starting with howard wolfson's 'HUBdate: The Popular Vote Leader' (HillaryClinton.com):

The Popular Vote Leader: The Philadelphia Inquirer reports about Tuesday night’s contests: "Hillary Clinton netted approximately 150,000 votes and is now poised to finish the primary season as the popular-vote leader. In some quaint circles, presumably, these things still matter...If you believe that the most important precept in democratic politics is to 'count every vote,' then...Clinton leads Obama by 71,301 votes." Read more.
Hillary Strongest in Swing States: A Quinnipiac University poll out yesterday shows Hillary's continued strength in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania…She leads Sen. McCain by 7 in both Florida and Ohio and by 13 in Pennsylvania. Read more.
Overriding Bush’s Farm Bill Veto: In a statement yesterday, Hillary said: "I was proud to stand with my Senate colleagues in overriding President Bush's veto of the Farm Bill by a vote of 82 to 13. This bill is now law, and will move us further down the path to energy independence, provide a safety net for family farmers, enhance nutrition programs, require Country-of-Origin labeling, and improve access to broadband in rural communities...Senator McCain has made it clear that he agrees with President Bush on farm policy. Americans will have a real choice this fall -- between a candidate who supports rural America and family farms and John McCain, who offers a continuation of President Bush's failed policies." Read more.
Why I'm Supporting Hillary: One New York farmer says, "My passion is ensuring that we have family farms for future generations and that American agriculture is strong. I know Hillary understands and supports that!...Like South Dakota, New York is home to family farms (about 34,000), and I KNOW she will make the best president for producers and rural South Dakotans alike." Read more.
In Case You Missed It: A member of the Kansas City Star editorial board writes this to Hillary in a memo: "I have only two words to share with you about your valiant quest to become the 44th president of the United States and the first woman to hold the highest office in the land: Don’t quit." Read more.
Previewing Today: Hillary attends a "Solutions for Securing South Dakota’s Future" conversation in Brandon, SD and a "Solutions for Securing South Dakota’s Future" town hall in Brookings, SD.
On Tap: Tomorrow, Hillary travels to Puerto Rico for island campaign events.

that's the only real candidate. now here's what i let it rip. ap reports: 'Former presidential candidate John Edwards next month will make his first trip back to Iowa since the state's caucuses.' guess what, no 1 cares. no 1 gives a damn.

john edwards was telling msnbc he wouldn't endorse, he was telling cbs' face the nation he wouldn't and then, boom, he does. not weeks later. all in the run up to his announcement. he's a liar.

no wonder people saw him as a trial lawyer.

he lost a son and was lucky his wife chose to get pregnant again. that should have taught him something about the value of life. meaning? his wife is ill. her time is probably not zooming into the future. he should be spending his time with her.

he made a joke of himself as a candidate and then he made himself a bigger joke when he endorsed barack.

his race is over. his time should belong to his wife.

no 1 cares, john edwards.

you're another democratic failure. a weak wimp who lacked the ability to run a successful campaign because you lacked the strength your wife has.

quit taking that for granted. your presidential run is over, your 'constituency' is gone. your wife is seriously ill, focus on her. quit seeking the limelight and focus on her.

no 1's going to show any sympathy should she pass away in the near future and you show up with another boo-hoo moment in public. there were people who said he should drop out of the race when the news of elizabeth edwards was made public. (such as matthew rothschild.) i didn't support that because elizabeth edwards clearly didn't support it.

but she did her part. she campaigned, she gave everything to his campaign (while he hedged his options in debate after debate). now's the time to honor that. and she may say, 'oh, it's not an issue.' she seems like the type of person who always puts others ahead of herself. that's a great trait and i have tremendous admiration for her.

but he's her husband. she gave up for him for this run, it's time for him to pay that back.

it's time for him to spend some time honoring her and letting her know how special she is.

nobody gives a damn about what john edwards - running for no office - has to say about poverty.

his wife has cancer and there's no cure.

he needs to get his priorities in order and that's not seeking more media coverage.

it's as though, in love story, ryan o'neal had told ali mcgraw, 'hey, you look a little better today, i think i'll go across country in my pathetic bid for more news coverage.'

in addition to his wife, her illness effects their children and he needs to be making sure that all of them (adult and non-adult) are prepared for what will arrive (hopefully in five to ten years - i don't think the odds are - short of a cure being discovered - for much longer than that).

on a non-political note, i am the keeper of cds. with kat, ava and c.i. not going home on the weekends - they go to puerto rico - i have been made the keepr of the cds they take on the road. (i'm in south dakota, along with jim, dona, wally, and marcia.) so 2 cds i love that i usually don't listen to are jack johnson's sleep through the static and cat power's the greatest. those are really great cds and, when mike was here during the week, they are cds that we'd all relax to in the evening when we finished speaking. (usually kat and i cut out early and they would continue speaking.) i don't know if, due to my baby, there was a thought of, 'oh, we need some soft music' or not. if there was, this baby rocks out. at the house, flyboy is always playing the who, janis and etta james so our baby is not offended by or awakened by music that's not 'gentle.'

but those 2 cds really do compliment 1 another and have the same bright quality to the sound of the music. if you haven't checked them out, i strongly urge you to. and if you need more urging, kat reviewed cat power's the greatest here and she reviewed jack johnson's sleep through the static here. also elaine is a huge, huge fan of jack johnson so there's another reason for you to check him out.

back to politics. this is from erica werner's 'Feinstein backs ticket with both Obama, Clinton' (san francisco chronicle):

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a staunch supporter of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, said Friday that if Sen. Barack Obama becomes the Democratic nominee he should pick Clinton as his running mate.
"I think as this race has emerged each one of them has garnered a different constituency and different states, and therefore when you put the two of them together it forms, I believe, the strongest ticket," Feinstein, D-Calif., told The Associated Press in a phone interview.
"Women feel very strongly about Hillary and African-Americans feel very strongly about Barack, and the election results show that, and the young versus old, the higher educated versus the working person ... All these things are sort of separated out into one or the other so there is a logic in combining the two constituencies."
Feinstein said she hasn't discussed the idea with Clinton and isn't pushing it with party leaders. The Obama and Clinton campaigns have dismissed reports that there were talks going on between the two campaigns about putting Clinton on the ticket.

dianne feinstein's right. (words i never expected to write - although, as c.i. pointed out, she was very effective in the april petraeus spin to congress - effective calling the nonsense out.) regardless of who the nominee is, the easiest way to bridge the very real division in the democratic party is for the nominee to pick the other candidate as the running mate.

i don't know that either would.

but that is reality.

i think hillary has to be the candidate and without her on the ticket they lose. i think she can run at the top of the ticket with wesley clark or whomever and win. i do not think that about barack. he's pulled too many stunts (including letting his campaign - and him as well - play the race card and his constant attacks on opponents with his later claims of 'i never attacked' when they respond in kind - we saw that with democrats throughout the race and he's now doing it with john mccain). hillary's the winner of the popular vote and can win the general election.

on her own or with barack as her running mate.

the nominee needs to pick their own running mate. but if they were practical, they would grasp that.

in terms of barack, he needs hillary on the ticket. there's talk of joe biden (bill richardson sold out and now he's not even a contender in the press). joe's a strong senator but a barack-joe ticket won't stop the bleeding of support. sorry.

hillary could. whether she would want to or not, i don't know.

i also don't know how much blood loss she could stop if she did want to be v.p. but some supporters of her would gladly vote for the ticket. some would refuse it.

if there's any justice, she'll get the nomination she's earned.

we can make sure of that by continuing to fight.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Friday, May 23, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces a death, Bully Boy rises to his level (latrines) and more.

Starting with war resistance. On Wednesday, US war resister and Iraq War veteran Corey Glass was informed by the Canadian government that he had until June 12th to leave the country or he would be deported. While a large chunck of the left and 'left' play dumb, stupid silent (including Amy Goodman who still hasn't informed her audiences of the decision), "digitaljournal.com" ("The Power of Citizen Journalism") notes Glass by repeating the lies the left and "left" have allowed to take hold: "Military service today is voluntary, not compulsory. There is no draft. Men and women in uniform today are they because they have enlisted or been commissioned of their own accord, not because they have been called into service by the draft board."

Canada didn't base the decision on there being a draft. The US involvement in Vietnam was illegal, it was a slaughter. Their decision wasn't about the draft. This is so remedial but apparently still needed. There were "draft dodgers" and "deserters." The former was a male who had been called out but did not report for induction. The latter was someone who was part of the military and decided to leave. They were both welcomed in Canada. Had "draft dodgers" been the only ones welcomed (legally) then digitaljournal.com would have a point. But that's not reality. "Deserters," members of the military who checked out, were welcomed into Canada. There was no question about, "Wait, you were drafted, right? You didn't enlist on your own, did you?" There was no, "Oh, wait! You chose to enlist. Sorry, no safe haven for you." The safe haven was not dependent on the draft during Vietnam. That is a lie.

We apparently need to again review. From the April 1st snapshot, (no quotes, we're just going to run it together) . . . During Vietnam, American males could go to Canada and seek asylum. There were two categories "draft dodgers" -- which everyone seems to remember -- and "deserters." A "draft doger" (also known as a "draft resister") was someone who had been called up. A "deserter" was someone already in the service. Canada's asylum then was not conditional upon someone being drafted. Those who were in the military and elected to resist were waived on through the border and welcomed the same way. There was no additional burden placed on them. They were not required, for instance, to prove that, yes, they were in the service, but they had been drafted into it. A male who chose to enlist and then began resisting after he was serving could go to Canada and be granted asylum. Pot apparently smoked the brains of not only our left 'leaders' of that period -- a pot haze is the only thing to explain the repeating of the lies of the draft -- but the Canadian education system failed to educate their citizenry on recent history because an editorial board that wants to argue -- as one did last week and all the right-wing Canadian cites have re-posted it -- that Canada should say "no" to today's war resisters because there was a draft during Vietnam and Canada only took in "draft dodgers" is merely flaunting how ignorant everyone serving on the editorial board is.

Had Canada put in a place a qualifier that said, "We will take war resisters but only those who have seen duty in Vietnam," Canada still would have been swarmed with some of the same war resisters. "Draft dodger" (or "draft resister") or "deserter," both cateogries were welcomed in Canada during Vietnam. That is reality and I'm sorry that the Canadian education system is so poor today. In terms of the US, honestly the same male 'leaders' of the left tripping out on tales of the draft today hurt the movement in many ways back then as well. They'll probably continue to do so when they are in their graves.

Then US president Gerald Ford pardoned Tricky Dick of crimes against the US citizenry, crimes against the US government, crimes against humanity and a great deal more. With the war resisters, he set conditions. Apparently he didn't think Tricky Dick's fat ass could make it through an obstacle course so he just waived Nixon on through. Ford granted war resisters an amnesty . . . . provided they went through a long process and met this criteria and that critieria and then, in the end, were judged to be worthy of the pardon. Having just pardoned the War Criminal Nixon, it was outrageous. Hearing an idiot, post-Ford's death, go on Democracy Now! and brag about Ford's program only explained to you just how much "establishment" is also in the left. In Canada (and I was visiting Canada when that program was announced) there was huge outrage and outcry -- from Canadians as well as US war resisters. Those who resisted the slaughter in Inochina were being asked to leep through hoop after hoop with no guarantee that if they made it through all the hoops they might be pardoned. Much speculation at the time was that it was a trap/trick to get US war resisters back in the United States where they would be tossed in prison. But Ford's program offered the obstacle course to both.

Jimmy Carter followed the Ford presidency. Carter didn't offer anything to deserters. Carter did offer draft resisters a limited asylum.In recent years, a number of war resisters from that era have been arrested while visiting the US. So there's really no excuse for people who lived through that time period to not know the difference. The only excuse is to provide cover for a peace movement that continues to struggle and to provide an excuse for your own inaction. (And to brag about days forty years ago which, let's face it, is all some left 'leaders' have to offer today having willingly been co-opted long ago.) Not grasping the difference, not speaking of that difference between reality then and 'reality' remembered now is hurting US war resisters and someone please throw a pie in the face of the next Baby Boom left male 'leader' who wants to gas bag about the hardships he endured due to the 'draft' that never found him called out because he knew how to game the system. It's the equivalent of fishing tales only damaging and it needs to stop. If you can't pie them, stop the males with, "When did you serve in Vietnam?" And when they stutter that they didn't, ask them how they got it. When they start to offer the tale of that 'invasive' physical, stop them and repeat, "I asked how you were able to avoid serving since you didn't go to Canada and you didn't go to Vietnam?" If one claims "I went underground" ask him, "From the time you turned 18 until Vietnam was over?" Because, no, the bulk of the 'leaders' jaw boning today did not go 'underground' and when a few did, it had nothing to do with the illegal war but everything to do with being kicked to the curb by the peace movement. But that's the story they never want to tell.

That's the April 1st snapshot. We have gone over and over this: May 20, 2007, September 9, 2007, March 26, 2008, we could go on and on. David Postman (Seattle Times) outlined what Gerald Ford offered to war resisters: "a limited clemency for Vietnam draft resisters and military deserters." Here's Gerald Ford speaking in September of 1974 (and link has text and audio):

In my first week as President, I asked the Attorney General and the Secretary of Defense to report to me, after consultation with other Governmental officials and private citizens concerned, on the status of those young Americans who have been convicted, charged, investigated, or are still being sought as draft evaders or military deserters.
On August 19, at the national convention of Veterans of Foreign Wars in the city of Chicago, I announced my intention to give these young people a chance to earn their return to the mainstream of American society so that they can, if they choose, contribute, even though belatedly, to the building and the betterment of our country and the world.

Get it? A lot of people don't. And some of them are 'helpful' 'friends'. This history hasn't just been lost, it's been distorted in outlets such as Democracy Now! where a 'friend' spoke of Carter and Ford's programs -- allegedly -- but was speaking of Ford's unknowingly. Jimmy Carter? Here's how PBS's The NewsHour (then The MacNeil/Lehrer Report) reported Carter's program on January 21, 1977 (link has text, audio and video):

Just a day after Jimmy Carter's inaguration, he followed through on a contentious campaign promise, granting a presidential pardon to those who had avoided the draft during the Vietnam war by either not registering or traveling abroad. The pardon meant the government was giving up forever the right to prosecute what the administration said were hundreds of thousands of draft-dodgers. . . . Meanwhile, many in amnest groups say that Carter's pardon did too little. They pointed out that the president did not include deserters -- those who served in the war and left before their tour was completed -- or soliders who received a less-than-honorable discharge. Civilian protesters, selective service employees and those who initiated any act of violence also were not covered in the pardon.

Then US House Rep Elizabeth Holtzman was among the four guests (and, in the seventies, with demands being made, there were two women and two men brought on for the report) and stated, "I'm pleased that the pardon was issued, I'm pleased that it was done on the first day and I'm pleased that President Carter kept a commitment that he made very clear to the American people. I would have liked to have seen it broader, I would like to have seen it extended to some of the people who are clearly not covered and whose families will continue to be separated from them . . . but I don't think President Carter has closed the door on this category of people." It's really clear. It hasn't been due to the fact that 'helpers' have continually gotten the facts wrong and we used to let that slide and think, "Oh, they mispoke. They'll correct themselves." But they never did. After March 2006 when a 'helper' got it so wrong, we started calling this crap out. You don't know your history, you need to stop speaking long enough to learn it. Obviously, you baked your mind with drugs.

Hope it was fun. But today's war resisters don't have to suffer because you repeatedly insist that "draft dodgers" went to Canada and they were the category provided safe harbor and it was just because there was a draft in the US. There is no draft today (and that's a good thing), you're nostalgia is not only distorting reality, it's damaging the chances of today's war resisters in Canada. Get your act together or get off the stage. Going on stage Saturday will be three war resisters who will speak as part of a presentation (including a film) from seven to nine p.m. at the First United Church, 435 21st St. W. in Owen Sound Canada for an event sponsored by the Grey Bruce Coalition for Peace and Justice and the Grey Bruce Presbytery Peace and Justice Committee.

War resisters in Canada need support as they wait to see if the motion for safe harbor is going to come to the Parliament floor. You can utilize the following e-mails to show your support: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. In addition Jack Layton, NDP leader, has a contact form and they would like to hear from people as well. A few more addresses can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. Lahey quotes NDP's Oliva Chow, who steered the motion, explaining, "If (Liberal leader) Stephane Dion were to say tomorrow that he supports this motion . . . we will then debate it. So we need people to call Mr. Dion . . . 'whose side you on Mr. Dion'?" The number to call is (613) 996-5789.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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, the Asia Times explains, "More than a million civilians have been disabled by the war in Iraq, and represent the most marginalised sector of society. They psychological traumas they bear create serious imbalances inside their families, and the central government is not paying attention." Voice of Iraq notes:

According to a study conducted by the International Disabled Persons' Organization (IDPO), in cooperation with the Iraqi ministries of labor and social affair, and health, there are over 1 million disabled persons, whose disability varies from mild to profound, in a country whose population is nearly 27 million.
There are an estimated 43,600 war disabled persons, including 5,600 who suffer from total disability, 100,000 amputees and over 100,000 blind persons, in addition to 205,000 who are threatened to lose their sight.
Abdul Ghaffar Saadi, the director of the mental disability department in the Labor Ministry, said that the mass media only focuses on the number of dead and wounded in the violence, but does not tackle the psychological or social effects on the victims and their families.

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Falluja car bombing (police were attempting to defuse the bomb) that resulted in two police officers being wounded a Salahuddin Province roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 person and left three more wounded.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an attack on 2 Iraqi troops in Salahuddin Province.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

Today the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division - Center Soldier was killed in an improvised explosive device attack 12 miles southwest of Baghdad, May 22." Sahar Issa(McClatchy Newspapers) notes: "A roadside bomb targeted a joint foot patrol in Bustan Albu Areim area, west Fallujah. The explosion killed 2 American soldiers, injured 1 in addition to killing 2 Iraqi army servicemen, said Fallujah Police. US military said, ' A Marine patrol was attacked just northwest of Fallujah by an IED at9:25 this morning. The attack occurred while conducting a dismounted patrol. One interpreter was killed, and there were six Marines wounded. All casualties have been evacuated and are under medical care'."

Reviewing one new topic and two topics noted in yesterday's snapshot. Zachary Coile (San Francisco Chronicle) notes the 165 billion dollar war supplemental that the US Senate approved yesterday and that, on the veterans measure of college tuition, "New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said the country should honor its soldiers' service by paying their full tuition at a public university when they return home. 'This is not a half-measure or an empty gesture,' she said. 'This is a full and fair benefit to serve the men and women who serve us'." MTV News notes: "Things got exciting (um, by Congressional standards) in the Senate this morning [Thursday] as a bunch of Republicans switched their votes to YES at the last minute. Sen. Jim Webb's plan to increase the amount of money veterans get to go to school passed 75-22 as part of next year's funding package for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That wide margin of victory is good news, since President Bush has promised to veto the entire thing. We're not sure if you all remember how a bill becomes a law (hello, Saturday morning!), but that's a large enough majority for the Senate to override that veto." The always inept Barack attempted to grandstand and overplayed his hand in his attacks on John McCain (who was on the campaign trail and didn't vote). Jake Tapper (ABC News) reports that McCain issued a statement declaring McCain "will not accpet from Senator Obama, who did not feel it was his responsibility to serve our country in uniform, any lectures on my regards for those who did. It is typical, but no less offensive that Senator Obama uses the Senate floor to take cheap shots at an opponent and easy advantage of an issue he has less than zero understanding of." Barack shot back that McCain was making a personal attack and seems to expect (as has happened repeatedly this campaign season) that he can trash anyone and if they fire back he can clutch the pearls. Those days are over, Bambi. Barack attacked McCain's commitment to veterans. That was a personal attack. His groupies may play otherwise but it was a personal attack and Barack's done this throughout his destructive campaign. McCain is correct on this. Maria Gavrilovic (CBS News) noted yesterday that "Barack Obama used the Senate floor today to jab at his rival" and that Barack has used the same thing to "jab at John McCain" in Michigan. It is a personal attack. Guess what, it's also politics, normal every day politics. But Barack launched it and wants to pretend he doesn't play politics. That's all he ever does. (That is not a defense of McCain's presumed "no" vote -- he wasn't in the Senate, he didn't vote. My own opinion of all refusing to support the veterans funding is that they're being cheap and it's shameful. There's no need to bring McCain's service into it or try to distort it or insult it. But some Dems are determined to relive 2004 with a flip and see this as payback for John Kerry's record being attacked.) Jennifer Duck (ABC News) notes Bully Boy went to Fort Bragg yesterday and asserted, "The vision for success in Iraq that I just outlined will not come easily. There will be tough fighting ahead. But the progress is undeniable." If it sounds familiar, check out every State of the Union address Bully Boy's given since Jan. 2004. James Gerstenzang (Los Angeles Times) notes, "Bush said that since he increased the troop level from 138,000 to approximately 160,000 last year, Iraq's economy had taken 'tremendous strides,' with inflation dropping, the economy growing, and investments in energy and communications increasing." Peter Maer (CBS) notes the only difference that took place yesterday: "It was a first in my more than 22 years on the White House beat: coverage of a presidential latrine inspection. It happened yesterday at Fort Bragg, N.C., where President Bush checked out military 'facilities' at the home of the famed 82nd Airborne Division." Latrine inspection? At last a job the Bully Boy may be up for. On corruption, Dana Hedgpeth (Washington Post) reports that the IG for the DoD admits that "$15 billion worth of goods and services ranging from trucks, bottled water and mattresses to rocket-propelled grenades and machine guns that were bought from contractors in the Iraq reconstruction effort" cannot be accounted for. James Glanz (New York Times) observes:


The Pentagon report, titled "Internal Controls Over Payments Made in Iraq, Kuwait and Egypt," also notes that auditors were unable to find a comprehensible set of records to explain $134.8 million in payments by the American military to its allies in the Iraq war.The mysterious payments, whose amounts had not been publicly disclosed, included $68.2 million to the United Kingdom, $45.3 million to Poland and $21.3 million to South Korea. Despite repeated requests, Pentagon auditors said they were unable to determine why the payments were made. [. . .] According to the report, the Army made 183,486 "commercial and miscellaneous payments" from April 2001 to June 2006 from field offices in Iraq, Kuwait and Egypt, for a total of $10.7 billion in taxpayer money. The auditors focused on $8.2 billion in so-called commercial payments to contractors -- American, Iraqi and probably other foreign nationals -- although the report does not give details on the roster of companies.

Turning to the race for president. Ralph Nader is running as an independent candidate, Matt Gonzalez is Nader's running mate. Outside the White House at noon today, Ralph Nader called for president of vice Dick Cheney and the Bully Boy of the United States to resign. Yunji de Nies (ABC News) quotes Nader saying the Bully Boy "dishonored the White House and brought a pattern of waste. A wasteful defense is a weak defense and a weak defense inspires waste." Nader is currently fighting for ballot access. Joe Sobczyk and Jonathan Salant (Bloomberg News) report: "Before Ralph Nader can win a single ballot this fall, he must first get his name on the ballot -- and that, an aide says, is a 'total nightmare.''
Nader, 74, making his third presidential bid, must gather more than 1 million signatures nationwide to run in all 50 states. It's an issue that confronts minor-party and independent candidates every four years: how to navigate, often on a shoestring budget, the patchwork of state ballot requirements. The signature drive will probably cost $2 million, of which Nader has raised 'more than a third,'' said Jason Kafoury, who is coordinating the effort. They have about 100 people working full time on the job. The goal is to get on the ballot in at least 45 states and Washington, D.C. That would be an improvement from 2004, when Nader was on 35 ballots." At The New Republic, Jonathan Chait (no link to trash) refers to the "noxious presence of Ralph Nader." Remember, every vote for Nader means 'little devils' like Chait get a pitchfork up the juxy and democracy lives for another day. CSPAN played Nader's call live this afternoon and Team Nader notes they will re-play at 6:40 EST on Friday.

Turning to the Democratic race for president. It is a tie. No one will be awarded enough delegates (from states and primaries) to be declared (or worse, to declare themselves) the winner. By rules and guidelines, the fight goes to the DNC floor. But the media lies. And they lie some more. Hillary's ahead in the popular vote. So they lie and they lie some more.

Let's deal with one of the 'kinder' lies. CBS News online features a conversation with Doug Schoen who is smart but dead wrong on one aspect, not calling out nonsense. CBS News tells him, "A lot of Obama partisans have argued that his weaknesses are exaggerated right now in the heat of a primary battle. They say that in this environment in which 80 percent of the public thinks we're on the wrong track, Bush has the highest disapproval of any President in modern history, that this is a Democratic year and Obama will do fine." Bully Boy is not running for a third term. That's the sort of weak-ass nonsense the Barack campaign offers daily. Give it up, it's not going to work. But let's deal with their "80 percent of the public thinks we're on the wrong track!" so any Dem will win. Today is March 23, 2008. Via CBS News, travel back with us to May 24, 2004. John Kerry was the nominee (due to everyone else dropping out after Kerry won the needed number of delegates from primaries and caucuses). And Bully Boy was in the White House. How many Americans thought the country was on the "wrong track"? 65%. 65% and Kerry couldn't pull out a win. In four years 15% more Americans think it's the wrong track and The Cult of Obama would have you believe (a) that is significant in terms of November and (b) that's astounding! It's neither. A lousy candidate can't close the deal with the public. [Bully Boy had a 41% approval rating then. Polls taken this month put him at a low of 28% with a high of 33% on approval. That's not a huge shift either. But, again, Bully Boy is not John McCain. It's interesting that the Barack campaign keeps screaming they are being "smeared by association" when their entire McCain counter-strategy appears to smear McCain by association.]

Andrew Stephen (New Statesman) documents some of the sexism the media used to attack Hillary with and how they felt good about themselves for lying and distorting:

The pincer movement, in fact, could have come straight from a textbook on how to wreck a woman's presi dential election campaign: smear her whole persona first, and then link her with her angry, red-faced husband. The public Obama, characteristically, pronounced himself "unhappy" with the vilification carried out so methodically by his staff, but it worked like magic: Hillary Clinton's approval ratings among African Americans plummeted from above 80 per cent to barely 7 per cent in a matter of days, and have hovered there since.
I suspect that, as a result, she will never be able entirely to shake off the "racist" tag. "African-American super-delegates [who are supporting Clinton] are being targeted, harassed and threatened," says one of them, Representative Emanuel Cleaver. "This is the politics of the 1950s." Obama and Axelrod have achieved their objectives: to belittle Hillary Clinton and to manoeuvre the ever-pliant media into depicting every political criticism she makes against Obama as racist in intent.
The danger is that, in their headlong rush to stop the first major female candidate (aka "Hildebeast" and "Hitlery") from becoming president, the punditocracy may have landed the Democrats with perhaps the least qualified presidential nominee ever. But that creeping realisation has probably come too late, and many of the Democratic super-delegates now fear there would be widespread outrage and increased racial tension if they thwart the first biracial presidential hopeful in US history.
But will Obama live up to the hype? That, I fear, may not happen: he is a deeply flawed candidate. Rampant sexism may have triumphed only to make way for racism to rear its gruesome head in America yet again. By election day on 4 November, I suspect, the US media and their would-be-macho commentators may have a lot of soul-searching to do.

