Monday, April 05, 2010

The fallen honored by Michael Reagan, veterans issues

"I have a drawing over there right now that I have in my mind of a dad that I'm going to be drawing kissing the cheek of his daughter who will never see him again, a young, little girl. This is with me all the time," Michael Reagan explained to KPLU's Liam Moriarty on yesterday's All Things Considered. The Vietnam veteran and Seattle artist has drawn over "2,000 0f these portraits, the faces of nearly half the soldiers who've died in Iraq and Afghanistan." Both links have audio but, if you click here for KPLU, you will be able to see examples of the portraits Reagan has one. And clicking here takes to to Reagan's Fallen Heroes Project. And moving to the topic of the returning, Danielle M. Horn (Worcester Telegram & Gazette)reports on the newly built, $8 million Northeast Veteran Training & Rehabilitation Center which opened at the end of last year full of promises but whose program director, Michelle B. Wilmot, fears "has misled its residents" because the 'for free' services are in fact being performed for a fee, for as much as $500 per month:

A 28-year-old Army combat veteran recruited to lead the center, Ms. Wilmot said no licensed counselors have been working on-site with the four current residents, all of whom suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injuries. Ms. Wilmot said she has felt "like a panhandler" as she seeks volunteers for services she believes should have been in place before the NVTRC opened its doors.
"I'm the only combat veteran in this company. It is personal to me," said Ms. Wilmot, a California native who last year was named "Outstanding Female Veteran of the Year" by the state Women Veterans’ Network. "I was pretty much given this building and told, 'All that stuff we advertised? Make it happen.'"

At Monthly Review, Robert Naiman notes US House Rep Bob Filner speaking on the House floor. Naiman provides a link to Filner but never refers to any figures Filner used (Bob Filner is the Chair of the US House Veterans Affairs Committee, by the way) but does note an estimate from Veterans for Common Sense. [Jess note added per C.I. Veterans for Common Sense advises they get documents via Freedom of Information.] We'll drop back to the March 22nd snapshot to note Filner's statements to Lila Garrett (on KPFK) about the actual number of wounded.

US House Rep Bob Filner: [. . .] in understanding this war, you have to understand the costs both in the material costs and the human costs. Our official statistics for Iraq and Afghanistan is that over 5,000 have been killed, almost 40,000 injured. Now take that 40,000. Compare that with almost a million veterans of this war who have already come to the Veterans Administration hospital seeking care for injuries and conditions suffered in the war. I mean, compare a million versus 40,000. I mean, that's not just a rounding error, that's a deliberate attempt to mislead us on the nature of the war and its cost. And out of that million who have come to the VA, several hundred thousand who have brain injury, several hundred thousand have Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and they were not diagnosed before they left the battlefield. And that's a purposeful ommission. If we don't evaluate them, then we don't know. And by the way, Lila, even earlier in the war when they were evaluating people, they deliberately changed the diagnosis from PTSD to what's called Personality Disorder. And a Personality Disorder means that you had this before you entered the armed services and therefore we didn't give it to you and, in fact, we don't even have to take care of you. Now that's a terrible crime perpetrated on these young men and women who have volunteered for service. When they get mental injuries, they're not recognized.

Apparently offering what Filner said on the House floor (the video Naiman links to) was too much work for someone so busy with 'actions' on how you can "Defend Obama". If you wonder why Naiman's not part of the peace movement, there's your answer. Faux 'actions' focused on glorifying Barack as opposed to efforts to end the Iraq War. Fresno's KFSN offers a video report on the Orange County send-off Friday for over 300 soldiers deploying to Iraq who fly to Iraq today. Maybe if they'll send some e-mails on behalf of Barack, Naiman might offer some faux concern on their behalf?


