Iraq

Patrick Donahue (Bloomberg News) reports AP is stating -- but the DoD has not confirmed -- that Alex Jimenez and Byron Fouty's corpses have been discovered. David Aguila (AP) cites Fouty's step-father as confirmation that the corpses of both were "found in the Iraqi village of Jurf as Sakhr."

O'Ryan Johnson (Boston Herald) reports:

Jimenez was assigned to the hard-charging 10th Mountain Division that was operating inside Iraq hot spots when the battalion was ambushed by insurgents in May 2007. Five men were killed and three captured.
"He always had the hope that he would return back to the city. But due to ther nature of where he was, it was difficult for him to return alive," said Ramon Jimenez, the soldier's father, through a translator.
The bodies of Alex Jimenez and Pfc. Brian Fouty were discovered in the Jurf As Sakhr region of Iraq and flown back to the United States, where their dental records were used to confirm the identities, a source close to the families said. The source said the bodies of both men are now at Dover Air Force Base. Prior to yesterday, the bodies of only one of the captured men, Pfc. Joseph Anzac, had been found and identified.

ICCC has moved the two over the total for deaths in Iraq since the start of the illegal war bringing that total to 4118.

A McClatchy Iraqi correspondent notes the rations program in "Corruption" (Inside Iraq):

Two days ago, I was talking about few house issues with my wife when she told me that my brother paid about 100$ just to buy flour to our family. I was surprised to know that because I usually never asked about the house needs since I know my youngest brothers take care of such things. I asked her about the reason because as far as I know, we get more than our need of flour through the ration food card. She told me that no family in my neighborhood didn't receive one kilo during the last three months because the agent of the ministry of trade who provide part of the neighborhood with the food hadn't receive any for the last three months.
At the same day (Wednesday), I attended a conference about fighting corruption in the governmental establishments. The officials talked about the big efforts they do to fight what they called (the cold terror) which according to their point of view funds the (hot terror).
I wonder why the officials don't start with the most important ministry, the ministry of trade since it is concerned with the most important part of Iraqis' life.



The Washington Post offers "Election 2008: Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader" which is a transcript of an online exchange:

Staten Island, N.Y.: Mr. Nader, what exactly is your plan for withdrawal from Iraq, and how long do you think it would take to implement it? Thank you.

Ralph Nader: The Nader/Gonzalez plan for the military and corporate withdrawl from Iraq would be on a six-month timetable. During that period, we urge UN-sponsored elections, continuation of humanitarian aid, since we owe it to the devestated Iraqi people, and negotiations with the three groups: Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds regarding a level of autonomy within the overall framework of a unified Iraq. All three groups want a unified Iraq but they want some autonomy. By returning Iraq and the oil back to the Iraqis, the bottom will fall out of the insurgency since its only objective is to evict the invader/occupier.

_______________________

Pikesville, Md.: I am a 28-year-old father, husband, student and educator. Would you be in favor of repealing No Child Left Behind? Do you believe -- as many educators do -- that NCLB punishes lower-income students/schools while rewarding the schools that already have a wealth of money and community support? Explain.

Ralph Nader: The Nader/Gonzalez campaign favors repeal of the No Child Left Behind law. Narrowly-based multiple choice standardized tests rupture the relationships between teachers and students and forces the teachers to teach to the test which themselves are of poor design. States are gaming the law, violating it and the overwhelming number of teachers are opposed to it - for good reason. There are far better ways to stimulate higher qualities of education and their assesment.

_______________________

New York: Many people I've spoken to have seen your presidential campaigns as nudging elections toward the republican candidate and not nearly achieving the votes needed to get third-party status. Can you explain why they're wrong, or why this time will be different?

Ralph Nader: As long as liberal voters continue to vote for the Democratic party no matter how badly the party behaves, so long as the Republicans are worse, the Democratic nominee will take these liberal votes for granted and move toward right-wing positions and also move toward the corporate interests that are tugging at the candidate. The only way this can change is if liberal or progressive voters signal to the Democratic nominee that they have somewhere else to go. That somewhere else can be the progressive Nader/Gonzalez campaign otherwise the liberal/progressive voters will be in a trap and will be taken for granted. This is already happening with the liberal progressive voters' relationship with Barack Obama. So it is up to these voters to generate leverage instead of surrender.

We'll come back to Iraq but while we're on Ralph Nader, who is running for president, Oliver notes Nader's "Hey Rush, Get Off Welfare:"

Posted by Ralph Nader on Thursday, July 10, 2008 at 04:05:00 PM

Listen to Ralph Nader's audio message here

According to press reports, Rush Limbaugh will be making $38 million a year.

For eight years.

Rush is making this money by being a radio talk show host.

On public property.

That would be - the public airwaves.

Owned by the American people.

For which Rush - and his affiliated companies - pay no rent.

Rush Limbaugh is on welfare.

Corporate welfare.

The public airwaves belong to the American people.

The Federal Communications Commission is supposed to be our trustee.

The people are the landlords.

The radio and TV stations and the corporate giants who own them are the tenants.

Rush's show is syndicated on over 650 radio stations.

Rush has enormous leverage over these stations.

They pay no rent.

And therefore, he pays no rent.

Here's the problem:

Since the Radio Act was passed in 1927, the corporate tenants have been more organized and more powerful than the tens of millions of listeners and viewers.

The result?

Rush Limbaugh and his corporation get to use the public's valuable property for free.

No payment of rent.

Zero.

Nada.

Nothing.

This freeloading on the backs of the American people is called corporate welfare.

Rush Limbaugh is the Kingboy of corporatist radio.

And it's past time he set a corporatist example for his peers and -

pay rent to the American people for using their property.

It's past time Rush Limbaugh takes himself off the corporate welfare rolls.