As today's HUBdate notes: "The Popular Vote Leader: The Philadelphia Inquirer reports about Tuesday night's contests: 'Hillary Clinton netted approximately 150,000 votes and is now poised to finish the primary season as the popular-vote leader. In some quaint circles, presumably, these things still matter...If you believe that the most important precept in democratic politics is to 'count every vote,' then...Clinton leads Obama by 71,301 votes.' Read more." She's the stronger candidate. She's leading in the popular vote. She has a plan. Bob Somerby notes the media confession on the decision to weigh the scales against Hillary. You'll see that in play tonight and over the weekend as a remark she made pointing out that this primary is not really going that long. That will be dubbed 'news'. Barack not knowing how many states there are? His fan club in the press doesn't care.

NOW on PBS (airs tonight in most markets, check local listings) explores assault and rape in the military and asks: "How are these women picking up the pieces of their life after military sexual trauma?" Streaming will be available online by late tonight. Also on PBS (check local listings, airs tonight in most markets, some air it later or repeat it later), Washington Week finds Gwen sitting down with, among others, Dan Balz (Washington Post), NPR's Tom Gjelten and Time's Karen Tumulty. And on PBS tonight (check local listings) Bill Moyers Journal will note Memorial Day (this Monday) and you can watch the commentary already at YouTube.

iraqcorey glass
james glanzthe new york times
the washington postdana hedgpeth
the asia timeswashington weeknow on pbspbsdan balznprtime magazinetom gjeltenkaren tumulty
bill moyers journal
zachary coilethe san francisco chronicle

opening with howard wolfson's "HUBdate: Count Every Vote" (HillaryClinton.com):

Count Every Vote: During a campaign stop at Century Village Retirement Community in Boca Raton, FL, Hillary told a crowd of 700 Floridians: "'We believe that casting your vote is the truest expression of your will. Here in Florida, you learned the hard way what happens when your votes aren't counted. If any votes aren't counted, the will of the people isn't realized and our democracy is diminished." Read more. Read Hillary's remarks here.
Automatic Delegate Watch: Guam Democratic Party Chair and automatic delegate Pilar Lujan today announced her support for Hillary.Hillary Strongest in Swing States: A new Quinnipiac University poll out today shows Hillary’s continued strength in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania…She leads Sen. McCain by 7 in both Florida and Ohio and by 13 in Pennsylvania. Read more.
Tomorrow On The Trail: Hillary will campaign in South Dakota, and will host "Solutions For Securing South Dakota's Future" events in Brandon and Brookings."Major General Paul Eaton Goes to Bat for Hillary" In Missoula, Montana, Major General Paul Eaton, Ret., told residents that Hillary is the best prepared to be commander in chief and bring the war in Iraq to a safe end. "We've got to get a competent leader into the White House," Eaton said. "Hillary Clinton is hands down electable because she is smart and she is tough." Read more.
Dalton’s Donation: "Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has her own poster boy: Dalton Hatfield, who, as she reminded us during her victory speeches in both West Virginia and Kentucky, sold his bike and video games to donate more than $400 to her campaign." Read more.

for weeks now, c.i.'s been hearing from the cult of bambi trying to make nice after their sexist attacks on hillary. today 1 of the kooks wrote me. none of us are e-mailing you back. but i'll respond here.

after a bunch of lying about how much he 'loved' my site, he writes:

how can you be a feminist and support hillary?

it's real easy bucko, feminists do not support homophobia.

baby boy went to south carolina to scare up some votes and used homophobia to do so. keep kidding yourself that he's something different. he's not.

even john mccain hasn't used homophobia in the campaign so far.

barack put at least 4 homophobes on stage at his rally. let 1, an ex-gay, give a little sermon on 'salvation.' that event was protested as soon as it was announced.

barack didn't care.

he was happy to use homophobia.

that's not something any REAL feminist can get on board with.

i have many reasons for supporting hillary but that is probably the biggest reason i could not support barack (and would not vote for him if he were the nominee).

i didn't support hillary early on. on super duper tuesday, i voted for cynthia mckinney.

that was a mistake. if she'd announced she was only running for 5% of the vote, i wouldn't have voted for her. i thought she was a real candidate. i thought she was running a real race.

i was wrong.

i also was wrong about hillary who has grown into this amazing voice of the people, voice for the people, fighter who is just ready to take on anything and anyone.

she doesn't back down.

she doesn't give up.

she knows her facts.

she has real proposals that will really make a difference in people's lives.

years ago, c.i. drug me to an a.b.a. thing and hillary gave this amazing speech. i didn't know who she was and c.i. said, 'she's going to be the first lady.'

she really was amazing.

i had forgotten about that speech until, really, new hampshire. in that race, i saw her with determination and with so much power to right wrongs, such a strong desire.

that's hillary. i think we've all suffered (including her) from the press portrayals of her when her husband was president.

she went into the senate and did her hard worker thing (she is a very hard worker) and really didn't have that profile and that profile was reduced by the media during the 90s.

i didn't follow iowa and she may have had her spark there. but i think she had to go from senator clinton to candidate clinton and it was a huge transformation.

think about how many idiots use the term 'billary.' that's a press thing. it was done in the 90s and so many little sexists who say they're democrats use it today. she had to scale back because of the 1992-1994 attacks. and then she was fighting the right like all other democrats. then she got into the senate and wanted to do the best job she could.

so she buried her nose in policy.

when she stepped back out on the campaign trail, she took awhile to warm up but when she did, there was no stopping her.

that's why she's leading in the popular vote.

it's because so many of us support her.

she won me over.

let me be clear on that because i voted for cynthia mckinney in feb.

that's what hillary does, she wins people over.

that is why she is the best candidate for the nomination. she won me over, she wins everyone over. with hillary, the democrats will wipe the floor with mccain come november.

with barack? get used to saying 'president john mccain.'

while he's gotten weaker and weaker, she's roared to life. his campaign has faded, her campaign has come to life. she has the momentum and she is the only 1 who can beat john mccain.



let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

starting with howard wolfson's 'HUBdate: Celebrating in the Bluegrass State' (hillaryclinton.com):


Previewing Today: Hillary hosts "Solutions for America" events in south Florida where she emphasizes the need to count every vote.Leading the Popular Vote: According to ABC News, Hillary's Kentucky victory keeps her ahead in the popular vote. She now leads Sen. Obama 17,387,254 to 17,188,969 when Florida and Michigan are included in the count. Read more.
Celebrating in the Bluegrass State: Last night, Hillary told supporters in Kentucky: "Tonight we've achieved an important victory. It is not just Kentucky bluegrass that is music to my ears. It is the sound of your overwhelming vote of confidence even in the face of some pretty tough odds. Some have said your votes didn't matter, that this campaign was over, that allowing everyone to vote and every vote to count would somehow be a mistake. But that didn't stop you. You’ve never given up on me because you know I’ll never give up on you." Read more and more.
$22 Million: In April, Hillary raised over $22 million from supporters across the country, making it the second best fundraising month ever for the campaign. Campaign Chairman Terry McAulliffe said, "Senator Clinton’s game-changing victories last month turned the tide for the campaign and resulted in an outpouring of grassroots support." Read more.
Superdelegate Watch: Ohio automatic delegate Craig Bashein of Hunting Valley announced his support for Hillary Clinton today….Massachusetts Attorney General and Automatic Delegate Martha Coakley endorsed Hillary yesterday: "Mrs. Clinton's energy, stamina, and resolve have changed the course of history for women seeking office, including the presidency, and I dare say, have changed the course of history of Presidential politics in the United States." Read more and more.
Looking Forward to SD, MT, and PR: Campaign Political Director Guy Cecil said, "We have thousands of volunteers in South Dakota, Montana, and Puerto Rico who are making calls and knocking on doors to get the vote out. The people they are talking to want to participate and be heard." Read more.
"Florida and Michigan Deserve to Be Heard" The campaign has urged supporters to send messages to the DNC urging them to count the votes of Florida and Michigan: "Millions of people in Florida and Michigan went to the polls to make their voices heard in the Democratic Presidential primary. They deserve to have their votes count. Sign Hillary's petition before the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee meets to show your support for seating Florida and Michigan delegates." Sign here.
Cuban Independence Day: Yesterday, Hillary joined with Cuban Americans in celebration of Cuban Independence Day. Hillary said, "After nearly 50 years of one-man rule, the new leadership in Cuba faces a choice - continue with the failed policies of the past that have stifled democratic freedoms and stunted economic growth - or take an historic step to bring Cuba into the community of democratic nations." Read more.
On Tap: This Friday, Hillary travels to South Dakota.

i didn't forget the hubdate last night (as some of you e-mailed asking). that whole post went south. the videos must have done it. sorry.

so hillary won kentucky and apparently that stopped being a part of the united states. that must be why prissy barack couldn't campaign there and why the news media doesn't think hillary winning a state by over 35% matters.

it's a funny kind of 'logic' - just like the 'logic' that paints hillary as 'bad' for insisting that all votes count. folks, that's what a democracy is supposed to be about.

we are seeing the left & 'left' play the same damn game the republicans did against al gore. they have no morals.

be sure to read cnn's 'U.S. deserter faces deportation from Canada' about corey glass. c.i. covers glass' story in today's snapshot but the cnn story went up after. they also have a photo of corey and he's very good looking which is another reason to check out the link. he is a u.s. war resister in canada. after serving in iraq, he went there because he could not continue to be part of the illegal war. he has been trying to seek asylum since 2006. so far canada has refused him the same way they've refused almost every war resister. (if i remember right, 1 resister may have gotten asylum but not because of the illegal war.)

canada's supposed to be so wonderful but they still haven't done a damn thing on this issue. they got a lot of credit in december for their motion. it's april. people may be forced to return to the u.s. and what the hell has the parliament done? still not even debated the motion let alone proposed a bill.

i think of that idiot american who moved to canada because she didn't like the election results and how every time she pens 3 words, she gets 1 wrong but, most of all, americans are not sympathetic to her because (a) she's so damn preachy and (b) those of us opposed the current occupant of the white house stayed to fight.

war resisters went to canada to avoid the illegal war, to avoid taking part in the slaughter of a people. that is noble and a reason to leave. leaving because you don't like the results of an election? that's really pathetic and that's why that woman does more damage to the war resisters with each idiotic, ahistorical piece she writes. she doesn't cause sympathy in the u.s.

no 1 needs to hear from 'i don't like the election results!' about how awful america is. her departure (with a refusal to move on) is just cowardice. war resisters, however, are taking brave stands. unlike her, if they are granted asylum, that means they can stay in canada but they cannot return to the u.s. without risking arrest. there is no out for them. they have made a very difficult decision that they were forced to make by our government and they deserve our support.

let's close with c.i.'s ' 'Iraq snapshot:'

Wednesday, May 21, 2008. Chaos and violence, US prisons in Iraq hold children (and deny them rights they would be guaranteed in prisons located in the US), US war resister Corey Glass is told he can't stay in Canada, Hillary wins Kentucky and more.


Starting with war resistance. Canada's Global TV reports, "Corey Glass, a former U.S. National Guardsman who deserted to Canada in 2006 to avoid serving in Iraq, was told today that his application to stay in Canada has been rejected supporters say. Michelle Robidoux, a spokesperson for the War Resisters Support Campaign, said Glass could be deported by June 12." Canadian Press notes: "Ottawa has decided that an American soldier who fled the army over the Iraq war will not face the risk of abuse or mistreatment if returned to the U.S. The means Corey Glass can now be deported to the United States, where he faces possible jail time for desertion."

On March 30, 2007, Corey Glass stood before Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board explaining he signed up for the National Guard in Indiana to assist with national disasters "on American soil." Iraq War veteran Glass self-checked out, went underground and moved to Canada in the fall of 2006. After self-checking out, Glass was underground for seven months before going to Canada and, during that time, the Army (which supposedly just waits for traffic violations to catch self-check outs) was visiting his parents, calling phone numbers trying to track him down. In October of 2006, Corey Glass, Justin Colby, Ryan Johnson and other war resisters in Canada were considering returning to US as a result of the way Darrell Anderson's discharge was resolved. However, once the military attempted to screw over Kyle Snyder, that changed. Glass told Brett Barrouqere (AP) at the start November 2006, "After what they did to him, I don't see anybody going back." Glass stated, "I knew the war was wrong before I went, but I was going to fulfil my end of the bargain, right or wrong and eventually my conscience just caught up with me. . . I felt horrible for being a part of it. If I could apologise to those people [Iraqis], every single on, I would."

Today at Trinity-St. Paul's Centre in Spadina, Glass spoke explaining, "What I saw in Iraq convinced me that the war is illegal and immoral. I could not in good conscience continue to take part in it. I came here because Canada did not join the Iraq War. Also I knew Canada had welcomed many Americans during the Vietnam War." Reuters notes, "If he is returned to the United States, Glass, of Fairmount, Indiana, could face jail time. He joined the National Guard in 2002" and they quote him stating of his work in military intel in Iraq, "Through this job I had access to lots of information about what was happening on the ground in Iraq. Through what I saw, I realized innocent people were being killed unjustly."

War Resisters Support Campaign puts out the call:

U.S. Iraq war resister Corey Glass was told today that his application to stay in Canada has been rejected and he now faces deportation. Glass would be the first Iraq war resister to be deported from Canada. Last December the House of Commons' Standing Committee on Citizenship & Immigration passed a motion calling on the Canadian government to "immediately implement a program to allow conscientious objectors and their immediate family members […] to apply for permanent resident status and remain in Canada; and … the government should immediately cease any removal or deportation actions … against such individuals".
Please take a moment tocall Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion at 613.996.6740 or 613.996.5789 Tell him you want the Liberal Party... • to support the Parliamentary motion to allow Iraq War resisters to remain in Canada, • to oppose the deportation of people of conscience who have resisted an illegal war, and • to support the will of the Canadian people, not Stephen Harper's decision to deport war resisters, and not the U.S.'s war agenda.

Some war resisters are in Canada and they need support as well as they wait to see if the motion for safe harbor is going to come to the Parliament floor. You can utilize the following e-mails to show your support: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. In addition Jack Layton, NDP leader, has a contact form and they would like to hear from people as well. A few more addresses can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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 and starting with a show confession. CNN reports on testimony -- self-incriminating -- that we're apparently supposed to rejoice over while ignoring the fact that the man is "blindolded and hancuffed" and "crouches in the corner of the detention center while an Iraqi soldier grills him about rampant crimes being carried out by gangs in the southern city of Basra." For those unaware, these show confessions are the equivalent of American Idol in Iraq and the reason they are taped is to broadcast them. A real 'winner' or 'audience pleaser' is when they can force of confession of crimes and homosexuality. That leads to tremendous rejoicing in a segment of the viewing public. There is no justice in Iraq and there's no need to believe any 'confession' obtained by the military (are we supposed to forget that there is an Iraqi police force?) let alone any confession where the person is "blindfolded and handcuffed". It's a travesty and it's shameful. Did the imprisoned kidnap and rape "15 girls"? You're not supposed to think that far. You're just supposed to be outraged. (Rape, kidnapping and murder go on daily in Iraq. That's not the issue here, the issue here is the show confessions, forced and presented as 'justice' and without question.)

One of the greatest indictments of the 'free' Iraq is what continues to pass for 'justice' in the country.

Need more indictments? In an editorial entitled "Iraq And Afghanistan: Recruiting young," the Seattle Post-Intelligencer notes the "up to 2,500 minors" being imprisoned in by the US military. Martha Neil (ABA Journal) explains, "In a report to a United Nations committee, the United States says it is holding 500 juveniles, apparently in adult detention facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan." As April round down, Radhika Coomaraswamy (UN Secretary General's Special representative for Children and Armed Conflict) completed a six-day trip to Iraq where she examined the the status of Iraqi children and stated, "Many of them are no longer go to schook, many are recruited for violent activities or detained in custody, they lack access to the most basic services and manifest a wide range of psychological symptoms from the violence in their every lives." UNICEF noted, "Ms. Coomaraswamy has urged all parties in the conflict to release any children in their forces who are under the age of 18" and quoted her stating, "Let peace in Iraq begin with the protection of children."

The US government is making a big deal out of the fact that they do not hold "enemy combatants" in Iraq -- they follow Geneva, they insist; however, whomever wrote the government's report to the United Nations needs to check their wording. Their reply [PDF format, CRC.OPAC.USA.Q1] notes: "Since 2003, the United States has held approximately 2,400 juveniles in Iraq. The juveniles that the United States has detained have been captured engaging in anti-coalition activity, such as planting Improvised Explosive Devices, operating as look-outs for insurgents, or actively engaging in fighting against U.S. and Coalition forces. As of April 2008, the United States held approximately 500 juveniles in Iraq. The response's next sentence (responding to length of time of imprisonment) is, "The U.S. Department of Defense detains enemy combatants who engaged in armed conflict against U.S. and Coalition forces or provided material support to others who are fighting against U.S. and Coalition forces." If the US government is upset that the media didn't remember the claim that the US follows Geneva in Iraq (follows the guidelines for warfare), they might try explaining that to allegedly honoring to the people writing resporses on behalf of the government. The response continues: "In Iraq, a great majority of juvenile detainees are released within six months, and most are currently held for no more than 12 months. A very small percentage of the juveniles detained in Iraq have been held for longer than a year, as they were assessed to be of a high enough threat level to warrant futher detention."

The response futher notes:

In Iraq, detainees are being held by U.S. forces as imperative threats to security with the authorization of the U.N. Security Council and at the request of the sovereign Iraqi government. Review of a detainee's status occurs at several different levels. The first level of review is called the Detention Review Authority and is completed by the detaining unit commander and the unit's Staff Judge Advocate to assess whether the individual is an imperative security threat. Approximately 50 percent of those initially detained in Iraq are determined not to be an imperative security threat, and these individuals are released at the unit location. Those assessed to be a threat are transferred to the TIF.
At the TIF, the detaining command Magistrate Cell, consisting of judge advocates, conducts a thorough review of each individual's case. Based on this review, the Magistrate Cell either recommends the detainee be expeditiously released or retained as an imperative security threat. Additionally, the Cell recommends either that the detainee be referred to the Central Criminal Court of Iraq (CCCI) if there are grounds for criminal prosecution, or that the detainee's case be referred to the Combined Review and Release Board (CRRB) if he is a security internee. The CRBB process is consistent with a review under Article 78 of Geneva Convention IV. The CCCI or CRBB, as appropriate, forms the third review in this system. Through each of the reviews conducted at the TIF, the detainee is ontified in writing and provided the opportunatiy to present information for consideration.
Through each of the reviews conducted at the TIF, the detainee is notified in writing and provided the opportunity to present information for consideration. Additionally, a detainee is authorized access to an attorney and, if referred to the CCCI, will be provided a government defense attorney if he does not have private counsel.

A few things to note just on the above. First US law (and British law -- those would be the two occupying powers in Iraq running prisons) recognizes "in loco parentis" which can be dumbed down "in place of a parent" and we also use "ward of the state." What the US government says in their response (in too many words), is that if you're an Iraqi child imprisoned by the US as a criminal suspect, you will be allowed an attorney and even have one provided for you if you need it; however, if you're imprisoned for security reasons, you're told you can have one and not provided with one by the US. (It would be interesting to see England's policy in writing on Iraqi juveniles.) That's not 'justice' and it's not 'freedom' and the US is over it. Not just in the puppet master way the US is over everything that happens in Iraq, but in the basics. The US is running the prisons in question, that's what they are responding about: US prisons in Iraq. This is a policy the US military has put in place in Iraq and, were they to try it in the US, it would meet with loud objections. A 'security' prisoner (as opposed to a criminal one) does not need an attorney -- according to the US military. Supposedly stating that they can have one is enough when the reality is that statement is meaningless. The bulk of children imprisoned have no contact with their families (including families who assume their disappeared child is dead). So telling a juvenile, "We won't provide you with an attorney but, hey, if you can somehow magically conjure up one, go for it" is crap.

US policies and laws apply to US jails and prisons, regardless of where they are. (As the current administration will most likely learn in 2009.) A juvenile imprisoned by the US is a ward of the state and needs to be provided with legal counsel. That is a basic. This is not to justify those charged as 'criminals' (but obviously never tried in the real sense of a 'trial') but that is to loudly call out the nonsense that someone who is so not a criminal that they can't even be charged with that, a child, is expected to navigate the complex legal labyrinth the US has constructed in their Iraqi prisons. That's ridiculous. That's shameful.

So is the credit the US wants for 'schools' they provide the juveniles with. Read closely and the school was established in August 12, 2007. How many of the nearly 2500 Iraqi children imprisoned in US prisons since 2003 had already been deprived of school by then? If you think about, you'll remember that in June of 2007, US soldiers were hailed as heroes (and that group, for that action, deserved that praise) for discovering and rescuing mentally disabled children in a facility where they were (at best) neglected. By August 17, 2007, the orphanage was back in the news. But if we're going to talk seriously about neglect, let's talk about the reality that prior August 12, 2007, US prisons in Iraq were holding children and not providing schooling. No offense intended to the US soldiers who rescued the Iraqi children in June 2007, they did a wondeful thing. But while they didn't seek to applaud themselves (they did deserve applause, however), the chain of command went crazy trying to applaud the military. (It was only August of that year that the chain of command would finally recognize the soldiers who deserved the credit.) It takes a lot of gall for the chain of command to point to neglect in an Iraqi children's facility while Iraqi children are held in a US prison (!) and denied education. (Most, the response rushes to assure, were only held for six months. That's six months too long and, if there's no way around it, you at least meet the same basics in Iraq that you are required to in the US.) AFP quotes the US Department of Defense's dept. assistant secretary Sandra Hodgkinson's "The US does detain juveniles that are encountered on the battlefield. We go to great lengths when we do detain juveniles to recognise the special needs of the juvenile population and to provide them with a safe environment away from hostilities." It takes a lot of nerve to make that claim with a history of denying Iraqi children imprisoned education and attorneys.

Last week, the ACLU issued a statement which includes:

According to the ACLU, the lack of protections and consideration for the juvenile status of detainees violates the obligations of the U.S. under the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict that the U.S. ratified in 2002, as well as universally accepted international norms. The CRC oversees compliance with the Optional Protocol, which mandates countries to protect children under 18 from military recruitment and guarantees basic protections to former child soldiers. The CRC will question a U.S. government delegation on its compliance with Protocol obligations on May 22 in Geneva.
According to the government report, approximately 2,500 youths under the age of 18 have been held, in some cases for months and years without being charged with a crime, in U.S.-run facilities overseas. As of April 2008, there are approximately 500 youths being held in US-run detention facilities in Iraq alone. The government report claims that it is holding Iraqi children in prison in order to educate them to "contribute positively to the future of Iraq."

Over the weekend, Jessica Lipnak (The Industry Standard) reported that Iraq isn't safe anyone:

"Many people have been killed going to meetings in Iraq." It was an offhand remark made by a US military advisor in a casual conversation about virtual work -- its benefits, its pitfalls, its resisters, its committed participants. Until that moment, it had never before crossed my mind that traveling to a face-to-face meeting could be lethal. Turns out Army commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken measures to reduce travel. "One of the first things I did here was set up a collaborative network to offset the fact that we couldn't travel easily or safely," Lieutenant General Jim Dubik explained in an email to me.

Meanwhile Sami Moubayed (Asia Times) grades puppet of the occupation Nour Al-Maliki's two year pretend reign and finds him lacking in every regard. Moubayed notes that al-Maliki just "fired Mutaa Habib Khazraji, the commander of the 2nd Army Division, which is based in Mosul. He was accused of supporting officers implicated in terrorist attacks. Additionally, the prime minister recalled nearly 5,000 retired soldiers from their homes, all being residents of Mosul, to take part in the fighting, along with 400 officers from the war-torn city." This follows Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reporting yesterday that that an armed clash in Sulaimaniyah resulted in the death of "gunmen" and one of those turned out to be "a captain in the army forces". Moubayed notes unemployment in Iraq is at 50%, sewage problems unaddressed, fear of cholera returning, Mosul school exams postponed, refugees, and on and on the list of al-Maliki's failures go. Anna Badkhen (Salon) observes, "Trash pickup in most of Baghdad ended with the rule of Saddam Hussein. Now the garbage chokes the capital's streets and clogs the sewage pipes and canals, which overflow and burst. The sewage that leaks out of broken pipes seeps through the dirt of roads that were once paved, but now have mostly turned to dirt because the tracks of American tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles have destroyed the asphalt over five years of war."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .


Bombings?


Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing that wounded four people, 3 Baghdad car bombings that claimed 3 lives and left thirteen wounded, an Al Anbar Province bomber who blew up herself and claimed the life of 1 "Awakening" Council members while leaving three others wounded and a Baghdad assassination attempt on Judge Qasim Ali Motar via a bomb attached the car -- the judge appears to have survived the explosion however he "lost one of his legs in the explosion". Reuters notes 3 dead from a Baghdad mortar attack.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the Ministry of Transportation's Col Abdul Kareem Muhsin was shot dead in Baghdad and 4 "Kurdish security members known as Asayish" were shot dead in Baquba. Reuters reports 11 Iraqis shot dead by US forces in Iraq for the suspected crime of being "militants".

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 5 corpses discovered in Baghdad, 10 corpses were discovered in two mass graves in Baquba, the corpses of 2 "young men" were discovered in Baquba -- the two men had been arrested along with thirteen others two hours prior.

Turning to US political races. As Ruth noted last night, "Senator Hillary Clinton has won the Democratic Party primary in Kentucky by a blow-out. This comes as she picks up another super delegate." Kentucky was a major victory. "Once again tonight, you and I stood together and showed America what we're made of," Hillary Clinton declared in last night's Kentucky primary victory speech. "Every time we win another state, we prove something about ourselves and about our country. And did we ever prove something tonight in Kentucky. We showed America that the voters know what the 'experts' will never understand -- that in our great democracy, elections are about more than candidates running, pundits commenting, or ads blaring."

And, yes, despite the false media narrative that the race is over, despite the rants that Hillary should drop out, Hillary won Kentucky last night, adding yet another state to her list of recent victories which most recently includes West Virginia and Indiana. 700,690 Democrats went to the polls and voted. Hillary beat Barack in a 35.5% win with 459,093 voters selecting her -- nearly 250,000 more votes than he received (his total is 209,869). Third place went to "UNCOMMITTED" (17,526 votes) and, coming in dead last, John Edwards (14,202 or 2% of the vote). (Results posted here at Kentucky's Secretary of State website.)In her victory speech, Hillary pointed out, "Some have said your votes didn't matter, that this campaign was over, that allowing everyone to vote and every vote to count would somehow be a mistake. But that didn't stop you. You've never given up on me because you know I'll never give up on you." Voters tend to agree judging by exit polls. CNN notes 49% of those voting in the Democratic primary (which was a closed primary) declared that if Hillary was not the Democratic Party nominee come November, John McCain and not voting become their choices with 33% choosing McCain and 16% choosing to abstain from voting in the presidential race -- an increase of 5% from West Virginia where 44% stated they would vote for McCain or not vote if Barack was the nominee in November.

In today's New York Times, Adam Nagourney and Jeff Zeleny don't lead with that information and pretty much disregard the rising anti-Barack sentiment (he peaked in Februrary) and stress his campaign's claim (as opposed to reporting) that, come November, he will be able to pull her "supporters into his camp; winning over elements of the Democratic coalition like working-class whites, Hispanics and Jews". Not very likely. Not only is Hillary ahead in the popular vote, Barack can't connect with working-class voters as a group. He remains distant and detached from them and that connection is not a 'skill' you suddenly pick up. His disdain for them and his campaign's disdain for them has been apparent throughout the primary cycle. This is not something you easily 'heal' in a matter of months especially when you avoid visiting states. (He would not have done significantly better in those states had he visited during the primary. The issue is that by refusing to campaign there he only solidified the message that he doesn't care for those voters.) Kristi Keck (CNN) observes of Barack, "He's yet to make his case with the working-class vote." She's not sure it's a lost cause. Mike is sure it's a lost cause for Barack and provides a long list of why in his post last night. Taylor Marsh observes: "The thing is that when you don't respect people enough to walk in to where they live, talk to them about their troubles and assure them you get it, they won't give you their vote. It's not a black - white thing, it's a ego thing; as in you think you're too good for them. People can sense political arrogance a mile away and Obama's got it in abundance. That's why if he thinks he's going to get beat he doesn't even bother.
This isn't about race. It's about ego. Obama's, that is."

