Thursday, June 14, 2007

Adam Kokesh

<span class=adam" height="500" width="474">

The marines in question do not deny they have spoken out against the war and
that on occasion wore parts of their military clothing at demonstrations.
Neither marine wore a full uniform. They wore camouflage fatigues without the
marine insignia, a right they have earned in blood. There is no law, or regulation
against wearing camo. A camo shirt, pants, and hat is not a uniform. You can
see people wearing camo everyday all around America.
The corps claims that is against regulations to wear a uniform, or apparently
a part of a uniform, at political events. If that is correct, the regulation
is selectively enforced by the Department of Defense. President Bush, Vice
President Cheney, and other politicians often have soldiers in full dress uniform
standing behind them for the cameras at political events.
In short, the Marine Corps is attempting to stifle legitimate pro-American
speech, which should not be tolerated. Are we fighting in Iraq to lose our
freedoms at home? The Marine Corps has a war to fight against Al Qaeda and shouldn't be wasting its time harassing veterans who exercise their democratic right to free speech. The Commandant of the Marine Corps should be summoned to Congress to explain the Corps' actions and to explain why those responsible should not be held accountable.
Gene Jones
For: Executive Committee Florida Veterans for Common Sense.

The above is from a letter posted at Adam Kokesh's site and the press really didn't want to get that right did they?

Now the story of the hearing played out wrong for one reason: Heather Hollingsworth. Hollingsworth is a joke but she writes for AP so people ran with what she wrote. No surprise the drone is back to distort again and the brief in the last entry is based on her 'reporting.'

So let's review what our alleged objective drone tells us.

*Kokesh has been "kicked out"

Really. Not just discharged? He was "kicked out"? Was it boot to ass and since when did the AP decide this passes for journalism? Maybe we should all be grateful it wasn't "drummed out"?

She repeats, in her first paragraph, the "wore his uniform during an anti-war demonstration" which are lies twice over and, at this late date, Heather Hollingsworth has little else to offer.

In her second paragraph, she's off on Bergman "agreed to give . . . a general discharge". Agreed to give? Wasn't Kokesh just kicked out? Didn't she just tell us that?

Well what was he discharged from?

The IRR [Individual Ready Reserve]. Not the marines. Though Hollingsworth has already told us he was "kicked out" of the marines. And "kicked out" on Wednesday? Am I missing it or has our little liar failed to tell readers that Kokesh would have been out of the IRR on Monday -- with or without a discharge because, Hollingsworth forgets this too, it is unusal for anyone to be discharged from the IRR.

Hollingsworth tells us that "Kokesh got into trouble" (we know this story -- though who's in trouble may be decided at a later date in a civilian court) and has Kokesh on "a mock patrol" and then has to play like she's the most delicate flower (far from it) by recounting the e-mail and let's zoom in on how she plays it today:

A superior officer e-mailed Kokesh, saying he was being investigated because he might have violated a rule prohibiting troops from wearing uniforms at protests. Kokesh, a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, responded to the superior with an obscenity, prompting the Marines to take steps to remove him with an "other than honorable" discharge.

That is appalling. Kokesh responded with an e-mail of over forty lines and declared the f-you in the last line. The response was not why steps were taken "to remove him". Cloy Richards and Liam Madden are also facing the witch hunt. It has to do with speaking out against the illegal war. The investigation had started, it would have gone on no matter what. More importantly, the "other than honorable" discharge came from the hearing two Mondays ago and the only thing that happened Wednesday was that the easily shocked agreed with it. Hollingsworth gets that wrong too.

Then she repeats "uniform" and puts street theater in quotes because a dumb ass like Heather Hollingsworth isn't smart enough to call street theater "street theater." A natural dumb ass, she doesn't have to work at it, Hollingsworth can't tell what street theater is but, chances are, she's against it if she smells it. What most people downwind of Hollingsworth smell can't be washed away.

