David Zeiger

This is an open letter from David Zeiger (ha! -- on spelling, I'll come back to that) who directed
Sir! No Sir!:

The letter below is a response I wrote to Michael Moore's piece on Bernard Madoff that was in Time Magazine's "2009 Time 100" issue. It's followed by his article.You can also read the entire exchange in The Rag Blog.
For the first time, I am breaking my own rule against sending you anything that is not directly related to GI resistance, and I apologize for that. But hey, it's my web site, right? And I won't do it again, I promise.
But before that, here are three items that are indeed about GI resistance:The U.S. Justice Department has dropped its case against LT. Ehren Watada. How the Army will proceed is still not decided. Read about it at The Seattle Times.
SPC Victor Agosto, facing a stop-loss tour of Afghanistan, has announced "There is no way I will deploy to Afghanistan. The occupation is immoral and unjust." Read his story in The Rag Blog.
Coming soon:
In Association with Iraq Veterans Against the War
This is Where We Take Our Stand
The new Web Series based on the
2006 Winter Soldier: Iraq/Afghanistan Investigation
Stay Tuned...

And now, An Open Letter to Michael Moore:

Dear Mike,

I read with much interest your piece "Bernie Madoff, Scapegoat" for Time Magazine. While I welcomed your main premise-that Madoff is a scapegoat and not more than a scab on the open, puss-filled, legal wound called the "American Financial System"-I was stunned to see you take a broad, uninformed swipe at everyone who invested money with Madoff. You say he "stole $65 billion from some already quite wealthy people," referring to his victims as his "own kind." Then you go on to make the incredible claim that most of these supposedly very rich people knew full well (or at least suspected) that they were part of a fraud and, essentially, hoped it would just go on forever. So they should stop their whining and just give all their stolen luchre back.

That's quite an argument. Let me say first of all, for full disclosure, that most of my family was among those supposedly "already quite wealthy people" who lost everything to Madoff. In our case, it was Stan Chais, one of his top "feeders," who gave over all of our life savings to him. But somehow I don't quite see us fitting your definition of people on his "side of the tracks," as you so casually claim. Yes, like the vast majority of the thousands of Madoff's investors, we weren't poor. Far from it. My father was a businessman who manufactured parts for airplanes and did quite well with his small company that he started in the fifties (as I always joked, he was the white man for the white time). He was a lifelong progressive liberal, who took great pride in hiring blacklisted writer friends in the fifties, fighting against the Vietnam War in the sixties, and leading the campaign for Pete Seeger to receive the Kennedy Center Honor in the nineties.

And yes, back in the late eighties he quite willingly joined Stan Chais's "investment" group-seeking stability and good, not massive, profits. And that's what he got for over twenty years, in the hands of a man who he, a smart businessman, trusted completely. And he brought all of his family and many of his friends into the fold because it was just too good to pass up. That included school teachers, artists, writers, doctors, lawyers, and one struggling documentary filmmaker (you remember what that was like). Maybe not the salt of the earth, but a far cry from the "one percenters" you have thrown us in with.

And if you go to the New York Times web site, you will find the letters from several hundred of Madoff's victims to the judge hearing the case-all with very similar stories, often with quite progressive backgrounds, mostly elderly people who had invested all of their retirement savings with him, many now penniless.

But, you claim, it should have been obvious to all of these supposedly intelligent people that the interest they were receiving was impossibly high and they were part of a fraud. Why, according to you, "Some have admitted they did have an inkling 'something was up.'" But you fail to mention that the people who didn't have an inkling "something was up" were the very ones most "intelligent" people look to for guidance-the SEC, who as recently as 2006 was telling the world that Madoff was right as rain despite the compelling evidence that they alone were privy to. Blaming Madoff's victims for not seeing what was being denied by every available source is absurd.

But whether they knew or not, if they took any money out they should give it back, right? "If I buy a stolen car from the guy down the street, the police will take that car from me regardless of whether I knew it was stolen." That's logical, but what if that guy was in my garage stealing my other car at the same time? That's how Ponzi schemes work, and the relatively few who made huge profits from it don't negate that reality.

Let's be honest and take your argument a step further. Hundreds of thousands of people over the last 20 years were conned into buying homes with sub-prime mortgages, all of which were pumped up and turned into massive boondoggles by the schemes called derivatives and credit default swaps (which make Madoff look like a rank amateur). They were, in essence, built on stolen "profits." So now should the people who bought those houses be made to give them back? You know full well that there are those making that argument, and in fact thousands are today being forced out of their houses by foreclosure. Are they getting their just desserts?

Of course you would never say that, but what's the difference here? Yes, there is an economic gap between people who invested with Madoff and people who bought houses with sub-prime mortgages, but the con is essentially the same, is it not?

Here's a thought: Given the quite liberal bent of many of Madoff's investors, I'd be willing to bet the little money I have left that somewhere, somehow, funds that had gone through Bernie's hands and came out bigger helped finance one of your films. I'm not being facetious here. I'm a big fan. But as you so cogently point out, in the Alice in Wonderland world of American finance the veil between "legal" and illegal is infinitely porous. And after all, if you buy a stolen car - well, you know.

In hindsight, every argument my father made in defense of this fund was glaringly and horrendously wrong. But that's easy to say now. I think I'm a pretty smart guy, and I wasn't even the one who got us into this thing, but even after Madoff was exposed I was still arguing it was impossible for Stan Chais to be part of such a scheme. My blinders were no smaller than my dad's, but by what twisted logic does gullibility put us on Madoff's "side of the tracks?"

Yes, many of us "benefited"-for a while and to varying degrees-from this scheme (that is, before losing everything). But putting us up there with the heads of Goldman Sachs and Bank of America? Please!

Yours in the spirit of healthy debate,
David Zeiger

P.S. I am producing a film about my family's situation, titled Ponzi & Me (catchy title, don't you think?). If you would like to invest in it, I can guarantee a return of 15-20%.


Great letter, no? On his name, I can never spell it right. I before e except after c . . .

But I spelled it right this time. And why?

C.I. had the boys bedroom decorated just for them. Let me back up. While I'm working in California for a year (job transfer), we're all staying at C.I.'s (and we all say thank you). So if you're late to the party, you're all caught up. My daughter had her own room even though I said, "Forget it, she'll be in bed with me every night." And she is. (She is also the baby.) So the boys room has all these posters and the boys love it and one is the Sir! No Sir! movie poster. My oldest was mature enough to see the film some time ago (I think right when it came out on DVD I let him see it but he'd seen it when we were visiting out here and it was playing). And he loved it and talked to his younger brother about it over and over. I didn't think he was mature enough for it until last November.

So they loved it and C.I. knew it and had one of the posters put up in their room. My daughter decided we needed in one in "our room." I told her we had pretty paintings (and we do) but she was insistent that we have one. So we do and I just have to look at the film poster to know how to spell David Zieger's last name or to find the website for Sir! No Sir!

And I have to go because I promised my son (oldest) we would watch the season finale of Fringe. (Time stamp is EST. I'm on the west coast these days.) I told him we'd have snacks and make a big thing out of it.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, May 12, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Steven D. Green's sentencing for War Crimes continues, Sgt John M. Russell is identified as the shooter of five Iraqi soldiers yesterday, Tina Richards speaks truth to power (and to Prescod) and more.

Steven D. Green, convicted last Thursday in the gang-rape of 14-year-old Iraqi Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, her murder, the murder of her five-year-old sister and the murders of both of her parents. His sentence hearing is ongoing. Today Evan Bright reports the defense put Dr. Ruben Gur on the stand: "Got one hell of a biology lesson on the brain and its functions from Dr. Ruben Gur of UPenn. 'Green acts on impulses and does as he's told'." And that Greg Simolke, Green's uncle, testified. Brett Barrouquere (AP) reports, "Gur told jurors that Green likely suffered closed head injuries." Evan Bright reports of yesterday's hearing:

And so it began. Marisa Ford of the prosecution opened up by speaking about murdering children and how terrified Abeer Al-Janabi must have been before she was killed. "The murder of a child is an unspeakable act, especially an innocent child, which all children are. Abeer's last moments must have been filled with terror as she was raped while her parents and little sister were shot in the room next door. And then, by one of the men who was sent there to protect them, she was murdered." Lots of legal jargon made it's way into the opening statements. Marisa Ford reminded the jury that they are encouraged and in fact, required to reconsider the evidence which was heard in the guilty phase of the trial. She spoke of imposing the death penalty, and how doing so requires that they, the jury, by law, must outline and note the aggravating circumstances, especially in the death of Abeer, which according to Ford was committed in an "especially heinous, cruel, and depraved manner." She repeated how the four soldiers committed the crime on March 12th, 2006, and reiterated how they agreed on the plan, changed clothes, "brought weapons and took tools to complete their mission," and how they worked to cover up the evidence. She told the jury how they would hear of the impact on the victims, and how the Al-Janabi family was like many families from both Iraq and "right here in Paducah, Kentucky." She ended her opening by elaborating on a quote from Winston Churchill: "All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." Ford defiantly expressed, "The defendant Steven Dale Green failed to live up to his duty, he didn't show mercy to Abeer, he took away the two remaining brother's hope for a normal life, he doesn't deserve mercy."

