|
|
 |
|
|
Oct 18, 2008
joe at cannonfire has the story and pictures on a woman beat up by one of barack's male thugs/supporters for advocating people vote mccain. that's the reality of america today. i blame barack who has made hatred of women so common place. call it the thuggery of barack. the barack thug, grabs a mccain sign and rips it up, then he does the same with the other 1, breaks the stick and begins hitting the woman in the face with it. that's the 'movement' patricia williams, norman solomon, laura flanders and tom hayden (among others) have applauded. each and every 1 of them needs to denounce the behavior publicly or they are supporting it. they've certainly supported the candidate who fostered it. and, hey, laura flanders - you self-loathing lesbian - you could be attacked for 2 fronts - being a woman and being gay. so you better find your backbone real damn quick. myiq2xu's 'Pesky Facts vs. Preferred Narratives' (the confluence) covers a topic we're all familiar with because c.i. was covering it last week and with ava on sunday and yesterday in the snapshot: For over a week we have been hearing how McPalin rallies resemble lynch mobs screaming for the blood of Teh Precious. Even His Excellency Paul Krugman said it:
Something very ugly is taking shape on the political scene: as McCain’s chances fade, the crowds at his rallies are, by all accounts, increasingly gripped by insane rage.
There’s one small problem with this media narrative: IT’S NOT TRUE:
The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.
Our friend gqmartinez put up a post at Corrente pointing out that these allegations are unfounded, and the reaction of the resident Obama supporters there is both revealing and disturbing:
Younger people, such as you, know of the JFK and MLK and RFK assassinations in the abstract, as things out of history, events that happened in another time and place of which you have only anecdotal knowledge and no visceral sense of context. Some of us writing here, including Sarah and myself, are old enough to have actually lived through them. We know, not just have heard about it but actually know, what those time sounded like and how it felt, the hatred and the fear and the violence and the sorrow.
Condescend much? By the way, Robert Kennedy was killed by a Middle-Eastern immigrant who was angry over Kennedy’s support for Israel, not by a conservative Republican upset about the economy.
The point I’m trying to make is the SS found “no evidence” regarding the Scranton incident, only. That single data point got strewn all over the media echo chamber as refutation for ALL the incidents, and I find that suspect.
Except that “single data point” was the basis for all the original stories. As Lambert quite rightly points out, the number of stories means nothing if they are all derived from the same source.just f.y.i., c.i. and ava were calling it single sourced. not 'same source.' it's a journalistic issue. as for paul krugman, he always falls in line. there are people who were ignored or kicked to the curb (journalists) for refusing to join in the 'hillary is evil' m.o. many of them maintain their sense of self-respect. barack is not qualified to be president. he lacks the experience, the knowledge. he needs to go live a life and accomplish something 1st. in 2000, the republicans ran an unqualified candidate and look at how the country suffered. in 2008, it's the democrats. sherry e-mailed about tennesse guerilla woman. i don't bother to go there since the woman ripped c.i. off and, when busted, still refused to cop to it. c.i. mislinked to a writer (at a friend's request) and it was a post that was weeks old. the next day, there was tgw claiming she'd just found it. but she hadn't. the woman moved her site. c.i. mislinked and only did so due to googling for the 1st sentence. but it's not a surprise that she's on board with barky and issuing her idiotic hisses at mccain. she was always a weakling and a fool. for a feminist, she sure posts a lot of 'comedy' skits that are sexist. and not with a 'i think this is sexist'. she posts with a 'this is so funny!' label. she's taylor marsh only more so. i have no respect for the ones who wrote they'd never support barack but now do. they are either liars or weaklings unable to stand up. i understand sherry's dismay but, pay attention, in the home stretch, a lot of people who swore they'd never ride have hopped onboard the obama bus. integrity isn't something you buy on the installment plan - you either have it or you don't. let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:' Friday, October 17, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, talk of the treaty between the White House and the puppet government continues, the UNHCR notes the Mosul crisis and more.
Starting with the treaty attempting to masquerade as a Status Of Forces Agreement. Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reminds that what's being talked about now is a draft and explains the process for Iraq: "presented today to Iraq's political and national security council, which is made up of top government officials and the leaders of major political groups. If it survives challenges there and among other government ministers, it will move to the Council of Representatives, or parliament, where Maliki has pledged to put it to an up-or-down vote. Far less controversial matters have taken months to move through the Iraqi legislative provess, if they moved at all." BBC's Jim Muir reports: "Rejection of any agreement with the Americans is spearheaded by the group led by the militant Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr, who has strong grassroots support and also 30 seats in parliament. The Sadrists have called for a mass demonstration in Baghdad on Saturday to denounce the accord. At least one other big Shia faction is believed to have reservations about the agreement, and some Sunnis have also voiced dissent." Also noting the anticipated Shi'ite split is the Minneapolis Star Tribune which adds, "Although passage would require only a majority of the 275-member parliament, Al-Maliki will submit the draft only if he is convinced it will receive two-thirds support. To reach two-thirds, the draft would need the 30 votes from the Supreme Council." US Senator Carl Levin has issued the following statement:
"I have not yet seen the proposed Strategic Framework Agreement nor the Status of Forces Agreement between the United States and Iraq. The Administration committed to provide the text of these agreements to Congress before they are finalized, and I look forward to reviewing the text. I am skeptical of any agreement that would subject U.S. servicemen and women to the jurisdiction of Iraqi courts in the middle of a chaotic war and in the absence of a judicial system that has been proven to be fair and protective of the rights of individuals."
Germany's DPA reports an increase in opposition to the treaty today "among Iraqi religious leaders," quoted Imam Sadr Eddin al-Qabani telling a large gatherin in Najaf ("crowd of hundreds"), "The Shiite clergy is very worried about this security agreement with the USA" and noted the protest by Moqtada al-Sadr supporters scheduled for tomorrow in Baghdad has already resulted in many people beginning "to arrive in Baghdad to participate in the demonstration". Mohammad Akef Jamal (Gulf News) explores the treaty's meaning beyond the US and Iraq:
The US has extended its influence throughout the world with treaties and agreements, thereby securing its status as a major military and political power. And irrespective of the wording of the treaties or accords, the US has categorised its partners into two groups -- friends, ans subordinates.
Basically, treaties and accords are partnership contracts signed between two countries or more, to mutually safeguard the interests and security of all the parties to the agreement.
In most treaties, there is one powerful partner. There is also provisions for such agreements to include financial, scientific and cultural aid, which is usually availed by the weaker partner in the pact.
The security treaty between the US and Iraq has become a popular political topic for discussion in Iraq and the Middle East, as its signing is round the corner.
Dr. Mohammad Akef Jamal goes on to explore the region and notes Iran's opposition to the treaty. We'll come back to that later in the snapshot. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Congress is not in session. In fact, let's quote White House spokesperson Dana Perino on that: "So Congress isn't even going to be back here until about November 17th." That's the situation that worried many included Senator Jim Webb who introduced legislation September 12, 2008 about this very possibility. Speaking on the floor (link has text and video) of the US Senate, Webb explained:
We are at an odd situation in the business of government at the moment in that the international authority for the United States to be operating in Iraq will expire at the end of this year. The UN Mandate through the UN Security Council will expire at that time.
Since last November, the Administration has been negotiating what they call a "strategic framework agreement," that is intended to replace the international authority of the UN Mandate. There have been two questions that have come up with respect to what the Administration is doing. The first is the timeline. The Iraqi government negotiators have some serious questions that weren't anticipated before. But the larger question, really, is what entity of the federal government has the authority to enter the United States into a long-term relationship with another government?
These are serious issues. I would submit that the conditions under which we will continue to operate in Iraq -- military, diplomatically, economically, and even culturally -- are not the sole business of any adminsitration. We have questions about the legal justifications under domestic and international law for the United States to operate militarily and quasi-militarily, by the way, given the hundreds of thousands of independent contractors that now are performing essentially military functions in that country.
There are questions about the process by which the United States government decides upon and enters into long-term relationships with another nation -- any nation. And in that regard we have serious questions here about the very workings of our constitutional system of government.
This Administration has claimed repeatedly since last November that it has the right to negotiate and enter into an agreement that will set the future course of our relations with Iraq without the agreement or even the ratification of the United States Congress. The Administration claims that the justification for this authority is the 2002 congressional authorization for the use of force in Iraq and as a fallback position, the President's inherent authority from the perspective of this Administration as Commander in Chief.
Both of these justifications are patnetly wrong. The 2002 congressional authorization to use force in Iraq has nothing to do with negotiation with a government that replaced the Saddam Hussein government as to the future relations -- culturally, economically, diplomatically, and militarily -- between our two countries.
On the other hand, we are now faced with the reality that the United Nations mandate will expire at the end of this year and that expiration will terminate the authority under international law for the United States to be operating in Iraq at a time when we have hundreds of thousands of Americans on the ground in that country. And I and other colleagues have been warning of this serious disconnect for ten months.
Many of us were trying to say last November that the intention of this Administration was to proceed purely with an executive agreement, to drag this out until the Congress was going to go out of session, as we are about to do; then to present essentially a fait accompli in the sense that with the expiration of the international mandate from the UN at the end of the year, something would have to be done and that something would be an executive agreement that to this point the United States Congress has not even been allowed to examine. We haven't been able to see one word of this agreement.
We've tried to energize the congress about this. We've met with all the appropriate administration officials. There have been hearings. There have been assurances from the administration that they will "consult" at the appropriate time. But we haven't seen anything. So we're faced with a situation that is something of a constitutional coup d'etat by this Adminstration. At risk is a further expansion of the powers of the presidency, the results of this is to affirm in many minds that the president -- any president -- no longer needs approval of congress to enter into long-term relations with another country.
In effect, that is committing us to obligations that involve our national security, our economic well-being, our diplomatic posture around the world, without the direct involvement of the United States Congress. This is not what the Constitution intended. It's not in the best interests of the country.
This amendment which I introduce today is designed to prevent this sort of an imbalance from occuring at the same time that it recognizes the realities of the timelines that are now involved with respect to the loss of international authority for our presence in Iraq at the end of this year.
This amendment is a sense of the congress. On the one hand, it states that it is a sense of the Congress that we work with the UN to extend the United Nations mandate for up to an additional year, giving us some addition international authority for being in Iraq, taking away the pressure of this timeline that could be used to justify an agreement that the Congress has not had the ability to examine. It also says that an extension of the United Nations mandate would end at such time as a strategic framework agreement and a status of forces agreement between the United States and Iraq are mutually agreed upon.
The amendment also makes the point that the strategic framework agreement now being negotiated between the United States and Iraq poses significant long-term national security implications for this country. We need a sense of the Congress. We need to be saying that. The Iraqis need to hear it. The amendment also puts the Congress on record, and the Administration on record, to the reality that the Bush Administration has fully agreed to consult with the Congress regarding all the details of the strategic framework agreement and the status of forces agreement and that there will be copies of the full text of these agreements provided to the chiarman and ranking minority members of the approriate committees in the house and senate prior to the entry into either of those agreements.
Importantly, it also says that any strategic framework agreement that has been mutally agreed upon by negotiators from our executive branch and the Iraqi government officials will cease to have effect unless it is approved by the Congress within 180 days of the entry into force of that agreement.
So, Mr. President, on the one hand this amendment recognizes the realities of where we are in terms of time lines. But, on the other, it protects the constituational process by which we are entering into long-term relationships with other countries, whether it is Iraq or Cameroon or Burudni, pick a country. We need to preserve the process. And it does it in a way that would not disrupt our operations in Iraq. I would urge my colleagues to join me on this amendment and protect the prerogatives under the Constitution of the United States Congress. With that, I yield the floor.
The White House continues its attempt to circumvent the Constitution while pretending that (a) it's not a treaty and (b) they share, they really, really share with Congress. Which explains Sean McCormack's song and dance before the press today at the US State Dept which included saying that Secretary of State Condi Rice is reaching out to various Senators and Reps and so is Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Asked what she told them, McCormak responded, "Talked about the text of the agreement and -- [asked if "agreement" was Rice's word] -- I don't know if she used that word. That's my word." He decided to stick with text and not agreement: "I'm sticking with text. I like the word text. And she also talked about the process, where we stand in the process. The process is ongoing. The Iraqis are considering the text. We are talking to the Iraqis. No news to announce in that regard. The process continues." By her phone calls, McCormack stated, we can surmise Rice supports the text. She wouldn't make phone calls if she didn't support it! Pressed on that, McCormack finally said, "Sure, sure. She supports the text, yes."
McCormack, in the same press confrence, made a badly worded statement when asked about Governor Sarah Palin, GOP vice presidential nominee, not being briefed when Senators Barack Obama, Joe Bide and John McCain have: "She -- if you hadn't noticed, she's a governor, not a sentor or congressman." I don't see how Palin could ever be a Congressman. She could be a Congress woman. She could be a member of Congress. She could be a US House Rep. But there was so much in that press conference. McCormack was asked didn't the Senate have approval and he responded, "Well, my understanding -- and you can check with the White House on this -- is this is not, it's not a treaty, so it doesn't require Congressional approval. And I think if you look back on the history of SOFA agreements, they are not traditionally things that have required Congressional approval. Of course, since this is a, you know, foreign policy, national security issues are issues of concern to all branches of government. And importantly, in this case, to the Legislative and the Executive Branches, there is a briefing process that's going on." After declaring that, he was asked six questions -- and answered none -- about complaints from members of Congress which led him to state, "I've -- you know, again, I've said what I'm going to say on the matter." At the White House, Dana Perino addressed the press and took questions and maintained that Congress is being briefed. Over and over, she maintained that. That's not advise and consent. As Karen DeYoung noted, "None of the actuald raft wording has yet been made public or unveiled to Congress".
From the Constitutional crisis to the Mosul crisis. Christians have been forced to flee from the Iraqi city as a result of attacks on them. Ed West (UK's Catholic Herald via Catholic Online) explains, "The refugees now face a bleak winter without any food or shelter in what aid workers are calling a 'desperate' situation." The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees issued the following this morning, attributed to spokesperson Ron Redmond:UNHCR is concerned about the displacement of Christian Iraqis from Mosul which started last week. We have received information from the Ministry of Displacement and Migration (MoDM) in Mosul that approximately 1,560 families (some 9,360 people) have been displaced so far, although UNHCR cannot confirm this number. The displaced population would represent about half of the Christians in the Mosul area. In recent days, we have sent at least 10 field assessment missions to areas surrounding Mosul, including Telesquf, Batnaya, Bartilla, Baashiqa, Akre, Shekhan. We've also had UNHCR teams in areas of Dahuk and Erbil, where Christians have sought refuge. According to initial reports, most Christian Iraqis decided to leave Mosul following direct as well as indirect threats and intimidation. One of those interviewed witnessed the killing of a Christian Iraqi on the street, while several of the displaced told us they had received printed threats at the university campus, in their homes and through text messages on their mobiles. Several others told our teams that they left when they heard news of 11 reported killings of Christians in Mosul. Others were warned by family members, friends and neighbours of potential threats and decided to leave before it was too late. Most of the families who fled are staying with extended family members, friends within the host community or in collective community buildings, including church facilities. There is an urgent need for food, clothes, non-food items (such as blankets, mattresses, and stoves), health facilities, hygiene kits, clean water and access to school. Over the past week, UNHCR and our partner, International Medical Corps (IMC), have distributed non-food items to a total of 802 families (about 4,800 people). We expect to have reached over 1,500 families by early next week, both new arrivals as well as those displaced people we have not been able to reach yet. Food and kerosene and additional assistance have been distributed by other UN agencies, non-governmental organisations and local authorities. A decision was also taken on Wednesday by the Ministers of Displacement and Migration and Defence to make available an immediate cash grant of 300,000 -- 500,000 Iraqi dinars ( $250-$425 ) to the displaced families, and another 1.5 million dinars ($1,250) to those who decide to return. For now, most of the displaced we spoke to do not envisage return to their homes as an immediate option, as they fear for their lives. A few told us that they will only return if and when their safety and security can be assured by the local authorities. UNHCR's led protection and assistant centres in Kirkuk and Mosul will continue to closely monitor the situation on the ground.
Gulf Daily News reports, "Lebanese political figure Amin Gemayel on Friday warned against attacks targeting Christians in Iraq, according to media reports. Gemayel was quoted by media as saying that a campaign targeting Iraqi Christians was 'part of a campaign to displace them, similar to displacing of Palestinians' by Israel'." Lebanon's Naharnet Newsdesk quotes Gemayel calling it "racial cleansing" and stating, "What sparks suspicion is that the campaign of racial cleansing targeting Iraqi Christians is underway as the security situation in Iraq is achieving progress. It is regretful that this campaign is underway while the new Iraqi regime and the American forces are watching." Fatih Abdulsalam (Azzaman) provides a unflinching look at the current state of Iraq which includes asking about the alleged 'strength' of Iraq: "Is it our political stability and security? The hundreds of thousands of Iraqi troops and police as well as 150,00 U.S. Marines cannot stop the persecution of Iraqi Christians in the city of Mosul." Also refusing to blink is Sami Moubayed (Asia Times):
Ever since the occupation of Iraq in 2003, Iraqi Christians have complained that they are being persecuted by Islamic militias. In some cases, many Christians were killed, churches attacked and women raped for walking outdoors without wearing headscarves. Over the past 10 days, 12 Iraqi Christians have been found dead in Iraq, angering the prime minister, who created a senior ministerial delegation to investigate the crimes. The group is composed of the ministers of defense, industry, planning and refugees. The depiction of Maliki's Iraq as a theocracy where freedom of religion is not tolerated is a terrible setback for Maliki, and is tarnishing his image in the United States and Europe. Ordinary Iraqis - mainly Christian - cannot but compare him with Saddam Hussein, who despite all the faults of his dictatorship, upheld religious diversity in Iraq and protected Iraqi Christians from fundamentalist threats.
Prior to the most recent outbreak of violence in Mosul, Iraqi Christians and other minorities were publicly demonstrating against the decision to strip Article 50 out of the legislation for provincial elections. Article 50 provided minority representation. Newsday reports, "The president of the semiautonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq, Massoud Barzani, said the omission of a minority quota in a recently passed elections law was a 'big mistake.' Barzani also promised to help the federal government in its 'efforts to provide the equivalent protection for our Christian brothers.' Kurdistan borders Nineveh province, which includes Mosul. More than 1,400 families have fled Mosul to nearby villages and towns, the Iraqi Ministry of Displacement and Migration said." Add Barzani to the long list -- which includes puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki and Iraqi president Jalal Talabani -- of people calling the elimination of Article 50 out . . . after the bill was signed into law. Saad Abedine (CNN) reports 4 males have been arrested today under suspicion of taking part in the attacks on Iraqi Christians and quotes Maj Gen Mohammed al-Askari stating, "We know that they are part of a criminal gang that has been committing criminal acts in Mosul and we will do our best to arrest the rest."
Today the United Nations HCR noted a new report: "A UN refugee agency report released on Friday shows that the number of Iraqis seeking asylum in industrialized countries dropped in the first six months of this year, but they were still by far the top nationality seeking asylum in these destinations. According to the asylum trends report, the number of claims made by Iraqis (19,500) during the first six months of 2008, was higher than the combined number of asylum claims submitted by citizens of the Russian Federation (9,400) and China (8,700), the second and third most important source countries. Other important countries of origin of asylum seekers were Somalia (7,400), Pakistan and Afghanistan (6,300 each)." The report [PDF format warning] is entitled "Asylum Levels and Trends in Industrialized Countries" and it examines the statistics on "asylum claims submitted in Europe and selected non-European countries during the first six months of 2008." The US and Canada rank first for asylum claims (not asylum granted, applications). France and the UK are third and fourth. The report notes that Iraq was the country of origin for most aslyum-seekers as it has been since 2006. For all of 2007, there were 45,000 asylum claims by Iraqis. For the first half of this year, there were 19,500 claims. The report is 25 pages and the bulk of it is tables.
While Iraq remains the number one refugee crisis in the world (and figures above were on external refugees making claims), tension remain between Iraq and it's northern neighbor Turkey. CNN reports that Turkish military planes again bombing northern Iraq today and notes that there are no known/confirmed deaths from the bombing. Reuters adds, "The general staff said on its website that the Turkish jets hit PKK bases in northern Iraq's Qandil mountains on Friday and that all planes had returned to their bases. Military sources, who declined to be named, earlier told Reuters that four PKK guerrillas were killed and several wounded in the bombardment of Qandil mountains."
In other reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and wounded four people and a Falluja bombing at the home of Sheikh Suleiman Ahmed al-Jumaili claimed the Sheikh's life as well as a man suspected of being the bomber. Reuters reports a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left one person injured, 2 more Mosul roadside bombing that resulted in 1 Iraqi soldier losing his life, four more wounded, two police officers and three civilians being injured and a roadside bombing outside Falluja that left three police officers injured.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "Qadir Aziz, a guard in a driver training establishment" was shot dead in Kirkuk.
Corpses?
Reuters notes the corpse of 1 "pregnant woman" was found in Kut ("gunshot wounds").
Turning to the US presidential race. Yesterday's snapshot mentions a debate at Columbia. Maria Recio's "Third-party debate's only confirmed participant: the moderator" (McClatchy Newspapers) informs that it's iffy with Cynthia McKinney saying she's doing another debate, Ralph Nader hedging and apparently no real desire for it. Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate, Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. Today Nader writes "In the Public Interest: Closing the Courthouse Door:"
"Real change comes from the bottom up, not the top down. The genius of the American system has been to let that change flow upward, from neighborhoods to cities to states and then to the federal government." George W. Bush February 26, 2001.
Unfortunately, the difference between words and deeds in Washington is often shocking even to those who think they have seen it all. Alicia Mundy in the October 15, 2008 edition of the Wall Street Journal reports: "Bush administration officials, in their last weeks in office, are pushing to rewrite a wide array of federal rules with changes or additions that could block product-safety lawsuits by consumers and states."
What President George W. Bush should have said is that he believes in states rights when they are in the interest of Big Business and their lobbyists in Washington. Mr. Bush and his cronies would like to forget about those harmed by dangerous products or reckless conduct. Indeed, Bush & Company seem to regard the civil justice system as a nuisance that threatens to destroy our economy and way of life. In reality, America's civil justice system plays an indispensable role in our democracy. When the rights of injured consumers are vindicated in court, our society benefits in countless ways: compensating victims and their families for shattering losses (with the cost borne by the wrongdoers rather than taxpayers); preventing future injuries by deterring dangerous products and practices and spurring safety innovation; stimulating enforceable safety standards; educating the public to risks associated with certain products and services; and providing society with its moral and ethical fiber by defining appropriate norms of conduct.
The Center for Progressive Reform has in painstaking detail chronicled the attack on the civil Justice system by the Bush Administration. In "The Truth about Torts: Using Agency Preemption to Undercut Consumer Health and Safety" legal scholars William Funk, Sidney Shapiro, David Vladeck and Karen Sokol write: "In recent years, the Bush administration has launched an unprecedented aggressive campaign to persuade the courts to preempt state tort actions…. Widespread preemption of state tort law would significantly undermine, if not eliminate, the rights of individuals to seek redress for injuries caused by irresponsible and dangerous business practices and to hold manufacturers and others accountable for such socially unreasonable conduct." (See: http://www.progressiveregulation.org)
And, Les Weisbrod, the President of the American Association for Justice (formerly known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America) hit the nail on the head when he said: "In effect the Bush administration made the safety of Americans secondary to corporate profits." Mr. Weisbrod added: "Big business lobbyists have been on a crusade to destroy state consumer protection laws, and further stack the deck against American consumers." The American Association for Justice has just published a report titled: "Get Out of Jail Free: A Historical Perspective of How the Bush Administration Helps Corporations Escape Accountability" – this report is available at: www.justice.org/getoutofjailfree.
Tort deform comes in many shapes and sizes – but the common theme is that tort deform severely damages Americans' cherished constitutional right to trial by jury. It ties the hands of jurors, preventing them from doing justice as the case before them requires. Only the judges and juries see, hear, and evaluate the evidence in these cases. But it is the politicians, absent from the courtrooms, who push bills greased by campaign cash that send a perverse message to judge and jury.
Tort law has produced decades of slow but steady progress in state after state respecting the physical integrity of human beings against harm and recognition that even the weak and defenseless deserve justice. Instead of seeing this evolution as a source of national and global pride, a coalition of insurance companies, corporate defendants' lobbies, and craven politicians, led by George W. Bush, want to destroy our civil justice system.
When Georgetown Law School Professor David Vladeck testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 12, 2007, he noted that the Bush Administration has "seized on regulatory preemption as a way to cut back dramatically on State law remedies for those injured by products and services Americans depend on every day for their health and well-being: medicines, medical devices, motor vehicles, the mattress on which we and our children sleep, and the commuter trains millions of us take to work every day."
Let us hope that Congress and the Supreme Court stop Mr. Bush from once again trampling the Constitutional rights of citizens throughout the land and preventing victims of corporate violence from obtaining justice in a court of law.
Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente is her running mate.
Green Party presidential nominee Cynthia McKinney will participate in a webcast forum for presidential candidates on Sunday, October 19, to be aired 7 to 9 pm on BreakTheMatrix.com.
Cynthia McKinney will join other candidates who've been invited to the online
forum, which has been organized by ThirdPartyTicket.com's Trevor Lyman.
Ms. McKinney will not appear at a candidates' forum at Columbia University on
the evening of October 19. The news of Ms. McKinney's participation in the Columbia event was released to the media in error by persons who are unassociated with the McKinney campaign, and who had not confirmed such
an appearance with Ms. McKinney or her staff.
"We invite everyone to go online, tune in to BreakTheMatrix.com, and listen to
Cynthia McKinney and the other candidates debate real issues. We'll hear Ms. McKinney offer ideas that have been censored from the McCain-Obama debates -- ideas that most Americans support, like bringing our troops home now, health care for everyone, and help for working Americans facing financial difficulty instead of a $700 billion bailout package for Wall Street," said John Judge, media secretary for the McKinney/Clemente Power to the People Committee.
Cynthia McKinney and running mate Rosa Clemente were nominated by the Green Party at the Green National Convention in Chicago this past July.
"A vote for Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente is an investment in a growing progressive antiwar party that accepts no corporate contributions. No other candidate in the 2008 election offers the hope of a permanent alternative to the Democrats and Republicans and the corporate interests that the two established parties serve. The Green Party isn't an alternative, it's an imperative," said Ms. Clemente.
Greens and other Americans have objected to the format of the McCain-Obama debates, which were sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), and which excluded all candidates except the Democratic and Republican nominee.
The CPD, which sets rules for candidate participation, is owned and run by the Democratic and Republican parties, which have an interest in excluding all candidates except their own. Greens noted that the CPD is funded through contributions from corporations, which have their own interests in limiting the candidates who participate in the debates.
Democracy Now! -- no link to trash -- had Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney on yesterday. Cynthia is the Green Party presidential candidate and wisely refused to take part in defending a White man who instigated more serious acts of violence than have the still persecuted Black Panthers (much to Goody's regret, Cynthia refused to rush to defend Bill Ayers). Ignoring Goody's need to for White privilege, McKinney responded:CYNTHIA McKINNEY: First of all, I think I should say that I believe that the people in this country need a political party and a movement that places our values on the political agenda. Obviously, with that exchange, that's not the case. There's something else that's a bit more troubling. I've also been talking about election integrity as I've gone across this country. But, you know, I really don't like the idea that the face of election fraud, given the past two presidential elections, is now a face of color and one of poor people. In 2000, when people went to the polls, when the voters went to the polls, they were met with confusing ballots, manipulation of the voter lists, electronic voting machines that didn't work, inappropriately or ineffectively or poorly trained officials who weren't familiar with the workings of those machines, and we know what the problems with those machines have been and are. We still have those problems that have been with us since 2000. In 2004, they added to these problems with the electronic poll books, the sleepovers that were discovered, where the machines weren't even secured, even intensifying the failures of the machines with the vote flipping, and usually in only one direction. The battery freezes in the midst of voters actually trying to cast their votes. And now we've got voter ID laws across the country, and we've got voter caging, which is a fancy way of purging people from the voter files. So, now, what kind of election is it when neither of the political parties is addressing the issue, the fundamental issue, of whether or not our votes are even going to be counted? McKinney's running mate is Rosa Clemente. Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate. Ralph took the bait so we won't note his exchange on that issue. Instead, we'll note this from him: RALPH NADER: There's no such thing as free trade with dictators and oligarchs in these countries, because the market doesn't determine the costs. There's no free collective bargaining for workers. That's a crime, de facto, in many countries, to try to form an independent trade union. There's no rule of law, bribery. These companies can go there and pollute at will. There's no judicial independence to make these companies accountable, and they abuse workers and consumers and communities, as the oil companies and the timber companies have on many occasions. Second, these-NAFTA and WTO have to be scrapped. Under those treaties, we can withdraw in six months and give notice of withdrawal and renegotiate these agreements for the following purpose: no more trade agreements that subordinate consumer, union, worker and environmental rights. These are pull-down trade agreements that are allowing fascist and corporate dictators to pull down our standards of living, because they know how to keep their workers in their place at fifty cents an hour. So, any new trade agreements should stick to trade. Any other treaty should be labor, environment and consumer on a level playing field. These trade agreements also have to be open, democratic. They cannot undermine our courts, our regulatory agencies and our legislature. That's what we've got to do. And our website, votenader.org, has ample information on this process. If you're in the mood to wade through garbage, you know where to go find the audio and video. Cynthia McKinney has the transcript posted at her campaign website. Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate, Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. In terms of the 'questions' Goody came up with, Ava and I will address that garbage on Sunday at Third.
Meghan McCain (McCainBlogette.com) offers her evaluation today on the debate Wednesday between her father, GOP presidential candidate John McCain, and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama: "My father nothing short of ROCKED Wednesday night's debate and I have never been more proud. He got up and showed this country why he is the right person to lead it into the future, and open the door to reinvention of the Republican Party. I am always proud of my Dad but even more so when he lets his maverick tendencies show so clearly. Eighteen more days to go and this election is nowhere near over!!!" McCain's running mate is Governor Sarah Palin. The McCain-Palin campaign has issued a press release that there's not room for in full. We'll quote from the top and include as much as possible (ues the link to read in full):
OBAMA MEDICARE MALPRACTICE #1: The Very Same Reforms That Barack Obama Calls "Cuts" Under John McCain, He Says Will "Strengthen" Medicare Under His Program
THE MALPRACTICE: While Saying Today That John McCain's Reforms Will "Cut" Medicare Spending, Barack Obama Says He Will "Strengthen" Medicare With His Reforms. OBAMA: "So what would Senator McCain's cuts mean for Medicare at a time when more and more Americans are relying on it? It would mean a cut of more than 20 percent in Medicare benefits next year. ... I think every single American has a right to affordable accessible health care. We can strengthen Medicare by eliminating wasteful subsidies to big HMOs in Medicare, and making sure seniors can access home-based care, and letting Medicare negotiate with drug companies for better prices. That's the kind of change we need." (Barack Obama, Remarks As Prepared For Delivery, Roanoke, VA, 10/17/08)
THE TRUTH: Just Two Days Ago, Barack Obama Highlighted His Own "Cut" To Medicare Spending. OBAMA: "And some of the cuts, just to give you an example, we spend $15 billion a year on subsidies to insurance companies. It doesn't -- under the Medicare plan -- it doesn't help seniors get any better. It's not improving our health care system. It's just a giveaway." (CNN, Presidential Candidate Debate, Hempstead, NY, 10/15/08)
THE TRUTH: One Such "Cut" That John McCain Must Support Under Barack Obama's Logic Is A Reform That Today, Barack Obama Said Would "Strengthen" Medicare. MCCAIN: "Government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid should lead the way in health care reforms that improve quality and lower costs. Medicare reimbursement now rewards institutions and clinicians who provide more and more complex services. We need to change the way providers are paid to focus their attention more on chronic disease and managing their treatment. This is the most important care for an aging population. There have been a variety of state-based experiments such as Cash and Counseling or The Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly, called PACE, that are different from the inflexible approaches for delivering care to people in the home setting. Seniors are given a monthly allowance that they can use to hire workers and purchase care- related services and goods. They can get help managing their care by designating representatives, such as relatives or friends, to help make decisions. It also offers counseling and bookkeeping services to assist consumers in handling their programmatic responsibilities. In these approaches, participants were much more likely to have their needs met and be satisfied with their care. Moreover, any concerns about consumers' safety appeared to be misplaced. For every age group in every state, participants were no more likely to suffer care-related health problems." (John McCain, Remarks, Tampa, FL, 4/29/08)
iraqthe washington postkaren deyoungjim muirsami moubayeded westasia timesmcclatchy newspapersmaria recio
Posted at 06:28 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
Oct 16, 2008
independent presidential candidate ralph nader was on fox news tonight, on the bill o'reilly show. this is from the transcript:
BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Personal Story" segment tonight: Although he's not getting much attention this year, Ralph Nader is again running for president and has been closely watching the McCain-Obama race, including the debate last night. Mr. Nader joins us now from Connecticut.
OK. I mean, you heard the program. You know how I feel about this economic chaos, and you saw the candidates last night. What say you?
RALPH NADER, INDEPENDENT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I didn't hear the phrase "jail time not bail time" for these Wall Street crooks who have swindled trillions of dollars and then jumped into a golden lifeboat while they tanked their own companies, unemployed workers and loaded up on innocent taxpayers and put it to the pensioners.
You know, don't these guys believe law and order? Crime in the suites. You know, $700 billion blank check bailout without any power given to the shareholders? Without re-regulating these crooks so they can't do it again? This is serious stuff, Bill.
In all of American history I've never seen anything like this. I've never seen more cowardly members of Congress. I've never seen such a toady in the White House. You know, 230 years ago we were 13 colonies under King George III. We're now 50 colonies under King George IV. Time for taxpayer rebellion.
O'REILLY: All right. Bush is certainly culpable on this. But we've got to look forward. And you've got two guys who both say they're change agents. You've got McCain, who has been noted as a tough, feisty guy. I think he's a no spin guy. You've got Obama, who's very smart and has seen poverty, because he worked in poverty in Chicago. They both get up on the national stage, and they don't show a lot of passion for the folks suffering, and I'm trying to figure out why. Do you know?
NADER: One, they're dialing for the same corporate dollars for their campaign. Two, they're not part of the risk. You know, you heard Obama say they're well off, they've got good pensions, they've got secure jobs. And third, the people are not organizing yet. They're really angry, but they're not organized to really put a laser beam on these guys. There is going to be... you can use the link to read the entire transcript. when ralph nader's shut out by the media, i'm not averse to linking to fox news which is known and why bonita e-mailed that to me. (thank you, bonita.)
this is from joseph cannon's 'Who is Evelyn Pringle and why is the Progressive Mafia trying to silence her?' (cannonfire):
Long-time readers know that I've been encouraging everyone to read the work of Evelyn Pringle, the investigative reporter who spent months looking into Obama's ties to the Illinois "Combine" -- a crook's paradise of unscrupulous businessmen and corrupt pols. Pringle previously had received great applause for her work exposing fraud and thievery in Iraq. She once was someone that the progs liked.
But Obama changes everything.Lefty writers never lacked publication venues when they went after Democrats in the past. Older readers will recall that "progressive" pundits previously expended most of their hatred on Democrats, not Republicans. In the pre-net days, the "Progressive Mafia" (which consisted, in those days, of Cockburn, Vidal, the pre-switch Hitchens and a handful of others) filled many a column railing against Clinton, Dukakis, Mondale, Carter, and so forth. In 2000, Michael Moore and other like-minded dopes demonized Al Gore, thereby forcing us to endure eight years of Dubya. Rags like The Nation and Z Magazine pretty much existed to attack Democrats from the left flank. The New Republic assailed Clinton with such vigor that I started calling it The Newly Republican.But Obama changes everything.Obama may not be criticized. No matter how deep his corruption, Obama may not be criticized. The left had no problem with Michael Moore's portrayal of Al Gore as being somewhere to the right of Mussolini -- but anyone who tells the truth about Barack Holy Obama must be a racist.And so Evelyn Pringle must be silenced.
