether Gates can be counted on to do what's in the interest of the larger American public is another question altogether."
Another issue, especially considering the illegal warrantless spying by the administration, is whether former CIA director Gates is the one to be put in charge of the US Defense Department since, as many can remember, the illegal spying of an earlier period wasn't confined to the FBI and the CIA, it also included DoD spying?
In US elections news, control over both houses of Congress shifted to Democrats yesterday when two Senate races were called: Jon Tester won in Montanna and Jim Webb in Virginia. On the Webb race, as Feminist Wire Daily points out, there was "a ten-point gender gap" between those voting for Webb and those voting for George Allen (with women favoring Webb over Allen by ten-points). FWD also notes that "women voted five percentage points more (56 percent) for Democrats than men (51 percent). Kim Gandy (president of NOW) sums up the results: "Women voters cleaned House. We turned out on Tuesday to turn out the politicians who were tuning out our concerns. Women are fed up with the 'stay the course' strategy in Iraq, the so-called economic recovery that has left most of the country behind, and the relentless efforts to limit women's reproductive rights. The 'gender gap' is alive and well, and making a difference on election day." [Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) noted that "young voters voted overwhelmingly Democratic."]
Noting the Democratic control, Tom Hayden (writing at Common Dreams) reminds that: "The Vietnam War continued for seven senseless years after the Paris peace talks began. While scaling back its original victory plans, the US still wants to station tens of thousands of troops in subdued, and perhaps partitioned, Iraq, and it wasnt the issue neutralized by the 2008 elections. The peace movement therefore needs to gear up for the 2008 elections by establishing anti-war coalitions that no candidate can avoid in the primary states."
Possibly having a panic attack over the concept of peace or just dismayed regarding the lack of breast-beating over Rumsfled's impending departure (and worried about his own ass), John Howard, prime Minister of Australia and professional War Hawk, rushes to weigh in. Though not known previously as a student of American politics, Gillian Bradford (Australia's ABC) reports that Howard is downplying the election results and claiming that it boils down to Bully Boy "running a Budget deficit" that led to Republicans staying home. When considering post-government careers, Howard would be wise to skip teaching. Translation, the deficit was not covered as an issue in the leadup and it was not named in polling.
Howard's attempt to spin the illegal war comes at a time when Carne Ross is criticizing Tony Blair's government's actions with regards to the illegal war. On Iraq, the BBC reports that the British diplomat told MPs that "our policy has been a rank disaster in the last few years in terms of blood shed. By that measure that invasion has been a much greater disaster even than Suez." Ross also informed the MPs that the current state was predicted and that during talks between the US government and the British government England's Foreign Office "would say, with emphasis, we do not believe regime change is a good idea in Iraq and the reason we do not believe that is that we think Iraq would break up and that would lead to chaos if you do that."
In Iraq the chaos and violence continues with CBS and AP noting: "October was a particularly bloody month for Iraqis, with more than 1,200 killed, and November so far looks to be just as bad. At least 66 Iraqis were killed on Wednesday, although that is likely much lower than the true figure since many deaths go unreported. Since this summer, the United Nations has bumped its daily death toll estimate to 100 per day."
Bombings?
Sabah Jerges (AFP) observes there were "at least seven explosions" in Baghdad, "the worst being a suicide car bomb that exploded near the Mishin shopping center in the southeast of the city that killed seven people and wounded 27" that appears to be part of a coordinated attack including a mortar round prior to the car bomb (also noted is the death of 10 in Baquba from violence though no details are offered), while in Amara a bomb took one life and left three wounded. CBS and AP note a bombing in Tal Afar that killed three people (including a police officer) and the death of two "when a mortar bomb landed on a car on Palestine street in eastern Baghdad". Reuters notes a roadside bomb in Baghdad that left four wounded; the *wounding* of two police officers in Baghdad as they attempted to disarm a bomb; a car bomb in Baghdad (Abu Ghraib district) that resulted in five people being killed; and two dead and four wounded in Tal Afar from a rocket attack.
Shootings?