Rush need not wait for the FCC and Congress to do the right thing and order him to pay.

He can lead by example.

And pay voluntary rent - for the hours and hours every month Rush occupies on the hundreds of stations that carry his show every weekday.

And by the way, this fits well within Rush's so-called conservative philosophy.

Payment of rent for the use of public airwaves owned by the American people is the conservative position.

Real conservatives oppose corporate welfare.

Note the Cato Institute's position.

Real corporatists feed off the public trough - from the hundreds of billions of dollars in corporate welfare gushing out of Washington, D.C. every year - your tax dollars.

So, Rush, today I ask you - which side are you on?

Freeloading?

Or paying rent for the public property you have been using free for so many years?

Today, I mailed a letter to Rush asking him to get off welfare.

The letter is posted at votenader.org.

Take a look.

And then let Rush know what you think.

You can e-mail Rush at: ElRushbo@eibnet.com

Tell him - hey Rush, I agree with Ralph Nader.

Get off welfare.

Start paying rent.

Onward

Ralph Nader

PS: We invite your comments to the blog.

Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.

Lloyd notes Dana Milbank's "Putting Her Foot Down and Getting the Boot" (Washington Post):

When Gina Gray took over as the public affairs director at Arlington National Cemetery about three months ago, she discovered that cemetery officials were attempting to impose new limits on media coverage of funerals of the Iraq war dead -- even after the fallen warriors' families granted permission for the coverage. She said that the new restrictions were wrong and that Army regulations didn't call for such limitations.
Six weeks after The Washington Post reported her efforts to restore media coverage of funerals, Gray was demoted. Twelve days ago, the Army fired her.
"Had I not put my foot down, had I just gone along with it and not said regulations were being violated, I'm sure I'd still be there," said the jobless Gray, who, over lunch yesterday in Crystal City, recounted what she is certain is her retaliatory dismissal. "It's about doing the right thing."

Now mark your calendars so you remember the latest military brass claim. From Ann Scott Tyson and Dan Eggan's "U.S. General: Iraqi Forces to Be Fully Ready in '09" (Washington Post):

Iraq's army and police will be fully manned and operational by mid-2009, possibly as early as April, the top U.S. general in charge of building Iraqi security forces said yesterday, signaling the prospect that Iraqi forces could assume primary combat responsibilities in the country while U.S. troops shift to a supporting role.
Asked when Iraqi ground forces could handle security so U.S. troops would not have to, Lt. Gen. James Dubik told lawmakers on Capitol Hill that the strength of Iraq's ground forces had grown significantly. "The ground forces will mostly be done by middle of next year; their divisions, brigades and battalions are on a good timeline," Dubik said in testimony before the House Armed Services Committee. "Could be as early as April. Could be as late as August," said Dubik, who until last week led the effort to train Iraqi forces.

Yes, you've heard it all before. No, it's never been true so far. By the way, to deal with something here, that doesn't make Ann Scott Tyson or Dan Eggan liars. They are reporters. There's apparently some barrier in Canada that allows dumb asses to think that reporters are psychics. The two did their job even if they stopped there. They didn't stop there. The next paragraph:

While U.S. commanders' predictions on Iraqi security forces have proven excessively optimistic in the past, the general's assessment is central to the debates in Washington and Baghdad over a timeline for when Iraqi forces can take charge of security, allowing the bulk of the approximately 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq to withdraw.

Had they left that off, they still would have done their jobs. Adding that paragraph, that perspective and information, makes them good reporters. But it's not their job to track down things that don't have to do with their story. For example, if someone gave them a quote and then later spoke to an attorney and found out that the quote they gave was wrong, that wouldn't be the reporters (or any reporter's) fault. There is apt media criticism. But to make it you probably need to understand what the media is actually supposed to do ideally.

If this isn't clear to you, you didn't e-mail about a stupid article last night. Check out Elaine tonight because I've been about as nice on this topic as I can be and Elaine will let it rip tonight. (And good for her.) I realize journalism is confusing -- especially with Panhandle Media, especially with Panhandle Media that employs Lyndon La Rouche-trained 'journalists' to cover Barack Obama. Bad enough The Nation prints them, CounterSpin interviews them. Lying is not new to someone trained by LLR and Panhandle Media has no standards. Skip the New York Times, nothing worth reading. Check out Rebecca's "british government pays for war crimes" and Mike's "More lies from The Progressive and the Falluja slaughter."

If you're confused as to the LaRouche-y, a friend asked that we note James Kirchick's "Robert Dreyfuss, Lyndon LaRouche, and The Nation" (The New Republic) and I'd forgotten until CounterSpin decided Drey-Drey was just the guy-guy to drool over. :

Robert Dreyfuss, a contributing editor to The Nation, has written a piece this week entitled "Hothead McCain." I wonder if Dreyfuss would use a similar descriptor for his longtime former employer, the convicted felon and political cult-leader Lyndon LaRouche. Though Dreyfuss officially left the employ of LaRouche (in the sense that he does not currently write for LaRouche's publications, at least not under his own byline), his politics clearly haven't changed much from the tinfoil hat variety characteristic of the 8-time fringe presidential candidate and conspiracy theorist. Dreyfuss still spends his days feverishly slumped over his keyboard warning of neocon conspiracies and shilling for authoritarian regimes--hallmarks of any good LaRouchite. Now, he just gets published in ostensibly respectable magazines like The Nation.

CounterSpin will have him on today -- along with the White woman who thought it was okay to appropriate the works of women of color. It's cute the way CounterSpin no longer just rolls around the gutter but actively rubs urine into its own flesh.