Afghanistan War veteran and Iraq War resister Matthis Chiroux has a new essay entitled "Beyond Flagatory" (World Can't Wait):

Since my burning of the American Flag in protest of the war and the U.S. Empire, I have been called both a sinner and a saint. Members of my movement, people who I love, have published letters and comments both in support and opposition of what I see as a righteous and timely stance.
Individuals have gone so far as to assert that my non-violent act of resistance to war and empire was indeed an act of war itself. I lament what I see as such a misconstrued analogy, and hope that in time people will see the folly of their condemnations.
The struggle to end war and the struggle to end U.S. Empire is one. As long as the latter exists, the former will be an inevitability as has been demonstrated since our founding. For too long as a movement, we have divided ourselves and diminished our message, for the sake of public image, at the cost of enough blood to stain every flag in history.
This cycle of violence will continue unbroken until a few are willing to stand against the many wielding little more than truth and a determined will to be free. I count myself among the few, but have faith that soon, we’ll be the many. One U.S. flag and my reputation as a leader is a small price to pay for a message of purity that may bring an empire at last to its knees.
I am no Martin Luther King, and shall not claim greatness before any person, but I will embody those examples left to us by greatness past, and will hold true to the cause of speaking truth to power, even if that power is embodied in my peers.
We will know peace within our lifetimes, but first, we must know truth. Truth is not a process of negotiation; it is not a compromise and it is not consensus. Truth comes from within, and with it the power to create new worlds and lay those of old to rest. It also comes with great personal sacrifice on behalf of those who carry its weight.

I think we've said it here (if I'm wrong, community members e-mail and we can go into the topic at length in a snapshot) but Matthis' actions are Constitutional and are not appalling. Appalling is not making a statement. Appalling is silence. Shameful is silence when you know you should speak out. Matthis made a big statement. Maybe if others would carry their weight he wouldn't have to carry all the burden? Matthis speech and actions are not the problem, the problems is the silence. Cindy Sheehan did an amazing job responding to the nonsense attacks on Matthis and Elaine Brower. Matthis earlier wrote about his DC rally actions here.

Speaking of the silence? Hey, where was Democracy Now!? Where was Amy Goodman? Thousands and thousands of us participated in protests across the country and we got a bulls**t headline out of it from Democracy Now -- the so-called war and peace report? Really? That's acceptable? More bad interviews with bad authors and bad filmmakers and we're still going to pretend Amy Goodman's doing her part? Explain to me how she gets away with an hourly, Monday through Friday show that does not regularly book IVAW as a guest, for example? Explain how the hell anyone mistakes her for anything but a self-promoter plugging yet another bad book that will yet again sell even less than the one before? Did we march in the streets all these years just so Amy Goodman could become a a freak show celebrity?

In England, where they still have something resembling free speech when it comes to criticizing the servants elected to work for them, Ruth Barnett (Sky News -- link has text and video) reports:

Lance Corporal Beharry told The Sun he was moved to act after the Prime Minister fidgeted during a two-minute silence.

"All that was going through my head was to knock him out. I decided I'd get his attention and let him know how I felt," he said.

"When he offered his hand to me I just turned round and walked away. I wanted him to think about his actions and it worked."



Had a US veteran said the same about Barack, Amy Goodman would spend an hour devoted to how the veteran had used a gun and make specious comparisons to his or her use of a gun in combat and militias in the US. Anything to allow her to continue to ignore the gang-rape of the 7-year-old girl in nearby (to her) Trenton, New Jersey. She hopes no one really notices that silence. She may get her wish since her show has less and less bearing on most listeners' lives.

Radio note: Deborah Amos is the author of the just released Eclipse of the Sunnis: Power, Exile, and Upheaval in the Middle East. Monday, April 5th, Amos appears on The Exchange with Laura Knoy, New Hampshire Public Radio which first broadcasts at 9 a.m. EST. Bonnie reminds that Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "These days, puppets pull the strings" went up last night.


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






























































Posted by at

Sunday, April 04, 2010

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "These days, puppets pull the strings"

These days puppets pull the strings

Isaiah's latest The World Today Just Nuts "These days, puppets pull the strings." Standing on one side, Hamid Karzai pulls strings while, on the other, Nouri al-Maliki pulls strings leading to a dancing Barack. Isaiah archives his comics at The World Today Just Nuts.







Posted by at

And the war drags on . . .

The blasts surely will color the intense political negotiations that are under way after the March 7 parliamentary election, raising questions about which candidates have the security credentials and the ability to cut across sectarian lines to lead a still-unstable Iraq after U.S. troops withdraw by the end of next year. The embassy bombings come barely two days after gunmen dressed in Iraqi army uniforms stormed a Sunni Muslim village south of Baghdad and killed 25 men and women in an execution-style attack that was reminiscent of Iraq's worst days of sectarian violence.