Qais al-Bashir (AP) notes an attack on "a primary school" in Muqdadiyah that left "a policeman, a guard and a student" dead; while in Baghdad, two incidents (one a drive-by) claimed three lives; and, in Mosul, a wife and husband were shot dead (the husband was with the Iraqi military). Reuters notes that in addition to the couple, four more people were shot dead in Mosul.
Corpses?
Qais al-Bashir (AP) reports that eleven corpses were discovered in Baghdad. The count increased to 26, Reuters notes, and four corpses were found in Latifiya. AFP notes that
Meanwhile, Patrick Cockburn (CounterPunch) examines "the rise of the sniper" in the capital and concludes it "will incerase the already numerous ways that Iraqi civilians can die," that the US military often offers "no warning shots"
In peace news, as Sandra Lupien noted yesterday on The KPFA Evening News, Cindy Sheehan was arrested outside the White House when she and others attempted to deliver a petition with at least 80,000 signatures on it. The petition was calling for an end to the war.
Today Military Families Speak Out attempts to deliver their petition to the soon to be gone Rumsfled calling for an end to the back door draft and noting: "We believe that the best course of action is to bring all of our troops home now, and take care of them when they get here. Our loved ones signed up to protect and defend the Constitution of this nation. That is not what they are doing in Iraq."
Today, Trina received an e-mail from the family of a war resister which only underscored to Trina how "hideous" the lack of coverage on this issue is. Trina: "If you believe the war is wrong and needs to end, then you need to cover those who are saying 'NO!' loudly and clearly. The fact that most independent magazines -- even at their own websistes -- can't is beyond disappointing. People standing up need support and their stories need to be told."
US war resisters that should have been in the news in the last two weeks include Kyle Snyder, Joshua Key and Ivan Brobeck. Kyle Snyder returned to the US Tuesday October 31st to turn himself in at Fort Knox after self-checking out and going to Canada. The agreement between Synder's attorney and the military was trashed after the US military had Synder in custody. Snyder self-checked out again. Joshua Key was denied refugee status by the Canadian government this week. Ivan Brobeck returned to the US from Canada this week, on election day, and turned himself in. These stories have garnered very little interest by independent media. Brobeck's return has hardly been noted. (Hurt feelings over the fact that Nora Barrows Friedman got the exclusive interview with Brobeck?) The verdict in Key's case has been noted even less. It's not cutting it and independent media (print and audio) needs to stop kidding themselves that it is. It's shameful.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home.
Ivan Brobeck, Kyle Snyder and Joshua Key are part of a movement of war resistance within the US military that also includes Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Ehren Watada, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. Their stories do matter. It's only the coverage that is lacking.
Which gets to a point Anthony Arnove made on yesterday's Flashpoints regarding the importance of knowing our history and how much energy is expanded to rob people of their history. History is all around -- it's just not getting the coverage. Arrnove and Alice Walker, both guests on yesterday's Flashpoints will be among those bringing history to life via a reading of Howard Zinn and Arnove's Voices of a People's History of the United States tonight (7:30 p.m.) at the Berkeley Community Theatre (1930 Allston Way) and along with Walker and Arnove, other participants will also include Mos Def, Steve Earle and Zinn himself.
Finally, Ehren Watada's father, Bob Watada, and his step-mother, Rosa Sakanishi, continue their speaking tour to raise awareness on Ehren -- the first commissioned officer to refuse to deploy to Iraq. Due to increased interest there have been some date changes and a full schedule can be found here. Upcoming dates include:
37-22 Union St Columbia University, 357 Benefit Street
Nov 14, TBA St. Louis, Mo. Location: Friends Meeting House
1001 Park Avenue Sponsors: Veterans for Peace Chapter 161, 314-754-2651
Contact: Chuc Smith, 314-721-1814, vfpch61@riseup.net
iraq
kyle snyder
amy goodman
juan gonzalez
democracy now
ivan brobeck
flashpoints
nora barrows friedman
robert parry
joshua key
cindy sheehan
military families speak out
ehren watada
bob watada
tom hayden
trinas kitchen
the new york times
john f. burns
michael luo
[C.I. note: Correction -- "*wounding*" -- not the death of.]
