Taking Protest to the Streets

Veterans and military families will lead the March 20, Washington, DC demonstration against war as more organizations and individuals connect the dots of racism, poverty and war.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/

Veterans and military families speak out

Veterans and military families are joining with tens of thousands of others who will be marching on Washington, D.C., on Saturday, March 20. 

If you are a veteran, active-duty service member or a member of a military family and would like to join the veterans, active-duty service members and military families contingent, click here.

[...]  We must continue the struggle. We must be louder than ever, as you will hear many tell us to shut up and go away. Don’t tell the public the truth that there has been no change … that we should not challenge the leaders of our country because they are now labeled Democrats rather than Republicans. As we have fewer voices, we must be louder now than ever before.

Read the entire release here:  http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/01/16/veterans-and-military-families-speak-out/

The group ANSWER is coordinating the demonstration:

All out for the March 20th March on Washington!

People from all over the country are organizing to converge on Washington, D.C., to demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan and Iraq.
On Saturday, March 20, 2010, there will be a massive National March & Rally in D.C. A day of action and outreach in Washington, D.C., will take place on Friday, March 19, preceding the Saturday march.
There will be coinciding mass marches on March 20 in San Francisco and Los Angeles.
The national actions are initiated by a large number of organizations and prominent individuals. To see a list of the initiators, click this link. 
We will march together to say “No Colonial-type Wars and Occupations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Haiti!" We will march together to say "No War Against Iran!” We will march together to say “No War for Empire Anywhere!”
Instead of war, we will demand funds so that every person can have a job, free and universal health care, decent schools, and affordable housing.

http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=m20_homepage

Pray for Peace

If you're reading this today then you, like me couldn't make it to DC to register your resistance to wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, on and on.  These wars are justified in our Amerikan minds because of 9/11, even though the jury is still out on who did what and why.  Here are excerpts from a very provocative article from the blog Veterans Today.

Special Report: 

YEARS OF DECEIT: US OPENLY ACCEPTS BIN LADEN LONG DEAD

BIN LADEN NEVER MENTIONED IN McCHRYSTAL REPORT OR OBAMA SPEECH

"HUNT FOR BIN LADEN" A NATIONAL SHAME

By Gordon Duff/STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

Conservative commentator, former Marine Colonel Bob Pappas has been saying for years that bin Laden died at Tora Bora and that Senator Kerry's claim that bin Laden escaped with Bush help was a lie.  Now we know that Pappas was correct.  The embarassment of having Secretary of State Clinton talk about bin Laden in Pakistan was horrific.  He has been dead since December 13, 2001 and now, finally, everyone, Obama, McChrystal, Cheney, everyone who isn't nuts is finally saying what they have known for years.
However, since we lost a couple of hundred of our top special operations forces hunting for bin Laden after we knew he was dead, is someone going to answer for this with some jail time?  Since we spent 200 million dollars on "special ops" looking for someone we knew was dead, who is going to jail for that?  Since Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney continually talked about a man they knew was dead, now known to be for reasons of POLITICAL nature, who is going to jail for that?  Why were tapes brought out, now known to be forged, as legitimate intelligence to sway the disputed 2004 election in the US?  This is a criminal act if there ever was one.

[...]  What kind of man was Osama bin Laden?  This one time American ally against Russia, son of a wealthy Saudi family, went to Afghanistan to help them fight for their freedom.  America saw him as a great hero then.  Transcripts of the real bin Laden show him to be much more moderate than we claim, angry at Israel and the US government but showing no anger toward Americans and never making the kind of theats claimed.  All of this is public record for any with the will to learn.
[...] We know this:  Bin Laden always denied any ties to 9/11 and, in fact, has never been charged in relation to 9/11.  He not only denied involvement, but had done so, while alive, 4 times and had vigorously condemned those who were involved in the attack.
This is on the public record, public in every free country except ours.  We, instead, showed films made by paid actors, made up to look somewhat similar to bin Laden, actors who contradicted bin Ladens very public statements, actors pretending to be bin Laden long after bin Laden's death.
These were done to help justify spending, repressive laws, torture and simple thievery.
For years, we attacked the government of Pakistan for not hunting down someone everyone knew was dead.  Bin Laden's death hit the newspapers in Pakistan on December 15, 2001.  How do you think our ally felt when they were continually berated for failing to hunt down and turn over someone who didn't exist?
http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=9641

As for today's demonstration, if you don't "subscribe" to cable or a dish, you will have to wait until tomorrow to get the meagre crumbs of information about the speeches and how it all played out.  Rather than feel frustrated, listen to "Listen", from Jordan Page.  Let's keep it in mind as we go about our daily chores.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_M_IO25xHg

Please remember:  no matter how difficult our lives are, we aren't living under fear of bombardment EVERY DAY.  Horrific as our 9/11 was, the people of those three countries suffer the horror as we divert out attention with entertainment.  Please, please pray for peace.