The above is from Laith Hammoudi's McClatchy Newspapers report on the bombing of embassies in Baghdad today. Bombings struck at Iran's embassy, Egypt's embassy and a third attack which may have been an attack on three embassies. The death toll is at least 41 with over 200 injured. Click here for a photo by Xu Yanyan (Xinhua) of the semi-standing Iranian Embassy after the bombing. From Alice Fordham's report for the Times of London:

"I heard the sound of the explosion and ran out into the street to see a big cloud of dust and smoke," said Ali Sanz Ali, 26, a labourer working close to the Iranian Embassy, near the city centre.
Cement walls outside the heavily guarded building had been flattened. "On the other side of the street, many cars had been destroyed and burnt. You could see the dead," he said.

Fordham also notes that the Iranian and Egyptian embassies were clearly targeted but the other bombing may have been meant for the Syrian Embassy, the Spanish Embassy or the German Embassy. Or it might have been a way to strike all three ("the third struck an intersection near the Germany, Spanish and Syrian missions"). Jamal Hashim (Xinhua) notes that they were suicide bombers who "detonated car bombs wihtin minutes of each other" at the three embassies with the Iranian Embassy being the third one attacked. Cab driver Abu Ahmed tells Prashant Rao (Australia's The Age), "The explosion was really strong. They never kill ministers, officials or heads of state. They kill tax drivers, public employees and shopkeepers. How much longer will this last?"

Over at the Los Angeles Times where Tina Susman and Alexandra Zavis used to make it the go-to for perspective, Ned Parker and Usama Redha offer: "The bloodshed raises fears that the security situation could unravel before Iraq's next government is formed, as armed groups and political parties look to exploit the uncertain period after last month's national elections. The conditions are reminiscent of early 2006 when Al Qaeda in Iraq took advantage of the transition between elected governments to blow up a major Shiite Muslim shrine and ignite a civil war between the country's Shiite majority and its Sunni minority, which dominated the government of President Saddam Hussein before he was toppled in the 2003 U.S.-led invasion." (Parker and Caesar Ahmed provide context of previous violence here.) Rod Nordland and Riyadh Mohammed (New York Times) do a better job noting that this is the third consecutive day of "violent attacks" and that these echo January Baghdad attacks on hotels. Jim Muir (BBC News) provides this context, "Each of the multiple bombings which have hit Baghdad over the past year has been 'themed' - clearly with the aim of conveying the message not only that the insurgents can strike several targets simultaneously, but that they can focus on a particular type of target each time."



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 Sunday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4386. Tonight? 4387. In some of today's other reported violence . . .

Reuters notes a Mosul car bombing which claimed 3 lives and left twenty-five people injured, a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured four people, a second Baghdad roadside bombing which left two people injured,a third Baghdad roadside bombings which left nine people wounded, a Baghdad sticky bombing which wounded one person, a second Baghdad sticky bombing which injured one police officer, a mortar attack on the Green Zone and, dropping back to Saturday for the rest, a mortar attack on the Green zone and a Baghdad sticky bombing which claimed 2 lives and left one person wounded.

Back to the embassy bombings that slammed Baghdad today, Martin Chulov (Guardian) gets reactions from Iraqi men and women such as Abeer Ahmed who states, "Security won't be sorted out here any time soon. Look at the situation. All our leaders are busy fighting with each other for good positions for themselves and leaving the country to drown in blood. My child refuses to go to school and how can I blame her. There are many partiest to blame for this carnage, firstly the current government, which can't stop it, and secondly the regional countries who are not happy with democracy in Iraq." Focusing on today's bombings and the violenct attack on Sahwa, Arab News editorializes, "Nevertheless, this said, the attention of Al-Maliki’s caretaker administration is clearly distracted by the wheeler-dealing that is going on among political leaders. The security of ordinary Iraqis is, therefore, very much in the hands of the Iraqi police and security forces as they await the emergence of their new political masters. This challenge is also an opportunity for them to demonstrate their efficiency and independence from overt political control. The rapid detention of suspects following the militia murders may go some way to calming fears among the Sunni community that they are now increasingly vulnerable." Also editorializing, the Palm Beach Post offers:

Perhaps the political fireworks will remain just that and won't escalate to actual, lethal explosions. But with Mr. Maliki's apparent defeat, the young Iraqi democracy has to deal with the challenge that defines a mature democracy -- the peaceful yielding of power from one party to its opponent.
If Mr. Maliki keeps power violently and/or illegally, the United States is in an untenable position. Troops are supposed to remain through next year. How can they if it's to protect a coup leader? What would be the consequences of deposing him?