OpEdNews' Rob Kall is wondering whether to remove Evelyn Pringle's articles because she "“attacked Obama". Kall says she did so because she is a Hillary supporter.
as cyndi lauper once sang, 'money changes everything.' and it certainly changed the 'left'. as my mother-in-law is so fond of saying, 'progressive' is just a fancy little word for the closeted communists to hide behind. and we've witnessed the same behaviors by the closet cases that led to so little support for them when mccarthyism started.
they couldn't count on the democratic party because they'd pissed off the democrats. they'd posed as democrats and told their lies just like they did today on barack.
so when the right went after them, the attitude of dems were 'rot in the hell of your own making.' they really thought the f.d.r. presidency was going to bring them into power. the same way they hitch themselves to the barack obama campaign today.
in neither case would that ever be possible. but they'd pose as dems, do a lot of damage and create the backlash that led to no support from dems when mccarthyism started.
f.d.r.'s administration had enough trouble pushing through needed programs, they didn't have time to deal with all the closet cases insisting to the public that they were dems. and by the time truman takes over, there's no reason to keep babying the closet cases.
the cute little fairytale version of events is that poor little communists were just off on their own doing their thing and joe mccarthy decided to pick on them.
that's not reality.
and then as now, these idiots burned their bridges.
for the republicans, it was a case of panic: these communists are taking over!
there were not that many communists to begin with. but when you find out ___ is a closet communist and so is ____ and they're both posing as democrats, you start thinking the entire democratic party is communist.
the way today, the right would think the entire democratic party was communist except for joe lieberman.
it was a way to make political hay for the republicans, no question. but they were truly afraid of 'subversives.' which is why gays and lesbians were part of the witch hunt as well - a fact that the likes of victor navasky like to pretend never happened.
but the term was 'subversive.' and it did include a witchhunt on gays and lesbians. other than c.i., i don't know of any 1 who's truly explored that online. ava and c.i. included details about a gay man who palled around with both truman and eisenhower and, on the ever of his senate approval to the highest post he'd ever hold - and during republican ike's administration - he suddenly withdrew his name from nomination claiming he was ill. he wasn't ill. he was gay and it was made clear he would be outed as a 'subversive' so he left d.c. and ended up in hollywood where he was a film censor for a major studio. (i believe it was m.g.m. but check with c.i. he remained in the closet there as well. he and his lover had houses with a secret passage between the 2.)
it was the republicans being scared of their own shadow and seeing evil everywhere. (sound familiar?) and it was democrats being damn sick of the closet cases passing themselves off as democrats and attempting to control the democratic party that laid the groundwork for mccarthyism. republicans went after the closet communists (and gays and lesbians) and democrats attitude was they were sick of the closet communists trying to control their party and they'd just let them dangle on their own.
during the witchhunt lives were destroyed. some people were communists and some people were wrongly accused of being that. but both groups suffered. both groups were victims. and, as usual, the big 1s escaped public scrutiny.
op-ed news isn't a site i take seriously. when r.k. decided he was going to go 'professional,' this community was done with that site. but if he's planning on being professional, he might grasp that a tide changer is taking place right now that goes far beyond the november election and that having evelyn pringle's amazing work at his site is a nice thing for him to point to.
i'd be a little less concerned that evelyn questioned the christ-child and a little more aware that having that questioning in my archives would allow me to avoid the need to issue a mea culpa in the following years.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:' Thursday, October 16, 2008. Chaos and violence continued, the US military announces two more deaths, the crisis in Mosul continues and there's news or not news on the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement.
At the US State Dept today, Sean McCormack held a press briefing and was immediately pressed on the issue of the treaty masquerading as SOFA. "Nothing new on the SOFA," McCormack declared. "We'll just get that out of the way. . . . Nothing new. . . . No, I have nothing -- I have nothing new to report. The process continues." He did say that US Secretary of State Condi Rice had been on the phone "with some of the Iraqi leaders yesterday" and listed the ones he believed she spoke with but stated he would provide a list later. The list provided had Rice speaking with KRG President Masoud Barzani, Iraq President Jalal Talabani, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Iraq's Shi'ite vice president Adil Abd al-Mahdi and Iraq's Sunni vice president Tariq al-Hashami. McCormack repeatedly stressed the SOFA such as when asked if Rice was focused on any other issue and he responded, "The focus -- her focus is on moving this SOFA process forward." Asked if there was a Plan B, McCormack replied, "We're focused on moving the SOFA process forward." Tossed out the possibility of an extension of the UN mandate (due to expire December 31st), McCormack responded, "I'm not aware of any serious contemplation of anything other than getting the SOFA done on our side. Again, I don't have perfect knowledge, but I'm not aware of any contemplation of anything other than getting the SOFA done. Asked if there was the possibilities of other options, McCormack replied, "I think the option is get the SOFA done."
Alissa J. Rubin and Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) detail the draft of the treaty between the White House and the puppet of the occupation (passed off as a SOFA) being whispered about but notes that there are many hurdles and also notes, "The Iraqis did not provide details about the language of the draft, and it is unclear whether it says the pullout would be based on conditions on the ground." Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman tells the paper, "In Parliament it will face a lot of opposition. Some of the nationalists won't like it and some other groups, too. They won't oppose it as such, by they will say they don't like this article or that article. Maybe it will pass, but it will take some time." Richard Beeston and Deborah Haynes (Times of London) explain, "The deal, yet to be approved by Iraqi leaders, the Cabinet and parliament, must be in place by December 31, when the existing UN Security Council mandate expires. An agreement between the two sides would open the way for a separate arrangement to allow 4,000 British Forces and other smaller coalition members to remain in Iraq."
At the Pentagon today, spokesperson Geoff Morrell declared that US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates "is in the process of consulting closely with members of Congress, those who have jurisdiction over this building. And, in fact, he has begun making a number of phone calls today to committee leaders and is intent on fulfilling his pledge to them to consult with them on this document before it is finalized." Two things, Democrats head all committees. They are "committee leaders." They can allow anything to go through or be stopped cold. Second, what Gates is doing is certainly admirable; however, it does not pass for "advise and consent" as outlined in the Constitution. From the March 6th snapshot:
Congress held several hearings today and we're noting two. Background for the first, Reuters reported this morning, "The U.S. military has authority to conduct combat operations in Iraq beyond the end of this year, even though a United Nations mandate for force ends then, a State Department official said on Wednesday. David Satterfield, the State Department's coordinator for Iraq, said Congress had authorized U.S. combat in Iraq back in 2002, and the Bush administration did not believe it needed to seek 'explicit additional authorization' from Congress for U.S. combat beyond the end of this year." Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reported that "[t]he Bush administration yesterday adavanced a new argument for why it does not require congressional approval to strike a long-term security agreement with Iraq, stating that Congress had already endorsed such an initiative through its 2002 resolution . . . Rep. Gary L. Ackerman (D-N.Y.), whose questions at a House hearing Tuesday elicted the administration statement, described it as an 'open-ended, never-ending authority for the administration to be at war in Iraq forever with no limitations.' The conditions of 2002 no longer exist, he said." This afternoon the US House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Middle East and South Asia held a hearing that David Satterfield again showed up for (but couldn't really answer anymore than on Tuesday) as did Mary Beth Long the Asst. Secretary of Defense for International Affairs.
Satterfield attempted repeatedly to claim everything was a hypothetical and refuse to answer. A lively exchange took place between Gary Ackerman and Satterield. Asked specific questions, Satterfield declared, "I will respond more formally to that question subsequent to this hearing" leading Ackerman to ask, "When will we hold that hearing?" At another point Satterfield attempted to hide by declaring, "I'm not a constitutional expert" leading Ackerman to respond, "Neither is anyone else" in the administration "apparently."
The basic principles here (outlined many times before) is whether or not Bully Boy and Nouri al-Maliki can enter into a treaty without Congressional/Parliamentary approval. The constitutions for both the United States and Iraq say "NO!" But that hasn't stopped the White House from attempting to circumvent the US Constitution. As Ackerman noted when Satterfield repeatedly declared questions "hypotheticals," "The Constitution is a document. It is not a hypothetical." Her futher noted, "The problem with the administration is that it thinks the Constituion is optional." Ackerman noted that everything was undefined -- now and in the lead-up to the illegal war. He noted that now Iraq was apparently a 'threat' to the US in some of the vague responses from Satterfield and that "threat" seems to change from moment to moment leading Satterfield to snap "No, Mister Chairman," the administration has clearly defined threats. Ackerman asked, "Is it this adminstration's belief that you have ongoing authorization in perpetuity?" and "Is Iraq about to attack the United States?" Ackerman noted that it appeared the White House had redefined the mission in Iraq so that "as long as there is trouble in Iraq" the US must remain in "a never ending process".
As the committee told Sattefield, it appeared he arrived with an attitude of he would talk about what he wanted to and not answer the questions posed. In a milder but still comical moment, Mary Beth Long attempted to compare the agreement Bully Boy and al-Maliki are trying to impose with agreements the US has with Belize. Bill Delahunt noted that nothing with Belize talks "about search and destroy actions" such as what takes place in Iraq and Long had to admit that they didn't. US House Rep Rosa DeLauro was brought into the meeting with the approval of other committee members (she's not a member of the subcommitte) and she noted that this wasn't a "typical" SOFA agreement and that "we should not rush to approve" it, that it is in the best interests of both countries not to rush. As Satterfield continued to obsfucate, DeLauro noted that, "We're not going to get any straight answers on this." While Rep Bill Delahunt had noted earlier -- when Satterfield again attempted to propose a closed door briefing -- "The American people deserve to hear what you have to say." The hearing ended with Ackerman having extracted the promise that Satterfield would have answers to the questions asked no later than three p.m. Friday.
Reps DeLauro and Delahunt have led in Congress on this issue and they addressed the issue in "The Wrong Partnership for Iraq" (Washington Post):
The Post argued that barring a "formal commitment to defend Iraq from external aggression," congressional approval of the agreement is not required. Yet constitutional scholars testifying before the oversight subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee have stated that "the authority to fight" that the administration seeks from Iraq does indeed require congressional approval. Requiring international legal approval of combat is what makes this agreement anything but what the administration incorrectly calls it: a "status of forces agreement." The U.N. mandate provides the last legal thread of domestic U.S. authority for combat because "enforcing relevant U.N. resolutions" was one of the two activities cited by the 2002 vote in Congress authorizing the use of force against Iraq (the other being to dispose of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein). If the U.N. mandate expires on Dec. 31, so does domestic authority for our troops to fight, along with their immunity from Iraqi prosecution. This is precisely the "legal vacuum" that constitutional scholars Bruce Ackerman and Oona Hathaway detailed in an April 5 op-ed, " The War's Expiration Date," on washingtonpost.com. We have proposed an alternative that would serve our interests and those of the Iraqis far better: extending the U.N. mandate in Iraq for six months, as has been done before, so that the new president and Congress can work with Iraq's leaders to determine the next agreement. Second, The Post failed to appreciate the exclusivist manner in which the administration has pursued this agreement. Congress was broadsided by the "declaration of principles," outlining the negotiating parameters, signed by President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in November. Lawmakers have since been denied access to information on the U.S. negotiating position and even on U.S. goals. This is a key reason that not just Democrats but also Republicans have expressed reservations.
Other leaders on the issue include Senator Hillary Clinton who raised the issue April 8th in a Senate hearing to US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker. Hillary noted that the White House "is planning to make an agreement with Iraq" and Crocker confirmed that it would "be submitted to the Iraqi Parliament for ratification" but, when asked by Hillary if the White House intended "to submit the agreement to our Congress," Crocker replied no. As Hillary noted that "seems odd to Americans . . . [that] the Iraqi Parliamnet may have a chance to consider this agreement" but "the United States Congress does not." [December 7th of last year, Hillary introduced legislation that would require Bully Boy to get "Congressional approval for any agreement that would extend the US military commitment to Iraq."] April 9th, US House Rep Susan Davis would echo Clinton's points and point out that allowing the Iraqi Parliament a say while the US Congress gets none (under the White House plan) "strikes people in our districts as strange." Senator Joe Biden (now the Democratic vice presidential nominee) pointed out in an April 10th hearing, "The second agreement is what Administration officials call a 'standard' Status of Forces Agreement, which will govern the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq, including their entry into the country and the immunities to be granted to them under Iraqi law. Unlike most SOFAs, however, it would permit U.S. forces -- for the purposes of Iraqi law -- to engage in combat operations and detain insurgents. In other words, to detain people that we think are bad guys. I don't know any of the other nearly 90 Status of Forces Agreements that would allow a U.S. commander to arrest anyone he believes is a bad guy." In that hearing Senator Jim Webb would also insist the "document" would need the consent of the Senate. From the April 10th snapshot:
Biden spoke of how US Ambassador Ryan Crocker told the committee on Tuesday that this was about setting "forth a vision, to use his words, of our relationship with Iraq" but "one of the problems . . . is the visition this administrations shares for Iraq is not shared by two of the thee" current candidates for president in the Democratic and Republican Parties -- referring to Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Biden noted that those appearing before Congress keep stating that the agreements "aren't binding to us but, in Iraq, they think we mean it . . . because otherwise we wouldn't be having this kind of discussion." Biden noted the "internal threat" aspect being proposed and how these requires the US "to support the Iraqi government in its battle with all 'outlaw groups' -- that's a pretty expansive commitment." He noted that it requires the US "to take sides in Iraq's civil war" and that "there is no Iraqi government that we know of that will be in place a year from now -- half the government has walked out."
"Just understand my frustration," Biden explained. "We want to normalize a government that really doesn't exist." Senator Russ Feingold wanted to know if there were "any conditions that the Iraq government must meet?" No, that thought never occurred to the White House. "Given the fact that the Maliki government doesn't represent a true colation," Feingold asked, "won't this agreement [make it appear] we are taking sides in the civil war especially when most Iraqi Parliamentarians have called for the withdrawal of troops?" The two witnesses didn't appear to have heard that fact before. Feingold repeated and asked, "Are you not concerned at all that the majority of the Iraqi Parliament has called for withdrawal" Satterfield feels the US and the agreement "will enjoy broad popular support" in Iraq. Satterfield kept saying the agreement wasn't binding. And Feingold pointed out, "The agreement will not bind the Congress either, if the Congress were to" pass a law overriding it which seemed to confuse Satterfield requiring that Feingold again point that out and ask him if "Congress passed a clear law overriding the agreement, would the law override the agreement." Satterfield felt the White House "would have to look carefully at it at the time" because "it would propose difficult questions for us."
"I would suggest," Feingold responded, "your difficulties are with the nature of our Constitution. If we pass a law overiding it . . . that's the law." The treaty and the efforts to bypass the Senate's advise & consent role was something that bothered senators on both sides of the aisle. Senators Norm Coleman and Johnny Isakson also addressed it. Republican Isaskson wanted to know if the agreement being pushed could be cancelled "by either at any time". "Yes, sir," Satterfield responded. Isakson noted the "pending elections" and couldn't remember a time when anything like that had happened before, where you'd put forth an agreement like this so close to the end of term. Mary Beth Long wasn't aware of a precedent either. Sentor Coleman was also concerned with the timing.
This is not a minor issue. And if something is agreed upon between the puppet and the White House and, by some miracle, it manages to clear the Iraqi chains of approval quickly, you could have Bully Boy putting it into effect before the election or immediately after -- while Congress is out of session. It seems very unlikely that it could go through the approval process in Iraq that quickly; however, if it were to, Congress isn't even in session currently. Or, as Dana Perino worded it at the White House press briefing today (speaking of the economy), "Well, obvioulsy Congress isn't here [DC], but we try to keep in touch with them on a range of issues. . . . So Congress isn't even going to be back here until about November 17th." Morrell declared at the Pentagon today that there was agreement and that the treaty was just in the process of being reviewed by both sides. Where's the Congress on this? Where's the leadership?
In Iraq, the crisis continues for Iraqi Christians. Despite Nouri al-Maliki stating over the weekend the crisis would be addressed, Mazin Yahya (AP) reports that today the puppet government finally managed to send "blankets and food . . . to help thousands of Christians" who fled Mosul. Assyrian International News Agency reports "Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Bakir al-Nassiri issued a fatwa (religious decree) yesterday stating the Christians whose lives are subjected to threats in the city of Mosul should be provided with aid and patronzage, calling on the Iraqi government to take all the necessary measures to protect them." As noted in yesterday's snapshot, in Canterbury, religious leaders ended a three-day conference. Ethan Cole (Christian Post) reports:
The 17 prominent Muslims, joined by 19 Christian leaders, denounced the persecution of Iraqi Christians in their communiqué, released Wednesday at an interfaith conference hosted by the Archbishop of Canterbury, according to Episcopal News Service.
It was deeply troubling, the leaders expressed, to learn of the situation in Mosul where more than 8,300 Christians have been forced to flee due to violence from Islamic extremists in the last two weeks.
"We are profoundly conscious of the terrible suffering endured by Iraqi people of every creed in recent years and wish to express our solidarity with them," the Muslims and Christians leader at the meeting stated. "We find no justification in Islam or Christianity for those promoting the insecurity or perpetrating the violence evident in parts of Iraq."
CNN reports that a curfew has been imposed in Mosul and that "At least 6,000 Christians have fled the northern Iraqi city of Mosul in the past week because of killings and death threats, Iraq's Ministry of Immigration and Displaced Persons said Thursday." Alsumaria reports that Iraqi Christians and "tribal figures" protested in Baghdad against the attacks on Christians in Mosul yesterday: "The Secretary General of the national council for tribes and awakening leaders council Mostapha Kamel expressed soldiarity with Christians." And while the puppet government finally made times -- all these days later -- to send food and blankets (things relief agencies were begging for as early as Monday morning), that's about all al-Maliki has managed. Except words. Qassim Khidhir (Kurdish Globe) quotes Father Rafael Benjamin declaring, "Up to this point, the Iraqi government has not found any solution to end the hostile acts against Iraqi Christians." Other than putting up some barriers (some more barriers) yesterday, the puppet government really can't claim much. In the face of a crisis.
Turning to other reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded two Iraqi service members, a Baghdad car bombing ('sticky' bomb) that wounded three people, a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 "6 year old child . . . and his brother, a 7 year old child, was injured while they were herding their sheep in the area," and a Salahuddin car bombing that left four police officers injured. Reuters notes a Mosul hand grenade attack that left seven Iraqi service members wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing that left two people injured and another Mosul bombing that left two children injured.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person shot dead by police in Kirkuk, 1 person shot dead in Shorash, Lt Col Mohammed Said shot dead in Kirkuk. Reuters notes "Iraqi troops fired shots into the air in eastern Mosul" and wounded four people.
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.
Today the US military announced: "A Multi-National Corps - Iraq Soldier died of non-battle related causes at approximately 10 p.m. Oct. 15 in Baghdad." And they announced, "A Coalition force Soldier was killed in an indirect fire attack Oct. 16 in Diyala." The announcements bring to 4185 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.
Yesterday the Republican and the Democratic presidential candidate were invited to a debate that barred all other presidential candidates. Barack Obama, Democratic candidate, and John McCain took part in a debate hosted by CBS News' Bob Schieffer -- here for transcript (and video), here for Katherine Q. Seelye's live blogging at the New York Times. Among the issues Schieffer probed was abortion. For those who've forgotten, Barack always knew he could use sexism throughout the primary because he had the club of "What will happen to Roe!" He knew -- or thought he did -- that women would have to flock to him -- like a battered wife to an abuser? -- because they had no where else to go. Mike caught the moment, "Mainly we got to see Barack was even more right-wing than we knew as he talked about 'partial-birth abortions' and said he wanted to end late-term abortions (except for health!). Except for health? He's already made clear what he thinks about that. So he's going to chip away at abortion rights the same way the Supreme Court has. Barack's apparently pro-life on the installment plan. He'll do away with Roe bit by bit if elected. There's no Democrat in the presidential race, sadly." Madamab (The Confluence) also points to Barack's embarrassing answer, "Didja catch that, ladies? First the veiled threat about Roe v. Wade, which events in the past eight years have proven to be fearmongering of the most despicable type. Then, Obama assumes that before making a decision about our own bodies and our own babies, we naturally "consult with" an entire committee of people. Does he actually know anyone who's had to deal with this choice? (At least he has finally realized that some women are not Christian! Mr. Sensitivity has substituted the words 'religious advisers' for the more exclusive word 'pastors.') It never occurs to Senator Obama that women can make these decisions without "consulting with" anyone. It never occurs to Senator Obama that some women would not dream of going to any religious figures to ask whether or not to get an abortion, because some women are atheists or agnostic, or know that their 'religious advisors' would not support them in their decision. (DUUUUHHHH.) And it never occurs to Senator Obama that some women are pregnant BY members of their families, and that going to their families would be the LAST thing they would do in that case. Anyone who is at all familiar with the attempts by the religious right to try to force women to get the consent of their parents before getting an abortion, would be aware of that fact. (Double DUUUUUHHHHHH.)" Heidi Li (Heidi Li's Potpourri) wonders why Barack refuses to make support for Roe v. Wade a litmus test when appointing Supreme Court justices if he's elected: "What does matter is that Senator Obama, whose party is committed to upholding Roe, refused to commit to treating that as a make or break issue when it would come to his judicial appointments. And another thing: why does Senator Obama think that women need to consult with doctors, families, and religious advisers when deciding what to do with their own bodies? I have no objection to anybody consulting with anybody about any decision, but Senator Obama's committee of consultants approach suggests that once again he misses the point when it comes to women's empowerment." Lambert (Corrente) explains, "Either the woman is in the 'best position,' or a sort of committee, composed of the woman (indeed, we've come a long way), her family, and various religious and medical experts is in the 'best position.' Why would Obama believe that a committee is in the 'best position' instead of the woman herself?"
Another exchange was focused on by Cedric and Wally (joint-post) and by Kat. This was when Barack refused to call out his supporters wearing t-shirts proclaiming Governor Sarah Palin was a c**nt or yelling to "stone her, old style." Instead Barack elected to lie. In fact, it was the Tawana Brawley campaign tactic. Play Barack as the victim and drive up the sympathy factor. Barack yammered on in that annoying uh way of uh his and at some point declared "all the Republican reports indicated were shouting, when my name came up, things like 'terrorist' and 'kill him' . . ." As Ava and I noted Sunday, " Based on one report (in The Washington Post), Goody tried to tease out a story of Governor Sarah Palin speaking to a crowd that yelled 'Kill him!' about Barack Obama. That didn't happen and your first clue is that only one outlet covering the speech mentioned it. Your second clue came when the Secret Service investigated the paper's allegation and found no evidence to support it." Eileen Sullivan's "Secret Service looking into Obama threat at rally" (Associated Press) reported yesterday, "Last week, The Washington Post reported a similar incident during a Palin rally in Clearwater, Fla. The Secret service investigated that allegation and found no indication that 'kill him' was ever said, or if it was said, that the remark was directed at Obama. Listening to tapes of that rally, the Secret Service heard 'tell him' or 'tell them,' but agents never heard 'kill him,' Secret Service spokesman Eric Zahren told The Associated Press on Wednesday." Sullivan also noted a media claim that it had taken place in Scranton and that the Secret Service was now investigating. Gqmartinez (Corrente) wonders, "Are we going to trivialize death threats the same way we trivialized racism? If Obama does win and we disagree with his policies, are we going to be called racists or, worse, be implicated in plots against him? Death threats are real and, in my view, very serious. Throwing out unfounded allegations to tarnish the opposition is not only a disgusting tactics, but it takes away focus from the real threats that may be out there." And Gqmartinez highlights Andrew M. Seder's "Secret Service says 'Kill him' allegation unfounded" (Scranton Times-Leader). Seder advises that the Scranton Times-Tribune reported that 'kill him' was cried "while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd"; however, "[t]he agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled 'kill him' when presidential hopeful Barack Obama's name was mentioned during Tuesday's Sarah Palin rally are unfounded." Seder goes not to note the way various outlets began 'reporting' it after the Times-Tribune's error. (Language Warning) Joseph (Cannonfire) also notes the Times-Leader article and compiles the threats against Hillary Clinton before wondering, "The disgusting behavior of the Obama culstists should have been an issue of national discussion -- and would have been, had the media deigned to cover the story. Why didn't they?" So let's review. Two published reports of one person yelling "kill him" and two investigations that found no proof of the claim. But it sure was a nice talking point for Barack last night. Ruth pointed out the best moment in the debate, when John McCain declared, "Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you want to run against President Bush, you should have done it four years ago."
Elaine focused on Barack's refusal to answer the question regarding mandates (a mandate does mean those not in compliance will be penalized and that's generally a fine but maybe it's jail time as well? Barack was happy to insist to Tim Russert that Hillary would fine because she had a mandate but he never wants anyone pointing out that his health care for children is mandated as well). Rebecca called the debate for McCain and noted how the forum was not to Barack's benefit. (For the perfect example of that, watch or read The CBS Evening News with Katie Couric's "Candidates Discuss Why Politicians Cheat" -- and those dependent upon the transcript should know it is very kind to Barack, leaving out all his uh-uh-uhs.)
Still on the topic of the debates, Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and his campaign issued the following which provides perspective on Barack's claims during last night's debate:
Donate $3 to Nader/Gonzalez now.
Why?
Well, on three key issues last night -- energy, health insurance, corporate crime -- Obama stood with the corporations against the interests of the American people.
Compare Nader to Obama.
Last night, McCain challenged Obama.
Tell me one time you have stood up to the leaders of your party, McCain said.
Obama couldn't name one time when he stood up to the corporations that control his party.
So, instead he named a couple of times when he stood with the corporations.
And against the interests of the American people.
I voted for tort reform, Obama said.
Wow!
Brave of you Barack.
You stood with the National Association of Manufacturers against injured people.
I support clean coal technology, Obama said.
Wow Barack, you stood with the polluting coal industry against people who suffer the consequences.
When McCain accused Obama of supporting a single payer, Canadian style national health insurance system, Obama said he didn't.
And he doesn't.
Despite the fact that a majority of doctors, nurses and the American people want it.
On national health insurance, Obama stands with the insurance industry and against the American people who are demanding single payer.
Over 5,000 U.S. physicians have signed an open letter calling on the candidates for president and Congress "to stand up for the health of the American people and implement a nonprofit, single-payer national health insurance system." (Here's the ad that ran in the New Yorker magazine.)
Obama says no.
McCain says no.
Nader/Gonzalez says yes.
Yes to single payer.
Yes to solar and no to coal.
Yes to protecting the American people from corporate recklessness and crime, no to tort deform.
So, donate $3 to the candidacy that is not on the debate stage.
But that is right on the issues.
Nader/Gonzalez.
Today, while Obama fronts for his corporate donors, Ralph Nader, Matt Gonzalez and the Nader Team will be on Wall Street protesting corporate America's sustained orgy of excess and reckless behavior.
Nader/Gonzalez continues to stand with the people.
Against the corporate criminals and their candidates in the two major parties.
Onward to November.
Shorter version, via Mike, "There's no Democrat in the presidential race, sadly." Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, John McCain and Barack Obama are all invited to a presidential debate Sunday. Austin Cassidy's Independent Political Report explains that the debate will take place at Columbia University from eight to ten p.m. (EST) and that the moderator will be Amy Goodman -- "CSPAN will cover the debate and live radio broadcasts are expected." Commenting on the exclusion of Cynthia McKinney (the only female presidential candidate this year), Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) noted, "This year, one of the pre-debate educational events at Hofstra University in Long Island will include a historical re-enactment presentation entitled 'Women's Rights: Conflicts and Schisms', which will include the character of Victoria Woodhull. Though, would Victoria Victoria Woodhull, a third party presidential candidate, have been allowed to participate in the Presidential Debates at Hofstra? If Victoria Woodhull was excluded -- as modern, woman presidnetial candidate Cynthia McKinney is slated to be -- what would Victoria Woodhull have done?" And, of course, Cynthia was excluded last night. File it under hypocrisy and see Marcia's post on hypocrisy in the 2008 election.
McCain-Palin Communications Director Jill Hazelbaker weighs in on last night's debate:
"John McCain won tonight's debate with strong, clear straight talk about setting a new direction for our country and fighting for working families. He outlined a specific, bold plan for creating jobs, helping those near retirement, keeping people in their homes, curbing spending, lowering health care costs and achieving energy independence. He vowed to fight for 'Joe the Plumber' every day he is President and he affirmed his belief that we shouldn't raise taxes just to 'spread the wealth.' While Barack Obama is measuring the drapes and campaigning against a man not even on the ballot, John McCain demonstrated that he has the experience, judgment, independence and courage to fight for every American."iraqthe new york timesalissa j. rubinstephen lee myersqassim khidhirtimes of londondeborah haynesrichard beestonmcclatchy newspapershussein kadhimkatie couricthe cbs evening newsthe washington postbill delahuntrosa delaurokatharine q. seelyethe new york timeslike maria said pazkats kornersex and politics and screeds and attitudethe daily jotcedrics big mixmikey likes itruths reportsickofitradlz
Posted at 09:31 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
"The Common Ills" (Elaine)
this week's bonus post here is elaine's post from last week. enjoy.
I
was supposed to be attending the Iraq study group but made the mistake
of mentioning to a few what I was planning on blogging tonight and the
reaction was, "Write it early so I can link to it!"
The Common Ills hits the four year mark next month. I thought I'd push ahead in line and write about that. I had many ideas of where to start but Ruth pointed out, "The only place to start is with C.I." She is correct. Throughout
2003-2004, I was among the many friends of C.I.'s saying, "You should
start a blog." In one regard, we were being selfish. C.I. is famous for
her letters. There are people I haven't seen in years but feel as if
I've kept up with them due to C.I.'s letters. The letters are page
turners and they address everything and anything. When I was a smoker,
I'd have to light up to enjoy the good read. In February 2003, C.I. had
to fill in for a friend who had scheduled some college campus events to
speak out against what seemed (and what was) the impending illegal war.
C.I. grabbed those and was supposed to finish them out at or near the
end of March. However, the illegal war started. So we all loved
the phone calls (those of us in C.I.'s inner circle) and we loved what
remained of the 'letters' (largely observations of campus reactions to
the illegal war and much shorter than most of us were used to). But to
be honest, a lot of us thought, "A blog would be a way to get those
letters still." Equally true was that many of us thought a blog
would mean C.I. could go off the road. So we pestered and we pleaded.
C.I.'s response was always, "I don't even know what a blog is." After
the 2004 election, C.I. participated in a "what worked and what didn't"
conversation. It was illuminating in many ways but the only thing C.I.
could really think of for "what I could have done but didn't" was do a
blog. If you know C.I. what happens next is not at all
unexpected. C.I. left the meeting, went home and tried to learn about
blogs. But there's never time so after about 20 minutes, C.I. just
tried to learn how to set up one. Within a half-hour of arriving home,
C.I. had done just that. I was a small handful of people (20) that C.I.
passed on the news to. In fact, we were on the phone that night. I
could talk about how to find readers but that's really C.I.'s story. If
she wants to tell it, she will. One thing she's written of online is
that the multi-posts on day two were really just practice and comfort. She
knew no rules and wasn't sure what to do or how to do it. Due to the
fact that the New York Times had ticked her off that day, that became
the paper they referenced. But C.I. has a shy streak that you really
have to know her to grasp. She can go out before a crowd and you'd
never know there was any discomfort if you didn't really know her. So
it's no surprise for those of us who know her that her first post that
first Friday was the sort of thing where her hands were shaking and she
was extremely nervous. She didn't want that discomfort level so she
planned 'easy' topics for Saturday that would let her post multiple
times and get comfortable. Due to her own interests, they caught
attention. Again, she can write about that. But she had people leaving
comments and e-mailing. I'll go ahead and share her greatest regret.
One of the nicest comments (there weren't any mean comments) was from a
young woman (I think she was 17) who had her own blog. C.I. did not
know how to do a "blog roll" then. If she had, that young woman would
have been on the blog roll just for that first comment. But when
comments were closed (I'll get to that), that comment was closed.
(There may be a way for C.I. to read it. If so, she's not aware of it
and no one else is.) But one of the posts that second day of
blogging is the only one that C.I. would ever change. She feels she was
"gushing." It didn't read that way but you could tell she was touched
by the fact that people were commenting and sending e-mails. I honestly
think it is more the self-referential factor that has C.I. embarrassed
about that post. As someone who has known her for years (we went
to college together and became friends, but I knew her before that), I
know that "Let me talk about me" (facts, feelings or memories or
dreams) is not a topic C.I. ever offers in conversation. So I truly
believe that's where the discomfort factor comes in. Jim, Jess, Ty and Dona were leaving comments and e-mailing from that Saturday. They go way back in the community. C.I.
always says (and often writes) that the community shaped The Common
Ills. Those aren't empty words. They shaped the focus, the content and
you name it. The first big attention getting thing at The Common Ills
was probably " When NPR Fails You, Who You Gonna' Call? Not the Ombudsman"
which resulted in a ton of links. C.I. didn't plan to write that.
Someone wrote in asking that the topic be addressed and C.I. did it.
From there, many more would get attention from outside the community,
but that first one came solely because a reader wrote in that he was
unhappy with the NPR ombudsman's response. So C.I. read the response
and explained why the commentator should never have been invited on. (A
point that the ombudsman should have known but apparently didn't or
didn't want to write about that.) That got a lot of attention
and a lot of comments. In December 2004, comments would be shut down.
Keesha had shared repeatedly that she didn't like the comment option.
She had visited many blogs and would feel comfortable with one and then
comments would be left attacking her for her race. C.I. promised her
that comments would be closed if that ever happened. There were two
Blue Dog Democrats who always had to leave comments and one day they
attacked Keesha with racist statements. That's when C.I. closed
comments (and had to learn how to do that). Keesha and other
members truly shaped the community. Liang and Marcia are early
community members. When comments were closed, it especially became
necessary for C.I. to represent the community and to speak for them.
That was a lot of pressure and it's not anything that the rest of us
would ever attempt to tackle. For one thing, we don't have the time to
go through multiple e-mails before we write a word. But that is C.I. She will always raise a voice for those who feel no one is speaking for them. It
was a left site from the start. It was a feminist site. It was a blog.
That changed before the comments were closed. C.I. jokes about how she
never learned to do a blog. What she did do was build a community. This
time, what's going on right now, is actually more helpful to explaining
The Common Ills than any other period. That's because it's similar to
when C.I. started The Common Ills. Look for discussions about Iraq. You
will have a hard time finding them. Iraq was a topic for The Common
Ills and Jim will tell you that is one of the things that drew Ty,
Jess, Dona and himself to The Common Ills that first weekend. No one
was talking about Iraq. Everyone was still in the election. They
would stay in that mode for the next month as well. In January, the
'anti-war' AlterNet would publish an essay that was a War Hawk
reconsideration of the Iraq War. (Tom Hayden, when he still had some
common sense, managed to call that essay out.) If you notice how C.I.
finds a way to cover Iraq each day right now, you've got a good idea of
the silence everywhere else that we had to put up with in 2004. Calling
cards are a big deal with Jim and he (rightly) has always noted that
Ava and C.I. are The Third Estate Sunday Review's calling card (their
writing). C.I. created calling cards at The Common Ills early on and
that's what allowed the community to build up. There was a move away at
allegedly 'left' sites from abortion and from the illegal war. C.I.
didn't play that game. Another game C.I. didn't play was "Bash
the Bitch." It was very, very popular online and went far beyond Judith
Miller. Every woman was a target to be carved up. The blogger bois had
their (male) heroes and pretty much hated all women and thought they
could sexualize them. Todd S. Purdum's "atheletic cup" was an early
effort at making the point about the difference in the way a woman was
treated and a man was treated. (C.I. knows Todd's wife very well. Todd
does not stink. That was an effort to show the way a woman's writing
was called out. The bulk of drive-bys got that but to this day, C.I.
still gets e-mails asking about that. Despite noting repeatedly at The
Common Ills that Todd doesn't stink.) The same thing happened
with members of Congress. Any man could be elevated as a hero and could
be applauded but it was as though there were no women in Congress --
unless they could be called out. C.I. wrote a piece on Barbara Boxer
and Shirley Tubbs Jones in January of 2005 that took The Common Ills to
a new level. It was those entries that really helped define The Common
Ills. You knew Iraq would be covered, you knew that feminism
would flow and you could usually count on some hard hitting press
criticism with or without humor. By January, community sites
started. I'll focus on A Winding Road here because it was one of the
first three and it is no more. A community member named Folding Star
started that site. FS covered the Senate and books. FS got e-mails that
were nasty and finally began wondering what was the point? After that
continued, FS shut down A Winding Road about seven months after it
started. You really have to have a thick skin to be able to
blog. (Within three weeks of its start date, The Common Ills was not a
'blog.' It was what everyone wanted C.I. to cover and never "What I
wanted to write about.") It's a lesson most have had to learn. C.I.
didn't have to learn it and that's what most people outside the
community never grasp. If you don't like something C.I. wrote, it's not
the end of the world to C.I. It is something C.I. will take seriously.