Last night, Ruth summarized the AP reporting on yesterday's hearing:The Associated Press' Brett Barrouquere reports that today's sentence hearing for Steven D. Green included testimony from members of Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi's family. He reports that cousin Abu Farras stated Abeer's brothers Mohammed and Ahmed no longer attend school because the killing of their two sisters and parents "destroyed their future. I'm sure if they died with their family it would be better for them." Mohammed is the older of the two brothers and he told the jury of "how his father taught him to ride a bike". Bright's reports that Abeer's aunt also testified and "spoke of having a good relationship with Qassim" (Abeer's father): "What I say about him ... isn't enough. He cared for all our family." The aunt said of Abeer, "She was proud of being young, and she was proud of the freedom her father gave her. She was spoiled, her father never suppressed her." Dave Alsup (CNN) notes, " Green might become the first former U.S. soldier to face the death penalty for war crimes before a civilian court. The reason for the distinction: Green was discharged from the military before his crimes came to light." Meanwhile the Daily 49er editorializes that "War is turning Americans into what we despise most:"The second incident is a clear-cut case of unjustifiable brutality. Last week, former Army Pfc. Steven Dale Green was found guilty of raping and murdering a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and killing her family. He now faces either death of life in prison.According to the AP, Green's defense team had asked jurors to consider the "context" of war, saying "soldiers in Green's unit … lacked leadership." Defense attorneys also said the Army missed signs that Green was struggling after the loss of friends in combat, and offered little help to him and other members of his unit.It is right that Green be punished, but there is little doubt his vicious acts were at least provoked by the horrors of war. If that's the case, why is he getting the book thrown at him while Ayala is receiving only probation?

Yesterday, a US soldier shot five others in Baghdad. Ernesto London (Washington Post) reported this morning that Sgt John M. Russell is the soldier who shot the five. The story actually caused the networks to snap to attention last night. ABC's ABC World News Tonight did the best job (click here for Martha Raddatz and Luis Martinez' text report and the video -- video is of the report aired on World News Tonight).Charlie Gibson: There was a tragic incident in Iraq today that is a stark reminder that while the demands on US forces in Iraq may be diminishing, the mental stress on service members remains high. A soldier this afternoon opened fire in a clinic in Baghdad that was treating military personnel for stress and suicide prevention. 5 American soldiers were killed, four others wounded including the shooter who is in custody. It was the worst case of soldier on soldier violence since this war began. ABC's Martha Raddatz, with us now. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: This is the entrance into our facility in Camp Liberty. Martha Raddatz: It was just days ago that Lt Col Beth Salisbury showed ABC News the very same combat stress control center where today's horrific shooting took place. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: They will sign in at our front desk. They'll be greeted by our staff here. Martha Raddatz: Salisbury, who runs the center, was not hurt but of the dead, two were on her clinical staff and three were soldiers waiting for treatment. The shooter, who officials say is a Sgt on his third deployment to Iraq, went on a rampage down these hallways and offices in one of the few places where those who were attacked would not have been armed. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: Their weapons are taken for safety and we secure those here for the safety of our staff and themselves. Martha Raddatz: The Sgt being held for the murders is married and based in Germany. ABC News has learned he had been having problems during his deployment. Initial indications are that he did not seek mental health treatment voluntarily but that his unit had referred him for care. It is unclear whether he had yet received treatment. Col Salisbury said recently soldiers are encouraged to look for signs of stress in others. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: The great thing is to have a leader bring in a soldier, come in -- leadership staff -- come in and ask us how that we can help them take care of their soldiers. Martha Raddatz: These centers are part of the response to a dramatic spike in army suicides a record 143 in the last year. Today the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said the shooting will be investigated to see if the stress of multiple and frequent deployments contributed to it. Adm Mike Mullen: It speaks to the issue of--of multiple deployments, you know , increasing dwell time, all those things that we're focused on to try to improve to relieve that stress. Martha Raddatz: It can't be understated what a terrible blow to any unit this is when soldiers are killed by fellow soldiers, especially soldiers who were trying to help others. Charlie?
On yesterday's Free Speech Radio News, Aaron Glantz reported on the story

Aaron Glantz: "Veterans advocates say the details of the incident will be critical in assessing whether the killings could have been prevented. Paul Sullivan is Executive Director of Veterans for Common Sense.

Paul Sullivan: We need to know if this soldier was examined by a physician before or after deployment and if any mental health symptons were observed. We know from repeated Congressional investigations and hearings that the military has knowingly sent soldiers back with physical and mentalh health diagnosis and severe symptoms back to the war zone in some of those case the service members killed themselves or others.
Today Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) quotes Maj Gen David Perkins stating of Russell, "The commander of the suspect had taken his weapon away. He had been referred to counseling a week beforehand. There was a concern that he should not have a weapon." Corinne Reilly (McClatchy Newspapers) explains he's been charged "with five counts of murder and one count of aggravated assault" and that "Two of the victims worked at the clinic, Perkins said. Both were officers, one in the Army and one in the Navy. The three other victims were enlisted soldiers." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) observes, "Confiscating the weapon of a noncommissioned officer in charge of other soldiers would be an extremely serious step. Russell, from Sherman, Texas, has served previous deployments in Bosnia and Kosovo. . . . Perkins said the sergeant, whom he said had been deployed to Iraq 'at least two other times' had been referred to counseling about a week before the shooting. He was being treated as an outpatient and it was not known whether he had been prescribed medication." Jenny Booth (Times of London) notes Russell "was due to leave Iraq soon" and a difference between the story out of Iraq that Russell got a hold of gun in the clinic and the story out of DC that that Russell left the clinic and returned with a weapon. CNN explains the timeline this way, "A defense official said that Russell was escorted out of the stress clinic Monday by a fellow soldier. Russell and that soldier apparently struggled over the soldier's weapon in a vehicle after they began to drive away, the official said. Russell then walked back to the clinic, the official said, after apparently obtaining the weapon." CNN quotes Perkins decrying the speculation. The entire last 24 hours have been speculation including retired Col Jack Jacobs, now a military propagandist, who told Brian Williams on NBC Nightly News yesterday (Click here for video page, here for transcript) that the problem was too much time on your hands -- a ridiculous assertion unless you know Jacobs has been opposed to increasing dwell time between deployments. "Speculation does not serve us well or rumor," insisted Perkins . . . while CNN notes that the clinic has been closed at least briefly. Gee, a stress clinic closed. How well does that serve? Especially after the shooting?

Veterans for Peace's Mike Wong explained this morning on KPFK's Sojourner Truth:

Well we don't know the exact circumstances In this particular incident so it's hard to comment on this particular incident other than -- other than the obvious observation that a lot of troops have been doing multiple tours, third, fourth and, in some cases, fifth tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan and they're under a lot of stress. There's a lot of really bad things that have happened in the war including torture, atrocities, accidental shootings, deliberate shootings of civilians. There's been a lot of dissent within the army. There was a poll taken back in, I think it was '06 when 72% of the troops in Iraq said that they disagreed with the war. In talking to soldiers today, I find that if anything that percentage has risen. So there are a lot of troops who are unhappy with the situation, unhappy with the war, being deployed and redeployed, they are under a great deal of stress and dissent is growing. Iraq Veterans Against the War started several years ago with about seven members and they have grown to the point where they now have many hundreds of members approching thousands probably and they have chapters clear across the country. They have chapters in Europe, they have a chapter in Canada and they have soldiers blogging against the war from Iraq. So dissent within the military is growing and if you see the movie Sir! No Sir! you'll see how it grew within the military during the Vietnam War. And you had people fragging their officers, throwing fragmentation grenades into their bunkers. You had people shooting their own officers.

Cloy Richards mother, Tina Richards was also on the broadcast.

Tina Richards: My oldest son is a Marine who did two tours in Iraq, came back with traumatic brain injury and severe Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. And he was actually out, he was honorably discharged and they stop-lossed him and they were going to send him back for his third tour and he literally told me that he would kill himself before he was going to go back and participate in an illegal and immoral war in Iraq. And I went to Capitol Hill and I stopped it but my other son who did a tour in Iraq and he suffers from PTSD and it took years to finally convince him to seek help. He's in the army right now and he's facing a second deployment in June and he got help went through the PTSD clinic in the army. They told him he was perfectly fine and ready to be deployed and two days later he beat his wife, he was thrown in jail and my son never would have struck a woman. And the DA dropped the charges so that he could be deployed. So still facing this deployment when he's obviously suffering severe PTSD is just insane. This soldier that did this [yesterday's shooting] he was on his, finishing up his third tour over in Iraq and he was, obviously, he needed help. And often when they're in the field and they report stress or that they're in trouble, they're given a handful of pills and they're sent back out onto the battlefield. I've talked to hundreds of soldiers that that's their exact experience when they report that they're having problems processing what they're doing over there.

Steve Mraz (Stars and Stripes) adds, "The alleged shooter fits the Army's profile of troops who are more vulnerable to mental health problems when deployed. Noncomissioned officers on their third and fourth deployments are more than twice as likely to have mental health problems as NCOs serving on their first deployment, according to the latest Army report on the mental health of deployed soldiers."

In Iraq, water is an issue for Iraqis and US service members. Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) reports an action by the Parliament which attempts to force Iran, Syria and Turkey to share the water resources and, if that doesn't happen, "lawmakers agreed to block any treaty or agreement signed with the three nations that does not include a clause granting Iraq a fairer share of water resources." This as CBS' Houston affiliate KHOU reports "that some soldiers were forced to ration water, perhaps as little as 2-3 liters per day, because there was never enough"

Turning to today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report two Baghdad roadside bombings which left six injured, a Diyala Province roadside bombing left six Iraqi soldiers injured, a Kirkuk car bombing claimed the lives of 6 police officers and left twelve people injured and a Mosul roadside bombing left one person injured.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report the corpse of 13-year-old girl was discovered in Diyala Province today -- two days after she'd been kidnapped. Yesterday, the corpse of a 5-year-old boy turned up in Baghdad. He'd been kidnapped as well (and a ransom demand issued). The kidnappings never stopped.

Returning to KPFK's Sojourner Truth to note several things.

Eric Gjertsen: Yes, well, these kinds of things, I mean they've been going on under the radar of the media for years now. But now it's become mainstream. As you said the rate of suicides, the level of PTSD and brain damage of soldiers who are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The fact, the fact that it's mainstream news that US officials were responsible for torture policies -- these are all things that we have to recognize are victories of the anti-war movement and that they only became mainstream because there were soldiers and families of soldiers and survivors who spoke out and refused and blew the whistle and that there was a movement there to support them and so one of our aims in publishing the Refusing to Kill website is to circulate this news about refusers in different countries internationally and really to build this movement to end the war.