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

iraq

patrick donahue
oryan johnson
dana milbank
the washington post
ann scott tyson
dan eggen
like maria said paz
mikey likes it
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
james kirchick

I Hate The War

Yeah, I saw the story. We're not linking. It's nonsense. It does explain a lot, though, doesn't it. Like how the 'movement' in Canada still struggles?

It's a bunch of nonsense. The 'journalist' doesn't even grasp that war resisters who went to Canada during Vietnam included deserters and, no, not all of them were drafted into service.

Whatever was supposed to have been accomplished with the article, nothing was. But in terms of the movement (or 'movement'), until everyone stops repeating this nonsense that Canada took in draft dodgers but not deserters, any real movement building suffers.

The stupidity at this point is the biggest obstacle to building a war resistance movement in Canada. Note the following:


Jeff Enger, a deserter from the Army and therefore excluded from the Presidential pardon, will be sworn in as a Canadian citizen next Friday, one of the many self-exiled American war resisters who "want to make our lives here." However, like other deserters, Mr. Egner would like to be able to travel freely in the country of his birth.
The Presidential pardon covered nearly all draft evaders of the Vietnam War period. Mr. Carter postponed a decision on the men who entered but then deserted the armed forces.
Jack Colhoun, a leader in the Toronto exile community, is one of those deseters who insist that they would fight in a "just war," or "if the United States were attacked," as Mr. Colhoun put it.
The men interviewed, who rerpesent a cross section of the estimated 20,000 to 25,000 American war resisters living in Canada, have in common a yearning for recognition by Americans at home that their actions were an acceptable exercise of principle "in the American tradition," as one said.
"We don't expect to be congratulated or anything," said Mr. Egner, a law student at the University of Toronto, "but we believe we acted correctly."
They also share a deep conviction that the deserters, as well as the draft evaders, should be pardoned.

Robert Trumbull, "Pardon Brings Cautious Response From Some War Exiles in Canada," New York Times, January 23, 1977. Let's just stay with the Times because I pulled all their articles from that period out of the journals and put them in a folder.

For Sidney and Ruth Schwarzmann of Nassau County, the war in Vietnam did not end when the last troops came home. Or when former President Gerald R. Ford declared his clemency program. Or when President Carter, on his first full day in office, signed a pardon for some Vietnam war resisters.
The Schwarzmann's 31-year-old son, Victor, has been living in Canada since 1968, in what amounts to enforced exile, since he faces desertion charges if he returns to the United States. He left the Army after passing his physical, applying for conscientious objector status and being turned down.

That's Paul Wilner's "After Vietnam, a War of Emotions," New York Times, April 3, 1977. In August 1976 when then candidate Jimmy Carter spoke to the American Legion in Seattle, what did he say? "I do not favor a blanket amnesty but for those who violated Selective Service laws, I intend to grant a blanket pardon." He's speaking of the draft. That's all he offered. If you doubt it, go to a real library and pull the rolls of film to look up January 22, 1977 when the Times ran "Evaders In Canada Call Action A Sham: Exclusion of Deserters Is a Source of Bitterness to Exiles Who Say Pardon Will Affect Only 2,000." The author is again Robert Trumbull. Second paragraph in the article:

Jack Colhoun, co-editor of a magazine for the self-exiled Americans in Canada who is a deserter from the Army, branded Mr. Carter's plan "a real sham, sinsiter, almost Nixonesque."
[. . .]
There is no official figure, since the Canadian Government omits reference to military status in its immigration procedures, but Mr. Colhoun's group estimates that the number is from 20,000 to 25,000 of whom 6,000 to 7,500 are believed to hae become Canadian citizens.
After counting out the deserters and those who have taken Canadian citizenship, only about 2,000 of the exiles in Canada, or one of every 10 or 17, will benefit by Mr. Carter's pardon, Mr. Colhoun declared.

Carter's decision was called out for leaving out deserters before Carter took office. In December 28, 1976, Tom Wicker was doing just that from the op-ed pages of the New York Times in "Clemency, It's Not So Simple."

We could go on and on all night. Carter did not pardon deserters. He set out the framework he was using on the campaign trail in 1976. He refused to alter it. Gerald Ford did offer a clemency program for deserters and draft dodgers. You had to jump through hoops and most war resisters found it to be a joke, but he offered it. Carter focused on draft dodgers, not deserters. For those who like to play what-if, if Carter hadn't talked up his 'big plan,' Ford might have issued a pardon. He was considering it. It was reported. But Carter had been elected and was coming in with his 'big plan.' As Elizabeth Holtzman told PBS on the first day of Carter's administration, she hoped he would revist his decision. He didn't. There was that hope. A lot of people were hoping. But he didn't revisit it.

Until the war resistance movement (in Canada and in the US) starts telling the truth about what happened, it's going to be a long muddle. You can find muddles and lies all over the internet, click here for one example, but that doesn't change reality. Canada's not being asked to do anything that they didn't do before. That's the talking point. Until that's established, the counter-argument will always be "There's no draft today!" There's no need for that back-and-forth. It's counter-productive and it wastes time. Canada welcomed draft dodgers and deserters during Vietnam. Today it's being asked to recognize deserters the same way it did during Vietnam. It's not being asked to do anything different or new.

It's that basic.


But even the CBC can't get it right today. Despite reporting on it real time. Here they are playing stupid in 2006: "Tens of thousands of Americans moved to Canada during the war, many of them settling in B.C. As many as half returned to the U.S. after president Jimmy Carter declared an amnesty in 1977." The amnesty was only for draft dodgers and the CBC has no idea how many moved back because there was no official figure kept by the Canadian government on them (dodgers or deserters).

Thing is, while the left wallows in stupidty, the right-wing does know what happened. They know because they condemned Ford and Carter in real time. They know because they've kept their hatred alive over the issue while the left has failed (repeatedly) to pass it down.

