Tuesday, February 08, 2011

Sick of Julie and his women who whore for him

Big Coleen Rowley is back to defending Julie Assange because . . . Well dogs gotta bark, eh Coleen?

I've had it with the likes of Crazy Coleen. I've had it with all their lies. She can whore for a man all she wants, doesn't make her anything but a cheap ass whore.

So the whores, remember, told us poor Julie was being persecuted. And that he had been in Sweden and they could have interviewed him then!!!!! They didn't!!!

Oops, little lying whores. Maybe next time you'll stop listening to an even bigger whore than all of you are: Julie's lawyer.

He's been caught in repeated lies.

He got caught again.

Today we learn that Julian's attorney was asked for his client to give testimony -- while Julian was in Sweden. And the lawyer agreed.

The texts still exist.

And the lawyer admitted it on the stand today.

Gee, why do you leave the country after agreeing your client will give testimony?

If you're guilty, you flee.


I don't know if he's guilty or not. But I know Coleen's a dirty little whore for mocking two women she doesn't know who state they were sexually assaulted.

I know Coleen's a crazy who has mistaken her 15 minutes of fame for a world wide fan base.

Of course, it's a damn shame Coleen, 'brave' whistle blower, couldn't get honest when it would have done some good, right Coleen?

I guess you have to live with the fact that your silence cost lives. That'd make someone sick in the head and certainly explain why you'd go around smearing women you don't kow.

Here's Wiki on Collie Rowley:

After the September 11, 2001, attacks, Rowley wrote a paper for FBI Director Robert Mueller documenting how FBI HQ personnel in Washington, D.C., had mishandled and failed to take action on information provided by the Minneapolis, Minnesota Field Office regarding its investigation of suspected terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui. This individual had been suspected of being involved in preparations for a suicide-hijacking similar to the December 1994 "Eiffel Tower" hijacking of Air France 8969. Failures identified by Rowley may have left the U.S. vulnerable to the September 11, 2001, attacks. Rowley was one of many agents frustrated by the events that led up to the attacks, writing:

During the early aftermath of September 11th, when I happened to be recounting the pre-September 11th events concerning the Moussaoui investigation to other FBI personnel in other divisions or in FBIHQ, almost everyone's first question was "Why?--Why would an FBI agent(s) deliberately sabotage a case? (I know I shouldn't be flippant about this, but jokes were actually made that the key FBI HQ personnel had to be spies or moles, like [Robert Hanssen], who were actually working for Osama Bin Laden to have so undercut Minneapolis' effort.) [2][3]

Rowley testified in front of the Senate and for the 9/11 Commission about the FBI's internal organization and mishandling of information related to the September 11, 2001, attacks. Mueller and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) pushed for and got a major reorganization, focused on creation of the new Office of Intelligence at the FBI. This reorganization was supported with a significant expansion of FBI personnel with counterterrorism and language skills.[citation needed]


Yes, she was so helpful . . . after it really didn't matter.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Tuesday, February 8, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, Amsty International releases a report, Amnesty International finds time to focus on everything except their new report, unrest continues in Iraq alarming the government, an MP issues a warning, and more.
Al Mada reports that yesterday the province of Dhi Qar in sourthern Iraq saw protests in Nasiriyah as people demanded rations card items and jobs. The protesters noted that the price of "sugar, flour and other essential goods" have doubled at the markets putting further strain on struggling families. One man explains that only a few months ago they were paying less than 10,000 dinars (around US $8) for a bag of flour but are now paying over 30,000 dinars (approximately $25.46 in US dollars). And he explains that the price of sugar has similarly increased. Which is why the decision by Nouri al-Maliki and his Cabinet to increase the monthly ration card by 15,000 dinars a month (see this Al Rafidayn article) is so meaningless. The prices have soared and 15,000 dinars (approximately $12.73 in US dollars) per month isn't going to help. Take the price of flour in Nasiriyah. A few months back, they paid less than 10,000 dinars. Toss in the 15,000 dinars and that's 25,000 dinars which still won't pay for the current price of one bag of flour. Dar Addustour notes protests are increasing and now include Kut, Hilla and Missan and notes Sheikh Qasim al-Tai decreed yesterday that citizens excercising their rights are engaged in activities which demand integrity and should be free of abuse. Haider Roa (Iraqhurr.org) quotes University of Baghdad political science professor Ali al-Jubouri stating that the Iraq protests are different from others in the region because they relate specifically to government performance and services. Related, Alsumaria TV reports, "The amendments made on Iraq's 2011 budget includes allocating 15% of the budget to the Iraqi people, member of the parliamentary financial committee Najiba Najib told Alsumaria News." Al Mada reports that the Parliament yesterday decided to form an investigative committee to examine the ration card system in relation to the years 2008 and 2010. Kholod al-Ziyadi (Zawya) adds:


The Iraqi parliament put off today's session to tomorrow, after reading the first reading of the draft law of the Supreme Judicial Council, according to the KBC member.
The Deputy, Sheriff Soliaman told AKnews that the Iraqi Parliament Speaker, Osama Nujaifi raised today's meeting to tomorrow after the postponed of the second reading of the law of the federal budget draft for 2011 and the first reading was read for the draft law of the Supreme Judicial Council.
"Today's meeting was limited to discuss the ration card items and mechanisms adopted in the provision and distribution of flour exclusively that is experiencing scarcity in distributing it with in most of the provinces."