Let's quote Adam Kokesh from Tuesday's Democracy Now!:

That is a very good question because a lot of the coverage has grossly simplified the issue and said that I wore my uniform to a protest, which isn't really accurate at all. What we were doing was conducting something called Operation First Casualty. And it's called that because it has long been said that the first casualty of war is the truth. So what we did was conduct a mock combat patrol through the streets of Washington, DC, in order to bring a small part of the truth of the occupation home to the American people and give them a small sense of what it's like to have squads of men in uniform, with rifles, although we were simulating them of course, running around the streets of their city. And we also had civilians playing affected peoples. They weren't playing Iraqis or pretending to speak Arabic or anything like that, but we treated them as we would treat Iraqi civilians on a daily basis. So it was more street theater than general protest, and I do not need to show up to a protest in a uniform to represent myself as a veteran. But for this particular demonstration we were simulating a combat patrol, and so that is what we did, that's why it was appropriate in that setting. Now, normally, as I did -- or as I am doing today, I should say, I wear this Marine Corps boonie cover, and that is how I choose to represent myself as a veteran.

We've noted the Supreme Court case. We've noted it over and over. It's only the press that refuses to report it.

Now let's turn to nonsense from independent media. And, note, we covered Iraq already. Katrina vanden Heuvel -- who could never be accused of being a feminist -- felt the need to run right to the sugary snacks:

Watch as CBS dances, deflects and dodges the valid and valuable criticism levied by Rather and plenty of other media watchdogs. Les Moonves, CBS CEO, called Rather's remark "sexist" and said, "Let's give [Katie] a break."
But it's got nothing to do with Katie Couric. Nor does it really have anything to do with the messenger, Rather (whose colorful, native Texanspeak has gotten him into hot water in the past--much as it did for the late former Governor Anne Richards). It's about the message.

TV's been dumbed down for years and that includes "Uncle Walter." (And it never was all of that and Ava and I have covered this before. Many times.) And the comments are sexist. And it does have to do with Katie Couric and, specifically, her gender.

I could go on and on and have (this is dictated). But it has been sexism from day one. And to pretend otherwise is stupid or sexist. Note that KvH is rushing in to write about Couric and do you remember her column on Charlie Gibson? Maybe her calling out ABC for breaking the law and demoting Elizabeth Vargas? No? Well you don't remember them because they don't exist.
But KvH, who couldn't say a word when a woman lost her promotion because she was pregnant, wants to come along and gas bag over Katie and say it's "not sexism." That's all it is. That's all it has been.

We covered this. Read Ava and my "Katie Was a Cheerleader" (The Third Estate Sunday Review) from April of 2006:

Who knew it was a war crime? Katie Couric was a cheerleader and an army of Beate Klarsfelds are on her trail in an attempt to warn America of this dangerous contravention of the law. We imagine it's only a matter of time before the tribunal is held. The cheerleader as Eichmann, no doubt, sends shudders through the hearts of many women on the left, center and right, since they too may be charged.
[. . .]
If women learned anything from the trashing of Katie Couric last week, it was that today, we're all cheerleaders. In their eyes, we're all cheerleaders. Our own work isn't addressed and there's no desire to familiarize themselves with it before weighing in. Call us when it's our turn to stand trial at the war crimes tribunal.

Katrina vanden Heuvel wants to wade in (late to the party as always -- and empty handed) and tells you it's not about sexism -- which is a bit like David Duke telling you Don Imus' remarks weren't racists.

Maybe if you were the editor and publisher of a magazine that has spent 2007 publishing approximately four male bylines for every one female byline, you'd rush to insist "No sexism! Not there! Not here! Not anywhere!"

It has everything to do with sexism. And the next time Katrina vanden Heuvel feels she has time to leave her regular beat of reality television, someone suggest to her she spend that time addressing The Nation's sorry record of publishing women under her leadership.

I hadn't planned to note this -- I wasn't even aware of it. I started returning messages this morning and KvH has rightly outraged a large number of women in broadcasting with that bit of nonsense. In exactly three weeks, we'll return to the topic of sexism here. But I share the outrage over this nonsense. And who it comes from makes it all the more offensive. See Ruth's Report from last month.

Again, please note, we covered Iraq. Unlike KvH, or NPR, we didn't rush straight to the gooey treat of a 'hot topic.'