Dec. 12--Be There

As I wrote after BHO's speech, let the demos begin.  Here's the first big one I'm aware of:

EMERGENCY ANTI-ESCALATION RALLY

Saturday, Dec. 12, 2009
11am-4pm • Washington DC

Lafayette Square | White House
Metro: Farragut West or Farragut North

Speakers: Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Rep. Cynthia McKinney, Sen. Mike Gravel, Kathy Kelly, Chris Hedges, David Swanson, Rev. Graylan Hagler, Gael Murphy, Brian Becker, Debra Sweet, Mathis Chiroux, Coy McKinney, Elaine Brower, Lynne Williams, Hon. Betty Hall, Marian Douglas, Dr. Michael Knox, Ralph Lopez, Cpt. Ron Fisher.
Plus: Statements from Rabbi Michael Lerner, Col. Ann Wright, Kevin Zeese, Dr. Stephen Zunes, Granny D (turning 100), and others.

Anti-War, 1969

Live Music: Jordan Page, Head-Roc, Emma's Revolution, Precise Science.

Under Obama-Pelosi-Reid, the US has already sent about 35,000 more troops into the Afghanistan graveyard of empires. Now, Obama has announced another round of re-enforcements—an Afghan surge of 30,000 additional GIs, thereby betraying his supporters on the left and ignoring the majority of Americans, 55% of whom disapprove of his handling of the war. Instead, Obama is taking the advice from the war party—from Petraeus, McChrystal, and Mullen. It's high time Obama, Pelosi, and Reid heard a clear message from a resurgent antiwar movement demanding no escalation and an immediate pullout of all US forces from Afghanistan and Iraq, including an immediate halt to Predator drone attacks and CIA operations in the region. 
Come to the rally and let our united voices be heard!
http://www.enduswars.org

Reject Obama's War

The anti-war community is growing again, momentum is building again.  There will soon be too many demos to go to, for our troops in Afghnistan, Iraq, places unacknowledged and most of all for the people of those traumatized countries.

Here are two views about Prez Obama's upcoming announcement of more boots on the ground, again.

From US Labor Against the War, I present in it's entirity their announcement.  It isn't posted on their web page yet but I felt it important that a broad audience read this:

               ***

November 29, 2009
To:           All USLAW affiliates, members and supporters
From:       USLAW Co-Convenors
RE:          Imminent Afghan Escalation

On the very eve of the USLAW National Labor Assembly in Chicago, President Barack Obama is expected to announce his decision about the deployment of tens of thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan. Media reports predict he will make an announcement on Tuesday evening, December 1, that he intends to send as many as 34,000 additional U.S. troops and will seek thousands more from NATO allies.
Antiwar organizations around the country are organizing to protest this military escalation in Afghanistan. We encourage USLAW affiliates, members and supporters to join them to convince the administration that this escalation puts our country on the wrong course. It is the path LBJ took in Vietnam and it cost him "The Great Society." We can do better.
While the Assembly will consider USLAW's overall stance, it has been USLAW policy since the Leadership Council meeting December, 2008, that we
    •    Oppose any escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan and military action in Pakistan and promote non-military solutions that rely primarily on diplomacy, economic development, and pursuit of terrorists as a criminal rather than military matter.
      On November 15, we reiterated this position in an Action Alert in which we said:
The wisdom of that stand has been born out by the steady deterioration in the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The government is viewed by Afghans as corrupt and ineffective.  The elections there made a travesty of the very notion of democracy.  Karzai, surrounded by warlords and drug lords, is thoroughly discredited.  His own brother is a druglord and a thug.
Committing thousands more troops will only stiffen Afghan resistance to foreign military occupation.
During the last few weeks, across the country, tens of thousands of people who share these concerns have written and called the White House to express opposition to any escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan. They believe, as we do, that the corrupt regime in Kabul does not deserve any more blood or money.
What Afghanistan needs now is not more foreign forces but rather more international diplomacy, regional negotiations that include the Taliban, real development assistance, more schools and clinics, electrification, clean water, and sanitation.
It costs $1 million for every troop the U.S. sends to Afghanistan. The billions of dollars we are squandering there are not making us any safer, but they are draining resources that could be used here to meet the urgent needs we have here at home - for health care, education, infrastructure, and more.
Rather than listen to the generals and Congressional hawks, we must convince the Obama administration to listen to the people - a majority of whom want an end to war and occupation in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Now is not a time for silence!
Join, Support & Build USLAW - Labor's Antiwar Voice!