Starting with War Hawk Down, Rumsfeld is Rumsfled and though the obits continue to pile up where are the mourners for his professional demise? Has even the U of Minnesota drop-out lost her gift for hagiography? Some say it's lonely at the top, Rumsfled discovers it's lonely at the bottom as well. Around the world, the feedback comes in. Mussab Al-Khairalla (Reuters) reports on the Iraqi consensus and the AP notes that a similar consensus around the world while John F. Burns and Michael Lou (New York Times) note Iraqi Sadoon al-Zubaidi response: "The Americans came to Iraq three and a half years ago to do something good for Iraqis, to free them from dictatorship. That has failed. The Americans helped, encouraged and planted civil disorder and sectarianism. Now, I would like to see all American troops taken out. I’d like to see all the reins of power placed in Iraqi hands."
Philippe Naughton (Times of London) notes that the next US Secretary of Defense will have "the clearest missions: get American troops out of Iraq as quickly and cleanly as possible."
Bully Boy has nominated Robert Gates for that position. Speaking with Nora Barrows Friedman yesterday on Flashpoints, Robert Parry noted Gates' involvement in Iran-Contra. Today on Democracy Now!, Parry also noted the involvement and the questions that had never been answered including, as Amy Goodman noted, his role in providing weapons to Saddam Hussein which he was just convicted for using. Online, Parry (Consortium News) delves into the world of Gates, his Bush family connections and concludes that "whether Gates can be counted on to do what's in the interest of the larger American public is another question altogether."
Another issue, especially considering the illegal warrantless spying by the administration, is whether former CIA director Gates is the one to be put in charge of the US Defense Department since, as many can remember, the illegal spying of an earlier period wasn't confined to the FBI and the CIA, it also included DoD spying?
In US elections news, control over both houses of Congress shifted to Democrats yesterday when two Senate races were called: Jon Tester won in Montanna and Jim Webb in Virginia. On the Webb race, as Feminist Wire Daily points out, there was "a ten-point gender gap" between those voting for Webb and those voting for George Allen (with women favoring Webb over Allen by ten-points). FWD also notes that "women voted five percentage points more (56 percent) for Democrats than men (51 percent). Kim Gandy (president of NOW) sums up the results: "Women voters cleaned House. We turned out on Tuesday to turn out the politicians who were tuning out our concerns. Women are fed up with the 'stay the course' strategy in Iraq, the so-called economic recovery that has left most of the country behind, and the relentless efforts to limit women's reproductive rights. The 'gender gap' is alive and well, and making a difference on election day." [Juan Gonzalez (Democracy Now!) noted that "young voters voted overwhelmingly Democratic."]
Noting the Democratic control, Tom Hayden (writing at Common Dreams) reminds that: "The Vietnam War continued for seven senseless years after the Paris peace talks began. While scaling back its original victory plans, the US still wants to station tens of thousands of troops in subdued, and perhaps partitioned, Iraq, and it wasnt the issue neutralized by the 2008 elections. The peace movement therefore needs to gear up for the 2008 elections by establishing anti-war coalitions that no candidate can avoid in the primary states."
Possibly having a panic attack over the concept of peace or just dismayed regarding the lack of breast-beating over Rumsfled's impending departure (and worried about his own ass), John Howard, prime Minister of Australia and professional War Hawk, rushes to weigh in. Though not known previously as a student of American politics, Gillian Bradford (Australia's ABC) reports that Howard is downplying the election results and claiming that it boils down to Bully Boy "running a Budget deficit" that led to Republicans staying home. When considering post-government careers, Howard would be wise to skip teaching. Translation, the deficit was not covered as an issue in the leadup and it was not named in polling.
Howard's attempt to spin the illegal war comes at a time when Carne Ross is criticizing Tony Blair's government's actions with regards to the illegal war. On Iraq, the BBC reports that the British diplomat told MPs that "our policy has been a rank disaster in the last few years in terms of blood shed. By that measure that invasion has been a much greater disaster even than Suez." Ross also informed the MPs that the current state was predicted and that during talks between the US government and the British government England's Foreign Office "would say, with emphasis, we do not believe regime change is a good idea in Iraq and the reason we do not believe that is that we think Iraq would break up and that would lead to chaos if you do that."