She'll think about it for days and days, mulling it over. That results
from two things. First, C.I. doesn't think she's the last word. (Many
would argue I put that mildly.) Second, she will gladly acknowledge she
could be wrong ("and I often am" -- pops up all the time at The Common
Ills). Equally true is that C.I. can handle negativity aimed at her
better than mass love. That's always been the case. C.I.'s hard wired
that way. But Folding Star was a lesson for a lot of people who
had sites then and would start one later. C.I. always made clear that
no one should ever blame FS for folding up tent. No one should. If you
spoke to most people doing sites in the community, you'd grasp that
they have thought about it. Wally almost shut down his site in 2006. This
is probably a good point to discuss the going dark in November 2008
aspect. In 2005, C.I. had gone through a great deal (including cancer).
She was tired. She was tired of the road, she was tired of the lack of
concern about the illegal war in the country at large, she was tired of
getting up each day and having to post entries to The Common Ills. A
number of other issues came together during a writing session for Third
and C.I. declared The Common Ills would probably close down in November
of 2008. (She also noted -- and this shocked Jim as much as the closing
down -- that the illegal war would still be going on.) That is
typical C.I. The idea of doing something forever, something that can
sometimes feel like serving a jail sentence, was too much and she
needed an end point she could work to. So knowing that come November
2008, the whole thing could end allowed her something to work to. The
first Christmas, a number of members e-mailed. Krista's gone public
about her e-mail so I'll share that story. She'd just graduated college
the previous May, found a job in Florida, moved out to Florida and
started working. But she didn't have the money to fly home and her
parents had their own financial issues that year and she didn't want
them to spend money on a plane ticket. So she told them she had to
work. She didn't. It's changed a little online but, back then,
Christmas meant two to three weeks of nothing online at most sites.
(Air America Radio also went into repeats back then. I have no idea if
they still do.) The e-mails like Krista raised an issue C.I. had not
thought of. It resulted in the fact that C.I. never takes a day off.
There's never been a day where C.I. hasn't posted in four years. If you think about that, you'll probably grasp why anyone would need an end point to work towards. (Of course, it should be noted that C.I. works with Third every weekend as well as doing The Common Ills.) Having an end point allowed C.I. to keep going. Those of us who insisted C.I. should do a site have been proved right. The
reason for that is that C.I. I really think she has come through
online. She is not afraid to express her opinion but she's not afraid
to allow other opinions and she will go out of her way to defend anyone
under attack. She has a fairness that is sorely lacking in many
quarters (online and offline). A perfect example is when the New
York Times slimed Paul Bremer. C.I. doesn't care for Bremer but when
Bremer responded to the unfair whispers that the paper ran as fact (and
unsourced), C.I. took up for Bremer's stand. You didn't find that a lot
of other places. Do we actually believe that Bremer could do whatever
he wanted without White House approval? There's no way in the world. It
was gossips trying to find a fall guy and going to Bremer. Bremer made
huge mistakes and needs to take responsibility for them. But to claim
that Bremer acted alone is dishonest. Oklahoma members found
themselves in a bind. Ralph Nader did not make the ballot. Nor did
Cynthia McKinney. In fact, their only choices are John McCain, Barack
Obama or not to vote. They can't write in. They deliberated for weeks
and came out with their answer this week: They're endorsing John McCain. That
wasn't a surprise to C.I. (who'd told me last week she expected that to
happen). But if you paid attention this week, even before they told her
their decision, you saw C.I. preparing for that, anticipating it. You
have seen C.I. defend their right and that goes to C.I. C.I.
doesn't care how you vote. C.I. was covering that in 2004 and noting
that no one 'steals' an election by garnering votes. C.I. also made
clear that your vote is your vote and only you can decide what to do
with it. When the decision was announced, it wasn't a shock to the
community because we've all grasped the basics on who owns your vote:
only you. The reaction of the community has not been outrage at the Oklahoma members. That goes to the ground work that C.I. has laid. That's
probably the most value of what C.I. has done. Yes, in terms of the
Oklahoma decision but also in terms of many other things. C.I. has
always been ahead of the curve, her entire life. "Trust those
instincts," I've always told her. What we're hearing (valid
criticism) about Barack Obama and Barack's campaign are all points C.I.
laid out some time ago. That's really true of any issue C.I. has
covered. Having known her for years, I was amazed at the
groundwork laid re: Iraq this week. It's the sort of thing you may not
catch if you're not looking but, even if you don't catch it, you absorb
it. A lot of people (online or offline) are caught up in the
"response." C.I.'s marking out new territory, breaking new ground. By
mid-January, some of the issues C.I.'s raising will be seized upon by
others who will rush to play catch up. So it's just been really
great to see. Any of us who try to blog or do a site have to learn how
to communicate and how to be who we are. Find a voice is the more
precise term. Rebecca will tell you that she was all over the place for
her first three or four months. She had the beginning of her voice but
it waivered from time to time and she had to find it. With C.I., she
just took who she is when she's speaking, who she is when writing a
letter and who she is offline. She's also known her limitations
and grasped that she can't cover everything. So you will see the focus
shift and narrow. As someone who blogs (and does so very badly), I
really appreciate and admire what she's managed to do. That's
leaving aside the personal issues (the cancer in 2005, the return this
year), that's leaving aside the hectic schedule, that's leaving aside
so many things which, if factored in, really amaze me. But she found a way to communicate and to keep the war front and center. The Iraq War. Begun in March 2003 and still ongoing. But
we saw the 'anti-war' crowd rush off to that war with Iran that they've
been telling us (since 2004) is about to break out any day. They've got
to stop it. Repeatedly. But it never started. All the time they wasted
on that non-issue took time away from Iraq. The illegal war drags on
because our 'voices' refuse to take it seriously. For four
years, C.I. will have covered the Iraq War as the illegal war it is.
Look around and find the others (online or off) who can say the same. Didn't
we see our big 'anti-war' group trying to garner press attention this
week by protesting . . . Wall St. Yes, they always have something to do
other than Iraq. Unless Iraq is big in the news and then the 'anti-war'
group suddenly remembers it. If we had ten of C.I., the illegal war would be closer to ending. Barack
Obama is not going to end the illegal war. He admitted June 5th that he
won't decide what he'll do if elected until he's elected. His on the
road 'promises' to end the illegal war aren't promises. But even those
false promises don't promise an end to the illegal war. Norman
Solomon, Jeremey Scahill, Laura Flanders, Matthew Rothschild . . .
Think of all the 'anti-war' voices and how they have destroyed their
own credibility. I don't know if C.I.'s going to continue The Common
Ills much beyond November (it will go through January due to a promise
Ava and C.I. made on an unrelated issue) but if C.I. feels like
continuing, the reason to do so is that C.I.'s one of the few in this
country who has maintained their credibility. The rest have defined
their role as cheerleading the War Hawk Barack into the White House. That
will not be forgotten. It's so strange because during Vietnam, we saw
these sell outs but they waited until the 1976 election -- after the US
left Vietnam. The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, and Ava, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, 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, Trina of Trina's Kitchen, Wally of The Daily Jot, and Marcia SICKOFITRDLZ. All
of the above sites spun off from The Common Ills. I'd hoped to talk
about Isaiah's comics, Kat's CD reviews, the community newsletters and
more. But I've run out of time. So I'll just steal from Kat and say,
"It is what it is." "Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):Friday,
October 10, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, another journalist is
killed, yesterday's assassination causes more suspicions of the US,
Iraqi Christians are targeted says an Archbishop, and more.
Yesterday
at the White House, spokesperson Dana Perino was asked about Iraqi
Christians "losing representation in Iraq's Muslim-dominated
legislature" and Perino responded that "I think that that was resolved
and the Christians' rights were restored." (Full answer: "I'll check,
but I think you should double check, because I think that that was
resolved and the Christians' rights were restored.") No, they were not.
Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reported,
"a separate bill" will be sent "to parliament to restore" Article 50.
The bill may or not pass. But the provincial elections bill, which
passed by Parliament, passed the presidency council and was signed into
law by Iraqi president Jalal Talabani, eliminated Article 50 which
guaranteed representation to religious minorities. Yesterday, Kim Gamel (AP) reported
that in Mosul so far this month, 7 corpses of Iraqi Christians have
been discovered, notes that a person's religion is listed on the state
i.d., that there are approximately 800,000 Iraqi Christians still in
the country, and quotes Chaldean Archibishop Louis Sako stating, "We
are worried about the campaign of killings and deportations against the
Christian citizens in Mosul." The Kurdish Globe reported
yesterday that the Yazidis and the Christians continue protesting over
the elimination of Article 50 and quotes Jamil Zeito ("head of the
Seriaques-Chaldeans Public Council") stating, "We will demonstrate and
protest until we achieve autonomous rights for Christians in our
districts as well as fair representation for religious minorities,
including Christians, in the provincial elections. The protests and
demonstrations will not stop till we accomplish our fair rights;
ignoring the rights of minorities indicates incomplete democracy in
Iraq." And, as AINA reports,
the issue has led to protests elsewhere as well such as the Iraqi
embassy in Sweden where protestors gathered and Isak Monir ("spokesman
for the Chaldean Federation in Sweden") explained, "Since the decision
to exclude minorities representatives was taken by the Iraqi parliament
the violence against Christians has increased remarkably. The groups
who want Iraq cleaned from other ethnic and religious groups maybe felt
that they are backed up by the parliament and consequently have begun
to kill Christians again. They want a homogeneous Iraq -- cleaned from
other ethnic and religious groups." Ethan Cole (Christian Post) notes
the 3 Iraqi Christians killed on Tuesday in Mosul and he explains of
Mosul "the city is a historic center for Assyrian Christians, who view
it as their ancestral homeland. It is home to the second-largest
community of Christians in Iraq, after Baghdad." Asia News (via Catholic Today) identifies the dead:
More Christian blood in Mosul. On October 7, a father and son were
killed in the neighborhood of Sukkar while they were working. Amjad
Hadi Petros and his son were killed because "they were guilty of being
Christian" in a place where a "systematic persecution" is being seen.
In a second attack, recorded in another of the city's neighborhoods, a
fundamentalist group broke into a pharmacy and killed an assistant,
also of the Christian religion. We also recounted the execution, on
Monday, October 6, of Ziad Kamal, a 25-year-old disabled shop owner in
the city. The young man owned a store in the neighborhood of Karama: he
was taken by an armed group from inside his store and brought to a
nearby spot, where he was shot to death. Also, on Saturday, October 4,
two more men were barbarously assassinated in two other areas of Mosul:
Hazim Thomaso Youssif, 40, was killed in front of the clothing store he
owned, while 15-year-old Ivan Nuwya was shot to death in the
neighborhood of Tahrir, outside of his house in front of the local
mosque of Alzhara.
Vatican Radio offers a report:
Vatican
Radio: Concern is growing once again over violence against Christians
in nothern Iraq where, in the last week alone, seven of them have been
killed in the city of Mosul. Attacks have tapered off amid a drastic
decline in overall violence nationwide but these latest killings have
sparked renewed fears. The Chaldean Archbishop of Kirkuk, Luis Sako,
has condemned the violence.
Archbishop Sako: In Mosul the
situation is terrible especially for the Christians and many families
left the city, children cannot go to the school and also people cannot
go to work they are staying in their houses. Just a real tragedy for
them. I made an appeal to the Mosul population because I am from Mosul
-- I lived years in Mosul, in a parish -- and I had many, many
relationships with Muslims most of them so I made a call and an appeal.
This appeal has been delivered in all the local medias. This could be
helpful to encourage Muslim moderates to react and to do something.
The United Nations and Peoples Organization notes
the Wednesday meeting of the European Parliament of the EPP-ED in
Brussles which addressed "Christian Communities in the Muslim World:
Iraq". Archbishop of Mosul Basile Georges Casmoussa called the crisis
"heartbreaking" and stated Iraq Christians make up 40% of the refugee
population despite being only 4% of Iraq's population. He also noted
that that "aid was not reaching Christians in Iraq". The report also
notes: "Kirkuk was identified as a crucial issue by Ms. Naglaa Elhag,
of the IKV Pax Christi organization, in her presentation on 'The
Situation of Refugees in Iraq' -- the topic of the final panel. Until
this was addressed and Europe adopted a cohesive policy there were few
positive signs to be seen in the region Ms. Elhag concluded. Even
outside Iraq, Christians continued to find themselves excluded from
basic social services and had to face ongoing intimidation and
violence. There was also a pressing need to hold the Iraqi government
accountable for its failure to adequately protect the Iraqi Christian
minority." Marwan Ibrahim (AFP) reports
Archbishop Louis Sako declared today, "We are the target of a campaign
of liquidation, a campaign of violence. The objective is political. . .
. We have heard many words from Prime Minister Maliki, but
unfortunately this has not translated into reality. We continue to be
targeted. We want solutions, not promises." So, to toss back to Dana
Perino, no, "that" was not "resolved."
Dana Priest (Washington Post) was online at her paper yesterday afternoon for a discussion with readers
and the topic of the National Intelligence Estimate [] was raised.
Priest: "The jist of the NIE has been known for a while, since all the
reporting that the Washington Post and other major news organizations
have been doing over the past year says, basically, the same thing. In
this sense, the NIE does not offer a big revelation; it just brings the
series of daily intel/military analysis on Afghanistan to a higher
level with more visibility. Unlike the days before the Iraq war, many
people have access to what's happening in afghanistan and are willing
to share it with reporters, in part because they are frustrated it's
not getting more attention and they believe it should if, as we have
said since 9-11, defeating terrorism is a priority." Wednesday Jonathan S. Landay, Warren P. Strobel and Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) reported
on the upcoming National Intelligence Estimate (which may or may not be
released prior to the US elections in November), "The draft NIE,
however, warns that the improvements in security and political
progress, like the recent passage of a provincial election law, are
threatened by lingering disputes between the majority Shiite Arabs,
Sunni Arabs, Kurds and other minorities, the U.S. officials said.
Sources of tension identified by the NIE, they said, include a struggle
between Sunni Arabs, Kurds and Turkmen for control of the oil-rich
northern city of Kirkuk; and the Shiite-led central government's
unfulfilled vows to hire former Sunni insurgents who joined Awakening
groups." At the White House yesterday Dana Perino noted that US
Secretary of State Condi Rice has not read the report. Not a slam at
Condi, just noting that the report is under wraps. Rice noted she
hadn't read it in brief remarks to the press before meeting with Maris
Reikstins (Lativian Foreign Affairs Minister) in DC, "Well, in fact, I
have actually not seen the NIE. I will -- I assume that we'll be
briefed on it shortly. But in any case, we had asked for the
intelligence community to take a look. It's important that it do so."
The issue of the NIE was raised at Thursday's State Dept press briefing
conducted by Sean McCormack who noted, "She [Rice] has not yet seen it,
and I don't believe any of the policy makers in the State Department
have seen any drafts of this assessment. I would expect at some point
that they will be briefed on it."
As noted in yesterday's snapshot,
Iraqi MP Saleh al-Auaeili was assassinated yesterday. al-Auqaeili had
been one of the 30 member Sadr bloc in Parliament. Tensions are high
over the assassination and Jeffrey Fleishman (Los Angeles Times) reports
overnight fighting in the Sadr City section of Baghdad between, on one
side, Sadr supporters and, on the other, Iraqi and US forces. Fleishman
also notes that Ahmed Massoudi ("a Sadr spokesman") states, "The
occupation sent us a message by staging this attack [the assassination]
because of our stance against the agreement." Sam Dagher (New York Times) quotes
Sheik Salah al-Obeidi (Moqtada al-"Sadr's chief spokesman") stating,
"By killing Ugaili they are silencing a major opponent of the
agreement" -- which would be the treaty the White House and the puppet
of the occupation want to pretend is a SOFA. Sheik al-Obeidi ties the
assassination in with other pressure to push on the treaty including US
Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte's visit to Iraq this week and
he also notes that a demonstration will take place October 18th in
Baghdad "against the American presence in Iraq." Ernesto London (Washington Post) quoted
MP Ahmad al-Massoudi stating, "We have laid the blame on the occupation
forces and the Iraqi government for the martyrdom of [the lawmaker]
because the explosion happened in an area that is under the control of"
the US military (the Green Zone). Marwa Sabah (AFP) reports
that the "[m]ourners shouted anti-American slogans . . . as relatives
hugged each other and wept while the wooden coffin of Ogayly was
brought out of his home early on Friday draped in the tri-colour Iraqi
flag." Khaled Farhan (Reuters) notes
a statement released by Moqtada al-Sadr: "The martyr gave most of his
time to eject the occupiers. . . . And for this reason the hand of the
hateful occupation and terrorism killed him." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) explains
that observers (US and Iraqi) are noting a shift from acts of violence
targeting mass numbers of people to assassination attempts "using
magnetic bombs, weapons with silencers and bicycle bombs. As
provinicial elections approach, some officials worry that
assassinations will increase as political parties try to eradicate
their competitors." Leila Fadel (McClatchy) quotes
the statement by al-Sadr reading, "Here is another star that brightens
in the sky of martyrs, of Sadr followers and the sons of Iraq. Another
martyr waters the land of Iraq with his blood, a martyr that sacrifices
himself for the sake of Iraq and the people of Iraq, a martyr that gave
all of his time to expel the occupier and not to sign agreements with
him."
Tensions in Baghdad also include the ongoing conflict between northern Iraq and Turkey. Hurriyet notes
reports coming out stating that Turkey will be "direct talks with the
regional administration in the northern Iraq in its fight against the
terror organization, PKK". CNN notes that Turkey bombed northern Iraq again today. Reuters provides
the catch-up for the latest tensions, "Turkey's parliament on Wednesday
approved a government request to extend for another year a mandate to
launch military operations against PKK rebels based in northern Iraq
from where they are suspected of crossing into Turkey to attack
soldiers.
Turkish authorities are under mounting pressure after a
series of deadly attacks on Turkish security forces and police, which
has left more than 20 dead in recent days." Meanwhile the Turkish Daily News offers
this observation, "It looks like the [Turkish] government will not bow
to pressure from the opposition which calls for a ground incursion to
Iraq as well as setting up a security zone in the border." At the US
State Dept today, spokesperson Sean McCormack was asked about Prime
Minister Tayyip Recep Erdogan's statements regarding " a buffer zone in
northern Iraq" to prevent attacks by the PKK on Turkey and McCormack
replied, "We are working with the Turkish and Iraqi governments on a
common problem, and that is the threat of terrorism from the PKK." An
October 17th vote for a non-permantnet seat on the United Nations'
Security Council will be held and that Turkey is a candidate for that
seat. Asso Ahmed (Los Angeles Times) quotes
PKK "senior leader" Bozan Takeen declaring in a phone interview "from
his hideout in Iraqi Kurdistan," "We are ready and our forces are
ready. We are not afraid of them. If they want to attack Iraq's
Kurdistan, then the Middle East will turn into a fire ball."
Meanwhile
Wednesday, in the Green Zone, US Maj Gen Jeffery Hammond declared:Now,
take for example, the transition or transfer of the Sons of Iraq to
Government of Iraq control. Now, we have two phases to this plan. The
first one is the transfer of the Sons of Iraq to the, to the Government
of Iraq control, which will include the assumption and the payment of
their salaries starting this month in October. We're working very
closely with our Iraqi counterparts to make sure this works. The
Government of Iraq has committed to accept responsibility for the Sons
of Iraq and it's been mandated in the Prime Minister Order No. 118‑C,
and we're going to be there to assist in the transfer. We spent the
last few weeks working hand in hand with the Iraqi Security Forces, the
IFCNR, our Iraqi partners and I'm confident ‑‑ I'm confident this is
going to go well. But again, effective this month, the Government of
Iraq will start paying the salaries for the Sons of Iraq.
Actually . . . Anwar J. Ali, Sam Dagher, Stephen Farrell, Erica Goode and Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) report
on the tensions brewing among the "Awakeing"s including graffiti
appearing that is "the motto of a feared paramilitary unit during
Saddam Hussein's era": "Allah. Homeland. Salary" -- which "Awakening"
Sgt. Alaa al-Janabi ("Dora Awakening") states is "our slogan."
al-Janabi goes on to cite that the Iraqi government is not paying them
enough money to live on and offer "We're not going to fight again.
Unless they make us." Saleh al-Jubori ("a leader of the Awakening
Council in Dora") states that "there is no trust between us and the
National Police" and, "if the Awakening is let go, Dora will go back to
worse than it was before. I hope you don't consider this a threat." And
staying with the topic of "worse," Robert Fisk (Independent of London) reports
"that secret executions are being carried out in the prisons run by
Nouri al-Maliki's 'democratic' government. The hangings are carried out
regularly -- from a wooden gallows in a small, cramped cell -- in
Saddam Hussein's old intelligence headquarters at Kazimiyah. There is
no public record of these killings in what is now called Baghdad's
'high-security detention facility' but most of the victims -- there
have been hundreds since America introduced 'democracy' to Iraq -- are
said to be insurgents, given the same summary justice they mete out to
their own captives."
Staying with violence, Reuters notes
that 28-year-old journalist Diyar Abbas was shot dead in Kirkuk today
joining "at least 135 journalists [who] have been killed in the line of
duty since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003." Tuesday the Committee to Protect Journalists featured Robert Mahoney's report
on 27-year-old Iraqi journalist Jehad Abdulwahid Hannoon who had
surived a shooting in Baghdad and, with help from the international
journalism community (including CBS News' Lara Logan), was able to come
to the US where he had "successful surgery in a California hospital to
repair his bullet-shattered right leg." CPJ notes "135 journalists and
50 support workers" have died in Iraq. Here, we say 185 journalists.
"Support workers" are doing a great deal more than that classification
implies. So Diyar Abbass becomes at least the 186th journalist to die
in Iraq.
In some of today's other reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed 2 lives and left twelve
wounded, a Baghdad car bombing claimed 12 lives with twenty-two more
wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 2 lives and left
fourteen wounded. On the Mosul roadside bombing, China's Xinhua cites
a police source who explains, "A roadside bomb detonated in the
afternoon at a popular marketplace in the Bab al-Tob neighborhood".
Corpses?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.
In legal news, mercenaries in Iraq got a setback today. Matthew Barakat (AP) reports
that KBR contractor Ira L. Waltrip -- caught with child pornography --
was informed by US District Judge T.S. Ellis III that he wasn't any
getting any special breaks and that the argument that Waltrip was doing
the same duties soldiers do so should be punished the same way one of
them would have been was bunk. The Judge informed Waltrip's attorney
that, "He wasn't there because he volunteered. He was there to get some
money."
Public TV notes. NOW on PBS examines the American Dream as gas prices soar and home values crumble. PBS' Washington Week
finds Gwen sitting down with Washington Post's Dan Balz, National
Journal's James Barnes, Wall St. Journal's David Wessel and mystery
guest Karen Tumulty (Time magazine) who may or may not do her Hush,
Hush Sweet Charlotte impersonation. Both programs air tonight in some
PBS markets, check local listings.
Turning to the US presidential race, Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente is her running mate. Rosa has the following upcoming campaign event this weekend in New York:
Jericho 10th Anniversary Weekend of Resistance www.jerichomovement.com
Saturday, October 11, 2008 @ 12 Noon Rally at the Harlem State Office
Building (Corner of 126th St. & A.C. Powell Blvd.) March through
Harlem @ 1 p.m. Closing Rally in Morningside Park @ 2 p.m. Between
112th & 114th near Morningside Ave. entrances
Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and Sunday he will be Fairfax, VA to speak at a press conference and rally at Geroge Mason Univeristy beginning at 5:00 p.m.
Barack Obama is the Democratic presidential candidate, Joe Biden is his running mate. As Wally and Cedric
noted yesterday, Barack seemed to offer some sort of Born Free/Elsa
excuse for his friendship with Ayers whom he called "rehabilitated." Jake Tapper (ABC News) ponders rehabilitation:
And Ayers has made it clear that he is unrepentant.
''I don't regret setting bombs,'' Ayers told the New York Times in 2001.
''I feel we didn't do enough.'' Asked if he would do it all again,
Ayers said ''I don't want to discount the possibility. I don't think
you can understand a single thing we did without understanding the
violence of the Vietnam War."
In a comic strip that Ayers recently posted on his blog,
Ayers tried to explain the "we didn't do enough quote" from seven years
ago, writing, "It's impossible to get to be my age and not have plenty
of regrets. The one thing I don't regret is opposing the war in Vietnam
with every ounce of my being. During the Vietnam War, the Weather
Underground took credit for bombing several government installations as
a dramatic form of armed propaganda. Action was taken against symbolic
targets in order to declare a state of emergency. But warnings were
always called in, and by design no one was ever hurt.
"When I say,
'We didn't do enough,' a lot of people rush to think, 'That must mean,
"We didn't bomb enough s---."' But that's not the point at all. It's
not a tactical statement, it's an obvious political and ethical
statement. In this context, 'we' means 'everyone.' The war in Vietnam
was not only illegal, it was profoundly immoral, millions of people
were needlessly killed. Even though I worked hard to end the war, I
feel to this day that I didn't do enough because the war dragged on for
years after the majority of the American people came to oppose it. I
don't think violent resistance is necessarily the answer, but I do
think opposition and refusal is imperative."
(He doesn't think violent resistance is NECESSARILY the answer?)
So today, with today's facts, does Obama think Ayers has been "rehabilitated"?
No, he doesn't think so, a source at the campaign tells me.
Mike did a press roundup on Barack's Ayers stories last night, Kat called out AP's Philip Elliott who does not seem to grasp the number of "40," Ruth contemplated the press mistakes, Rebecca noted the lack of standards and Marcia congratulates Oklahoma community members (as have Kat, as did Elaine and Mike). Oklahoma community members are supporting the Republican ticket of John McCain and Sarah Palin.
The McCain-Palin campaign has a new TV ad entitled "Ambition" (click here to read more about it):
ANNCR: Obama's blind ambition.
When convenient, he worked with terrorist Bill Ayers.
When discovered, he lied.
Obama. Blind ambition. Bad judgment.
Congressional liberals fought for risky sub-prime loans.
Congressional liberals fought against more regulation.
Then, the housing market collapsed costing you billions.
In crisis, we need leadership, not bad judgment.
JOHN MCCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.
In addition, the Republican ticket notes:
Today
McCain-Palin 2008 announced that Bill Bruins, a dairy farmer from Fond
du Lac County, Wisconsin, joined the McCain-Palin Farm & Ranch Team
National Steering Committee. Bruins joins a distinguished team of
elected officials and leaders in agriculture who share a common goal
with John McCain: to provide the leadership necessary to create
prosperity in America's rural heartland. "John McCain understands
agriculture's need for a comprehensive national energy policy that will
combat rising energy costs," Bruins said. "I support John McCain
because he will foster greater opportunities for agriculture to thrive
in a market-driven society by reducing taxes and government
regulations. Most importantly, he understands that reducing trade
barriers expands international commerce and increases farmers' income."
In addition to serving on the McCain-Palin Farm and Ranch Team National
Steering Committee, Bruins joins former Wisconsin Secretary of
Agriculture Jim Harsdorf as a Wisconsin state co-chair on the Wisconsin
McCain-Palin Farm & Ranch Team. "Bill's understanding of
agriculture from both state and national public policy involvement
makes him a great addition to the McCain-Palin team in Wisconsin,"
Harsdorf said. "Bill Bruins is a hands-on dairy and crop producer who
understands the importance of John McCain's support for free trade, his
commitment to reducing the inheritance and capital gains tax on farmers
and his plan to reduce high energy costs by pursuing domestic energy
sources." The continuing success of American agriculture and the health
of America's rural heartland require a leader who understands that
productivity and innovation are created by the effort, ingenuity and
investment of individual Americans. As president, John McCain will
address the key issues facing agriculture and rural America:
Establishing a comprehensive energy strategy
Controlling taxation and regulation
Judicial restraint and preserving property rights
Providing a sustainable, market-driven risk management system for farmers
Promoting agricultural markets and reducing trade barriers
Improving incentives to invest in technology and rural infrastructure
Encouraging common-sense conservation and food safety measures
Securing America's borders and implementing a fair and practical immigration policy
Recognizing the role of agriculture in national security
Strengthen
America's economic competitiveness by eliminating wasteful government
spendingThe benefits of American leadership in agriculture extend well
beyond our borders -- America's contribution to meeting the food,
fiber, feed and energy needs of a growing world population through
efficient production and technology innovation are critical to our
national security. More details on John McCain's statement on
"Prosperity for Rural America" can be found on the McCain-Palin 2008
web site at rural.JohnMcCain.com. MCCAIN-PALIN 2008 FARM & RANCH TEAM NATIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE*
And finally, Team Nader notes:
This morning, as markets around the world are crashing, Nader/Gonzalez is on the rise.
And we need your help right now.
Here's why:
We have a chance over the next week to run inexpensive radio ads.
In battleground states all across this country.
To expose The Bailout Boys -- Obama and McCain.
And to let the American people know that on November 4, they have a choice.
The people's candidate -- Independent Ralph Nader.
The man who stood against the bailout of Wall Street crooks.
And for regulation that would have prevented the current crisis.
Here's the problem:
We want to run the radio ads from October 21 to Election Day -- November 4.
In thirty markets all across this country.
Our radio guy tells us he needs the money by Monday to be able to reserve air time for the last two weeks before the election.
Throughout this year, when we have asked, you have delivered.
Thanks to you, we have not missed one fundraising deadline this year.
Now, we are in a corner.
Over the past week, you have donated $130,000 to our October Surprise Fund.
On our way to our goal of $250,000 by Sunday midnight.
Now, to reach our goal, we need 12,000 of you -- our loyal supporters -- to kick in $10 each.
We know that many of you have dug deep for the past seven months.
So,
after you hit that contribute button, pick up the phone and get your
friends, relatives, neighbors -- who are angry about the bailout and
looking for an independent outlet -- to support the one candidate who
has stood with the American people against the corporate criminal elite
on Wall street.
To give you a sneak preview, we have cut a demo tape.
If
we reach our goal by Sunday night, we will be professionally producing
a version of this demo ad and getting it out to our radio guy in Los
Angeles.
As the Dow collapses, the Nader/Gonzalez shift the power platform is on the rise.
So, donate now -- whatever you can afford -- $10, $100, $1000 -- up to the legal limit of $2,300.
Help us fund our nationwide radio ad buy.
Inform the American public.
There is a choice on November 4.
Vote Independent.
Vote Ralph Nader for President.
Onward to November.
The Nader Team
iraqethan colekim gamelthe new york timesalissa j. rubinerica goodesam dagherstephen farrellanwar j. alirobert fiskthe washington postdana priestleila fadelmcclatchy newspapersnancy a. youssefjonathan s. landaywarren p. strobeljeffrey fleishmanthe los angeles timesnow on pbspbswashington weeklike maria said pazkats kornersex and politics and screeds and attitudethe daily jotcedrics big mixmikey likes itruths reportsickofitradlz
Posted at 05:10 am by politicsscree
Permalink
Oct 15, 2008
ralph nader was on the newshour (pbs) yesterday. when i blogged last night, i couldn't get the audio to ever play. there is audio now, there is video and there is a transcript. as some 1 on the phone with c.i. this morning (1 of many, c.i. was juggling the phones while doing the morning entries) i will note it would have been helpful if such a transcript had been up this morning. instead c.i. had to transcribe. i did see it today, watched the video, and i agree (with c.i.) that ralph was very impressive. it's a shame bill moyers is too scared of ralph nader to bring him on the journal. poor bill moyers. scared of democracy. katharine q. seelye live blogged tonight's debate between john mccain and barack obama at the new york times. here's a sample: Our colleage, Adam Nagourney, just offered this observation: One rule of presidential debates is, if you have what you consider a grabby line attack, try to get it out at the beginning of the night. The idea is that is when you have the biggest audience that is paying the closest attention and newspapers writers pay more attention to the beginning of a debate than the end, as deadlines approach.
Mr. McCain clearly had that in mind at the debate tonight. Twenty minutes into the debate, Mr. Obama began talking about the explosion of spending and the deficit under President Bush – part of his ongoing effort to link Mr. McCain and Mr. Bush – Mr. McCain began fidgeting in his seat. He clearly had a line he wanted to deliver and nothing is going to get in his way.
The moderator, Bob Schieffer, had a question. "Can you balance the budget in four years," he asked
"Sure I do," Mr. McCain said immediately and, without elaborating, delivered his sound-bite that you pretty likely will see repeated on the air over the next few days.
"Senator Obama, I am not President Bush," he said. "If you wanted to run against President Bush you should have run four years ago."c.i. has been saying since august mccain needed to do a line like that (and proposed several publicly but i also know that - the same way c.i. will give feedback if asked by friends working on barack's campaign - c.i.'s advocated with 1 friend on the mccain campaign that this needed to happen) and i think it is the take away. it was really important that it be said. i think it is the moment that will stand out in the debate. who do i think won? i think mccain did. i'm not voting for either of the 2 but mccain was feisty and he really benefitted from the format. barack's repetition? he needs to be able to move around or to stand up (so you have to look up at him) to really 'take off.' since team obama is supposed to know all about public relations it really was shocking that the democrats allowed this format to be used in the last debate. they had to know it would not benefit him. he did get the head angles right, a point ava and c.i. stressed with friends who are part of team obama. when he starts tossing that head backs, it looks like he's sneering at people. if he had done that this debate, it would have been awful due to the format. but for some 1 who's not voting for either, i'd call it for mccain. he was stronger this go round and did his best job yet. barack did a bad job. mccain made 1 huge factual error that most people watching probably caught. i waited for barack to call that out but he never did. maybe he only listens when he's speaking? i had a lot more but i lost my post and it's late now so this is going up and i'll do more tomorrow night. let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:' Wednesday, October 15, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, Steven D. Green has a defense 'strategy', Iraqi Christians continue to flee attacks, PBS' The NewsHour demonstrates it believes in functioning democracy, and more.
Starting with the puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki. Deborah Haynes and Richard Beeston (Times of London) interviewed al-Maliki for "Time to go home, Nouri al-Maliki tells Britain". The transcript of the interview has a portion that caught the attention of Today's Zaman because it deals with the oil-rich city of Kirkuk. From the transcript:
[Times of London]:What about Kirkuk, is this a serious problem facing your Government? The area is controlled by Kurdish militias, can you ever imagine re-imposing Government authority by force?[al-Maliki]: Kirkuk is a city that belongs to the federal government and is outside the boundaries of the Kurdistan region. The existence of any force that is not formal and governmental is considered, as you said, outside the legal rules and goes by the principle of militias. Kirkuk is a very sensitive area. Our opinion about Kirkuk is that it will not be solved by using force to impose a solution ... It is shared by Turkomans, Sunni Arabs, Kurds, and a small ratio of Christians…The only suitable solution, at this time, is to treat it as a special case, like being an independent region ... The different ethnic groups accuse each other of bringing in people from outside the province and granting them residency. The province is under Kurdish control at the moment … The others, the Turkomans and the Sunni Arabs, accuse the local government of manipulating the census and the figures… It is better to have a solution between the groups based on consensus…
al-Maliki's statement is rather clear on what is a murky situation. He maintains that the oil-rich city of Kirkuk is part of the federal government in Iraq and not part of the Kurdistan Regional Government in the north. A bill for provincial elections over the summer led to a walk-out by Kurdish members of the Parliament. From the July 23rd snapshot:
Turning to Iraq and starting with the latest in the provincial elections bill -- CNN reports it has been rejected today. Yesterday, the Kurdish bloc in the Iraqi Parliament staged a walk-out over a bill regarding the alleged provincial elections that allegedly would take place October 1st. The walk-out means the already much postponed provinicial elections may be postponed further. Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) covers the political process backdrop for yesterday's actions: "Some Iraqis think that the offensives that Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki launched in the southern cities of Basra and Amara and the Baghdad slum of Sadr City were to weaken his political rivals, the Sadrists, who controlled those areas. The possibility of a months' long delay in the elections could fundamentally alter the priorities of local and national politicians." Ned Parker and Saif Hameed (Los Angeles Times) zoom in on the backstory/history, "The contentious issue was among several points that have delayed a vote on the law that would pave the way for the first local elections since January 2005, when most Sunni Arabs and many Shiite followers of cleric Muqtada Sadr boycotted the vote. U.S. officials believe the participation of such groups could go a long way toward righting the balance of power in provincial politics, in which a small number of parties, mainly Kurdish and Shiite Muslim, have dominated." Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) focuses on the struggle for the oil-rich Kirkuk, "The disagreement centered on the multiethnic city of Kirkuk, one of several areas in Iraq where there are competing claims over which province a city or district belongs in. The question for Kirkuk is whether it should be absorbed into the Kurdistan region -- a particularly charged question because the city sits on some of the largest unexploited oil reserves in the country. Both Arabs and Kurds lay claim to the area. At bottom, the disagreement is also about the ethnic identity of Iraq and about Arab frustration with the Kurds. Although the Kurds are a minority, they have proved adept at turning the political process to their advantage, often to the chagrin of larger ethnic and religious groups." Last December, Stephen Farrell (New York Times) reported on the attempts of the Kurdish region to take control of Kirkuk (with something other than the security forces they currently utilize) -- forcing Kurds out of the Kurdish region and into Kirkuk to live in "the squalor of the Kirkuk soccer stadium." CNN quotes this statement from President Jalal Talabani's office today, "The president, who does not agree with such a law, which was voted on by 127 deputies who do not represent half of parliament, is confident that the presidency council will not pass it." Al Jazeera points out, "Wednesday's move, which comes after protests by Kurdish and some Shia MPs, is likely to delay the elections, which have been encouraged by US officials as a key step toward repairing Iraq's sectarian rifts."