The e-mail address for this site is

Added. Ava here and these are my thoughts and opinions that follows.
A former coffee fetcher (male) for Katrina vanden Heuvel sputters via e-mail that C.I. knows Katie Couric!
Yeah, and so do I and it's not a secret.
In fact, use the link, we noted that in "Katie Was a Cheerleader." C.I. also knows Katrina vanden Heuvel and has avoided calling her out on all her nonsense ("all her nonsense" is my opinion) for some time.
Only when a group of women writers asked to drop by on a Saturday last year and presented C.I. with stories and figures about the treatment of women under the 'leadership' of Katrina vanden Heuvel did that begin to change.
C.I. and I steered the December 25, 2006 edition of The Third Estate Sunday Review. One of the first things we did was start the now regular feature where we track each issue of The Nation in terms of how many women are being published.
The coffee fetcher feels the need to inform that C.I. and I do not own the TV beat.
No, we don't.
And if Katrina would like to cover it, please do.
We're moving more and more towards calling out the Water Cooler Set by name for their idiocy and, judging by Katrina's American Idol post, she'd fit right in with the Water Cooler Set.
Her American Idol post?
Yes, she did write about the vast wasteland (and wrote about it at the vast wasteland that is The Nation).
The grown woman was rightly embarrassed and deleted it a week later. But it did exist.
Ruth's Report noted it before it disappeared. But it's now gone.
C.I. was tipped off by a friend with the magazine that it was being 'disappeared' and given the Google link for the cached version -- also warned that would disappear as well.
Which it has.
But fret not, you can read the embarrassing piece to this day.
Go to Mike's "The Third Estate Sunday Review " for the first section, to Elaine's "Monday" for the second and then Rebecca's "cynthia mckinney" for the last part.
It is now preserved and out of Katrina's power to make it 'disappear.'
You can laugh as she (badly and immaturely) rips off Nora Eprhon's commentary on Upstairs, Downstairs by applying a similar device to American Idol in comments such as these: "My colleagues know I've watched every week, all of 19, checking out all of the theme nights."
Along with Ruth calling out the nonsense of a woman about to hit 50 offering Tiger Beat-ish thoughts on American Idol at an allegedly political forum, it would probably be wise to recall Cindy Sheehan's words from her farewell: "Casey died for a country which cares more about who will be the next American Idol than how many people will be killed in the next few months while Democrats and Republicans play politics with human lives. It is so painful to me to know that I bought into this system for so many years and Casey paid the price for that allegiance. I failed my boy and that hurts the most."
Katrina's writing certainly indicates that she cares more about American Idol.
That may explain why neither she nor her magazine have covered Adam Kokesh thereby ensuring that she will retain her title as The Peace Resister.
So, to the former coffee fetcher, scrape and bow before her, then inform her to bring it on because I have no fears that she's 'moving in' on C.I. and my "turf."
No fears at all.
I've gone to college for an education, not to land a husband.
That means, I have actually learned something as opposed to batting my eyes at male professors.
As a woman who would never marry one of my professors, I am quite comfortable stating, "Bring it on, little girl" to a woman physically older than I am even if she elects to pretend she's 15.
15 Going On 50
-- someone call Jennifer Garner and tell her the sequel's ready.
Katie Couric was trashed before she ever stepped behind the anchor's desk.
And I don't expect a coffee fetcher to know the term. It's a feminist one. So I also don't expect Katrina to know it.
But that's what happened and it has gone on non-stop.
C.I. and I have covered it repeatedly.
If Katrina wants to show her (tired) ass by jumping in and swearing it's not sexism, well: "Have at it, little girl. Stick up for the older men, you always do."
But I didn't grow up mooning over Daddy and waiting for the day I could finally have some sort of (pathetic) relationship with him.
Point, I don't have Daddy issues.
And there's something a bit pathetic about a grown woman who does as she faces down fifty.
To repeat, my thoughts, my words, my opinions. -- Ava
P.S. If a disclosure's needed, possibly it's by Katrina? After all, the laughable Nation cruise this year is a fund raiser for The Nation. Among the many 'names' you can pay for the 'pleasure' of chatting with is Mary Mapes. Might there be another reason Katrina rushes in to defend the freakish Dan Rather from charges of sexism?