In Iraq the chaos and violence continues with CBS and AP noting: "October was a particularly bloody month for Iraqis, with more than 1,200 killed, and November so far looks to be just as bad. At least 66 Iraqis were killed on Wednesday, although that is likely much lower than the true figure since many deaths go unreported. Since this summer, the United Nations has bumped its daily death toll estimate to 100 per day."
Bombings?
Sabah Jerges (AFP) observes there were "at least seven explosions" in Baghdad, "the worst being a suicide car bomb that exploded near the Mishin shopping center in the southeast of the city that killed seven people and wounded 27" that appears to be part of a coordinated attack including a mortar round prior to the car bomb (also noted is the death of 10 in Baquba from violence though no details are offered), while in Amara a bomb took one life and left three wounded. CBS and AP note a bombing in Tal Afar that killed three people (including a police officer) and the death of two "when a mortar bomb landed on a car on Palestine street in eastern Baghdad". Reuters notes a roadside bomb in Baghdad that left four wounded; the *wounding* of two police officers in Baghdad as they attempted to disarm a bomb; a car bomb in Baghdad (Abu Ghraib district) that resulted in five people being killed; and two dead and four wounded in Tal Afar from a rocket attack.
Shootings?
Qais al-Bashir (AP) notes an attack on "a primary school" in Muqdadiyah that left "a policeman, a guard and a student" dead; while in Baghdad, two incidents (one a drive-by) claimed three lives; and, in Mosul, a wife and husband were shot dead (the husband was with the Iraqi military). Reuters notes that in addition to the couple, four more people were shot dead in Mosul.
Corpses?
Qais al-Bashir (AP) reports that eleven corpses were discovered in Baghdad. The count increased to 26, Reuters notes, and four corpses were found in Latifiya. AFP notes that
Meanwhile, Patrick Cockburn (CounterPunch) examines "the rise of the sniper" in the capital and concludes it "will incerase the already numerous ways that Iraqi civilians can die," that the US military often offers "no warning shots"
In peace news, as Sandra Lupien noted yesterday on The KPFA Evening News, Cindy Sheehan was arrested outside the White House when she and others attempted to deliver a petition with at least 80,000 signatures on it. The petition was calling for an end to the war.
Today Military Families Speak Out attempts to deliver their petition to the soon to be gone Rumsfled calling for an end to the back door draft and noting: "We believe that the best course of action is to bring all of our troops home now, and take care of them when they get here. Our loved ones signed up to protect and defend the Constitution of this nation. That is not what they are doing in Iraq."
Today, Trina received an e-mail from the family of a war resister which only underscored to Trina how "hideous" the lack of coverage on this issue is. Trina: "If you believe the war is wrong and needs to end, then you need to cover those who are saying 'NO!' loudly and clearly. The fact that most independent magazines -- even at their own websistes -- can't is beyond disappointing. People standing up need support and their stories need to be told."
US war resisters that should have been in the news in the last two weeks include Kyle Snyder, Joshua Key and Ivan Brobeck. Kyle Snyder returned to the US Tuesday October 31st to turn himself in at Fort Knox after self-checking out and going to Canada. The agreement between Synder's attorney and the military was trashed after the US military had Synder in custody. Snyder self-checked out again. Joshua Key was denied refugee status by the Canadian government this week. Ivan Brobeck returned to the US from Canada this week, on election day, and turned himself in. These stories have garnered very little interest by independent media. Brobeck's return has hardly been noted. (Hurt feelings over the fact that Nora Barrows Friedman got the exclusive interview with Brobeck?) The verdict in Key's case has been noted even less. It's not cutting it and independent media (print and audio) needs to stop kidding themselves that it is. It's shameful.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home.
Ivan Brobeck, Kyle Snyder and Joshua Key are part of a movement of war resistance within the US military that also includes Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Ehren Watada, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. Their stories do matter. It's only the coverage that is lacking.