Lt Ehren Watada is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy in the illegal war. He went public in June of 2006 after working for months (as his superiors requested) with the military to attempt to work out some thing other than deployment to Iraq (he'd offered, for example, to deploy to Afghanistan). If you can hold your nose or just ignoring Margret Prescod's whoring for Barack, KPFK's Sojourner Truth spoke with Ken Kagan. Did you know we don't have a US Justice Dept, we have an "Obama Justice Department"? In the Cult of Saint Barack, that's what they have. Poor Ken Kagan, forgot to say "Barack Justice Dept" and forgot to make Barack the AG and the Solicitor General (Elana Kagan). Margret needs to take her multiple orgasms off the air. If she can't, between gasps can she explain how her Lord and Savior Barack 'rescued' Ehren only partially?

Ken Kagan: In addition, he was also on trial for two charges they referred to as "conduct unbecoming an officer" and that related to statements he made in press interviews critical of the war, critical of the president for bringing us into war under false premises and indicating that the commission of war crimes would be taking place by anyone who participated in a war of aggression.

Those are the charges that were unaffected by Elana Kagan's decision not to pursue the three charges that US District Judge Benjamin Settle has already ruled were over due to the Constitution's barring double-jeopardy. The two charges remain up in the air. Why can he still be charged with those? Kagan stated that two charges were set aside. He told Prescod that it's not Ehren's fault that the trial ended in a mistrial. And that due process should have allowed the charges to be dismissed. Prescod offered that the other side is that those charges weren't brought before the jury and so those charges haven't been pursued yet. Not stated was that the charges weren't just set aside and this all goes to the stipulation.

Sarah Olson and Dahr Jamail were being asked to testify. Dahr didn't whine. Dahr didn't try to make it about him. Sarah? Norman Solomon's 'protegee' made it all about herself. She went all over the place whining, "Stop them! They're trying to make me testify!" Would she testify? She didn't know, she didn't want to talk about her legal strategy. Norman hand-held with her on Flashpoints in one of her less hysterical interviews. Norman got all of his friends to write bad columns in defense of Sarah (Phil Donahue had no clue what Ehren had done or had not done but he wrote a column about Sarah). As Panhandle Media's circus continued, Ehren agreed to a stipulation -- drawn up and approved by both the prosecution and the defense and overseen by the judge (Judge Toilet, John Head). He was not going to dispute any comments in the press. That left Sarah Olson off the hook and her 'gratitude' was so immense that she waited a few months before trashing him publicly.

Should Ehren be tried on those charges (which each could carry a year sentence), he'd be punished for trying to be a nice guy and also doing the country a favor by getting whiny Sarah Olson off any and every open mike.

Kagan was upset by some who have called Ehren a pacifist. Who? Maybe one of Norman's friends, it certainly described Phil's column. Mike Wong (Vietnam era objector) joined the group and noted the lobbying effort that took place with people phoning and e-mailing Elana Kagan asking that the charges against Ehren be dropped. (Margret didn't have much interest in that but it doesn't allow her to sing "Glory, glory, Lord Obama, glory, glory . . .") Mike Wong talked about things that took place in Vietnam and the shocker there, as he spoke of it ("In Vietnam, entire units would go out on patrol and instead of patrolling as they were supposed to, they would just go out in the bush a short distance"), was how little anyone's paid attention. (Hint, the New York Times reported on that in Iraq in an article no one seems to have ever noticed.)

Ken Kagan: Well the army has to make a decision and they have to make it soon about whether they are really going to try to proceed against Lt Watada on the two remaining criminal charges. It obviously is in their interest, time is on their side. They can wait -- they think they can wait as long as they want to but there's actually a clock ticking on the speed with which they have to proceed once they're free to do so. Which is now. And so we would urge them to make a decision quickly and we're working on that quietly behind the scenes to point out to them why it is that they have to make a decision quickly. We kind of -- We would like to be able to bring this matter before a court so that we can lay out our case for why those two remaining charges should be dismissed If they are there would then be no discipline pending against Lt Watada and, if he wished, he could resign from the army, resign honorably his commission. But he's not able to do so now. The army will not accept his resignation while there is discipline pending.

If Margret Prescod's Cult of St. Barack babbles get on your nerves, be sure not to miss the moment when Tina Richard put some real truth onto the program.

Tina Richards: I'd like to actually focus on one thing really quick. Jeremy Scahill recently wrote about this. I'd like one quote from him, that "by September of this year, Obama will have sent more troops into combat than Bush" We, as military families, we feel this. We see the rest of the numbers going down in protests and peace activities because everyone kind of feels like, well, they did their job, they voted Obama in, and the job is over and everything is winding down. It's not winding down. We are getting increased deployments. We are -- you know, the processes that led us to this are actually being accelerated under Obama and I just really want to emphasize as a military family that we really need your help and support out there when we have these events like on Sunday or Winter Soldier on Saturday we need people to attend and listen to our stories because things are actually ramping up in these wars especially with the drone attacks and the destabilization and what's happening in Pakistan. It's only going to get worse, not better. We have a lot of work to do.

Margret's snippy little reply? "You'll have the opportunity to give your website out in a minute." Me-ow, Maggie The Cat, Me-ow.

iraq
evan brightsteven d. green
brett barrouquere
cnndave alsup
the daily 49er
the washington posternesto londonoabc world news tonightmartha raddatzabc news
nbc nightly newsbrian williams
the los angeles timesliz sly
jane arraf
aaron glantz
ehren watada
kpfk
sojourner truth
margaret prescod
tina richards
jeremy scahill

Friday

"Cherie Welch go FUCK YOURSELF" went up this evening. Ruth posted it. Ruth does not curse. Ruth is furious. I am as well.

We have been very kind to Danny Schechter. For those who do not know, the alleged News Dissector refused to call out any sexism and even contributed to the sexism in the Democratic Party primaries.

He has since begun writing (when he writes it himself) like a stark raving idiot. He is so stupid he really thinks Frank Rich is a good columnist, that Frank Rich plays it straight. He pretends that Maureen Dowd does as well. He reads those liars (exposed by Bob Somerby as liars repeatedly) and he grooves on MSNBC (the failed networks whose ratings have only sunk more) and he just lets all the hate well up inside him and then writes his garbage that is (a) badly written and (b) so hate filled it begs for psychiatric help.

Once upon a time, he pretended like he was a reasoned and reasonable person. That was obviously a pretense and it has now become equally obvious why he lost his network career. He writes like a raving lunatic.

And we laugh about it. Out of respect for C.I., we try to keep it limited to the community newsletters.

But he writes like a lunatic.

Ava and C.I. have had to leave him in their hardcopy commentaries and pull him out when they type it up. He is the idiot they were referring to last Sunday ("TV: Don't Lie To Me") who ditched John Pilger to keep his lips wrapped around Barack's knob. He is the one who managed 100 or so mentions of John Pilger, links to his work, since 2000 but, since John Pilger told the truth about Barack in 2008, he's only popped up twice.

Do you get that? Do you get that Pilger got over ten mentions a year until Danny couldn't stomach Pilger telling the truth?

Do you know that John Pilger regularly plugs Danny's bad work? He does, around the world Pilger plugs Danny's work.

But Danny's not interested in being independent, he's interested in whoring and when you're a fat whore, you have to whore twice as hard to pull in a few bucks.

So Danny non-stop whores for Barack.

It's why Chris Hedges disappeared from being mentioned by Danny. Chris Hedges too refused to drink the Kool-Aid.

And a whore like Danny is all about stabbing people in the back. He's got whore it for Barack. And he'll stab anyone and everyone in the back. He'll pretend like Frank Rich -- the bad drama critic -- knows what he's writing about when Frank Rich repeatedly lies, repeatedly 'bends' the truth.

But Danny's high on whoring.

He's got whore cause that's all he has left.

He's trashed his name, he's ruined his image. He's nothing but a whore.

If you missed it, supreme Kool-Aid drinker Dave Lindorff is now calling Barry O out regularly.

What happens next?

More and more people wake up.

More and more people realize there is nothing natural or desirable about worshipping any US president.

And when that happens, the whorehouse Danny's been peddling it in shuts down.

Danny can take the street then.

I don't know.

I don't care.

Not after that bulls**t e-mail his little assistant sent Ruth.

I may start lobbying for Danny to lose his little blogging award just announced. He shouldn't be getting it. He's not given billing to Cherie who's been doing a lot of writing as Danny as News Dissector.

Okay, this is from a World Can't Wait e-mail sent out by Debra Sweet:

Tuesday, the Department of Justice made public a report, written in November, recommending no prosecutions against the torture memo authors.
This is an outrage, not unsurprising, given Barack Obama's statements of support for the CIA agents who did the torture, and his contention that even investigations of the torture would amount to "retribution."
Vince Warren of the Center for Constitutional Rights said, "We represent people who were tortured as a result of these criminal policies: calling what was done to them a mere 'lapse in judgment' is outrageous," Warren said. "Government officials broke laws and then tried to create legal justifications for breaking the law-since when do we decide whether to prosecute crimes based on political expediency?"
The report called for professional sanctions against Jay Bybee, now a federal judge, and John Yoo, the UC Berkeley law professor. Both wrote and signed the memos. It's worth another read to appreciate the criminality in minutely detailing the torture of individual human beings.
An Associated Press story Tuesday, Bush attorneys who wrote terror memo face backlash, covered the movement which World Can't Wait is a part of:
"Pressure is mounting against two former Bush administration attorneys who wrote the legal memos used to support harsh interrogation techniques that critics say constituted torture. John Yoo, a constitutional law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is fighting calls for disbarment and dismissal, while Judge Jay Bybee of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals faces calls for impeachment. Justice Department investigators have stopped short of recommending criminal charges, but suggest in a draft report that the two men should face professional sanctions. A number of groups across the country agree...In December, the Berkeley City Council, known for wading into politically charged national and international issues, passed a measure urging the federal government to prosecute Yoo for war crimes. Human rights and anti-war activists are planning a demonstration at the Berkeley School of Law's May 16 commencement ceremony to press for Yoo to be fired.
"It's unconscionable that the legal architect of the torture apparatus is teaching the future generation of lawyers and judges at UC Berkeley," said Stephanie Tang, an organizers with the group World Can't Wait."
Today's Daily Californian (UC Berkeley) says, "Yoo, who authored memos supporting the legality of techniques such as waterboarding and sleep deprivation, may be disbarred if the State Bar of California acts on the report, said Susan Gluss, spokesperson for Boalt Hall School of Law. The report, which will be published this summer, may affect his Boalt tenure."
And, from Stephanie Tang,"We think that the dean is wrong, that academic freedom does not protect the construction of the legal green light for the Bush administration to carry out torture."
Read and DIGG Jill McLaughlin: Obama Won't, But We Can Prosecute War Criminals.
Survey Results: The results of the first 600 responses to World Can't Wait's survey "What do the Torture Memos Mean?" showed that 90+% of you want prosecutions. I'll be printing some of the in-depth responses you gave to why there isn't more visible outrage against the war crimes and torture, and how to bring more it out.