Alsumaria TV notes the government's fears over protests which have been taking place in Diwaniya: "Iraq's Trade Ministry took drastic measures to meet the people's demands. The Ministry approved to provide full ration cards and acknowledged that the level of poverty in the province has approached the limit of 88%. [. . .] Diwaniya residents believe the latest measures taken by the central and local governments have come a bit late." And, as Al Mada observes, protests gathered steam quickly after starting with small demonstrations last week. And Alsumaria reports MP Alia Nassif (Iraqiya) has issued a statement warning about "an uprising in Iraq. All the motives of uprising are there, namely unemployment, bad services and mounting poverty, she said. The Iraqi people expected a lot from its Parliament and Government after the changing developments in the past years, Alia uttered. Recent demonstrations in Iraqi cities are alarming and should be a warning for the government and Parliament to take responsibility, she added." And she's not the only one with concerns. Al Mada reports on a new Babuz survey in which the majority of respondents declared that they did not believe the government would be able to provide adequate security or services any time soon. The newspaper notes that the poll can be seen as a warning to various figures that if the fight against corruption and lack of services is not resolved, there ould be a "political explosion." Hari Sreenivasan (PBS' NewsHour -- link has text, video and audio) stated last night, "The government of Iraq is moving to address a wave of protests there." However, Al Mada reports today that Iraq's housing crisis will require the construction of two million additional housing units over the next five years.
Today Amnesty Internation released [PDF format warning] their report "Broken Bodies, Tortured Minds." For clarification, this report was noted this morning. A number of visitors e-mailing insist there is no such report. Use the link. Before we get to the report, let's talk about why people wrongly think there is no report: Amnesty did a report and now Amnesty decides TO BURY IT. Why? Because they can't resist being part of the useless gasbags. Go to their sites (whichever country you prefer) and you will see it's Egypt, Egypt, Egypt. That is not the only story in the world. And when you release a report, YOU NEED TO HAVE IT FEATURED PROMINENTLY ON YOUR HOME PAGE. Let's talk about the ambulance chasing of the soap opera for a moment. As January ended, Pew examined the coverage and US viewers response. The Middle East unrest made up 36% of the US news coverage (January 27th through 30th) with 30% of that being just Egypt. During this period, the media made it the story despite the fact that "[o]nly about one-in-ten (11%) cite news about protests in Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries as the story they followed most closely last week." Today Pew released this report on the US public's attitude to the story the media really needs (a) to spend less time on and (b) to offer more insight when they do cover it. (All the wall-to-wall has produced is mass confusion. But that's what happens in a world of EZ Bake Gasbags.) If you need another example of how people are saturated with this story, ask the Pacifica program that tried to raise money on air and began yammering away -- for no reason -- about Egypt and ended up with their worst fundraiser ever. In the US, people are very much aware that Egypt is not the only story. And an already struggling fundraiser (only two lines were in use when they went into the Egypt pitch and then all the lines were available . . . forever). If you're not getting how much time has been spent oversaturating America with this story, Pew explains today, "Last week's turmoil in the Middle East registered as the biggest international story in the past four years- -- surpassing any coverage of the Iraq war, the Haiti earthquake and the conflict in Afghanistan. From Jan. 31-Feb. 6, the Middle East saga, driven by televised images of the protests and power struggle in Egypt, filled 56% of the newshole studied by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism. Not only was that easily the biggest overseas story in a single week since PEJ began its News Coverage Index in January 2007. It registered as the fourth-biggest story of any kind -- trailing only two weeks in the 2008 presidential campaign and the aftermath of the Jan. 8, 2011 Tucson shooting spree." Repeating, oversaturation. (And with all that, unable to effectively communicate the story -- with all the wall-to-wall, they still couldn't communicate it to the public.) Taking it back to Amnesty, if the US home page lists 22 items (and it does), one of those items should be a headline about the report you issued today.
Backstory, at the tail end of last month, Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) broke the story of the secret prisons in Iraq and how they were run by Nouri's security forces. Last week, Human Rights Watch issued their report adding many more details. Throughout it all, including Sunday to CNN, Nouri and his spokespeople have denied the reports.
AFP notes that at least 30,000 people are held in these secret prisons, according to the report, and that torture is routine.
The report includes the stories of prisoner abuse. Example:
Samar Sa'ad 'Abudllah, aged 27, says she was beaten on the soles of her feet -- a form of torture known as falaqa -- and given electric shocks to force her to "confess" to killing her uncle and his family for money. Based on her "confession", she was sentenced to death in 2005 and her sentence was confirmed in 2007. The judge failed to order an investigation into her torture allegations. She says that her fiance carried out the killings; he is still being sought by the authorities. She is now in al-Kadhimiya Prison and, according to her father, suffering from depression, diabetes and high blood pressure.
Another prisoner told Amnesty last April:
We [father and son] were tortured in the same manner: suspension from a bed upside-down, suffocation by putting plastic bags on our heads, beatings, use of electric shocks on various parts of the body. The suspension is for about 30 minutes. . . I was tortured three times. They used electric shocks on me twice. I was beaten several times. After that I confessed. I confessed to things I never knew what they were.
Forced confessions are one of the most common features of 'justice' in Iraq. Torture has many consequences (including imprisoning the innocent and letting the guilty go free). The report notes:
Most torture victims have long-term psychological issues to deal with. A common consequence of torture is post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), including flashbacks, nightmares, depression, anxiety and memory loss. Many of the detainees interviewed by Amnesty International are not receiving psychological support for the torture they endured. Torture also affects families of detainees. According to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims, children are particularly vulnerable. They can suffer feelings of guilt and personal responsibility for what has happened to their tortured parent. Family members also experience anxiety and a sense of loss. Many psychologists believe that family members would benefit from therapy along with the survivor of torture.
There are many forms of torture including rape. The report notes:
In Iraq, rape or threat of rape of detainees or their loved ones has been widely alleged. Sexual assault shares with other forms of torture the objective of inflicing suffering, humiliation and degradation. It is also used to force "confessions", extract information or punish detainees.
A member of Iraq's parliament who met four male inmates at al-Rusafa prison in Baghdad in June 2009 said they told him that they had been raped and otherwise tortured, and that he had seen marks on their bodies that supported their allegations. Hundreds of inmates at the prison went on hunger strike in May and June 2009 to demand an end to torture and other ill-treatment.
Other Iraqi members of parliament have raised serious concerns about sexual violence in prisons. In mid-June 2009, for example, one said that security forces had sexually assaulted at least 21 male detainees at al-Rusafa and al-Diwanya prisons in southern Iraq since the beginning of the year. In May 2009, a delegation from the Council of Representatives' Human Rights Committee visiting al-Kadhimiya women's prison in Baghad heard testimony from two female prisoners who said they had been raped repeatedly after their arrest.
Ramze Shihab Ahmed, a 68-year-old man with dual Iraqi-UK citizenship, was held in communicado and tortured, including by being raped with a stick, after he travelled to Iraq to secure the release of his son Omar. Both men were beaten, suffocated, given electric shocks to the genitals, and supsended by the ankles. Interrogators also threatened to rape Ramze's first wife, who lives in Mosul, in front of him, and threatened Omar that he would be forced to rape his father if he did not confess to killings. Both men signed "confessions".
Rape or threat of rape has serious psychological and physical effects on survivors. The physical consequences for men and women can include sexually transmitted infections, such as HIV; sexual dysfunction; tears or lacerations to the anus and vagina that cause long-term pain; and bruising. Women can also suffer from unwanted pregnancy and gynaecological problems resulting in infertility.
The long-term mental effects on both sexes can include depression, anxiety, substance abuse, phobias, eating and sleeping disorders, PTSD and suicidal behaviour.
Turning to today's violence, Al Rafidayn reports that the Ministry of Defense's Brg Gen Ali Ashan was killed by a Baghdad bombing at his home. Xinhua adds, "Later, another roadside bomb went off at the scene when Iraqi security forces and civilians gathered at the site of the first blast, wounding two policemen, a soldier and a civilian, the source said." Reuters adds 2 Mosul bombings wounded two people, 1 injured man was discovered in Kirkuk and 1 corpse was discovered in Mosul.
Scott Peterson (Christian Science Monitor) reports that US Lt Gen Robert Cone spoke at a press briefing today in Iraq and declared, "Theere are many indicators of violence -- attack trends, casulty trends -- but certainly by all measures we believe there was about a 20 percent decrease in 2010 from 2009." "We believe." That's always different than "we know." Once upon a time, reporters were aware of that. Yesterday at the State Dept briefing (link has text and video), spokesperson Philip J. Crowley was asked about Iraq.