In September an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy Newspapers noted that Kurds made up only 40% of Kirkuk's population and wondered if "is it right to cause a state to collapse into entitites to realize your dream?" Months later, to pass the bill on provinincial elections and get it signed into law, the Parliament had to set aside the issue of Kirkuk. Reporting yesterday on the Kurds attempts to 'expand' their region into Qahtaniya, Campbell Robertson (New York Times) quoted the KRG's Internal Affairs Minister Karim Sinjair revealing, "We could throw all the Arabs out of the city. But the Americans told us we have to wait." This not only complicates things between the KRG's government and Baghdad's, it also comes at a time when tensions between Turkey and northern Iraq are running hight. Today UPI notes "published leaked images taken by a Turkish spy drone that appeared to show rebels of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, massing in the Aktutun area near the Iraq border hours before a devastating Oct. 3 attack on a Turkish army outpost, the newspaper Today's Zaman reported Wednesday." That attack has been the justification for Turkey's most recent bombings on northern Iraq (and the October 3rd attack enraged the Turkish population). Zerin Elci (Reuters) notes that Turkish Gen Ilker Basbug ("chief of Turkey's armed forces") issued a denial today that "the army had received any information on" the attack before it took place. World Bulletin describes Basbug as speaking "harshly" and notes that he stated he was fully confident and investigation would prove that the military had no advance knowledge of the PKK attack.
Meanwhile David Sapsted (The National) reports on a Cambridge meet-up between Muslim and Christian leaders today (which was the final day of the three-day conference) where Sheikh Ali Gomaa (the Grand Mufti of Egypt) declared of the ongoing attacks on Christians in Iraq, "This is something that both Christianity and Islam reject. We hope to leave this world a better place for our children and grandchildren, a place where there is mutual co-operation." Ecumenical News International reports the Middle East Council of Churches issued a statement today: "The MECC is following with worries the latest news of the painful incidents which are taking place in Mosul in the past two weeks against the Iraqi Christians and are manifested in acts of violence, killings and forced displacement. The MECC condemns such violent demonstrations against innocent Christians who were attacked by strangers and insurgents. . . . The MECC affirms the historical fact that Iraqi Christians are a major component of the Iraq national ethnic groups. They have taken part in building their old civilization, and are taking honest part in rebuilding their nation today." Sam Dagher (New York Times) notes, "A church in the northern city of Mosul was bombed Tuesday as Christians continued to leave the city to escape recent violence that has been directed at them. . . . On Tuesday, a homemade bomb placed at the door of the Miskinta Church in the Old City district of Mosul detonated and caused some damage to the building but no casualties, Monsignor Warduni said." Dagher spoke with Shukria Youssef whose sister, a nun, remains in Mosul at an orphanage: "As long as there are people my sister and the other nuns will not leave. They consider themselves spiritual soldiers." AP reports that Jawdat Ismaeel has tabulated the number of Christian families who have left "Mosul since last week" and it is "1,390 -- or more than 8,300 people." AFP reports that US military spokesperson Patrick Driscoll blame the attacks on al Qaeda in Iraq today. As noted yesterday, no one yet knows who is responsible. Afif Sarhan (Islam Online) stays with the known and speaks with Iraqi Christians. Tony Bardinin who explains, "We are feeling like Gypsies moving from one place to another and are seen as criminals rather than victims. Our children are sick, out from schools and we cannot even claim help because we don't know who is with or against us." Yehia Nawadisin states, "It is clear that only few people want us out from Iraq. Muslims have been our friends for centuries and now, one more time, they are proving that by helping us and giving their love and support." AGI reports that, as the violence continues, "Authorities ordered further road blocks in a number of Christian neighborhoods." Vatican Radio continues to cover the crisis (link has audio):
Vatican Radio: Some 140 Iraqi refugees living in Syria headed home today on a free trip organized by the Iraqi government, which cited improved security in their country. The Iraqi Embassy says it is planning several such trips in the coming weeks. A significant number of Iraqi refugees are Christian. Several thousand have also fled the Arab south of the country for the relatively safer Kurdish north. This is causing tensions with the majority Muslim Kurds, who had already been accused of stepping on the rights of the area's native Christian minority. Catholic MP Edward Leigh on return from his visit to northern Iraq with Jubilee Campaign told us the situation of the Christians in the region
Edward Leigh: There's mixed evidence. I mean, some Christians have undoubtedly been welcomed in the north and they've had to flee to the north. And originally the Kurds and the Christians worked quite closely together under Saddam because there are all these villages mixed up together in northern, mountainous Iraq. And the Kurds rebelled in 1988 and Saddam came in and bombed them. And many of the Christians fled the villages as did the Kurds. I think one of the problems now is because the Christians are being persecuted so badly by Arabic extremists in Baghdad, I think Christians have fled up to the north and I suspect that's created some tension with the Kurds. And the Kurds themselves have been coming to the north and coming from other areas perhaps in Iran and Turkey. So there is tremendous pressure for land and the Kurds undoubtedly have the upper hand. They control the government, they control the police, they control the army -- it's pretty well a state-lette. I don't think the writ of the Baghdad government really extends much in Kurdistan or even the Ninevah plains and when I was in the Ninevah plains -- which is not really part of Kurdistan -- everywhere the Kurds have checkpoints. They are the military presence and the Christians are undoubtedly a small minority increasingly being squeezed between the Sunnis and the Shias and the Kurds.
Turning to the US, CBS and AP report, "A federal judge has set a hearing to decide whether to bar from trial statements a former Army soldier made after being arrested on sexual assault and murder charges. U.S. District Judge Thomas B. Russell scheduled the hearing for Oct. 29 in Louisville after a request from attorneys for 22-year-old Steven D. Green." Abeer Qassim al-Janabi is not making any special requests from the court. That's because she's dead. She was gang-raped by US soldiers while her sister and parents were murdered in the next room and then she was murdered. The other US soldiers had their day in court and confessed to their crimes. They fingered Green as the ring-leader. Because Green had already been discharged from the military, he faces a civilian court. March 12, 2006 was when the war crimes against Abeer and her family took place. Over two years later, Green's attorneys continue to delay justice. His trial has already been postponed for a quilting bee (no, that's not a joke from me -- although it might be one from the justice system) and, as noted in the July 14th snapshot, Russel Carollo (Fort Worth Star-Telegram) reported that "Green's attorneys notified prosecutors that they may use insanity as a defense." Brett Barrouquere (AP) reports that Green "faces 16 charges that include premediated murder and aggravated sexual assault. He has pleaded not guilty and claims he was insane at the time of the 2006 attack." AP notes that the trial is now scheduled for April. No word on whether another quilting bee could yet again derail it. Click here for a video of Jane Fonda addressing the Media Reform Conference (January 2007) and discussing Abber.
Jane Fonda: I want to share a story. I wonder how many know the name, Abeer Qassim al-Janabi. How many people? Raise your hands. Not many. Abeer was a 14-year-old girl, living with her family about 50 miles south of Baghdad, trying to grow up as best she could in a country ravaged by violence and war. That is, until March 12, 2006, when she was killed. On that night, five American soldiers, dressed all in black, burst into the home where Abeer lived with her family. After spending the evening drinking whiskey mixed with energy drinks and playing cards, the soldiers allegedly decided to execute the crime they allegedly had been planning for weeks. The men took turns raping 14-year-old Abeer before shooting her. In the next room, her mother, her father, and her five-year-old sister were executed. When the men were done, apparently they drenched the bodies in kerosene and set them on fire. Then they went back to the base and grilled up some chicken wings for dinner. It was months before this crime came to light.
When did it come to light? In June of 2006. Prior to that the crimes were committed by 'insurgents'. Gregg Zoroya (USA Today) reported on how Justin Watt (who was not part of the conspiracy) came forward with what he had been hearing. This was while US soldiers Kristian Menchaca and Thomas Tucker were missing and, though the two were not involved in the war crimes, they were the ones chosen for 'punishment' as The Sunday Telegraph revealed in December 2006. Mechaca and Tucker get no special requests to the court. Like Abeer, they're dead. Like Abeer, they were guilty of no crime. Green has certainly managed to elude his day in court while a number of deaths have piled up.November 8th, 2006, Green entered a not guilty plea in a federal court in Kentucky. In November 2006, Ryan Lenz (AP) reported that James P. Barker testified to Lt. Col. Richard Anderson that Steven D. Green came up with the plan and, of the rape of Abeer, that "[Paul] Cortez pushed her to the ground. I went towards the top of her and kind of held her hands down while Cortez proceeded to lift her dress up." Those who were still in the military admitted to their part in the conspiracy. They have been sentenced.
In April 2009, Green is scheduled to stand trial. And he plans to offer an insanity defense. Back in 2006, at the Article 32 hearing for those still serving, Capt. Alex Pickands summed up the soldiers' actions: "Murder, not war. Rape, not war. That's what we're here talking about today. Not all that business about cold food, checkpoints, personnel assignments. Cold food didn't kill that family. Personnel assignments didn't rape and murder that 14-year-old little girl." And it was planned, with Green studying her and making her uncomfortable. Julie Rawe and Aparisim Ghosh (Time) reported in June 2007, "Abeer's brother Mohammed, 13, told TIME he once watched his sister, frozen in fear, as a U.S. soldier ran his index finger down her cheek. Mohammed has since learned that soldier's name: Steven Green."
In fairness to Green, he got in a moral waiver and shouldn't have been let in. But then, no foreign forces should be in Iraq period. Addressing how the US changes the dynamic, Ralph Nader spoke yesterday with Ray Suarez of The NewsHour (PBS -- link has text, audio and video):
Ray Suarez: What would you do about Afganistan the Republican and Democratic nominees opposing you in this race, have come out with different plans what's yours?Ralph Nader: Mine is: More soldiers in Afghanistan on the Pakistan border is going to destabilize Pakistan. The National Intelligence Estimate of Mr. Bush just came out with a statement saying there's never been more violence in chaos in Afghanistan since 9-11. So we have to look to wise people, like Ashraf Ghani who was finance minister for Karzai, the president, and who was a professor here in this country, a native Afghani who says you've got to connect with the tribal leaders and give them and their people jobs, public works, security. And that will be the buffer against the people who just want chaos. Let's put it this way: Nobody conquers Afghanistan. The British didn't do it. The Soviet Union didn't do it. We're not going to do it. It's the scar on the conscience of Obama and McCain that they are ready to get us into a massive quagmire. And if Pakistan is destabilized, it's going to make Iraq look like small potatoes -- even with the million Iraqis and 4200 soldiers who've died in that conflagration.Ray Suarez: And can you extricate the United States from Iraq?Ralph Nader: Six month negotiated withdrawal with modest autonomy between Shi'ites, Sunnis and Kurds under unified Iraq of all US soldiers and corporate contractors. Continued humanitarian aid and UN sponsored elections. That should do it because that would knock the bottom out of the insurgency. You know, given the time, I have to ask people to contact our website for more details -- VoteNader.org -- where we have this elaborated. We invited volunteers. We invite donations. We take no money from commercial interests. But I know this area. My parents came from Lebanon at age nineteen. We know the language. We know the authority of the religious leaders, that the tribal leaders are still intact. And that's what we have to do. Any diminution of violence in recent months in Iraq have been due to realignments between these authority figures. And that's what we have to support; not more preferring one sectarian group over another, wheeling-dealing hundred dollar bills, the intrigue and the revenge killings. And, also, there's no way to knock the bottom out of the insurgency, which will ebb and rise according to circumstances, then to eliminate the occupation of their country and to give Iraq back to the Iraqis and their oil back. And it would help if the US government would support the peace movements in Israel and Palestine which have worked out a two-state solution, which was somehow prohibited from appearing in Congress. They're off-limits to the two- party campaigns, Obama and McCain. And it's disgracefully cowardly for these two people who are smart. I know them. They know what it takes to make peace between the Israelis and Palestine people. A majority of Jewish-Americans, Arab-Americans want a two-state solution. So do the majority of the Israelis and the Palestinians. And, instead, both major candidates support the hard-liners. You don't make peace by supporting the militaristic repression, occupation and colonization of Palestine. .
That's real change and it's actually a plan to end the illegal war. Until people get honest, expect more violence and chaos, death and destruction. Such as . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left four people wounded, two more Baghdad roadside bombing that left six people wounded, and another Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed 2 lives (police officers) and wounded two people; 4 Mosul roadside bombings resulting in fifteen people being wounded, and Baghdad mortar attacks on the Green Zone, the Baghdad airport and a Baghdad neighborhood and the last resulted in 2 deaths with six people wounded.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 people shot dead in Diyala Province (another wounded) and 1 person was shot dead in Mosul (four more wounded).
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad and, last night, "a mass grave containing the remains of at least 20 people" was discovered in Karbala ["The dead people were Shiite shepherds who were kidnapped by the Qaeda about 18 months ago in Nikhaib (south west of Ramadi and west of Karbala), police and medical sources said."].
As noted already Ralph Nader was on The NewsHour yesterday. Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate. Today, Ralph Nader will speak at Cooper Union (NYC) at six p.m. and the following day the independent presidential candidate at noon "Ralph will take to the street in front of the NYSE to protest the bailout at Federal Hall, 26 Wall St. NYC." Ray Suarez asked Ralph about the bail-out last night.
RAY SUAREZ: Well, we've just come through these remarkable weeks, where the Treasury, the Fed, and Congress have been working to cobble together a plan.
The presidential candidates, the Republican and Democrat in the race, say they reluctantly went along with these bailout packages because of the urgency of the situation. What did you make of the bailout plans?
RALPH NADER: The right word is "cobble." It's the wrong kind of plan, and they have to readjust now with injections into the banks. But what they should have done, because Washington had Wall Street over the barrel, Wall Street wanted a $700 billion bailout. And what Congress should have done is add to Bush's blank check with comprehensive regulation to prevent this; criminal prosecution resources for the culprits on Wall Street; more power to the shareholders to control their company and restrain their bosses' excesses, real taxpayer equity, with good conditions and, finally, making them pay for it.
If you make the speculators pay for their own bailout, then there's a relief throughout America that there's some fairness coming out of Washington. A 0.1 percent tax on security derivative transactions in one year -- it's going to be $500 trillion of transactions in one year -- is $500 billion. So that alone would make a sense of equity. And you wouldn't put it on the backs of the taxpayer. England has that kind of tax, by the way, for years. FDR had it. We helped finance the Civil War with it. But after World War II, it was scrapped. So people go into a store in all your areas where your show shows, and they buy necessities of life, and they pay 6 percent or 7 percent sales tax. Tomorrow, someone in Wall Street can buy a billion dollars of Exxon derivatives, pay no sales tax. That's where the fairness has to go.
John McCain is the Republican presidential candidate and Sarah Palin is his running mate. McCain-Palin '08 announces:
ARLINGTON, VA -- Tuesday in the Oval Office, U.S. Senator John Warner was privileged to join with other members of Congress, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as the president signed the annual $542 billion dollar defense bill into law. The National Defense Authorization Bill annually fulfills the constitutional responsibility to provide for our nation's armed forces. This was the 30th consecutive defense bill Senator Warner has worked on with other senators.
Subsequently, in response to press inquiries, Senator Warner praised John McCain's leadership on defense issues and stressed the importance of his contributions, as the committee's ranking member, in structuring this bill.
"Having worked with John McCain for more than 20 years on the Senate Armed Services Committee, I know that, as President of the United States and commander in chief, he will continue working with Congress to ensure that the annual defense bills will adequately provide for our men and women in uniform the best equipment and training in order to protect America's freedom around the world."
Senator Warner also pointed out the importance of this bill to Virginia's overall economy.
Virginia is home to 31 military installations, approximately 130,000 active-duty personnel and some 80,000 Department of Defense civilian employees. (Source: Department of Defense)
The Department of Defense Authorization Bill signed today invests more than $50 billion in direct defense spending in Virginia, which translates into jobs, added research and development, procurement and acquisition of new equipment, and maintenance and upgrading of military installations. Of particular interest is the continuation of a strong naval shipbuilding and repair program. (Source: Department of Defense)
Senator Warner continued, "As a former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I know how critical defense spending is for Virginia's economy.
"Virginia is proud to be home to 814,000 veterans, whose past service helped build the foundation for today's U.S. military serving in Virginia and worldwide. There are provisions in this bill which continue to recognize military retirees' service to country, particularly in the field of health care.
"As I retire after 30 years in the Senate, I am absolutely confident that John McCain, as our next president, will continue his leadership and dedication to the needs of today's men and women in uniform, and to those of future generations."
And they note that the New Hampshire Union Leader has just endorsed John McCain for president with an editorial which opens, "In this time of great uncertainty, America needs an experienced, decisive leader with clear vision and a steady hand to guide us through. That man is Sen. John McCain."
Tonight, McCain debates Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama. No other presidential candidates will be allowed on the stage because democracy is just too gosh darn important to actually practice it. It's like good china. You hide it away for very special occasions. Otherwise, someone might break it! (You can, however, watch The New Adventures of Old Christine every Wednesday night on CBS' first half-hour of prime time.) Team Nader notes:
Donate $10 to Nader/Gonzalez now.
Why?
Well, Ralph Nader appeared on the PBS NewsHour last night for ten minutes.
Which was better than nothing.
Nothing is what Ralph got from PBS this year up until now.
No Jim Lehrer.
No Diane Rehm.
No Terry Gross.
But thanks to thousands of your phone calls and e-mails, the NewsHour relented.
And Ralph was given a chance last night.
To make the argument -- Jail Time for Corporate Crime.
Of course, when Americans think of crime, they think first of street crime.
Gangsters.
The mob.
But that's a bit unfair, don't you think?
Given the wave of corporate crime that has swamped Wall Street and tanked the economy?
So, today we launch a new fundraising widget.
And to open up the fundraising drive, we're making this offer to you -- our loyal supporters.
If you donate $100 now to Nader/Gonazalez, we will ship to you our corporate crime package -- two great books on how big business is robbing you blind -- plus a DVD featuring tomorrow's Nader/Gonzalez Rally on Wall Street. First we have the 260 page book -- Gangster Capitalism by Michael Woodiwiss.
Woodiwiss makes the argument that the lethal tenets of organized crime have worked their way into the operating models of corporations and governments.
And that the politicians, businessmen and bureaucrats are actually beating the wise guys at their own game -- shifting the rules to broaden and legitimize criminal behavior in a far more dangerous and sinister manner.
The other book is the 302-page hardcover classic The Cheating of America by Charles Lewis, Bill Allison and the Center for Public Integrity. This book is about how corporations and the super-rich don't pay their fair share of taxes.
So, donate $100 now, and we'll ship you these two eye-opening books -- Gangster Capitalism and The Cheating of America -- plus the Wall Street Rally DVD. (This offer ends October 24, 2008 at 11:59 p.m.)
Understand Gangster Capitalism.
Then organize to control it.
By the way, in the event you missed Ralph's appearance on the PBS NewsHour last night, check it out here.
Onward to November
iraqtimes of londondeborah haynesrichard beestonnancy a. youssefmcclatchy newspapersthe los angeles timesned parkersaif hameedthe new york timesalissa j. rubinrussel carollojane fondapbsthe newshourray suarezthe new york timessam dagher
Posted at 09:19 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
Oct 14, 2008
women don't work (he said it)
 we're all noting The New Adventures of Old Christine airs wednesday nights (that's tomorrow), 1st 1/2 hour of prime time on cbs. catch it tomorrow because it disproves the lie that women don't work. women don't work? billie e-mailed me about a commercial airing in texas. i called her back at 9:34. she was watching fringe on her local fox station and said, 'hold on! listen!' i did. she put the phone up to the t.v. so i could hear the commercial that was again airing. who does barack care about? 'the guy'. that's what he says. 'the guy whose job is being shipped overseas'. that's an outright lie. he got caught on nafta during the primary though liars like john nichols and amy goodman tried to invent rumors that it was hillary and not barack. barack was trying to scare up votes by pretending he gave a damn about workers. he was telling voters he was opposed to nafta. turned out, he'd had his campaign contact the canadian government and tell them he was just saying what he had to get elected and he didn't mean it. he denied that. he lied. the associated press got hold of proof. the proof was printed widely. it was time for worthless garbage like amy goodman and john nichols to lie and insist they had a story that it was really hillary. they had no story. no story ever panned out because they were LYING. they are liars. john nichols and amy goodman are DAMN LIARS. in june, barack would kind-of-sort-of own up to it in his interview with fortune magazine. he's not opposed to nafta. your other clue was his infamous speech in san francisco where he insulted small town voters and the insult wasn't just 'cling to religion' it was also that they didn't like free trade. barack's a damn liar. but notice he's lying again and he's presenting the work force as 'the guy'. he's talking about the 'humiliation' of losing your pension - if you're a guy. the work force is male and women do not work. in barack's world. he's a damn sexist pig. that was obvious months ago. it's obvious with his new ad in texas. i was reading billie's e-mail and thought, 'she must have missed something.' i called her to make sure. she didn't have to tell me anything. she just had to hold the phone up to the t.v.
(9:34 p.m. is my time. i'm in the eastern time zone. it was 8:34 at her place in texas.)
i'm so sick of barack obama and his sexism.
i'm voting for ralph nader and if the hypocrite kim gandy hates him (and she does hate him), you know he's got something going for him. this is from team nader:
Nader on CNN, FOX, CNBC and PBS NewsHour Tuesday
Posted by The Nader Team on Monday, October 13, 2008 at 09:11:00 PM
ShareThis
It’s time to bring it on home.
We are within shouting distance of our goal of $250,000 by midnight tonight.
We’re bumping up against the top of our widget.
But we need just one more push.
So, please.
If you haven’t given yet to Nader/Gonzalez, do so now.
Whatever you can afford — $5, $10, $15, $50, $100.
Is there a hero out there who can give $500?
Is there a hero out there who can give $1,000?
Drop it now on Nader/Gonzalez.
We’ve got about four hours to go.
Let’s get it done for Nader/Gonzalez.
And remember, if you donate $100 or more now, we will send you an autographed copy of Ralph’s classic — The Seventeen Traditions (HarperCollins 2007).
This 150-page hardcover book details the seventeen traditions that Ralph grew up with and is the closest thing so far to a Ralph Nader autobiography.
So, don’t miss out on this limited edition offer. (This offer expires tonight at midnight.)
We need just 100 more of you — our loyal supporters — to step up and snap up The Seventeen Traditions.
And we will meet our goal.
So let’s crank it up.
And get it done.
And now, the News Flash!
Tomorrow, Ralph be moving from TV studio to TV studio, breaking the down the walls of enforced media silence.
Ralph will be on CNBC with John Harwood between 2 and 3 p.m. EST.
He will be on CNN with Rick Sanchez at 3:30 p.m. EST.
He will be on the NewsHour on PBS between 6 and 7 p.m. EST.
And he’ll be on Fox with Shepherd Smith at 7:30 p.m. EST.
So, grab your remote, and look out for Ralph.
Tomorrow, Ralph’s the cable guy!
Okay folks.
Let’s kick it in.
And watch that there widget go.
Onward to November
The Nader Team
ShareThis
did you catch any of that? i didn't. sorry. i planned to catch cnn but the baby is teething so it was on but i have no idea what he was saying. then i thought i would catch the newshour but that didn't work out either. however, you can watch the newshour online tomorrow. which i will be doing. woah! i was wrong. c.i. returned my call from earlier this evening and she steered me to this - it's already online. just audio right now. i'm trying to download it but still waiting. c.i. saw it on t.v. and says ralph really came off well. i'm limited on time because blogger/blogspot has an announcement that they're going down tonight and it's like 5 minutes away so i'll probably have to post this before the interview starts playing (if it does). they may not have the link working yet, and just have it up. if you read this on wednesday morning, it will be working. i'm d.s.l. so downloads just zip through but this 1 is just not moving. i'm going to have to go ahead and post. let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot' for today: Tuesday, October 14, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the United Nations' High Commissioner for Refugees issues a call, the US military announces another death, and more.
Today UNHCR's Ron Redmond, speaking in Geneva, addressed the issue of Iraq's Palestinian refugees noting:
UNHCR has issued an urgent appeal for the resettlement of Palestinian refugees. Most have been stranded for over two years in two camps at the Iraq-Syrian border and in Baghdad, while a small group has been stranded in Al Hol camp in Syira. Of the estimated 34,000 Palestinians in Iraq in 2003, less than 15,000 remain in Iraq -- including 2,943 Palestinian refugees currently living in the border camps at the Iraq-Syrian border. Of those in the border camps, 358 families (1,278 persons) are considered to be highly vulnerable -- having life-threatening diseases, needing urgent medical treatment or fearing persecution if they return -- and therefore are in urgent need of resettlement. The majority fled Baghdad since 2003 because of threats, torture, detention, or after friends and family members were killed. The steady drain on financial resources has forced middle class families into the ranks of the poor, needing housing, food, medical, and cash assistance.
The United Nations News Centre notes, "Living conditions at the camps are very difficult and continue to deteriortate, with refugees facing searing heat in the summer and freezing termperatures in the winters. There is also little security and limited medical services available to camp residents." Iraq is the largest refugee crisis in the world. And those who account for the nearly five million internally and externally displaced refugees are a diverse group. The UN's IRIN notes the disabled Iraqi refugees today including Jaafar Hamza whose family moved to Egypt in 2007 and whose father, Hami, explains, "We came here because the situation in Iraq was unbearable. Not only were we in danger, but Jaafar was suffering the most." His mother, Om Omar, adds, "Jaafar is completely dependent on us. We have to feed him, carry him to the washroom and anywhere he needs to be taken. He is getting older and heavier and I don't know how long we can provide for him. Doctors say his condition is permanent; he needs special care." In one of the most high profile reports on the disabled in Iraq, Lara Logan (CBS News) reported in June 2007 on US soldiers coming across a Baghdad orphanage where 24 special-needs boys were being abused. In that instance, some of the children were left by parents or a parent with the hopes that the institution would provide the care they couldn't. One father expressed how he had thought his son would be safer there than in the war zone that was his neighborhood. No one had any idea that the boys would be stripped of clothing and abused. The conditions are not getting better and, in fact, Sapa-AFP explain that, in Karbala, 200 doctors "have closed their clinics in protest" since yesterday due to death threats. For those who've forgotten, September's wave of Operation Happy Talk found the puppet government inflating the number of doctors who had returned and insisting it was safe and Iraq was back on track medically. Meanwhile Elizabeth Ferris and Navteg Dhillon (Guardian of London) note the young refugees, "As Iraq takes important steps towards national reconciliation and economic development, no one is paying attention to young Iraqi refugees. Their plight is largely portrayed through a sectarian lens. But when the focus shifts to the age of those uprooted, it is clear that a large number are young men and women, struggling with displacement at the prime of their life. Rather than building their future careers and families, their plans are on hold and their hopes are in limbo." Ferris is with the Brookings Institute and last week she called attention to the Iraqi refugees with regards to voting noting, "Participation of Iraq's refugees and IDPs in the provincial elections is critical to a legitimate electoral process, national reconciliation, and regional stability. Many of the Iraqi refugees currently living in harsh conditions in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Turkey, and the Gulf were displaced because they favored a secular Iraq. To exclude these Iraqis from the process is to let the militias' efforts to rid the country of secularists, intellectuals, Catholics, Yezidis, and many other minority groups win."
Religious minorities were dealt a huge setback when a bill on provincial elections passed the Parliament after it removed Article 50 that protected minority rights. The presidency council signed the bill into law. The Yazidis were the focuse of Campbell Robertson (New York Times) today as he noted that "Kurdish security forces moved into Qahtaniya and other Yazidi villages, having already made a fortress of Sinjar" and quoted the KRG's Internal Affairs Minister Karim Sinjair revealing, "We could throw all the Arabs out of the city. But the Americans told us we have to wait." Not, "We were told 'no'." He states they were told they would have to wait. The Kurds have made one power grab after another and Robertson does a fine job of sketching that out including how Qahtaniya would not directly seen made for a power grab due to its surrounding areas; however, it could be used as "a bargaining chip for political negotiations over the status of Kirkuk". From the Yazidis to the current crisis in Mosul, the attacks on Iraqi Christians which has led to many fleeing and added to the number of refugees. Al Jazeera reports, "Muslim scholars have spoken out against a spate of attacks against Christians in northern Iraq" and quotes Ekmeleddin Ihasanogul of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference stating that the attacks were "unprecedented in the history of Iraq" and that the government needs to "prosecute the culprits who are behind these acts." Deborah Haynes and Tim Albone (Times of London) explore theories developing, "Some Christians blame al-Qaeda for the attacks while others speculate that Kurdish elements might be involved as part of a political ploy to coerce minority sects into supporting Kurdish parties before forthcoming provincial elections. This allegation is strongly denied by the Kurdish authorities." The reporters note that the Kurds, in turn, blame the Baathists. Emmanuel Brikha (Australia's Streem) explains, "An Iraqi Sunni MP of Iraq Osama al-Najifi has strongly blamed the Kurdish militia groups, saying they are responsible for the murder and displacement of thousands of Assyrian Christians. He also blamed the Kurdish intelligence agencies in playing a part in organising and carrying out the murder campaign alongside militias. Al-Najifi claims the militias want to change the demographic balance of Mosul, which is located in Nineveh Province, a province highly populated by Assyrians, to serve Kurdish interests." Others blame al Qaeda in Iraq (which has issued a denial). At this point, no one knows who is responsible for the slaughter. Jerry L. Van Marter (Church Executive Magazine) reports, "Religious leaders around the world, including those in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), are asking their members to pray for the Christian community in Iraq and particularly the northern city of Mosul, where more than two dozen Christians have been murdered in recent days by militant Sunnis." Marter quotes Rev. Duncan Hanson ("area coordinator for Europe and the Middle East for the Reformec Church in America") stating, "The Mosul church is the oldest in Iraq, having been established in 1840. Our congreagation has had a long and glorious succession of pastors. Over the years these pastors also ministered to the Muslim community. It was out of the Mosul church that God sent missionaires to Baghdad, Basra and elsewhere to plant new congregations. We Iraqi Reformed and Presbyterian people call Mosul our 'mother church'." ZENIT quotes Carlidnal Emmanuel III Delly ("patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans and archbishop of Baghdad") declaring today that the "situation in some parts of Iraq is disastrous and tragic. Life is a Calvary. Peace and security are lacking, just as the fundamental elements in daily life. Electricity, water, fuel continue to be lacking; telephone communication is always more difficult; whole roads are blocked; schools either closed or in a continuous danger; hospitals function with a reduced staff; the people fear for their own safety. All fear kidnapping, abduction and intimidation." Stephen Mirarchi (National Catholic Register) notes that some are calling it "the holocaust of the Christians" and adds:
Father Ninous Ibraheem knows about that panic.
He remembers how two years ago, having made the precarious journey from Syria to Iraq without incident, he prepared to offer Mass in Dora, the Christian area in southern Baghdad.
Immediately after Mass, Father Ninous walked into the church's courtyard to the blast of a car bomb. Another was detonated moments later as it rolled through the fleeing congregation. At the same time, another church within walking distance suffered the same terror.
It's a risk Father Ninous takes every time he returns.
The next time he went back, in February of this year, only one church of the original 13, St. Shmoni, remained. "One of them was turned into a mosque," he said through a translator, his voice full of exasperation. "It became routine that people thought there was no one doing services."
Meanwhile Reuters reports, "Iraq's government pledged on Tuesday to send senior officials to the north of the country to tackle violence against Christians which has led thousands to flee their homes fearing for their lives." Yeah, that song and dance has been performed since this weekend. With little to no results. Pulling back to the topic of refugees in general, Corinne Reilly (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that of the 8% of Iraqi refugees who have returned to their Baghdad homes, "Many Iraqi families have returned to their old homes in peace, but a disturbing trend already is emerging: They're being targeted and attacked, and in some cases killed, for trying to go home. Some have been threatned. Others have found explosives tied to trying to go home. Some have had their homes blown up." Sunday, the New York Times offered a very bad offering of Operation Happy Talk pushing the good times are coming and the refugees are so happy and Iraqi children are in school (not the ones killed in the Sunday explosion reported the following day). The article didn't even note that the UNHCR continues to maintain that it is not safe for Iraqis to return. Nor did it note that it was using figures from the Iraqi government -- or that those figures are in dispute. The same day Basil Adas (Gulf Daily News) was reporting: "Baghdad: A dispute is raging between the United Nations and the Iraqi government on the number of Iraqi refugees living abroad - particularly in Jordan, Syria and Egypt - who have returned to Iraq. While the UN report said that the number of returning refugees is less than the number of those departing, Major General Abdul Karim Khalaf, director of the operations at the Interior Ministry, denied this." But the Times went with the 'trust worthy' puppet government and not the United Nations.
Turning to the issue of treaties. Saturday the Washington Post's Ernesto Londono interviewed Gen Ray Odierno (top US commander in Iraq) and asked what happens if an agreement is not in place by the end of the year? The UN mandate that authorizes the occupation expires December 31st. Odierno replied that "we must have a political framework for our presence here in Iraq. So that's really a policy issue, it's a national policy issue, so you still have to work with Washington to determine what our next steps are if we don't get a SOFA agreement. But we either must have something like a UN Security Council resolution that -- or some sort of bilateral agreement with the Government of Iraq for our continued presence. So it's got to be one or the other or something that is agreed upon between the two governments." Asked if he was optimistic, Odierno replied, "Um, it's unclear." And then swtiched to being "somewhat confident" before adding "I can't predict the future on that." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) observes, "Time's running out for reaching a security agreement with the U.S., and an accord is unlikely before the end of this year, Iraq's Sunni Muslim vice president [Tariq al Hashimi] said Monday." Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) explains that the UN mandate could be extended but that "Russia or others" on the UN Security Council might oppose the deal while another theory is "a simple handshake agreement between Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and President Bush to leave things as they are until a new deal, under a new U.S. administration, can be negotiated." Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) reports that some are saying the stalled process on the SOFA (really a treaty) is due to the various players including the Parliament and Parker mentions Massoud Barzani, president of the Kurdistan region. Barzani got an invite to the big meet-up in Baghdad today (sort of). Today's Zaman notes that the Turkish delegation was headed by the country's envoy to Iraq, Murat Ozcelik. World Bulletin explains the Turkish delegation was invited to a meet-up, just not the big meet-up -- meaning Barzani got his own meeting and the scheduled one with Nouri al-Maliki took place and did so without Barzani. At the big meet-up, al-Maliki declared, "We are ashamed that the PKK is using Iraqi soil. This menace has to be eradicated and what needs to be has to be done to that end." al-Maliki's statement may have prompted (or maybe it was US arm twisting) the KRG to issue a statement today condemening the PKK's attack on Diyarbakir, Turkey stating that it "serves no political purpose and has brought only tragedy to the people of Diyarbakir and throughout Turkey. Thomas Seibert (The National Newspapers) reminds:
For much of the past several years, Turkish politicians accused Mr Barzani of raising tensions in the region and of protecting members of the PKK. Only last year, Mr Barzani caused a storm of protests in Ankara by warning that if Turkey was to meddle in decisions about the future of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk, which is claimed by Iraq's Kurds, the Kurds themselves would stir up unrest in Diyarbakir, Turkey's main Kurdish city. Mr Erdogan accused Mr Barzani of "overstepping his line", while opposition leader Deniz Baykal said Mr Barzani was acting against "Turkey's territorial integrity and national sovereignty". In October last year, Mr Erdogan said Mr Barzani was "aiding and abetting" the PKK.