Have I even mentioned torture this week? Probably not.

I was focused on the War Crimes trial of Steven D. Green. I was crying when I wrote last night's post, by the way. Which is why it was so brief. My youngest son (my middle child) walked in and asked me why I was crying and I said, "Let me post this and I'll explain."

And I did. We'd talked about the case before. Not in huge depth. We'd talked about how he did things that were wrong. But he's really too young for a discussion about rape. So I stuck with "touching her wrongly." My children know that no one touches them. That's something I drilled into them early on. No one touches you and if they do and they say they'll hurt you or me if you tell, just say "okay" and come tell me. That's what I told them when they were very little. I told them that the people would be lying to scare them and that they just needed to tell me.

So he knows what is inappropriate and he already knew Abeer was a little girl (14 years old) and had been murdered. So we talked about her for a long time last night and he just kept asking why anyone would want to hurt a little kid? I told him the fact that he asked that question went to how he knows it's wrong and that made me very proud.

Steven D. Green obviously never worried too much about whether it was right or wrong.

He gets sentenced on Monday.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, May 8, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, US troops continuing shipping out to Iraq, some cover the War Crimes conviction, some stay silent, Diane Rehm bans female callers from the second hour of her show today out of fear that one will bring up Abeer, Odierno holds a press conference, and more.

Yesterday the jury issued a verdict in the War Crimes trial of Steven D. Green. Last night on The KPFA Evening News, the events were summed up as follows:


Andea Lewis: A jury convicted a former soldier today of raping and fatally shooting a 14 year old girl after kiling her parents and younger sister while he wsa serving in Iraq. PFC Steven Dale Green faces a possible death sentence when the penalty phase of his trial begins on Monday. Green, aged 24 from Midland Texas, was being tried in civilian court because he had been discharged from the army for personaltiy disorder before he was charged with the Iraq crimes. Green stared straight ahead as the verdict was read in U S District Court in western Kentucky efense attroney Darren Wolff speaking afterward said the defense never denied Green's involvement. "Is this verdict a surprise to us? No. The goal has been to save our client's life," Wolff said Green's defense team had asked jurors the context of war saying soldiers in Green's unit of 101st lacked leadership and received little help from the army deal with the loss of friends in combat. The prosecution rested six days into the trial after presenting witnesses who said Green confessed to the crimes and others who put him at the home of the 14 year old Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, heard him shoot her family and saw him rape and shoot the girl. Three other soldiers are serving time in military prison for their roles in the attack and they all testified against Green at his trial.

Alsumaria explains, "A high panel court found Steve Green guilty for 16 counts while a death sentence is still to be decided in trial which will start on Monday." Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) adds, "Prosecutors say Green was the ringleader in raping and killing fourteen-year-old Abeer Kassem Hamza al-Janabi and killing her parents and five-year-old sister." Evan Bright reports on the verdict:As the jury entered the court room, Green(red sweater vest) let out a large sigh, not of relief, but seemingly of anxiety, knowing the weight of the words to come. As Judge Thomas Russell stated "The court will now publish the verdict," Green interlaced his fingers and clasped them over his chin. Russell read the verdict flatly and absolutely. Green went from looking down at each "guilty" to eyeing the jury. His shoulders dropped as he was convicted of count #11, aggravated sexual abuse, realizing what this means. A paralegal at the defense table consoled Green by patting him on his back, even herself breaking down crying at the end of the verdicts. After Russell finished reading the verdicts, he begged questions of the respective attorneys. Wendelsdorf, intending to ensure the absolution of the verdict, requested the jury be polled. Honorable Judge Russell asked each juror if they agreed with these verdicts, receiving a simple-but-sufficient yes from all jurors. Green watched the jury flatly.

Evan Bright is the 18-year-old high school senior who has been in the court every day of the trial and reporting on it. Something most outlets pointedly avoided. The only outlet that can hold its head high is the Associated Press which reported on it and utilized Brett Barrouquere to do so. Barrouquere has been on this story for nearly three years now and has covered the other court appearances of soldiers involved in these war crimes. Barrouquere notes some reactions in Iraq to the news of Green's convictions. Mohammed Abbas Muhsin states, "If American court has convicted the American soldier I will consider the U.S. government to be just and fair. This verdict will give the rights back to the family, the relatives and the clan of the victim Abeer." Ahmed Fadhil al-Khafaji feels differently, "The American court and government are just trying to show the world that they are fair and just. If they are really serious about it, they should hand the soldier over to an Iraqi court to be kept in Abu Ghraib prison and tried by Iraqis." Sami al-Jumaili, Habib al-Zubaidy, Tim Cocks and Samia Nakhoul (Reuters) quote Abeer's uncle Karim Janabi, "By all measures, this was a very criminal act. We are just waiting for the court to sentence him so he gets justice and the court can change the image of Americans. Some people, when they die, I forget them. But we will never forget this girl [his niece Abeer] -- never." Another relative, Yusuf Mohammed Janabi, states, "So they decided this criminal was guilty, but we don't expect he'll be executed. Only if he's executed will it mean American courts are just."

Sky News reports on the case, as does the Belfast Telegraph, England's Evening Standard, Al Jazeera, the BBC, AFP, Caroline Hedley (Telegraph of London), the UK Daily Mail and Reuters. And US outlets? There's CNN and USA Today blogged on it.

Where's the New York Times? They are the news oulet, pay attention, that has refused to ever name Abeer. They began rendering her invisible in 2006. Let's fall back to the first big article the Times did on the matter by propagandists and professional liars Robert F. Worth and Carolyn Marshall. "G.I. Crime Photos May Be Evidence" ran August 5, 2006 and the fifth paragraph -- apparently in an attempt at parody, referred to the crimes as "first widely reported in June". Widely reported by whom? Not the Times. Ellen Knickmeyer's strong "Details Emerge in Alleged Army Rape, Killings" ran, not in the Times, but in the Washington Post. And even now, if you read it, you'll see Abeer named. But Worth and Marshall scribbled a 1464 word article but somehow couldn't squeeze in Abeer's name. The entire article is an attempt to soften up sentiment for the criminals. Worth and Marshall got in bed with the defense and present the arguments that will later be made in the Article 32 hearing. Combat stress, you understand, and Marshall and Worth got there first -- even before the defense could make the case. Andy Mosher (The Washington Post) explained after the Article 32 hearing started, "Eugene Fidell, a Washington military law expert, said Tuesday that the defense attorneys were most likely emphasizing combat stress to argue that their clients not face a possible death penalty in the event of a court-martial. 'This is not a defense known to the law,' Fidell said. 'But this kind of evidence could come in during the court-martial, and it might be pertinent to the sentence. They could be setting the stage to avoid a death penalty'." This is not a defense known to law. But it was known to readers of the New York Times.

Worth and Marshall could present -- could argue for over 1400 -- for the defense, in logic, not "known to the law" but they couldn't mention Abeer's name. The paper always made it very clear where their loyalties were. It wasn't with Abeer. What did Aged Go-Go Boy in the Green Zone John F. Burns so famously say? Oh, yes, the paper tailors its Iraq coverage to US tax payers.

Worth and Marshall went to a lot of trouble hunting down sources who could give them the mind frame (or alleged mind frame) of the ones involved and their company. When do we get the serious story about Abeer Qasim Hamza and her family? When is that story going to be told? It's nearly three years since that propaganda ran in the New York Times and the paper has never run Abeer's story. The War Criminals Robert F. Worth and Carolyn Marshall were carrying water for have all been sentenced. Surprisingly, the propagandists skipped reporting on that. And no one at the paper has ever told Abeer's story. Her name has never appeared in the paper.

Yesterday a US federal court found one of the War Criminals guilty on every count and yet you will find nothing about that in today's New York Times. You won't find an AP article they slapped on a page or even a paragraph in "Nation Briefs." You won't find anything. This is the alleged paper of record.

A 14-year-old girl was gang-raped and murdered by US soldiers who only knew of her because they were supposed to be protecting the neighborhood she lived in. These were War Crimes. This was an international incident. But readers of the New York Times have never heard that. They've never even been informed of Abeer's name. Today they don't even know that the ringleader was found guilty.

The paper has consistently rendered Iraqis invisible, over and over. In what is the worst known War Crime of the illegal war, the paper has avoided telling the story and it has done so repeatedly. Over and over.
When 'defense attorneys' Worth and Marshall thought they could sway public opinion on behalf of the War Criminals, the New York Times put the story on the front page.

The front page.

'Poor Little Boys in Iraq' was a front page story. Minimizing the crimes and excusing them was front page news for the New York Times. Telling the damn truth about what was done to Abeer? Telling the world that the ringleader was convicted? Not even worth a paragraph.

The paper should be ashamed of itself. It's far from alone in needing to feel shame. Diane Rehm thinks rape is icky. Here's a transcript of my call today with a friend on the show.

Friend: She thinks rape is a bad subject.

Me: She said that?

Friend: When the story was suggested, she wrinkled her nose.

Me: She wrinkled her nose?

Friend: Yes.