We called out the CBC, let's call out the US. Here's Democracy Now! serving up misinformation in 2006:

AMY GOODMAN: How does amnesty--didn't Carter give amnesty for resisters?
TOD ENSIGN: Well, not exactly amnesty. He set up a program--he gave amnesty to the draft refusers who were more--tend to be more white and middle class. The soldiers, he gave what was called "clemency," and you had to actually go to a military base and apply for it, and then you were given what was called a "clemency discharge," which in some ways was a stigma also, because it told the employer that you were a Vietnam refuser. At any rate, only about 8,000 people actually applied for that program, so it was not a very large program. Remember, there was half a million desertion cases from the Vietnam War, so that was a very large number.

Tod Ensign likes to help. It's a shame when he doesn't know what he's talking about. The clemency program he's referring to was Ford's. Since he's being called out by name, let's note his jumping all over Dalia Hashad on Law and Disorder (scroll down, it's the the June 11, 2007 broadcast) when she pointed out Camilo Mejia's stop-loss was not only uncalled for, Dalia was right. That's because Dalia actually read the damn book. Dalia was not wrong. She actually read the book. She stated Camilo was stop-lossed through 2031. Dalia was jumped on for that comment. Camilo Mejia's book is Road From Ar Ramadi (highly recommended). It should be page 309 (that's from memory, it's in the Afterword by Chris Hedges regardless, but check page 309 first), this appears: "His commitment to the army was extend until the year 2031." If that's wrong, Chris Hedges is wrong, The New Press is wrong. But one thing is not wrong, Dalia Hashad's comments. Again, she read the book. We've noted that before without naming the individual, Mike's noted it, but if we're going to talk about reality and the ones who get it wrong, let's take a moment to defend Dalia who read the book and attempted to discuss it only to be loudly shut down. It wasn't pretty, it wasn't nice. She did not deserve it -- nor was she wrong.

Tod Ensign was wrong. Tod Ensign was wrong when he spoke to Amy Goodman.

Did Carter give amnesty? Tod said, "Well, not exactly amnesty." Carter used "pardon." And specifically stated he didn't approve of "blanket amnesty." An amnesty, Carter stated, "says what you did was right." Which is why he called it a pardon. It applied only to draft dodgers. Tod: "He set up a program--he gave amnesty to the draft refusers who were more--tend to be more white and middle class." Leaving out the word "amnesty" (which Carter rejected), Tod is correct on that. Tod: "The soldiers, he gave what was called 'clemency,' and you had to actually go to a military base and apply for it, and then you were given what was called a 'clemency discharge,' which in some ways was a stigma also, because it told the employer that you were a Vietnam refuser." No. A pardon, a presidential pardon, wipes away 'crimes.' That's what Carter did. The Clemency Program was Ford's. Tod is confusing the two programs. Ford set up The Clemency Review Board, headed by former US Senator Charles E. Goodell. Those wanting to take part in that program had to start by turning themselves into DoD (unless they were in prison already). Carter did not include deserters. Ron Kovic called that out in 1977 stating, "I didn't feel Carter's pardon went far enough. The only way our nightmare and trauma of the Vietnam war and truly heal ourselves as a nation is by granting a total and unconditional amnesty for all resisters of the Vietnam war. I'm definitely going to oppose any war started by any Administration from the point out. I'm definitely going to encourage deserters, and if I go to jail, I'm ready to speak out from jail, if necessary" (New York Times, front page to page ten, April 3, 1977). Tod: "At any rate, only about 8,000 people actually applied for that program, so it was not a very large program. Remember, there was half a million desertion cases from the Vietnam War, so that was a very large number." 500,000 desertion cases? I'd be interested in seeing the footnote on that. He may be lumping in "bad discharges" (the figure most often used for that was 750,000) or he may be lumping in draft dodgers with deserters (by 1971, the figure for the two categories combined was said to be between 70,000 and 100,000). Ignoring his numbers, he's speaking of Ford's program.

Not trying to be sarcastic, does Gerald Ford not have biographers? Do none of them hit the roof as his credit (he's the only president that did a damn thing for Vietnam deserters) is stolen and assigned to Carter? I think Ford's program was a joke. But in terms of what Carter did? Ford's credit's being stolen. And Carter's being cited as a wonderful, amazing person when that's not how his program was seen in real time. The arguments against Carter's pardon (by supporters of amnesty) included that the reasons he gave for pardoning draft dodgers was that they actually applied to deserters. Deserters were more likely to be poor, to be less educated and to be a racial minority (Wicker: "a fourth were black or Hispanic, three-fourths were high school dropouts, and 57 percent were from low-income homes").

Prior to Carter's first day on the job assignment, Time magazine published "Pardon: How Broad A Blanket?" on January 17, 1977:

What Carter promised was a blanket pardon "for those who violated Selective Service laws." This presumably would include all those civilians who fled the country to avoid the draft, simply failed to register or refused to submit to induction. As for those who deserted after induction or enlistment, Carter said each case "should be handled on an individual basis in accordance with our nation's system of military justice." That seemed to imply that military officials, hardly lenient in such matters, would have to process all of these desertion cases and try to decide what was in each person's mind, some four or more years ago, that caused him to desert.
This general approach also seems to contradict Carter's frequently expressed concern for the underprivileged in society. As he has noted, the draft evaders are overwhelmingly white and middleclass. A report prepared for President Ford in 1975 placed 87% of them in this category. The deserters are largely poor and disproportionately black--more than 50% low-income and 20% black. In general, the more affluent, better-educated war resisters found the means to avoid service by evading the draft; the underprivileged submitted, turning against the war later, if at all, by deserting.