QUESTION: There was a report on Iraq on the weekend that Ambassador James Jeffrey has said that the U.S. troops might stay in Iraq beyond 2011, and there is a new threat to regional stability. Can you confirm that or talk to the --
MR. CROWLEY: Well, I'm not familiar with Ambassador Jeffrey -- I know he was here last week and testified before the Hill. He might have been responding to questions that were posed to him from senators who have asked questions about military presence. Look, we are proceeding based on an existing Strategic Framework Agreement and Status of Forces Agreement, which says that all military forces will be out of Iraq by the end of this year. We are working on that transition where many of the activities that have been performed by military personnel will be performed by State Department personnel. So we're proceeding on the current strategy. We're going to have a long-term partnership between the United States and Iraq. And we'll define with Iraq going forward, the nature of that relationship. To the extent that we have military cooperation going forward, we'll be happy to have that discussion with the Government of Iraq.
His statements are being wrongly trumpeted by one outlet as stating the SOFA will not be extended. He said no such thing. And he's addressed the desire to renew the SOFA before. As for James Jeffreys, he addressed that option or putting the US military under the State Dept when he testified at last Tuesday's Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing and Thursday's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
Related, Julia Steers' "On The Ground In Iraq: Serving The Needs Of Disabled Iraqi Children" (Huffington Post) reports on Brad Blauser's Wheelchairs for Iraqi Kids:
"During my first wheelchair distribution event at a border command post on the Iraq Syrian border, a young boy named Alaa old pulled himself along the ground approaching me from behind," Brad said. "He asked me 'Mister, I can have a wheelchair?' and I lost my breath for a split second, I had to regain my composure."
Brad describes giving Alaa a wheelchair as a process that transformed the young boy into "a person of worth and dignity."
"For all his 10 years, he dragged himself through the desert sand...and he was given a respectable way of getting around. He became eligible to attend school for the first time because he didn't have to be carried."
Due to the departure of General Petraeus from Iraq, Brad had to return to a day job, but remains in Iraq and focused on maintaining WFIK, the only nonprofit working with disabled Iraqi children.
As the US State Dept begs for billions in tax payer monies in order to weaponize diplomacy, grasp how little money is required for WIK and how steadfastly the US government avoids assisting with that. Remember, for all the efforts at stamping the government's motives with a happy face, it's never really about addressing the human pain.