Me: You're saying she wrinkled her nose? Excuse me, but considering the condition of her skin, how ever could you tell?

Diane didn't just nix it as a topic to put on the agenda for the second hour, she nixed the e-mails that came in before and during the show. A huge number of e-mails that came in. We'll include some of those at Third this weekend (passed on via my friend). Not only did she exclude the e-mails but she insisted, as the e-mails poured in on this topic, that no female callers be put through on air because she "just knew" that someone would try to sneak on to bring up Abeer. Which is why you had Diane speaking to several callers in the second hour but none were women. It's also why Diane didn't do one of her "___ in ___ e-mails . . ." Diane censored Abeer from the program. She went so far as to ban female callers from the second hour because she just knew a mole would get through, a woman who would trick the screener, get on the air, and say, "Diane, you ignorant hypocrite, how the hell dare you refuse to cover the federal conviction yesterday."

Well now we know how far someone will go to avoid covering the news. So the only real question is why Diane doesn't go ahead and retire if she's not interested in discussing -- during the international hour of her program -- an international incident. I didn't listen. I'm told, however, she did make time for swine flu. How very. What a proud way for a woman with one foot and four toes in the grave to prepare to go out.

Golly Diane, do you feel everyone should be like you? If raped or molested, they should never name their attacker? Is that what's going on? If so, it's pretty damn pathetic because you're seventy-three in September and you should have come to terms with being molested as a child long, long ago. If you can't, you don't need to be doing a public affairs show because while you grew up in the Dark Ages when sexual asaults weren't spoken of, today we name names, today we talk about the crimes. If it's too much for you, you really need to retire.

And this is why feminists should have been all over this story. Credit to Jill at Feministe and to Heart at Women's Space who drew attention to Abeer this week. But women needed to be on this story because we saw it during the Article 32. Abeer was ignored throughout the US coverage. International coverage would mention her. US coverage of the Article 32 hearing? No. Only by getting out in front of this, only by demanding that the press cover this, was it going to happen.

They have made it very clear that 14-year-old girl doesn't matter. Maybe it's because she was Iraqi? Maybe it was because she was Muslim? Maybe those two things added into it but what's really going on is what always happens which is stories that have to do with women's lives get ignored. Hillary Clinton, during her run for the Democratic presidential nomination, proposes a major move on combatting breast cancer and it's either ignored or reduced to one sentence in a 'report' about how she bowled with Ellen on Ellen's show. That's ridiculous. We see it over and over and we see how these sexual assualts are buried time and again. We knew the record on this or we should have known. And feminist should have been out in front demanding coverage of this.

Mother's Day is Sunday. No feminist who was silent has anything to celebrate. She should hang her head in shame. And that includes the women at Feminist Majority Foundation who are responsible for Feminsit Wire Daily and do not find time to mention it in their 'news briefs' today. At least Rebeckah (Women's Media Center blog) included it as an item on her news roundup. 35 years after Susan Brownmiller's classic Against Our Will is published and we're still surprised we have to fight to get sexual assault covered in the media? All of those Take Back The Night rallies of the last two decades and we're unprepared to fight to get sexual assualt covered? What a truly sad commentary on the state of feminism today -- or at least the state of feminism at the top. Among the grassroots? There's a lively discussion taking place at Feministe and we'll note this comment by Gillian:

I'm going to look to see if there's a new thread on this but I want to just ask: Am I the only one who thinks if rape weren't among the crimes, the press would have covered this story 24/7? Look at what Valerie has to explain and the dismissal of rape period. I really think if this had been four murders we would have had CBS Evening News and everyone else parked outside the court house. Instead, they pretty much all stuck their heads in the sand.I think when the issue is rape, a lot of our media would rather play dumb.

Actually, Feministe has two lively threads on the topic, click here for the other one. Let's be clear that the males and 'mixed' gender sites need to be calling out the silence as well but it's especially disappointing to see all the women online who are silent. New Agenda? Just pack it in, you're a disgrace. Today they serve up Nicky Kirstoff as a savior of women. Nicky who bought a sex worker. Do we forget that? Apparently New Agenda is Limited and Remidial Classes on Women's Rights.

Today at the Pentagon, US Gen Ray Odierno, top US commander in Iraq, gave a briefing to the press. At the start, he insisted that this was "not 2006 or 2007." True, in 2006 and 2007, peace activists actually thought US troops would be out of Iraq before the end of the decade. Odierno then insisted, "The government of Iraq has assumed complete responsibility for paying the Sons of Iraq, a clear sign of its resolve to continue the important program. The government has budgeted over $300 million to ensure full payments in -- in calendar year '09." And when will these payments be made because, as multiple news outlets noted earlier this week, they're still not paying all members of Sahwa. Odierno stated of US forces training Iraqi security forces:

I've been very proud of the U.S. units and the fact that they have continued to work with their Iraqi security force partners; that they have not even thought about their concern about continuing to work with their partners; that they understand that these are individuals who make these decisions and that we have to be vigilant about every individual because there are individuals that have still infiltrated some of the Iraqi security forces.

Yesterday Campbell Robertson and Stephen Farrell (New York Times) explored Iraqi security forces turning on the Americans who are allegedly training them. The reporters do note Saturday's events but fail to identify Hassan Al Dulaimi as the man who shot dead Jake R. Velloza and Jeremiah P. McCleery. The report mainly focuses (in terms of specifics) on the November 25, 2008 shooting deaths of Anthony Davis and Warren A. Frank by Iraqi soldier Mohammed Saleh Hamadi. From the article:For months, Mr. Hamadi's case has been winding its way through the Iraqi justice system at a pace that frustrates members of the team. Two other soldiers from the battalion have been convicted for their roles in his escape."I guarantee you there's a handful of these in every battalion," Captain Keneally said, adding that if justice was not swift for Mr. Hamadi, others might get ideas.
Today Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) reported, "Iraq's security forces, despite significant improvements, remain hobbled by shortages of men and equipment, by bureaucracy, corruption, political interference and security breaches" and built on interviews and government reports (Iraqi and US) to come to those conclusions.

At the press conference, Odierno insisted that the US was out of Iraqi "cities except for two, Baghdad and Mosul. We are on our way out of Baghdad." Really? From the April 27th snapshot: "Rod Nordland (New York Times) broke that story in today's paper and noted that Iraq and the US are going to focus on Mosul in talks about US troops remaining in some Iraqi cities. Nordland reveals they will remain in Baghdad (he says 'parts of Baghdad' -- that means they will be in Baghdad and Baghdad is a city) and that Camp Victory ['Camps Victory, Liberty, Striker and Slayer, plus the prison known as Camp Cropper'] and 'Camp Prosperity' will not be closed or turned over to Iraq according to Iraqi Maj Gen Muhammad al-Askari. The SOFA 'requires' that they be closed or turned over but al-Askari says they're making exceptions even though the SOFA 'requires' otherwise. For the mammoth Camp Victory, it is in Baghdad and out of Baghdad, for example, so al-Askari says they consider it out of Baghdad." They're not leaving Baghdad, they've got a waiver. There's a difference. The Bush administration pushed through a treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement. Barack, being Bush III, has gone along with it (after grand standing before the general election that he would oppose it and demand Congressional oversight of any agreement between Iraq and the US). Odierno was asked about it and where it might be "renegotiated to permit some elements of the US military to reamin -- air support, for example, and protective services?"

Ray Odierno: Yeah, I would just say I think it's too early for that, I mean, I think that's something that's down the road, that will have to be decided jointly between the United States and the government of Iraq. But I don't think now is the time to assess that.

Iraq's air force will not be prepared (not even in training) at the end of 2011. That was always known. Known when the agreement was forced through. But keep kidding yourself that the SOFA means something. Odierno noted it was "down the road" which is different from "no." He was asked about Facebook and we'll note his most recent post there. From May 4th:

This week, Iraqi Soldiers of the 3rd Battalion, 39th Iraqi Army Brigade, completed the first half of an eight-week commando training course run by Romanian Special Forces Soldiers near Basrah, Iraq. Romanian Soldiers guided their Iraqi students through the same course of instruction that Romanian special forces receive, consisting of tactical, physical, and weapons training. After completing the second half of the training, which will consist of complex exercises such as scouting, reconnaissance, check point procedures and patrolling, the Iraqi troops will join their units in patrolling the tri-province region of Dhi Qar, Maysan and Muthanna in southern Iraq. Meanwhile, at Al Asad in western Iraq, American special forces continue to develop Iraqi special operations capabilities, and this past week conducted fast rope insertion training with their Iraqi counterparts.

The DoD has a budget request. Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) explains that Afghanistan war funding request is $4 billion more than Iraq ($65 billion to $61 billion). This as another battalion of Marines ship off for six-months of training before being deployed to Iraq. Howard Greninger (Terre Haute Tribune-Star) reports, "About 30 motorcycles, many driven by military veterans, escorted four buses Thursday containing more than 150 members of Company K, 3rd Battalion, 24th Marines to Terre Haute International Airport-Hulman Field." Terre Haute's WTHITV has the story here with text and video. In addition to those marines, Fort Dix is sending 170 US soldiers to Iraq. The Reading Eagle reports, "Members plan a yellow-ribbon ceremony for families at Fort Indiantown Gap, Lebanon County, on May 16. Another ceremony is planned at Fort Dix in July, Gilmer said." Meanwhile Colorado just sent troops to Iraq. The Denver Post notes, "More than 100 Colorado Air National Guard support troops bound for Iraq, many of them for at least their fourth tour in six years, flew out of Buckley Air Force Base on Wednesday." And Ashley Bergen (Mountain View Telegraph) reports that the "Headquarters and Headquarters Company, a unit subordinate to the 1st Battalion of the New Mexico National Guard's 200th Infantry, will soon deploy for more than a year to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom." We're not done. Matthew Hansen (Omaha World-Herald) reported yesterday that the 313th Medical Company of Nebraska's National Guard is re-deploying to Iraq and notes that on the earlier deployment, "Sgt Tricia Jameson of Omaha, died July 14, 2005, when a roadside bomb struck her Humvee as it raced to another roadside attack. Jaemson was the second female soldier from Nebraska to die in Iraq. She was the only member of the 313th Medical Company killed durign the company's first deployment." Still not done. Frenchi Jones (Coastal Courier) reports Charlie Troop, 1st Battalion, 82nd Cavalry, 41st Infantry Brigade deploys to Iraq in July. Done? No. Didi Tang (Springfield News-Leader) reports 150 "Marines from the Weapons Company, 3rd Battallion, 24th Marines" will deploy to Iraq after training in California:On Wednesday morning, loved ones bid farewell to the soldiers, sharing tears, at the U.S. Military Reserve Center at 1110 N. Fremont Ave."The last five minutes were tough," [Maj Shannon] Johnson said.Missouri Highway Patrol troopers then escorted the military buses down Chestnut Expressway, up Kansas Expressway and west on Kearney Street toward the Springfield Branson National Airport.Many family members followed the caravan, hoping to catch one more glimpse of their child or spouse.The traffic was slow, but most motorists were patient.When the buses passed Williams Elementary on West Kearney Street, schoolchildren were out, waving red and blue behind a school fence.For a war Barack's allegedly ended/ending (depending on whom you speak to), a lot of troops are still going to Iraq. Today Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Mosul car bombing which wounded four people (three were police officers).