Ruth notes the victory speech including a significant word, "Referring to whomever the Democratic presidential candidate might be, Senator Clinton used the pronoun 'she.' It was a statement and vision of the possibilities her campaign is creating and it may also be seen as a rebuttal to former 2008 Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards' repeated emphasis on the best 'man' for the job when endorsing John Edwards last Wednesday."

In Oregon, Barack won with 349,132 votes (58.19%) to Hillary's 245,770 (40.96%). Jeryln (TalkLeft) notes, "Regardless of what the DNC does on May 31 with FL and MI delegates, the popular votes were certified by the states. Their numbers are real and they must be added to her popular vote total." Hillary leads in the popular vote and, for those who have forgotten, Barack's campaign used to use that as a marker and scream "the will of the people." The press appears to have 'forgotten' that fact.

Eloise Harper (ABC News, text and video) reports, "In her most emphatic argument yet for counting the votes in Michigan and Florida, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, traveled Wednesday to Palm Beach County, Florida -- ground zero for hanging chads and the vote-count controversy of the 2000 election" and quotes Hillary stating:

We believe that the outcome of our elections should be determined by the will of the people. Nothing more. Nothing less. And we believe the popular vote is the truest expression of your will. We believe it today just as we believed it back in 2000 when right here in Florida you learned the hard way what happens when your votes aren't counted and a candidate with fewer votes is determined the winner.

Meanwhile, Paul Bedard (US News & World Reports) notes Sidney Blumenthal pointing out the obvious: "Don't run against GOP nominee John McCain by painting him as Bush III, because he's not." He isn't and if that's how some in the DNC think Barack could pull off a win, they're kidding themselves. Blumenthal notes re: Iraq, that McCain's son is serving there and someone appears to have missed that point. (Well, MoveOn's never been that smart, have they?) In addition, as Ava and I noted last week of a report on CBS' The Early Show:

It featured a clip where Barack was mouthing about how a vote for John McCain would be giving a third term to the Bully Boy and that's part of Barack's problem. The myth is that he was against the illegal war from the start and that he stayed against it. It's not true but it's too late to change perceptions. So when he speaks about mistakes, he is on dangerous ground. No one likes a know-it-all. "Eggheads" do, it's a case of like attracting like. The reality is that a lot of Americans voted for Bully Boy. He wouldn't have been in the White House if that wasn't the case. (Yes, 2000 was stolen.) A lot of Americans supported the illegal war. Barack's Little Mister Perfect. The eggheads and his campaign don't grasp that they created that trap for him. He's always right! That's the myth. And his statements are inprecise and often hit voters. He thinks he's targeting the Bully Boy but he's shooting scatteshot and hitting a lot of voters with his charges. Hillary's position on Iraq, as portrayed by the media, is more consistent with the public view. Barack's is "I was right! I was right!" And it really irritates people because not everyone knew everything from day one. So when he criticizes McCain, he needs to be specific about policies (Barack's weakest area) and stop insulting voters. His "third term" nonsense doesn't play well. It does for Hillary to say it but for him to say it, it plays into his larger image problems, "He really doesn't like us. Oh, look, he's insulting us again."


People voted for Bully Boy. A lot of people may not like him today but you have to be very careful when campaigning not to give people the impression you think they are idiots. In word and deed, Barack gives that impression every day.


iraq
corey glass
jessica lipnack
iraqsami moubayed
anna badkhen
mikey likes it

if the video doesn't work, click here to watch.

and let me also note valerie plame and joe wilson's endorsement video.



okay, oregon will be announcing unofficial results at their secretary of state page beginning 11:00 p.m. est (8:00 p.m. pst).

i'm nervous and blogging right now to get it out of the way. hillary's won kentucky.

even typing that makes me nervous.

the tv says she leads by over 30% and i'm sure not every 1 voted. that would be a miracle if every 1 registered voted. but there are little less than 1/2 the voters who could have voted with the total counties reporting not yet at 100%. so i suppose somehow all those remaining registered democratic (it's a closed primary) voters could show up in the final count, but i doubt it.

she's won kentuky. they said she was out. they said she should quit.

if she's winning still what does that say about barack?

if he's the nominee the media keeps telling us he is, then why is he losing to hillary. he lost indiana to her, he lost west virginia to her and now he's lost kentucky to her.

seems to me the only 1s saying she's losing is the obama campaign which includes a number of the press. c.i.'s 'other items' this morning was an amazing correction to the media narrative. i hope you read that.

the race is not over. and, by the rules, it now should be headed to the convention floor.

the media keeps saying it's over and voters keep saying, 'no, it isn't.'

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'


Tuesday, May 20, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Sadr City invaded, guess who says they have more oil, Kentucky and Oregon primary results due this evening, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Great Britian's Socialist Worker notes Matthis Chiroux refusal to deploy to Iraq in June and quotes him stating: "My decision is based on my desire to no longer continue violating my core values to support an illegal and unconstitutional occupation." Meanwhile Courage to Resist notes that Robert Weiss, conscientious objector, has been "sentenced to seven months confinement during a court martial Tuesday [of last week] at Rose Barracks in Vilsek, Germany. Weiss pled guilty to charges of desertion and missing movement, which reduced the court martial's proceedings mostly to the sentencing phase." Back in July of 2007, Adam Kokesh posted an e-mail from Weiss where Weiss explained he had "informed my chain of command that the only way I will go to Iraq is if they tranquilize me, cuff me, and throw me on a plane. That being the case I won't perform any duties or wear a uniform anyways. I don't plan on letting the situation progress that far. I am hopeful that I will be placed on rear detachment until the decision on my application comes in. When it becomes apparent that they won't do this I will simply refuse to follow any orders given to me or wear a uniform. This will surely result in some jail time but that doesn't deter me one bit. It makes more sense to me to resist the military now rather than in Iraq where the situation would be much more difficult." Courage to Resist explains: "Though this agreement carried a prison sentence of eight months, Judge [Peter] Masters issued a seven-month sentence, to be served at the U.S. Military Detention Facility Europe at Coleman Barracks in Mannheim, Germany."



Turning to Iraq where Sadr City remains in the news. BBC toys at news and insists that "Iraqi government troops" went into Sadr City to "clear mines". Alexandra Zavis and Caesar Ahmed (Los Angeles Times) provide far less spin: "Iraqi security forces moved deep into Sadr City today to wrest control of the vast Baghdad district from militiamen loyal to radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada Sadr. Columns of Iraqi armored Humvees and tkans, backed by helicopters, lumbered down the slum's main arteries, while soldiers fanned out over the roof tops and into narrow allies. Others set up checkpoints, searching vehicles for weapons and fighters." Of course the helicopters are US helicopters as are most of the vehicles listed. UPI notes that the purpose of the raid includes "confiscating weapons." AFP cites one of their reporters "in Sadr City said residents were welcoming the Iraqi soldiers who began spreading out across the district while US soldiers remained deployed outside." Great Britain's Socialist Worker points out, "The US military and its Iraqi allies have abandoned the siege of Sadr City, the poor Shia slum of Baghdad, after failing to disarm the Mehdi army -- a resistance organisation led by rebel cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. The humilitating climbdown is a heavy blow to the 'surge' strategy launched by George Bush that had the central aim of crushing all major resistance to the occupation." CBS and AP note: "The move is the strongest attempt yet by the government to impose control over the district, which has long been the unquestioned bastion of the Mahdi Army, the militia loyal to al-Sadr. Iraqi and U.S. troops have in the past largely stayed on the neighborhood's edges" and their photo demonstrates that the illegal occupation of Iraq includes the US dictating military fashion since the uniforms Iraqis are wearing are the same as the US.

AFP alone notes, "Much of the fighting had centred around a huge concrete wall that the US military has been building to cut off one third of the Sadr City in a bid to prevent the flow of heavy weapons to the rest of Baghdad. Work on the wall became a key issue for the militiamen who repeatedly attacked those constructing it under tight US protection." Meawhile, as Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) noted last week, over "8,500 families" -- not individuals, "families" -- were forced to flee since the assault on Sadr City began in March. Ali Hamdani and Deborah Haynes (Times of London) quote Iraqi military spokesperson Qassim Abdul Raheem stating, "The opeartion will continue to tomorrow. We expect to be controlling all parts of Sadr City by tomorrow morning."

The assault on Sadr City began as an off-shoot of the assault on Basra. Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) reports that, following the failed efforts by puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki, "British soldiers have re-established a permanent presence in the city of Basra, patrolling with Iraqi forces in 'no-go' areas they were driven from months ago by Shia militants."

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing wounded two people, another Baghdad bombing claimed the life of 1 civilian wounding four, a Balad Ruz mortar attack claimed 2 lives and left nine wounded and a Diyala Province bomber who killed themselves, wounded four civilians and claimed the life of 1 five-year-old girl. Reuters notes: "A woman suicide bomber attacked the house of Sheikh Mutlib al-Nidawi, the head of the U.S.-backed neighbourhood police of Mandili, killing his niece and wounding him as well as two of his guards, police said."

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed clash in Sulaimaniyah that left three people wounded and that 1 "of the gunmen is a captain in the armed forces and has been handed over to the military authorities for disciplining" and 4 "Awakening" Council members were shot dead in Salahuddin Province. China's Xinhau reports an attack on a minibus outside of Mosul that resulted in 11 police recruits being shot to death.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

Anna Badkhen continues filing reports from Iraq for Salon. In her latest, she opens with: "The most important man on Twenty Third Street in Baghdad's southwestern neighborhood of Risala is Haidar Majli Finjan, a bony, balding man in his 30s who likes to dress in a dirty T-shirt, plastic flip-flops and gym pants he rolls up to his knees. Finjan gives local residents what no one else apparently can: electricity."

In other Iraq news, Sonia Verma (Times of London) reports that "Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister told The Times that new exploration showed that his country has the world's largest proven oil reserves, with as much as 350 billion barrels. The figure is triple the country's present proven reserves and exceeds that of Saudi Arabia's estimated 264 billion barrels of oil. Barham Salih said that the new estimate had been based on recent geological surveys and seismic data compiled by 'reputable, international oil companies ... This is a serious figure from credible sources'." Verma also notes that Iraq's Minister of Foreign Affairs Hoshyar Zebari is calling for an investigation into "sexual abuse and harrassment of Iraqi workers" at the British embassy in Baghdad: "This is something the Foreign Office needs to investigate. The embassy has to conduct some investigation. The Foreign Office needs to be involved." Verman notes that this comes after allegations of Iraq abuse by KBR were investigated by . . . KBR which cleared itself of all wrong doing.

In the US, Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that yesterday's announcement by the Defense Department that 39,000 US servicemembers are being ordered to Iraq has a talking point from the Pentagon: "The deployments, which would indicate a plan to keep 15 combat brigades, or rougly 140,000 troops, in Iraq through 2009, don't mean that there won't be a reduction in troops before then, said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman." Pentagon spin. It's a Nixon type maneuver on the part of the White House: Pump up in the number in a foreign land so that, close to the election, you can announce "X number will be returning!" and the crowd cheers. After the election, they grasp that the numbers never really fell but the hope is you already influenced the election.

Turning to US politics where the Democratic primary contest continues [and will continue to the August convention unless (a) one candidate drops out or (b) the rules are thrown out]. A9 of today's New York Times is a full page ad entitled "not so fast . . . Hillary's voice is OUR voice and she's speaking for all of us" taken out by WomenCount PAC. (A version of the ad can be seen at Tennesse Guerilla Women from when it ran in USA Today earlier this month.) The text of the ad concludes: "Women risked all they held dear to make this country great. They put their lives on the line in all our quests for justice -- from Abigail Adams to Sojourner Truth to Susan B. Anthony to Eleanor Roosevelt to Fannie Lous Hamer to Barbara Jordan to Ann Richards to Dolores Huerta. And now, Hillary. We know that when women vote, Democrats win. Now is it the responsibility of our party to hear our voices and count all of our votes. We want Hillary to stay in this race until every vote is cast, every vote is counted, and we know that our voices are heard." (For more information on WomenCount, their e-mail address is womencountpac@gmail.com) William Branigin (Washington Post) notes the advertisement today, that Kentucky and Oregon's primaries take place today (Oregonians have until 8:00 p.m. their time to turn in their ballots if they did not mail them in) and that Puerto Rico (June 1st), Montana (June 3rd) and South Dakota (June 3rd) will be the final three primaries. Brian Montopoli (CBS News) notes: "There has been speculation that Hillary Clinton might drop out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination following today's primaries in Kentucky and Oregon, even as Clinton herself has insisted that she will fight on. Now her campaign has released a new ad in South Dakota, where voters don't have their say until June 3rd. It's a signal that Clinton has no plans to leave the race anytime soon -- one that the campaign underlines in its press release touting the ad, which notes that the spot 'comes two weeks before South Dakota voters head to the polls'." [The link has the text to the video as well as the video itself.] Howard Kurtz (Washington Post) weighs in with "Women are pretty ticket off these days." You think? Carolyn Lochhead (San Francisco Chronicle) reposts an e-mail which includes this: "I will not vote for Barack Obama. I will not stay home. I will go to the polls and proudly write on my ballot, HILLARY CLINTON. I want the DNC to count my vote as a protest vote. I want them to know I am tired of being a second-class citizen in my own country. This isn't about Barack Obama or John McCain. This isn't about Iraq or Iran. This is about a war, a war for our voice, our dignity, and our selves...I hope you will join me." A number will. Clinton Democrats note the latest poll of New Jersy Democratic voters finds "Only Sixty-five percent (65%) of Democratic Primary voters in New Jersy say they are at least somewhat likely to vote for Barack Obama against John McCain in November. Note that this is not just Hillary supporters, but ALL primary voters." A lot of people got tossed under the bus by the Obama campaign. A lot of Democrats still don't buy that he has 'experience' or 'leadership.' Lois Romano (Washington Post) reports: "Women of all ages and nationalities push against the rope line carrying books and T-shirts, posters and stuffed animals -- anything for her to autograph. They tote huge signs that shout 'Hillary Cares About Me'-- and they tearfully grab her hand to implore her to stick it out, to take her trailing campaign all the way to the Democratic convention in Denver." Romano quotes Hillary: ""I believe this campaign has been a groundbreaker in a lot of ways. But it certainly has been challenging given some of the attitudes in the press, and I regret that, because I think it's been really not worthy of the seriousness of the campaign and the historical nature of the two candidacies we have here." Link also contains video to Hillary speaking.

The groundswell is becoming so big it made the networks this morning when Geraldine Ferraro and Rachel Maddow appeared on NBC's Today this morning. Ava and I have covered the backstabbing 'Maddow The Mad Cow' (as MSNBC refers to her). This morning, she was selling it for Barack. While Geraldine Ferraro provided examples of sexism (even noting at one point that she was giving specific examples), Maddow played her usual wrothless role. Maddow is a lesbian and it needs to be remember that when Time produced that awful Ann Coulter cover story, Maddow refused to call it out. That was because the author of the Time piece (a man drooling over how 'sexy' Coulter allegedly was) was a friend of Rachel's and -- as she explained off-air at Air America, part of "the community" meaning the gay community. (John Cloud is out, he's not being outed in this.) So then she wanted to show solidarity. (Although she refused to tell listeners of her radio show that she knew the man -- she did, they're very good friends and he often uses the term "angel" to describe her.) But Maddow has never called out Barack's use of homophobia in South Carolina. When Maddow starts babbling on about "racism and sexism" and trying to play like she's a feminist, she needs to be stopped and asked point-blank: "Do you support homophobia? Then why is it okay for Barack to use homophobia and for you to stay silent?" For the record, homophobia is unacceptable in the feminist world. Rachel avoids that. When Ferraro brought up the brush of the shoulders being disrespectful, Rachel dismissed it (he also did a stabbing motion and flipped Hillary the bird in that same speech, Rachel didn't weigh in on those) and said she "saw this as his referencing" a music video by Jay-Z. Someone should ask Rachel to quote those lyrics on broadcast TV. It's highly unlikely that she could get approval to do so and there's something in those lyrics to offend everyone ("Middle finger to the Lord" might get the most complaints). Rachel was on to provide cover from a very real discussion and that's all she did.

Donna Darko posts various statements by women who've had enough of Barack's sexist campaign and don't intend to vote for him and we'll note this woman:

The sexism has been beyond belief. IMHO it began when Obama threw Gays and Lesbians under the bus last fall. Outside GL and Feminist groups there was very little understanding or concern. If someone wants to test how mysogeny will play out, first try it on gays. If you get away with it, then women are fair game. And you will probably get away with it.

Also raising questions in Jersey Girl Kristen Breitweiser (via Taylor Marsh):

Those who are responsible for putting Democrats in the broken place we are in right now with regard to Barack Obama had better own it to the end. Leave those bumper stickers on and wear those campaign pins until the bitter end folks because YOU OWN IT. And people are going to want to know whose to blame.



iraq
matthis chiroux
adam kokesh
the washington post
howard kurtz
william branigin
carolyn lochhead
the san francisco chronicle
kristen breitweiser
mcclatchy newspapers
nancy a. youssef
leila fadel
the los angeles times
alexandra zavis
caesar ahmed
sonia verma
the socialist worker
anna badkhen
nbc
today

starting with howard wolfson's 'HUBdate: Getting Out the Vote' (hillaryclinton.com):

Getting Out the Vote in Kentucky: Hillary attends "Get Out The Vote" rallies throughout Kentucky. Tonight, she will be joined by President Clinton for rallies in Lexington, KY and Louisville, KY. Bowling Green, KY: Yesterday, "more than a thousand people came to Western Kentucky University's south lawn to hear Clinton speak…Kentucky Speaker of the House Jody Richards, D-Bowling Green, introduced Clinton…He said, 'She has the ability to make our country great again.'" In the crowd, one supporter "said she came to the rally because she wanted to see the next president of the United States." Read more.
Mayfield, KY: "Take a vote from the crowd that turned out in Mayfield Sunday and Senator Hillary Clinton would be the next president. She got a spirited welcome from about 600 supporters outside the Chamber of Commerce Sunday afternoon." Said one local supporter: "It definitely has changed over the years and its gotten worse and I'm looking for something better.” Read more and more.
'Honk and Wave': In Rapid City, SD, volunteers have launched a "Honk and Wave" campaign in support of Hillary. "All of us are out here and we're going to be and we're going to support her to the very bitter end, when she wins on June third,” said one. Read more.
On Tap: Hillary will spend Election Night in downtown Louisville, KY.

the baby has a hillary button. pinned to a little outfit. it was a case today of grabbing for them and c.i. pinned it on. there were a few attempts to try to grab it and pull (presumably off) but i think it was just a case of wanting to be like every 1 else. i've never seen so many hillary buttons as i did today and i know some are not from the campaign. i'm not insulting that, i'm just pointing out that there are some really great hillary buttons out there and they're not all the official 1s.

after c.i. pinned it on (and for those not in the know, i don't give out my baby's gender or name here. my baby turned a year-old last month and that's probably more than any 1 needs to know, in my opinion), i saw the reaction from people we were speaking to (intensely positive) and thought, 'becky, use your head!' i should have pinned on a button when we 1st got to oregon. people love babies.

so we're in oregon and we is flyboy, the baby and:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Ava,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz,
and Trina of Trina's Kitchen

and dallas and isaiah (and i'll be posting isaiah's comic in a moment). kat and trina arrived back (kat, trina, ava and elaine were in puerto rico over the weekend to work on getting the vote out there) looking fresh. elaine, ava and c.i. (who did every scheduled event) were looking less well. ava and c.i. still have that nasty cold from last month. but to credit to the 3, in 15 minutes, they looked picture perfect. in terms of elaine and c.i., that's something i've never understood. remember, i went to college with them. even back then, i needed 30 minutes to 1 hour to prepare for a date. they wouldn't even need 15 minutes if it wasn't necessary to shower and dry the hair. i don't know if any 1 reading watched the wonder woman show on abc in the 70s with lynda carter but the 1st time i saw that, i thought, 'that's elaine and c.i.! they spin around and boom, they're ready.'

the 3 of them and trina, dallas and isaiah are at 1 more thing and have another to do before the end of the night but kat and i came back to the hotel (and flyboy is out getting food).

this has been a lot of fun and i hope that doesn't make me seem non-serious to any 1. it's just been really great to see so much enthusiasm for hillary and also to spend so much time with friends.

can hillary win oregon tomorrow? i see a lot of enthusiasm. c.i. cautions me that we're mainly here to make sure that it's not a blow out for obama and that's being practical (very c.i.) but i really think she has a shot at winning.

maybe i'm dreaming.

what i do know is that it has made some difference in terms of people saying they weren't sure about sending in their ballots (or turning them in on election day by 8:00 p.m. - as c.i. always interjects when any 1 says that). they really felt like it was going to go to obama (and that goes to the media's selling of the hype). but there are a lot of people we've talked to in the last days that have sent in their ballots just because they realize the state is competative.

1 woman told me she was 82-years-old and 'if hillary doesn't get it, i'm not voting in november. that man and his friends have ridiculed women non-stop.' i hear ya!

there was a stupid article in the new york times today. actually it started on the front page. c.i. ignores the writer who is now on her 3rd name. but i was pestering and pestering and, finally, at lunch, c.i. said, 'hand it over.'

c.i. said the article treated gender like a minor issue even while covering it.

and that's really the truth. concrete examples were ignored. (of course, can't call out the media. but also from barack.) it was practically a summer's eve commercial, so hazy were its points.

c.i. also pointed out something i hadn't thought of. barack had 75,000 people in portland.

that's what's being reported.

who gave them that figure?

the barack campaign - only that's not in print.

as c.i. pointed out there's no reference to 'police estimate'. they're just running with the numbers barack supplies them with.

c.i. pointed out oprah's 'big' u.c.l.a. rally that was actually sparsely attended and staged like the pulling down of saddam's statue. the few outlets (in both cases) that ran the non-official photos showed a much smaller crowd. not even 1/4 of the stadium was full at u.c.l.a. barack's obviously learned a lot from the bully boy.

okay, here's Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Endorsement"




doesn't john edwards make a 'lovely' cheerleader? he did all throughout the campaign. simp. pushing barack in debate after debate. what a loser.

i got to see isaiah draw that and let me talk about that.

it was whatever time it was. 8:00 a.m. est but we were in pst and the gang all had to wrap up (ava and c.i. were already in a cab going to the 1st event of the morning). isaiah wasn't sure he was going to draw a comic.

he had a number of ideas but nothing that really grabbed him. and he'd already done his comics for maria, francisco and miguel's newsletter. he had 1 idea he talked about. he was telling me about maybe a john edwards and barack obama cartoon. it would be disney's robin hood and edwards would be sir hiss (the snake) and barack would be the sniveling prince.

i loved it but could tell isaiah wasn't excited. so i just repeated what c.i. had said, that isaiah was in oregon to get out the vote and no 1 was going to be surprised that there wouldn't be a comic so don't even worry about it. our 1st event was after noon (due to sunday church schedules we didn't want to do anything during that and offend some 1) so we all went to sleep. i woke up and was walking around (really trying to wake up) and flyboy said, 'hey, this is for you.'

it was isaiah's comic and a note, he'd slid it under the door.

i loved it. i showered, put on mascara and lipstick (no 1 sees me without that, that's my 'natural') and hurried to isaiah to tell him it was wonderful. it was too.

but it wasn't this comic.

he was surprised i liked it. he started insulting it and i said, 'who are you? ava and c.i.!' (a joke because they hate everything they write.) he laughed and said, 'well hold on a second.'

he grabbed his paper and sketched a new comic (the 1 above) and the 1st 1 was good but this 1 was so much better. (the 1st 1 was only similar in that barack and john were going to prom together.)

so that's the story there. and i was surprised how quickly isaiah drew it. he said he was tired and just wanted to get it done. so that's the story.

(and elaine has the comic now and will be framing it when she gets home. she's got isaiah's originals in frames all over her home.)

speaking of great. i need to note 2 things. 1st, ava and c.i.'s 'TV: The return of I Dream of Jeannie.' if you were a bewitched fan, you will especially love this. they're taking on counterspin and washington week and this is hilarious. and i love the comparison of jeannie to joan kennedy (poor woman). 2nd up ty's 'Ty's Point of View.' ty's writing about the court verdict allowing same-sex couples to marry the same as any other couple in california. this was something that we were all supposed to work on and there was no time. it just ran out. ava and c.i. were in the cab on the way to their 1st event and they said, 'this has to be covered. we can't ignore this topic.' we all agreed but were all so tired. ty said, 'i'll write it myself as a solo piece.' when ava and c.i. made sure he was okay with doing that, they said, 'great!' ty said not to expect anything wonderful but they said it would be and they were right. ty wrote an amazing article. please read it if you haven't already.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Monday, May 20, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Bully Boy orders more US service members to Iraq, VA issues, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Last week (see Thursday and Friday's snapshots), Matthis Chiroux, currently in the IRR (Individual Ready Reserves), publicly announced that he would not deploy to Iraq. Brittany Whitley (Opelika Auburn News) reports that "Chiroux will . . . return to Washington D.C. in an attempt to win an audience with a committee in Congress. He said the goal is to talk to Congress and build support for war resisters in the legislative branches of the government." Whitley and Beverly Harvey (The Dothan Eagle) report Chiroux's back story:

Matthis Chiroux had it all planned out after he graduated from Auburn High School in 2002. First, he would join the U.S. Army. Then, he would use his G.I. Bill benefits to enroll in college to pursue his dream of becoming a lawyer. After college, Matthis planned to become a public defender and dabble in politics. And the 24-year-old Army sergeant's dream was on track when he was honorably discharged last September. He wasted no time moving to New York City to attend college as a journalism and pre-law major. But less than six months after relocating, the Army came calling again. This time, they needed him to deploy to Iraq.

David Botti (Newsweek) posts a video of Matthis' statement from Thursday and notes that "he said his position as a military journalist exposed him to countless disturbing stories he was afraid to publish for fear of retribution by the Army." The Pentagon states that if Matthis does not report on June 15th, the next step is to list him AWOL.

Some war resisters are in Canada and they need support as well as they wait to see if the motion for safe harbor is going to come to the Parliament floor. You can utilize the following e-mails to show your support: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. In addition Jack Layton, NDP leader, has a contact form and they would like to hear from people as well. A few more addresses can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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).

We're going to pick up with a hearing last week. As noted Thursday and Friday, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, chaired by Lynn Woolsey, Maxine Waters and Barbara Lee, and featured veterans offering testimony Thursday -- Iraq Veterans Against the War. The hearing was broadcast on CSPAN and KPFA (click here for KPFA's archived broadcast) and at Aaron Glantz' website The War Comes Home. Earlier (in March) Iraq Veterans Against the War held their Winter Soldier Investigation and it was broadcast live at War Comes Home, at KPFK, at the Pacifica Radio homepage and at KPFA over three days, here for Friday, here for Saturday, here for Sunday with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz anchoring Pacifica's live coverage. (It was also broadcast at the IVAW site.) Allison and Glantz also hosted a live report on KPFA about the lawsuit against the VA on April 22nd.