Which gets to a point Anthony Arnove made on yesterday's Flashpoints regarding the importance of knowing our history and how much energy is expanded to rob people of their history. History is all around -- it's just not getting the coverage. Arrnove and Alice Walker, both guests on yesterday's Flashpoints will be among those bringing history to life via a reading of Howard Zinn and Arnove's Voices of a People's History of the United States tonight (7:30 p.m.) at the Berkeley Community Theatre (1930 Allston Way) and along with Walker and Arnove, other participants will also include Mos Def, Steve Earle and Zinn himself.
Finally, Ehren Watada's father, Bob Watada, and his step-mother, Rosa Sakanishi, continue their speaking tour to raise awareness on Ehren -- the first commissioned officer to refuse to deploy to Iraq. Due to increased interest there have been some date changes and a full schedule can be found here. Upcoming dates include:
Nov 9, 11AM, Philadelphia , PA,
Location: TBA Sponsors: Iraq Delaware Valley America
Contact: Bill Perry, 215-945-3350, BpVetforPeace@aol.com
Nov 9, 12:30PM, Philadelphia , PA.,
Location: Rutgers , Details TBA
Sponsors: Iraq Delaware Valley America
Contact: Bill Perry, 215-945-3350, BpVetforPeace@aol.com
Professor Elizabeth Hillman (RU Law School Delaware Valley America
Nov 9, 3:30PM, Philadelphia , PA.,
Location: St. Joseph'
Sponsors: : Iraq Delaware Valley America
Bob Watada, Patrick Resta of IVAW, Bill Perry of Delaware America St. Joseph'
Nov 9, 7PM, Philadelphia , PA., University of Pennsylvania
Annenberg Center Room 109,
Sponsors: Iraq Delaware Valley America
Contact: Bill Perry, 215-945-3350, BpVetforPeace@aol.com
Bob Watada, Professor Carolyn Marvin (Annenberg School Delaware Valley America
Nov 10, Early PM, New York City , NY
Location: UN, 777 United Nations Plaza, E. 44th Street
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contact: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
George McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 10, 7:30PM, New York City , NY
Location: St. Paul/St. Andrews Methodist Church -- West End Avenue
Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
Nov 11, 10AM-2:30PM, New York City , NY
Sponsor: Veterans For Peace Chapters 34 & 138, IVAW, MFSO
Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
George McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 11, 3-5 PM, Flushing , NY
Location: Macedonia AME Church
Sponsors: "United for Lt. Watada"
Contact: Gloria Lum 646-824-2710, lumgloria@yahoo.com
Nov 11, 7 PM, New York City Manhattan,
Sponsors: Asian American Alliance
Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34
Contact: Gloria Lum 646-824-2710
Nov 12, 11AM-1PM, Providence , RI
Location: Brown University, John Nicholas Brown Center,
Sponsor: Veterans For Peace National
Contact: Naoko Shibusawa, 401-286-1908, Naoko_Shibusawa@brown.edu
Nov 12, 7PM, Rockland County , NY
Location: TBA
Sponsor: Rockland Rockland County
Contact: Nancy Tsou, LYTHRN@aol.com
Barbara Greenhut
Nov 13 , TBA, Ann Arbor , MI,
Location: University of Michigan
Sponsors: Michigan
Contact: Phillis Engelbert, work - 734-761-5922, home - 734-662-0818, cell- 734-660-489, philliseng@yahoo.com
Nov 14, TBA St. Louis, Mo. Location: Friends Meeting House
1001 Park Avenue Sponsors: Veterans for Peace Chapter 161, 314-754-2651
Contact: Chuc Smith, 314-721-1814, vfpch61@riseup.net
iraq
kyle snyder
amy goodman
juan gonzalez
democracy now
ivan brobeck
flashpoints
nora barrows friedman
robert parry
joshua key
cindy sheehan
military families speak out
ehren watada
bob watada
tom hayden
trinas kitchen
the new york times
john f. burns
michael luo
[C.I. note: Correction -- "*wounding*" -- not the death of.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)