Ehren Watada was the first officer to publicly resist the Iraq War. Yesterday's Free Speech Radio News noted the latest on Ehren:

Mark Taylor-Canfield: The Department of Justice has asked the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss their appeal of a lower court ruling which blocked a second court martial trial for 1st Lt Ehren Watada. In June 2006, Lt Watada refused to serve in Iraq on the grounds that the US invasion was both illegal and immoral. His court-martial was declared a mistrial in February 2007. A civilian US federal judge blocked the Army's attempt to hold a second court-martial in October of 2007, ruling that a second trial would qualify as double jeopardy. According to the US Constitution, a person cannot be tried twice on the same charges. Although Lt Watada's period of enlistment was up two years ago, he is still virtually confined to the US army has barred him from communicating with anti-war groups. Despite the Dept of Justice's decision not to appeal the earlier civilian court ruling, the US army is still considering prosecution of Lt Watada on two charges of "behaviour unbecoming an officer" because of an anti-war speech he gave to the Veterans For Peace national conference in Seattle in 2006.

Ami Radil (KUOW -- link has text and audio) adds, "Fort Lewis commanders must now decide how best to resolve them [the two charges]. Fort Lewis spokesman Joe Piek says Watada's old unit is now training for its third deployment to Iraq. Both sides say the mistrial was unfortunate because it prevented a fuller airing of important issues like the grounds for Watada's refusal, and whether service members are entitled to First Amendment protections. When he's released from the Army, Watada hopes to attend law school."

TV notes. NOW on PBS begins airing tonight on most PBS stations:This week, NOW's David Brancaccio sits down with one of the most prominent figures in world health to discuss the future of the swine flu pandemic. Dr. Larry Brilliant is an epidemiologist, former chief philanthropist at Google.org, and was a central figure in the World Health Organization's successful small pox eradication program.Brilliant sheds light on high-tech tools that are making it easier for scientists to detect global outbreaks, the critical importance of early detection and early response, and how the current pandemic has yet to show its real hand."Anyone who tells you that they know that this is a mild pandemic, and the WHO has overreacted, they don't know. Anyone who tells you that the WHO and CDC [Center for Disease Control and Prevention] have underestimated it, they don't know," Brilliant tells NOW. "We're all going to find out at the same time...we're all in it together."The show also features vital insight from Dr. Nathan Wolfe, a Stanford University epidemiologist who specializes in hunting viruses to their source.Lethal and deadly to female reporters, Washington Week and Gwen line up three suiters this week and toss in a woman for 'contrast.' Doyle McManus (Los Angeles Times), Charles Babington (AP) and online gossip Eamon Javers (Hedda Hopper Lives!) are joined by token 'chic' Joan Biskupic (USA Today) in PBS continued war on women and Gwen's determination to be "the prettiest girl at the table! I am! I am! Miss Beasley hair and all, I am!" The vanity and sexism begins airing tonight on most PBS stations. Also on PBS (and starts airing tonight on many PBS stations, check local listings), Bonnie Erbe sits down with Ann Lewis, Linda Chavez, Patricia Sosa and Karen Czarnecki to discuss this week's news on To The Contrary. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:America's New Air ForceIncreasingly, the U.S. military is relying on un-manned, often armed aircraft to track and destroy the enemy – sometimes controlled from bases thousands of miles away from the battlefront. Lara Logan reports. Watch Video
The Perfect SpySteve Kroft examines one of the most mysterious cases in the annals of modern espionage: the curious life and death of Ashraf Marwan, an Egyptian billionaire claimed by both Israelis and Egyptians to be their greatest spy. Watch Video
All In The FamilyBill James doesn't run, hit or catch a baseball but his intense statistical analysis of the game and its players have made him an essential ingredient in a formula that brought two world championships to the Boston Red Sox. Morley Safer reports. Watch Video
60 Minutes, Sunday, May 10, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

On Monday, Discovery Channel airs it's new three-part series Weaponizers. I thought this might be something your readers would love. The series pits two teams of master builders against each other, as they turn ordinary vehicles into remote-controlled machines of destruction. With the pace and intensity of a video game, vehicles are completed with live-ammunition machine guns and other seemingly ordinary objects that are transformed into powerful weapons. DOWNLOADS AVAILABLE: --> PHOTOS of the cast and of the (cars? weapons? both!) available for download: https://www.box.net/shared/zeikcbc2tq --> EMBEDDABLE VIDEO AVAILABLE VIA YOU TUBE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRMHPJTjaxg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgBNkKGcfYo --> VIDEO AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD: https://www.box.net/shared/m281linumt


iraq
evan bright
brett barrouquere
steven d. greenbrett barrouquerekpfa
the kpfa evening newsandrea lewis
amy goodmandemocracy now
ehren watada
mark taylor-canfield
free speech radio news
the washington postellen knickmeyer
the new york timesrobert f. worthcarolyn marshall

rod norland
steven lee myers
campbell robertsonstephen farrellann scott tysonhoward greningerfrenchi jonesmatthew hansenashley bergendidi tangnprthe diane rehm show
60 minutescbs newspbsto the contrarybonnie erbenow on pbs

Justice for Abeer

Steven D. Green was found guilty by the jury today. I really was afraid they were going to let him walk. Some sort of 'poor little White boy' combined with 'he had a hard life!' and 'he was in a war zone!'

I'm so glad that justice was carried out.

Abeer, I am sorry you were gang-raped and killed. I am sorry that you did not live to see 17. I am sorry you were gang-raped and sorry that it happened while you screamed as you heard your sister and parents murdered in the next room.

I am sorry that you, an innocent civilian, saw your life destroyed as a result of this illegal war.

I am sorry that you will never get to pursue your dreams.

I did not forget you over the last couple of years and I will not forget you now. You are my sister always and I do not forget what my country did to you.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Thursday, May 7, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, justice for Abeer at last, the US Congress hears testimony today that the country's biggest problem is not enough lying, a DLC Democrat refers to Americans as paranoid, Amnesty asks for an end to the death penalty in Iraq, and more.

A federal court in Kentucky has reached a verdict today. March 12, 2006, Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi's parents and five-year-old sister were murdered in their Iraqi home while Abeer was gang-raped in another room. Following the gang-rape, Abeer was murdered. Steven D. Green is said to be the murderer of all four, a gang-rapist and the ring leader who planned the entire thing. The jury went into deliberation yesterday. Evan Bright reports, "Steven Dale Green found guilty of and convcited on -- ALL -- sixteen (16) counts; including eight (8) which could bring a death sentence." Evan Bright is the 18-year-old high school senior who has attended and reported one every day of the trial. This is Bright reporting on Marisa Ford, of the US Attorney General's office, making her closing remarks yesterday:She reminded the jury of Barker and Cortez raping Abeer while "Green, behind closed doors, blew Qassim Hamza's brains out with his Army supplied shotgun." According to Ford, he then took the AK47, "which was provided to the family for protection against insurgents," and used it on the mother, Fahkriyah, and their six year old daughter, Hadeel." She went on to describe Green's sexual assault and execution style murder of Abeer, before he "burned her, beyond all recognition." At this, Green(in a blue Polo) looked down but was still listening intently. She talked about Green having had the AK47 disposed of, and his not-so-impaired judgement. "This was a crime…not committed in the chaos of battle, not committed while on an Army assigned mission, but a crime planned, and acted out in cold blood." Marisa cattle prodded the Defense team, referring to Pat Bouldin's "dumbing things down" for the jury in his opening statement. "To 'dumb things down' for you is an insult to your intelligence," Ford told the jury, "you don't need things dumbed down to know that what Stephen Green did was wrong." Mr. Bouldin frowned as he listened. She talked about the non existent evidence that would dispute the planning of this crime(regarding the conspiracy counts). The killings were "a result of planning and deliberation," Ford intoned(referring to the four counts of pre-meditated murder). "Everything you have seen before, during, and after the crimes, all the evidence, shows pre-meditation."

The Courier-Journal's Andrew Wolfson also notes that Green was convicted on all counts as does AFP. Brett Barrouquer (AP) notes that jury delibrated for a little over ten hours.


While lies were exposed in court, something different happened today in front of the legislative branch. While lying during Congressional testimony is neither new nor novel, it's rare that Congress is informed that the US needs more lying and that, in fact, laws should be changed to allow it. But that's what tubby David Kilcullen insisted. Meanwhile Lisa Schirch fluttered her War Hawk feathers in public.