Since Friday afternoon, the hearings were noted in the following: Trina's "Contentment in the Kitchen," Rebecca's "sergio korchergin speaks to congress," Betty's "A red day," Ruth's "Sgt. Adam Kokesh speaks to Congress," Kat's "Luis Montalvan," Marcia's "Vincent Emanuele testifies to Congress," Elaine's "IVAW's Vincent Emanuele testifies to Congress," Mike's "IVAW's James Gilligan speaks to Congress" and The Third Estate Sunday Review's "Editorial: The teachable moment." We'll pick up with Adam Kokesh's testimony on Falluja that can be applied to Sadr City, to Mosul, to any Iraqi city under assault:

At one point during the siege of Falluja, we decided that we were going to allow women and children out. We thought this was the most magnanimus thing we could have done. And yet our rules were to let only women and children out so any male over the age of fourteen . . . was turned away. So my responsibility during this time at certain points was to go out on the bridge and turn away families and, like I said, we thought this was the most magnanimus thing we could be doing; however, it was clear we were giving these families an impossible choice: whether they could stay together with their families intact or split their families up and hope that half of them end up with something better.

Kristofer Goldsmith testified about what he witnessed in Sadr City and how there were no efforts to inform then of Muqtada al-Sadr's role (in the "Sadr" City section of Baghdad). He noted "at the end of January 2005," "the humantiarian and rebuiling process . . . was supposed to begin with my units deployment. The soldiers of my unit were told that a cease-fire had been declared between Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army and American Forces in Sadr City as of October 2004" so there should be little incidents of violence. He testified to learning upon arrival that the residents of Sadr City were not pleased by the US presence: "Adults in the area encouraged children to throw rocks, bricks, trash and bottles of oil at US army vehicles and personnel." He spoke of seeing "huge piles of trash and enormous puddles of raw sewage" and how they would file reports (SWET Reports -- Sewage-Water-Electric-Trash Reports) documenting in words and photos "the lack of adequate clean water, the never ending presence of trash and sewage throughtout the streets, and the very limited few hours of electrical power provided" and there was never any improvement. The service members were told, by command, to tell the residents that improvements would be made and the improvements never came. He explained, "Throughout my entire time in Sadr City my platoon only brought supplies to a medical facility once, on March 10, 2005. The items we dropped off at the Sadr City Women's Hospital were a truckload of baby diapers -- we never provided any real medical supplies despite the fact that the hospitals and clinics in the area were in dire need of antibiotics and basic surgical equipment." Sergio Korchergin's testimony about Najaf would echo that with him noting, "While serving in Najaf, the only humanitarian work we did was painting a park for kids and after that we did not do any humanitarian work until we left."

Near the end of the hearing, Rep Waters explained the House vote on Wednesday:

US House Rep Maxine Waters: As a matter of fact, we just voted on a rule. . . . And that supplemental funder request was about $170 billion more dollars to continue the war. And we fought to try and separate the funding from other issues. We met with the leadership and we said, 'The members deserve an opportunity to vote up or down on this issue. Don't pile the funding up with a lot of domestic spending to make people feel bad that they're not supporting the extension of unemployment or they're not supporting other kinds of things. So we did get that. We advocated for that. They did separate it. So the funding resolution is going to be separate and for all those people who say that they want to end the war the proof of the pudding is in the eating. If they vote for this supplemental appropriation, they're not serious about ending this war. They have two other portions to the bill. Amendment number two where basically they have a lot of other conditions but . . . the first part of it is a little trickery because they say that there will be an attempt to start redeployment within thirty days with an absolute end -- the goal of an absolute end of the war, by December 09. I'm not nervous about that because that's too long. That's December 09. We have had some targets before. We've always been for getting out as quickly as possible. We know that it takes some time to wind down and move equipment and redeploy. And we've always thought six months was a reasonable amount of time to talk about doing that. We've even entertained the idea of maybe one year but now, you know, it's further out with this December '09. So I know that I'm voting against the first part of the war. I'm uncomfortable with it going to December of '09 and the third part, where there are some conditions, the separate amendment I could support. So I'm going to be talking with my colleagues before we take that vote to take a look at that second amendment that talks about of winding -- starting redeployment in thirty days. In thirty days of? Does anybody know in thirty days of what?

US House Rep Lynn Woolsey: The new president.

US House Rep Maxine Waters: Well see, that takes us to January, then thirty days, that takes us to February and then it goes on to the end of the year. That may be just a little too long for me even though I'm anxious to get some kind of language that talks about getting out. That's taking it a little bit too long. Now -- December '09, that's a little bit too long for me. But I wanted to share that with you so that you know when you are talking to members of Congress who are telling you all of these good things and how much they're supportive and against the war, you take a look at their vote today and see who's voting for that money to continue the kinds of things that you have described here to us.

Waters made that point last week. Today the US Department of Defense issued two press releases. The first noted "additional major units scheduled to deploy" to Iraq -- "one division headquarters and seven brigade combat teams consisting of approximately 25,000 personnel." The second noted that "four brigades from the Army National Guard" were being sent to Iraq -- "approximately 14,000 personnel who will begin deploying in the spring of 2009." That would make 39,000 the White House is ordering to Iraq The first announcement stated deployment would "begin in the fall and continue until the end of the year." The second has the White House scheduling deployments for a period of time when the current occupants will not be present. (Elections in November will result in a new leader being sworn in come January.) In terms of Waters' points quoted above, it needs to be noted that withdrawal is all the more complex (planning and implementing) if the numbers on the ground are increased. Equally true is that the numbers were already supposed to be reduced to pre-'surge'/escalation levels. That got tossed out this spring when it was noticed that, even after July, more US service members would be stationed in Iraq than were there prior to the 'surge'/escalation. Prior to that 'fix' that failed, there were approximately 130,000 US service members stationed in Iraq. As Kristin Roberts (Reuters) notes that before today's announcements the plan was for the number to fall from 155,000 to 140,000.

Returning to last week's hearing and focusing on testimony regarding health care or the lack of it.

Sergio Korchergin: When we all come back from Iraq and we seek help from our command they call us 'weak' and 'cowards'. The line for psychologists is almost a year long and the only thing that can help us is the alcohol and the prescription pills that they are giving out to us like candy to keep us down because it seems like doctors don't want to do their jobs and they just don't care. . . . The last thing I want to tell you about is a roomate who we shared a bathrooma with. A marine who was on a suicide watch for about afew months on and off. The last three weeks before we were deployed he was constantly on watch. A week before a family day -- when a family comes in and says good-bye to their marines before we deploy -- he was released from the watch so that he would not say anything to his parents and he did not say anything to them. About a month into deployment, he blew his brains out in the shower stall. Actions like that show the poor judgement of our command, just to have numbers for the troops and just to keep their own skins safe. The marines should never have gone to Iraq in the first place and nobody was held responsible for his death. If there's no care for your marines what care do they have for the people of Iraq when they give the orders?

We'll come back to the topic of the health care but we'll wrap up the hearing but noting the testimony of another Iraq War veteran. "Dear Ted, you are my hero," Luis Montalvan stated as he began his testimony delivered in the form of a letter to the late Ted Westhusing. "I did not get the opportunity to meet you while we served in the army together, but I feel as though I know you from your honorable life and tragic death. Just one month before returning to your wife Michelle and three children, you were found dead on June 5, 2005 from a bullet to the head. Investigators conducted -- investigations conducted by the army deemed your death a 'suicide' but the circumstances are highly controversial. I have spoken with your brother Tim and your father Keith and we are now close friends. Both Tim and your father believe that the army did not do a thorough investigation and covered up many of the aspects surrounding your mysterious and untimely death." Westhusing was bothered (to put it mildly) by corruption in the contracting in Iraq. Montalvan explained what he experienced, lack of weapons, lack of supplies. "I lost many friends in Iraq, American and Iraqi," he explained. He cited an Iraqi friend in Jordan applying for asylum (to the US) via the United Nations. PISCES system (Personal Identification Secure Comparsion and Evaluation System) was supposed to track immigration and emigration flow across Iraq. Gen Ricardo Sanchez and Bwana Paul L. Bremer sent a team to look into putting PISCES in place and the official word was that it would be done. Then came the story that the equipment wasn't in Iraq -- it was there as Montalvan discovered when he returned to Iraq in 2006 on his second tour and it had been there and it was never implemented.

On the subject of PISCES, it is a tracking device and one of the systems that raises concerns -- in the US -- about bio-chips. The US uses the system to some degree (and has for some time) and has tried to get India (they refused) and other countries to implement it. Those who have are generally the ones most dependant upon foreign aid. (Such as Uganda and Djibouti.) There are serious concerns about civil liberties with this program but such concerns haven't prevented the US government from trying to sell it and have it implemented. In Iraq, due to the refugee situation, it's 'best' for the White House that it wasn't implemented. Had it been, actual concrete numbers would have been readily available. But real numbers were never of interest to the White House as evident by The Myth of The Great Return. Bio-metrics do exist in Iraq and are used in, for example, Falluja to deny entry and only make life more cumbersome for Iraqis. If there was a use for them on a temporary basis that could be justified, it would most likely be during a continuing refugee crisis to provide statistical data.

Montalvan concluded his testimony by declaring, "I strongly urge you to please take measures to perhaps have a Congressional testimony to address these matters in entireity particularly the death of Col. Ted Westhusing." For more on Westhusing, you can refer here and here to two pieces by Robert Bryce (Texas Observer).

Sergio Korchergen was quoted above and he wasn't the only veteran informing Congress last week about the efforts to deny veterans the health care they need (and are due). The Veterans Administration is already in hot water over hiding the rate of suicides among veterans, now they have a new problem. CREW has published [PDF format warning] an e-mail the VA sent out:

Given that we are having more and more compensation seeking veterans, I'd like to suggest that you refrain from giving a diagnosis of PTSD straight out. Consider a diagnosis of Adjustment Diorder, R/O PTSD. Additionally, we really don't or have time to do the extensive testing that should be done to determine PTSD. Also, there have been some incidence where the veteran has a C & P, is not given a diagnosis of PTSD, then the veteran comes here and we give the diagnosis, and the veteran appeals his case based on our assessment. This is just a suggestion for the reasons listed above.

Despite this being the latest revelation in an ongoing story, the New York Times noted it Friday in a tiny AP article. You can put it with CBS News' coverage of the veterans suicides (click here for text and video as well as links to past reporting, here for the PDF format e-mail Dr. Ira Katz sent out on the actual suicide numbers, and here for Congress questioning Katz and VA officials about the suicide numbers -- Armen Keteyian was the reporter and Pia Malbran the producer on those reports), with Korchergen's testimony and with Adrienne Kinne's testimony at Winter Soldier last March. Explaining after leaving the military how she did college internships at VA hospitals, Kinne shared that a study on PTSD and TBI resulted in a proposal to screen for the two.

And then they went to go to the next step, to actually make this happen. And I was actually on a conference call when someone said, "Wait a second. We can't start this screening process. Do you know that if we start screening for TBI there will be tens of thousands of soldiers who will screen positive and we do not have the resources available that would allow us to take care of these people so we cannot do the screening." And their rationale was that medically, medical ethics say if you know someone has a problem, you have to treat them. So since they didn't have the resources to treat them, they didn't want to know about the problem.

The latest e-mail is identified by Bonnie Goldstein (Slate) as having been written by "Norma Perez, team leader and psychologist at the Temple, Texas, Olin E. Teague Veterans' Center". The Fayetteville Observer issues a strong editorial on the subject of the e-mail CREW obtained asking of the the 'strategy' laid out to deny care: "Does it get more coldly than that? Actually, it does. 'Additionally,' the e-mail continued, 'we really don't or have time to do the extensive testing that should be done to determine PTSD.' Without the 'additionally,' and with the afterthought placed ahead of the suggestion, that might have left a little room for a limited discussion of, for example, the inadequacy of the VA's psychiatric budget. But the writer of the e-mail gave the play away in his or her first 11 words, and there's no hauling them back now. It was about money."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?


Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad rocket attack that injured five people, a Baghdad bombing that left three people injured, a Baghdad bombing that is seen as an assassination attempt on "Major Ahmed, the chief police of al Quds police station" that wounded him and three bodyguards, another Baghdad bombing left two people wounded, a Tikrit car bombing left three people injured and an Al-Anbar Province bombing took place in a home following a search by police where, apparently, a husband made his wife put on a vest -- lined with explosives -- to conceal it and shortly after the police departed, the bomb exploded killing the couple. Reuters notes a Suq al-Shiyukh assassination (bomb placed under bed) of 1 "local Iraqi police chief."

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports three police officers were wounded in a Baghdad shooting and "an officer in the ministry of interior affairs" was wounded in a Baghdad shooting. Reuters notes 11 police officers shot dead in Ba'aj and they also note that (dropping back Sunday) police Lt Col Ahmed al-Nouri was shot dead in Baghdad.

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 corpses discovered in Suwayra and 2 outside Rutba.

Turning to US politics, the Democratic race for the party's presidential nomination. Wah-wah-wah cried Barack Obama today. On Good Morning America (here for video) he attempted to dictate to the GOP what they could and could not do -- insisting they can say this or that . . . What a big baby. He really has had it too easy. He thinks -- he thinks he's getting the nomination and if he does that he can then dictate to a rival political party what they can do or what they can't. Grow up. Talk about not being ready to run for president. As with the Democratic race, he's saying his opponents "can say whatever they want to say about me, my track record." Uh, wake up Barack, the GOP isn't the love-sick John Edwards looking at you in debate after debate with cow eyes. He then declared that Michelle Obama was off limits. Grow the hell up, Barry. If you get the nomination, she'll be the subject of press the same way any other prospective First Lady is and it's always more difficult on the ones who have worked. As Rick Klein (ABC News) points out, the DNC "has aggressively targeted Cindy McCain over her decision not to release her tax returns, and DNC officials said Monday that they would continue to do so". Hillary Clinton survived it. Is Michelle unable to fight back? No, she can fight back so what's got him so worried? Larry Johnson (No Quarter) thinks it's the video of Michelle responding enthusiastically (to put it mildly) to a speech (let's not call them sermons) by Jeremiah Wright. That may be or, since he's mentioning "low class," it might be the shopping around of those 'side-boob' photos of Michelle looking ridiculous in that 'dress' that ____ selected for her to wear to the private party late last year. Those are pretty frightening pictures (and I thought so when they were sent to my cellphone last year during the party). They do not look First Lady-ish and, yes, they are being shopped around.

CBS and AP note Hillary's response to Barack's assertion (seemingly now withdrawn) that he will declare himself -- excuse me, that he will anoint himself the nominee Tuesday night: "You can declare yourself anything, but if you don't have the votes, it doesn't matter." And he doesn't have the votes. The delegates he's been awarded aren't enough to become the nominee -- same with Hillary. They are in a tie. Superdelegates -- in fact, all delegates -- vote on the convention floor. That should mean -- if both stay in the race and the DNC rules and guidelines are followed -- the nominee will be known in August of this year. Barack's apparently backed down from his desire to self-annoint and that has less to do with concern for letting the people decide and more to do with what Ava and I noted Sunday (and it was noted here last Wednesday) announcing you are the candidate in the midst of a tight race results in one of two things. 1) The DNC calls you out and the press laughs. 2) The DNC doesn't call you out and the GOP immediately argues that the Democrats have now named their candidate and have entered the general election in May, while the GOP will declare their nominee September 4th. In other words, general election funds will need to last for the Democratic Party from May through November while the GOP will only be constrained from September to November. And the DNC thought things were bad in 2004 when they announced in July and the GOP announced in September? The race is a tie and Hillary's now ahead in the popular votes.


Tomorrow, Molly Bingham and Steve Connors' amazing documentary is released on DVD, Meeting Resistance. As the press release notes:

Meeting Resistance is about the people and make-up of the Iraqi resistance. Since it was released in theaters last fall, we have shown the film in more than 80 U.S. cities, as well as to several key military audiences. We've made more than 200 appearances with the film to talk about our understanding of the conflict in Iraq and take questions from the audience. When the lights come up, we are greeted with the kind of silence associated with people trying to reconcile what they thought they knew with what they now understand. We've come to realize that our film is delivering a paradigm shift about the Iraq conflict--one audience at a time. There are two wars in Iraq. Meeting Resistance explores the first war, the popularly supported resistance to occupation, which contains the majority of the organized violence that is happening in Iraq. Using primary source material, critical analysis and cross-referencing, we crafted a film that tells the story of that conflict. The second war is the civil war--an internal political struggle being waged over competing visions of Iraq's future, of which the country's sectarian violence is a symptom, not a cause.

iraq
matthis chirouxbrittany whitleybeverly harvey
iraq
iraq veterans against the war
aaron glantz
kpfa
meeting resistancemolly binghamsteve connors
armen keteyianpia malbran
mcclatchy newspapers

starting with howard wolfson's 'HUBdate: Hillary in Oregon' (hillaryclinton.com):

Today In Oregon: Hillary hosts a "Solutions for the American Economy” event in Junction City, and participates a town hall hosted by KGW Newschannel 8 in Portland.
Hailing Passage of the Farm Bill: Yesterday, the Senate passed the Farm Bill by an overwhelming vote of 81 to 15. Hillary Clinton responded by saying: "By passing this bill, we have achieved an important step forward for farmers and consumers…Americans will have a real choice this fall - between a candidate who supports rural America and family farms and John McCain, who has threatened to veto this critical legislative priority." Read more and more.
Momentum in the Bluegrass State: As a sign of growing momentum in the state, the Clinton campaign announced its Kentucky Steering Committee, which is comprised of more than 100 former and current federal, state, and local elected officials that have endorsed Hillary. Read more.
Standing Up For Montana Families: Kalispell, MT Mayor Pam Kennedy endorsed Hillary yesterday. At a rally with former President Bill Clinton, she explained why Hillary is her choice: "Hillary Clinton has been standing up for women and families throughout her long career in public service. She is the candidate who best understands the issues facing Montana families." Read more.
Health Care For All: At a campaign stop at Dennis Jones' Farms in Bend, SD, Hillary pledged that she would fight for quality, affordable universal health care for all South Dakotans and all Americans: "I believe we need a plan that's not going to leave anybody out." Read More.
If You Read One Thing Today: "NARAL Pro-Choice America affiliates in key swing and primary states are openly distancing themselves from the decision…to endorse Illinois Sen. Barack Obama over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to be the Democratic nominee for president." Read more.
On Tap in KY: Hillary will campaign in the Bluegrass State this Saturday, May 17.

how did i end up in oregon by myself? that was an e-mail today. i'm not by myself. flyboy and my baby are here, first of all. betty was supposed to be here but when her parents decided to come as well, they couldn't get tickets. they could to kentucky, so that's where she is. but maria and francisco arrived friday morning and hilda will be here on monday. (ava, c.i., kat and trina will be back on monday.) in addition, the mother-daughter duo of marlene and goldie arrived this evening. so, i wasn't alone before, but i'm not alone now.

puerto rico sounds like fun. but, unlike the 1s who went (ava, c.i., kat, trina and elaine) i do not speak spanish and i wasn't keen on hopping on a plane friday, then flying back to oregon at the start of the week. since oregon is a primary about to take place, it made sense to stay here.

i also appreciated the faith c.i. and ava have in me that they were willing to let me lead in oregon over the weekend. oregon is a very close state. they vote by mail. however, as c.i. drilled into my head, they can be turned in in person. they have to be received, either by mail or in person, by 8:00 p.m. tuesday. i'm working the area around corvallis this weekend. it's not an area that's hostile to hillary and my main thing is making sure every 1 remembers the deadline and that they can send in their ballots right now or turn them in in person.

who ever wins, it will be close. this is a contested state that barack's assumed to lead in.

i do not see the young v. old split i keep hearing about in the media. i do see a class split. if you're attending college on mommy and daddy's dime and living it up, barack is your choice. if you're working class, hillary is your choice. i see that play out across the age spectrum, in fact. we spoke with high school seniors a lot this week and, time and again, that is the split.

what i see as a potential harm to hillary here is that the working class feels that the nominee has been chosen for them by the media. i do not hear that from the bulk of voters, but i do hear it often enough to know it is on people's minds. i mainly copy what c.i. said word for word throughout the week about owning your power and sending a message.

having had the very strong examples of c.i., ava and kat all week (and all last week), i would be comfortable soloing; however, i'm not solo and we're all having a lot of fun.

sergio korchergin testified to the congressional progressive caucus this week. he was among the members of iraq veterans against the war. he spoke mainly of his time serving in najaf and how they were encouraged to rough up citizens and 'told that everyone was an enemy.' sergio explained that 'while serving in najaf, the only humanitarian work we did was painting a park for kids and after that we did not do any humanitarian work until we left.' outside of najaf, he explained they were given 'drop weapons are the weapons given to us by chain of command so that if we kill someone we do not get into any trouble. ... the weapons did not come from any one else but the chain of command.' you should remember that when you read reports of 'insurgents' killed. sergio wondered 'where is all the money going that is given to the military? during the 1st deployment' he was giving a flap jacket from vietnam.

he talked about how when you return if you ask for help you're called 'cowards' and how prescriptions are dispensed like candy to shut people up. he spoke about a marine he served with who was on suicide watch who was taken off a week before deploying to iraq because it was family day and the brass didn't want his family knowing about it. they sent the unstable and in need of treatment marine to ira and, approximately 1 month into the deployment, 'he blew his brains out in the shower stall.' he talked about the message that sends, how they don't even care about their own marines so what do you think that says about what they really think of iraqis?

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Friday, May 16, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, an important DVD is released next week, what's up with Chalabi now, and more.


Starting with war resistance as Iraq Veterans Against the War noted yesterday (text, video)

Good afternoon. My name is Sgt. Matthis Chiroux, and I served in the Army as a Photojournalist until being honorable discharged last summer after over four years of service in Afghanistan, Japan, Europe and the Phillipines. As an Army journalist whose job it was to collect and filter servicemember's stories, I heard many stomach-churning testimonies of the horrors and crimes taking place in Iraq. For fear of retaliation from the military, I failed to report these crimes, but never again will I allow fear to silence me. Never again will I fail to stand. In February, I received a letter from the Army ordering my return to active duty, for the purpose of mobilization for Operation Iraqi Freedom. Thanks in great part to the truths of war being fearlessly spoken by my fellow IVAW members, I stand before you today with the strength, clarity and resolve to declare to the military and the world that this Soldier will not be deploying to Iraq. This occupation is unconstitutional and illegal and I hereby lawfully refuse to participate as I will surely be a party to war crimes. Furthermore, deployment in support of illegal war violates all of my core values as a human being, but in keeping with those values, I choose to remain in the United States to defend myself from charges brought by the Army if they so wish to pursue them. I refuse to participate in the occupation of Iraq.

IVAW includes a link to an online donations form that people can select "legal fund" from and notes that thankyoumatthis@ivaw.org is the address to express support to Matthis Chiroux. (That's thankyoumathhis at ivaw.org ).

As for those war resisters who are in Canada need support as well as they wait to see if the motion for safe harbor is going to come to the Parliament floor. You can utilize the following e-mails to show your support: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. In addition Jack Layton, NDP leader, has a contact form and they would like to hear from people as well. A few more addresses can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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).

As noted yesterday, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, chaired by Lynn Woolsey, Maxine Waters and Barbara Lee, and featured veterans offering testimony Thursday -- Iraq Veterans Against the War. The hearing was broadcast on CSPAN and KPFA (click here for KPFA's archived broadcast) and at Aaron Glantz' website The War Comes Home. Earlier (in March) Iraq Veterans Against the War held their Winter Soldier Investigation and it was broadcast at War Comes Home, at KPFK, at the Pacifica Radio homepage and at KPFA, here for Friday, here for Saturday, here for Sunday with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz anchoring Pacifica's live coverage. (It was also broadcast at the IVAW site.) Allison and Glantz also hosted a live report on KPFA about the lawsuit against the VA on April 22nd. We'll focus on the second half of the first panel (which should get us through the second hour) and it was during this portion, after the veterans had offered their testimonies, that co-chair Maxine Waters first spoke and we'll pick up with this section.

US House Rep Maxine Waters: I have often wondered as I have read accounts of killings in Iraq of civilians, where they are described to us in the newspaper as 'some attack' or 'some killings' that have been executed because 'suspected terrorists' or 'suspected this' or suspected 'that'. And when I see women and children and civilians be killed, I often wonder who are those people? No one will ever be able to know what the true story is and they have nobody to stand up for them to say that they are innocent, that they are guilty of on crime. They just get killed and they die and that's it. And I wonder often times about those families and those children that we see getting killed in ways that you described here this morning. Mr. Goldsmith I want you to know I am so moved by your testimony that you had the courage to come here today and share with us what you have shared and say "This is how I thought a long time ago but that's not who I am today." That is very powerful, that is very moving. And I had to be contained up here by my leader . . . I just wanted to stand up and applaud and she said "Just be cool because we want to honor everybody in a special way."

US House Rep Waters was directing her last statements to Kristofer Goldsmith who testified last on the panel. Goldsmith presentation included visual slides. Juxtaposed were photos of him in uniform after completing basic training and him as a young child dressed up in a military uniform. He discussed specifically what his motivation was prior to deployment: to kill Iraqis, to kill Muslims. He spoke of the transformation he'd gone through -- which was what Waters was noting. He spoke of Sadr City (which will pick up at a later time) and, with time running out, noted US Senator and presumed GOP presidential nominee John McCain's opposition to the GI Bill US Senator Jim Webb is proposing. He said it wouldn't apply to him because he was he dishonorably discharged for attempting suicide so he wouldn't receive the benefit (due to the classification of the discharge) but it was sorely needed. Goldsmith would also note how telling his story was theraputic and how there are those who aren't able to tell their own stories: "It is very hard for us to find the courage to come up here and I would like to thank you again for hearing us."

US House Rep Maxin Waters: I don't like to make committments that I'm not sure I can follow or carry out but you're going to get your GI Bill, you're going to go to college.

Kristofer Goldsmith: Thank you.

US House Rep Maxine Waters: I want to tell you here and today that I'm on it, I'm focused. I don't know what I have to do but I'm going to get it. You're going to get it. I'm going to make that committment to you today. And whoever's standing in our collective way because, I know, that my collegues here share in my feelings about this. They [those opposed such as McCain] better get out of the way because we're going to get it. You have to have it. You must have it. And I'm so glad that you did not take you life, that it did not work. And I want you to know that no matter the disappointment, no matter the lies, no matter the experiences, there's some people here [in Congress] who believe in you, some people who are going to continue to fight to bring our soldiers home and some people here will stand up and fight for you no matter what the obstacles are. And I just wish you all would just defy this leader [Lynn Woolsey] and give him and everybody a big round of applause.

Rep Waters was referring to Rep Woolsey's explanation that this was a hearing and they would need to hold their applause. Also speaking was US House Rep Sheila Jackson-Lee who expressed her gratitude towards Kelly Dougherty for using her "anguish" to motivate greater change. Dougherty, who introduced the witnesses of the first panel, is an Iraq War veteran and the executive director of IVAW, the organization she co-founded. Jackson-Lee cited the testimonies and the need to end the illegal war.