Staying in the US, In March of last year, the Justice Dept announced: "A captain in the United States Marine Corps was charged today with conspiring with his wife to skim approximately $1.75 million from government contracts awarded under the Iraqi First Program while he was acting as a Marine Corps contracting officer's representative in Iraq. Eric Schmidt, 39, of Murietta, California, who is assigned to the First Marine Division at Camp Pendleton, was charged this morning with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and filing a false tax return that concealed the illicit income from the Internal Revenue Service. Capt. Schmidt's wife, Janet Schmidt, 39, also of Murietta, also was charged today with the same two felony counts. According to the criminal information filed this morning, Capt. Schmidt used his position in the contracting process to steer contracts to his favored Iraqi contractor, the Al-Methwad Company. The contracts were often awarded under the Iraqi First Program, which was designed to award certain contracts to Iraqi vendors to assist with Iraqi economic expansion and entrepreneurship. Once Al-Methwad had been awarded the contract, Janet Schmidt found United States-based vendors to provide the goods purportedly to be furnished by Al-Methwad under the terms of the contract. Janet Schmidt purchased the goods using money provided by Al-Methwad, often purchasing far fewer or inferior products than those required by the contract. She then arranged for the goods to be delivered to the United States Marines in Iraq. Once the shipment arrived in Iraq, Capt. Schmidt falsely certified that both the number and type of goods required by the contract had been provided by Al-Methwad Company to the Marines. Armed with the false certification, representatives from Al-Methwad Company sought and received payment from the United States."

Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times) reports Eric Schmidt received a six year sentence to a federal prison and that Janet Schmidt will be sentenced in March. The amount of money they were convicted of stealing? $1.69 million. And what does the government have? "propereties in Big Bear and Murrieta" which are not worth what they were in 2008, "two automobiles and $40,000 in cash" and, no, that's not the same as the $1.69 million the couple made off with, $1.69 million of tax payer money. Nothing in the case, in fact, argues well for the claims that US Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey made last week about a system being in place to prevent theft of tax payer dollars from the money he would love to see allocated to Iraq. Dan Whitcomb (Reuters) quotes Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Stuart Bowen stating, "The Schmidts defrauded U.S. taxpayers, cheated the Iraqi people and betrayed the trust placed in them. They will now pay a price for their criminal wrongdoing."
And finally, the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee released the following today:

(Washington, D.C.) -- Yesterday, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, along with 17
Senators from both sides of the aisle, wrote to Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Eric Shinseki, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget,
Jack Lew, to urge the Administration to carry out the law and begin
providing supportive services to caregivers of wounded veterans. The Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010,
Public Law 111-163, was enacted May 5, 2010 and directed VA to begin providing caregiver support by January 30, 2011. To date, the Obama Administration has failed to even set out its initial plan to carry out the
law.
In the letter sent Monday, the bipartisan group of Senators urged VA
and the Office of Management and Budget to quickly implement this
vital law to provide crucial benefits for very seriously injured veterans.
The Senators noted that, as a result of the Administration's inaction,
family caregivers across the nation have not received the benefits to which they are entitled. Among the services required by the caregivers law are training in the provision of care, respite care, technical assistance,
counseling, and financial support for those who give up the opportunity
to work in order to provide needed care to their injured loved ones.