According to the Univeristy of Texas' online statements, the bulk of the Ford papers on this are open to the public. Charles E. Gooddell headed the clemency committee and, again the bulk of those papers are available to the public ["Open. Some items are temporaryl restricted under terms of the donor's deed of gift, a copy of which is available on request, or under National Archives and Records Administration general restrictions (36 CFR 1256).]. From their online guide to those papers:

Shortly after assuming office, President Ford created a clemency program to allow the young men who were "convicted, charged, investigated or still sought for violations of the Military Selective Service Act or of the Uniform Code of Military Justice" to contribute a "share to the rebuilding of peace among ourselves and with all nations." On September 16, 1974, Ford issued a proclamation and executive order establishing the Presidential Clemency Board (PCB) to oversee this program and announced the appointment of the nine members of the Board. The President selected his old friend and former congressional colleague Charles Goodell as chairman.

The PCB handled applications for clemency on a case‑by‑case basis. As the number of applications went from 850 in early 1975 to 21,500 by the deadline at the end of March, it became apparent that the original board of nine members and less than 100 staff members was inadequate to complete the task in the specified time. In May 1975 the President authorized nine additional board members and a dramatic increase in staff to keep the work on schedule. The PCB finished its work in September 1975 and turned over all incomplete cases to the Justice Department.

During the year of its existence, the PCB disposed of 14,514 cases. For each case, they determined whether or not the individual deserved clemency and, if so, whether he should be required to complete a period of alternative service. Alternative service involved working for a non‑profit organization in a job promoting the national health, safety, or interest. Of the civilian clemency applicants, more than four out of every five received outright pardons, only a few were denied clemency, and the remainder were assigned to alternative service before receiving their pardons. Only slightly more than one‑third of military applicants received outright pardons, 7 percent were denied clemency, and the remainder participated in the alternative service program.

While the PCB claimed to have succeeded in its assigned task, many people disputed this statement. Only about 19 percent of the eligible people even applied for the program. Many draft evaders and deserters attacked the program for not going far enough and demanded an unconditional amnesty. At the same time many people in the military and in veterans organizations were unhappy with any form of amnesty or clemency.

Now Carter's papers are a joke -- you will discover he decided to reinstate Selective Service registration in October of 1979 even though he would announce it in his January 1980 State of the Union speech. But you have the realtime coverage on PBS (the program that is now The NewsHour) and you can watch it online, you can read it online. And though the CBC is shaky on that era today, they do have archives. (We link to it on the permalinks to the left.) You can watch their "Amnesty -- but not for all" from January 21, 1977 online and here's their text summary of the report:


In his first act as president, Jimmy Carter pardons those who peacefully evaded the draft by travelling abroad or failing to register. Military deserters, however, have not been included in the blanket pardon. In the two-tiered system, deserters can apply for a limited pardon to be reviewed on a case by case basis. CBC Radio's Barbara Frum talks to one frustrated military deserter who would like to go home again.

Any Democrat who runs for public office gets targeted with the smear that they were pardoned. Bill Clinton was, John Kerry was. And the right-wing gets all excited, "Carter pardoned them!" And then those with knowledge pass on the reality. Kerry was discharged, there was no need for a pardon. Had he not been discharged, he would have been covered by Ford's program because he would have been a deserter. (Kerry was discharged, he wasn't a deserter.) Bill Clinton did not evade the draft. He registered. He wasn't called up. There was no reason for him to be in Carter's pardon. As Jane Fonda correctly says in Sir! No Sir!, the right keeps going back to it. The left needs to as well because too many damn lies have taken hold. When we don't even know which president did what, too many lies have taken hold. When we don't even know that Canada welcomed deserters during Vietnam, too many lies have taken hold. The right-wing never stops talking about Vietnam (including revisionary tactics) but what does the left do? Not a whole damn much if we can't even get the basic facts right. Fonda's right that we do need to keep going back because until we do enough to get it right, we're not learning anything, we're not passing on anything. And we are certainly not accomplishing anything.

It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)

Two Thursdays ago, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4113. Tonight? 4116. Just Foreign Policy lists 1,236,604 as the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the Iraq War up from 1,225,898. Like last week, it still reads 1,225,898 last week. Maybe that's where the White House is getting their 'violence is down' talking point?

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

iraq
i hate the war
the ballet
mikey likes it
robert trumbull
paul wilner
tom wicker
dalia hashad
law and disorder
democracy now
amy goodman
sir! no sir!