US House Rep Sheila Jackson-Lee: And I feel a sense of urgency. I will leave the mike for a moment to go to the [House] floor to take some of the points you've made to offer them in my opposition to the war and what will be my vote to against any more funding for the war in Iraq. We made a personal committment that we will never vote for another cent. Sometimes we're blindsided. Sometimes they sneak it in or sneak it around. We try to be Sherlock Holmes and to find it and make sure we do not cast our vote. What I think I heard from Mr. Goldsmith was that there was this stop-loss policy of Secretary [Donald] Rumsfeld and I think that what I've heard from my constituents that a general discharge -- in fact I think we heard that yesterday, about a general discharge -- now blocks everyone from their education benefits. So let me join with Congresswoman Waters to say this has to be fixed. Morphed. Refined. Distinguished. So that individuals who have for causes, for reasons, for tragedies, found themselves under this particular discharge do not have to suffer anymore. Let me also very quickly say that you are creating a movement. It pains me to hear that you are representing those who are shouting in the darkness. So maybe as we have had and I know that you have gathered but those hundreds of thousands need to hear our voice. Let us welcome them to Washington. Let's bring 100,000 of your members to Washington and let's call the roll on members of Congress to come and tell them why this war continues. I think frankly that should be the challenge today.

Along with explaining what needs to happen to pressure Congress into action (those weren't pie-in-the-sky words, she was offering serious advice), Rep Jackson Lee noted that the Act of Congress by which the illegal war was 'justified' has expired and referenced her own bill. The title of that bill is Military Success in Iraq and Diplomatic Surge for National and Political Reconciliation in Iraq Act of 2007. It notes that the Military Force Against iraq Resolution has expired and calls for the "Withdrawal of Armed Forces and Contractor Security Forces From Iraq -- Not later than October 1, 2007 or 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, whichever shall occur first". It was referred to two House committees (Committee on Armed Services and Committee on Foreign Affairs) in February of last year. It remains in committee. The bill itself and Rep Jackson Lee's remarks at the hearing Thursday argues that US service members have done all that was asked of them and that it is time to withdrawal ("You have done everything we asked you to, Saddam Hussein is not there . . .").

As the first panel wound down, Rep Lynn Woolsey asked the witnesses to share how they dealt with their own grief. Jason Lemieux explained that after he returned from Iraq he sought PTSD counseling in Florida which was ended, not by his choice, when the counselor transferred/rotated. Today his focus is on attempting "to right to write as much as I can the wrongs I have done". Scott Ewing spoke of his work with IVAW and his academic work of providing him with a sense of direction and purpose. Kristofer Goldsmith explained his own history which included self-medicating with alcohol early on. He noted that seeking help at the VA requires waiting and waiting and waiting some more due to the long, long backup at the VA. In February, things improved for him when he was contacted by IVAW and began sharing his story with others. Geoffrey Millard noted that he puts on his black (IVAW) t-shirt every day: "I get to wake up every morning, put on that black t-shirt and work to bring the troops home, take care of them when they get home and make sure that Iraqis receive reperations. That is what keeps me going, gets my head off the pillow, every morning".

Rep Woolsey thanked them but noted that in terms of obligations and debt, "Moral debt belongs up here [Congress]. We thank you, you did the job you were hired to do . . . and you did it the best you could. The moral debt belongs to us."

Had the hearings received any significant media attention, that was the moment that should have been played. Woolsey was against the Iraq War before it started and has repeatedly called for an end and taken action to end it. But there was a member of Congress stating very clearly that the government held the moral debt. (Think of the Richard Clarke moment at the 9-11 hearings.) It was needed and it's to her credit (and her strength) that she made the statement.

Turning to Iraq, Nancy A. Youssef, Leila Fadel and Warren P. Strobel (McClatchy Newspapers) report that CIA asset Ahmad Chalabi is apparently again on the outs with the US and they quote a "senior military official" saying: "That's it. He's out." Thug, would be dictator and journalist-go-to-guy Chalabi has been repeatedly counted out and always surfaced again. This time he is supposedly on the outs with puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki and supposedly to close to Iran (the latter charges have repeatedly dogged Chalabi in the last few years) but he denies he's any closer to the Iranian government than is al-Maliki.

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Baghdad roadside bombings that claimed 1 life and left five wounded and a Falluja car bombing that claimed the life of "1 baby, six months old" and left seven people (including a two-month-old baby) wounded.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Sadr City hospital personnel have seen 2 deaths and eleven people wounded as a result of the ongoing fighting in the US-led assault on Sadr City and, outside Falluja, 1 police officer shot and in critical condition.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 1 in Sirwan Lake.


On a different topic. Every year many, many movies are released. Most will never speak to anyone. A few will have a quality (a performance, a director's gaze, etc.) that will make it worthy of at least one viewing. Some should be firmly embraced because they are that important, that well done and that necessary. Molly Bingham and Steve Connors' amazing documentary Meeting Resistance, available on DVD Tuesday (May 20th) is one that deserves to be embraced and has been in limited theartical showings. These are excerpts from the press release:


"Meeting Resistance," is about the people and make-up of the Iraqi resistance. Since it was released in theaters last fall, we have shown the film in more than 80 U.S. cities, as well as to several key military audiences. We've made more than 200 appearances with the film to talk about our understanding of the conflict in Iraq and take questions from the audience. When the lights come up, we are greeted with the kind of silence associated with people trying to reconcile what they thought they knew with what they now understand. We've come to realize that our film is delivering a paradigm shift about the Iraq conflict--one audience at a time. There are two wars in Iraq. "Meeting Resistance" explores the first war, the popularly supported resistance to occupation, which contains the majority of the organized violence that is happening in Iraq. Using primary source material, critical analysis and cross-referencing, we crafted a film that tells the story of that conflict. The second war is the civil war--an internal political struggle being waged over competing visions of Iraq's future, of which the country's sectarian violence is a symptom, not a cause. "Meeting Resistance" is a journalistic documentary, not an advocacy or polemic film. Although we did not set out to challenge the narrative of the Iraq conflict--the one that has been constructed in Washington--our reporting eventually led us to do so. U.S. military's briefings in the Green Zone during 2003 and 2004 told journalists that the violence against American troops came from "dead-enders" and "Ba'athi die-hards," from common criminals, religious extremists, foreign fighters, and al-Qaeda--characterized as "fringe elements". While some might fit some of these descriptions, the vast majority of those involved are citizens from the core of Iraqi society. In time, we came to see the U.S. military's misnaming of the "enemy" as an intentional act--as a key part of their objective to control the "information battle space." They aspire to control the perception of the enemy's identity, and through the news media persuade the American public that these "fringe elements" of Iraqi society are the only ones who oppose the U.S. presence in Iraq. A military push (or surge) to isolate and eliminate them would accomplish a perceived "victory." The National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq delivered to the White House in October 2003 was leaked in February 2006 by Robert Hutchings, the 2003-2005 chairman of the National Intelligence Council. Speaking in interviews, Hutchings revealed that the report said that it is composed of nationalists fighting for their country with deep roots in the society and that the U.S. military, if it remains in Iraq, will be fighting a counterinsurgency war for years to come, a conclusion that echoed what we had found in our on-the-ground reporting for "Meeting Resistance." If the predominant narrative about the Iraq conflict was truly based in reality, it would involve pointing out that the majority of Iraqis want a withdrawal of all foreign forces, and that the Department of Defense's quarterly reports to Congress, on average, show that from April 2004 to December 2007, 74 % of significant attacks initiated by Iraqis targeted U.S.-led coalition forces. Americans would also find out that half of registered marriages in Baghdad in 2002 were mixed marriages between Sunni and Shia, Kurd and Arab, Christian and Muslim, and many of the tribes and clans and families are, in fact, mixed between Sunni and Shia. Also, nearly all of the Arab Iraqis polled oppose dividing the country along ethnic and sectarian lines, and the vast majority demands that Iraq have a strong central government, not the decentralized powerlessness imposed by the American-influenced constitution. It is not that these points have never been reported, but the booming voice of "disinformation"--from which the Pentagon wants the American public to view the conflict--drowns much of this information out. Ultimately, our film has helped reveal the success of the Pentagon's strategy to obscure the real nature of the war in Iraq. Unfortunately, too many in the news media have been willing to allow that to happen. Throughout the world's history, there have been occupations--and resistance to those occupations. Why then do Americans have such a difficult time grasping that our troops are unwelcome by the vast majority of the Iraqi population? And why has reporting by our mainstream news media generally failed to recognize and draw our attention to this central, core aspect of the violence? Steve Connors and Molly Bingham are directors of "Meeting Resistance." Their film is distributed by First Run Features and available on DVD May 20th.


Changing topics again. Independent journalist, photo-journalist and artist David Bacon examines and explores the issues of immigrant rights frequently. At the Americas Program,
Bacon notes the massive rallies, marches and demonstrations for immigration rights in 2006 and 2007: "Yet today the federal government is taking actions that make holding a job a criminal act. Some states and local communities, seeing a green light from the Department of Homeland Security, are passing measures that go even further. These actions need a reality check." That should have been noted last Friday but time ran out. There's another piece I'd like to note but can't find. We'll grab it Friday and remember at Bacon's site, you have text and photos.

Turning to the US presidential race, Hillary Clinton is asking for your help: "Tell the Democratic National Committee to count the votes of Florida and Michigan." As Texas Darlin (TaylorMarsh.com) notes, Hillary's not losing and the calls of "Get out!" are coming about for just that fact. Jeralyn (TalkLeft) reports on a conference call with Hillary: "The number one message: It's the math not the map. In addition to the popular vote, the electoral map shows her with a cushion and Obama with a deficit. She has won 311 electoral votes to Obama's 217. While a few of her's like Texas and Oklahoma will be a challenge in November, many of his states will be: Alaska, Idaho, Utah, to name a few."
iraq
iraq veterans against the war
linjamin mulljenny yuen
aimeee allisondavid solnit
aaron glantz
kpfa
meeting resistancemolly binghamsteve connorsdavid bacon
leila fadelmcclatchy newspapers
warren p. strobelnancy a. youssef

starting with howard wolfson's 'HUBdate: Leading the Popular Vote' (hillaryclinton.com):

Leading the Popular Vote: According to ABC News, Hillary's West Virginia victory put her over the top in the popular vote. She now leads Sen. Obama 16,691,283 to 16,647,926 when Florida and Michigan are included in the count. Read more.
Previewing Today: Hillary Clinton travels to South Dakota and attends a "Solutions for the Rural Economy" town hall in Bath, SD.
Automatic Delegate Watch: Yesterday, Tennessee Automatic Delegate Vicky Harwell endorsed Hillary. "Hillary's decisive victory in West Virginia is the latest evidence that she is the strongest candidate to take on John McCain and win back the White House," Harwell said. Read more.
In Case You Missed It: Clinton National Campaign Co-Chair Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones and other Members of Congress held a press conference last night to discuss Hillary Clinton’s strong pro-choice record. The Politico's Ben Smith reports "Amie Parnes emails that more than a dozen congresswomen who endorsed Clinton gathered in front of the DCCC to express disappointment in NARAL's Obama endorsement. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz said ‘we feel abandoned by this organization today.' Rep. Shelley Berkeley called the endorsement 'extremely unnecessary' and 'inappropriate.' Rep. Jane Harmon called it 'a betrayal.'" Read more.
Kentucky Endorsement Watch: Four former Kentucky governors endorsed Hillary yesterday. "The people of Kentucky need a President who has the strength, experience, and leadership to lead on day one," said former Governor Julian Carroll. "My friendship with Hillary goes back more than 30 years and I know she'll make a fine President." Read more and more.
OR Supporters Standing By Hillary: "Linda Mayer of Eugene knows they're out there: the pollsters and pundits who insist that Sen. Hillary Clinton is on the ropes and should give up her quest for the presidency. But that doesn’t mean she has to listen to them... A retired Lane Community College teacher who is giving about 30 volunteer hours a week, [Mayer said:] 'As a woman, I’ve been waiting for a woman -- who is qualified -- for a long time... To me, Hillary is the best qualified and also very brave and courageous.'" Read more.
Why I Support Hillary: Jordan Kokich, a student at Portland State University and a field organizer for Hillary in Oregon remembers meeting Hillary through the Make-A-Wish Foundation when she was only eight years old. She says, "I am 22 now, and in less than four hours I would be meeting Hillary yet again…Upon seeing her at last, I met her half way as she greeted me with open arms. This was history coming full circle." Read more.
'Esa es mi candidata': In Puerto Rico, "A group of volunteers took to the busy streets of Río Piedras, handing out bumper stickers, yard signs and, most importantly, one-on-one information on Hillary’s comprehensive agenda for the jurisdiction with the largest Hispanic population under the American flag." Read more.
On Tap: This Friday, Hillary will campaign throughout Oregon.

let me echo ava and c.i. with the point they've been making for months: michigan and florida held primaries, people voted, the votes were certified. there is no reason for the press not to include those primaries in the popular vote.

if they are part of the obama campaign, they would leave the tallies out.

but the primaries are not in doubt. they took place. they were certified.

those are events and reporters report events.

it's very basic.

even the dnc isn't disputing that the primaries took place. but if they were, it wouldn't matter.

for the record, they aren't.

and so the primaries took place and were certified and are part of the count.

that's basic.

the press doesn't get to decide whether they call count hurricane katrina as a hurricane. it is 1. that's the end of the story. the press doesn't get to decide what they include in the popular vote. primaries took place, they are part of the results.

too bad for obama that it doesn't favor him.

those are the breaks.

things don't always go the way you want.

tough s**t.

the primaries took place. they need to be counted.



let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Thursday, May 15, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, IVAW appears before Congress, Hillary leads in the popular vote, and more.


Starting with war resistance. James Burmeister's father Erich writes about his son at Courage to Resist:

Passion and empathy: Why is it that it takes a harsh reality to kick in your own front door, grab you by the scruff of your own all too relaxed neck, before you really cry again. Maybe its cancer, a hurricane, a drunk driver, somebody gone crazy with a gun on campus, in a shopping center, on the job, on the freeway, or maybe a kid with a gun in a war, a soldier, your kid, like mine PFC James Burmeister.
He is not a kid anymore. When he joined the army, he was a typical poor kid, naive kid, painted himself in a corner kid. A typical young man high on testosterone low on common sense, he brought the recruiter's line of crap and fine-print flim flaw, and was coached on how to assure his induction despite medical conditions that would have disqualified him.
So the army trained him how to kill efficiently in urban warfare situations and shipped his naive butt over to Baghdad to carry out the orders of his commander and chief, the Warrior Prince Bush, our president, brave military veteran of Vietnam. So my son was forced to take part in and was witness to acts of human cruelty beyond his wildest imagination. He killed other young men just like him. In another place in another time, they could have been friends, they could have worked side by side and shared their dreams, now their ghosts will haunt his dreams, like the dreams of this brand new generation of "winter soldiers". For the matter of a few feet, or maybe even a few inches, my son's brains would have been spilled out on a Baghdad street. My nightmare of a soldier's dad, of cradling my son's blown up head in my lap while I try to put it back together, it would have become reality like the nightmares of the families of those soldiers who have already died, and those who will die next week, next month, and next year.
So now my son sits in Army custody, brain injured by a roadside bomb and struggling mightly with PTSD while he awaits court-martial for desertion, because he refused redepolyment to combat in Iraq in May 2007 in protest over the war crimes he was ordered to engage in. He married a fifty-caliber machine gun atop a hummer providing perimeter security for one of the now infamous small kill teams.
With the help of war resistance groups in Canada, on the eve of his re-deployment, he went AWOL and has lived in Canada until March 4th of this year when his worsening mental and physical condition, his homesickness and his family responsibilities left him little choice but to turn himself in to the Army at Fort Knox Kentucky.

Maria Hinojosa interviewed James Burmesiter and Agustin Aguayo for NOW on PBS (here for a/v, here for text). And while we're noting NOW on PBS and Hinojosa, their "Child Brides: Stolen Lives" report won the 2008 Edward R. Murrow Award for Best TV Documentary and the episode can be viewed online here. As Hinojosa's report explained, after being injured by a bombing resulting in PTSD, Burmeister was placed on medication and ordered to serve another tour of duty in Iraq. Burmeister explained his reaction: "I got back home -- talked to my wife. You know, I said, 'I think I'm gonna leave.' It was like a 15 minute decision that I'm -- I'm gonna leave -- I'm gonna leave the army."

Now he awaits word on what the military is going to do? Are they going to court-martial a wounded veteran, on medication, who they were trying to redeploy to Iraq for another tour? No one knows. But his Erich Burmeister is asking for people to "Drop my son a card of encouragement!" and the address is: PFC James Burmeister, HHC Bldg 298, Gold Vault Rd, Fort Knox, KY 40121.

Those war resisters who are in Canada need support as well as they wait to see if the motion for safe harbor is going to come to the Parliament floor. You can utilize the following e-mails to show your support: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. In addition Jack Layton, NDP leader, has a contact form and they would like to hear from people as well. A few more addresses can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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).

Today the House of Representatives were talking about Iraq. Mainly in the hearing held by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, chaired by Lynn Woolsey, Maxine Waters and Barbara Lee, and featured veterans offering testimony -- Iraq Veterans Against the War. If you missed the hearing, along with being broadcast on CSPAN, it was broadcast by KPFA (click here for KPFA's archived broadcast) and at Aaron Glantz' website The War Comes Home. Earlier (in March) Iraq Veterans Against the War held their Winter Soldier Investigation and it was broadcast at War Comes Home, at KPFK, at the Pacifica Radio homepage and at KPFA, here for Friday, here for Saturday, here for Sunday with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz anchoring Pacifica's live coverage. (It was also broadcast at the IVAW site.) Allison and Glantz also hosted a live report on KPFA about the lawsuit against the VA on April 22nd.

US House Rep Lynn Woolsey: You know around here in recent months, we've heard from General David Petraeus, we've heard from Ambassador Ryan Crocker, we've heard from the White House over and over again. And they're all armed with PowerPoint presentations, they're armed with colorful posters, and all the language trying to convince us after five years we are finally making progress in Iraq. Well we know that's not so and what makes this morning so unique is that we now have an opportunity to hear from -- not the military's top brass, but directly from you, the very soldiers who put your lives on the line to carry out this president's failed policies. Today's event actually is a continuation of the Winter Soldier hearings that were organized by the Iraq Veterans Against the War earlier this year at the National Labor Council in Silver Spring, Maryland. Over three days, dozens of veterans shared their personal stories, testified about their own experiences on the ground, in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. These weren't pundits. They weren't analysts talking about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the abstract. These were the stories -- the stories we're going to hear today and the testimonies of the men and women who have experienced the horrors of war up close and personal.

As noted the supplemental was being voted on today as well. Co-chair Barbara Lee explained some of the basics of that proposal.

US House Rep Barbara Lee: It's really ironic that we will debate and vote on three amendments to the Iraq supplemental appropriations bill. Of course I plan and I know Congress women Woolsey and Waters plan to vote against the amendment providing an additional -- can you believe this -- $183 billion? More money to fund this occupation and war through . . . June of 2009. We have long advocated that funding be appropriated only for the limited purpose of fully funding the safe and responsible redeployment of American troops and contractors from Iraq. No more funds for combat operations. We offered an amendment last night that would do just that. Regrettably, my amendment was not accepted so once again, once again. I intend to vote against funding this war and occupation. Now second amendment to the supplemental contains two restrictions that we have championed. First is the prohibition against the establishment of permanent military bases in Iraq. We need to, once again, make sure the president understands that is what the American people want. It's been passed and signed into law at least eight times and actually the president has issued a signing statement saying basically he's not going to comply with the law. So once again, we're going to do it again. The second condition that we have championed will prohibit the president from negotiating, entering into or implementing any agreement with the government of Iraq that includes security assurances for mutual defense unless the agreement is in the form of a treaty requiring ratification by the Senate or is specifically authorized by law. Today's proceedings are historic because it has been 37 years since the the first Winter Soldiers convened in Detroit in 1971 to speak out against the Vietnam war.

US House Reps Sheila Jackson Lee, Keith Ellison, were among the Congress members present at today's hearings. IVAW executive director Kelly Dougherty explained

Sgt. Kelly Dougherty: Two moths ago over 200 members of IVAW gathered in Silver Spring, Maryland to submit, listen to and offer their eye-witness accounts of the occuaptions of Iraq and Afghanistan and their first-hand experience in the American military. . . . We continue our duty to our country and our fellow human beings by offering our testimony to Congress members today. The stories you are about to hear will not be easy to listen to but, believe me, they are much harder to relive. We have witnessed first-hand the ultimate violence, chaos, fear and suffering of war and occupation and are intimately familiar with the indelible mark that it has left on our lives. These nine Iraq veterans that are here today are going to relive memories that they probably would rather forget but they won't because they know that the people need to hear their stories in order to understand the way that war impacts people, their families and their communities.

Along with Kelly Dougherty, there were other members of IVAW appearing before Congress including Adam Kokesh (IVAW co-chair), Matthis Chiroux (who made news after the hearing), Jason Lemieux, Scott Ewing, Geoffrey Millard, Vincent Emanuele, Kristofer Goldsmith, James Gilligan. We'll focus on some of the testimonies today and some in tomorrow's snapshot.

Sgt. Jason Lemieux: The written testimony I submitted today illuminates how unit loyalty and camaraderie, psychological trauma, lack of strategic guidance, command complicity and our national insistance on minimizing short-term casualty rates all lead to widespread destruction of civilian life and property in Iraq and make rules of engagement, for all practical purposes unenforcable.

Lemieux spoke of his three tours and how they were encouraged to shoot any Iraq and not worry because the leadership would "take care of us" -- meaning protect them. Protection also came in orders to falsify reports to minimize casualties. Scott Ewing followed and he spoke mainly about his time serving in Tal Afar. He referenced civilian casulaties, detainess and house searches.

Scott Ewing: I also saw more innocent civlians injured or killed by American forces than by the enemy. One particularly memorable incident occured after we raided two houses and found no one there. Everyone thought we were going home but a vehicle stopped again and we were told to get out and go to a nearby house. I assumed that we were going to search it but when we went in through the front gate I noticed that there were already other American soldiers there -- a mortar platoon from our troop -- there were six Iraqi men against the wall and, as I rounded the car that was in the drive-way, we saw several middle-aged women sprawled out on the cement covered in blood. It looked like someone had opened up on them with a machine gun. What we found out, shortly thereafter, was that one of our Apache helicopters had shot high explosive rounds into their front yard. . . . And so we started treating them with bandages. The first woman I got to had shrapnel had pentetrated her head. She was still alive but she died shortly there after. The other women were very badly wounded. . . . We got medical supplies from the Bradleys and tried to bandage their wounds. [exhales] . . . Two of the injured women were laying next to each other over in the back of the Bradley and a little boy about 9-years-old came up to me and pointed to his chest and there was a blood spot on it so I kind of looked and -and listened to his breathing to see if his lungs had been punctured and they hadn't so I sat him back in the back of the Bradley next to the two women and they were all taken to an aid station which was just outside the city. There were numerous other events, incidents, that involve civilian casualties, I don't have time to go into them all but this incident illustrates the first serious difference between what I saw in Iraq and what is seen back home. There's been virtually no explicit reporting by the mainstream media of civilian casualties caused by US troops in Iraq. Anytime a suicide bomber kills civilians, it is highly publicized. But from my personal experience, in Tal Afar, the number of Iraqis killed or injured by our forces far outnumbers those killed by insurgents or suicide bombers.

These are highlights. Geoffrey Millard stated "thank you for listening" and thanked the co-chairs as did everyone offering testimony. Millard observed that every day in Iraq seems to repeat "over and over and over again," endlessly.

Geoffrey Millard: One day there was a briefing that was briefed for the General that there was a traffic control point shooting. In it, a young private saw a vehicle speeding at his traffic control point and made a split-second decision and put more than 200 rounds into this vehicle as it sped towards them putting it to a stop and killing all of its inhabitants. He then watched as the mother, father and two children were dragged from that car. That evening as it was briefed to the general -- and I flipped the slide for that briefing -- Col. [William] Rochelle from the 42nd Infantry Division [Support Command] . . . and I have to apologize for a little vulgarity here but I feel it's intricate for my testimony. He turned and stared to an entire division level staff and said, and I quote [not broadcast]. I was set back by that. I expected more out of high ranking officers coming from a line unit. I expected a lot more and as I looked around at the officers and high ranking NCOs in the room -- Non Commissioned Officers -- I found no dissenting facial expressions or body language, just nodding of the heads as if to say, "Yep, if these f-ing Ha**s learned to drive this wouldn't happen."


Dropping back to the March 17th snapshot:

In Saturday's panels on Racism and War: the Dehumanization of the Enemy, Geoff Millard would testify that not only was the h-word used by the brass in Iraq, they also would declare that the checkpoint killings were the result of h-words not knowing how to drive. Hurd and Kokesh's testimonies provided reasons for the deaths that have received little attention.

In a news release, Rep Woolsey notes Kristofer Goldmsith's testimony:

As we were preparing to leave Iraq, we were given a mental screening test, which was supposed to identify possible mental ailments. But we were warned by the medical staff issuing the test that "should you come up positive for mental problems, you could be forced to stay in [Iraq] for three to four more months before you can go home." Most lied while completing the test because they wanted to get home as soon as possible. No one was held in Iraq any longer due to this test, but in hindsight, it is clear that verbal warning was used to prevent the inconvenience to the Army of having Soldiers that needed medical attention.

Again, we'll come back to the hearing tomorrow and on Monday. If time runs out, Trina will most likely grab Adam Kokesh for her site this weekend and we'll note him in the snapshot on Monday. The above doesn't even cover the first hour of the hearing. After the hearing, a new development. From IVAW:

Sgt. Matthis Chiroux, who served in the Army until being honorably discharged last summer after over four years of service in Afghanistan, Japan, Europe and the Phillipines, today publicly announced his intention to refuse orders to deploy to Iraq.
Sgt. Chiroux made made his announcement in the Cannon House Office Building Rotunda after members of Iraq Veterans Against the War testified before the Congressional Progressive Caucus during Winter Soldier on the Hill.
To donate to IVAW's Legal Fund to support Matthis and other servicemembers who are refusing to support the occupation of Iraq, use our online donation form and select "Legal Fund" under special projects.
If you would like to send a message of support to Sgt Matthis Chiroux, email thankyoumatthis@ivaw.org.

On the House floor today, the supplemental was voted on. Leading the Republican objection to it was Rep David Drier (who attempted to engage Rep David Obey who complained that he should not have to yield his time). Drier repeatedly cited "small businesses" as his concern. On the Democratic side, Rep Jan Schakowsky spoke passionately in her brief time (time limits appeared to be enforced on Schakowsky though other members of both parties were allowed to exceed them) who noted that the only funding Congress should be considering was funding that would "bring our troops home" and also raised the issue of the indiscriminate killins by the mercenaries of Blackwater Worldwide. Richard Cowan (Reuters) notes, "The U.S. House of Represenatives, in a surprise and largely symbolic move, defeated legislation on Thursday to fund the war in Iraq for another year. But it also sent the Senate a controversial troop-withdrawal paln that will give that chambe an opportunity to restore the money for waging the conflict, which is deeply unpopular with the public. With a large group of anti-war Democrats voting against the Pentagon $162.5 billion to keep fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through mid-2009, the House defeated the measure by a vote of 149-141." Christopher Stern and Laura Litvan (Bloomberg News) note: "Some anti-war Democrats cheered, shouting, 'The war is over." They also point out that US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office states there is "enough money to pay for the war through July under the current law". Jonathan Weisman (Washington Post) credits the failure of the bill to a coalition: "An unusual coalition of antiwar Democrats and angry Republicans in the House today torpedoed" the bill but the House "voted to demand troop withdrawals from Iraq, force the Iraqi government to shoulder more war costs and greatly expand the education benefits for returning veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflict." Deidre Walsh (CNN) also gives credit to the Republicans and describes the outcome as "a surprising defeat to Democrats who had expected to pass the measure." As do Mike Soraghan, Susan Crabtree and Jared Allen (The Hill): "House Republicans knocked the carefully choreographed Iraq war funding process into chaos Thursday when they declined to vote for" the bill. NPR's Brian Naylor (All Things Considered) offers an audio report on the G.I. Bill aspect of it.