"Families of wounded warriors are waiting for these new caregivers' benefits," said Chairman Murray. "And with each day of delay the strain

from the sacrifices they make only grows. Congress heard the concerns

and problems of family caregivers and responded. This delay in putting

the program in place is simply unacceptable. Responding to the needs of

those injured while serving their country is a cost of war that must be

paid."

Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), who has served as the Ranking Member

of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs since 2007, said: "The long delay in getting this program up and running is a disservice to veterans

and their families. Caregivers need training and instruction so they can provide the men and women who were severely wounded while serving our country a better quality of life."

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) said "Many families are making enormous sacrifices to care for their loved ones. They are often forced to give up their full-time jobs, bear the cost of home care and even move across the country

in search of treatment. It is past time for our nation to step forward and provide support to these families. Any further delay in distributing these benefits is a disservice to the brave men and women who have served our country."

Senator Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI) said: "VA and OMB must fulfill their duty
to implement this law and provide timely assistance to families and other
caregivers of veterans who have served this nation bravely. These caregivers have sacrificed so much for so long, and they deserve the full support of the nation their loved ones risked everything to serve."

The full text of the Senators' letter follows:

February 07, 2011

The Honorable Eric K. Shinseki

Secretary of Veterans Affairs

810 Vermont Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20420

The Honorable Jacob J. Lew

Director

Office of Management and Budget

725 17th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20503

Dear Secretary Shinseki and Director Lew:

We are writing regarding the status of the family caregivers program mandated by the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, Public Law 111-163, which was enacted on May 5, 2010. To date, implementation of this program is significantly behind the schedule required by law. The statutory deadline for the full implementation of this program was January 30, 2011, yet not even an initial plan has been completed to this point. We are troubled by this apparent inaction.

Among the critically needed benefits and services that are being withheld from family caregivers are instruction and training in the provision of care, respite care, technical assistance, counseling, and a living stipend for those who must give up their jobs or work limited hours to provide care to their loved one. This law also requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to submit a plan for the implementation of the family caregiver program. That report was due to the Committee 180 days after the enactment of the law, which was November 1, 2010. At this point, the report is more than three months late.

We also note that the National Defense Authorization Act, Public Law 111-383, tied the Department of Defense's stipend for caregiver services to the amounts of the caregiver stipend to be developed under Public Law 111-163. As a result, any further delay in implementing the caregiver program hinders the implementation of the Defense Department's program as well.

We know you share our view that very seriously injured veterans and servicemembers should not be made to suffer by being denied care essential to daily living. Indeed, we noted the commitments made in the President's most recent State of the Union address, and his comments on the recent release of the report on services for military families, which seem to support prompt assistance to those who have served the nation. The caregivers program is one of the most important ways to assist the families of our servicemembers and veterans and we ask for the immediate completion of any further work so that efforts to implement this program can proceed.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Patty Murray (D-WA), Richard Burr (R-NC), Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Charles Grassley (R-IA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Roger Wicker (R-MS), James Inhofe (R-OK), Mark Begich (D-AK), John D. Rockefeller IV (D-WV), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Scott P. Brown (R-MA), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)

Monday, February 07, 2011

Naomi Wolf, grave digger but no feminist

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Unnatural Obsession" from last night.

The Unnatural Obsession

Grave digger Naomi Wolf (not smart enough to pull herself out of the hole she dug) continues to demonstrate she's not a feminist, not even close to one. But she's also a fraud as a writer. Angus Johnston has been calling on her to issue a correction to her smear against the two women who may have been raped by Julian Assange. She finally offered the closest to one that a liar like Naomi can probably get. Johnston writes:

Well, apparently Wolf got wind of my criticism (or received a nudge from someone else), because sometime in the last week or so she finally added a correction to the HuffPo piece.

Here it is:

The Guardian has, since I wrote this original post based on the Daily Mail, reported that the two women’s complaints to Swedish police centered on the alleged misuse of or failure to use condoms, which can be illegal in Sweden.

Yep. That’s it.

No acknowledgment that she misrepresented her own sources. No apology for ascribing false motives to the accusers. No link to the Guardian story.

And most crucially, no honest description of the allegations themselves.

According to the Guardian’s ccount, accuser A claims that Assange first pinned her down during sex to keep her from getting to her condoms, and then — after subsequently relenting and agreeing to wear one — deliberately tore it so that he could have unprotected sex with her without her knowledge. Accuser W claims that Assange penetrated her vaginally while she slept without using a condom after she had repeatedly told him that she would not have intercourse without protection.

In each of these cases, the women allege that Assange forced himself on them. He is accused of holding A down against her will to keep her from getting at a condom, and then later sabotaging that condom. He is accused of having sex with W while she was unconscious under circumstances in which she had previously explicitly denied him consent to do so. That’s what’s being claimed here. There’s no ambiguity about it.