The last time an official Turkish delegation held talks with Mr Barzani was in 2004, one year after the US invasion of Iraq, the Turkish news channel NTV reported. Before the cold spell in their relations, Ankara and the Iraqi Kurdish leader were in close contact for much of the 1990s, when both Mr Barzani and the other main Kurdish leader in the region, Jalal Talabani, the Iraq's president, were given Turkish passports to be able to travel abroad.
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded three people, a Baghdad car bombing ('sticky bomb') that wounded three police officers and, dropping back to Monday, a Tuz Khurmatu bombing that left five people wounded. Reuters notes a Kirkuk bombing on a Kirkuk "secondary pipeline" and a Mosul bombing that left two police officers injured.
Shootings?
Reuters notes 1 person shot dead in Mosul.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.
Today the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division - Baghdad Soldier dies of wounds at approximately 5 p.m. at a Coalition force's Combat Support Hospital Oct. 14. The soldier was wounded when enemy attacked his patrol with small-arms fire in western Baghdad at approximately 4 p.m. The Soldier was quickly transported to the medical facility by air medevac; however, the Soldier later succumbed to the wounds." The announcement brings to 4183 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war (seven for the month thus far).
Turning to the US presidential race. The first three links are dealing with a topic that is offenisve. You've been warned. Members of the Cult of Barack have a new uniform they sported over the weekend. A t-shirt proclaiming Governor Sarah Palin is a c**t. With a photo of the t-shirt, Joseph (Cannonfire) explains, "The left has turned into an emetic morass of human sewage. When you go into the voting booth, picture the faces of the smug, haughty young creeps pictured in the photo above. They represent the new Democratic party. They are the reason why this lifelong Dem left the party. If you reward the Obots with your vote, you are saying: 'I want the Democratic party to keep acting like that'." Jake Tapper (ABC News -- in the safest version) covers the story and asks, "Why would these four think this is acceptable discourse?" BIG WARNING on Ben Smith because an innocent looking link in his piece will take you to nudity. He quotes Barack Cultist Rhiannon Volpe who declares, "I personally am a register Liberatrian, supporting Obama this year." She thinks those shirts are acceptable (and she designed and sold them) because, hey, in Cult of Barack, anything goes. The ones wearing those shirts in Philadelphia? That crowd included a man calling for Palin to be stoned. That never worried Amy Goodman or the beyond-pathetic Robert Parry. Mari A. Schaefer and Amy S. Rosenberg (Philadelphia Inquirer) report the threat was, "Let's stone her, old style." Meanwhile social worker and pro-life feminist Angela Kays-Burden (Christian Science Monitor) expresses her opinion, "The White House Project, a nonprofit organization, states that support from other women is critical to increasing the number of women in politics. But, in general, feminists have led attacks on one of their own who is close to shattering the ceiling. To them, Palin's pro-life position alone is proof that she is not fit to lead." At The Confluence, Riverdaughter addresses where she stands regarding the bullying from the Cult of Barack:
Many of us PUMAs are perfectly comfortable in our own skin with our own decisions. We don't want others pestering us about Obama anymore. We aren't interested in poll results. Obama supporters who come here to try to depress turnout or convert us are wasting their time. We simply do not care what you think of us. We have been called stupid, old, uneducated, ridiculous females, a shrieking horde of paranoid holdouts, racists, traitors and Republicans. Oddly enough, this has not made us want to vote for Obama.
The world will go on, no matter what we're called. And if Obama loses on Nov. 4, I will be the first to say, "Good!" You can blame me, scream at me, jump up and down throw a fit, ostracize me, I really don't give a flying fig. I will live through it and so will the others on the many dozens of blogs like this one.
It is regrettable that we have grown apart but I'm sure we will both survive. And the next time the party tries to pull this $#%^, I hope they will think twice as to whether it was worth it.
Now, masslib and people who gave in to peer pressure can say that Obama is going to win but I have enough emails from the party that suggest that plans to launch a full out attack to pressure us into voting for Obama. If he were doing that well, the upcoming psychological warfare would be unneccesary. So, please stop the annoying pro-Obama blather. We aren't buying it and we don't care.
Klownhaus adds, "We Conflucians may indeed be the last paranoid band of shrieking hold-outs, but we damn sure ain't gonna quit now." On the polling, Jake Tapper (ABC News) observed yesterday, "That's not what lots of smart folks in the Obama campaign think. They believe Obama's poll numbers are artificially high, McCain's are artificially low, this race will come down to two or three points, and anything could happen." As Ava and I explained Sunday:
Polling is not an exact science and the only poll that matters is the election vote. Polling works as an indicator (when it works) and not for who's going to win the election but for where campaigns should and should not invest time. But it does not work when an egg head class has repeatedly told the American people that those who will not vote for Barack are racists. We've tried to figure out why idiots push that nonsense? Maybe they think it will intimidate on election day? Most likely, it won't. Most likely, people will say, "I voted for Barack" and won't vote for him. How many? No one knows. But when so many idiots have pushed to make a vote for anyone other than Barack a vote for racism, you can't expect to get honest answers in the polling. Someone should have called them out on it a long time ago. We're told (by friends with the Barack campaign) that they're aware of the problem and it's created a huge issue for the campaign. They're trying to figure out what's the magic number to lead by. They have no clue -- not because they're idiots but because Idiot Rothschild, Idiot Herbert and so many others have made it impossible to get an honest answer from the most basic polling question of whom are you going to vote for? Smart observers have already grasped that even exit polls on election day will now be in question due to idiots turning "who are you going to vote for?" into a loaded question. If Barack loses (we have no idea who will win), some of the harsh words should be aimed at the people who repeatedly attempted to make it vote-for-Barack-or-be-a-racist. It was stupid. And it never should be allowed to happen again. If Barack loses (and he may win, we're not saying he's going to lose), a large part of the blame will have to go to those who so poisoned the well that his campaign was denied accurate polling numbers. (That's not arguing that the problems in the primaries don't matter. In this, we're speaking of the general election phase and how the polling is damaged -- a fact that became very clear as the primary process wrapped up.)
Today the McCain-Palin campaign announced the endorsement of Latino business leaders:
ARLINGTON, VA -- McCain-Palin 2008 today announced the support of more than 50 influential Hispanic business leaders from across the country. They will work to communicate John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin's economic plan which will create jobs, ensure energy security, reform government spending and bring relief to American consumers.
"I am supporting John McCain because he has always done what is right for all Americans," said Mary Jean Duran of California, "He will continue to give Hispanic-American-owned small businesses the opportunity to compete in the global markets, while Barack Obama proposes billions in higher taxes, more spending and isolationism from global economy."
Jerry Natividad from Colorado added, "John McCain will fight to ensure the American dream is still achievable for us and for our children. He has a plan to get our economy back on track, create jobs, and keep people in their homes. He understands that small businesses are the job engine of America. Our economy simply cannot afford Barack Obama's plans for trade, health care, taxes, and energy."
HISPANIC BUSINESS LEADERS FOR MCCAIN
Frank C. Rivera, Arizona Ruben Alvarez, Arizona Claudia Bermudez, California Donald C. Garcia, California Fred Armendariz, California Issac Barcelona, California Jarryd Rudolph, California Josh Valdez, California Mario Rodriguez, California Mary Jean Duran, California Matthew Venegas, California Pablo Wong, California Solomon D. Trujillo, California Tom Garcia, California William Jerry Silva, California Willie Wulff, California Jerry Natividad, Colorado Eric Rojo, Washington, D.C. Jose A. Fuentes, Washington, D.C. Juan Carlos Benitez, Washington, D.C. Roberto Jose Coquis, Washington, D.C. Al Cardenas, Florida Roberto Espin, Florida David Hernandez, Florida Eric Carson, Hawaii Gloria M. Campos, Illinois Vinicio E. Madrigal, Louisiana Jose Nino, Maryland David Olivencia, Michigan Richard Aguilar, Minnesota Jeannette Hernandez Prenger, Missouri Fernando Romero, Nevada Tibi Ellis, Nevada Dr. Horatio Villareal, New Mexico Ramon Tallaj, New York Dr. Cynthia Lama, New York Dr. Carlos Aviles, New York Alfredo Gutierrez, New Jersey John Regis, Puerto Rico Ignacio Veloz, Puerto Rico Maria Taxman, Missouri Jeannette Hernandez Pranger, Missouri F.H. Guzman, Tennessee Raul Lopez, Tennessee Sylvia Marcela Gomez, Tennessee Adryana Boyne, Texas Jacob Monty, Texas Jenny De La Rosa, Texas Jose Cuevas, Texas Rick Jaramillo, Texas Rolando Pablos, Texas Massey Villareal, Texas Nina Vaca, Texas Ted Cruz, Texas Tom Covino, Texas Sylvia Haro, Utah Jacqueline Krick, Virginia Jo- Ann Chase, Virginia Luis Quinonez, Virginia
Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. Wednesday October 15, Ralph Nader will speak at Cooper Union (NYC) at six p.m. and the following day the independent presidential candidate at noon "Ralph will take to the street in front of the NYSE to protest the bailout at Federal Hall, 26 Wall St. NYC." Team Nader notes the blackout on the campaign by some outlets (blackout and distortions):
While local AP bureaus have done an excellent job in many states covering the Nader/Gonzalez campaign, we have noticed what can only be described as a 'lights out' policy from AP's Washington, DC national political desk. After waiting six months for a national AP news story, we get a third party story that is really about Barr ("Bailout angst provides a push for Libertarian Barr.") You couldn't even dedicate resources inside AP to research our campaign and write up the story, though given the present state of repair, Mr Runyan was probably less biased than what you would have offered from in house.We are running third place, polling 100% higher than Barr according to Ipsos, have been warning on the financial crisis for two decades, and have a thoughtful alternative proposal to the bailout that would work for Americans. Nader is also polling 4-8 per cent in six swing states and has raised almost $4 million dollars--about four times as much as Barr.And for that, we get a squib marginalized by a headline. The AP's treatment of this campaign to date will go down in history as a blight on your professionalism--allowing personal animosity to black out your role of informing people of the important things that are happening. Your sports writers did a considerably better job in Beijing than your politics desk is doing this election in Washington, DC. There were ample reports about Americans who won bronze medals, coming in third place, exactly where Nader is sitting right now. To add insult to injury, the Olympics is only 2.5 weeks, and we have been in this contest for over six months. When did it become the role of the press to only write about winning candidates, winning corporations, and winning sports teams, completely blacking out everything else no matter how thoughtful, interesting, or relevant to the discourse and development of the nation?It is simply unbelievable that you have done nothing on Nader's bailout plan. As the most relied upon news organization for print media in the world, one would expect a shred of professionalism for the third-highest ranked Presidential candidate. Every day, we hear from people that say they did not even know Nader was running. When he pulls in more than a million votes on November 4th, and many more people see his name on the ballot for the first time in print (as his name will be before roughly twice as many voters this time), they will wonder what in the heck the news media was doing for them to have not yet heard he was running. One national story all campaign does not a newswire make. I hope you take the opportunity to return to your proud traditions which are quickly turning into receding laurels. As the government continues to do a new multi-billion dollar bailout each week, the least you could do is a story on Nader's alternative plan to the bailouts. See below a release detailing it. http://www.votenader.org/media/2008/09/16/meltdown/Not a happy camper,Toby HeapsNational Media Coordinator202 471 5833Feel free to reach out to Donna, and ask why she hasn't done one national story on us since launch, a story on the bailout, and Nader's alternative plan, dcassata@ap.org, 202-641-9421
If Donna is not responsive, try the Washington Bureau chief, Ron Fournier, rfournier@ap.org, 202-641-9402
In addition, Team Nader is launching a "What's your breaking point?" series where you are invited to share your stories with the campaign (via Communications Director Loralynne Krobetzky -- loralynne@votenader.org).iraqmcclatchy newspapersleila fadelthe los angeles timesned parkerthe washington postkaren deyoungthe new york timescampbell robertsonthe times of londondeborah haynescorinne reillymary beth sheridantim alboneelizabeth ferrisbasil adas
Posted at 08:13 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
Oct 13, 2008
ms. magazine gets punked by donna brazile
starting with Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Private Dancer Bambi"
shake that money maker barack!
okay, i hope you already read ava & c.i.'s 'TV: Some moments should stay undercover' which is amazing, no question. i want to emphasize 1 section on donna brazile:
Our favorite moment was probably when 'regular gal' Donna felt the need to inform Charlie that "I talk to White people, Latinos, everybody." Are your sides aching yet?The same Donna Brazile who declared in May, "Well, Lou, I have worked on a lot of Democratic campaigns, and I respect Paul. But, Paul, you're looking at the old coalition. A new Democratic coalition is younger. It is more urban, as well as suburban, and we don't have to just rely on white blue-collar voters and Hispanics. We need to look at the Democratic Party, expand the party, expand the base and not throw out the baby with the bathwater."
The only response to Donna's claim to to "talk to White people, Latinos, everybody," is to ask, "And do they speak back to you?" Charlie, of course, avoided that obvious question. Then again, maybe Donna was referring to those angry e-mails she's become so infamous for with pithy little sentiments such as "Message to the Base: Stay home."
Donna got off a few truths, to her credit. She noted of Barack, "he's mixed race -- he's bi-racial." (She later referred to him as "half-Black".) She rejected the notion that Ralph Nader cost Al Gore the election in 2000 noting, "Had Al Gore won Tennessee, we wouldn't be having this conversation." She noted the responsibility was Gore's ("Al Gore had to close the deal"), that he was polling low ("he was in the mid-40s") and, "Put Nader aside . . . I didn't fight hard enough." (Donna was the campaign manager of Gore's 2000 run.) But this being Donna Brazile, the hilarity always stands out more than anything else.
And we're were laughing so hard, at the end of the interview, when she gave her credits to Charlie, "I work four jobs, I love it. I write for Roll Call, I'm a syndicated columnist, I teach, I'm on CBS, CNN." Are you laughing too? If not think about what periodical has allowed Donna's tired ass to write for them? That's right, Donna's on PBS and can't even plug Ms. magazine. Doesn't it all seem so fitting? That's gratitude for you and it reminded us of how a DC hostess has christened Donna "The Ass With Sass." Were truer words ever spoken?
'the ass with sass' is hilarious (and i know who the hostess is, by the way) but what i think is just so poetic is that ms. magazine hired the closet case donna brazile and they run her hideous column each issue but brazile can't even give them a plug while on national television. hey, ms. magazine, you got punked.
austin cassidy's independent political report notes:
Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader has received the endorsement of Chris Hedges, a journalist who won a Pulitzer Prize when writing for the New York Times. Hedges has previously said that he would vote for Nader because neither Obama nor McCain are unequivocally against continuing the war in Iraq.
that's in the snapshot (about hedges, not the link to austin that just went up 2 hours ago) but i wanted to emphasize it here.
ralph nader is not a losing choice. ralph nader is a solid choice. if you're against the illegal war, he's an outstanding choice. if you're agains the mega-bucks bailout that just passed our spineless and corporate toady congress, he's an outstanding choice.
if you're some 1 who whines and whines for 3 years before a presidential election about how you want a candidate who stands up for the things that matter, you can stop being a whiner and realize that such a candidate is ralph nader or you can betray what you believe in this go-round (again) and go back to whining in 2009. it's your choice. but i'm really not interested in hearing you whine after the election about how barack sold you out.
he's already done that with fisa.
he's already done that with the iraq war.
he sells every 1 out.
do you think he's going to get into the white house and magically transform himself?
if so, that's not 'hope' you've swallowed, that's some hard drugs you've swallowed.
ralph doesn't say 1 thing to 1 group of people and another thing to others. he doesn't suck up to the telecoms because they're financing his political convention (and campaign).
you don't have to wait for a candidate you believe in to emerge, he's already here. ralph nader is some 1 who has repeatedly proven he will stand up. he will not turn tail and run. so if you think your vote matters, then use it in such a way that it can make a difference.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:' Monday, October 13, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces a death and Iraqi Christians continue to be targeted.
We're going to focus mainly on the crisis for Iraqi Christians. Today the United Nations' IRIN has issued a call for more humanitarian aid to assist Iraqi Christians fleeing their homes in Mosul. Iraqi Christians? From Friday's snapshot:
Yesterday at the White House, spokesperson Dana Perino was asked about Iraqi Christians "losing representation in Iraq's Muslim-dominated legislature" and Perino responded that "I think that that was resolved and the Christians' rights were restored." (Full answer: "I'll check, but I think you should double check, because I think that that was resolved and the Christians' rights were restored.") No, they were not. Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reported, "a separate bill" will be sent "to parliament to restore" Article 50. The bill may or not pass. But the provincial elections bill, which passed by Parliament, passed the presidency council and was signed into law by Iraqi president Jalal Talabani, eliminated Article 50 which guaranteed representation to religious minorities. Yesterday, Kim Gamel (AP) reported that in Mosul so far this month, 7 corpses of Iraqi Christians have been discovered, notes that a person's religion is listed on the state i.d., that there are approximately 800,000 Iraqi Christians still in the country, and quotes Chaldean Archibishop Louis Sako stating, "We are worried about the campaign of killings and deportations against the Christian citizens in Mosul." The Kurdish Globe reported yesterday that the Yazidis and the Christians continue protesting over the elimination of Article 50 and quotes Jamil Zeito ("head of the Seriaques-Chaldeans Public Council") stating, "We will demonstrate and protest until we achieve autonomous rights for Christians in our districts as well as fair representation for religious minorities, including Christians, in the provincial elections. The protests and demonstrations will not stop till we accomplish our fair rights; ignoring the rights of minorities indicates incomplete democracy in Iraq." And, as AINA reports, the issue has led to protests elsewhere as well such as the Iraqi embassy in Sweden where protestors gathered and Isak Monir ("spokesman for the Chaldean Federation in Sweden") explained, "Since the decision to exclude minorities representatives was taken by the Iraqi parliament the violence against Christians has increased remarkably. The groups who want Iraq cleaned from other ethnic and religious groups maybe felt that they are backed up by the parliament and consequently have begun to kill Christians again. They want a homogeneous Iraq -- cleaned from other ethnic and religious groups." Ethan Cole (Christian Post) notes the 3 Iraqi Christians killed on Tuesday in Mosul and he explains of Mosul "the city is a historic center for Assyrian Christians, who view it as their ancestral homeland. It is home to the second-largest community of Christians in Iraq, after Baghdad."
Things did not magically improve over the weekend and, in fact, got worse. The BBC explained: "Mosul's provincial governor said hundreds of Christian families had fled the city in the past week to seek refuge in outlying villages." Sunday Gulf Daily News reported, "Militants blew up three empty Christian homes yesterday in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, where more than 3,000 Christian families have fled in the past two days. The governor of northern Ninevah province, Duraid Mohammed Kashmoula, said more than 3,000 Christians have fled Mosul over the past week alone in what he called a 'major displacement.' This is despite months of US and Iraqi military operations to secure the city." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) added, "Fleeing Christians have sought refuge in monasteries and churches and with family members in other towns, an Interior Ministry official said." Patrick Cockburn (Independent of London) reports that 4,000 people have fled and quotes Ni'ma Noail explaining, "We left everything behind us. We took only our souls. Relatives in other cities and friends in Mosul, including Muslims, advised me to leave after recent events." Mosul is the third largest city in Iraq and Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) reminds, "Nineveh, whose capital is Mosul, has been a front line in the simmering conflict between Kurds and Arabs over northern Iraq's future boundaries. "
Friday's snapshot noted this report from Vatican Radio (link has audio):
Vatican Radio: Concern is growing once again over violence against Christians in nothern Iraq where, in the last week alone, seven of them have been killed in the city of Mosul. Attacks have tapered off amid a drastic decline in overall violence nationwide but these latest killings have sparked renewed fears. The Chaldean Archbishop of Kirkuk, Luis Sako, has condemned the violence.
Archbishop Sako: In Mosul the situation is terrible especially for the Christians and many families left the city, children cannot go to the school and also people cannot go to work they are staying in their houses. Just a real tragedy for them. I made an appeal to the Mosul population because I am from Mosul -- I lived years in Mosul, in a parish -- and I had many, many relationships with Muslims most of them so I made a call and an appeal. This appeal has been delivered in all the local medias. This could be helpful to encourage Muslim moderates to react and to do something.
Today Atul Aneja (The Hindu) reports on the Pope, "In Vatican City, Pope Benedict XVI condemned the violence against Christians in Iraq and India" and quotes the Pop stating, "I invite you to pray for peace and reconciliation as situations cause concern and great suffering. . . . I think of violence against Christians in Iraq and India." [Aneja also notes that "India's first woman saint," Sister Alfonsa, "was canonised" on Sunday.] Today Vatican Radio reports again on the situation (link has audio):
Vatican Radio: Scores of Christian families have fled Mosul in nothern Iraq, and police have been deployed to protect the lives and property of those who have chosen to remain as a wave of violent anti-Christian persecution engulfs the city.
Chris Altieri: More than a dozen of the faithful have been killed in a spate of the anti-Christian violence that broke out last week centered in Mosul, a city located 390 kilometers or 240 miles north of the Iraqi capitol Baghdad. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki vowed on Sunday to protect Christians in the city as police were deployed following a surge of attacks that have prompted hundreds of families to flee. Maliki made the promise in a statement after receiving Christian officials in his office, pledging that security forces in Ninevah Province would take all necessary measures to provide security for Christians. Pope Benedict XVI condemned the violence Sunday on Saint Peter's Square saying he prays daily for all who suffer persecution for the sake of the Gospel. More than a thousand police have been deployed to protect Christian districts and churches in Mosul. Police commanders say there have been more than 14 arrests and one suspect was killed during a confrontation. Iraq's Christians number in the hundreds of thousands and have sought to avoid the sectarian bloodshed that has plagued the country since the US-led invasion in 2003. Christians have been targeted for kidnapping or killing and have fallen victim to random violence as well. In recent weeks, Christians have called for the restoration of quotas for religious minorities in a provincial election law passed last month. Maliki's government also supports the inclusion of quotas. I'm Chris Altieri.
Meanwhile Italy's AGI reports that "pamphlets have appeared on the city streets urging Christians to convert to Islam or pay 'yiziyah', an ancient tribute that the minority was forced to pay the Muslim authorities to avoid persecution, if they don't, those responsible for the threats offer only one alternative: leave or be killed." AP notes that the homes of three Christian families who had fled were blown up Saturday and "On Saturday, Bashir Azoz, a 45-year-old carpenter, said he was forced to flee his home in the city's eastern Noor area after gunmen warned a neighbor the day before to leave or face death." Azoz is quoted asking, "Where is the government and its security forces as these crimes take place every day?" Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) explains that Iraqi Christians "fled to Mousl" from Baghdad in 2007 due to the dangers they were facing and that "Archbishop Paulos Faraj Raho of Mosul was kidnapped and killed" in February. February 29th, the Archbishop and three companions were kidnapped: "Catholic World News states, 'Bishop Paulos Faraj Raho was seized by terrorists who attacked his car as he left the Holy Spirit cathedral in Mosul after leading the Stations of the Cross on Friday, February 29. Three companions who had been in the car with him were killed'." March 13th, the Archbishop was found dead, his body half-buried. Today Kim Gamel (AP) reports another Iraqi Christian was killed in Mosul -- this one shot dead after "gumen" broke into his Christian music store "late Sunday". Iraqi Christians are being targeted in Mosul. Luis Sako, the Chaldean Archbishop of Kirkuk, has referred to the assaults as "liquidation." Tariq Alhomayed (Asharq Alawsat) spoke with the Archbishop who maintains that "the population of Christians before 2003 was around eight hundred thousand, but the targeted violence against the Christian population in Mosul, Kirkuk, Baghdad and Basra has led to a mass-migration of some two hundred and fifty thousand."
For all the talk of help being provided, it doesn't appear to have arrived. Alissa J. Rubin and Stephen Farrell (New York Times) report that despite the Interior Minister announcing "two police brigades" were dispatched, "Sunday evening, local Christians said that they were awaiting the police reinforcements but that they had not yet seen them." The reporters notes that Iraq's Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, met with Iraqi Christians in Baghdad and he stated, "The Iraqis stand in solidarity with the Christians." Mujahid Mohammed (AFP) reports that "the United Nations voiced concern at the community's plight" and that, on Monday, "An AFP correspondent said Mosul was filled with police manning checkpoints and patrolling churches and residential neighbourhoods in the multi-religious city while volunteer organisations, including the Red Crescent and various church groups, were handing out food and water." Which brings us back to where we started. IRIN quotes Jawdat Ismaiel ("provincial director of the office of the Ministry of Displacement and Migration") stating, "The most needed items are food, blankets and bed rolls. . . . We have distributed 350 items so far and we will distribute at least 200 more tomorrow."
While the humanitarian crisis continues, Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) reports that the tag-sale on Iraqi oil continues: "Representatives of 35 companies have been given six months to apply for a 20-year right to operate oilfields that hold up to 40 per cent of the country's 115 barrels of proven reserves. Hussain al-Shahristani, Iraq's Minister for Oil, convened the meeting at a Park Lane hotel in central London. Aides said the location was deliberately chosen to demonstrate that Iraq had shed its old pre-occupations about foreign powers dominating the industry, which generates ninety per cent of its annual income." Corporate Watch calls today's meet-up "the formal launch of a round of bidding for some of Iraq's largest oil fields, with the aim of signing long-term contracts in June 2009. The Iraqi Oil Ministry claims these deals will be for risk service contracts -- in theory, a significant improvement over PSCs [Production Sharing Contracts]. But with such secrecy, it is impossible to know what the Iraqi government is signing away. What we do know is what the US and UK government, and Big Oil want, and the force -- enabled by prolonging the occupation -- that they will use to get it." England's The Sun reports the executives of "34 companies" attended today's meet-up with Iraqi Energy Minister Hussain al-Shahristani. Energy Intelligence states the bid is for oil fields (six) and gas fields (two) and that al-Shahristani is stating that the cabinet will approve the contracts "before the end of June." The Scotsman reports an estimated 80 people were protesting outside the meeting.
Tensions continued over the weekend between Iraq and it's northern neighbor Turkey. China's Xinhau notes, "The Turkish General Staff said in a statement posted on its website that this was the seventh time that the Turkish warplanes have bombed 31 PKK targets in northern Iraq since Oct. 4." BBC explains: "The Turkish government accuses Iraq of failing to stop the guerrillas - who are fighting for greater autonomy in south-east Turkey - from using the mountainous area as a safe haven." Hurriyet reports: "Turkish President Abdullah Gul is also expected to pay a visit to the neighboring country in the coming weeks, accepting an invitation from Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, himself a Kurd. Following the first contact between Turkish and Iraqi Kurdish officials, which was held after another PKK attack late in 2007, the northern Iraq administration took several steps but those were not satisfactory." Last Thursday's snapshot noted the meeting of the Higher Board of Counter-Terrorism in Turkey for "about six hours" and that it would meet again tomorrow. While Turkey's Higher Board of Counter-Terrorism is scheduled to meet Tuesday, that's not the only meeting planned for tomorrow. Reuters reports that a Baghdad meeting between Iraqi officials and a Turkish delegate is scheduled for tomorrow. Reuters also notes that, facing criticism from northern Iraq, Tureky's Prime Minister Erdogan has stated, "At the moment there is no need for a buffer zone." Reportedly officials from northern Iraq are not currently invited to attend the Tuesday meet-up in Baghdad.
Friday's snapshot noted 28-year-old journalist Diyar Abbass who was shot dead in Kirkuk. Leila Fadel (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy) writes, "Diyar was a young journalist who worked for The Eye, a privately owned Iraqi News Agency. He is one of 222 media workers who've been killed in Iraq since the start of the war, according to Reporters without Borders. His death is a tragedy and his life was a light. The more journalists that are killed or intimidated the more darkness there will be." Reporters Without Borders issued a statement "Ahmed was the 22nd media worker to be killed in Iraq since March 2003. What kind of political or spiritual victory can those who commit such horrible crimes hope to achieve?" The Committee to Protect Journalists also issued a statement from their deputy director Robert Mahoney: "We express our condolences to the family and colleagues of Diyar Abas Ahmed. We call on the authorities do everything in their power to track down Ahmed's ýkillers and bring them to justice."
Diyar Abas Ahmed's death comes at a time when non-Iraqi outlets continue to cut back on their Iraq assignments. Ernesto London and Amit R. Paley (Washington Post) explained the problem Saturday:
In a stark indication of the changing media focus here, the number of journalists traveling with American forces in Iraq has plummeted in the past year. U.S. military officials say they "embedded" journalists 219 times in September 2007. Last month, the number shrank to 39. Of the dozen U.S. newspapers and newspaper chains that maintained full-time bureaus in Baghdad in the early years of the war, only four are still permanently staffed by foreign correspondents.CBS and NBC no longer keep a correspondent in Baghdad year-round. "It remains important and it remains interesting," said Alissa J. Rubin, the New York Times' acting bureau chief in Baghdad. "But what's in front of us now is almost a static situation. There's not a clear narrative line. The stories are more complex."
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that left five people wounded.
Today the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division - Baghdad Soldier died of non-battle related causes at approximately 5:50 a.m. Oct 12 in Baghdad." The announcement brought the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4182.
Turning to the US presidential race. Chris Hedges (via Information Clearing House) expresses this thought: "This is a defining moment in American history. The next few weeks and months will see us stabilize and weather this crisis or descend into a terrifying dystopia. I place no hope in Obama or the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is a pathetic example of liberal, bourgeois impotence, hypocrisy and complacency. It has been bought off. I will vote, if only as a form of protest against our corporate state and an homage to Polanyi's brilliance, for Ralph Nader. I would like to offer hope, but it is more important to be a realist. No ethic or act of resistance is worthy anything if it is not based on the real. And the real, I am afraid, does not look good." If you're asking "Polanyi?" -- Team Nader is already on it:
Fascism, like socialism, is rooted in a market society that refused to function.
A financial system always devolves, without heavy government control, into a Mafia capitalism -- and a Mafia political system.
A self-regulating market turns human beings and the natural environment into commodities, a situation that ensures the destruction of both society and the natural environment.
Who is this speaking?
It is the Hungarian intellectual Karl Polanyi, author of the influential book The Great Transformation (1944).
Polanyi fled fascist Europe in 1933 and eventually taught at Columbia University.
Remembering Polanyi, former New York Times reporter Chris Hedges writes today:
"I place no hope in Obama or the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is a pathetic example of liberal, bourgeois impotence, hypocrisy and complacency. It has been bought off. I will vote, if only as a form of protest against our corporate state and an homage to Polanyi's brilliance, for Ralph Nader. I would like to offer hope, but it is more important to be a realist. No ethic or act of resistance is worth anything if it is not based on the real. And the real, I am afraid, does not look good."
We live in difficult times.
But one man has shown the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the corporate state -- Ralph Nader.
For most of this year, Ralph has been barnstorming across the country -- bringing a message of hope and resilience to a troubled America.
And now it's time to step up and support Ralph Nader and the shift the power platform he has gifted to the American people.
Today, thanks to your help, we are within striking range of meeting our October Surprise Fund goal of $250,000 by midnight tonight.
We are less than $17,000 away.
Please, give $10, $50, $100 now -- whatever you can afford -- up to the legal limit of $2,300.
And if you donate $100 or more now, we will send you an autographed copy of Ralph's classic -- The Seventeen Traditions (HarperCollins 2007).
This 150-page hardcover book details the seventeen traditions that Ralph grew up with and is the closest thing so far to a Ralph Nader autobiography.
So, don't miss out on this limited edition offer. (This offer expires tonight at midnight.)
We need 170 of you -- our loyal supporters -- to step up and snap up The Seventeen Traditions.
And we will meet our goal.
So let's crank it up today.
And get it done.
After you have contributed, check out Hedges' article here.
Onward to November
The Nader Team
Wednesday October 15, Ralph Nader will speak at Cooper Union (NYC) at six p.m. and the following day the independent presidential candidate at noon "Ralph will take to the street in front of the NYSE to protest the bailout at Federal Hall, 26 Wall St. NYC."
Ralph's running mate is Matt Gonzalez. John McCain is the Republican presidential nominee and his running mate is Sarah Palin. The McCain-Palin '08 campaign notes (link has video):
U.S. Senator John McCain delivered the following remarks at the McCain-Palin 2008 rally in Virginia Beach, VA:
Three weeks from now, you will choose a new President. Choose well. There is much at stake.
These are hard times. Our economy is in crisis. Financial markets are collapsing. Credit is drying up. Your savings are in danger. Your retirement is at risk. Jobs are disappearing. The cost of health care, your children's college, gasoline and groceries are rising all the time with no end in sight. While your most important asset -- your home -- is losing value every day.
Americans are fighting in two wars. We face many enemies in this dangerous world, and they are waiting to see if our current troubles will permanently weaken us.
The next President won't have time to get used to the office. He won't have the luxury of studying up on the issues before he acts. He will have to act immediately. And to do that, he will need experience, courage, judgment and a bold plan of action to take this country in a new direction. We cannot spend the next four years as we have spent much of the last eight: waiting for our luck to change. The hour is late; our troubles are getting worse; our enemies watch. We have to act immediately. We have to change direction now. We have to fight.
I've been fighting for this country since I was seventeen years old, and I have the scars to prove it. If I'm elected President, I will fight to take America in a new direction from my first day in office until my last. I'm not afraid of the fight, I'm ready for it.
I'm not going to spend $700 billion dollars of your money just bailing out the Wall Street bankers and brokers who got us into this mess. I'm going to make sure we take care of the people who were devastated by the excesses of Wall Street and Washington. I'm going to spend a lot of that money to bring relief to you, and I'm not going to wait sixty days to start doing it.
I have a plan to protect the value of your home and get it rising again by buying up bad mortgages and refinancing them so if your neighbor defaults he doesn't bring down the value of your house with him.
I have a plan to let retirees and people nearing retirement keep their money in their retirement accounts longer so they can rebuild their savings.
I have a plan to rebuild the retirement savings of every worker.
I have a plan to hold the line on taxes and cut them to make America more competitive and create jobs here at home.
Raising taxes makes a bad economy much worse. Keeping taxes low creates jobs, keeps money in your hands and strengthens our economy.
The explosion of government spending over the last eight years has put us deeper in debt to foreign countries that don't have our best interests at heart. It weakened the dollar and made everything you buy more expensive.
If I'm elected President, I won't spend nearly a trillion dollars more of your money, on top of the $700 billion we just gave the Treasury Secretary, as Senator Obama proposes. Because he can't do that without raising your taxes or digging us further into debt. I'm going to make government live on a budget just like you do.
I will freeze government spending on all but the most important programs like defense, veterans care, Social Security and health care until we scrub every single government program and get rid of the ones that aren't working for the American people. And I will veto every single pork barrel bill Congresses passes.
If I'm elected President, I won't fine small businesses and families with children, as Senator Obama proposes, to force them into a new huge government run health care program, while I keep the cost of the fine a secret until I hit you with it. I will bring down the skyrocketing cost of health care with competition and choice to lower your premiums, and make it more available to more Americans. I'll make sure you can keep the same health plan if you change jobs or leave a job to stay home.
I will provide every single American family with a $5000 refundable tax credit to help them purchase insurance. Workers who already have health care insurance from their employers will keep it and have more money to cover costs. Workers who don't have health insurance can use it to find a policy anywhere in this country to meet their basic needs.
If I'm elected President, I won't raise taxes on small businesses, as Senator Obama proposes, and force them to cut jobs. I will keep small business taxes where they are, help them keep their costs low, and let them spend their earnings to create more jobs.