New content at Third:



Isaiah's latest goes up after this. Pru notes Gabby Lennox' "Texas workers battle oil giant" (Great Britain's Socialist Worker):

A high-profile court case in the United States, involving British-based oil multinational BP, has hardly been reported here. Yet it tells us so much about how giant companies and the law operate.

In April 2007 toxic chemicals poured into the air at the BP refinery in Texas City. Workers started to feel dizzy and fell ill with a variety of symptoms.

They researched what had happened and came to the conclusion they had been exposed to carbon disulfide while working on two refining units.

The plant had a terrifying safety record. A 2005 explosion had killed 15 people and injured 170.

The chief government official investigating the explosions—appointed by George Bush and therefore no die-hard opponent of oil firms—said the accident was preventable and that “risk denial and risk blindness” had not been addressed.

Subsequent legal action saw BP forced to pay $2 billion in compensation—the US’s largest ever safety fine.

The company was determined not to repeat that experience. So when in 2007 around 140 staff asked for $5,000 each to cover hospital costs arising from the fume emissions, BP suggested to the press that the entire incident might be a hoax by “disgruntled workers”.

Bosses said this “odour event” was not toxic and that workers could have just $500 each.

The multinational’s lack of care enraged a group of workers who decided to go to court—and they won. They won big.

A jury decided BP was guilty of gross negligence and ordered the firm to pay punitive damages of $100 million to the ten workers who brought the case.

If BP had paid the 140 the $5,000 they had asked for it would have cost it just $700,000. Now it was looking at a possible bill of $1.4 billion.

Appeal

But BP bosses were determined to change the decision. BP spokesperson Ronnie Chappell said the company was “shocked and outraged” by the verdict, which was “unjustified, improper and unsupportable”. So BP appealed against it.

Last week, soon after BP announced profits of $14 billion for 2009, the case came to court again—this time without a jury.

US district judge Kenneth Hoyt set aside almost all of the damages that had been won in the first court case. His ruling included the finding that “the nature of refinery work is that workers are subject to a variety of toxic odours at all times. The defendant, the employees and contractors are fully aware of the potential hazards that exist in a refinery.”

Judge Hoyt was very familiar with BP. He had enjoyed an all-expenses-paid trip to an “educational event” part-funded by the oil giant.

The three-day long programme was hosted by the George Mason Law and Economic Center (LEC), an organisation that hosts judicial conferences and is funded by the big business firms that appear in court before federal judges.

LEC is no stranger to controversy. Three years ago, federal Judge Andrew Kleinfeld reduced the penalty against Exxon Mobil for the Valdez oil spill in 1989 that saw 11 million gallons of oil ooze into Prince William Sound. He had been on LEC trips partially funded by Exxon.

A jury had ordered Exxon to pay $5 billion damages. A series of judges’ rulings left it facing a bill of one tenth of that sum.

Tony Buzbee, an attorney for the workers in the BP case, says the decision to slash the damages gave the industry “a free pass from gross negligence.

“The judge acknowledges that BP is a bad actor, but, for whatever reason, decides that a jury who hears three weeks of evidence should be ignored.

“As far as this court is concerned, BP and any other person or entity, can injure, kill, pollute with impunity as long as they monitor for it.”

Buzbee is bringing more cases to court, and is determined to bring BP to justice. But for the moment the company can relax, particularly if you are BP’s chief executive Tony Hayward who has just grabbed a 41 percent pay rise to just over £4 million a year.


© Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original.

Share this story on:

Delicious | Digg | reddit | Facebook | StumbleUpon

If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by » making a donation.

» comment on article | » email article | » printable version









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



























the socialist worker

Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)