Here's their link:  http://uslaboragainstwar.org/

Next is Michael Moore''s letter to the president.  Blessed be Michael Moore!!

An Open Letter to the President

Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1267518840#/notes/aser-plac/open-letter-to-obama-by-michael-moore/218683830309

Michael Moore's blog:  http://www.michaelmoore.com/?%28none%29

What Are We Hiding and Why?

The heady days of "hope" are long gone and we are now faced with the dilema of supporting a president most  of us only supported in theory.  He was unknown, untested and now, it seems, untruthful.  A man of the law who runs for president must completely comprehend and accept his campaign promises of transparency in governance and justice for ALL (not JUST US).  What is Obama protecting by messing around with linguistics in policy?  What have we done to maintain our security?  Why are lies and obstructions more pallatable to some citizens than truth and setting things straight?

The question that's haunting me is what could a person possibly do to make them "untriable?"  The answer keeps coming back that it isn't the prisoner who is untriable, but the legal system which "dissappeared" law abiding citizens.  Which brings us back to the question of what our president is  doing to protect and maintain our democracy, because democracy HAS to be for all, or it just ain't democracy.

I hope you have sufficiently digested and recovered from yesterday's food fest to stomach this.  And get ready when the news breaks out of our new Afghani Gitmo in Bagram.

(Image: Lance Page / t r u t h o u t;
Adapted: christophe dune / Flickr)

Obama's Fifth Category: The "Untriable" 

Tuesday 24 November 2009

[...]  According to The Washington Post, quoting an unnamed official, there are some 75 prisoners in this "fifth category." And the administration's position is that these people are untriable because the evidence against them was obtained through torture or because public trials would involve and potentially expose an unacceptable volume of classified material.

[...]  The Obama administration gave the human rights community apoplexy when it referred to "preventive detention." Now, it is simply saying that it's not going to seek any additional authority from Congress for such preventive detention. Which perhaps gives us a clue to the approach the administration has in mind. In a study by the Obama-friendly Center for American Progress, analyst Ken Gude suggests that the Obama administration "incarcerate detainees convicted in US criminal courts in maximum-security US prisons and transfer those who will remain in military custody to Bagram prison in Afghanistan." (Emphasis mine.)

That latter group would presumably include the untriable. Which appears to create a neo-GITMO at Bagram in Afghanistan.

http://www.truthout.org/1124094

Pakistan War Launched on 9/11

It's just a matter of time before the mainstream media start to use the words "Pakistan War." Just like Afghanistan and Iraq, we will be busy with our lives and yet feel a vague discomfort. Someday I hope we become conscious of the suffering of innocent people, and put an end to it.
September 11, 2008
BUSH SAID TO GIVE ORDERS ALLOWING RAIDS IN PAKISTAN
By ERIC SCHMITT AND MARK MAZZETTI
President Bush secretly approved orders in July that for the first time allow American Special Operations forces to carry out ground assaults inside Pakistan without the prior approval of the Pakistani government, according to senior American officials.
The classified orders signal a watershed [my bold] for the Bush administration after nearly seven years of trying to work with Pakistan to combat the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and after months of high-level stalemate about how to challenge the militants' increasingly secure base in Pakistan's tribal areas.
American officials say that they will notify Pakistan when they conduct limited ground attacks like the Special Operations raid last Wednesday in a Pakistani village near the Afghanistan border, but that they will not ask for its permission.
''The situation in the tribal areas is not tolerable,'' said a senior American official who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on condition of anonymity because of the delicate nature of the missions. ''We have to be more assertive. Orders have been issued.''
[...] Pakistan's top army officer said Wednesday that his forces would not tolerate American incursions [my bold] like the one that took place last week and that the army would defend the country's sovereignty ''at all costs.''
It is unclear precisely what legal authorities the United States has invoked to conduct even limited ground raids in a friendly country. A second senior American official said that the Pakistani government had privately assented to the general concept of limited ground assaults by Special Operations forces against significant militant targets, but that it did not approve each mission.
The official did not say which members of the government gave their approval.
[…] Details about last week's commando operation have emerged that indicate the mission was more intrusive [my bold] than had previously been known.
According to two American officials briefed on the raid, it involved more than two dozen members of the Navy Seals who spent several hours on the ground and killed about two dozen suspected Qaeda fighters in what now appeared to have been a planned attack against militants who had been conducting attacks against an American forward operating base across the border in Afghanistan.
Supported by an AC-130 gunship, the Special Operations forces were whisked away by helicopters after completing the mission.
[…] Pakistan's government has asserted that last week's raid achieved little except killing civilians and stoking anti-Americanism in the tribal areas.
''Unilateral action by the American forces does not help the war against terror because it only enrages public opinion,'' said Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's ambassador to Washington, during a speech on Friday. ''In this particular incident, nothing was gained by the action of the troops.''
As an alternative to American ground operations, some Pakistani officials have made clear that they prefer the C.I.A.'s Predator aircraft, operating from the skies, as a method of killing Qaeda operatives. The C.I.A. for the most part has coordinated with Pakistan's government before and after it has launched missiles from the drone. On Monday, a Predator strike in North Waziristan killed several Arab Qaeda operatives.
[…] Spokesmen for the White House, the Defense Department and the C.I.A. declined to comment on Wednesday about the new orders. Some senior Congressional officials have received briefings on the new authorities. A spokeswoman for Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who leads the Armed Services Committee, declined to comment.
[…] The commando raid last week and an increasing number of recent missile strikes are part of a more aggressive overall American campaign in the border region aimed at intensifying attacks on Al Qaeda and the Taliban in the waning months of the Bush administration, [my bold] with less than two months to go before November elections.
State Department officials, as well as some within the National Security Council, have expressed concern about any Special Operations missions that could be carried out without the approval of the American ambassador in Islamabad.
The months-long delay in approving ground missions created intense frustration inside the military's Special Operations community, which believed that the Bush administration was holding back as the Qaeda safe haven inside Pakistan became more secure for militants.
The stepped-up campaign inside Pakistan comes at a time when American-Pakistani relations have been fraying, and when anger is increasing within American intelligence agencies about ties between Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, known as the ISI, and militants in the tribal areas.
Analysts at the C.I.A. and other American spy and security agencies believe not only that the bombing of India's embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, in July by militants was aided by ISI operatives, but also that the highest levels of Pakistan's security apparatus -- including the army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani -- had knowledge of the plot.
''It's very difficult to imagine he was not aware,'' a senior American official said of General Kayani. […]
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E02E7DD163EF932A2575AC0A96E9C8B63&fta=y