Funded today or not, the illegal war drags on. In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 Baghdad roadside bombings that claimed 2 lives and left ten wounded.

Shootings?Tim Cocks (Reuters) reports 3 Iranian embassy workers were wounded by gunfire (as was their driver) in Baghdad today.

Kidnappings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "3 prominent doctors . . . kidnapped by gunmen on the way between Tikrit and Baiji".

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

Turning to US presidential nominations. Rick Klein (ABC News) reports on Hillary supporters who state they will boycott if Barack Obama is the nominee and not Hillary Clinton. A surprise to the MSM perhaps but this community decided last week that if Hillary doesn't get the nomination, Ralph Nader gets the vote in the November. Klein notes that the nonsense group of crybabies making up NARAL (include Kate in that, I still laugh at Kate's crying in the Senate -- still and always) deciding to endorse Barack yesterday has had a reaction: "Emily's List is furious. Anad Martha Burke" expresses "It feels like they are abandoning a known ally for a less committed candidate because they want to jump on a bandwagon. I think the pro-choice community should stick by a woman who has stuck by them." Taylor Marsh points out that local NARAL chapters are saying (basically), 'Don't blame us, the national leadership kept us in the dark and didn't even consult us." Jo Mannies (St. Louis Post-Dispatch) quotes the Missouri chapter's president, Pamela Sumners stating, "In our membership demographic, a lot of longtime women's rights supporters are strong supporters of Hillary Clinton. If we had been consulted, we would have said, 'Let this play out'." Plus don't support a man who regularly insults women. Klein earlier noted that a woman finally got an apology from Obama for his referring to her as "sweetie" ("Hold on one second, sweetie . . .") but then, she's a reporter. He's called women "sweetie"s over and over. "Little Miss" is probably next. Delilah Boyd (A Scriverner's Lament) compiles a list of men who could call her "sweetie" and Obama's not on it. As Michael Regunberg (Boston Globe) noted yesterday, "When the history of the 2008 presidential campaign is written, we may find that Gloria Steinem was right. In a column in The New York Times that appeared between the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary she wrote, 'Gender is probably the most restricting force in American life, whether the question is who must be in the kitchen or who could be in the White House.' Fast forward six months and Steinem looks downright prescient. We didn't know then just how biased the media would be against Hillary Clinton, a woman running for president. But the 'boys on the bus' (and a good number of women as well) have had a tough time with Clinton and criticized everything from her pantsuits to her laugh, things they would not excoriate a man for. What's worse, they get away with it . . . they use her as a punchline." Punchline? That would includes 'cracks' made by self-loathing lesbian Laura Flanders (be sure to read Marcia's "Laura Flanders the self-hating, disrespecting lesbian") who felt Gloria and Robin Morgan were missing the point. What point was that, Laura? That you're a semi-closeted lesbian or a Brit playing Democrat when you were raised a Communist? That is, after all, why you do NOT vote Democratic. Step out of your closets, self-loather. You could write about all the Communists mentioned in this article because your family was tight with all of them. (Self-loathing lesbian Laura especially took offense at Robin's "Goodbye To All That (#2)." Probably the notion of saying goodbye to illusions scared the sexually and politically closeted Flanders.)


Gene Lyons (Arkansas Democratic Gazette) is far kinder than I am, he calls them "progressives." Yeah, they tried to hide behind that label before as well. There's no reason for a Communist to be in the closet today (and young ones are not) unless you're trying to trick and decieve. The way Flanders did the night/early morning of the 2004 election when she pretended she understood the anger and upset, when she pretended she'd voted Democratic. Maybe all these 'progressives' wouldn't have so much influence if the Democrats they're trying to steer knew how many of them weren't Democrats. It's not "red-baiting." It goes to honesty. Lyons:

There's no denying that her candidacy has encountered what a friend calls a "perfect storm" of progressive idealists merging with Clinton-hating celebrity courtiers in the "mainstream" media. And yet she keeps chugging along like the Little Engine That Could, defying increasingly shrill demands to quit.
Weeks before the Indiana primary, Obama described it as the potential tiebreaker. Then he went out and lost it. Nevertheless, all but openly gloating, NBC's Tim Russert took it upon himself to announce, "We now know who the Democratic nominee's going to be, and no one's going to dispute it." Reaction among some Obama supporters was less polite.

Maybe Marie Cocco (same column as yesterday but link goes to the Washington Post) had those types in mind when she wrote: "I won't miss reading another treatise by a man or woman, of the left or right, who says that sexism has had not even a teeny-weeny bit of influence on the course of the Democratic campaign." Meanwhile snippy little Ryan Corsaro (CBS News) declares of Hillary leading in the popular vote: "Clinton only leads in the popular vote if Michigan and Florida's primary votes count, which they currently do not, because of Democratic Party rules." As Ava and I noted in March:

One offered, "She's thousands behind! If you don't count Florida and Michigan." Thanks for the add-on but shouldn't a press be aware that a presidential election in November will take place in all fifty states? Shouldn't a press not be concerned with the talking points of the Obama campaign and report the facts which is Hillary isn't behind due to Florida and Michigan? If there's a re-vote, by all means, replace the votes. But there was a vote in both states and Hillary won both primaries. While it may not be in the Obama campaign's best interest to include those totals, the press is supposed to report what happened and what happened in those states' primaries was that Hillary won. "If you don't count"? Why wouldn't the press count them? They took place, millions voted. More people voted in the Florida primary, for example, than took part in all the primaries and caucuses before Florida combined. If you're the press, not the Obama campaign, and you're talking about the popular vote, there's no reason not to include Florida and Michigan. The press reports what happened. What happened is that Florida and Michigan voted. The delegates may be in dispute but there's no question that voters in both states showed up at the polls and no question about who won.

As we noted in April:

The popular vote is the popular vote. Primaries took place in Florida and Michigan. Whether the DNC seats, or doesn't, the delegates, the primaries took place and news outlets shouldn't pretend otherwise. Reporters are supposed to report what took place and, fact, primaries took place in both states and Hillary won. John Dickerson -- whose outlet created a Hillary Death Watch and likened it to their Saddam-Meter, so therefore really shouldn't be invited on to comment on the Hillary campaign -- was whining that "the arithmetic we were taught in school" didn't allow for including the primaries. Actually, John, it did. Math exercises had you count apples and oranges. You weren't allowed to determine whether a national grocer would carry those apples and oranges before you were expected to count them. You were told there were X number and you added them. The same way that the primaries in Michigan and Florida are part of the popular vote.

The race isn't over. Yesterday Hillary received the endorsements of former governors of Kentucky Wendell Ford, Paul Patton, John Brown and Julian Carroll. Guessing they matter a bit more to Kentucky then John Edwards' nonsense. The race isn't over and, unless one of them drops out, goes to the convention floor.

iraq
iraq veterans against the war
linjamin mulljenny yuen
aimeee allisondavid solnit
aaron glantz
kpfa
now on pbs
adam kokeshjonathan weismanthe washington post
nprall things considered
mcclatchy newspapers
robin morgan
gloria steinem
marie cocco

starting with howard wolfson's 'HUBdate: Victory In West Virginia' (hillaryclinton.com):

Victory In West Virginia: Hillary won the West Virginia primary by a 41-point margin, earning 67 percent of the vote…In her victory speech, she told supporters that "there are some who have wanted to cut this race short. They say 'give up, it's too hard, the mountain is too high,' but here in West Virginia, you know a thing or two about rough roads to the top of the mountain… I’m in this race for the millions of Americans who know that we can do better in our country, for the nurse on her second shift, for the worker on the line, for the waitress on her feet, for the small business owner, the farmer, the teacher, the coal miner, the trucker, the soldier, the veteran, the college student." Read more.
In Case You Missed It: Watch Communications Director Howard Wolfson on the significance of Hillary’s West Virginia victory: "This isn't just a small victory, this is a huge victory. The media has been telling voters: Barack Obama is the presumptive nominee. It's all over. Give up. Don't come out and vote. And yet, in overwhelming numbers, they’ve come out and voted for Senator Clinton tonight." Watch here.
Why West Virginia Matters: "The Mountain State is used to picking winners. Every nominee has carried the state's primary since 1976, and no Democrat has won the White House without winning West Virginia since 1916. Democrats carried West Virginia in 1992 and 1996, but lost the state - and the White House - in 2000 and 2004. Hillary has predicted victory against Sen. McCain in West Virginia based on the strength of her economic message. Given the attempts by our opponent and some in the media to declare this race over, any significant increase in voter turnout, coupled with a decisive Clinton victory, would send a strong message that Democrats remain excited and energized by Hillary’s candidacy." Read more.
Hitting the Airwaves: Hillary appears on national news programs today including ABC World News, CBS Evening News, CNN’s Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, FOX News, NBC Nightly News, and Noticiero Univision.
By The Numbers: A new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows that "more than six in 10 Democrats…64 percent…say Clinton should remain in the race." A USA Today Poll also shows a majority of Democrats want Hillary to continue. (View the ABC poll and the USA Today article.)
Standing For You: In a Courier-Journal op-ed, Hillary writes to voters in Kentucky: “Day after day, I've been inspired by the people I've met -- people who embrace opportunity, never waver in the face of adversity, meet hard times with hard work, and never stop believing in the promise of America… The challenges we face are great, but the possibilities are endless if we roll up our sleeves and get to work with a president who works her heart out for you every day. I hope you will go to the polls on May 20 and give me the chance to be that president." Read more.
On Tap: Hillary will campaign in South Dakota on Thursday and Oregon on Friday and Saturday.


hillary won! 41% of the vote! and some people want to tell you the race is over. it's not over and we're not letting it be over. we're hitting all the remaining primaries. some of us are setting up shop here in oregon, some are going to kentucky, some are going to south dakota, and ava, c.i. and kat will be in puerto rico (probably with trina) as well as in oregon.

this is going to require a lot of effort and we discussed this at length tonight in a conference call. it means we'll probably be blogging more brief posts between now and june 3rd. every 1 will still be doing it (and non-blogs the common ills and the third estate sunday review will still be publishing). but this race matters and every 1 is pitching in to make sure the fighter who keeps fighting for all of america gets the support she needs.

hillary is the candidate for america. she is the 1 who understands america and speaks to americans. barack's naturally received the support of the african-american community. outside of that, he doesn't have widespread support from democrats. his true independent support (as opposed to non-democratic radicals) dries up in a general election if he gets the nomination. the media is ready to come gunning for him and they will destroy him in a general election. hillary can win the white house and is the best - and now only - choice for democrats.

the non-african-american support barak has received has been some students (who don't always show up at general elections) and the pointy-heads. he's a pointy-head himself and they don't win elections.

latinos, asian-americans, the lgbt community, the working class voters, all these groups are behind hillary.

she can win in november. she doesn't need to invent a 'new math,' she just needs to work with the field the way it is.

the excuses being trotted out for barack's HUGE loss in west virginia are people auditioning their excuses for a general election if barack were to be the nominee.

if the white house matters, you run a race to win it. you don't bet the white house on a crap game. but that's what the obama campaign wants people to believe is possible - that the entire history of the electoral college can be tossed aside and forgotten, that they can invent a completely new strategy and win in november.

they can't. it's a fantasy.

you have to work within the world. you can dream but you have to be practical. barack support is like some 1 getting paid $350 for the week, needing to pay rent and instead spending the $350 on lotto tickets.

if you believe john mccain doesn't belong in the white house, you fight to win. you don't have time for fantasies or pipe dreams. you realize the world we are living in and what is needed to win.

a fighter can win. the only fighter is hillary clinton.

we're going to go all out to get the voters to turnout for hillary.

and if that doesn't happen or if the democratic party refuses to recognize her support, ralph nader will be the choice for the community.

i was laughing as c.i. was dictating the snapshot today (it's funny) and asked, after, 'where did you find out about tyra's show?' c.i. said a call from a friend came in. (tyra?) all i know is i have been asking ava and c.i. to review that show (which i really enjoy whenever i can catch it) since it started. congratulations to tyra for 500 episodes.

kat just said, 'rebecca, if we're going to write quicker in the coming days, we need to use shortcuts!' indeed we do. i've mentioned (or should have) the following:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, Ruth of Ruth's Report, Wally of The Daily Jot, trina of Trina's Kitchen and Marcia SICKOFITRDLZ.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Wednesday, May 14, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, a bombing leads to multiple deaths, al-Maliki pulls a for-show stunt, John Edwards endorses a super-model, Hillary wins West Virginia, and more.

Starting with political realities. There have been reports that US Senator Barack Obama intends to declare himself the Democratic presidential nominee (click here for Tennessee Guerilla Women citing an outlet's report). It's possible that the campaign truly is that stupid. Making that declaration would be a disaster and most have focused on the p.r. when the bigger disaster would be the finanical one. Ava and I discussed this morning a number of realities including that if August seems to long to wait for a Democratic presidential nominee to take it up with the DNC that shoved the convention back so that the Democratic candidate would be running on a level playing field (financially) with the Republican candidate. We didn't factor in the alleged May announcement because we'd honestly forgotten it.

In 2004, John Kerry and the DNC considered delaying the nomination. Not because Kerry was at risk of losing it Why? Because the DNC convention was in July of 2004 and the GOP convention would wrap up in September. The Washington Post, May 2004: "Under federal law, each major-party nominee will receive a check for $74.69 million from the U.S. Treasury to finance the general election. Receipt of the money is triggered by formal acceptance of the nomination, and after that no money raised for the primaries can be used on behalf of each nominee's general election campaign." Read the article. The Kerry campaign and DNC were not talking about delaying the convention, they were talking about no announcement of the nominee being made at the convention and doing that later. That was one idea they were toying with. If the announcement is made, the FEC regulations kick in.

When John McCain's mentioned here we generally note he is the presumed nominee and often include the point that, barring some upset ("heart attack or scandal"), he will be the GOP nominee in the fall. Barack Obama making an announcement this month would result in one of two things. A) The DNC calls him out on it and he has egg on his face that the press laughs at from now until the convention. (Possibly beyond.) B) The DNC doesn't call him on it. If the DNC makes no statement that the nominee has not been decided and it is not in Barack Obama's power to declare himself the nominee, then Barack would be in the presidential spending cycle. In May. Defeating everything the DNC was hoping to achieve this year by pushing the convention back to August. Read the Washington Post article. The 2004 convention would take place but John Kerry would make a speech in August declaring himself the nominee and they intended to argue that the speech was when Kerry became the nominee. By the same token, if Barack declares himself the nominee before the convention and is not loudly rebuked by the DNC, the federal guidelines should kick in and you better believe the Republicans will argue that they should.

When one candidate is left standing (the 'norm' for those especially young), they still aren't the nominee until the declaration. Barack making such a declaration before the convention and doing so while another candidate remains in the race would be viewed as a formal acceptance (seizure) of the nomination and the FEC spending rules would kick in.

Along with the p.r. nightmare Barack would create by declaring himself the nominee, people better get real about what happens in terms of financing. And, if you missed it, Barack's engaged in a dance with the press about how he would finance a general election campaign. Declaring himself the nominee -- with no LOUD rebuke from the DNC -- would take the issue from the hypothetical into the near future into the immediate present. (While the GOP nominee would have months to decide what they intend to do.) Since, unlike 2004, there are still two candidates, Barack declaring himself the nominee to shut out Hillary would most likely have to be seen by the FEC as his nomination unless the DNC loudly rebuked him and the federal finance laws on the general election cycle would immediately kick in.

Barack shouldn't be able to declare himself the nominee. It's a tie and the rules and guidelines say it goes to the convention where it's decided. But if he does try to do that the two most likely outcomes are (A) he enters the general election finance period in May or (B)he is loudly rebuked by the DNC. If it's (A), he defeats the entire purpose of the DNC moving the convention to August for 2008. If it's (B), he becomes the laughingstock of the press and America which suddenly gets an education on how a nominee is decided and Barack's speech becomes his Dan Quayle potato moment (or, as Dan spelled it, "potatoe").

We'll return to politics later in the snapshot. Turning to war resistance, Jesse McLean (The Samia Observer) reports on war resister Richard Droste. Twenty-two-year-old Droste served in Iraq as a medica and then self-checked out after seeing what was really taking place in the illegal war. He says, "I was a stupid one and didn't see what we were really doing there until I was already there for four months." Now he's in Canada, where he's married to a Canadian citizen, and speaking out in favor of the Canadian Parliament granting safe harbor to US war resisters. He and Josh Randall spoke in Sarnia yeterday and he states, "It's not looking good. I'm worried the government in Canada right now is too bought into the American life" and if safe harbor isn't granted "you're going to see hundreds of objectors shipped back stateside, where a lot of them would probably get imprisoned."

Currently, you can utilize the following e-mails to show your support: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. In addition Jack Layton, NDP leader, has a contact form and they would like to hear from people as well. A few more addresses can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

Meanwhile George Bryson (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that a US judge, John D. Roberts, has declared that paratrooper Michael Barnes is a conscientious objector. In the Anchorage Daily News, Bryson explains that Barnes enlisted in 2005 and was sent to Iraq where he realized he was a conscientious objector. Bryson notes: "In a 26-page recommendation to the U.S. District Court, Roberts noted that the Army failed to show 'any basis in fact' to support its decision to deny Barnes' petition to be honorably discharged due to his religious beliefs. At the same time, the record includes strong reasons to justify the request, including Barnes' own testimony, supporting letters from fellow soldiers and the opinion of an Army chaplain, the judge said." He is not the first war resister to require a court interceeding. Robert Zabala is the most recent example and Agustin Aguayo is hoping the Supreme Court will intercede on his behalf.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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 the violence, like the illegal war, never ends. Reuters notes a bombing resulting in mass deaths at an Al Anbar Province funeral. AP notes the death toll is 22 and that: "The bomber blew himself up inside a funeral tent in the village of Abu Minasir, just west of the capital. Police say that funeral was for Taha Obaid, the principle who was shot and killed one day before in his school. There was no reason known for Wednesday's killing, but many members of so-called Awakening Councils, Sunnis who switched allegiance and are now fighting al Qaeda, were attending the funeral. Col. Faisal al-Zubaie, the director of police in nearby Fallujah, says the original death toll was 18, but some people died later.
In other reported violence." Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) notes that the principle was Taha Obaid Zubai and identifies him as "a member of the Islamic Party" and the cousin of "Faisal Zubair, . . .the Fallouja police commander." The "Awakening" Council members are paid $300 US dollars a day by the US government. al Qaeda in Iraq has always been a small presence and the ones on the payroll of the US government today are mainly paid to not attack US service members (as Petraeus and Crocker repeatedly admitted/bragged in their April Congressional testimony). In other reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing targeting Iraqi parliamentarian Ayad Al Samarai which did not kill him but claimed the lives of 3 bystanders and wounded twenty-seven people, a Baghdad 'female suicide bomber' who claimed her own life as well as 1 Iraqi military captain and 1 Iraqi soldier while injuring four more Iraqi soldiers, a Baghdad roadside bombing that targeted another Iraqi parliamentarian, Abdul Kareem Al Samari, and claimed the lives of 3 of his bodyguards (he survived) and left seven people injured, a land mine bombing in Sulaimaniyah claimed the life of an NGO worker with another wounded, while a bag bombing in Sulaimaniyah left three children wounded.

Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports armed clashes in Sadr City continued and claimed 6 lives with fourteen more wounded.

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 5 corpses discovered in Baghdad,
Sulaimaniyah

In other news, Reuters reports puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki has headed to Mosul to oversee the assault and has dubbed the ones under attack "terrorists" and "criminals." al-Maliki last oversaw the failed campaign in Basra which created the current conflict in Sadr City.


In US political news, West Virginia held a primary yesterday. As the Boston Globe headline proclaimed, "Clinton Crushes Obama in W. Va." With 100% precints reporting, Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by 41% and exit polling revealed a number stating that if Barack was the Democratic Party nominee, they would vote for John McCain in November. On NBC's Today Show this morning, Matt Lauer noted that the voters rejected the conventional wisdom the pundits keep pushing: that Barack is the nominee; while Andrea Mitchell noted problems in the upcoming primary in Kentucky "unless there is a major change in the way he connects to people." Barack Obama is in a tie with Hillary Clinton. Neither will finish the primaries with enough delegates awarded to claim the nomination. The rules and guidelines dictate that the decision be made at the August convention. In the meantime the 'invincible' Barack seems even less so but David Gregory assured Lauer that "new math" was being used by the Obama campaign and that they are convinced he can lure Republican states in the last two elections based on his 'appeal' to Latino voters -- an appeal that did not exist in Texas, California or Florida. Hillary declared in her victory speech last night, "After tonight's tremendous victory here in West Virginia, it's clear that the pundits declaring this race over have it all wrong. The voters in West Virginia spoke loud and clear -- they want this contest to go on." If there were a nominee selected by the people, the press-appointed nominee wouldn't have lost yesterday's primary by 41%.

Meanwhile, yes, it's true, John Edwards, former Democratic presidential candidate this year (and 2004 vice presidential nominee) appeared on TV today to make an endorsement. His taped announcement appeared at the end of The Tyra Banks Show where he joined other celebrities (such as Will & Grace's Debra Messing) in congratulating Tyra on her 500th show and wishing her many more episodes. With Merv Griffin and Michael Douglas no longer having TV shows, Edwards spoke live to endorse Barack Obama, the candidate who repeatedly punked him on stage, the one he refused to stand up to, the refusal that led to American voters seeing him as weak. At this late date and considering his non-stop desire to act as if his campaign existed for him to be part of an Obama entourage, no one gives a damn. Edwards joined Barack, Tim Russert and Brian Williams in the tag-team bashing of Hillary -- the debate FAIR didn't think warranted a "media advisory." He was a weak candidate who couldn't finish. His endorsement is meaningless. But it was nice to see him on Tyra playing the grinning fool he does too well.

Today Hillary Clinton explained what's at stake:

There are some people out there who want to declare this race over now, before all the ballots have been counted or even cast. There are some who say they don't know why I'm in this race. So let me tell you why I'm still running.
I'm in this race for everyone who needs a champion. For the hardworking families who are losing sleep over gas prices and grocery costs and mortgage payments and medical bills -- but who never lose that American can-do spirit and optimism.
I'm in this race for the more than 16 million people like you who have supported me -- for the people who have put their hearts into winning this race. You never gave up on me, and I'll never give up on you.
We are in the homestretch. After sixteen months, there are only three weeks left to compete in the final contests. With your help I'm going to keep fighting until every last American has a chance to be heard, and as we learned last night in West Virginia, I know we can win.
Contribute now to keep our campaign going strong.
I'm also in this race because I have the best chance of beating John McCain in November and putting America on the right track.
We proved something in West Virginia last night -- a state every Democratic president has won since 1916. And we proved something in a few other battleground states that have a history of picking presidents. Pennsylvania. Ohio. Arkansas. New Hampshire. New Jersey. New Mexico. Nevada. And, yes, Michigan and Florida.
I am in this race, and so are you, because we both know the stakes in this election are too high to stay on the sidelines.
So let's keep going together, you and me. Let's keep driving our campaign forward, and let's keep winning.
Make a contribution today to help me win.
I want to thank you again for the incredible generosity of spirit you have shown over the course of this campaign. Together, you and I are going to make history.

Turning to Team Nader:

While most of us sit in front of screens typing and searching, Ralph Nader still types out his prose on a manual Underwood typewriter.
On Monday, Mr. Underwood traveled to Google headquarters in Mountain View, California.
Nader is not easily dazzled by technological wonders.
Throughout his career, Nader has confronted head-on the downside of nuclear, automobile, genetic engineering and other industrial advances.
And now he's questioning the enormous amount of time we spend in front of our computers.
Has Google and the information revolution that it leads made our society better?
Or is it just another mass diversion from the reality of the corporate takeover of our democracy?
At Googleland, Nader took questions for an hour.
And then sat down for an eight-minute interview with Youtube.
Nader/Gonzalez is confronting head-on the reality of the corporate takeover of our democracy.
As you know this week, we are raising money to get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in the Land of Lincoln - Illinois.
In just five short days, 462 of you - on-line and face-to-face at Nader/Gonzalez rallies on the West Coast - have donated $43,718.
Thank you.
We need just another 70 of you - our loyal supporters - to donate $100 each - to reach our Illinois goal of $50,000.


iraq
richard drostejesse mclean
nbctodaymatt lauerandrea mitchellcbs newsdean reynolds
mcclatchy newspapers
tina susmanthe los angeles times
the washington post

Early results from West Virginia exit polls show race, education, Barack Obama's former pastor and a plan for a summertime suspension of federal gas taxes all gave Hillary Rodham Clinton a huge advantage in the state's presidential primary.

that's from ap. so going with barack obama for the nomination means losing in november. i won't be kind if they give barack the nomination. that man and his campaign have destroyed the democratic party.

a lot of people have no idea how toxic the obama campaign has been because most americans don't listed to michael basin (that may not be how you spell his name). he's an urban radio gas bag who spins a few tunes, cuts callers off before they can speak and has turned his program over to getting barack elected.

the gas tax holiday mattered to people in west virginia, the same 1 michael basen made fun of day after day, distorted and lied about.

you should hear some of the things he's said about hillary. it woul dmake rush limbaugh bash. and it's a sign of how sick or society is that he got away with it. it's a sign of how little women are valued that he was able to get away with what he's done day after day.

having heard his garbage, i'm not going to be offended when any non-african-american dee jay says something outrageous. michael said outrageous things every day and never got called on it. i don't buy into a double standard.

obviously the so-called fair does. they've never called out the sexism in the media - big or small. they've just worked on inflating barack.

because women don't matter.

that's the big lesson from this election cycle.

women don't matter.

any 1 can insult us, any 1 can trash us.

it's always 'okay' to do that.

they can get away with it.

over and over.

and it's not just the sewer of cable 'news'. it's the nation magazine, the progressive magazine, democracy now and so many more.

it's okay to trash women, it's okay to slam them.

we've also seen that you can trash gays and lesbians. barack obama can and has used homophobia and it wasn't called out. not by fair, not by the nation, not by ...

i can't figure out if they're trying to say that only barack matters or if goes deeper than that.

but certainly there are special rules for barack.

apparently he couldn't compete without them.

he couldn't win a fair fight so they tilted the playing field.

won't happen in the fall so let's hope the democratic party isn't stupid enough to give barack the nomination.

if they are, they get what they deserve: losing in november.

and where was the feminist 'bible' ms. magazine during all of this?

a.w.o.l.

when they finally 'weighed' in on the race, they let fat-ass, closeted lesbian donna brazile pretend she respected both candidates.