Iraq snapshot

Thursday, July 10, 2008.  Chaos and violence continue, US war resister Corey Glass' good news, a Mosul assassination attempt was a flop yesterday but today . . ., Turkey's prime minister visits Iraq today for a two-day visit and apparently checks out early, the Green Party Convention kicks off in Chicago, and more.   Starting with war resistance.  There are celebrations in Canada today but before we get to that, two journalists get the facts right at the top and deserve note.  Patrick Arden (Metro) opens with, "Canada was a safe haven for 60,000 U.S. military draft dodgers and deserters during the Vietnam War."  Ian Austen (International Herald Tribune) also grasps and conveys the basics, "During Vietnam, Pierre Trudeau, the Liberal prime minister, welcomed American deserters and draft dodgers, declaring that Canada 'should be a refuge from militarism.' Americans who arrived were generally able to obtain legal immigrant status simply by applying at the border, or even after they entered the country."  Adding a detail, prior to Trudeau's 1969 declaration, some were being advised to fly in because you could not be immediately turned back the way you would be if you tried to enter through a land border.  London Topic notes a 5:00 pm rally this evening in Victoria Park for US war resisters attempting to be granted safe harbor in Canada and among those participating will be MP Irene Mathyssen who states of Judge Robert Barnes' decision in US war resister Joshua Key's case, "The federal court is filling the void that is left by the lack of political will demonstrated by Immigration Minister Diane Finley."  Demonstrations were scheduled to take place throughout Canada.  They found a celebratory note with some late breaking news.  The CBC reported that US war resister Corey Glass, due to be deported as early as today, "can stay in Canada while the court reviews and decides on his applications for leave and judicial review -- process his lawyer said could take months"; and they quoted him declaring, "I was shocked.  I was just enjoying my last little bit of time I had in Canada."  AP and Canada's GMA pointed out that Glass "is one of about 200 American deserters believed to have come to Canada to avoid service in Iraq.  So far, Canadian immigration officials and the courts have rejected efforts to grant them refugee status."  Canwest News Services (via Ottawa Citizen) quotes Glass stating, "I had my bags ready and had moved out of my apartment.  So I'm in the process of looking for another apartment."  Colin Perkel (The Canadian Press via CNews) quotes attorney Alyssa Manning stating, "The fact that the stay was granted in both cases means that the Federal Court judge decided that there was a serious issue to be decided in both of the applications.  There is a strong indication that leave will be granted."  Perkel also notes the one carrying on the spirit of Pierre Trudeau today, MP Olivia Chow, stating that the Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper needs "to stop wasting taxpayers' money" by refusing to implement any program (or heed the motion the House of Commons passed June 3rd) because "[i]n the meantime, we're wasting thousands and thousands of dollars throwing people in jail and attempting to deport them."  Amnesty International updated their call for Glass not to be deported noting the latest developments.  Kevin Connor (Toronto Sun) quotes the government's spokesperson for citizenship and immigration, Danielle Norris, stating, "His deportation has just been stayed -- it doesn't mean he can stay and he hasn't been granted refugee status."  Liam Lahey (Inside Toronto) notes attorney Manning explaining that "Glass still needs three decisions to go his way in order to be on the path to permanent Canadian citizenship.  The federal court first has to decide to hear his case.  If that happens, he'll get another hearing at and if that decision comes down in Glass' favour, he'd then be allowed to argue his deportation order anew with immigration officials."  In the US, UPI reports, "News of the judicial reprieve was greeted favorably by protesters in Washington, who gathered outside the Canadian Embassy to show support for Glass and other war resisters living in Canada."  CTV News notes that the news has led to celebrations and today's planned demonstrations "will now celebrate the news" but, War Resisters Support Campaign's Lee Zaslofsky explain, "We're also going to try to put pressure on the government to resolve this whole thing on war resisters instead of dealing with it one court at a time."   Which brings us specifically to US war resister Robin Long.  Rod Mickleburgh (Globe and Mail) explains, "Mr. Long, 25, was arrested and taken into custody by Nelson police last Friday on a warrant from the Canada Border Services Agency.  The CBSA alleged that he had violated his release conditions by failing to inform them of his address changes in the charming Interior city, home to several other U.S. deserters seeking to remain in Canada. With no work permit allowing him to earn money, Mr. Long had been 'couch surfing' at the residences of friends. He was further shocked on Tuesday to learn for the first time that authorities were planning to deport him almost immediately, despite a key Federal Court ruling last week ordering the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada to reconsider another deserter's failed refugee claim."  Jack Keating (The Province) adds, "The surprise decision was revealed by a Canada Border Services lawyer at an Immigration and Refugee Board Hearing in Vancouver on Tuesday. Long, 25, is being held in the Nelson city jail after being arrested by police last Friday on an outstanding immigration warrant."  Lahey pins down July 14th as the day Long faces deportation.  Meanwhile Steve Clarke, Federal Liberal candidate for Simcoe North, writes "Gov't can't keep ignoring motion concerning war objectors: Clarke" to the Orillia Packet & Times.   To pressure the Stephen Harper government to honor the House of Commons vote, Gerry Condon, War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist all encourage contacting the Diane Finley (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration -- 613.996.4974, phone; 613.996.9749, fax; e-mail finley.d@parl.gc.ca -- that's "finley.d" at "parl.gc.ca") and Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, 613.992.4211, phone; 613.941.6900, fax; e-mail pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's "pm" at "pm.gc.ca").  Courage to Resist collected more than 10,000 letters to send before the vote.  Now they've started a new letter you can use online here.  The War Resisters Support Campaign's petition can be found here.   There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Megan Bean, Chris Bean, Matthis Chiroux, Richard Droste, Michael Barnes, Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Jose Vasquez, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Jason Marek, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum. Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).   Turning to Iraq where Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrived.  China's Xinhua quotes him stating, "I assure the people of Iraq that you will always find us besdie you to overcome those difficulties."  "Difficulties" was undefined but most press reports are focused on the fact that this is the first visit by a Turkish prime minister in eighteen years.  CNN notes that Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki called the "two-day visit" "historic" and states the pact the two countries have now entered involves "military and border security issues, . . . economis and energy."  Hurriyet quotes Erdogan stating, "As the first Turkish prime minister visiting Iraq after 18 years, I am pleased to be here with my brothers and sisters. . . . I am confident that from now on we will not wait for another 18 years before a Turkish prime minister visits Iraq.  The agreement we have signed on Thursday for the establishment of a high strategic cooperation council is a symbol of our determination to promote relations."  Despite CNN stating it was a two-day visit, the Turkish Press reports the visit is over and that the prime minister "returned to Turkey from Iraq where he met top Iraqi officials on a one-day formal visit in Baghdad on Thursday."  They note that along with al-Maliki, Recep Tayyip Erdogan was also received by Jalal Talabani (Iraq's President), Tariq al-Hashimi and Adil Abd al-Mahdi (the two vice-presidents) and Mahmoud al-Mashhadani (the Speaker of Parliament). Mehmet Ali Birand (Turkish Daily News) observes the interest in the visit by all parties (including the US), "Kurds have been very successful in fortifying their status during the Sunni-Shiite conflict. They got constitutional recognition for their autonomous zone as well as increased their influence over the central government. The northern Iraqi administration has acquired internal and external prestige by becoming the only stable region in Iraq. The Kurds have played their cards well."   In other news from Iraq, Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) explores IRAMS (Improvised Rocket Assisted Munitions) which the US military is stating has become the weapon of choice in attacks by resistance fighters with "at least 21 peoplce, including at least three U.S. soldiers" dying from them so far in 2008; while Sally Buzbee (Los Angeles Times) explores the growing season in Iraq during a time "of drought and sand storms across Iraq -- a dry spell that has devastated the country's crucial wheat crop and created new worries about the safety of drinking water."  Patrick Cockburn (Independent of London) interviews the ever-present Ahmed Chalabi who states that if the treaty being worked out between the White House and Nouri al-Maliki does not include immunity from prosecution for mercenaries they will "likely" be targeted by Iraqi forces:  "The Iraqi forces will follow them with vigour because they are not popular in Iraq. People haven't forgotten about the Iraqis who were killed by private security men in Nisour Square."   In the US, Tony Fratto entertained the press corps with the White House briefing.  He noted that Gens David Peteraues and Raymond Odierno were being voted on (promotions) in the US Senate and his glee over that but the reporters present weren't interested in that or anything else Iraq related. Reuters reports the Petraeus vote was 95 for and two against and on Odierno (Lieface of Baghdad), 96 for and one against.  Senator Tom Harkin voted against on both votes.  Senator Robert Byrd voted against on Petraeus.  Staying on the topic of the US Senate, James Risen (New York Times) details why US Senator Byron L. Dorgan accuses General Jermoe Johnson of lying to the Senate Armed Services Committee when providing testimony in April of last year on KBR's work supplying water to US forces during which time Johnson denied that there was "widespread problems with water supplied by KBR" despite "the Pentagon's inspector general" stating that there was (and, yes, there were huge problems).   In other reported violence (yes, KBR's actions were violence):   Bombings?   Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left four more wounded, a Baghdad car bombing that killed the bomber as well as two bystanders and left eleven people wounded.   Shootings?   Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two doctors ("husband and wife") were wounded in a shooting in Kirkuk and Brig Gen Riyadh Jarallah Kashmula ("Head of Iraqi Identity and Civil Affairs Department" and "a cousin of Durald Kashmula Governor of Nineveh") was assassinated in Mosul. Reuters notes Kashmula was shot dead "outside his office" and that another person was shot dead in Mosul.  Today a successful assassination attempt in Mosul, yesterday a failed one.  Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) explains yesterday's attack: "A suicide bomber detonated his car outside a regional traffic police building in Mosul, where Lt. Gen. Riyadh Jalal Tawfiq, the chief of the Iraqi military command for the city, was holding a meeting.  Genreal Tawfiq was not hurt, but five of the eight killed were civilians, and 41 people were wounded, including seven of his bodyguards, Iraqi officials said."   Corpses?   Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad and 1 in Kirkuk.  Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered in Tuz Khumato.     Turning to the US presidential race.  "We were taught as young children," Ralph Nader explained, "that in our democracy, under our system of justice, nobody is above the law -- nobody.  But this bill puts the President and the telecom companies above the law."  It was the expansion of spying on Americans.  And it passed.  Barack Obama broke another pledge, flipped another flop, and voted for it.  (Those voting against it included Senators Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold .)   As Nader noted, "This legislation . . . sets up a double standard of justice.  Break the law as a citizen, go to jail.  Break the law as a corporation, go to Washington and get immunity. Remember, there were telecom companies, such as Qwest, that refused to follow President Bush's illegal wiretap orders and chose instead to obey the laws of the land."  Barack caved.  He broke his word.  He sold out his supporters and the rule of law.   Rebecca's "your frankenstein monster has escaped," Kat's "Hillary and Barbara stand up, Barack crawls," Marcia's "Ralph Nader, Jesse Jackson, Barack, Hillary," Ruth's "Barack, Hillary, Ralph, Glen Ford," Mike's "He tore apart the Democratic Party, now its families," Elaine's "Who stood up? The woman they attacked.," and Cedric's "Jesse Jackson Jnr. has a new Daddy" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! GUESS WHO GOT A NEW DADDY!" (joint-post on the last two) address it.  A Barack supporter blogs at the Nader-Gonzalez presidential campaign site: "With yesterday's vote, it was last straw, for my decision not to contribute to Senator Obama's presidential candidate."      Meanwhile, the Green Party's confention began today and runs through the weekend (July 10th through July 13th).  It's taking place in Chicago. Pacifica Radio will broadcast a three hour special on Sunday "as the convention comes to a close) that will stream online at the Pacifica website (noon to 3:00 p.m. EST; 11:00 a.m. to 2 p.m. Central and 9:00 a.m. to noon PST).  Kimberly Wilder (On the Wilder Side) notes some initial press coverage.  Vying for the party's presidential nomination are Kat Swift, Kent Mesplay, Jesse Johnson and presumed nominee Cynthia McKinney.  Today is introductions and receptions.  