No Time Out for the Iraqi People

In another time and place, this guy was a Maverick, too.

I like this brief essay, but also must add that we consider the needs of the innocent people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and any other country we are bombing and/or intimidating into submission to full spectrum dominance.
Our Troops Don't Get a Time-Out for the Financial Crisis
Jon Soltz Posted September 24, 2008 05:56 PM (EST)
So, because there's a financial crisis, Senator McCain cannot take 90 minutes to address how he will face challenges around the world, including how and when he will send American troops to fight, and possibly die.
Wow. Troops would sure love that luxury.
Unfortunately, though, insurgents in Iraq don't stop shooting at us, or setting IEDs, because our Commander in Chief needs a breather to figure out Wall Street.
Al Qaeda in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region don't send our troops notes that read, "Hey, I hear you guys are tied up with Wall Street. Your President needs to concentrate on other things, so we'll give you a break. So, to make things easier on you, here's our coordinates."
Nor do our troops get a few days to figure out how to hold onto an area we've secured, if there's an unexpected attack. Sometimes we need to deal with multiple flare-ups at once in any warzone. We'd sure love a time-out, but sadly, the world isn't such a nice place that it gives us that kind of pity.
When you're Commander in Chief, I don't think there'd be a worse signal to send to our troops in harm's way than to say, "Hey, hold on guys. I know you're getting killed over there, but I have to get a time-out here to deal with Wall Street."
If troops need to multi-task without a break, is it so wrong that we demand that a potential President-in-waiting prove that he can manage a financial crisis, and still address crises around the world for 90 minutes? And, if a potential President-to-be can't manage that, is it wrong to think that maybe he ought not just suspend a debate and the campaign, but move aside and get out of the race?
Just something to think about.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-soltz/our-troops-dont-get-a-tim_b_129055.html

EU Sells It's Soul for Gas Pipelines

Human rights are almost completely non-existent in the countries towards which the EU is crawling. Journalists are arrested, tortured and worse, but that doesn't stink enough to slow profits. PEOPLE: WE NEED TO THINK BEYOND THE MERCANTILE MODE!

Human rights take back seat at EU-Central Asia talks

PHILIPPA RUNNER

19.09.2008 @ 16:56 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - EU and Central Asian foreign ministers pledged to work together on new gas pipelines and counter-terrorism at a meeting in Paris on Thursday (18 September), with the problem of grave human rights abuses in the region pushed down the agenda.

"We re-affirm the importance of active co-operation in the development of different hydrocarbon transport corridors that aim to ensure a guaranteed and reliable supply for European markets," the ministers' joint statement said.

The EU and the five Central Asian countries - Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan - will in future hold "regular exchanges" on security risks. [my bold] The EU will help combat terrorist financing and offer expertise on how to stop the illegal traffic of people, arms and drugs.

The EU also offered to develop hydro-electric and water management projects to head off confrontation between upstream and downstream countries, such as Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan.