If I'm elected President, I won't make it harder to sell our goods overseas and kill more jobs as Senator Obama proposes. I will open new markets to goods made in America and make sure our trade is free and fair. And I'll make sure we help workers who've lost a job that won't come back find a new one that won't go away.
The last President to raise taxes and restrict trade in a bad economy as Senator Obama proposes was Herbert Hoover. That didn't turn out too well. They say those who don't learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. Well, my friends, I know my history lessons, and I sure won't make the mistakes Senator Obama will.
If I'm elected President, we're going to stop sending $700 billion to countries that don't like us very much. I won't argue to delay drilling for more oil and gas and building new nuclear power plants in America, as Senator Obama does. We will start new drilling now. We will invest in all energy alternatives -- nuclear, wind, solar, and tide. We will encourage the manufacture of hybrid, flex fuel and electric automobiles. We will invest in clean coal technology. We will lower the cost of energy within months, and we will create millions of new jobs.
Let me give you the state of the race today. We have 22 days to go. We're 6 points down. The national media has written us off. Senator Obama is measuring the drapes, and planning with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid to raise taxes, increase spending, take away your right to vote by secret ballot in labor elections, and concede defeat in Iraq. But they forgot to let you decide. My friends, we've got them just where we want them.
What America needs in this hour is a fighter; someone who puts all his cards on the table and trusts the judgment of the American people. I come from a long line of McCains who believed that to love America is to fight for her. I have fought for you most of my life. There are other ways to love this country, but I've never been the kind to do it from the sidelines.
I know you're worried. America is a great country, but we are at a moment of national crisis that will determine our future. Will we continue to lead the world's economies or will we be overtaken? Will the world become safer or more dangerous? Will our military remain the strongest in the world? Will our children and grandchildren's future be brighter than ours?
My answer to you is yes. Yes, we will lead. Yes, we will prosper. Yes, we will be safer. Yes, we will pass on to our children a stronger, better country. But we must be prepared to act swiftly, boldly, with courage and wisdom.
I know what fear feels like. It's a thief in the night who robs your strength.
I know what hopelessness feels like. It's an enemy who defeats your will.
I felt those things once before. I will never let them in again. I'm an American. And I choose to fight.
Don't give up hope. Be strong. Have courage. And fight.
Fight for a new direction for our country.
Fight for what's right for America.
Fight to clean up the mess of corruption, infighting and selfishness in Washington.
Fight to get our economy out of the ditch and back in the lead.
Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.
Fight for our children's future.
Fight for justice and opportunity for all.
Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.
Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. America is worth fighting for. Nothing is inevitable here. We never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.
Now, let's go win this election and get this country moving again.iraqthe new york timesalissa j. rubinstephen farrellsam dagherpatrick cockburnthe los angeles timesned parkermohammed tawfeeqbasil adasethan colekim gamelleila fadelmcclatchy newspaperstariq alhomayedatul anejathe washington postamit r. paleyernesto londono
Posted at 08:27 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
Oct 12, 2008
Third party presidential candidate Ralph Nader said Friday the government missed a historic chance to rein in greed and excess on Wall Street when it approved a financial bailout package.
Speaking at a Statehouse news conference, Nader said Congress could have pushed for reforms but instead caved into Wall Street.
"Washington had Wall Street over the barrel two weeks ago and they could have gotten all these reforms because Wall Street wanted $700 billion," Nader said. "Instead, Wall Street stuffed Washington into a barrel and rolled them, so we have to wait until next year."
Nader spoke in Des Moines before holding a rally later in the day at Iowa State University in Ames.that's the opening of mike glover's ' Nader: Government missed chance with bailout' ( ap). ralph is on the road fighting the blockade against him the press has created. some might argue the democratic party created it and i wouldn't try to split hairs except to note that the press does what it wants. in november, every vote for nader - gonzalez is a vote against undemocratic actions and a closed press. remember that. and remember you can vote for ralph if you live in any state except oklahoma. he's on the ballot in 45 states (and d.c.) and the other 4 allow you to write him in. this is his biggest run ever so let's make sure we make our voices heard. if enough people have guts, he could end up in the white house. gillian e-mailed a highlight. john leo ' the power of one' ( city lights) traces how bad reporting leads to lies and this is too difficult to cut so if you get lost, use the link:
Dana Milbank of the Washington Post often writes with a good deal of attitude, and his Tuesday column was no exception. In his report on Sarah Palin’s campaign speech in Clearwater, Florida, laced with mocking Palinisms (“darn right,” “betcha”), he wrote that “the self-identified pit bull has been unleashed, if not unhinged.” The “unhinging,” in Milbank’s assessment, came when Palin charged that Obama still has some explaining to do about his relationship with 1960s Weatherman bomber William Ayers.
Milbank also wrote that Palin blamed Katie Couric for her “less-than-successful” CBS interview. Other newspapers reported a more light-hearted Palin response to the dismal interview. The Tampa Tribune, for example, reported that she said: “I shoulda told them I was just trying to keep Tina Fey in business.”
But Milbank’s report triggered Democratic rage across the Internet with his charge that “Palin’s routine attacks on the media have begun to spill into ugliness.” Some in the Clearwater crowd, he wrote, shouted abuse at reporters. Someone yelled “Kill him,” apparently a reference to Ayers; and one person shouted an epithet at a network sound man (apparently the N-word, though Milbank didn’t say) and told him, “Sit down, boy.”
[...]
Milbank’s lone racist at the rally soon became a group (or a mob) of people shouting racial epithets. A New York Times editorial Tuesday (“The Politics of Attack”) misquoted Milbank’s Post column, claiming that one person shouted “Kill him” and “others shouted epithets at an African-American member of a TV crew.” Many blogs followed suit: “Crowd at Palin Rally Hurled Racial Epithets at African American on News Crew,” read the headline at Pensito Review. This was too much for Bob Somerby, the left-leaning blogger at the Daily Howler. Calling Milbank “a highly unreliable chronicler,” Somerby taunted the Times for multiplying racists at the rally: “It’s the power of pluralization!...One example becomes much more powerful when we stick an ‘s’ on the end. In this case, one epithet-shouter turns into a group. How many people were shouting those epithets? The editors let you imagine.” gillian lives in delaware and will be voting for nader (and this is the 1st election she can vote in so she's really excited to have a strong candidate to support). but she wrote that she wanted that highlighted for 2 reasons. 1st, she wanted to be sure 'the people in oklahoma know i support their decision to endorse john mccain and sarah palin. if i was in their position, i might be voting mccain. i know they must feel like some will judge them harsh for that but i don't and can speak only for me. barack is a liar who lies about ending the iraq war and no 1 who wants the war over should reward a liar. add in his use of homophobia and sexism and barack doesn't deserve a vote.' i agree with gillian and will note that here. i'm sorry, i didn't realize i hadn't written about the oklahoma endorsement until gillian pointed it out in her e-mail. always remember that these posts are written by a woman with a 1-year-old meaning i start and stop a lot. i'm sitting on the couch with the laptop, planning what to say and starting to type and, boom, have to stop. that's not an insult of flyboy who is a wonderful father but there are so many times when the baby just wants me and will fuss and fuss until she gets me. that's fine. i've waited all my life to have a baby so i'm not complaining. but in the stop and start over and over, i sometimes think i have covered something i meant to only to find out that i didn't. long before june 5th when barack admitted on cnn that he wasn't really promising anything and any campaign promise would be set aside if he got into the white house, i knew barack wasn't about ending the illegal war. you don't have so many advisors who support counter-insurgency (the opposite of peace) if you're planning to end the illegal war. i agree with the decision of oklahoma community members. there will be no honeymoon for mccain. the peace movement will not continue to cower in silence. neither barack or mccain will end the iraq war, the people would have to under either of them. i'm doing my pat to end it by supporting a candidate who will end it. but if i were in oklahoma and had to choose between the 2, i would vote mccain. look at gillian's highlight and think about how you've heard that lie over and over all week and it never happened. (afp reported yesterday that the secret service concluded their investigation after finding no evidence of such a shout.) the press is in the tank for barack, a good portion of the left and 'left' are as well. that's why he can't get real coverage from our allegedly 'independent' media. you think if he gets elected, they'll finally find a way to call him out? they had a chance to support ralph (or cynthia mckinney) who agrees with them and will end the illegal war. but positions and issues suddenly didn't matter because they wanted to hop on board the hopey-changey train. barack has spat on the left and a number of them have stood there with their mouths open and swallowed his spit after. in his 1st townhall in 2005, he told people the illegal war had to wait. he'd just been elected as the 'anti-war' senator and was already selling out. he'll do the same as president. which is why i wouldn't vote for him under circumstance and, if i lived in oklahoma, be announcing i was voting for john mccain. i think the decision by the oklahoma community members also proves a point the nader campaign has raised: he's not pulling votes from barack, he's pulling them from mccain. ralph's the real deal. he's not afraid to defend palestinians. he's not standing on stage asking them to take the flag down and put up the flag of israel so he can offer a pledge to that. ('no 1 has been a better friend to israel than joe biden,' bragged biden in his debate with sarah palin.) he's not afraid to call out wall st. he's for unionizing and, pay attention to this 1, the union 'leaders' are endorsing barack. it's a real shame so many are afraid to vote for what they believe in. but we don't have to sell out. when there's a candidate who really would bring change, i think it's our duty to support him or her. in the case of oklahoma, they had no such choice. i think they made a strong statement and i think they made a great 1. i applaud them. thank you to gillian for pointing out that i hadn't written about their decision. it was an oversight and not intended. this is the latest from team nader: In the Public Interest: The Derivatives Casino
Posted by Ralph Nader on Friday, October 10, 2008 at 04:36:00 PM
ShareThis In the Public Interestby Ralph Nader
The derivatives markets of today have become a high stakes casino of unimaginable magnitude. Wall Street's bets have gone bad, and now the whole financial system is in peril. In a best-case scenario, it appears, the taxpayers will be required to rescue the system from itself. This is why Warren Buffet labeled derivatives "weapons of financial mass destruction."Amazingly, there seems to be some lingering sense that current-day derivatives properly perform an insurance function.Case in point: Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve Chairman. Greenspan says the world is facing the type of wrenching financial crisis that comes along only once in acentury, but, reports the New York Times, "his faith in derivatives remains unshaken." Greenspan believes that the problem is not with derivatives, but that the people using them got greedy, according to the Times.This is quite a view. Is it a surprise to Alan Greenspan thatthe people on Wall Street--said to be ruled only by the opposing instincts of greed and fear--"got greedy?"This might be taken as just a bizarre comment, except that, of course, Alan Greenspan had some considerable influence in driving us to the current financial meltdown through his opposition to regulation of derivatives.A series of deregulatory moves, blessed by Alan Greenspan, helped immunize Wall Street derivatives traders from proper oversight.In 1995, Congress enacted the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) of 1995, which imposed onerous restrictionson plaintiffs suing wrongdoers in the stock market. The law was enacted in the wake of Orange County, California's government bankruptcy caused by abuses in derivatives trading. An amendment offered by Rep. Ed Markey would have exempted derivatives trading abuse lawsuits from the PSLRA restrictions. In defeatingthe amendment, then-Representative and now-SEC Chairman Chris Cox quoted Alan Greenspan, saying “it would be a grave error to demonize derivatives;” and, “It would be a serious mistake to respond to these developments [in OrangeCounty, California] by singling out derivative instruments for special regulatory treatment.”The New York Times reports how the Commodity Futures Trading Commission aimed for some modest regulatory authority over derivatives in the late 1990s. Strident opposition from Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and Alan Greenspan spelled doom for that effort.Senator Phil Gramm helped drive the process along with theCommodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which deregulated the derivatives market.Defenders of deregulation argued that sophisticated players were involved in the derivatives markets, and they could handle themselves.It's now apparent that not only could these sophisticated players not handle themselves, but that their reckless gambling has placed the entire world's financial system at risk.It seems to be then a remarkably modest proposal for derivatives to be brought under regulatory control.Warren Buffet cut to the heart of the problem in 2003: "Another problem about derivatives is that they can exacerbate trouble that a corporation has run into for completely unrelatedreasons," he wrote in his annual letter to shareholders. "This pile-on effect occurs because many derivatives contracts require that a company suffering a credit downgrade immediately supply collateral to counterparties. Imagine, then, that a company is downgraded because of general adversity and that its derivatives instantly kick in with their requirement, imposing an unexpected and enormous demand for cash collateral on the company. The need to meet this demand can then throw the company into a liquidity crisis that may, in some cases, trigger still more downgrades. It all becomes a spiral that can lead to a corporate meltdown."That is to say, our current problems were foreseeable, and foreseen. There is no excuse for those who suggest that present circumstances--what many are calling a once-in-a-hundred-years event--were unimaginable during earlier debates about regulation.Some ideologues continue to defend derivatives from very strict government control. As Congress moves to adopt new financial regulations next year, hopefully the proponents of casino capitalism will be given no more credence than those insisting that the sun revolves around the earth.
ShareThisgo read elaine's ' The Common Ills' and let's close with c.i.'s ' Iraq snapshot:'
Friday, October 10, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, another journalist is killed, yesterday's assassination causes more suspicions of the US, Iraqi Christians are targeted says an Archbishop, and more. Yesterday at the White House, spokesperson Dana Perino was asked about Iraqi Christians "losing representation in Iraq's Muslim-dominated legislature" and Perino responded that "I think that that was resolved and the Christians' rights were restored." (Full answer: "I'll check, but I think you should double check, because I think that that was resolved and the Christians' rights were restored.") No, they were not. Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reported, "a separate bill" will be sent "to parliament to restore" Article 50. The bill may or not pass. But the provincial elections bill, which passed by Parliament, passed the presidency council and was signed into law by Iraqi president Jalal Talabani, eliminated Article 50 which guaranteed representation to religious minorities. Yesterday, Kim Gamel (AP) reported that in Mosul so far this month, 7 corpses of Iraqi Christians have been discovered, notes that a person's religion is listed on the state i.d., that there are approximately 800,000 Iraqi Christians still in the country, and quotes Chaldean Archibishop Louis Sako stating, "We are worried about the campaign of killings and deportations against the Christian citizens in Mosul." The Kurdish Globe reported yesterday that the Yazidis and the Christians continue protesting over the elimination of Article 50 and quotes Jamil Zeito ("head of the Seriaques-Chaldeans Public Council") stating, "We will demonstrate and protest until we achieve autonomous rights for Christians in our districts as well as fair representation for religious minorities, including Christians, in the provincial elections. The protests and demonstrations will not stop till we accomplish our fair rights; ignoring the rights of minorities indicates incomplete democracy in Iraq." And, as AINA reports, the issue has led to protests elsewhere as well such as the Iraqi embassy in Sweden where protestors gathered and Isak Monir ("spokesman for the Chaldean Federation in Sweden") explained, "Since the decision to exclude minorities representatives was taken by the Iraqi parliament the violence against Christians has increased remarkably. The groups who want Iraq cleaned from other ethnic and religious groups maybe felt that they are backed up by the parliament and consequently have begun to kill Christians again. They want a homogeneous Iraq -- cleaned from other ethnic and religious groups." Ethan Cole (Christian Post) notes the 3 Iraqi Christians killed on Tuesday in Mosul and he explains of Mosul "the city is a historic center for Assyrian Christians, who view it as their ancestral homeland. It is home to the second-largest community of Christians in Iraq, after Baghdad." Asia News (via Catholic Today) identifies the dead: More Christian blood in Mosul. On October 7, a father and son were killed in the neighborhood of Sukkar while they were working. Amjad Hadi Petros and his son were killed because "they were guilty of being Christian" in a place where a "systematic persecution" is being seen. In a second attack, recorded in another of the city's neighborhoods, a fundamentalist group broke into a pharmacy and killed an assistant, also of the Christian religion. We also recounted the execution, on Monday, October 6, of Ziad Kamal, a 25-year-old disabled shop owner in the city. The young man owned a store in the neighborhood of Karama: he was taken by an armed group from inside his store and brought to a nearby spot, where he was shot to death. Also, on Saturday, October 4, two more men were barbarously assassinated in two other areas of Mosul: Hazim Thomaso Youssif, 40, was killed in front of the clothing store he owned, while 15-year-old Ivan Nuwya was shot to death in the neighborhood of Tahrir, outside of his house in front of the local mosque of Alzhara.Vatican Radio offers a report: Vatican Radio: Concern is growing once again over violence against Christians in nothern Iraq where, in the last week alone, seven of them have been killed in the city of Mosul. Attacks have tapered off amid a drastic decline in overall violence nationwide but these latest killings have sparked renewed fears. The Chaldean Archbishop of Kirkuk, Luis Sako, has condemned the violence. Archbishop Sako: In Mosul the situation is terrible especially for the Christians and many families left the city, children cannot go to the school and also people cannot go to work they are staying in their houses. Just a real tragedy for them. I made an appeal to the Mosul population because I am from Mosul -- I lived years in Mosul, in a parish -- and I had many, many relationships with Muslims most of them so I made a call and an appeal. This appeal has been delivered in all the local medias. This could be helpful to encourage Muslim moderates to react and to do something.The United Nations and Peoples Organization notes the Wednesday meeting of the European Parliament of the EPP-ED in Brussles which addressed "Christian Communities in the Muslim World: Iraq". Archbishop of Mosul Basile Georges Casmoussa called the crisis "heartbreaking" and stated Iraq Christians make up 40% of the refugee population despite being only 4% of Iraq's population. He also noted that that "aid was not reaching Christians in Iraq". The report also notes: "Kirkuk was identified as a crucial issue by Ms. Naglaa Elhag, of the IKV Pax Christi organization, in her presentation on 'The Situation of Refugees in Iraq' -- the topic of the final panel. Until this was addressed and Europe adopted a cohesive policy there were few positive signs to be seen in the region Ms. Elhag concluded. Even outside Iraq, Christians continued to find themselves excluded from basic social services and had to face ongoing intimidation and violence. There was also a pressing need to hold the Iraqi government accountable for its failure to adequately protect the Iraqi Christian minority." Marwan Ibrahim (AFP) reports Archbishop Louis Sako declared today, "We are the target of a campaign of liquidation, a campaign of violence. The objective is political. . . . We have heard many words from Prime Minister Maliki, but unfortunately this has not translated into reality. We continue to be targeted. We want solutions, not promises." So, to toss back to Dana Perino, no, "that" was not "resolved." Dana Priest (Washington Post) was online at her paper yesterday afternoon for a discussion with readers and the topic of the National Intelligence Estimate [] was raised. Priest: "The jist of the NIE has been known for a while, since all the reporting that the Washington Post and other major news organizations have been doing over the past year says, basically, the same thing. In this sense, the NIE does not offer a big revelation; it just brings the series of daily intel/military analysis on Afghanistan to a higher level with more visibility. Unlike the days before the Iraq war, many people have access to what's happening in afghanistan and are willing to share it with reporters, in part because they are frustrated it's not getting more attention and they believe it should if, as we have said since 9-11, defeating terrorism is a priority." Wednesday Jonathan S. Landay, Warren P. Strobel and Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) reported on the upcoming National Intelligence Estimate (which may or may not be released prior to the US elections in November), "The draft NIE, however, warns that the improvements in security and political progress, like the recent passage of a provincial election law, are threatened by lingering disputes between the majority Shiite Arabs, Sunni Arabs, Kurds and other minorities, the U.S. officials said. Sources of tension identified by the NIE, they said, include a struggle between Sunni Arabs, Kurds and Turkmen for control of the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk; and the Shiite-led central government's unfulfilled vows to hire former Sunni insurgents who joined Awakening groups." At the White House yesterday Dana Perino noted that US Secretary of State Condi Rice has not read the report. Not a slam at Condi, just noting that the report is under wraps. Rice noted she hadn't read it in brief remarks to the press before meeting with Maris Reikstins (Lativian Foreign Affairs Minister) in DC, "Well, in fact, I have actually not seen the NIE. I will -- I assume that we'll be briefed on it shortly. But in any case, we had asked for the intelligence community to take a look. It's important that it do so." The issue of the NIE was raised at Thursday's State Dept press briefing conducted by Sean McCormack who noted, "She [Rice] has not yet seen it, and I don't believe any of the policy makers in the State Department have seen any drafts of this assessment. I would expect at some point that they will be briefed on it." As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Iraqi MP Saleh al-Auaeili was assassinated yesterday. al-Auqaeili had been one of the 30 member Sadr bloc in Parliament. Tensions are high over the assassination and Jeffrey Fleishman (Los Angeles Times) reports overnight fighting in the Sadr City section of Baghdad between, on one side, Sadr supporters and, on the other, Iraqi and US forces. Fleishman also notes that Ahmed Massoudi ("a Sadr spokesman") states, "The occupation sent us a message by staging this attack [the assassination] because of our stance against the agreement." Sam Dagher (New York Times) quotes Sheik Salah al-Obeidi (Moqtada al-"Sadr's chief spokesman") stating, "By killing Ugaili they are silencing a major opponent of the agreement" -- which would be the treaty the White House and the puppet of the occupation want to pretend is a SOFA. Sheik al-Obeidi ties the assassination in with other pressure to push on the treaty including US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte's visit to Iraq this week and he also notes that a demonstration will take place October 18th in Baghdad "against the American presence in Iraq." Ernesto London (Washington Post) quoted MP Ahmad al-Massoudi stating, "We have laid the blame on the occupation forces and the Iraqi government for the martyrdom of [the lawmaker] because the explosion happened in an area that is under the control of" the US military (the Green Zone). Marwa Sabah (AFP) reports that the "[m]ourners shouted anti-American slogans . . . as relatives hugged each other and wept while the wooden coffin of Ogayly was brought out of his home early on Friday draped in the tri-colour Iraqi flag." Khaled Farhan (Reuters) notes a statement released by Moqtada al-Sadr: "The martyr gave most of his time to eject the occupiers. . . . And for this reason the hand of the hateful occupation and terrorism killed him." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) explains that observers (US and Iraqi) are noting a shift from acts of violence targeting mass numbers of people to assassination attempts "using magnetic bombs, weapons with silencers and bicycle bombs. As provinicial elections approach, some officials worry that assassinations will increase as political parties try to eradicate their competitors." Leila Fadel (McClatchy) quotes the statement by al-Sadr reading, "Here is another star that brightens in the sky of martyrs, of Sadr followers and the sons of Iraq. Another martyr waters the land of Iraq with his blood, a martyr that sacrifices himself for the sake of Iraq and the people of Iraq, a martyr that gave all of his time to expel the occupier and not to sign agreements with him." Tensions in Baghdad also include the ongoing conflict between northern Iraq and Turkey. Hurriyet notes reports coming out stating that Turkey will be "direct talks with the regional administration in the northern Iraq in its fight against the terror organization, PKK". CNN notes that Turkey bombed northern Iraq again today. Reuters provides the catch-up for the latest tensions, "Turkey's parliament on Wednesday approved a government request to extend for another year a mandate to launch military operations against PKK rebels based in northern Iraq from where they are suspected of crossing into Turkey to attack soldiers. Turkish authorities are under mounting pressure after a series of deadly attacks on Turkish security forces and police, which has left more than 20 dead in recent days." Meanwhile the Turkish Daily News offers this observation, "It looks like the [Turkish] government will not bow to pressure from the opposition which calls for a ground incursion to Iraq as well as setting up a security zone in the border." At the US State Dept today, spokesperson Sean McCormack was asked about Prime Minister Tayyip Recep Erdogan's statements regarding " a buffer zone in northern Iraq" to prevent attacks by the PKK on Turkey and McCormack replied, "We are working with the Turkish and Iraqi governments on a common problem, and that is the threat of terrorism from the PKK." An October 17th vote for a non-permantnet seat on the United Nations' Security Council will be held and that Turkey is a candidate for that seat. Asso Ahmed (Los Angeles Times) quotes PKK "senior leader" Bozan Takeen declaring in a phone interview "from his hideout in Iraqi Kurdistan," "We are ready and our forces are ready. We are not afraid of them. If they want to attack Iraq's Kurdistan, then the Middle East will turn into a fire ball." Meanwhile Wednesday, in the Green Zone, US Maj Gen Jeffery Hammond declared: Now, take for example, the transition or transfer of the Sons of Iraq to Government of Iraq control. Now, we have two phases to this plan. The first one is the transfer of the Sons of Iraq to the, to the Government of Iraq control, which will include the assumption and the payment of their salaries starting this month in October. We're working very closely with our Iraqi counterparts to make sure this works. The Government of Iraq has committed to accept responsibility for the Sons of Iraq and it's been mandated in the Prime Minister Order No. 118‑C, and we're going to be there to assist in the transfer. We spent the last few weeks working hand in hand with the Iraqi Security Forces, the IFCNR, our Iraqi partners and I'm confident ‑‑ I'm confident this is going to go well. But again, effective this month, the Government of Iraq will start paying the salaries for the Sons of Iraq. Actually . . . Anwar J. Ali, Sam Dagher, Stephen Farrell, Erica Goode and Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) report on the tensions brewing among the "Awakeing"s including graffiti appearing that is "the motto of a feared paramilitary unit during Saddam Hussein's era": "Allah. Homeland. Salary" -- which "Awakening" Sgt. Alaa al-Janabi ("Dora Awakening") states is "our slogan." al-Janabi goes on to cite that the Iraqi government is not paying them enough money to live on and offer "We're not going to fight again. Unless they make us." Saleh al-Jubori ("a leader of the Awakening Council in Dora") states that "there is no trust between us and the National Police" and, "if the Awakening is let go, Dora will go back to worse than it was before. I hope you don't consider this a threat." And staying with the topic of "worse," Robert Fisk (Independent of London) reports "that secret executions are being carried out in the prisons run by Nouri al-Maliki's 'democratic' government. The hangings are carried out regularly -- from a wooden gallows in a small, cramped cell -- in Saddam Hussein's old intelligence headquarters at Kazimiyah. There is no public record of these killings in what is now called Baghdad's 'high-security detention facility' but most of the victims -- there have been hundreds since America introduced 'democracy' to Iraq -- are said to be insurgents, given the same summary justice they mete out to their own captives." Staying with violence, Reuters notes that 28-year-old journalist Diyar Abbas was shot dead in Kirkuk today joining "at least 135 journalists [who] have been killed in the line of duty since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003." Tuesday the Committee to Protect Journalists featured Robert Mahoney's report on 27-year-old Iraqi journalist Jehad Abdulwahid Hannoon who had surived a shooting in Baghdad and, with help from the international journalism community (including CBS News' Lara Logan), was able to come to the US where he had "successful surgery in a California hospital to repair his bullet-shattered right leg." CPJ notes "135 journalists and 50 support workers" have died in Iraq. Here, we say 185 journalists. "Support workers" are doing a great deal more than that classification implies. So Diyar Abbass becomes at least the 186th journalist to die in Iraq. In some of today's other reported violence . . . Bombings? Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed 2 lives and left twelve wounded, a Baghdad car bombing claimed 12 lives with twenty-two more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 2 lives and left fourteen wounded. On the Mosul roadside bombing, China's Xinhua cites a police source who explains, "A roadside bomb detonated in the afternoon at a popular marketplace in the Bab al-Tob neighborhood". Corpses? Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad. In legal news, mercenaries in Iraq got a setback today. Matthew Barakat (AP) reports that KBR contractor Ira L. Waltrip -- caught with child pornography -- was informed by US District Judge T.S. Ellis III that he wasn't any getting any special breaks and that the argument that Waltrip was doing the same duties soldiers do so should be punished the same way one of them would have been was bunk. The Judge informed Waltrip's attorney that, "He wasn't there because he volunteered. He was there to get some money." Public TV notes. NOW on PBS examines the American Dream as gas prices soar and home values crumble. PBS' Washington Week finds Gwen sitting down with Washington Post's Dan Balz, National Journal's James Barnes, Wall St. Journal's David Wessel and mystery guest Karen Tumulty ( Time magazine) who may or may not do her Hush, Hush Sweet Charlotte impersonation. Both programs air tonight in some PBS markets, check local listings. Turning to the US presidential race, Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente is her running mate. Rosa has the following upcoming campaign event this weekend in New York: Jericho 10th Anniversary Weekend of Resistance http://www.jerichomovement.com/Saturday, October 11, 2008 @ 12 Noon Rally at the Harlem State Office Building (Corner of 126th St. & A.C. Powell Blvd.) March through Harlem @ 1 p.m. Closing Rally in Morningside Park @ 2 p.m. Between 112th & 114th near Morningside Ave. entrances Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and Sunday he will be Fairfax, VA to speak at a press conference and rally at Geroge Mason Univeristy beginning at 5:00 p.m. Barack Obama is the Democratic presidential candidate, Joe Biden is his running mate. As Wally and Cedric noted yesterday, Barack seemed to offer some sort of Born Free/Elsa excuse for his friendship with Ayers whom he called "rehabilitated." Jake Tapper (ABC News) ponders rehabilitation:
And Ayers has made it clear that he is unrepentant.
''I don't regret setting bombs,'' Ayers told the New York Times in 2001. ''I feel we didn't do enough.'' Asked if he would do it all again, Ayers said ''I don't want to discount the possibility. I don't think you can understand a single thing we did without understanding the violence of the Vietnam War."
In a comic strip that Ayers recently posted on his blog, Ayers tried to explain the "we didn't do enough quote" from seven years ago, writing, "It's impossible to get to be my age and not have plenty of regrets. The one thing I don't regret is opposing the war in Vietnam with every ounce of my being. During the Vietnam War, the Weather Underground took credit for bombing several government installations as a dramatic form of armed propaganda. Action was taken against symbolic targets in order to declare a state of emergency. But warnings were always called in, and by design no one was ever hurt.
"When I say, 'We didn't do enough,' a lot of people rush to think, 'That must mean, "We didn't bomb enough s---."' But that's not the point at all. It's not a tactical statement, it's an obvious political and ethical statement. In this context, 'we' means 'everyone.' The war in Vietnam was not only illegal, it was profoundly immoral, millions of people were needlessly killed. Even though I worked hard to end the war, I feel to this day that I didn't do enough because the war dragged on for years after the majority of the American people came to oppose it. I don't think violent resistance is necessarily the answer, but I do think opposition and refusal is imperative."
(He doesn't think violent resistance is NECESSARILY the answer?)
So today, with today's facts, does Obama think Ayers has been "rehabilitated"?
No, he doesn't think so, a source at the campaign tells me. Mike did a press roundup on Barack's Ayers stories last night, Kat called out AP's Philip Elliott who does not seem to grasp the number of "40," Ruth contemplated the press mistakes, Rebecca noted the lack of standards and Marcia congratulates Oklahoma community members (as have Kat, as did Elaine and Mike). Oklahoma community members are supporting the Republican ticket of John McCain and Sarah Palin. The McCain-Palin campaign has a new TV ad entitled "Ambition" ( click here to read more about it):
ANNCR: Obama's blind ambition.
When convenient, he worked with terrorist Bill Ayers.
When discovered, he lied.
Obama. Blind ambition. Bad judgment.
Congressional liberals fought for risky sub-prime loans.
Congressional liberals fought against more regulation.
Then, the housing market collapsed costing you billions.
In crisis, we need leadership, not bad judgment.
JOHN MCCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.
Today McCain-Palin 2008 announced that Bill Bruins, a dairy farmer from Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin, joined the McCain-Palin Farm & Ranch Team National Steering Committee. Bruins joins a distinguished team of elected officials and leaders in agriculture who share a common goal with John McCain: to provide the leadership necessary to create prosperity in America's rural heartland.
"John McCain understands agriculture's need for a comprehensive national energy policy that will combat rising energy costs," Bruins said. "I support John McCain because he will foster greater opportunities for agriculture to thrive in a market-driven society by reducing taxes and government regulations. Most importantly, he understands that reducing trade barriers expands international commerce and increases farmers' income."
In addition to serving on the McCain-Palin Farm and Ranch Team National Steering Committee, Bruins joins former Wisconsin Secretary of Agriculture Jim Harsdorf as a Wisconsin state co-chair on the Wisconsin McCain-Palin Farm & Ranch Team.
"Bill's understanding of agriculture from both state and national public policy involvement makes him a great addition to the McCain-Palin team in Wisconsin," Harsdorf said. "Bill Bruins is a hands-on dairy and crop producer who understands the importance of John McCain's support for free trade, his commitment to reducing the inheritance and capital gains tax on farmers and his plan to reduce high energy costs by pursuing domestic energy sources."
The continuing success of American agriculture and the health of America's rural heartland require a leader who understands that productivity and innovation are created by the effort, ingenuity and investment of individual Americans. As president, John McCain will address the key issues facing agriculture and rural America:
- Establishing a comprehensive energy strategy
- Controlling taxation and regulation
- Judicial restraint and preserving property rights
- Providing a sustainable, market-driven risk management system for farmers
- Promoting agricultural markets and reducing trade barriers
- Improving incentives to invest in technology and rural infrastructure
- Encouraging common-sense conservation and food safety measures
- Securing America's borders and implementing a fair and practical immigration policy
- Recognizing the role of agriculture in national security
- Strengthen America's economic competitiveness by eliminating wasteful government spending
The benefits of American leadership in agriculture extend well beyond our borders -- America's contribution to meeting the food, fiber, feed and energy needs of a growing world population through efficient production and technology innovation are critical to our national security.
More details on John McCain's statement on "Prosperity for Rural America" can be found on the McCain-Palin 2008 web site at rural.JohnMcCain.com.
MCCAIN-PALIN 2008 FARM & RANCH TEAM NATIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE*
Here's why:
We have a chance over the next week to run inexpensive radio ads.In battleground states all across this country.To expose The Bailout Boys -- Obama and McCain.And to let the American people know that on November 4, they have a choice.The people's candidate -- Independent Ralph Nader.The man who stood against the bailout of Wall Street crooks.And for regulation that would have prevented the current crisis.Here's the problem:We want to run the radio ads from October 21 to Election Day -- November 4.In thirty markets all across this country.Our radio guy tells us he needs the money by Monday to be able to reserve air time for the last two weeks before the election.Throughout this year, when we have asked, you have delivered.Thanks to you, we have not missed one fundraising deadline this year.Now, we are in a corner.Over the past week, you have donated $130,000 to our October Surprise Fund.On our way to our goal of $250,000 by Sunday midnight.Now, to reach our goal, we need 12,000 of you -- our loyal supporters -- to kick in $10 each.
We know that many of you have dug deep for the past seven months.
So, after you hit that contribute button, pick up the phone and get your friends, relatives, neighbors -- who are angry about the bailout and looking for an independent outlet -- to support the one candidate who has stood with the American people against the corporate criminal elite on Wall street.
If we reach our goal by Sunday night, we will be professionally producing a version of this demo ad and getting it out to our radio guy in Los Angeles.As the Dow collapses, the Nader/Gonzalez shift the power platform is on the rise.So, donate now -- whatever you can afford -- $10, $100, $1000 -- up to the legal limit of $2,300.
Help us fund our nationwide radio ad buy.Inform the American public.There is a choice on November 4.Vote Independent.Vote Ralph Nader for President.Onward to November. The Nader Team
iraq
ethan cole
kim gamel
 the new york times
 alissa j. rubin
 erica goode
 sam dagher
 stephen farrell
 anwar j. ali
 robert fisk
 the washington post
dana priest
 leila fadel
 mcclatchy newspapers
 nancy a. youssef
 jonathan s. landay
 warren p. strobel
 jeffrey fleishman
the los angeles times
 now on pbs
 pbs
 washington week
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
ruths report
sickofitradlz
|
Posted at 08:39 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
Oct 9, 2008
starting off with abdon m. pallasch's article from the chicago sun-times: Starting a two-day blitz in Wisconsin, where they're running 5 to 10 percentage points behind, John McCain and Sarah Palin praised veterans, denounced abortion, slammed the media and blamed the country's economic mess on Barack Obama and the his fellow Democrats.
Palin gave a shout-out to Wisconsin hunters, praising an "eat local" campaign and adding, "I hope that includes wild game, too, for those of us who are hunters."At the town hall meeting at a youth sports center here, McCain said, "We don't care about an old washed-up terrorist and his wife, who still, at least on Sept. 11, 2001, said he still wanted to bomb more. That's not the point here. The point is, Sen. Obama said, Ayers is "just a guy in the neighborhood."The crowd booed.