Tomorrow will provide several news conferences with Congressional and public office candidates (first at nine in the morning) with a Presidential Candidates' Forum beginning at seven p.m.  The presidential candidates will hold their press conference at nine a.m. on Saturday. Saturday afternoon will have the roll call vote, the v.p. acceptance speech and presidential nominee acceptance speech followed by a press conference featuring the ticket.  Presumed nominee Cynthia McKinney has picked her running mate: Rosa Clemente.  Clemente declares, "I hope that my Vice Presidential run will inspire all people to recognize that they have more than two choices.  The time has come to stop talking about what we have to do, but do it by building a 3rd party.  I hope you join me on this journey."  Austin Cassidy's Independent Political Report notes that Democrat Drew Pritt has launched a blistering attack at McKinney.  As we said throughout the Democratic primary, if it's not your political party, butt the hell out.  It's a real shame some Greens couldn't adopt the same policy during the Democratic Primary but instead acted as cheerleaders for Barack (Ted Glick for starters). Speaking to Green Party Watch Radio, Kat Swift encouraged people to contribute to Cynthia so that she might qualify for federal matching funds.  The Green Party asked the four candidates to fill out a questionnaire.  It's shocking that with the Iraq War over five years old it doesn't even qualify for a question. Asking 'your thoughts' on "Middle East Policy, including Iraq, Iran, and Israel" is not asking about the Iraq War.  Note all candidates repsonses are in PDF format.  Johnson responds, "Diplomacy is key."  Mesplay responds at length but speaks of the "admitted mistake: poor intelligence."  After that and his apparently mistaken belief that WMDs were found in Iraq, I'm not interested in quoting him, use the link if you're interested.  Cynthia responds, "In 2006, I voted no on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date.  I consistently opposed every regular and supplemental appropriation meant to fund the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  I have participated in International War Crimes Tribunals (in Brussels, Spain and Malaysia) designed to bring to justice the Bush-Cheney administration.  I was targeted by AIPAC and others for my opposition to the Israeli occupation of and genocidal policies toward Palestine."  McKinney's referring to the House Resolution "On Prevailing in the Global War on Terror Bill" (June 12, 2006 for the vote).  Her record in the US Congress allows her to cite many votes and she repeatedly voted (in all of them) against the illegal war -- going all the way back to HR 114 in October 2002.  Should McKinney be the nominee, she would likely be one of two candidates who were in Congress in 2002 and voted on the original resolution.  While McKinney voted against it, presumed GOP nominee John McCain voted for it (in the Senate).  Mark Blumenthal (National Journal) writes of polling and his thoughts are mainly useless; however, someone might want to ask him where Cynthia McKinney is in his discussion?  She's expected to be the nominee Saturday night.  She's been expecte to be the nominee since at least January.  John McCain and Barack Obam are not yet their party's nominee.  So what's the excuse for leaving Cynthia out?  You'd think the press -- having rubbed themselves raw as they got off on their own sexism -- would be making an effort at this point to be inclusive.  But don't just call out the MSM, what's Yes! Magazine's pathetic excuse for Erik Leaver's crap called "Presidential Candidates on Foreign Policy" that does not cover Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader but includes John McCain?  Answer: There is no excuse and Yes! is struggling for readers. Crap like this explains why.  (A topic we'll return to tonight.)   Ryan Teague Beckwith (News Observer) notes Nader will be in Raleigh, Carolina Saturday night (St. Mary's School auditorium from 7:30 to 10:00 p.m.) and that he needs 500 signatures to qualify for the North Carolina ballot which should not be difficult since Nader "was the top write-in candidate in North Carolina" in 2004.  Matt Holmes (Charlottesville WCAV) notes Nader's Virginia Sunday rally, "Nader will be in Charlottesville on Sunday. He'll hold a rally at Gravity Lounge at 2pm. The campaign suggests a $10 donation for the general public, $5 for students who attend."  Nader will be in Richmond, Virginia Saturday as well, at the Virginia Holocaust Museum from one p.m. to three p.m.  And he became the first presidential candidate in nearly 50 years to campaign in Hawaii last week (1960 was the last time a presidential candidate campaigned in Hawaii).   Gregory Kafoury (Team Nader) asks:   Were you drawn to the Nader website because Obama broke his word to you on  FISA/Telecom? Or was it because his vote not only immunized and concealed blatantly criminal conduct, but helped lay the legal foundation for a future police state? Or perhaps it was simply his new fundraisers, where the price of admission exceeds $30,000?  No matter. You are here now. Seduced and abandoned. We all know the stages of grief, but we are also serious people, and we are not at a funeral, we are in a fight, a fight for justice in our country and our world.  For now -- at least -- stand with Ralph Nader. Our campaign has far more promise than you have been led to believe. With only a modest increase in our poll numbers, Obama and McCain will be debating Nader this fall. Google and YouTube are sponsoring a debate in New Orleans, and the bar is set at 10% support. Nader is at 6% and growing. Such an event could bring a seismic shift in our politics, because the public is far more progressive than the corporate media would have us believe.  Nader's platform is the real center.  There remains a more tantalizing possibility: Such a debate could create a genuine 3-way race. Today, 14% of voters say they would support Nader if he was competitive, and forcing open one debate could open them all.  You know that Nader is responsible for seatbelts and airbags, but did you also know that he led the campaign against nuclear power, an effort that has blocked the construction of new nuclear plants in America for more than 30 years? You may know that he is largely responsible for the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Freedom of Information Act, but did you know that in recent years he secured cheap, generic AIDS drugs for India? Nader became an American hero when be brought General Motors to its knees by exposing their campaign to intimidate and smear him for having written about auto safety. Since then, he has founded more than 100 public interest groups. His impact and accomplishments dwarf those of his opponents. His is a story worth repeating, and his campaign is worthy of your support.  Those most impressed with Nader are those who have known him the longest. He will never flatter you, never pander to you, never betray you.    iraq robin long joshua key patrick arden rod mickleburgh colin perkel jack keating kevin connor kpfa the morning show gerry condon aimee allison philip maldari david solnit jeff paterson the new york times the los angeles times steven lee myers sally buzbee the washington post ernesto londono sabrina tavernise james risen xx