She lied about the women but she wants you to believe her on Assange? She's such a dirty ass liar. She really is.

There are people I have no respect for. That includes Coleen Rowley. This community doesn't give a damn about that overrated ____. C.I. was really nice months ago and didn't name her but she was one of the ones smearing the women who may have been raped. She did so on KPFA's Flashpoints. We heard it, we're done with her trashy ass.

It's amazing the way they rush to attack women and prop up men.

Last month, Kathleen Barry wrote a response to those attacking the women. It was brief and I didn't highlight it because I didn't know how to pull from it so you could follow. But it's been a month, so I'm going to include her post in full and urge you to check out her site:

Following is my response to Daniel Elsberg’s defense of Julian Aussange against those “false and slanderous” rape charges as if it is inconceivable that Aussange, because he had done important work with Wikileaks could possibly have sexually assaulted those women in Sweden. See http://www.feministpeacenetwork.org/2011/01/06/im-a-left-wing-hero-therefore-i-couldnt-be-a-rapist-or-why-daniel-ellsberg-is-no-longer-my-hero/
Why are the men on the left, progressives the last to get that if one in four women are victims of rape, if pornography and prostitution have become massive industries, that a huge proportion of men sexually exploit women and children? As long ago as 1979 I pointed that out in Female Sexual Slavery. Progressive men appear to think that their entire population is outside of these facts, and hence exonerate Julian Aussange because he is one of them.

Daniel Ellsberg is modeling this behavior and thanks to Feminist Peace Network for exposing it as such, for we, women will have peace without rape or there will be no peace.

Why Daniel Ellsberg did you not personally get the accounts of the Swedish women before you stand in judgment against them? Instead of misogynist male bonding, why do you not call for a thorough police investigation that would either lead to charges being made or Aussange being exonerated. And by the way, you can still support Wikileaks for its courageous and significant work.

Kathleen Barry


If you missed it, Naomi's got another 'column' on WikiLeaks. The woman who made her name cozying up to the brass in Iraq, Nancy A. Youssef, wrote a column. I haven't read it. But Little Naomi finds it amazing. See Nancy was explaining that WikiLeaks wasn't the source, they were just publishing --

What's that?

Yeah, we've heard this from C.I. for months now. But remember, C.I. really called Nancy out on her lies and attacks on Bradley Manning so it's no surprise Nance is raiding C.I.'s writing. Probably helps her have more 'night time' and we all know what I mean (think back to the colleague of Nance's that took part in the roundtable for the gina & krista round-robin last june).