"The expression 'common threats and challenges' may seem audacious, as it covers two vast regions separated by ... six thousand kilometres,"" [my bold] EU foreign relations head Javier Solana said. But energy security, terrorism and drug smuggling "impact our two societies equally and in a direct way." [my bold]

The Paris meeting was in itself a diplomatic coup for the EU's Central Asia policy, launched in June 2007 with the aim of pulling the young, post-Soviet states closer to the West.

The modest package, which sees EU spending of just €100 million a year on all five countries, has had little impact so far. EU plans to open large embassies in the five capitals have stalled, with the blue flag visible only in Astana[capital of], Kazakhstan. Plans to build a major gas pipeline - Nabucco - linking Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan to Europe via Turkey, are also wobbling.

EU states such as Italy, Bulgaria, Hungary and Greece have backed a competing Russian pipeline. The Georgia conflict has made the Nabucco transit route more risky, and the European Commission is sending mixed messages on whether it backs the Nabucco pipe or small-scale, compressed gas alternatives instead.

"We intend to redouble our efforts to develop energy links between the EU and Central Asia through diversified energy transportation routes and new energy infrastructure, including Nabucco," external relations commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner said in Paris.

Human rights nuisance

EU diplomacy has not been entirely ineffective. Earlier this year, Turkmenistan pledged to supply 10 billion cubic metres of gas a year for EU energy projects and none of the Central Asian countries have joined Russia in recognising Georgia's rebel enclaves as independent states.

But efforts to build relations with the repressive regimes are complicated by obligations to make at least some noise on democracy and human rights, with the values enshrined in the EU's foreign policy charter and monitored by NGOs such as Human Rights Watch (HRW).

"It's unrealistic to expect these countries to become like Europe. None of our [energy] competitors in the region - Russia, China, America - make co-operation conditional on human rights," an EU official said.

The EU has taken an increasingly soft line on values since the launch of the Central Asia package. EU states suspended a visa ban on Uzbek officials for six months and will in October debate scrapping the ban entirely. The EU's special envoy to Central Asia, Pierre Morel, is keen to push through a trade agreement with Turkmenistan desite objections from MEPs.

Salijon Abdurakhmanov

Neither Ms Ferrero-Waldner nor Mr Solana mentioned human rights in their Paris speeches, while the joint text made Central Asia sound like a co-guardian of EU values.

"Driven by a shared commitment to developing and organising our long-term partnership on the basis of ... respect for human rights and the development of the rule of law and democracy," the statement began.

Boiling water

The Paris meeting saw activists from French NGO Reporters Without Borders mount a brief protest inside the Turkmen embassy to demand the release of two journalists.

Annakurban Amanklychev and Sapardurdy Khadjiev have been in jail since 2006. They were arrested with a third reporter, Ogulsapar Muradova, who died in prison, AP reports.

HRW is calling for Uzbekistan to free human rights activist Akzam Turgunov, arrested for bribery, and journalist Salijon Abdurakhmanov, charged with drug smuggling, with 18 other dissidents also stuck in prison.

Mr Turgunov had boiling water poured on his neck during police questioning. "In evaluating Uzbekistan, the EU should demand evidence of real reform, because Turgunov's prosecution shows that nothing has changed," HRW researcher Igor Vorontsov said.