"We know that's not true," McCain said. "We need to know the full extent of the relationship because we need to know whether Sen. Obama is telling the truth to the American people or not."john mccain is right. and, if his words have a familiar ring to community members, throughout 2007 and 2008, what did c.i. say? 'barack needs to get honest.' barack's had plenty of time to. he has never done so. the press needs to stop covering for him. we're voting for the president of the united states. we need to know the truth about the candidates and we need to know if they're incapable of telling the truth. with less than 30 days to go, barack's repeatedly refused to tell the truth. they think they can scream 'racism!' and people will run in fear. that works for the egg heads and for the press, it doesn't work for the american people and that's why barack has no overwhelming lead despite outspending mccain 3 to 1 on advertising. if you missed it, the 2nd big theme in the press today is that no 1 can use barack obama's middle name. hussein. hussein. hussein. hussein. hussein. i'm waiting. no crash of thunder, no bolt has hit me.
i haven't been stricken dead.
what do you know, you can say his middle name.
now i'm fully aware that michelle obama has declared it is 'racism' to say barack's middle name. so if barack were in the hospital, michelle wouldn't give out his middle name to admissions? she wouldn't fill it in our forums?
barack gets in a fender and bender and the police ask his name and what? he screams 'racism!' if they insist upon knowing his middle name?
he wants to be president of the united states.
that's how coddled he's been by the press. he wants to be president of the united states and thinks - like many a junior - he can stamp his feet and say, 'don't call me that!'
where is this sense of entitlement coming from? you have a name. you're an adult and a lawyer. you chose not to change your name. it's your name.
get damn used to it.
in america we're supposed to strive for equality. there has been nothing equal about the press coverage of barack when compared to other candidates and it damn well needs to stop.
william jefferson kennedy. george herbert walker bush. no 1 ever screamed 'racism! you're racist for mentioning their middle names!' neither of those men ever said, 'you can't say my middle name!'
it's time for christ-child to take the same lumps every 1 else does. you think the average boy wants to be called 'francis'? probably not. but when he's an adult, he can change his name if he gets so unhinged by any 1 saying 'francis.'
barack's a grown up - or supposed to be.
he needs to get honest real damn quick.
and the press needs to hold him accountable the way they would any other candidate.
deroy murdock is a right-winger with the hoover institute. i don't care. if the press won't do their damn job then i will highlight deroy murdock's 'Obama's Weathermen pals should worry voters' (seattle post-intelligencer):
Barack Obama's supporters have trivialized his connections to former Weather Underground terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. "This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood," Obama told ABC's George Stephanopoulos on April 16. Campaign strategist David Axelrod told CNN Monday that Obama "certainly didn't know the history" of these two barbarians when they hosted a reception for him when he launched his political career.
Obama might not have heard of Ayers and Dohrn's brutality from the '60s through the '80s had they merely tossed a rock or two in anger. But these two went much, much farther.
In 1970, Ayers encapsulated the Weathermen's worldview: "Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home. Kill your parents." In his 2001 memoir, "Fugitive Days," Ayers brags that he helped blast NYPD headquarters in 1970, the U.S. Capitol in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.
in 2007, the nation magazine did their cover story (by christopher phelps) where they were so alarmed that bernardine dohrn was being welcomed by some audiences of today's s.d.s. in 2007. but today? you get idiots like ari berman insisting it's not a story for barack.
but in 2007, it was enough of a damn story for the nation that they made it cover story.
i'm sick of the hypocrisy. i'm sick of the lies.
let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:' Thursday, October 9, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, tensions between Turkey and nothern Iraq continue, a member of al-Sadr's bloc is assassinated, Petraeus gives a speech, and more.
This morning UPI reported a Baghdad roadside bombing in the Sadry City section that which resulted in the deaths of 2 bodyguards (three more wounded) and the death of Saleh al-Ageili, of the Sadr Movement, being taken to the hospital for his wounds Reuters updated with: that with: "At least two members of Iraq's parliament and a health ministry official told Reuters that Saleh al-Ugaili was pronounced dead in a Baghdad hospital following the roadside bomb that exploded near his convoy earlier in the day in the Habibiya district of eastern Baghdad." China's Xinhau states it was a motorcycle bombing. Citing Iraqi police, BBC maintains that "the bomb had been placed on a motorcyle and exploded as a convoy carrying Mr Ogaili drove past." AP notes an eye witness who states "the explosives had been planted in a hole near the road" and that "Al-Auqaeili was a senior member of al-Sadr political bloc, which has 30 seats in the 275-member parliament. The Shiite cleric's cease-fire order to his militia has been a key factor in a sharp decline in violence over the past year. The attack raised concerns that internal rivalries within Shiite and Sunni political groupings could emerge ahead of upcoming provincial elections as a major threat to Iraq's stability, even as sectarian violence ebbs." BBC reminds, "The last MPs killed in Iraq were among a group of eight people who died after a suicide bomber attacked the cafeteria at the Iraqi parliament on 12 April 2007." AFP reports that puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki stated "he appointed a panel headed by Interior Minister Jawad Bolani to probe the assassination". Mariam Karouny and Aseel Kami (Reuters) note that another MP from the Sadr bloc, Bahaa al-Araji, is calling it an assassination and has stated, "We are not excluding the possibility that it might be a government-linked group which carried it out." Jeffrey Fleishman (Los Angeles Times) quotes al-Araji telling Al Arabiya TV, "There will be a battle in the elections and this [killing] is indeed a liquidation. We have warned that the Sadr movement has been targeted, especially in seats where they already hold office."
Dropping back to yesterday's bombing in Diyala Province which claimed 10 lives (plus the bomber), Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) provides some basic figures: from 2003 to 2008, the street where the attack took place (in front of the Court of Appeals) has seen "at least 16" suicide bombers or attempted ones; of that 16, 3 in 2008 have been women; and of that 16, 7 were people wearing bomb vests and 9 were done via car bombings. Ernesto London (Washington Post) adds that, across Iraq, over 50 women have either been "suicide bombers" or been caught "before detonating explosives" since the start of the illegal year, "including 30 this year" and that "at least 380 people" have been killed along with the bombers that have taken their own lives. Londono cites Ibrahim Hasan Bajilan ("chairman of the Diyala provincial council") stating that "he was told the female suicide bomber was a 16-year-old from Muqdadiyah". Londono also reports an increase in the use of "sticky IEDs" -- bombs utilizing "magnets so they will adhere to the undersides of automobiles and detonated by remote control or with timers" that have resulted in "rougly 200 cases involving magnetic bombs" this year alone.
Staying with weaponry, "On September 26, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Turkey of AN/AAQ-33 SNIPER Targeting Pods and AN/AAQ 13 LANTIRN Navigation Pods as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $200 million. . . . The prime contractor will be Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control Company in Orlando, Florida." [PDF format warning, click here for announcement.] The pontential transcation comes as the tensions between Turkey and northern Iraq grow worse. As Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) noted yesterday, "Turkey's parliament voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to extend by one year its authorization of military operations against Kurdish separatists in northern Iraq, keeping the door open to future strikes in the region. The approval, by a vote of 497 to 18, had been largely expected, and occurred amid a flurry of attacks in Turkey's largely Kurdish southeast." AP reports that this has been followed by a meeting today by "Turkey's leaders" to decide whether or not to up "the military's powers to combat Kurdish rebels . . . Newspaper reports, citing unnamed officials, said the requests include the right to search and detain suspects without prior authorization and to extend detention periods. Officials did not immediately confirm the reports." World Bulletin explains the meeting (of the Higher Board of Counter-Terrorism) met today for "about six hours" and is scheduled to meet again Tuesday. Hurriyet notes Nechirvan Barzani (KRG Prime Minister) states that the KRG "administration in northern Iraq" is "watching with concern the recent terrorist attacks in Turkey". Cuba's Prensa Latina notes talk of creating "a security area in US-occupied northern Iraq, where alleged PKK camps have been set up."
Meanwhile Gen David Petraeus spoke to the right-wing Heritage Foundation yesterday. Petraeus was the top commander in Iraq until just moving to head Centcom. Gen Ray Odierno is now the US' top commander in Iraq. Peter Spiegel (Los Angeles Times) reports that Petraeus stated "that things could still go wrong" in Iraq and that "This progress is a little less fragile, if you will, and a little more durable" than during his testimony to Congress last spring. Anna Mulrine (US News and World Reports) notes, ". . . Petraeus highlighted what he sees as the chief threats to Iraq's progress in the months to come. Among them are the upcoming provincial elections, the possible return of Shiite special group militia members from Iran (whose specialities include planting devastating roadside bombs), and the return of Iraqi refugees to homes that they may find occupied by militias." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that the deadline for provincial elections to be held was Januaary 31st; however, "there may be a further postponement, according to the Independent High Electoral Commission." Among the problems include staffing issue and the candidates who are running (no list has been provided to the commission). On Article 50 which guarantees minority representation and which the Parliament dropped, Fadel explains, "After approving the law, the Presidency Council decided to send a separate bill to parliament to restore a deleted article that assures minority representation in provincial assemblies. Christians across Iraq objected to the removal of the clause and even staged a demonstration on Monday to demand representation. The Council plans to propose the law to parliament this week, said Nasir al Ani the chairman."
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded for people, a Baghdad car bombing ("sticky IED" of the sort Ernesto London reported on today) claimed the life of the driver, a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 2 lives (three more wounded) and a second one that claimed the life of 1 police officer, a Karbala car bombing ("sticky IED") that claimed the life of the driver, and a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed the lives of 4 family members including the father who "was a Sahwa member." Who are the four? Two childen and the "Awakening" member. The fourth is either his wife or his nephew depending upon which outlet's reporting. AFP notes the man was Abbas Khudair and he headed "a Sahwa, or Awakening group, that is paid by American forces, was targeted as he drove with his family in the Al-Uthaim area in Baquba, the capital of the restive Diyala province, officials said. An AFP photographer saw the bodies of Khudair, his son and daughter and the nephew taken away to the local hospital, where five more relatives were being treated for blast wounds." Reuters is among those stating Khudair's wife was killed, they also note that 8 women ("all relatives, travelling in the same minibus") were injured in the bombing. Reuters also notes a Tal Afar restaurant bombing that claimed the life of 1 police officer and 1 civilian.
Shootings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Patriotic Union of Kurdistand intelligence member was shot dead along with another person in Kirkuk.
Corpses?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad and the corpse of 1 Sawah/"Awakening"/SoI was discovered in Zab. Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered in Mosul.
Turning to the US presidential election. Barack Obama is the pampered baby in Pampers for the press. The wipe his butt for him, they burp him. And you're seeing just how expected that action for the allegedly grown man is. Barack Obama's name is Barack Hussein Obama III. We refer to him as Barack Obama. The same as we referred to Hillary Clinton as Hillary Clinton. Others included Rodham, others included her middle name (Elizabeth). It wasn't a problem. Her name is her name. True of all candidates. If their name is a 'liability' in their minds, then they should take their embarrassed and sheepish asses into court and change it. Until they do, their name is their name. If someone wants to list it, that's their business. And if you're ashamed or embarrassed by your name, maybe your delicate ass shouldn't run for public office, certainly not for the presidency. Jimmy Orr (Christian Science Monitor) demonstrates just how ridiculous it's gotten, "The 'H' word. As in Barack Obama's middle name. Hussein. It's something you just don't say." The "H" word? There are millions of people with that name around the world and, yes, in America. The "H" word? Everyone's gotten a little too damn sensitive that Barack Junior might have diaper rash or catch cold. He's an alleged grown up. His middle name is his middle name. He and his supporters need to grow the hell up. A Florida sherrif is in the news for using Barack's nearly fully name (he left off "II"). Steven Beardsley (Naples Daily News) reports on Cult of Barack's self-created drama over this entire nonsense. John McCain should say in the next debate, "My middle name is Sydney. I'm not ashamed about. What's your problem with your middle name, Barack? Aren't you named after your father?" This is the biggest nonsense. If he doesn't like his name, change it or shut the hell up. Back in 2004, during the DNC convention, he was called "Barack Osama" -- on Air America -- by mistake -- on The Majority Report -- by Janeane Garofalo who immediately apologized (on air) for the trip of her tongue. He needs to grow up or change his name. And the press needs to stop breast feeding their little baby.
Senator Joe Biden has the difficult task of being Barack's running mate which may explain the additional stress. Ryan Corsaro (CBS News) reports Biden is stating, ". . . John McCain could not bring himself to look Barack Obama in the eye and say the same things to him." If you've wept on stage in Pennsylvania the week before showing up at a televised debate where you almost lost it again, maybe interpreting the psyche of others isn't a door you want to open?
Scott Conroy (CBS News) reports the Republican ticket campaign in Wisonsin today and quotes Sarah Palin telling a town hall, ""Oh, yeah, the first thought that pops into my head also when you're talking about rights, and you're talking about freedoms is, we're talking about Senator John McCain and what he has done for our country, in putting his country first his entire life to fight for freedoms. And Wisconsin, here again kudos to you, your great Wisconsin Guard, about a third of your troops will be over in a war zone, in a number of months, in '09. You guys are going to be over there again helping to defend freedom, and defend liberty and the democratic liberties that we all cherish so much." Governor Palin is the topic Vaughn Ververs (CBS News) addresses noting a Pew Research Center study that has found that 38% said the coverage of Palin had "been too tough" and "41 percent of independents say they think the press has been too tough on her." Ed O'Keefe (ABC News, link has text and video) reports on McCain's interview with Charlie Gibson for World News Tonight where McCain declares, "This is a tough campaign. I'm the underdog. I've always been the underdog from the beginning" -- and on the subject of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, McCain stated, "[Ayers] wasn't a guy in the neighborhood. [Obama] launched his political career in his living room, in Mr. Ayers' living room. And I don't care about two washed-up old terrorists that are unrepentant about trying to destroy America. But I do care, and Americans should care, about his relationship with him and whether he's being truthful and candid about it." Today, McCain-Palin '08 released an online campaign ad entitled "Ayers" (here for video, here for text and announcement):
ANNCR: Barack Obama and domestic terrorist Bill Ayers. Friends. They've worked together for years.
But Obama tries to hide it. Why?
Obama launched his political career in Ayers' living room.
Ayers and Obama ran a radical "education" foundation, together.
They wrote the foundation's by-laws, together.
Obama was the foundation's first chairman.
Reports say they, "distributed more than $100 million to ideological allies with no discernible improvement in education."
When their relationship became an issue, Obama just responded, "This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood."
That's it?
We know Bill Ayers ran the "violent left wing activist group" called Weather Underground.
We know Ayers' wife was on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted list.
We know they bombed the Capitol. The Pentagon. A judge's home.
We know Ayers said, "I don't regret setting bombs. .... I feel we didn't do enough."
But Obama's friendship with terrorist Ayers isn't the issue.
The issue is Barack Obama's judgment and candor.
When Obama just says, "This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood."
Americans say, "Where's the truth, Barack?"
Barack Obama. Too risky for America.
JOHN MCCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.
Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente is her running mate. Rosa has upcoming campaign events:Rosa Clemente in New York October 9-11Tuesday, 07 October 2008 23:01from Rosa ClementePeace and Hello to all my New York City People:As the billionaires on wall street get bailed out, and more and more people are tired of a two party stranglehold, join me, as I celebrate my electoral independence, I am in town, for three exciting days of campaign activities, attending a press conference for assistance and solidarity for Haiti, marching for the freedom of Politcal Prisoners and Prisoner of War, as well as these media appearances, hope to see you! "The Green Party is not the alternative, it is the imperative!" Rosa A. Clemente, Green Party Vice-Presidential CandidateGritTV, with Laura Flanders, to air Wednesday October 8th, 2008, at 8:00pm & 1:00am ET, on Free Speech TV(DISH Network ch. 9415) www.lauraflanders.comWhere we Live, with Sally O'Brien Thursday October 9th, 2008 at 8:00pm on WBAI 99.5FM, www.wbai.orgThe Truth, with Jeff Johnson on to air on BET Friday October 10th, 2008 at 10:00pm (EST)_____________________________________________________________[. . .]____________________________________________________________THURSDAY OCTOBER 9th, 2008 @ 3:30pm Open Community Forum with Green Party Vice Presidential Nominee ROSA CLEMENTE, to be televised on Manhattan Public Access @ MNN Television Studios Manhattan Neighborhood Network 537 West 59th Street, New York, NY 10019 (between 10th and 11th Avenues) Green Party VP Candidate - Discusses the Economy, Foreign Policy, Education, Gender Equity, Racism, Social Justice, & the Environment LIVE WITH THE COMMUNITY Featuring Community Organizations: -Grassroots Artists MovEment (G.A.ME) -UHURU Movement -Brenda Stokely from NY Solidarity Coalition With Katrina / Rita Survivors - La Peña del Bronx Performances: -Hasan Salaam -Video Screening of Final Outlaw's"HIP HOP 4Ever" THIS IS A LIVE TO TAPE EVENT: IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT ALL AUDIENCE MEMBERS ARRIVE AT 3:00PM SHARP! Please Contact: (917) 940-8961 or (917) 239-8992 with Questions or to RSVP for this event ABOUT G.A.ME - The Grassroots Artists Movement (G.A.ME) is a membership organization dedicated to addressing sociopolitical and economic realities facing low-income Black and Latino communities. Galvanizing the influence of hip-hop artists and culture, G.A.ME unites artists and community members to work side-by-side for social justice. G.A.ME runs youth leadership and community development programs that provide tools for positive change. __________________________________________________________FRIDAY, OCTOBER 10th, 2008 12:00 NOON YES! to international assistance and solidarity to Haiti, NO! to the military occupation of Haiti and the attacks on Haitian sovereignty! The Brecht Forum, 451 West St. @ Bethune St. in West Village, between W.
12th St. and Bank St. Tel. 212-242-4201 3:00pm Rally at Madison Square Park at 5th Ave and 23rd St.www.jerichomovement.com 9:00pm Evening Concert to Benefit the Prisoners@ the Knitting Factory @ 74 Lenard
St., NYC • 9 p.m. until . . .Featuring: Inmesyah Soul, Hassan Salaam,
X-Vandals, Emperor,Rebel Diaz, The Wordstock Poetry Collective, Maroon Society,Gist the Essence, Collective Flow, United Front 6:30pm New York Univeristy(NYU) __________________________________________________________Jericho 10th Anniversary Weekend of Resistance www.jerichomovement.com Saturday, October 11, 2008 @ 12 Noon Rally at the Harlem State Office Building (Corner of 126th St. & A.C. Powell Blvd.) March through Harlem @ 1 p.m. Closing Rally in Morningside Park @ 2 p.m. Between 112th & 114th near Morningside Ave. entrances
Rosa Clemente appeared on Grit TV with Laura Flanders where she was among the Cult of Barack who especially seemed blank-eyed when Rosa pointed out that two debates now and Barack's not addressed issues for young Americans -- not even 'middle class' ones. Rosa also pointed out that his 'youth' support is more 'middle class' and not monolithic. Yesterday Pacifica and Free Speech Radio News' Election Unspun spoke with Matt Gonzalez (Leigh Ann Caldwell provides real laughs -- and no journalism -- as she 'preaches' about Sarah Palin's "vendetta" in what's supposed to pass for 'news' prior to the interview). Gonzalez is Ralph Nader's running mate. Gonzalez spoke out against the Congressional bailout and stated, "I think government should be promoting existing solvent institutions . . . But we should not be buying the bad debt." Asked about the McCain and Obama campaigns, Gonzalez explained, "I think the truth is each of the candidates makes a calculated decision as to whether or not they can blame the other for a specific issue. In virtually every single case, these are jointly-owned issues, jointly-owned problems." Ralph Nader will be in NYC October 16th to protest Wall St. at noon in front of the Federal Hall, 26 Wall St. The day before (October 15th) he'll be speaking at Cooper Union in NYC.
Ralph Nader writes:
I'm sitting at home reading a Bloomberg wire report about one of my favorite foods -- hummus.
Bloomberg reports that a group of Lebanese businessmen wants the European Union to declare hummus and other of my favorite foods like tabouleh -- as "traditional Lebanese dishes."
The Lebanese businessmen think that other countries are ripping them off.
"It's mostly Israeli companies claiming all our specialities as their own," said Fady Abboud, president of the group. "So many of our specialties are being marketed now as Israeli traditional dishes and among the most famous is hummus."
Abboud wants the EU to grant the hummus legal protection, the same way that the Greeks were given protection for feta, the French for champagne, and the Italians for parmesan cheese.
Now, I don't want to interfere in a international trade dispute.
Suffice it to say that my mother Rose was born in Lebanon.
And she made perhaps the best hummus I've ever had.
And I've had a lot of hummus.
Hummus is nutritious.
And delicious.
It makes you stronger and healthier.
So, Bloomberg's report on the Lebanese claim to hummus got me to thinking about an idea that would help us raise funds to push our substantive agenda onto the front burner of American politics.
Here it is:
If you donate to Nader/Gonazlez by midnight tonight an amount that has the number three in it (three being the number of lemons in my mom's hummus recipe), we'll e-mail to you Rose Nader's hummus recipe tomorrow.
That simple.
So, you can give $3.
Or $13.
Or $30.
Or $33.
Or $300.
Anything up to the legal limit of $2,300.
But it has to have at least one three in it.
If it has a three in it, we'll e-mail you the recipe tomorrow.
You can share it with your friends and family.
(Your donation will help us reach our current fundraising goal of $250,000 by the October 12 deadline. It will help us fund our get-out-the-vote drive over the final stretch of this campaign -- which translates into putting the substantive Nader/Gonzalez shift the power agenda front and center in this crucial election year.)
Thank you for your ongoing activism and support.
Together, we are making a serious difference -- and keeping our sense of humor.
Onward to November.iraqleila fadelmcclatchy newspapersthe los angeles timespeter spiegelthe new york timesalissa j. rubinsabrina tavernisethe washington posternesto londono
Posted at 08:45 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
Oct 8, 2008
manhola dargis lets me down
this morning, i added the following to last night's post: [added 10-08, thank you to susan of random thoughts for linking to me. read her on the social security, she says it better than me.] thank you to sherry who saw that and e-mailed. i've mentioned susan here before. i never met her, i never exchanged e-mails with her. she was kind enough to link to me. if you're a new reader, i've written before about a number of 'girls' who wrote to get a link. they wanted to link swap. and i would say 'sure' and add them. and wait and wait. some times they'd e-mail back that i'd done something 'controversial' and they had to lay low a bit. sometimes i'd have to e-mail them. they'd have some excuse. when i went on vacation in 2005 and elaine filled in here, she removed all of them from my blogroll. she had her me ask repeatedly, 'is it me?' that's why elaine doesn't swap links especially with the push-up bra 'girls.' but i never had any contact with susan and then 1 day some 1 (maybe sherry) e-mailed me and said susan had me on her links. and i added her. there was no link trade. she didn't e-mail me this kiss-ass e-mail. she never asked for any attention. she's a real feminist who just added me for whatever reason. but she never expected anything back from it. that's why i repeatedly warn against link trades to people who ask. i alway say, 'e-mail back i will keep you on for 2 weeks and if i haven't been added by then, i'm pulling you down.' because i really got burned. it was not funny and i kept thinking, 'well it must be me. i must have done something wrong.' i do many things wrong, that wasn't the problem. the problem was thinking and thinking about it and trying to figure out what it was. in the end i didn't do anything wrong. i thank elaine for removing them. (i didn't ask her, she just did it. she had to ask c.i. how to do it and she explained to c.i. what was going on. at which point, c.i. dumped all those 'girls' from the common ills as well.) but susan never asked for anything and never expected anything. so she's some 1 who's stand up in my book. if you haven't checked out her blog, make a point to. she writes from reno. she writes about hiking and movies as well as about politics. 1 of her favorites is carole lombard. she also likes bad movies. (so she probably likes my favorite film, valley of the dolls!) you'll find text and video at her site. now let me talk about another woman. manohla dargis does film reviews for the new york times. i called her here (back in 2005) and i was thinking about writing something nice about her work because i've really enjoyed of late. (of late is probably the last 18 months.) i never did. now i have to call her out. she's reviewing guy richie's new film (which is the same film he always makes) and it is enjoyable review. and i like her comment about 'many of the lads look lovely' which is 1 of things i really started noting about her review 18 months ago. she really does write something useful. if the film has a hottie (so few do), she'll let you know. but here's my problem with manhola's latest: she leaves out something very important. in fairness, she probaly has no say on the photos that run with her review. it's a photo of gerald butler and idris elba from the film. but on page 2 of the arts section is a full page ad for rock n rolla (the guy richie film) and i recognize thandie newton and gerald butler (butler from the photo the paper runs with manhola's review) and i recognize jeremy piven and idris elba (elba from the photo with the review) but who the hell is the hottie in the shades with the cute self-pleased expression, holding a gun and flashing pit hair? manhola, you failed me. does he look like that in the movie? if so, i'd pay to see it and i loathe guy richie films because they are all the same movie badly done. but i've bought many a ticket for a hottie. (and flyboy likes guy's bad films and has been saying, 'we should think about seeing it' - which really means 'i want to see it.') if manhola had told me who the hottie was and if he looks like that in the film (and not just in the ad), i would know whether to tell my husband we could see the film this weekend or not. but manhola, you failed me. i'm semi-joking. the review is actually good ( click here for it) but i really have come to count on manhola's eye when it comes to which film has a hottie and which doesn't. and what else? no political news from me tonight. sick baby or maybe just crying (doctor's visit today) and she's finally down for the night. i didn't even watch the new adventures of old christine (tivoed it) because it was just that kind of day. let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:' Wednesday, October 8, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, attempts to lure back Iraqi refugees fail, tensions continue to escalate between Turkey and northern Iraq, a widow sues the VA, and more.
Starting with the refugee crisis. The UNHCR estimates Iraq has 4.7 million refugees (internal and external). On the heels of Jordan getting the oil gifts from Iraq and deciding to bus and fly some Iraqi refugees out (who did not want to leave), attempts took place in Syria to 'ease out' the Iraqi refugees. AP reports that they were offered "free journeys" by Iraq's Embassy in Damascus but "there have been no takers" and "Adnan al-Shourifi, the commercial secretary at the Iraqi Embassy, said that free convoys and plane tickets would be provided for the returnees, along with about $1,300 in cash to each family from the Iraqi government and $500 from the United Nations." Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) notes that "[o]nly a small fraction [of refugees] have returned," cites the Baghdad neighborhood of Hurriyah where only 325 "of the more than 7,000 Sunni families who fled in late 2006" have returned and notes that "U.N. officials and human rights groups are concerned that a speedy resettlement could touch off new strife, in part because sectarian segregation has helped to reduce violence".
AFP reports that Abdel-Karim Khalaf, Iraq's Interior Ministry spokesperson, stated today, "We have the ability to take over the internal security responsibility in Baghdad if American forces pull out of the city. The Interior Ministry is able to take responsibility for protecitng Baghdad." Erica Goode (New York Times) reports on yesterday's Green Zone press conference staged by the US Deputy Sec of State John Negroponte and Iraq Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zerbair where the two claimed that a SOFA (really a treaty) was coming any time soon." Today at the State Dept, spokesperson Sean McCormack pointed out that he had not said the SOFA would be singed by the end of July ("If you look back in the transcripts, you will find that I did not put a timeframe on it" -- no, he refused to do so; however, the White House put a deadline of July on it). McCormack acknowledged that "others did. Look the discussions are ongoing. And I guess the state of play is that nothing is done until everything is done and not everything is done. Secretary -- Deputy Secretary Negroponte offered some public comments when he held a press conference with Iraqi Foreign Minister Zerbari, so the discussions continue. And I think that the fact they are taking this long and that the discussions are as intense as they have been over this period of months is an indication of how seriously the Iraqi government takes this, as well as how seriously we take this issue. It's a negotiation between two sovereign states. And our negotiators continue their efforts -- our negotiators as well as the Iraqi negotiatiors." Asked if expected the treaty to be worked by year's end, he replied, "We're still working to get this thing done as soon as possible." December 31st the UN authorization for the occupation expires. This as Jonathan S. Landay, Warren P. Strobel and Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) report an upcoming National Intelligence Estimate (which may or may not be released prior to the US elections in November) sounds alarms, "The draft NIE, however, warns that the improvements in security and political progress, like the recent passage of a provincial election law, are threatened by lingering disputes between the majority Shiite Arabs, Sunni Arabs, Kurds and other minorities, the U.S. officials said. Sources of tension identified by the NIE, they said, include a struggle between Sunni Arabs, Kurds and Turkmen for control of the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk; and the Shiite-led central government's unfulfilled vows to hire former Sunni insurgents who joined Awakening groups."
Meanwhile tensions between Turkey and northern Iraq are not going through. The PKK (considered a terrorist organization by many governments including the US) is the source of the conflict. Hurriyet reports Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey's Prime Minister, has stated that "a buffer zone in the north of Iraq could be created as a counter measure against terror attacks from this territory." Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) notes, "Turkey's parliament voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to extend by one year its authorization of military operations against Kurdish separatists in northern Iraq, keeping the door open to future strikes in the region. The approval, by a vote of 497 to 18, had been largely expected, and occurred amid a flurry of attacks in Turkey's largely Kurdish southeast." China's Xinhau explains, "The anger of the Turkish people is mounting after last Friday's deadliest attack that killed 15 Turkish soldiers in Hakkari province, while the Edrogan government and the powerful military have pledged to intensify a campaign to crush the outlawed PKK." Meanwhile Arwa Damon (CNN) visits a PKK camp in the Kurdistan region of Iraq (Qandil Mountains) and speaks with Rengin ("head of a female battallion of the Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK") who states, "We want a natural life, a society that revolves around women -- one where women and men are equal, a society without pressure, without inequality, where all differences between people are eliminated."
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded two people, a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed the lives of 3 police officers and left six more injured and, in Diyala Province, "a female suicide bomber blew herself up near the Diyala governorate building" claiming the lives of 3 civilians, 1 police officer and 5 Iraqi soldiers. Ernesto London (Washington Post) notes that the death toll has risen to "at least 10 people" and explains, "Since 2003, more than 50 women carried out suicide bombings or were detained before detonating vests packed with explosives in Iraq, according to the U.S. military." CNN adds, "The official said the woman, covered in a traditional black garment known as an abaya, blew herself up near a security checkpoint outside the courthouse."
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 "Christian man" shot dead today in Mosul and 2 shot dead in Mosul yesterday.
Corpses?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Baghdad.
ICCC reports 4180 US service members have died in Iraq since the start of the illegal war with 4 for the month thus far. That count includes Col Michael R. Stahlman whom the Defense Department announced died October 5th "from injuries sustained in a July 31 non-hostile incident in Anbar province, Iraq. . . . The incident is currently under investigation."
Meanwhile a widow brings a lawsuit against the VA. John Latimer (Lebanon Daily News) reports that the wife of Donald Woodward, Tiera Woodward, has brought a $2 million law suit against the Lebanon VA Medical Center for "wronful death and medical malpractice" in the death of her husband who shot himself to death in March of 2006. Donald Woodward was an Iraq War veteran and beginning in July of 2005, the family was attempting to get help for him following a suicide attempt. Latimer notes, "Although he screened positive for depression and PTSD, it was determined that Woodward did not meet the criteria for a 'major depressive order'." Also covering the story, Carrie Cassidy (The Patriot-News) explains, "The lawsuit states that Donald Woodward has also tried to commit suicide three times before he succeeded, though he tried to get help before that . . . The Lenbaon VA staff failed to diagnose him with a 'major depressive disorder' earlier. A psychiatrist eventually diagnosed him with the disorder on Feb. 2, 2006, about a month before he died". The family is united on this, Larry Alexander (Lancaster Online) quotes Donald Woodward's mother, Lori Woodward, stating, "It's in her (his widow's) name, but I'm the one behind it. And we're not going to comment on it until it's settled."
Turning to the US presidential race. On the subject of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers (and Bernardine Dohrn), the McCain-Palin campaign released this statement by John M. Murtagh whose father was an NY State Supreme Court justice:
"When I was 9 years-old the Weather Underground, the terrorist group founded by Barack Obama's friend William Ayers, firebombed my house. Barack Obama has dismissed concerns about his relationship with Ayers by noting that he was only a child when Ayers was planting bombs at the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol. But Ayers has never apologized for his crimes, he has reveled in them, expressing regret only for the fact that he didn't do more.
"While Barack Obama once downplayed his relationship with Ayers, today his campaign took that deceit one step further. Barack Obama now denies he was even aware of his friend's violent past when, in 1995, Ayers hosted a party launching Obama's political career. Given Ayers' celebrity status among the left, it's difficult to believe. The question remains: what did Obama know, and when did he know it? When did Obama learn the truth about his friend? Barack Obama helped Ayers promote his book in 1997, served on charitable boards with him through 2002, and regularly exchanged emails and phone calls with him through 2005. At what point did Barack Obama discover that his friend was an unrepentant terrorist? And if he is so repulsed by the acts of terror committed by William Ayers, why did the relationship continue? Any honest accounting by Barack Obama will necessarily cast further doubt on his judgment and his fitness to serve as commander in chief.
"Barack Obama may have been a child when William Ayers was plotting attacks against U.S. targets -- but I was one of those targets. Barack Obama's friend tried to kill my family."
Deliah Boyd (A Scriverner's Lament) calls out Obama mouthpiece David Axelrod's claim that Barack was just too wet behind the ears to have ever known anything about the Weather Underground: "But Dear Axelrod, I'm suggeting, nay, stating a damned fact -- that Obama's undergrad Poli Sci classes (at freakin' Columbia University, fer cryin' out loud) surely didn't skip the 1960's." Drew Griffin and Kathleen Jonston (CNN) reported last night that "the relationship between Obama and Ayers went deeper, ran longer and was more political than Obama -- and his surrogates -- have revealed, documents and interviews show." Ruth observes, "At this point, the relationship with Mr. Ayers is not even the issue. The issue is how Barack Obama has lied about it repeatedly. Just like he lied about his relationship with Antoin Rezco, he has lied about his relationship with Mr. Ayers."
Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and, in a new column at Black Agenda Report, she takes on the bailout:
At the precise moment when we couldn't imagine it getting worse, it does. After all, the Democrats, since they acquired majority status in the Congress, delivered funding for George Bush's wars several times. They authorized retroactive immunity for telecoms that helped Bush's Administration illegally spy on us. And they never really considered any alternatives to the basic bailout wish list given to them by Bush and his Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson.
Sadly, I must say that this failure on the part of the Democratic leadership is by far the greatest perfidy of the Democrats yet. I shudder to think what betrayal of the Constitution and the people of this country yet awaits us. I am forced to ask, "What do they stand for?" I think they have shown us time and time again what they stand for, what their values are, and that they are willing to leave the people behind in their quest to acquiesce to what Bush's base asks for. And remember, Bush told us that his base were the haves and the have mores! So, if the Democratic leadership is more loyal to them than they are to the working people in this country, then a new political alignment of historical proportions is taking effect that the working people of this country must recognize.
Reporter Chris Hedges (via Information Clearing House) examines the bailout and notes, "The passing of the $850-billion bailout pulled the plug on the New Deal. The Great Society is now gasping for air, mortally wounded, coughing up blood. It will not recover. It was murdered by the Democratic Party. We are on our own. And don't expect any help from Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who lobbied hard for the bill and voted for it. Ignore their rhetoric. Look coldly at the ballots they cast against us. We, as citizens, have only a handful of representatives left in Washington, most of whom were left sputtering in rage and frustration on the House floor. The sad irony is that some of them were Republican." Hedges goes on to explore the vote and the bailout and to quote US House Rep Dennis Kuccinich explaining of the vote, "It is a direct attack on the American people's ability to be able to stabilize their homes and their neighborhoods. This single vote will define the careers of everyone. We are back to taxation without representation to markets that are openly rigged. We buried the New Deal. Instead of Democrats going back to classic New Deal economics where we prime the pump of the economy and start money circulating among the population through saving homes, creating jobs and building a new infrastructure, our leaders chose to accelerate the wealth of the nation upwards." Hedges juxtaposes Barack's support for the bailout with Barack's voting record and it's a must read article. Last week, Kucinich declared on Democracy Now!, "You know, I'll tell you something that we were told in our caucus. We were told that our presidential candidate, when the negotiations started at the White House, said that he didn't want this in the bill. Now that's what we're told. . . . That he didn't want the bankruptcy provisions in the bill. Now, you know, that's what we were told. And I don't understand why he would say that, if he did say that. And I think that there is a -- the fact that we didn't put bankrptcy provisions in, that actually we removed any hopes for judges to do any loan modifications or any forbearance. There's no moratorium on mortgage foreclosures in here. So, who's getting -- who's really getting helped by this bill? This is a bailout, pure and simple, of Wall Street interests who have been involved in speculation."