Not everyone is a person of peace. That should be obvious. And just because someone claims they are doesn't mean they are. Again, it should be obvious. But the laughable War Hawk Lisa Schirch has been allowed to repeatedly and falsely pimp herself as a person of peace. Schirch is the director of 3D Security Initiative. Somehow being the director of 3D did not prevent her from writing on it for Foreign Policy In Focus -- nor was it noted anywhere in "Leveraging '3D' Security: From Rhetoric to Reality" (November 15, 2006) that she was the director of 3D Security Initiative, not even in her credit line. When the usual crowd of useless ran her soggy 'reasoning' entitled "I Want a Woman President But Am Voting for Obama," it wasn't thought necessary to present her as anything but a college professor.

War Hawk Lisa Schirch has been given a pass by our 'allies' in the peace movement and it's past time that her pass was revoked and people quit pimping her as a peace queen. Certain elements of the US 'intelligence' community (those who worked in Jakarta subverting freedom and human rights) have been happy to promote Lisa as a 'hero' and that should have only alarmed the left further. But they ignored it. At their own peril. This morning Lisa appeared before the House Armed Services Committee's Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee.

Lisa Schirch: The-the- field that we're talking about is conflict prevention and this conference that the JFCOM Joint Forces Command and the Marine Corps put on together was called "Whole of Government: Conflict Prevention." And many of us in the NGO community are working actively now to try to figure out how to build a more comprehensive approach to the issues of terrorism? And for the NGOs, we have been working actively on the ground in Iraq, Afghanistan, and we have many partner networks who are indeginious Iraqi NGOs and Afghan NGOs who have been sharing their perspective on counter-terrorism and how best to prevent the kind of spread of the insurgencies we see in these regions. And they very much want to be able to feed into the process and partly -- part of the challenge here is that interagency coordination is so new here in Washington that there's really no points of contact for NGOs that are on the ground who have cultural intelligence information to share that would inform US strategy. Uh over the weekend, Dr. Kilcullen made some statements that were in the media about the drones flying over Pakistan bombing villages is actually having a counter-effect to our national interests in the US -- that the drones end up creating more fuel on the ground for recruitment into Taliban-al Qaeda insurgencies. We've been hearing that in civil society NGOs for several years -- that this kind of drone activity is counter to US interests. So that's the kind of information civil societies want to give over and have conversations with the [US] government. So it's actually very much in our interest as uh civil society to help to help to foster and think about what is the best way for the defense, development, diplomacy, tools of American power, how they are coordinated because this impacts then how civil society can feed into the process. Again, we don't take particular stands on whether it's the State Dept's Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization -- although we very much support that -- or the National Security Council. There are a variety of models that I think we need to have more hearings on how is this best going to be done in this country because it's very urgent. The-the ratio of cost prevention versus -- uh prevention versus cost of terrorism is -- is not met in terms of our US budget, in terms of national security. So several of us have argued for a unified security budget that would try to balance out more these preventative responses uh because right now if you look at one tax dollars less than half-of-a-percent is going to all of our development activities abroad. Whereas almost 60 percent of that dollar goes to defense approaches. So this balance is off. It makes coordination between -- in this interagency process -- very difficult for USAID at the Simulation For Conflict Prevention, they couldn't really risk a lot of the staff time because they have so few staff to even give over to this conversation.

Smith: It also pushes DoD into doing a lot more development work than they are actually qualified to do because they have the money.

Lisa Schirch: Right. And and they were comments at this conference that DoD is being forced to create its own internal USAID, its own civilian response corp which is mirroring structures that also exist in the State Dept and USAID which is a waste of tax payer dollar.

There is so much be appalled by in Little Lisa's statements. Let's start with NGO. It stands for, pay attention, Lisa, Non Governmental Organization. Non Governmental. That's hard for Little Lisa to grasp because she believes NGOs WHORE themselves out to a government. So getting into bed with the US government is, for her, perfectly natural. Her testimony, public testimony, just made life a whole lot harder for real NGOs in Iraq who will now be suspected of existing to spy.

That is what Little Lisa's floating. NGOs have information on combatting terrorism! They have knowledge on how to work a better counter-insurgency! The US government must listen to Little Lisa. That is a betrayal of what NGOs are supposed to do. (It's a betrayal of "civil society" as well -- whether one uses the definitions established by Hobbes or Locke or the definitions of Marx and Alexis de Tocqueville.)

What concern is it of an NGO director what the US spends money on? If they want to give money to DoD, what business is it of an NGO? It's not. It's none of her damn business as director of an NGO. It's about as relevant as her ridiculous story where she attended a USAID conference and, you know what, people there were saying DoD was getting more money and they were saying DoD duplicates efforts and, oh did you hear about Tad and Brenda, I so cannot believe that and let me tell you one damn thing, Tad's in a lot of trouble, he is in hot water, that little mister better watch his --

Little Lisa, in testimony before the Congress gave gossip. Little Lisa talked about what DoD was doing (according to gossip) based on a conference that DoD wasn't present at. She gave unsourced comments that had no grounding in reality and were most likely made up by her on the spot. (If you'd seen her body language and the way she threw herself forward during this part of the production, you'd be very sure that she made it up on the spot.)

The United States is not an NGO. Little Lisa is the Director of 3D. She needs to learn to speak properly (that would require her to lose the Valley Girl inflections, eliminate the hair toss and attempting to flirt with members of Congress while testifying and a great deal more). And she needs to be called out.

A 'peace' person does not speak about how drones attacking civilians is 'bad' because it breeds anger. A peace person states: "You don't kill innocent civilians." That's not complicated. It's not even controversial. It is a peace position and has been for many centuries now. The hearing was entitled "Counterinsurgency and Irregular Warfare: Issues and Lessons Learned." Yes, it was a huge blurring of lines. Consider it the let's-drop-acid hearing of the Congress. And grasp that the counter-insurgency movement in the US supported Barack. They were not the peace movement and the refusal of the No Stars of Beggar Media (print and Pacifica) to explore that aspect goes a long ways towards explaining how a counter-insurgency czar like Barack could ever be mistaken for a peace candidate. Counter-insurgency is war on the native people. It is colonialism and it, rightly, had a horrible reputation after Vietnam. Lisa Schirch, Montgomery McFate, Sarah Sewall, Samantha Power and many more worked overtime to give it some gloss and buff it up. But it is war on a native population.

The Network of Concerned Anthropologists' David Price has been one of the few voices to strongly and consistently call out counter-insurgency. Last month, at CounterPunch, he noted that counter-insurgency exists to:

provide military personnel with cultural information that will help inform troop activities in areas of occupation. Since the first public acknowledgement of HTS [Human Terrain Teams] two and a half years ago, it has been criticized by anthropologists for betraying fundamental principles of anthropological ethics, as being politically aligned with neo-colonialism, and as being ineffective in meeting its claimed outcomes. For the most part, the mainstream media has acted as cheerleaders for the program by producing a seemingly endless series of uncritical features highlighting what they frame as kind hearted individuals trying to use their knowledge of culture to save lives; while misrepresenting the reasons and extent of criticism of the Human Terrain program. A few early boosters of Human Terrain Systems (HTS) have now called for its closure (most notable, the British journal Nature), and some journalistic coverage has shifted from uncritical fawning to more reserved critical writing (e.g. Noah Schachtman's writings on Wired's military Danger Room blog). But most media coverage remains uncritical in its thinly veiled support for a program that has never had to answer to the fundamental critiques of its critics, and Human terrain continues on its trajectory of counterinsurgency domination.

While David Price deserves applause, it's past time to ask Foreign Policy in Focus, David Swanson, Foreign Affairs (Marxist Thought Online) and so many others why they pimped counter-insurgency cheerleader Lisa? She is not about peace. Not only did she participate in today's hearing, she advocated NGOs -- non governmental by definition -- turning over 'intel' to the US government. Information that will be used against a people. Counter-insurgency does include (and has included in Iraq, as Bob Woodward has detailed) 'targeted killings' (assassinations) of local figures. That's not peace and someone on the ground in Iraq, the NGOs Lisa's talking about, would be just the ones to provide that 'intel.' It's shocking, it's appalling and the peace movement needs to pull a Michael Corleone at the end of The Godfather and close the door in her face.

Was counter-insurgency guru David Kilcullen forced out of Australia due to the government's fear that there wasn't enough food to feed him? It certainly appears that way and it's hard to think of a hearing where a chair's appeared under more assault than the one he plopped his huge girth in. David Kilcullen wanted the subcommittee to know a few things, "One is that we place a different priority within the military on information operations to the priority that our enemy places." "We"? Kilcullen is not a member of the US military nor does he work for the Defense Dept. He most recently worked under Condi Rice at the State Dept. The State Dept is not "within the military." That might be confusing for Kilcullen since he is not a US citizen and only left Australia in 2005. If we're really worried about immigration, how about worrying about the truly dangerous who come to these shores to do harm to the rest of the world and not those who just try to make a living for themselves and their families?

Kilcullen continued that the Taliban "put information or propaganda first so the first thing they decide is what is the propaganda mission that we're trying to send?' Then they figure out what operations to design and carry out to meet that propaganda objective. We do it the other way around. We design how we're going to operate and then at the last minute we throw it to the information office folks and we say, 'Hey, can you just explain this to the public?'" So Kilcullen thinks that's the more effective propaganda model. As you listen to the John Candy wanna be you wonder how the hell the United States decided to bring in this reject into our government? Even more you wonder if, decades from now as this stain on the US grows ever greater, will it be remembered that the nation let a foreigner dictate this? One who knows little about the history of the United States and shows no respect for the bits he managed to register? If you doubt that or how much this human filth loves his propaganda, let's note this from section of his testimony today:

And one final legislative issue. We had a lot of trouble uh in Iraq uh trying to counter al Qaeda in Iraq propaganda because of the Smith-Mundt act which meant that we couldn't do a lot of things online uh because if you put something on YouTube uh and it's deemed to the information operations and there's a possibility that an American might log on to that page and read that and be influenced by that's technically illegal under the Smith-Mundt Act and we had to get a uh uh a waiver as you may recall to be able to do that. I think for Congress it might be worth looking at uh how that legislation may need to be relooked at or re-examined in the light of a new media environment so that it still has the same intent but doesn't necessarily restrict us from legitimate things that we might need to do in the field.