0http://euobserver.com/9/26778/?rk=1

Lying Murderers and the Media Who Protect Them

The housing crisis, hurricanes, political corruption, Wall Street meltdowns and major, OVERT wars on two fronts. Pakistan soldiers have been told to fire at American soldiers who have crossed the border into their sovereign country. We comfortably ponder the insanity that has become normal while people who live in other places spend their days in fear of US missiles crashing into their homes. Is there any line across which BushCo. won’t tread in its last, desperate grasp at “full spectrum dominance?” Will the human beings who wield power ever realize that today’s destruction will cause blowback so severe that 9/11 will seem like just a bad day? And how the hell are the rest of us going to pick up the pieces once the house of cards come tumbling down?
You know our “foreign policy” sucks really huge eggs when Ollie North is defending the case. For a quick brief on the details, go to ThinkProgress.org’s excellentU.S. Military Relied On Oliver North To Dispute Afghanistan Civilian Deaths»
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/08/military-oliver-north/
Glenn Greenwald’s excellent blog discusses the disgusting attempts at covering up this latest disgraceful military episode in Afghanistan.
Thursday Sept. 11, 2008 07:13 EDT
The government, the media and Afghanistan
North Now
[...] What makes the Azizabad attack particularly notable is the blatant and now clearly demonstrated lying engaged in by the U.S. Government regarding this incident, with the eager propagandistic assistance of what we are constantly told is the "legitimate news arm" of Fox News -- namely, Brit Hume's show and his stable of "legitimate news reporters." Working in unison, Fox and the Pentagon continuously denied claims that large numbers of civilians had been killed in the airstrike, accusing the villagers of lying and U.N. investigators of having been "duped." But a mountain of documentary evidence and independent investigations have now conclusively confirmed that it was the U.S. Government that was lying and the villagers' claims which were true all along, forcing the military to "reinvestigate" its own conclusions. While local villagers, the Afghan government, U.N. investigators, and independent journalists all insisted that the U.S. air attack resulted in the slaughter of 95 civilians, including 50 children, and killed no Taliban fighters, the U.S. military repeatedly issued vehement denials of those claims, insisting for weeks "that only 5 to 7 civilians, and 30 to 35 militants, were killed in what it [said] was a successful operation against the Taliban." The Bush administration even "accused the villagers of spreading Taliban propaganda" and claimed "that the villagers fabricated such evidence as grave sites," even though those "villagers have connections to the Afghan police, NATO or the Americans through reconstruction projects, and they say they oppose the Taliban." [...] There are numerous vital issues raised by this episode relating both to the bombing and particularly how the U.S. Government so frequently issues false claims, but in light of all the recent uproar over what is and is not "appropriate journalism," I want to focus for the moment on Fox News' role in this. When the U.S. military originally was denying the villagers' claim, the Pentagon claimed it had had conducted an investigation and that an unnamed "independent journalist" who happened to be with them confirmed their account that large numbers of Taliban were among the dead and only very few unarmed civilians were. But then this was revealed:

The US military said that its findings were corroborated by an independent journalist embedded with the US force. He was named as the Fox News correspondent Oliver North, who came to prominence in the 1980s Iran-Contra affair, when he was a[ Marine] colonel.

That "independent journalist" is the same person who, in 1986, proudly went before Congress and boasted: "I will tell you right now, counsel, and to all the members here gathered, that I misled the Congress," [my bold] and then justified that lying -- and to this day still justifies it -- on the ground that it was for a greater good. That behavior -- which led to multiple felony convictions that were ultimately overturned because he had received immunity in connection with his testimony -- hasn't prevented North from being employed as a "reporter" by the serious, legitimate news arm of Fox News, nor from appearing regularly on Brit Hume's Serious News Show as a journalist, nor being cited as an "independent journalist" by the U.S. military to confirm its claims and accuse Afghan villagers of lying about the number of their dead.
[...] [Jim] Angle then introduced Fox News "national security correspondent" Jennifer Griffin, and this is what Fox viewers heard:

GRIFFIN: So what did happen during the 2:00 a.m. raid into Azizabad? The Special Forces teams involved have been muzzled pending the new investigation, but FOX News cameramen Chris Jackson and Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North happened to be embedded [my bold] with the Marine Special Forces Unit involved in the raid. This is their video exclusive to FOX News. They witnessed the entire operation firsthand. (END VIDEOTAPE)

Fox's news show -- not Bill O'Reilly, but Brit Hume's "legitimate news program" -- continued to insist, based upon the "reporting" of "journalist" Oliver North and his cameraman, that the U.S. military's original claims were true, and the villagers and the U.N. were lying, even as the U.S. military itself was, in light of the ample evidence, severely backtracking on its story:

[...] "The [video] footage that is there on this shows horrendous pictures of these bodies and clearly identifies women and children. In some cases, the bodies are not in one piece," a U.N. official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "Whether you say it was 76 or 82 or even 92 -- it was clearly not seven who were killed there." Said a senior U.S. military official: "Whatever information [Gen. David D. McKiernan, the top NATO commander in Afghanistan] got that was shared by Afghan and U.N. representatives led him to believe there was good cause to want to look at all of this more deeply."

It is hardly uncommon for claims by the U.S. Government regarding the multiple countries in which our "War on Terror" is being waged to be vehemently disputed by a whole array of people. The only difference here is that video, other documentary evidence, and independent investigations have all emerged confirming the falsity of the U.S. Government's claims.
[...] Way beyond Fox, this is the same thing that our media generally (and with some important exceptions) has been doing for years, at least -- mindlessly repeating and confirming false Government claims. [my bold] That's what makes Carlotta Gall's on-scene actual investigation of the Pentagon's Afghanistan claims so notable -- it's so unusual. From Jessica Lynch's heroic Rambo-like firefight to Pat Tillman's murder by Al Qaeda monsters to pre-war claims of the Iraqi menace to post-war claims of Glorious Progress to current claims of the Grave Russian and Iranian Threats to the concealment and then justification of virtually every act of government radicalism over the last eight years, our media has, by and large, done what Fox News did in the Azizabad case -- offer itself up as an uncritical conduit for state propaganda.