You need to remember for that for a number of reasons. The most current has to do with last night's Democratic and Republican presidential candidate debate during which John McCain declared, "As president of the United States, Alan, I would order the secretary of the treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes -- at the diminished value of those homes and let people be able to make those -- be able to make those payments and stay in their homes. Is it expensive? Yes. But we all know, my friends, until we stabilize home values in America, we're never going to start turning around and creating jobs and fixing our economy. And we've got to give some trust and confidence back to America." Katharine Q. Seelye (New York Times) live blogged the debate and noted McCain's proposal was "not somethng that had been proposed. Nor is it clear without further detail how or whether this would work" citing the paper's Jackie Calmes (citing Barack's campaign)? Robert G. Kaiser (Washington Post) doing a post-debate critique noted, "I was taken aback by McCain's opening proposal, which if I understand it correctly would have a huge impact on the housing market, the banks, the holders of securitized mortgages, etc." The proposal was a proposal. Michael Abramowitz (Washington Post) reports that Doug Holtz-Eakin, the campaign's policy advisor, on a morning press conference call, "offered a few more details of the so-called American Homeownership Resurgence Plan, unveiled at the Tuesday night debate, in which a homeowner having difficulty making payments or facing foreclosure would be eligible for an FHA-insured mortgage. He said that some of the money for the new program, which could cost $300 billion, could come from the new $700 billion authority granted the Treasury Secretary to buy distressed assets; he also said some of the funds could also come from existing authority in the Federal Housing Administration." Abramowitz also notes that the Obama campaign is attempting to downplay the proposal by stating Barack was floating something like that publicly back in September. A shame he didn't fight to have it put in the bill -- especially considering he is the party's 'leader' and the Democrats control both houses of Congress. But can't tick off his biggest donors on Wall St. apparently. Alison Fitzgerald and Sharon L. Lynch (Bloomberg News) report Barack's whining the bailout that passed allows this to take place already and quote Holtz-Eakin stating, "It could help literally millions of people. We don't have a precise estimate." The McCain-Palin campaign has posted the text (and audio option) of Doug Hotlz-Eakin's comments:
"Senator McCain last night announced his initiative, the McCain Resurgence Plan, that has four very straightforward goals. Goal number one is to provide direct help to struggling homeowners making sure they can stay in their homes with a manageable mortgage, avoid foreclosures and the damaging impact that has on neighborhoods and property values in that area. It would also, in the process of refinancing, help them with their financial situation and, as a result, give some stability to the household spending in the overall economy.
"Second thing is it would provide, to the mortgage market, lower interest rates. If history was a guide, we'd see a spread of about 160 basis points above government interest rates to the mortgage market. That would put interest rates in the low five percent. Mortgage rates are above that right now. Providing this kind of financing would stabilize housing values and obviously take some stress off the pressures downward in the economy. Having a stabilized housing market would, in turn, combine with the purchase of these mortgages to stabilize the values that are underneath mortgage-backed securities and all the housing-related derivatives that have been plaguing the valuation of balance sheets in the financial sector. And so by starting with the homeowner and working up you accomplish some of the objectives of the financial stabilization plans that we've seen come out of Congress and proposed by the administration in recent weeks. Senator McCain beli eves this is exactly the right kind of policy: provide direct help to homeowners and, at the same time, support the financial markets and keep them from further damaging the availability of credit to Main Street America, one of the real threats to the economy at this point it time.
"The initiative would rely on authorities that have been provided in recent months by the Congress. There's $300 billion worth of refinance capacity at the FHA at this point. That can be combined with the statutory capacity at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are now owned by the federal government for all practical purposes, to purchase mortgages. If Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac bought 80% of the mortgage, you could leverage that $300 billion in financing tremendously. And there's also the $700 billion that was provided to the Treasury by the Congress. There's direct purchase authority in there that would allow to augment these as well, although, it may be useful to reserve that for other purposes.
"Mechanically the initiative is very simple. A homeowner would initiate the process by calling a mortgage broker or other originator and basically saying 'I'd like to refinance my home.' They would start the underwriting process, verify incomes, this is an opportunity as well to make sure the program has in it appropriate checks to make sure that government money is not being given to folks who are not primary homeowners, who don't have adequate income, or otherwise, in the initial purchase of their home didn't provide valid information. These authorities could then be used to retire the existing loan. The FHA would issue a guaranteed thirty year fixed-rate mortgage at a manageable interest rate. The homeowner would stay in the home, their financial burden would be relieved, the valuation of the existing loan would be resolved, there would no longer be a threat of default or diminished capacity to repay. That would stabilize financial markets, and t he taxpayers' contribution would be, in some cases the difference between the values of those two loans, something which would be the necessity for taxpayer contribution.
"Senator McCain thinks this is the best way to go forward. He's obviously been personally very concerned about the problems facing the economy. He has participated, as I think everyone on this call knows, extensively in the process of taking the initial proposal by the administration to directly purchase Wall Street securities shaping it in a way that it was both possible to get it through Congress in a bi-partisan fashion, and also had it augmented with the adequate taxpayer protections, some oversight and transparency. This would take the authorities that have now come through and further target them in a way that he thinks would accomplish the purposes of financial stabilization but also to provide some relief to homeowners, near-term stimulus to the overall economy, and lay out a path where he can then turn to his initiatives in taxes, in energy, healthcare, trade to provide job creation in the American economy and a path forward out of this ter rible crisis."
Tomorrow, Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin will hold a town hall at noon in Waukesha, Wisconsin (Center Court Sports Complex, 815 Northview Boulevard) and the proposal will be addressed there. Foon Rhee (Boston Globe, link has text and video) reports that he raised the issue at a campaign stop in Bethlem, Pennsylvania. Jonathan Newman, Matthew Jaffe and Stu Chamberlain (ABC News' Political Radar, text and video) report Democratic vice-presidential nominee, US Senator Joe Biden, was introduced at a Tampa campaign event today by Jim Pacillo who stated, "Please help me today in welcoming the next vice president of the United States, John McCain!" Also McCain-Palin announce the endorsement of 100 US ambassadors from a group co-chaired by Mark W. Erwin who was supporting Hillary in the primaries (and, disclosue, I know and like Mark and that's probably why I'm putting it in the snapshot). Other endorsements today include the majority of board members on the US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce with Jerry Natividad explaining, "I am supporting John McCain because he understands that small businesses are the job engine of America, and he has a real plan for the issues that Hispanic-owned small businesses confront, such as health care. John McCain's plan puts families first, provides them with more choices, and while it cut costs for my business, it allows my company to afford the best medical coverage for my employees." Maria G. Taxman is quoted explaining, "I am very confident John McCain will continue to break down foreign trade barriers, giving Hispanic-American-owned small businesses the opportunity to compete in the global markets. John McCain will promote a strong and growing economy that creates new jobs and increases wages."
Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader will speak out on Wall St. next week:
News Advisory FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Ryan Mehta, 408-348-0681, rmehta@votenader.org (National HQ); Josh Starcher, 718-909-6343 (Local) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE RALPH NADER TO SPEAK IN NEW YORKWHO: Ralph Nader WHAT: Major Campaign Address WHEN: Thursday, October 16 at 12:00pm WHERE: Federal Hall, 26 Wall St. NYC On Thursday, October 16 at 12:00pm, Ralph will take to the street in front of the NYSE to protest the bailout at Federal Hall, 26 Wall St. NYC. Ralph is the only Presidential candidate who supports jail time, not bail time for Wall Street fat cats, so come hear him speak in the historic Cooper Union after watching the game show debates on TV. He will also comment on the Presidential debates from which he was excluded. In another part of the city, after Ralph speaks in Cooper Union, the two corporate candidates will be debating each other without even mentioning the issues that Ralph will talk about and that matter to the American people. Since 1988, the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) has sponsored every presidential debate and kept the discussion empty. Since its inception, the CPD has always been headed by two former chairs of the Democratic and Republican parties. In 1987, the League of Women Voters refused to sponsor any more presidential debates, ìbecause the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter.
Back to the debate. Susan (Random Thoughts) analyzes the debate and will note this section on Barack, "Obama was absolutely incoherent. He would start strong, but then he would wander off on some tangent and constantly ran overtime with his answers. This is going to kill him when people realize he doesn't really know what he is talking about. It was the same problem John Kerry had, but Kerry learned to keep his answers short in the debates with our dictator in 2004."
Rebecca noted that Barack declared war on Social Security, Elaine noted Barack's rush for more war, Mike found the debate a waste of time, Cedric & Wally (joint-post) noted how Barack got his way, Marcia skipped it and noted the crony ways of Barack in Chicago, and Kat explored the liars and cover-up artists in the press
Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney's running mate is Rosa Clemente who has a series of campaign stops coming up including the following:
Rosa Clemente in New York October 9-11Tuesday, 07 October 2008 23:01from Rosa ClementePeace and Hello to all my New York City People:As the billionaires on wall street get bailed out, and more and more people are tired of a two party stranglehold, join me, as I celebrate my electoral independence, I am in town, for three exciting days of campaign activities, attending a press conference for assistance and solidarity for Haiti, marching for the freedom of Politcal Prisoners and Prisoner of War, as well as these media appearances, hope to see you! "The Green Party is not the alternative, it is the imperative!" Rosa A. Clemente, Green Party Vice-Presidential CandidateGritTV, with Laura Flanders, to air Wednesday October 8th, 2008, at 8:00pm & 1:00am ET, on Free Speech TV(DISH Network ch. 9415) www.lauraflanders.comWhere we Live, with Sally O'Brien Thursday October 9th, 2008 at 8:00pm on WBAI 99.5FM, www.wbai.orgThe Truth, with Jeff Johnson on to air on BET Friday October 10th, 2008 at 10:00pm (EST)________________________________________________________________WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 9th, 2008 @ 7pm-10pmTHIS IS AN HISTORICAL MOMENT...BUT ONLY SOME OF IT WILL BE TELEVISED!You are invited to the home of Gloria Mattera & Sean Sweeney and host M1 of dead prezfor light fare, drinks and lively discussion with special guest:Rosa Clemente is a nationally known hip-hop activist, independent journalist, community organizer and Green Party vice presidential candidate. She helped organize the National Hip-Hop Political Convention in 2003, to create a national political agenda for the hip-hop generation.Let's help Rosa and Cynthia raise the funds needed to get their message of peace and justice out to voters throughout the country!Campaign Merchandise will be on hand!Location: 437 2 Street between 6/7 Avenues in Park Slope BrooklynF train to 7 Ave; Q/B to 7 Ave (at Flatbush); R train to Union StRSVP: gmattera@gmail.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it or 718 369-2998________________________________________________________________THURSDAY OCTOBER 9th, 2008 @ 3:30pmOpen Community Forum with Green Party Vice Presidential Nominee ROSA CLEMENTE,to be televised on Manhattan Public Access@ MNN Television StudiosManhattan Neighborhood Network537 West 59th Street,New York, NY 10019(between 10th and 11th Avenues)Green Party VP Candidate -Discusses the Economy, Foreign Policy, Education, Gender Equity, Racism, Social Justice, & the EnvironmentLIVE WITH THE COMMUNITYFeaturing Community Organizations:-Grassroots Artists MovEment (G.A.ME)-UHURU Movement-Brenda Stokely from NY Solidarity Coalition With Katrina / Rita Survivors- La Peña del BronxPerformances:-Hasan Salaam-Video Screening of Final Outlaw's"HIP HOP 4Ever"THIS IS A LIVE TO TAPE EVENT: IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT ALL AUDIENCE MEMBERS ARRIVE AT 3:00PM SHARP!Please Contact: (917) 940-8961 or (917) 239-8992 with Questions or to RSVP for this eventABOUT G.A.ME - The Grassroots Artists Movement (G.A.ME) is a membership organization dedicated to addressing sociopolitical and economic realities facing low-income Black and Latino communities. Galvanizing the influence of hip-hop artists and culture, G.A.ME unites artists and community members to work side-by-side for social justice. G.A.ME runs youth leadership and community development programs that provide tools for positive change.
The Nader team notes:
Ralph Nader is on TV tonight!
Ralph will be on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blizter at about 5 p.m. EST this afternoon.
And he'll be on Fox's The O'Reilly Factor with Bill O'Reilly at about 8:25 p.m. EST tonight.
Hope you get a chance to watch.
And remember, this week we're offering a limited number of Ralph's most recent book -- The Seventeen Traditions. (HarperCollins, 2007).
It's a 150-page hard cover classic -- detailing the traditions Ralph grew up with in his home town of Winsted, Connecticut.
For a donation of $100 or more, we'll ship you this Nader classic -- signed by the man himself -- Ralph Nader.
(This offer ends Sunday October 12, 2008 at 11:59 p.m.)
So, donate now.
By the way, the Nader/Gonzalez video team was with Ralph in Winsted, Connecticut last week.
And they put together this neat little peek of Ralph in his hometown.
Take a look.
Pass it around.
And then pick up a copy of The Seventeen Traditions.
Thank you for your ongoing support.
Onward to Novemberiraqthe washington postsudarsan raghavanernesto londonomcclatchy newspapersleila fadelnancy a. youssefjonathan s. landaywarren p. strobelthe new york timeserica goodesabrina tavernisechris hedgesjohn latimercarrie cassidylarry alexanderkatharine q. seelyethe new york timeslike maria said pazkats kornersex and politics and screeds and attitudethe daily jotcedrics big mixmikey likes itruths reportsickofitradlz
Posted at 10:15 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
Oct 7, 2008
barack declares social security is on the table
tom brokaw lied about social security and barack, who is not a liberal or even a real democrat, rushed in to say that he would reform it. remember that. remember also that barack can't stick to the rules. before that question he was trying to butt in when it was not his turn to and tom brokaw had to remind him that he and john mccain had agreed to the rules ahead of time. but barack can never stick to the rules. he's the press prince! he needs special benefits because he's so very loveable. 'to deal with social security and deal with medicare' barack babbled on. it's not a surprise that he just the left in the back because he did that in 2007 on this same issue. but every 1 wanted to get on board with bambi. it's hilarious. he's stabbing his cheerleaders in the back. poor katty vanden heuvel. the big nosed, hair ball that smelled piss as a child is more or less the same today except she's also now been punked in public. how does it feel, katty van van? 'part of the reason i think it's so important to end the war in iraq is to get more troops in afghanistan,' barack declared tonight. that's the 'peace' candidate that katty van van and assorted other liars have sold you (robert scheer, laura flanders, matthew rothschild, amy goodman, jeremy scahill ...) julie bosman (new york times) reports on governor sarah palin: She worked her way back row by row, shaking hands with each reporter and saying "Nice to meet you!" to each one.
Then she answered questions on the state of the race, on the relevance of William Ayers, on the state investigation in Alaska centered on her husband, Todd, and on the recent negative campaigning.Ms. Palin was asked if she thinks voters who are worried about the economy are turned off by the "attack politics" of bringing up Mr. Ayers on the trail.
"It is, though, about the economy about creating jobs and about resource development and energy independence here," Ms. Palin said. "It comes down to one ticket's proposal that can be trusted, and another ticket’s proposal to deal with some of these issues and maybe questioning the truthfulness and the intention there. I think it’s very relevant there."
Are you saying that Senator Obama is dishonest, one reporter asked?
"I'm not saying that he's dishonest, but in terms of judgment, in terms of being able to answer a question forthrightly, it has two different parts to this. The judgment and the truthfulness and just being able to answer very candidly a simple question about when did you know him, how did you know him, is there still -- has there been an association continued since '02 or '05, I know I've read a couple different stories. I think it's relevant."i went to the paper's website to get a link for their live debate coverage because i hoped it would be katharine q. seelye live blogging. it was. click here to read her live blogging of the debate. i don't know if we're going beyond the plan or not - meaning all community sites going dark shortly. c.i. and ava made a promise to a friend with some show (i forget which) that they would wait to weigh in on it. they promised and they wrote about that. that carried it to january. the plan was to go dark in november. they're going to january for sure (probably middle of januray). they didn't realize when they promised that it meant going beyond the deadline. (believe me, they both have a lot more on their minds than 'we're done!'). so i'll stay through as long as they are and then decide what i'm going to do. i may shut down (if they do), i may not. but in case i do, seelye has been trashed in a way that is disturbing. that was before i ever blogged so i can't undo that but i can make a point to toss out a link which is what i'm doing tonight. let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:' Tuesday, October 7, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, tensions escalate between Turkey and northern Iraq, Barack tries to scramble away from another friend, and more.
As of last weekend, Poland is now officially out of Iraq. The 'coalition' continues to shrink.
Reuters reports Zoran Kojanovski, Macedonia's Defence Minister, declared today that his country's will leave at the end of the year and he stated, "Their mission is over and local authorities there are capable of running their own territory."
From who's leaving to what's going on. The law for provincial elections? Leila Fadel knew what was what but no one else did. Dropping back to Friday's snapshot:In Iraq today . . . confusion. Corinne Reilly (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that the presidency council "has agreed to approve a long-delayed law that will allow most of the country to hold provincial elections early next year, officials said Friday." However, China's Xinhua reports that the "presidential council had not approved the provincial election law passed by the parliament, local media reported Friday." Al Jazeera does not say that they have agreed to pass it, Al Jaezeera states that it is passed. AP also states it has passed and, in fact, signed into law by Iraqi President Jalal Talabani: "Firyad Rawndouzi, a Kurdish lawmaker, told The Associated Press that the three-member panel led by President Jalal Talabani had signed the law Friday and asked the parliament 'to solve the minorities problem'." Article 50 issue was never addressed. It is the one that has been called out by everyone from Iraqi Christians to Moqtada al-Sadr and puts minority representation at risk. Nouri al-Maliki did express some public statements and there is said to have been concern on the part of the presidency council. But if it's signed, it's the law. The Parliament can try to fix it but the law is what was signed by Talabani.
Saturday Sam Dagher (New York Times) reported: "Meanwhile, Iraq's presidency council, made up of the president and his two deputies, issued a statement Friday saying the body had ratified a provincial election law that the Parliament passed 10 days ago. This paves the way for local elections . . ." Today Erica Goode and Stephen Farrell (New York Times) declare, "The law, passed on Sept. 24, still requires the approval of a three-member presidential panel led by President Jalal Talabani before it can take effect, clearing the way for elections to be held in most of the country early next year." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) explained it yesterday, "That evening a petition of 50 parliament members demanded the law back from the presidency council, lawmakers said. They would add the article to the law before the council decided to pass or reject it." It had not been passed. Despite claims to the contrary. Reuters states today, "Iraq's president and vice presidents have formally approved a long-awaited provincial elections law, paving the way for the vote to take place by Jan. 31 next year." And that the council asked the Parliament to restore Article 50 (minority represenations).
And attempting to cite 'progress' in Iraq today, the State Dept ran into a few problems. Reuters reports US Dept Secretary of State John Negroponte's Green Zone based press conference was the site of a mortar attack shortly before the press conference began. Negroponte was the topic of interest at the US State Dept press briefing yesterday held by Deputy spokeperson Robert Wood who delcared of Negroponte's visit, "The Deputy Secretary -- as you know, he was an Ambassador there. He goes from time to time to check on how things are going on the ground in Iraq. Obviously, the SOFA and the strategic framework agreement will come up in the conversations, but he's not necessarilly there to negotiate. But it's not unusual for the Deputy Secretary to go to Iraq." The press pointed out that the treaty had to be in place by December 31st (when the UN mandate authorizing the occupation ends) and that the White House promised the treaty would be completed in July. Wood replied, "No, I understand your point. You know, this is a -- we're talking about a very complex agreement. This is something that many in the Administration have been working hard on. As you know, there's a team from the United States that's there and that's been working hard on these negotiations. But, yeah, the fact that it slipped, you know, these things happen. But it's important that we get a good agreement for both Iraq and the United States -- you know, one that obviously allows us to operate there in a legal framework and also that upholds Iraqi sovereignty. And those are two very important issues for us." Today CBS and AP cite Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq's Foreign Minister, stating that the US and the puppet government are "very close" to finalizing a treaty. Zebari was speaking at the same press conference as Negorponte. Deborah Haynes (Times of London) quotes Zebari stating of the treaty, "This issue needs, I think, some bold political decisions. And we are at that stage. And that's why I suggested that soon you and your colleagues will see hectic political meetings here in Baghdad on this issue to determine the fate of the agreement." Jeffrey Fleishman (Los Angeles Times) adds this perspective, "The negotiations come at critical times for both nations. The emboldened Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, determined to show he is independent of Washington, wants more control over security and is insisting on an American troop withdrawal by the end of 2011. The U.S. is facing a widening financial crisis at home and a public growing wary of the high costs of keeping more than 146,000 soldiers in Iraq."
While the same statements continue to be made, conflicts continue between Turkey and the northern region of Iraq. Monday Ellen Knickmeyer (Washington Post) reported on the air raids Turkey launched Sunday following the deaths of 15 Turkish soldiers. Monday Ibon Villelabeitia (Reuters) reported Turkey continued air strikes. The Turkish Press reports that Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Prime Minister of Turkey, declared today that "cross-border operations" would continue. Huriyet quotes him stating, "The sole target of a possible cross-border operation will be the terrorist organization" and that, "The best choice for the regional administration of northern Iraq is to cooperate with us against terrorist elements because the terrorist organization is a cause of regional unrest and tension." Asked about Turkey and the Kurdish PKK on Monday, the State Dept' Robert Wood stated, "Look, the PKK is a terrorist organization. We want to see it go out of business. That's been very clear. And, you know, we've obviously conemned the attack and expressed our concolences to the people of Turkey." In this morning's press briefing, Wood was asked if the US was sharing intelligence with Turkey and he replied, "Well, we do cooperate with the Turks on intelligence with regard to dealing with the PKK. We have good cooperation. We also have good cooperation with Iraqis as well in dealing with some of these issues with regards to the Kurds."
Turning to some of the other reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Baghdad car bombings that left five wounded and a Mosul car bombing that claimed 2 lives and left ten people wounded.
Shootings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 "shop owner" shot dead in Mosul, 1 "governmental employee" shot dead in Mosul and a "butcher" shot dead in Mosul (with his son left wounded). Reuters notes, "Two minority Christian men were gunned down on Tuesday in northern Mosul."
Corpses?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 corpses discovered in Kut.
Today the US military announced: A Multi-National Division -- North Soldier died of wounds sustained from a small-arms fire attack in Mosul, Oct. 7." The announcement bring to 4179 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war with 3 for the month thus far.
Tonight Dem. presidential nominee Barack Obama and Rep. presidential nominee John McCain debate. Alexander Cockburn (The First Post) observes of last Thursday's debate between the Democratic vice presidential nominee, Senator Joe Biden, and the Republican vice presidential nominee, Governor Sarah Palin, that only Palin has passed the test of the Democratic and Republican candidates: "Palin, despite somewhat excessive folksiness, with 'gosh-darneds' and the like, did look as though she and Todd had spent some time at their kitchen table in the not-too-distan past figuring out how to pay the bills and deciding they couldn't afford health insurance. . . . Alone of the four candidates [Obama, Biden, McCain and herself], she spoke to the fury and fear of Main Street America about the
$700bn bail-out . . . More than once last night, I thought Palin must have been watching re-runs of Reagan's speeches, though decades of deference to Hollywood tycoons made Reagan far more respectful of Wall Street than the Alaskan Governor, who even presumed to introduce the antique phrase 'working class' into the debate."
As noted in yesterday's snapshot, following the New York Times lead on Saturday, Palin has been bringing up Barack Obama's ties to Weather Underground's Bill Ayers. Today on Democracy Now! Amy Goodman lied (it's a lie, the Red Diaper baby damn well knows better), "Obama was eight years old when Ayers was a Weather Underground member." That's how the media's worked it. Obama says it's so it's 'true.' In the debate with Hillary, that was one of the lies regarding Weather Underground that Barack uttered, "And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn't make much sense, George." The press has run with the lie ever since. However, George Stephanopoulos actually asked the question correctly (and that's part of the reason George was attacked by the Cult of Obama), "A gentleman named William Ayers. He was part of the Weather Underground in the 1970s. They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol, and other buildings. He's never apologized for that." Idiots and liars run with that garbage of eight years old.
Barack was born in August of 1961. Weather Underground is not "Weatherman." Weatherman did the Days of Rage in 1969. Weather Underground emerges with the "Declaration of a State of War" (read by Bernardine Dohrn). You can find a transcription here (as published in Berkeley Tribe, July 31, 1970 and released May 21, 1970). 1970 is when Weather Underground emerges. Prior to that Weatherman existed. 1970 is when the bombings begin and they are not a one-year thing. Barack was prepped for that debate with Hillary, coached to toss out a lie the press could run with and obsesses over: " Look, I'm going to have to respond to this just really quickly, but by Senator Clinton's own vetting standards, I don't think she would make it, since President Clinton pardoned or commuted the sentences of two members of the Weather Underground, which I think is a slightly more significant act." The campaign then prepped all reporters that Bill Clinton had pardoned the two women (there was no pardon) and look for yourself and see who LIED. Did anyone do their own work? No. David Corn, when forced to 'correct' at Mother Jones made a real ass of himself insisting that "commuted" and "pardon" were basically the same thing. No, they are not. But the press went running where Barack told them to do like the good little doggies they are. George Stephanopoulos was correct and most (including Diane Rehm) knew he was correct, it was the 1970s. And yet the liars repeatedly lie (including Diane who's tired ass needs to retire). As Mike pointed out last night, Ben Smith (Politico) can get it right: "On the other hand, Obama's not that young. He started at Columbia University, for instance, in 1981, when their names were certainly in the New York tabloids, which haved always loved the story of upper-middle-class radical cop killers. Kathy Boudin's role in a botched, fatal 1981 Brinks roberry was huge news. Bernardine Dohrn was imprisoned in 1982 for refusing to testify against fellow Weather Underground members. And Ayers' past was hardly a secret in Chicago, where he was regularly quoted as an ex-radical and ex-fugitive."
As Nathaniel Sheppard Jr. explained in "Bernardine Dohrn Gives Up To Authorities in Chicago" (New York Times, December 4, 1980): "Still espousing revolutionary causes, Bernardine Dohrn, the 38-year-old reputed leader of the radical Weather Underground, surrendered to authorities here today, 10 years after going into hiding to avoid Federal and local riot charges. . . . Mr. Ayers was also indicted on Federal charges in connection with the disorders, but the Federal charges against Miss Dohrn, Mr. Ayers and other Weathermen were dropped in 1979 when a court ruled that the Government's evidence had been obtained through illegal telephone wiretaps. . . . An associate of Miss Dohrn said privately that she might have come forward now partly because of fear that her treatment under the administration of Ronald Reagan could be harsher than under the Carter Administration." Joe Boyle (BBC) explains Weather's actions: "From 1970 to 1975 the group bombed police stations and patrol vehicles and court and government buildings. In 1970 there were fatalities - a police officer died from his injuries after a pipe bomb was detonated in a San Francisco police station, while three of the group blew themselves up while building explosives in their New York apartment."
The ever-changing story from Barack. What was the earliest lie? Who knows? One claimed, as Ava and I noted, that all their kids went to school together: "The focus wasn't helped when the Obama campaign attempted to lie that Ayers and Barack were friends because they had children the same age. As The Guardian of London's Daniel Nasaw pointed out Dorhn and Ayers' son Zayd is 30-years-old, Malik is 27-years-old and Chesa Boudin, Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert's son that Ayers and Dorhn raised, is also 27, while Barack and Michelle Obama's daughters 'are 6 and 9, respectively'." Believe it or not, the lie of "kids go to school together" was bought and re-sold by the press without question for months. Geoff Earle (New York Post) quoted Team Obama leader David Axelrod telling CNN that Barack didn't know all this public history. He then repeated the eight-year-old lie. Or maybe, what he's trying to say is Barack doesn't condemn the bombings of the Pentagon and the State Dept which took place after he was eight-years-old? As Elaine pointed out last night, Geoff Earle repeats without question the latest spin. The McCain-Palin campaign issued this statement yesterday:
Does Barack Obama truly expect the American people to believe that he had no idea about his friend's past as the infamous founder of the domestic terror group 'The Weather Underground' or is he just lying? If Obama didn't know in 1995 about the bombings Ayers was responsible for, when did he find out -- because Obama was promoting Ayers' book in 1997, serving on boards with him until 2002, and trading emails and phone calls with him as recently as 2005. If Obama really was unaware of Ayers' radical past, learning the truth doesn't seem to have had any effect on their friendship. Whether Barack Obama is lying to voters about his previous support for higher taxes on the middle class, his votes against funds for American troops in the field or his associations with an unrepentant terrorist, voters are left wondering who Obama is and what he stands for.
Today Athena Jones (NBC) explains, "Reporters pressed Barack Obama's chief strategist David Axelrod on when the senator became aware of William Ayers' radical past during the flight from Asheville, NC to Nashville for tonight's debates. When asked to clarify when it was that Obama learned about Ayers' history of planning bombings to protest the Vietnam War, Axelrod said it was some time after their first meetings but that he did not know the exact moment." Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller (ABC News' Political Punch) add, "The Alaska governor has been blurring what Axelrod said to make it seem as though Obama was claiming that he didn't know about Ayers' history until recently, which is not what Axelrod said. Not that there's been any clear explanation of this relationship forthcoming from the Obama campaign. So when did Obama find out that Ayers had been a member of an organization the FBI called a 'domestic terrorist' group, and had been for years a fugitive from the law?" On the campaign trail today, Palin again raised the issue. Perry Bacon Jr. (Washington Post) quotes her stating in Jacksonville, Florida, "Now our opponent's campaign is claiming for the first time Barack Obama wasn't aware of Ayers' radical background. He didn't know he launched his own political career in the living room of a dometic terrorist? What's next, claiming he didn't know that two of his biggest supporters were running Fannie Mae? . . . Maybe he thought they were just guys in his Washington neighborhood." ABC News' Political Radar includes the next statement, "And since he got called out on his plans to meet unconditionally with terror state leaders like [Iran's President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad, will he now claim he was unaware of his radical backround? Ladies and gentlemen, this election is about the truthfulness and judgment needed in our next president. John McCain has it and Barack Obama doesn't." The McCain-Palin campaign site is highlighting the issue and clicking here takes you to Obama LIAR Anita Dunn now insisting (CNN transcript) that Barack was seven at the time, seven! What a pack of liars. For more McCain-Palin releases on Barack and Bill, click here and here.
And, in more news for Barack, CBS News' Laura Strickler, Sarah Fitzpatrick and Ariel Bashi reported yesterday:
CBS News has learned that two donors to the Obama campaign that gave a total of $7,722 appear to have made their contributions under fake names that look like they were written by a mouse running across a keyboard: Dahsudhu Hdusahfd of Df, Hawaii with the following employer CZXVC/ZXVZXV and Uadhshgu Hduadh listed as living in Dhff, Florida listed their employer as DASADA/SAFASF. CBS News did not find any records of these last names, towns or employers anywhere else. Newsweek reported two questionable Obama donors over the weekend named "Doodad Pro" and "Good Will". Contributions from the two donors Hdusahfd and Hduadh were made on the same day starting on July 16, 2008. Federal Election Commission (FEC) records show the campaign began refunding the donations as early as August 6, 2008. Despite numerous refunds from the Obama campaign, Hdusahfd still has a record of giving a total of $7500 to Obama which is well over the legal limit for the primary and general election of $4600. Hduadh gave $14,200 but the Obama campaign returned all but $222.00.
Ruth noted the CBS news item last night in her round-up of the presidential campaigns. And Kat pointed to the biggest liar or the most uninformed in the press, Jason Szep of Reuters who claimed Weather Underground "was involved in bombings in the 1960s" -- uh, Szep, what bombings are you referring to? McCain and Obama debate tonight or 'debate'. And the other presidential candidates are shut out of the debate. Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate. Kevin Alexander Gray (Progressive via Some Carolina) writes, "McKinney, who served as a Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives for twelve years, left the Democratic Party last year to join the Greens. In Congress, she had one of the most progressive records. And as a Presidential candidate, she offers up a coherent agenda. In her acceptance speech at the Green Party convention in Chicago on July 12, she denounced what she called 'Democratic Party complicity' in 'war crimes, torture, crimes against the peace' and 'crimes against the Constituion, crimes against the American peopke, and crimes against the global community.' She said, 'Those who delivered us into this mess cannot be trusted to get us out of it.' She told her supporters, 'A Green vote is a peace vote,' and 'A Green vote is a justice vote.'"
Rosa Clemente is Cynthia's running mate. Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and his running mate is Matt Gonzalez. Nader - Gonzalez notes:
Donate $5 to Nader/Gonzalez now.
Why?
To protest the sheer arrogance of the Gallup Organization.
In a recent WSJ/NBC national poll, Ralph Nader pulls 5 percent.
Contrast that to the most recent Gallup national poll, where Nader polls a fraction of one percent.
Why the big difference?
Answer: Gallup, the 800-pound gorilla of the polling world, doesn't list Ralph Nader as one of the Presidential candidates in the primary polling question.
Are you kidding me?
No.
We are not kidding you.
And guess who the Commission on Presidential Debates depends on to do its polling to see which Presidential candidates get to debate before tens of millions of Americans tonight in Nashville?
You guessed it: Gallup.
I called Frank Newport. (pictured above)
Newport is the editor-in-chief at Gallup.
I asked Newport:
Is there an objective standard you use to keep Ralph off your primary polling question?
"No," Newport said.
"We use our internal judgment to decide."
Whoa!
Gallup's "internal judgment" keeps Ralph Nader out of their polling.
So, I tried again.
Any ballpark levels of support Gallup looks to as a threshold?
"No," Newport said.
Again, it was just subject to unidentified "internal judgment criteria."
What a total crock of you know what.
There are some polling agencies -- such as Ipsos/McClatchey and CNN/Opinion Research Corp. -- that include all the major third party candidates.
Not Gallup.
So, we propose two ways to protest Gallup's arrogance in keeping Ralph Nader out of the Gallup polls, thereby denying him the chance of having a chance to debate McCain and Obama.
Protest method number one:
Donate $5, $10, $100 -- whatever you can afford -- up to the legal limit of $2,300 -- to Nader/Gonzalez now.
The stronger we become in October, the more difficult it will be for even Gallup's "internal judgment" to ignore us.
We're in the middle of our October Surprise fundraising drive.
And we need to reach $250,000 by the end of the week.
So, if you haven't donated yet, hit that there contribute button now.
Protest method number two:
Call up Gallup's Frank Newport.
Give him a piece of your mind.
Nader/Gonzalez is on more state ballots (45) than any other independent or third party candidate.
And we're polling five percent and higher in other polls nationwide.
Why is Gallup keeping Ralph Nader out of their polls?
What standards does Gallup use to determine who is included in their Presidential polls?
You can call Newport at: 609-924-9600
Or you can e-mail him directly at: frank_newport@gallup.com
Thank you for your ongoing activism and support.
Onward to November.
Toby Heaps
National Media Coordinator
Though shut out of the corporation's debate between the corporatist candidates, Ralph Nader will be addressing the debate tonight:
News AdvisoryFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEContact: Ryan Mehta, 408-348-0681, rmehta@votenader.org (National HQ)PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE RALPH NADER TO RESPOND TO DEBATES IN WINSTEADWHO: Ralph NaderWHAT: Debate responseWHEN: Tuesday, October 7 from 9:00pm until after the debatesWHERE: Founders Hall Auditorium, Northwestern Community College, Park Place Winsted, CT 06098On Tuesday, October 7 starting at 9:00, consumer advocate and Presidential candidate Ralph Nader will be in Founders Hall Auditorium at Northwestern Community College. After the debates, he will give his response and take question about the debates.
iraqthe new york timesnathaniel sheppard jr.sam daghererica goodestephen farrellleila fadelmcclatchy newspapersjake tapperdeborah haynesthe washington postperry bacon jr.ellen knickmeyeralexander cockburnthe los angeles timesjeffrey fleishman
Posted at 08:51 pm by politicsscree
Permalink
|
|
|