MS. MAGAZINE HAS FAILED WOMEN.

let's all accept that.

let's all accept that michelle kort is an IDIOT.

c.i. can rip kort apart and i have a feeling that if the democrats go with barack it will be only a matter of days before c.i. informs america about michelle kort's 'writing.'

it won't be pretty.

but we're not here to pretty it up.

we're here to make sure every 1 knows what's going on and, if the nomination is stolen from hillary, that every 1 knows who participated in the theft.

these people - men & women - who stabbed feminism in the back, tried to stab it to death better pray hillary's gets the nomination because c.i.'s actually been kind in 2008.

part of the reason the snapshots are such a hassle to dictate is that c.i. edits out parts of it. c.i. will say, 'don't take this down, just let me vent in snapshot form for 5 minutes.' and if those were in the snapshots, a lot of people would be hiding their heads right now.

i keep hearing talk in the media about 'the nuclear option' that the hillary campaign might use. i'm sure they don't know what they're talking about.

but c.i. is the nuclear option all the little cowards and liars better worry about. c.i. is pissed. and i wouldn't be surprised if, for instance, a much admired man in trash media got exposed for the attempted rapist he is. i wouldn't be surprised if an editor who stole other people's work (and that can be proven and would be if c.i. brought it up in a snapshot) was outed as the plagiarist they are. i wouldn't be surprised if all the bodies they hoped were buried didn't start floating to the surface.

c.i.'s the 1 who can do it. as my mother-in-law always points out, 'c.i. knows where all the bodies are buried.' that's in part because c.i. knows every 1. that's in part because c.i. can find out anything. that's in part because the papers of so many who pass away generally end up with c.i. either immediately or on down the line.

so, for instance, the hillary hater with a history of arrests for domestic abuse? that might be made public. the hillary hate (woman) who is mentally unstable and has attempted suicide multiple times? probably that would be exposed.

cheaters beware, i wouldn't be at all surprised if c.i. contacted your spouses.

the 'media' has exhibited outrageous behavior this election cycle and i wouldn't be surprised if all their dirty laundry gets aired.

it's been really cute to watch them weigh in on what they thought of hillary's 'ethics' while staying silent on their own. do you know about the 1s using scab labor or undocumented labor that they pay below minimum wage? that they treat like less than human?

do you know about the 1s screaming for hillary's tax returns who cheat on their own taxes?

c.i. may just focus on getting votes for ralph nader but i wouldn't rule out the nuclear option.

this is howard wolfson's 'HUBdate: Election Day in West Virginia' (hillaryclinton.com):

By the Numbers: A new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows that “more than six in 10 Democrats…64 percent…say Clinton should remain in the race." A USA Today Poll also shows a majority of Democrats want Hillary to continue. Read more and more.
"Honored to Have Hillary" Yesterday, Hillary made a campaign stop at Westside High School in Wyoming County, WV. "While the hoarseness in her voice indicated the strains of campaigning, her enthusiasm remained strong…'I'm honored to have Hillary in Wyoming County,’ noted Delegate Richard Browning…'This speaks volumes about who she cares about – the small town people.'" Read more.
On the Air: In a new radio ad, Hillary encourages West Virginians to get out and vote: "We can pick a president. After all, no Democrat has been elected president without winning West Virginia for almost a hundred years." Listen here.
"Clinton Fever Hits Bowling Green" "Clinton fever has come to Bowling Green. 'Kentucky for Hillary' opened a new office and held an open house Monday. Crowds turned out to show support for their favorite candidate. A candidate they hope will stand out in Kentucky next week... 'The woman has a lot of purpose,' said Barbara Burns, a Clinton supporter. 'She wants to serve our country as best she can, and I believe she can do that as president.'" Read more.
SD Endorsement Watch: Yesterday, 41 former South Dakota state legislators and constitutional officers endorsed Hillary for President. "With over 330 years of combined experience," they believe that "South Dakotans need a President who will stand with them." Former State Representative Al Waltman said, "Hillary Clinton has real solutions to our economic problems…and she has the experience and resolve to make those plans a reality." Read more.
Previewing Today: Hillary celebrates election night in Charleston, WV.
On Tap: This Friday and Saturday, Hillary returns to the Beaver State, where she will meet with Oregonians from across the state.

i had 4 e-mails asking if c.i. wouldn't join the crowd if barack got the nomination? no. it's not going to happen. c.i. knows barack's supporters in hyde park and c.i. knows more than the media is telling. (telling currently.) c.i. will not vote for barack. elaine's on record that she won't and if elaine says she won't, you can bet c.i. won't. the 2 of them think alike and know all the same people.

and don't throw out the nonsense about 'what if mccain wins!' if the democratic party cares about not giving mccain the white house, they'll go with hillary. if they don't care, they'll go with barack. elaine and c.i.'s attitude will be 'that's not our problem.'

and it will be the attitude community wide. but i know them both (went to college with both) and when their minds are set, their minds are set.

they do not approve of homophobia or sexism and they do not approve of barack obama who is a fraud.

if barack were so popular, oprah wouldn't have dropped so in popularity after she endorsed him. he's not popular.

he's the 1 you don't know that you want to like. and that's why they have negative campaigning. by the time the g.o.p. is done with him, barack obama will not look like the person people thought he was in february. 'in february' because he's been on a downslide ever since.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Tuesday, May 13, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces a death, West Virigina votes today, the Congress loves veterans . . . as long as they don't expect what's been promised, and more.


Starting with war resistance. The May 2nd snapshot noted war resister Ryan Jackson who turned himself in and was waiting to find out what was next. Courage to Resist reports: "War objector Army PFC Ryan Jackson was temporarily moved from his brig cell yesterday and arraigned at Fort Gordon, Georgia. Ryan was formally changed with multiple counts of AWOL stemming from his attempt to be released from the Army prior to Iraq deployment. He is scheduled to face a special court martial--with a maximum one year prison sentence--on Tuesday, June 3. Since voluntarily returning to Fort Gordon on April 14 and formally applying for a conscientious objector discharge, Ryan has been held in pre-trial confinement at the Charleston Navel Brig. Write to Ryan Donate to Ryan's defense Attend Ryan's court martial."

That's the US, in Canada, war resisters are hoping the Parliament will take action on a motion waiting to be debated. Currently, you can utilize the following e-mails to show your support: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. In addition Jack Layton, NDP leader, has a contact form and they would like to hear from people as well. A few more addresses can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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).


In an editorial, The Honolulu Star-Bulletin observes, "The Bush administration has been lowballing the cost of the war in Iraq since it began more than five years ago, and the true surge will not be known for decades. Internal documents obtained by The Associated Press indicate that the cost of care for disabled veterans will more than double today's exependitures. That may be erring on the low side but still is intolerable. The government now spends $29 billion a year in compensation to injured warriors, including those from previous wars, but that figure is expected to reach $59 billion in 25 years." Jennifer C. Kerr (AP) noted Sunday, "Increasing numbers of U.S. troops have left the military with damaged bodies and minds, a pool of disabled veterans that will cost the nation billions of dollars for decades. . . . VA officials were not eager to talk about reasons for the increases. They declined several requests for interviews. In a written response to a handful of questions, the agency noted a few factors at play in rising costs, such as the aging veteran population, an increase in the number of disability claims and the severity of injuries suffered. Outside experts provided more insight." A Los Angeles Times' editorial entitled "War wounds we don't see" notes: "The cost of treating brain injuries in 2007 ranged from $26,000 for mild cases to $409,000 for severe ones. The survey estimated that costs for treating post-traumatic stress disorder and depression in the first two years after deployment are as high as $6 billion. Pain, heartache and blighted young lives, of course, are incalculable."

Dropping back to the May 9th snapshot: "Today Paul Kane (Washington Post) reports that
'Blue Dog Democrats' are in opposition to a House measure specifically because of 'the creation of a program that would guarantee veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan a year of in-state college tuition for each year served in the war zones'." Rick Maze (Army Times) examines the threat to the bill and quotes American Legion's national commander Mart Conaster explaining AL had to fight "in 19944 for the orginal" GI Bill "even some veterans' groups complained that it would break the treasury. Instead, the GI Bill transformed the economy and has been widely hailed as the greatest domestic legislation Congress has ever passed." John Young (Waco Tribune) observes, "It's only when people return from battle that we become sticklers for decimal points" and goes on to point out that what has the Pentagon and Senator John McCain upset isn't the cost apparently but the fact that education benefits would be available after three and not six years (and that six wasn't required for the original GI Bill). From the April 17th snapshot: "Thomas L. Bush is the Acting Deputy Assistant Secreteary of Defense for Reserve Affairs at DoD. Last month he was telling the press that increasing education benefits for service members will increase 'the risk that many who enter for the benefits will leave as soon as they can use them.' Yesterday he repeated his assertion that DoD 'does not believe that the basic structure of the Montgomery GI Bill is broken'."

The Pentagon's head, Sec of Defense Robert Gates, treked it over to Colorado Springs, CO today to participate in a conservative 'think'-tank's day of seminars. The 'think'-tank is the Heritage Foundation and Gates didn't speak on the "Green Gone Wild: Elevating Nature ABove Human Rights" panel but tax payers have every right to ask exactly what he was doing promoting a private organization's day of seminars to begin with? Josh White (Washington Post) explains the big take-away: "Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates today implored the U.S. military to focus more on wars against insurgents and militias such as the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan, rather than focusing time and money on potential conflicts." That's nothing new and was the point of the April 17th House Armed Service Committee's Strategic Forces Subcomittee hearing as well as Gates' April 21st speech. As Mark Thompson (Time magazine) observed, "Gate's comments richoeted at supersonic speed around the Pentagon and across broader defense networks, as officers -- and contracters -- tried to parse their implications. His bottom line: The Air Force ought to be less concerned with buying more $350 million F-22 fighters for use in future wars that may never happen, and do more to deliver what is needed to fight the wars currently underway 'while their outcome may still be in doubt'." Gates was delivering his standard speech today with a few modifcations.

For instance there was Gates' insult to DC which goes beyond mere 'joke' when you grasp the 'think'-tanks target audience: "It is always good to be away from Washington, DC -- and of course the beauty of the Broadmoor and Colorado Springs make it especially difficult to go back to the place where many folks often become lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." There was also his opinion that the outcome with Vietnam resulted in "profound damage" to the US military military as a result of "the reality of defeat in that war." Surely some revisionary historians are gasping for air having spent the last decades trying to rewrite the defeat. While Gates gave a little honesty about the Vietnam era (only a little) today, Senator Barack Obama gave a lot of lies by repeating right-wing garbage about Vietnam returns being "shunned, demonized and neglected". No, The Nation, The Progressive or any of the other filth that regularly promises to hold his feet to the fire (Tom Hayden, Laura Flanders) someday didn't find the comments worth calling out. But then, they never do, do they? And for the record, this is not the first (or second, or third) attack on the peace movement during Vietnam from Barack. We'll get into his politics more in the politics section.

In Baghdad the Sadr City cease-fire/truce is supposed to be the answer. Anna Badkhen (Christian Science Montior) reports on a problem when ever Iraqis flee their homes to escape fighting -- empty homes that they may or may not be able to reclaim. Badkhen reports that US Capt Andrew Betson states US policy is to allow squatters in the homes and the original inhabitants "basically have to stay displaced, they have to stay wherever they are" and turn the matter over to a local council to resolve. At Salon, Badkhen cites 1st Sgt. James Braet explaining how US monies are used: "In addition to distributing $2,400 micro-grants to businesses that want to reopen inside Saidiyah, and occasionally handing out goodies such as school backpacks and soccer balls to the neighborhood children, the U.S. military here pays a monthly salary of approximately $300 to about 300 people, Braet says. Some of them work on the neighborhood council, and some of them are members of a pro-government Sunni militia called Sons of Iraq" and quote Braet stating, "I'd say 80 percent of these people we pay don't do anything. It's just free money." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reported over the weekend, "Followers of rebel cleric Muqtada al Sadr agreed late Friday to allow Iraqi security forces to enter all of Baghdad's Sadr City and to arrest anyone found with heavy weapons in a surprising capitulation that seemed likely to be hailed as a major victory for Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki. In return, Sadr's Mahdi Army supporters won the Iraqi government's agreement not to arrest Mahdi Army members without warrants, unless they were in possession of 'medium and heavy weaponry'." Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) notes, "Representatives of Iraq's main Shiite Muslim factions signed a deal Monday clearing the way for Iraqi soldiers to operate throughout Sadr City, a vast Baghdad slum that is largely under the control of militiamen loyal to firebrand cleric Muqtada Sadr. The signatures put an official seal to a truce brokered over the weekend by Sadr's political representatives and members of Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's governing alliance." But Selcan Hacaoglu (AP) notes the "fragile cease-fire failed to stop fighting in Baghdad's Sadr City where the latest clashes between Shiite extremists and U.S.-backed Iraqi forces killed 11 men and wounded 19, Iraqi hospital officials said Tuesday." CBS and AP explain, "It was not immediately clear if those killed in the clashes, which escalated early Tuesday, were militants or civilians. There were women and children among the wounded, said hospital officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media." AFP reports that despite the cease-fire being signed "both sides said it will be Wednesday before they fully implement it on the ground." NPR's Ivan Watson (on Morning Edition today) reports on Sadr City and notes that the taxi driver is also a Mahdi fighter who declares, "We can survive the siege for a long time. If Moqtada Sadr gives us the order then we'll go, one by one, and pull the American soldiers from their tanks." Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed (Reuters) report that not all are certain of al-Sadr's control/leadership and quotes Baghdad University professor Kadhum al-Muqdadi on the continued fighting, "It is clear that Sadr does not control all of the armed groups that make up the Mehdi Army. This fighting could last a long time." They also quote Sadr spokesperson Luwaa Sumaisem insisting, "Ceasefires cannot always be implemented immediately. Violations will happen in the first few days. Some armed groups may not be aware of it."

In other reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing injured five people, a US air strike claimed 5 lives and left four injured (cites Imam Ali Hospital), a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed the lives of 5 Iraqi troops and a Kirkuk car bombing that injured ten people. Reuters notes a Mosul bombing that left two children injured.

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses were discovered in Baghdad.

Today (PDF format warning) the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier was killed when his vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device in northwestern Baghdad at approximately 7 p.m. May 13." The total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war currently stands at 4077.

Turning to US politics . . .

Meanwhile AP reports: "The Bush administration repeatedly ignored corruption at the highest levels within the Iraqi government and kept secret potentially embarrassing information so as not to undermine its relationship with Baghdad, according to two former State Department employees. Arthur Brennan, who briefly served in Baghdad as head of the department's Office of Accountability and Transparency last year, and James Mattil, who worked as the chief of staff, told Senate Democrats on Monday that their office was understaffed and its warnings and recommendations ignored."


Let's go to MTV "News" where Gil Kaufman is a certifiable idiot. First he repeats Barack's claim that the US is "facing the largest homecoming since the Second World War." When he needs a fact, he just makes it up and his MOANING THAT HE'S WEARING BLUE JEANS press pack, is too STUPID to say, "Hey, how man troops did the US deploy to Vietnam?" Gil then decares that there is a "near-mathematical impossibility of her beating Obama for the nomination" -- what?????? Look, you're a reporter -- a bad one -- but a reporter. When you don't know what you're talking about, you 'research' it (make phone calls). Here's reality: neither Hillary or Barack will reach the magic number. Unless one of them drops out, this could go to the convention. If it does, there are no "pledged delegates." Super delegates can change their minds at any time. But, at the convention, pledged delegates make their own decisions. As Big Tent Democrat (TalkLeft) observes, it's probably not a good idea for Barack's campaign to be applauding a pledged delegate to Hillary (Jack B. Johnson) who states he'll "support Obama at the August convention."

Can Johnson, sent by the state (he's not a super delegate) to be a Hillary delegate, change his vote at the convention? Absolutely. And those of us who survived Miami in 1972 know very well that on the floor of the convention there are no promises. George McGovern himself proved that as he stabbed women OVER AND OVER in the back and sent out a woman to try to explain his betrayals and justify them. (Coward then, coward now: George McGovern. See Rebecca's "george mcgovern, start worrying about the after-life.") But Barack's campaign's applauding that. Good. Maybe it will make the press wake up to how STUPID they are. There is no winner. There will be no winner. There is a set number that the nominee has to reach. If no one reaches it and there's more than one standing, the issue is supposed to be resolved at the convention. Translation, NO ONE HAS A LOCK on the nomination. No one. Now those old enough to remember past Democratic nominations decided on the convention floor could explain that but the elders went AWOL in the party sometime ago, mouthing meaningless patter about 'movement.'


Christopher Hayes (The Nation, gets a link because he's a nice guy) can't understand why the media notes Barack's religion by stating he 'says he's a Christian.' Allow us to break it down for you. Thus far, mainstream journalists have attempted to locate Barack's baptismal record. Can't find it. And a number with the church when Barack started showing up there say (to the press) it's due to the fact that Barack wasn't baptised. What did he do May 4th? What he always does. On NBC's Meet The Press, he insisted he was "uh a Christian" and then went on to list what Wright had done for his family including baptizing Barack's children. But where was Barack's baptism. I know it's hard for a lot in Panhandle Media to grasp due to not being religious or not being part of a religion that requires baptism. However, Barack says he's a Christian and says he's a member of a church. The church and the faith requires those coming to the Lord to be baptiszed -- regardless of age. Those changing churches can simply have their baptismal records forwarded (the church secretary takes care of that). If someone's not grasping it, if Barack wasn't baptized -- and that is becoming the consensus in the press -- he's yet again misrepresented himself to the public. He can try to fix it by claiming, "Well, I came to God on my own." But he hasn't said that. He's stated he's a Christian and stated that a church was his church. Allowing people to believe he'd been baptized in that faith. If he never was, he misrepresented and that will be one of the kinder things said about him. And that is what will rally the religious right to the polls for John McCain in November. If you don't grasp that, you don't grasp religion. Here's Barack speaking to Tim Russert from Meet The Press' transcript (which leaves out the 'uh-uh's):

And, as a consequence, when Reverend Wright, who married me and baptized our, our children, when he made those statements, or I learned of those statements that I found so objectionable, I, I .

What's missing? Barack saying Wright baptized him. (Again, the press consensus is becoming that it never happened.) He doesn't mention it in either of his books. A grown man getting baptised, you'd assume he'd have an anecdote. This would be an issue in the general election if he got the nomination.

If you disagree, note this from conservative ("crunchy con") Rod Dreher (Dallas Morning News):

His former pastor the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is an unreconstructed '60s radical, a fire-breathing disciple of James Cone's period-piece black liberation theology. Mr. Obama wrote in his 1995 autobiography, Dreams From My Father, about his attraction to the leftist pastor's church as a vehicle for social change. If black nationalism would uplift the race, he wrote, "then the hurt it might cause well-meaning whites, or the inner turmoil it caused people like me, would be of little consequence."
That's a remarkable admission of a racialized "ends justify the means" morality. It helps explain why Mr. Obama was willing to stick with a crackpot like Dr. Wright. It also might explain why an up-and-coming Barack Obama found nothing particularly wrong with rubbing political elbows with Bill Ayers, the Chicago university professor and onetime fugitive member of the revolutionary, communist Weather Underground.

You can use the link to read the entire piece. If Barack wasn't baptised, the GOP attack will include that and it will effect voters (including some of Barack's core support because the word for many church goers -- of all races -- will be stronger than "fraud"). Meanwhile, Egalia (Tennessee Guerilla Women) notes, "So many women in the media have remained silent" during the non-stop sexist attacks on Hillary and post a clip of ABC's This Week where Cokie Roberts (who has called it out before during this election cycle) again pointed out the double standards. Marie Cocco (link goes to Real Clear Politics -- Cocco is syndicated by the Washington Post) appears to write a burial for the Clinton campaign (it's not over, Marie) and finds her voice to speak out against some of the sexism (left out of the list are the writings at the website which reposts her for free). It's a greatest hits of the most obvious. Cocco notes: "I will not miss the deafening, depressing silence of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean or other leading Democrats, who to my knowledge (with the exception of Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland) haven't uttered a word of public outrage at the unrelenting, sex-based hate that has been hurled at a former first lady and two-term senator from New York." Don't stop there, Marie. As we all know Laura Flanders has defended Laura Bush, Condi Rice and countless other GOP women in print and over the radio when they were attacked for or discriminated against due to gender. But the self-loathing lesbian Laura Flanders couldn't call it out. And The Nation thought it was cute to print all those sexist attacks on Hillary, as did The Progressive, as did . . . The entire Panhandle Media. This will not be forgotten. And it's not hurting feminism, it only fuels greater strength.

And just as the sexism will not be forgotten, the campaign isn't over. Fernando Suarez (CBS News) quotes Hillary explaining, "West Virginia has a record of picking presidents. West Virginia made it possible for President Kennedy to become president of the United States. West Virginia in the general election votes for the winner and if West Virginia had voted for our Democratic nominee in 2000 and 2004 we wouldn't have had to put up with George Bush." Yesterday 41 former South Dakota state legislators and Constitutional Officiaers endorsed Hillary. I guess they didn't hear that the race was over? Or maybe they weren't foolish enough to believe the spin. The race isn't over. There are two candidates left in the Democratic primary and they are in a dead-heat. Neither will finish the race with enough pledged delegates to be declared the winner or to declare themselves the winner. And while the Obama Groupies run to a largely compliant press yelling "Shut it down!" the people want it to continue. The new ABC News - Washington Post poll finds 64% want the race to play out. Read Elaine's "Debates" in context of the poll and realize how badly Panhandle Media failed America by refusing to call out Barack's refusal to debate. Lindsay Levin (HillaryClinton.com) points out, "In the face of grim poll numbers, the Obama campaign has attempted to dismiss today's outcome despite the fact that Sen. Obama has outspent us on advertising, has more staff in the state, and more than double the number of offices. He has also benifted from the support of the most high-profile endorses in West Virginia -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller and Congressman Nick Rahall. By every measure, the Obama campaign has waged an aggressive campaign in the Mountain State. Despite being the so-called 'presumptive nominee' and benefiting from these advantages, Sen. Obama has been unable to close a significant gap in the polls. Sen. Clinton has already won Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan. With a win in West Virginia, Sen. Clinton will have once again proven her greater ability to win in the key swing states." Lastly Jake Tapper (ABC News) notes how no matter what happens in the Obama campaign, "It's never my fault!" is the cry of Barack.

iraq
paul kanethe washington post
josh white
anna badkhen
alexandra zavisthe los angeles times
leila fadelmcclatchy newspapers
fernando suarez
jake tapper

that's isaiah's latest comic entitled 'Electable?' about the unelectable crazy barack obama who doesn't even know how many states are in the united states.

how can you not the number of states in the country and run for president? maybe it's time to institute a basic competency test that candidates have to take.

you really need to grasp how stupid barack is that he doesn't know how many states are in the u.s.

who's the real candidate left standing? hillary! this is howard wolfson's 'HUBdate: Getting Out the Vote in West Virginia' (hillaryclinton.com):

Today In West Virginia: Hillary hosts a "Solutions for the American Economy" Town Hall in Clear Fork, a "Solutions For America" rally in Logan, and an "Old-Fashioned Political Rally" with Governor Joe Manchin in Fairmont. Mother’s Day In Grafton, WV: "Sunday was Mother's Day, but U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did not take the day off. Instead, she was campaigning here at the birthplace of the holiday. Clinton, along with her daughter Chelsea, toured the home of Mother's Day founder Anna Jarvis early in the afternoon. The two Clintons stopped briefly to wave to onlookers who had braved the rain to line the road in order to catch a glimpse of the presidential candidate. 'Happy Mother's Day,' Clinton shouted to the spectators." Read more.
In Case You Missed It: Read and listen to Hillary's Mother's Day remarks here.
Sunday Show Appearances: On CBS' Face the Nation yesterday, Campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe said, “We still have seven million Democrats yet to vote. We have West Virginia this Tuesday...We're up in Kentucky. We're up in Puerto Rico."…Communications Director Howard Wolfson told Fox News Sunday: "We as a party have to be able to compete in places like West Virginia and Kentucky."
Donating To Hillary: Dalton Hatfield, an 11-year-old boy from WV, "presented former President Bill Clinton with a check for $440 after Friday’s rally at the Williamson Fire Station...Hatfield feels so strongly that Hillary Clinton should be the next president he not only sold his bicycle, but video games and anything else he could find that 'I could make money with’ to donate to the former first lady's bid for the Democratic nomination." Read more.
On Tap: Hillary will spend election night on Tuesday in Charleston, WV.

i'm not really sure what i'm going to talk about tonight besides cherie booth blair. that's tony blair's wife and, in 2002, as they were preparing for a vacation and as england and the u.s. was gearing up for the illegal war, cherie had a miscarriage.

i know my regular readers know that until giving birth last year, i miscarried over and over. over and over. for years and years.

so discovering today that tony blair's reaction to the miscarriage was to meet with his cabinet and strategize what to tell the press (while cherie's miscarrying - not after, while she's miscarrying) really pisses me off. it's obvious (links in snapshot) that it upset cherie. she appears to have moved away from that and good for her.

but i think even less tony blair now and i didn't think that was possible. forget the physical pain (it can be like a non-stop period, cramps and all - and cherie writes about being in pain and bleeding so her miscarriage was physical painful), you're also dealing with the reality that you're not going to have a baby. you've been carrying a fetus inside you and dreaming about it becoming a boy or a girl. and while you're misccarrying, you're in pain - physical pain - and feeling like it's all over. it is a major blow. it's a major grieving experience.

and she calls him to tell him that she's miscarrying and he's off taking meetings. now these weren't regular meetings. if he couldn't get away that would be 1 thing. i'd feel sorry for her but think, 'he's the prime minister and things were schelued.' but he's off strategizing what to tell the press. and along with that he's also informing gordon brown and others (not in on the strategizing) about it. she is miscarrying, she's not even at the hospital yet and tony blair's running all over the place telling people and talking about it and planning how to spin it.

i am so offended for her. she appears to have moved beyond it and good for her. but that was just disgusting. he is a disgusting person.

and get this, she's still not at the hospital when he calls (again) to inform her that he and his buddies have decided they're going to tell the press. she's still miscarrying, he's nowhere to be found and she's being told that what she's going through right now, they're going to tell the press.

he says if they don't tell the press, people will think there's a problem with the upcoming war. he's whining on the phone to cherie in the middle of her miscarriage. he is disgusting, he is self-obsessed and he has no idea of what's going on.

now i lost any affection for tony blair when he became bully boy's little poodle (before the iraq war). i lost any respect for him when he cheerleaded england into the illegal war. and i really never thought i could think any of less of him. but after reading the excerpt of cherie booth blair's book, i loathe tony blair.

closing with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Monday, May 12, 2008. Chaos and violence continues, a 'truce' in Sadr City, bombings in northern Iraq, the US presidential race and more.

Starting with war resistance, Iraq Veterans Against the War chair Camilo Mejia, author of Road from Ar Ramadi: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia, is the first Iraq War veteran to publicly resist the illegal war. Cindy Von Quednow (The Daily Sundial) reports, "An an immigrant, Mejia has strong opinions about the notion that Latinos are targeted by recruiters to join the armed forces. '(Recruiters) use the lack of benefits of Latinos and immigrants to lure people in,' he said. 'The biggest problem is that they don't give all the information, they only give the pretty information, which is not the true picture.' According to the Pew Hispanic Center, Latinos made up 13 percent of the enlisted military personnel in 2006, compared to 18 percent of the civilian population, and there is an effort to increase those numbers to 22 percent. As reported in The New York Times, the Pentagon started an advertising campaign through the Spanish-language media to exclusively appeal to Latinos. 'It you look at documents released by the Pentagon and the federal government, they have deliberate attempt to recruit and socialize young Chicanos and Latinos for the military,' said Rosa Furumoto, assistant professor of Chicano/a Studies at CSUN."

While young Latinos are under attack in the US, in Canada, war resisters are hoping the Parliament will take action on a motion waiting to be debated. Currently, you can utilize the following e-mails to show your support: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (http://us.f366.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. In addition Jack Layton, NDP leader, has a contact form and they would like to hear from people as well. A few more addresses can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes 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).