And that's to say nothing of their more overt propagandistic activities -- the still-extraordinary fact that for the last seven years, virtually every American news program has employed as "independent analysts" people who were part of a formal, coordinated and likely illegal U.S. Government propaganda program run out of the Pentagon, a program which resulted in countless false stories broadcast by these networks to boost Government lies. And even after all of that was revealed and documented on the front page of the NYT, these media outlets -- all 3 networks, plus CNN and others -- continue to employ the propagandists, and worse, refuse even to tell their viewers about what happened, or even to disclose to their viewers the existence of the story, and then -- at best -- actually defend it all when forced on their obscure blogs to mention it.

* * * * *
There’s more. I urge you to read the full post: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/11/azizabad/

"Time Horizon" = Timetable!

Just because Mr. Bush's handlers creatively applied the term "time horizon" to keep his loyalists from taking the cyanide pills doesn't mean it isn't a plan for withdrawal. Obviously, Afghanistan, Pakistan and who knows what else are looming too large to ignore. Remember this was not reported on CNN. Thank you, Reuters!
Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan
Sat Jul 19, 2008
BERLIN (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.
In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible.
"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."
It is the first time he has backed the withdrawal timetable put forward by Obama, who is visiting Afghanistan and us set to go to Iraq as part of a tour of Europe and the Middle East.
[...] Whoever is thinking about the shorter term is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems."
Maliki, who is due to visit Germany this week, has suggested a timetable should be set for a U.S. withdrawal but U.S. officials have been more cautious, despite an improving security situation. The White House said on Friday President George W. Bush and Maliki had agreed that a security deal under negotiation should set a "time horizon" for meeting "aspirational goals" for reducing U.S. forces in Iraq.
"The Americans have found it difficult to agree on a concrete timetable for the exit because it seems like an admission of defeat to them. But it isn't," Maliki told Der Spiegel.
Some five years after the U.S.-led invasion, there are still some 146,000 U.S. soldiers in Iraq.
(Reporting by Madeline Chambers; Editing by Jon Boyle)
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSL198009020080719
So what will Obama do with the bases in Iraq? Does anyone believe he will turn them over to the Iraqis? If only! Click on the image to enlarge, then read Chalmers Johnson!

Tough Times Ahead for Italia

Cari amici, now it is up to you to bring some sense back to Italians and make Berlusconi listen to you! Turn off your TVs, go to the Internet for news, not Berlusconi's hysterical media which uses fear tactics worthy of FAUX News. Now they're going to convince you to send more troops to AFGHANISTAN? Will you buy it? I also have a very nice bridge, right nearby, very well known, and you might like to purchase it?
Bush to press Berlusconi on Iran and Afghanistan
Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:35pm EDT
By Matt Spetalnick and Stephen Brown
ROME (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush will urge Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi as an old ally on Thursday to take a tougher stand over Iran's nuclear program and expand Italy's military role in Afghanistan
[...] But beyond the smiles and handshakes, Bush will be looking for concrete signs that Berlusconi, whose previous government supported the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, is bringing Italy's foreign policy back closer in line with Washington's.
[...] Berlusconi's admiration for Bush runs counter to public sentiment in Europe where he is widely reviled for the Iraq war.
While Berlusconi and Pope Benedict prepared to roll out the red carpet for Bush over the next two days, about a thousand leftists and anti-war activists staged a peaceful protest in the centre of Rome after his arrival on Wednesday.
Bush's bid to ratchet up pressure on Iran over its nuclear program is expected to be high on the agenda with Berlusconi, as it has been since the start of his European trip on Monday.
[...] Italy, one of Iran's top foreign investors, could have an impact should the European Union carry out a threat to impose new measures on Tehran beyond existing U.N. sanctions if it keeps defying demands to stop uranium enrichment.
Washington had urged the centre-left government of Berlusconi's predecessor Romano Prodi to take a harder line with Italian companies doing business in Iran but to little avail.
Signalling a stronger stance, Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said in a television interview the "path of sanctions should be resumed more firmly than ever" if Tehran rejected a revised incentives package it would soon be offered.
Bush wants a firmer commitment from Berlusconi to the war effort in Afghanistan. He has pressed NATO allies, so far with limited results, to increase troop levels and lift bans on deployment of forces to places where fighting is fiercest.
Italy has about 2,700 troops in Afghanistan, mostly off the front lines.
Defense Minister Ignazio La Russa told a parliamentary hearing on Wednesday he had agreed to a "limited" deployment of Italian troops to combat zones.
[...] Bush's critics say he has been so distracted by Iraq that he has neglected the Afghan war. The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was opposed by Germany and France and sowed division in Europe, but bitterness has gradually subsided.[...]
http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GCA-iraq/idUSL1157145920080612