It's really telling that Namoi and the other crazies keep screaming (falsely) "Guantanamo!" and that Julian might be killed! When, reality, Bradley's the one being held, not little Jules Assange.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Monday, February 7, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, the Iraqi Parliament and Nouri mouth a lot of pretty words over the weekend but apparently meant very few, protests alarm and worry the government, the US government seems to think it has money to waste in propping up Nouri's puppet government, and more.
Asked what Barack Obama plans to cut in the budget by Renee Montagne today on Morning Edition (NPR), Cokie Roberts observed, "Well we had a little hint yesterday when his budget director Jack Lew had an op-ed in the New York Times which was titled 'The Easy Cuts are Behind Us,' But he said the administration is ready to cut some things like community services which was near and dear to the president's heart as a former community organizer. That they would cut $350 million out of that, that they would cut a $125 million out of Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and another $300 million out of the community development bloc grants. Now, Renee, I remember the community development bloc grants being on the chopping block back in 1981, thirty years ago when President Reagan was there and they're still with us because the president caught then a lot of flack from mayors and other local officers and, uhm, and so these are not cuts that are easy to make and even if they were they would still just be chicken feed in terms of cutting the deficit. And Lew said that in his op-ed. So it's going to be a big fight ahead."
And yet the federal government wants to drastically increase the budget of the US State Dept. For Fiscal Year 2010, the State Dept budget was $16,389 billion, as noted in [PDF format warning] "The Budget In Brief Fiscal Year 2010." Of that $16,389 billon, "[a]pproximately $1.7 billion of the request is required to support the Department's activities in Iraq, previously funded through supplemental appropriations." From the report:
The Department requires a total of $1.715 billion to maintain operations at the U.S. Mission in Iraq. These funds will support basic mission operations, logistic support, information technology, the sustained operation of up to 27 Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) and overall security requirements. Funding will enable the U.S. Mission to continue to work toward the strategic goal of a unified, democratic Iraq that can govern, defend and sustain itself. The request moves to end the practice of funding these operations through supplemental appropriations, thereby normalizing the budget process.
If money is to be cut, the most obvious place to cut would be the unneeded programs. "Unneeded" would include militarizing the State Dept. Don't look for Jack [Jacob] Lew to suggest that since he doesn't even know how much money the State Dept is asking for re: Iraq. Since he's the Deputy Secretary of State, he should know the money. Of course, he may know the amount and may just be lying. So whichever he sees as more flattering: ignorant or lying. Last Tuesday he gave a press breifing in DC (click here for text and video) and declared, "In the FY 2010 supplemental, funding for Iraq is necessary to assure that these time-sensitive investments proceed on schedule. The 2011 funding for Iraq is $2.5 billion. The programs in Iraq will include police training, rule-of-law programs, and a transition from the current military footprint to a more diplomatic and development presence." $2.5 billion? He declared that Tuesday afternoon. Yet, that morning, in Tuesday's Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, US Ambassador to Iraq declared 2011 would be 3 to 3.5 billion dollars. One might think that possibly Jack Lew found a way to save one billion dollars in a single afternoon. However, Ambassador James Jeffrey also appeared before Thursday's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing and he was using the same figures Thursday that he had used Tuesday.
So who is speaking for the State Dept and why is the department unable to speak in one voice on this issue? And why are we pretending the State Dept needs to spend money in Iraq -- anymore money than they spend for an embassy in England, France or Jordan?
Let's remember this:
A Stable and Democratic Iraq. Now that coalition military forces have ousted Saddam Hussein's regime, the United States will work side-by-side with the Iraqi people to build a free, democratic, and stable Iraq that does not threaten its people or its neighbors. Our goals are for Iraqis to take full control of their country as soon as possible and to maintain its territorial integrity. We will assist the Iraqi people in their efforts to adopt a new constitution, hold elections, and build a legitimate government based on the consent of the governed and respect for the human rights of all Iraqis. We will remain in Iraq as long as necessary, but not one day longer.
That was the State Dept's Mission Statement issued in 2004. Where is the necessary? Do you really think the Iraqis need the US government to burp, wipe bottoms and change diapers? Iraq's now got a Constitution. They've had elections. Hasn't "as long as necessary, but not one day longer" arrived and then some? Especially when the US is in the midst of a recession?
Now the senile and sexist Alan Simpson can go on CNN yesterday (link has video) and, in between discussing his apparently green penis ("Anybody giving you anything different than that, you want to walk out the door, stick your finger down your throat, and give them the green weenie."), demand that cuts be made to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and defense" and the defense industry will resist and protect itself by circling the wagons and preaching paranoia. Libertarian Nick Gillespie (Reason) is the only one noting that Simpson mentioned gutting foreign aid and that he's saying there should have been a tax (should be one now?) on the Iraq War. Gillespie notes, "Well, he's right that the actual folks fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and the people who live in those misbegotten nations too) are the only ones who have sacrificed. The real point, though, is that we don't need to be sacrificing anybody or anything there. We need to get out, sooner rather than later." That should include saying "NO!" very loudly to giving the State Dept monies to train Iraqi security forces, etc.
And while the US government can find money for propping up Nouri, they've never been willing to invest even a fraction of that into aiding Iraqi refugees. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports on refugees being forcibly returned to Iraq from European countries:
Refugee officials say those flown back from Sweden to Baghdad include Christians from Mosul, where the religious minority has been specifically targeted over the last year.
Britain, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden have each signed bilateral agreements with the Iraqi government to return failed asylum seekers, says Umran Riza, the United Nations' top refugee official in Jordan, where hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have sought temporary refuge.
"We've advised these governments to still be cautious about it and we consider it the wrong message to be sending at this time where there is still a great deal of insecurity," he said in a recent interview with the Monitor.
The UN automatically considers any Iraqi from central Iraq to be at enough potential risk to be automatically considered a refugee – a position not shared by the Iraqi or many European governments.
Unrest in Egypt has dominated the news cycles for days and days. Abigail R. Esman (Forbes) ponders the issue of whether "democracy" will come to Egypt and points out:
Five years ago, when a friend was struggling to arrange asylum for a young Iraqi refugee, she ran up against continuing refusal by the US government to open its doors to any of the four million Iraqis displaced by the war in Iraq, many running for their lives simply because they had assisted American journalists or soldiers. "Iraq is a democracy now," US officials said. "She doesn't need asylum here."
If what we saw in Iraq five years ago is what "democracy" really means, then I have, indeed, no doubt: we'll be seeing democracy in Egypt. But I don't believe it is.
Over the weekend, Nizar Latif (The National) reported, "Protesters who stormed government buildings and a police station in a small, poor southern Iraqi town on Thursday continued their demonstrations yesterday, despite a crackdown by security forces." You can refer to Thursday and Friday's snapshots for more on the Diwaniya protests. Saturday, Alsumaria TV reported, "Hundreds of Iraqis took to the streets of Baghdad on Friday in protest against unemployment, freedom restrictions and other demands. Demonstrators waving the photo of late Argentinean revolutionary leader Che Guevara said they had no one to represent them in Iraq. Iraqi demonstrators urged to change the policies in Iraq and accused Parliament of shortcoming." Al Rafidayn noted that they marched on Muntanabi Street, activist, young people and intellectuals, demanding improved services. Al Rafidayn reported Sunday that approximately 250 people demonstrated in Baghad over the continued problems with basic services with some protesters carrying a coffin upon which the term "services" was written and demonstrations took place in Basra. On the Basra protest, the paper quoted a protester who states, "My children and I depend entirely on food rations and will die without them. " The man is a construction worker who gets temporary jobs and he wonders, since they have been unable to afford kerosene, if the government wants his family to burn each other to stay warm? Ramdi and Mosul also saw demonstrations Sunday according to Al Rafidayn. Xinhua reports the Baghdad protest had 3,000 participants. Al Mada notes that the Basra protests demanded that the provincial governor resign. The UK Morning Star quotes professor Nidal al-Sarmad speaking at the protest Sunday in Basra, "The people feel they have been deceived, they are frustrated. The change the Americans brought has brought us a new set of thieves, a new set of dictators, not justice and freedom." Al Mada also features an essay which notes protests in Falluja as well and stresses that these protests are not an attempt to "imitate" either Egypt or Tunisia, that this is the Iraqi people -- with their proud heritage -- demanding that basic services be provided and demanding that the "cake" stop being eaten by politicans while the people starve.
Salar Jaff and Raheem Salman (Los Angeles Times) added that MP Abbas Bayati declared Saturday that the Parliament "will also enact a law that guarantees equilibrium between the salaries of officials and ordinary Iraqis. The current circumstances are pushing us to descrease expenses and salaries, and spend them on the low income classes." Pushing? The Parliament's not held sessions during the recent holiday and only sprung back into them last week. Last week has seen a lot of words but not a lot of action.
And words versus actions? After airing words of salary cuts, Al Mada reports today, there is a split in the Iraqi National Alliance on this issue and that it was said they would not be voting on the issue of salary reduction. Al Mada notes they were not the only political bloc in Parliament objecting to cutting their own salaries and allowances.
Of course no one does easy, meaningless words like Nouri. Saturday, his words included the announcement that he wouldn't seek a third term. His spokesperson discussed the 'decision' and Nouri himself announced the decision to Sammy Ketz of AFP in an interview. Ketz reported him stating he won't seek a third term, that 8 years is enough and that he supports a measure to the Constitution limiting prime ministers to two terms.