Jamie Leigh Jones was a contractor for Halliburton's KBR, sent to Iraq, gang-raped by her co-workers and held in a pod. Maddy Sauer (ABC News) reports that Jones case will go to court despite Halliburton's absurd claim that arbitration can be used and that District Judge Keith Ellison "wrote in his order Friday that Jones' claims of sexaul assault, battery, rape, false imprisonment and others fall beyond the scope of her cemployment." Previous ABC News coverage of Jones can be found here and here. Sonia Verman (Times of London) reports, "The decision has opened the door for other American women who have reported sexual assaults in similar circumstances to challenge clauses in their employment contracts restricting such claims to private arbitration and keeping them out of court. It comes at a time when the US Congress is examing whether the Government is adequately protecting contractors who allege sexual assault." Meanwhile Emma Schwartz (US News & World Reports) notes that Alaa ("Alex") Mohammad Ali ("Iraqi-born Canadian) will be "the first civilian contractor in Iraq" to be court-martialed "under the military justice system". The Orillia Packet & Times notes, he "is accused of stabbing another contractor four times during a fight in February on a base west of Baghdad" and that this is "the first such military prosecution since the Vietnam War."

Meanwhile a book in England, or at least a section of it (excerpt here at the Times of London), has caught the attention of many including Rosalin Ryan (Guardian of London), Robert Winnett (Telegraph of London) and The Hindu Times. The book, by attorney Cherie Booth Blair, includes a section detailing her 2002 miscarriage and how her husband, then-Prime Minister Tony Blair, 'handled' it. Despite phoning that he'd be there "straight away," Booth Blair writes, Tony instead ran off to inform Alastair and the two men phoned her to tell her that the Blairs' announced vacation presented a problem because with the Iraq War impending, if the vacation were cancelled (as it would need to be) with no explanation, people might assume it had something to do with the upcoming war. Booth Blair was informed that her miscarriage needed to be announced to the media immediately. Booth Blair writes: "They had decided that the best thing was to tell the press that I'd had a miscarriage. I couldn't believe it. There I was, bleeding, and they were talking about what was going to be the line to the press. I put down the receiver and lay there staring at the ceiling, as pain began to grip."

In Iraq, tensions between northern Iraq and Turkey continue. Hurriyet reports: "Turkish jets bombed on Sunday the Nerwa and Rekan areas in northern Iraq, the website of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) reported. Turkish jets also bombed mountainous areas in the Zakho district of Duhok province earlier on Sunday, PUK media reported, adding Turkish artillery sporadically shelled the same areas." Reuters quotes Iraq's Kurdish Peshmerga security forces spokesperson Jabbar Yawar stating that the bombings resulted in no deaths or wounded. Suzan Fraser (AP) reminds, "Turkey has launched several cross-border aerial attacks this year to stamp out PKK bases in northern Iraq. The military also sent ground troops into Iraq in February for an eight-day cross-border incursion in pursuit of the rebels."

Further into Iraq, Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reported over the weekend, "Followers of rebel cleric Muqtada al Sadr agreed late Friday to allow Iraqi security forces to enter all of Baghdad's Sadr City and to arrest anyone found with heavy weapons in a surprising capitulation that seemed likely to be hailed as a major victory for Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki. In return, Sadr's Mahdi Army supporters won the Iraqi government's agreement not to arrest Mahdi Army members without warrants, unless they were in possession of 'medium and heavy weaponry'." The immediate impact? Hala Jaber (Times of London) reported: "A humvee military vehicle idles on a broad avenue as an Iraqi army soldier walks nonchalantly past without so much as a glance at the body slung across the bonnet.The dead man's trousers have been pulled down to his ankles, exposing white underwear below a torn T-shirt drenched in blood from wounds to his chest and side. Behind is a second Humvee with another body sprawled over the front, arms and legs outstretched. On his white shirt, a large bloodstain indicates the wound that may have killed him. A soldier sitting on the roof dangles his legs over the windscreen and seems to prod the corpse's stomach with his boot." Sunday Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) noted that Sadr City residents "blame both" the US-Iraqi fighters and the Mahdi militia and that they do not expect the cease-fire will hold. Leila Fadel noted that residents report the truce did not stop the violence and quotes Suham Bresam explaining, "This agreement happened and I was up all night from the gunshots and strikes." Simon Assaf (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) notes the estimated 800 civilians "feared dead" in the long assault on Sadr City and how many more have been turned into refugees in order to avoid the slaughter. As the assault continues Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports today that Sadr City hospital have received 3 dead and eighteen wounded. AP reports that the cease-fire was signed today and that it is "a four-day cease-fire" as well as that there are doubts as to whether or not it will be followed.

Turning to other reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Baghdad roadside bombings resulting in three people being injured, Hussein Shaban was killed by a car bombing outside Mosul, an Al Anbar Province roadside bombing claimed the lives of 2 children, 2 bodyguards and "Awakening" Council member Abu Qutaiba.

Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Col Nibras Fadel Abbas of the Ministry of Defense was shot dead in Baghdad today, a Baghdad armed clash resulted in three people being wounded, one person wounded in a Sulaimaniyah Province shooting, and, dropping back to yesterday, a women's shelter in Sulaimaniyah was shot up by unknown persons with one woman being wounded.

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

Today (PDF format warning) the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier was killed after being struck by an improvised explosive device during a route clearance patrol at approximately 9:20 p.m. May 11 in northwest Baghdad. The Soldier was quickly transported to the medical facility where he later died of his wounds." 4076 is currently the number of US service members who have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.

Yesterday Tom Vanden Brooks (USA Today) reported on US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates sudden chatty nature on stop-loss and how he regrets that it was "my decision to go to 15-month tours" which "made it impossible for them" to reduce the numbers stop-lossed. What's really the point of Chatty Gates? Friday Julian E. Barnes (Los Angeles Times) reported that stop-loss/backdoor draft numbers are increasing again: "number steadily declined through May 2007, when it hit 8,540. But since then, the number of soldiers subjected to stop-loss orders began to increase again, reaching 12,235 in March 2008." Gates is yacking it up because George W. Casey and US Army Secretay Pete Geren testified to the Senate Armed Services Committe (Feb. 26th) and committee chair Carl Levin specifically asked about stop-loss and was told that the number was "a little less than 8,000 today" -- which would be a LIE since the lowest it ever reached was 8,450 and that was in May of 2007 and the number then began it's climg to 12,235 (March 2008 -- a week after their testimony) and that the Army wanted to "move away from" using stop-loss. As Levin continued to ask for answers, Geren stated it might drop to 7,000. It was already well above 8,000 (it didn't leap to 12,235 one week later in a huge bound) and it never got below 8,000 over the previous 12 months. Geren, with Casey beside him nodding along, LIED to Congress. Levin asked specific questions and was LIED to. Now Gates is a on yack-fest to get 'information' out there and to shift the focus to that and not the LIE. Geren LIED. The same way the VA lied to Congress about the number of veterans' suicides.

Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times' Babylon & Beyond) notes: "Government officials had been talking about it for months. But when the offensive finally began Saturday to clear the northern city of Mosul of insurgents, residents were caught off guard." Talking about it? Did someone miss that Barack Obama, April 8th, was praising it in the Senate during The Petraeus & Crocker Variety Hour? Praising it, acting like it had taken place. Turning to US politics. PBS' NewsHour on Friday featured THREE IDIOTS, chief among them Mark Shields who wants to claim to be a "hard working American." Old idiot should have retired a long time ago so it is hilarious to watch him claim that Hillary Clinton needs to exit "gracefully." Shields won't exit period. Mark Sheilds turns 70 this month (May 25th). Exactly when he is going to exit? Exactly when will his tired ass be taken off television or does he really think anyone believes he's from the "left" all these years later or that anyone needs his nonsense? 70 years old and he wants to pretend anyone else needs to exit? Get real, Mark, it's time to go. Step down and allow someone younger -- even ten years younger would be something at this point -- to step up to the plate.

We don't do "Don't Run! and "Drop Out!" pieces in this community (community-wide, it doesn't happen). Someone's campaign may appear over to us and we may note that. We don't then say, "Drop out!" (We didn't with Dennis Kucinich when he demonstrated that he would give votes away in Iowa. That's when his campaign died. Had he stayed in, were he still in today, there would be no "Drop Out Dennis!" piece.) Those pieces -- whether aimed at Ralph Nader, Cindy Sheehan, or whomever -- go against the beliefs in democracy that the US is supposed to have. Someone wants to run, they run. Someone wants to stay in the race, they stay in. It's really basic but it's something that a number of people have trouble grasping and they need to start answering the question: "Do you believe in democracy?" Their actions indicate that they do not.

In terms of the Democratic primaries a few things. Iowa and New Hampshire should not have a lock on who goes first. That's been the position community-wide (and we wrote about it at Third -- over and over -- beginning in 2005). Iowa's caucus is prone to theft and not open (ibid). Caucuses are not used in the general election so they shouldn't be used in any primaries (ibid). Every vote should be counted (ibid). Everyone who wants to run for public office has a right to (ibid). No candiate 'steals' votes from another. Everyone gets the ones they get and if they lose by X% that is their own loss (ibid). Those are the basic beliefs that this community has operated under since it started. In terms of this election cycle, the only thing to add to that is that this site (The Common Ills), Wally and Cedric (at their sites) have all argued for Michigan and Florida's delegates to be seated and done that going back months and months well into 2007 -- long before either state held their primary (and Wally, Cedric and I were making comments that the delegates will need to be seated and the totals honored in roundtables at Third long before that -- Wally lives in Florida, this has always been a primary issue to him). We have not adopted to a position helpful to 'our candidate,' we have stayed consistent with our core democratic beliefs.

Now the DNC has repeatedly lied to states -- presidential election cycle after presidential election cycle -- that there's no harm in the order. It may happen, they've said, that states pushed all the way to the end of the calendar could end up being the deciding factors! It just might be, they've lied, that the final states could decide it! Well now the race continues and shame on anyone in an elected office who tries to call it off or says someone needs to drop out. The campaign's still going (West Virginia's primary is tomorrow, Kentucky & Oregon's on May 20th, Puerto Rico's on June 1st and then Montana & South Dakota on June 3rd.) Every four year, Iowa and New Hampshire get their asses kissed by every candidate and the rest of the states suffer. It's not fair, it's never been fair. It's not right, it's never been right. 2012 should see real changes from the DNC. That should include doing away with caucuses which are not used in a general election, which allow people to 'vote' in 'rounds' and which are useless. That should include immediately implementing a rotating schedule for state primaries so that all states will have a chance at being the first ones (yes, even Alaska).

To cover a few more points, we don't waste our time on faux candidates. Meaning Cynthia McKinney. When idiot Ted Glick stated on Democracy Now! that McKinney (who is not yet the Green Party nominee) knew she couldn't win the presidency and was defining 'victory' by getting 5%, that was idiotic. That was stupid. But he said it. When her campaign turned around and linked to the interview stating he speaks for her, this community was under no obligation to ever again give a damn. And, if she's the nominee, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC should shut her out of the debates because a candidate (who doesn't even have her party's nomination) who states that 'victory' would be 5% of the vote isn't a real candidate. They should shut her out and she has no right to complain if they do. Ralph Nader's not saying, "I'm going for X% of the vote." Nader's running to win. Though you hear over and over that Ralph's running a vanity campaign (you heard that in 2004, 2000, 1996 . . .), he is not (and has not) run a vanity campaign. He's running to win. He may win or he may not win but he's running the best campaign he can and in a race to win it. Nader has a right to be on stage taking part in all debates. I don't know right-wing third parties. If their candidates are running to win (and not announcing "I can't win, I just want a percent of the vote!") then they should be allowed on stage at the debates as well. That's a basic of democracy as surely as count every vote: candidates in a race to win it are real candidates -- not based on polling, not based on fund raising. It's not only that they have a right to be included it's also that in a democracy those 'deciding' have an obligation to include them.

Those are the basics and we'll touch on them throughout the next section. Another basic, how many states are there in the US? Answer: 50. Who said this: "Over the last 15 months, we've traveled to every corner of the United States. I've now been in 57 states, I think one left to go. One left to go. Alaska and Hawaii I was not allowed to go, even though I really wanted to visit but my staff would not justify it."? It wasn't John McCain, it was Barack Obama. Video here. The NewsHour link earlier will find Barack saying "I said uh on Brian Williams yesterday" . . . Not 'to' Brian Williams. Sorry to break it to Barack but there's no Brian Williams Show to say that on. The program's title remains NBC Nightly News, the same title it's had since Barack was a child going by "Barry." (It was Huntley-Brinkley Report until July 31, 1970.) This comes on top of his absurd claim last week (in his North Carolina victory speech) that the media refused to notice where he was insisting his father (a Kenyan) was buried (in Kenya) with a US flag draping the coffin. (Be sure to check out Isaiah's comic on Barack's blunders.) I'm sure some will rush foward -- the same who chuckled at Barack's slam to John McCain last week, the ageism, no doubt -- to insist Barack's tired. Now I know the Bully Boy's made it look easy by delegating so much of his work to Dick Cheney; however, the president of the United States is supposed to be one of the hardest and most demanding in the country. If Barack's not up for the job, voters need to know that now. He's already required a tropical vacation (Virgin Islands -- March right after he gave the nearly 4,000 word speech) and a day of rest last Wednesday. Barack Obama is young for a presidential candidate (46-years-old) currently. And he's having trouble keeping up with the campaign schedule? And he wants to smear John McCain with little jabs? (Covered in Friday's "Iraq snapshot" and Ava and I note it in "TV: Tiny Tots"). He thinks he can accuse McCain of "losing his bearings" after all of that plus repeatedly calling Matt Lauer "Tim" last week?

Now he's decided to write off campaigning in many states (he can't win them) and his campaign is allegedly calling people in those states and telling them the race is over? That's as phoney as targeting certain areas with fliers stating the wrong date for an election or telling some communities that anyone with an outstanding traffic ticket or warrant will be arrested if they vote. He should be ashamed of his campaign. He should be ashmed of himself for writing off states -- were he to become the nominee, he would need to have used the opportunity to introduce himself to residents of West Virginia. Big Tent Democrat (TalkLeft) notes "that Democratic Presidential candidates carried West Virginia in every recent election except the last 2". Jeralyn (TalkLeft) again stresses the issue of the electoral college map and notes Bringiton (Corrente) results where the idea of sharing delegates is tossed out and the winner takes all system is used (as it is in the general election for all but two states). In that match-up, based on the states that have voted thus far (and tossing Oregon over to Barack before their primary), Hillary comes out the strongest. Bringiton's point is the one that NOW on PBS addressed two Fridays ago when David Brancaccio spoke with Willie Brown and Dan Schnur and it was noted that if the system the Democrats are currently using was used by the GOP, John McCain would still be facing Mike Huckabee; however, under the winner takes all system, Hillary would have been declared the Democratic primary winner long ago. So, to be clear, the GOP will be putting up a nominee (barring any unforseen circumstances) who has played on the winner take all field and the Democrats may very well go with a candidate who's been given delegates that really don't matter even though he lost the states (Schnur compared it to Little League giving every player a trophy). Anglachel (Anglache's Journal) asserts, "I will simply repeat what I've been saying for weeks now: Hillary = nominee= vicotry; Obama = nominee = defeat. Neither candidate has enough pledged delgates to get to 2209 votes without super delegates, so it is up to the SDs to decide the fate of the party in this electoral cycle. The nominee isn't the person with the most at a certain point in time, it is the person who first hits 2209."

Meanwhile John Edwards' supporter John Mashek (US News & World Report) weighs in on John Edwards "playing games with his preference for his party's nomination. Truth be told, it really doesn't matter at this late hour. Edwards holds a meager handful of pledged delegates, and even they can act as free agents at the convention in Denver." What's he talking about is John Edwards was on Face The Nation (CBS) Sunday (link has text and video and, PDF format warning, transcript here). As Edwards noted himself, she doesn't need any advice so why are so many rushing to give it to her? Rushing to tell her to drop out? Fernando Suarez (CBS News) reports that the latest Suffolk University Poll shows Hillary Clinton with a huge double-digit lead in West Virginia -- a 36 point advantage over her opponent Barack Obama. But the most striking figure in the poll is that Clinton is viewed more favorably than Obama". Doesn't sound like a loser. Suarez also notes that "no Democratic candidate has won the White House without winning West Virginia since 1916." Egalia (Tennessee Guerilla Women) notes Barack's absences from West Virginia and Kentucky and wonders, "If Obama views it as pointless to campaign in the Kentucky and West Virginia primaries, why would he bother showing up in the general?" Good point but it also needs to be noted that this was his Michigan strategy. Idiots keep repeating, "He wasn't on the ballot!" He took his name off. He did so for the same reason he's refusing to campaign in Kentucky and West Virginia right now: He doesn't think he can win. The plan with Michigan, which he knew he couldn't win (and he couldn't, he was right on that) was to take his name off so that he could say of Hillary's victory (she was expected to win and she did), "It doesn't matter, I wasn't on the ballot." Just as his trashy campaign will attempt to argue that Kentucky and West Virginia's votes don't matter "because he didn't campaign!" He took his name off the Michigan ballot after the internal campaign voting showed him losing to Hillary and John Edwards. His own campaign polling showed him coming in third. He took his name off the ballot (as did Edwards) and then used that to suck up to the residents of Iowa and New Hampshire.

Hillary's still in the race because the race is a dead-heat. The cries for her to drop out are coming because Barack's campaign knows it does reject their narrative that he is the choice of Democratic voters when the upcoming primaries take place. Actually, had the media been paying attention, Indiana recently made that argument. He lost, she won. Were he the choice why, in May, would he be losing to her? He's not the choice. It's a tie, neither will reach the necessary number of delegates awarded by states. The decision should be mae on the convention floor unless one of them drops out. Whining about August being so late in the year? Blame the DNC. They were the fools that moved it back. The mistaken belief is that part of John Kerry's losing campaign's failure was in fundraising -- and by being so far ahead (so many weeks) of the GOP convention, the July DNC convention was the reason. He had so many more weeks where he needed to buy advertising! Boo-hoo. But if August is too far away, blame the DNC for pushing the convention so far back this year.

Barring one of them dropping back, the race should go to the convention room floor. Those are the rules. I don't know why so many big babies -- alleged adults -- are afraid of a convention floor fight? The Demcractic Party used to have them all the time. Maybe it's scary when one candidate is vetted and the other isn't? Texas Darlin (TaylorMarsh.com) notes this from Chuck Neubauer and Tom Hamburger (Los Angeles Times) report on Barack's relationship with Chicago business person Robert Blackwell Jr.: "After After an unsuccessful campaign for Congress in 2000, Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama faced serious financial pressure: numerous debts, limited cash and a law practice he had neglected for a year. Help arrived in early 2001 from a significant new legal client -- a longtime political supporter. Chicago entrepreneur Robert Blackwell Jr. paid Obama an $8,000-a-month retainer to give legal advice to his growing technology firm, Electronic Knowledge Interchange. It allowed Obama to supplement his $58,000 part-time state Senate salary for over a year with regular payments from Blackwell's firm that eventually totaled $112,000. A few months after receiving his final payment from EKI, Obama sent a request on state Senate letterhead urging Illinois officials to provide a $50,000 tourism promotion grant to another Blackwell company, Killerspin." Darlin notes that "the day after Obama wrote his letter soliciting state funds for Blackwell's company, Obama's U.S. Senate campaign received a $1,000 donation from Blackwell." There are things like this throughout Barack's 'career.' Panhandle Media has inflated him and you hear that he was a "community organizer" (he did get-out-the-vote work), a "law professor" (he lectured -- the Chicago university may cover his butt, we won't here, reality is reality, he was a lecturer), a "Civili Rights" or "Civil Liberties" attorney. Don't hold your breath waiting to hear about those cases because they don't exist. Since he hasn't provided any (again, they don't exist), journalists are checking the Chicago docket (and finding nothing). There seems to be some delusion in the Obama campaign that no one will ever ask questions. (They're backed up by the fact that the many in the media still think Bill Ayers-Barack Obama is the connection when, in fact, the connection is to Bernardine Dohrn and all who know Bernardine and Bill -- myself included -- no Bill never does a thing without her say so.) That's what's behind the attempts to push Hillary out of the race. If Barack's get the nomination, the thinking is, the Dems are stuck with him and they'll have to defend him from whatever scandal (I count four brewing in the press and it will be interesting to see which one gets reported first). The thinking is that if they sell this lemon and it's driven off the car lot, it won't matter, people will be stuck with Barack. They'll have to defend for things that they do not approve of. It's a losing strategy and it's a loser for the Democratic Party.

Jennifer Agiesta and Jon Cohen (Washington Post) reported Saturday that, yes, Jeremiah Wright is making a difference in voting with presumably White churchgoers the most vocal while "African American churchgoers were not uniform in their response to the uproar surrounding Wright's controversial views, which the preacher rekindled the week before the primaries. Nearly half of black weekly churchgoers in Indiana said Wright was not at all important to their vote, while in North Carolina, about the same percentage said it was a significant factor. In the Tarheel state, black voters who gave Wright's sermons the most consideration still gave Obama a 70-point advantage, but it was slimmer than his 93-point win among those who said it was not a factor." Issue after issue and the presumed conviction of Antoin "Tony" Rezko all rolls together to make Barack Obama not the image he presented to the American people. And he was never that popular to begin with. He was popular with those following Democratic primaries which doesn't even include all Democrats. What Barack's done is run an impressive -- though not winning -- primary campaign and demonstrated that he's not a general election candidate. The bloom came off the rose when ABC's Good Morning America broadcast the Wright videos, his campaign's been a drag ever since. Not helped by his uh-uh-uh-uh, not helped by the fact that he can't win a debate -- exactly how do his supporters assume they would prod swing-voters to his side after they saw him embarrass himself in repeated debates with John McCain (and hopefully Ralph Nader)? Or is he going to stomp his feet and insist that there be no debates the way he did in the primary season? Hate to break it to the Big Baby and his Devoted Cult, Hillary hasn't hit that hard. If Barack does steal the nomination, it will be a rude awakening for his devoted following when false charges of racism backfire on them, when he's excepted to be competent and know what he's talking about, when he's expected to grasp issues -- those things he always wants to talk about (he says) but never gets around to. His radicals in Panhandle Media can stomp their feet all they want, they can scream and yell all they want, it won't do any good -- and bystanders watching the proceedings from the sides are already sick of the trash the Barack campaign has used. It's like all the pathetic White people of the 'left' defending Jeremiah Wright. There is no excuse for what he said. There's no excuse for it. Carol F. Roye (Women's eNews) notes that "Wright's incedniary comment was unwarranted and destructive. I wish he'd dare to raise an actual HIV-AIDS threat that is being dangerously silence by taboo. It's a threat that the public health community continues to ignore and that we must talk about: women's unprotected anal intercourse with male partners." Wright offered crackpot science and it was justified, excused, defended by Panhandle Media. Grow up. You can trick your small devoted into believeing that for a little while; however, let's be honest, the bulk of you have also tricked your same audiences into believing that you are Democrats.

Jake Tapper (ABC News) notes that Chris Rock, NPR's Ken Rudin and US House Rep Steve Cohen have now all compared Hillary to the Glenn Close character in the backlash trash Fatal Attraction. Tapper notes "as the late great Pauline Kael wrote in The New Yorker at the time, the 'film is about men seeing feminists as witches'." It's exactly that sort of crap that made people like Ava and myself get off the sidelines. The Obama camp has no one to blame but themselves. They have used sexism over and over and the media has amplified it and provided their own. (And let's remember, Betsy Reed, wanting to talk sister-to-sister to all of us gals cited the 'feminist' Chris Rock in her column. Reed's not a feminist, she's not a Democrat and she needs to stop trying to trick America but people like her having nothing to offer but tricks and deceptions. If forced to be honest -- about anything -- they'd probably suffer a heart attack.) Another who called out Fatal Attraciton, Susan Faludi, noted last week (Friday in the New York Times but link goes to Der Spiegel), "Pundits have been quick to attribute the erosion in Barack Obama's white male support to a newfound racism. What they have failed to consider is the degree to which white male voters witnessing Senator Clinton's metamorphosis are being forced to rethink precepts they've long held about women in politics." That's certainly logical and plausible and would be similar to the shift in the Latino community, the one Cokie Roberts attempted to address the night of Super Duper Tuesday on ABC when she noted that, in the 1980s, Latino voters were among the more resistant to female candidates -- and not only had Hillary won their support but that the change had begun in the 90s for the Latino community. That is two women now who noted it. Hopefully, others in the media will at some point. It's one of the major developments of this campaign season. Another development is that US House Rep Ciro Rodriguez has endorsed Hillary today stating, "The voters of Texas' 23rd congressional district voted overwhelming for Senator Clinton in the Texas primary and I will respect their decision. I believe Hillary Clinton has the experience, vision, and toughness to win a general election and can help expand our Democratic majority in Congress. Not only can she win, I am convinced that she will be a truly great President. In two areas of special importance to me, caring for our veterans and improving our schools, Hillary has been a real leader. I am happy to follow the clear choice of my constituents and support Hillary for President." Which does put pressure on Barack supporters who scream "popular vote! popular vote!" but whose own constituents voted for Hillary. (Yes, John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, that would include you.)

Peggy Simpson (Womens Media Center) reports on Barack and Hillary's statements that the Democratic Party will come together in November regardless of the outcome of the nomination process. Trina would disagree. Joel S. Hirschhorn (Information Clearing House) makes the argument for Ralph Nader, assumes Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee and argues: "Peoplw with intelligence and conscience must resist peer pressure and the temptation to vote against John McCain by voting for Barack Obama." Regardless of who gets the nomination -- Hillary or Barack -- some voters (maybe many) will go elsewhere. A Nader supporter grasps that, too bad for the pathetic public faces of the Green Party that they couldn't grasp that very basic fact. This community is pro-Hillary. That's the Green members, the independents, the third partied and the Democrats. Democratic community members are supporting her with their votes but community-wide she had support in terms of the primary race. That didn't prevent Green 'faces' from smearing her throughout the primary. Teddy Glick, I-Need-Attention Benjamin and all the others. Between that and the nonsense of McKinney's I'm-Running-For-5%-of-The Vote, Ralph Nader sewed up the community. He is the choice of Greens and most independents and has become the back-up choice for all the rest should Hillary not get the nomination. (For those visitors who have continued to whine in e-mails -- I didn't vote in the poll, I do not disclose my vote. And I honestly don't give a damn what any of you cry babies have to say. The community made up its mind, you aren't part of it, whine elsewhere.) "Call it the no more whinging campaing," says Team Nader:

Don't tell us about Bush/Cheney. We know already. The sewage has risen to the surface. The question is -- what are we going to do about it? The answer is -- Nader - [Matt] Gonzalez. [. . .] We put our people vs. the corporations platform on the table. And -- per your request -- we've just updated our issues pages with more detail. We're working hard to get Nader/Gonzalez on as many state ballots as possible. And -- per your request -- we've just launched a clickable state by state map of the country for ballot access.


iraq
camilo mejia
susan faludi
pbs
now with david branccacio
jake tapper
peggy simpson
fernando suarez
rosalin ryanrobert winnett
leila fadelmcclatchy newspapers
the new york timesalissa j. rubinhala jaber
the socialist worker
tom vanden brooksimon assafjulian e. barnes
alexandra zavisthe los angeles times
the daily jotcedrics big mix
trinas kitchen
the third estate sunday review

speaking of fraudlent man, guess who decided to wear a flag pin? that's right barack obama. he wants to play pool hustler after crapping out at bowling and he wants to wear a flag pin now. pandering is the term. he's a panderer. what a fake and a fraud.