NYC Lawyers for May Day

NYCLAW Support for ILWU May Day
Antiwar Work Stoppage
NYCLAW salutes:
The ILWU's Pacific Coast May Day
Shutdown to Stop the War in Iraq and Afghanistan By New York City Labor Against the War (NYCLAW)
It will take a mutiny to end this war. The ILWU has a proud tradition of work stoppages to protest South African apartheid and U.S. death squads in Central America. Your May Day action shows how workers -- both in and out of uniform -- have the collective power to end this war, bring the troops home now, and get the U.S. out of the Middle East.
From the beginning, Bush & Co. have sought to justify this war for oil and empire with phony claims about "fighting terrorism," finding "weapons of mass destruction," and spreading "democracy." Despite overwhelming rejection of its policies at the polls, the administration has steadily escalated its war in the Middle East.
This has meant not only ordering thousands more troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, but also arming and financing Israel's war on Lebanon and its increasingly brutal slow-genocide of the Palestinians, launching a proxy invasion of Somalia, bombing Pakistan, and threatening to attack Iran.
As in all such wars, ordinary working people pay the price. In Iraq and Afghanistan, this war has killed more than a million people, caused more than 50,000 G.I. casualties, promoted civil war, cost at least $1.2 trillion and pushed the economy into crisis — with no end in sight.
At home, the administration continues to attack civil liberties, the Arab-Muslim community, undocumented immigrants, Katrina refugees, people of color and labor.
Yet this is a bipartisan war. Congressional Democrats -- including senators Clinton and Obama -- have given Bush every penny he has asked for. They have refused to filibuster war spending (which requires only 41 Senate votes) and won't even promise to get out by the end of the next presidential term in 2013. At most, they call for "redeployment" to maintain U.S. control of the region.
A generation ago, a war ended when Vietnamese resistance and the Black freedom movement ignited a grassroots working class mutiny in the military, auto plants, ghettos and barrios, against what Martin Luther King Jr. accurately called "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today . . . my own government."
It will take a similar mutiny to end this war. The ILWU has a proud tradition of work stoppages to protest South African apartheid and U.S. death squads in Central America. Your May Day action shows how workers -- both in and out of uniform -- have the collective power to end this war, bring the troops home now, and get the U.S. out of the Middle East.
Issued by NYCLAW Co-Conveners
(Other affiliations listed for identification only): Larry Adams, Former President, NPMHU Local 300, Michael Letwin, Former President, UAW Local 2325/Assn. of Legal Aid Attorneys, Brenda Stokely, Former President, AFSCME DC 1707; N.E. Regional Coordinator, Million, Worker March Movement
By New York City Labor Against the War (NYCLAW) nyclaw01@gmail.com

http://nyc.indymedia.org/en/2008/04/96527.html

Support Our Troops, For REAL

Jumping into the elevator to get back to my desk after lunch I read on the elevator news that Petraeus wants more troops in Afghanistan. Where will the bodies come from to fill these boots? The added incentives of bonuses for recruiters will create more lies, which will disenfranchise more young people from “politics” and on and on. At least the Vets for America is on the case:

Dear Friend:
Today, Veterans for America will deliver two new critical reports to every Member of Congress in anticipation of General Petraeus testifying next week in Washington.
As a supporter of Veterans for America, and we very much appreciate your help, I wanted to make sure you had a copy of these reports today, just as they are being released.
These two new reports--"The Consequences Of Churning" and "Weekend Warriors To Frontline Soldiers" -- make one thing absolutely clear: we must say no if General Petraeus suggests we stop the withdrawals of troops from Iraq. The consequences of our deployment policies are simply catastrophic and stopping withdrawals will only make it worse
Deployments now last 15 months instead of 12, and where once the Army provided two days at home for every one away, that ratio is now less than one day at home for every day served overseas. Four of the Army's Brigade Combat Teams (BCT's) have been deployed four times, 10 have been deployed three times, and almost all at least twice. Defense Department reports prove that a Soldier's likelihood of developing severe post-combat mental health problems leap 60% with each deployment.
The burden on our National Guard is also great - as it was designed primarily for domestic missions, not as an operational reserve for the most-heavily deployed elements of the active-duty Army. Nearly 200,000 members of the Army National Guard have been deployed to Iraq and/or Afghanistan - about half of whom already have post-combat mental health problems, a rate 29% higher than their active-duty counterparts.
These new reports are part of our Wounded Warrior Outreach Program - a program we have launched to give our troops a voice. We have visited bases around the country and we will continue to do so - but for those efforts, we need your help.
PLEASE SUPPORT OUR WOUNDED WARRIOR OUTREACH PROGRAM - PLEASE GIVE WHAT YOU CAN.
http://www.veteransforamerica.org/woundedwarrior/