Background, Smith-Mundt Act is the popular name for 1948's US Information and Educational Exchange Act. Marc Lynch has observed:

The temptation to manipulate American public opinion has always been there, and has only grown more potent in an age where counter-insurgency practitioners and "Long War" planners openly view the American domestic arena as a vital strategic arena. I'd go so far as to suggest that a non-insignificant portion of General Petraeus's information operations efforts have been directed towards shaping American public discourse. It isn't an accident that he has been so available to so many journalists, or that the flow of "good news" about the Anbar Awakening and the surge into the American media has expanded so dramatically. And why wouldn't he, when at the heart of the new counter-insurgency doctrine lies the recognition that maintaining domestic public support for a long, drawn-out military presence is one of the most important single factors?

Subcommittee chair Adam Smith shamed his party by insisting that "it absolutely needs to be fixed" -- Smith-Mundt, the legislation Harry Truman signed into law. He is a blight on the Democratic Party. A long term War Hawk, Smith can no longer embarrass himself but the DLC "New Deomcrat" War Hawk can and does embarrass the party.

He embarrasses the party with statements like this one today, "The problem we're going to have is the paranoia of the American public right now that the government's trying to manipulate them." Oh, those paranoid Americans! Justice would be a Green, Republican, Libertarian or whatever running against him in 2010 and using that little soundbyte for the commercials. Just zooming in on "the paranoia of the American public" and asking if Washington is really sending Adam Smith to DC to talk about American citizens like that?

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

Bombings?

Reuters notes a Mussayab roadside bombing which wounded three people. Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report two Salahuddin Province sticky bombings on tankers which left three drivers injured yesterday, today a Falluja suicide car bombing no known injuries or deaths other than the bomber ("The U.S. military cordoned off the area so that not even Iraqi police were allowed near the site. No comment from the U.S. military was available at time of publication."), a Mosul roadside bombing which wounded two people, a Mosul grenade attack . . .

Shootings?

Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report the Mosul grenade attack was followed by US soldiers shooting and a 12-year-old boy was shot dead and, yesterday, 2 fisherman were shot dead by "Iranian snipers."

Today Amnesty International issued the following:

The Iraqi authorities executed 12 people on Sunday, according to information received by Amnesty International. The 12 are believed to be among the 128 people who were on death row. There are growing fears that more executions will follow in the coming days or weeks. The Iraqi Supreme Judicial Council confirmed to Amnesty International on 9 March 2009 that Iraq's Presidential Council had ratified the death sentences of 128 people who had been facing imminent execution. The death sentences were originally passed by criminal courts in Baghdad, Basra and other cities and provinces on charges under Iraq's Penal Code and the Anti-Terrorism law that include murder and kidnapping, and were upheld by the Cassation Court. A spokesperson for Amnesty International expressed dismay at the executions and called for their full names to be disclosed. "Amnesty International is urging the authorities to commute all death sentences and to establish an immediate moratorium on executions," said Malcolm Smart, the Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme. "Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases."

Yesterday's snapshot noted the news in Lt Ehren Watada's case. Watada was the first officer to resist the Iraq War publicly. Quickly, US District Judge Benjamin Settle barred a second court-martial on three charges. This was when the military should have appealed. In October 2008, Desert Peace explained then, "However, this time around the military added back in the two counts of conduct unbecoming . . . and did not offer the same deal to stipulate. So now Judge Settle has left it up to the military to appeal his ruling as well as continue on concerning those two counts." What happened yesterday? The same thing. The three charges Settle found (Nov 2007) to be double-jeopardy risks are not allowed. The other two charges the military could file on. William Cole (Honolulu Advertiser) explains: "More than a year and a half after he would have left the Army -- had he deployed as ordered -- the 1996 Kalani High School graduate still reports to a desk job at Fort Lewis in Washington state. Watada is likely to continue to have to do so as the Army weighs its next move." Courage to Resist highlights an action for another war resister:
Action alert: Ask that Cliff Cornell's sentence be reduced
Your letter to the Commander of Fort Stewart, Georgia requesting that Iraq War resister Cliff Cornell's 12-months prison sentence be reduced is urgently requested. Cliff was convicted of desertion on April 28, 2009 after being denied sanctuary in Canada. These letters of support will be collected by Cliff's civilian lawyer James Branum and submitted to the military through the official appeals process.
Address letters to: COMMANDER, Fort Stewart and fax to 866-757-8785. Please do not send letters directly to the CG but through Cliff's lawyer at the fax number provided.
Basic guidelines for letters:
Good points to raise:
Cliff's good character
The importance of acting upon conscience
The severity of the sentence, especially since a 12 month sentence is a felony in the US.
Things to avoid:
Partisan politics
Any attacks on the Army itself. For example, you can say the war is bad; however, but don't say the Army is an evil institution.
Letters should include the full name and contact information of the author, including e-mail. This is requested so that Cliff's lawyer can contact you if needed.
Letters need to be received by May 31, 2009 so that they can be submitted as part of the formal appeals process.

Yesterday's snapshot noted J-Som (Liberal Rapture) who, to his credit, added an update: ""Below I take what any logical person would read as a dig at Chris Hedges. I was not clear. I have read Hedges here and there and he spoke at my church once and I attended. What I have read and heard from him I found edifying and thought provoking. Hedges is morally consistent, unlike so many others on the Left. My interjection of 'gee. ya think?' was in response to my annoyance with the entire Lefty chattering class using a cut and paste from Hedges as back up. It reads as a direct dig at Hedges which is unfair. And it was sloppy of me and I apologize for it." Applause for J-Som. (That's not sarcasm but we'll leave it at that because we're moving quickly.)

Non-Iraq, independent journalist David Bacon latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press). In the latest issue of Monthly Review, Michael D. Yates' "Don't Pity the Poor Immigrants, Fight Alongside Them" addresses Bacon's book and notes:A third conclusion that flows from Bacon's book is that anti-immigration politics have little basis in fact. If we look just at undocumented immigrants, we find that they pay their own way. They add more to the national income than they take from it. They pay taxes, all sorts of taxes, including sales and excise taxes, payroll taxes, property taxes, and yes, income taxes. They get little in return for these taxes; they are much less likely than similarly-situated natives to receive health care, education, public assistance, police protection, and all other publically provided services. As noted above, they do not often compete directly with native workers for jobs. By any reasonable standard, they face harsher work regimens and enjoy fewer protections on the job than do native laborers. They commit fewer crimes than natives. What all of this means is that the crusades being waged against "illegal aliens" have ulterior motives. Lou Dobbs and Tom Tancredo know that employers will never be harshly prosecuted for hiring undocumented workers, and they do not want them to be. Rhetorical attacks on employers play well with the masses, and this is why they do it. What the hysteria they foster does accomplish is to divide working people by making part of the working class the "other," a quasi-criminal element that can be used to hide the true horrors of this economic system, one that the immigrant bashers love and profit from. Whatever divides workers makes it hard for them to form the one thing that employers and their xenophobic allies really hate-unions.David L. Wilson also reviews it in "The Immigration System: Maybe Not So Broken" (only Wilson is available online):Much of Bacon's answer is right there in his title: Illegal People: How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants. He argues that undocumented workers come here largely because of the neoliberal economic policies that the U.S. elite has vigorously pushed on our southern neighbors over the past 30 years, disrupting local economies and forcing millions to seek employment outside their countries. At the same time, he says, U.S. legislators were passing laws that tightened restrictions on immigrants from these countries. These restrictions haven't stopped immigration; instead, they've created a class of "illegals" who are forced to keep their heads down as they work for less pay in brutal conditions -- involuntarily providing downward pressure on the wages of native-born workers. In short, he shows us a system that lets U.S. corporations profit from globalization in countries like Mexico and then profit again by exploiting globalization's victims when they seek work here.It's easy enough to document this process with statistics and academic studies, and Bacon does his share of that. But he also brings the statistics to life by providing the other element missing in the immigration debate -- he tells us about the experiences and opinions of actual immigrants.-- Juan Gonzalez (not his real name) worked at the giant Cananea copper mine, which the Mexican government sold in 1990 for a fraction of its value to the Grupo Mexico corporation as part of a massive privatization program promoted by the United States. Gonzalez was fired in 1998 because of his role in a strike against the new owners. Blacklisted and unable to find a decent job in his home state of Sonora, he ended up becoming an "illegal" working in an Arizona warehouse.-- Luz Dominguez and Marcela Melquiades worked for years cleaning hotel rooms in Emeryville, a small city on the San Francisco Bay. Their employers had no problems with their lack of legal status until the city council passed a living wage ordinance and some hotel employees complained their bosses weren't in compliance. Management then discovered problems with the workers' documents and fired them.-- Edilberto Morales is the only survivor of a September 2002 accident that killed 14 immigrant forestry workers when their speeding van ran off a wooden bridge into Maine's Allagash River. The workers were employed through the U.S. government's H2 guest worker program. The U.S. Labor Department found that the employer, Evergreen Forestry Services, had failed to ensure the workers' safety and fined Evergreen $17,000 -- but the company never lost its certification for the H2 program.Bacon brings together the system's different aspects in the person of Representative James Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin. Sensenbrenner is best known as the author of HR 4437, an ultimately unsuccessful bill that would have made felons of undocumented workers like Gonzalez, Dominguez, and Melquiades. But Sensenbrenner has other interests in the issue. His family founded the Kimberly-Clark Company in the early 1900s, and the family trust continues to be an important shareholder in the papermaking giant. Many of the workers who plant and fell the trees that ultimately become Kimberly-Clark's paper are hired through the H2 program by forestry companies like Evergreen, which employed Morales and his 14 coworkers. Kimberly-Clark's Mexican subsidiary is closely associated with Grupo México, which fired Gonzalez from the Cananea copper mine.

iraqevan brightandrew wolfsonsteven d. green
brett barrouquere
david price
ehren watadawilliam cole
cliff cornellmcclatchy newspaperssahar issa
david baconmichael d. yatesdavid l. wilson