Well Jalal Talabani declared he wouldn't seek a second term as President of Iraq in an interview and then . . . took a second term. Point, if you're speaking to a single journalist, it really doesn't seem to matter what you say. Did Nouri announce his decision to the people? No, Iraqhurr.org is quite clear that an advisor made an announcement and that Malliki made no "public statement" today.


In other words, a statement in an interview is the US political equivalent of "I have no plans to run for the presidency" uttered more than two years before a presidential election. That's Iraqi politicians in general. Nouri? This is the man who's never kept a promise and who is still denying the existence of secret prisons in Iraq. Deyaar Bamami (Iraqhurr.org) notes the Human Rights Watch report on the secret prisons and that they are run by forces Nouri commands.
And Nouri couldn't even make it 24 hours with his latest 'big promise.' Sunday, Ben Lando and Munaf Ammar (Wall St. Journal) reported that Nouri's spokesperson, Ali al-Mousawi, declared today, "We would like to correct this article. Maliki said, 'I think that the period of eight years is adequate for the application of a successful program to the prime minister, and if he is not successful, he must vacate his place'." Of course he's not announcing that. He's a thug. His previous four year term was an utter failure.

That's not speculation, that's not opinion. He agreed to the benchmarks that the White House set. He was supposed to achieve those in 2007. Those benchmarks, supposedly, were what would determine whether or not the US tax payer continued to foot the bill for the illegal war. But he didn't meet those benchmarks and apologists rushed forward to pretend like they weren't a year long thing and that, in fact, he had 2008 as well. Well 2008 came and went and the benchmarks were still not met. Nor were they in 2009. Nor were they in his last year in 2010.

That's failure. When you agree you will meet certain things -- such as resolving the Kirkuk issue -- and you do not, you are a failure. Not only did he fail at the benchmarks, he failed in providing Iraqis with basic services. He failed in providing them with security.

There is no grading system by which Nouri can be seen as a success.

But just as he will not admit to or own his failures from his first term as prime minister, do not expect to own or admit to his failures in his second term. In other words, Little Saddam wants to be around, and heading the Iraqi government, for a long, long time.


In other Nouri news, Al Mada reports that there are rumors of a reshuffling on Nouri's Cabinet in the next few months. Nabil al-Haidari (Iraqhurr.org) reports that efforts are now underweigh to provide the ration card system with actual rations the way they once were (US pressure has repeatedly led to more and more items being dropped from the rations system) and Nouri and his cabinet promised Friday that provinces will not experience shortages of what is currently offered. (No more will they experience shortages, that's the promise. A Nouri promise so refer to earlier for what that actually means.) Al Mada reports that Parliament wants an investgiation into the police interaction with protestors in Diwaniya (they shot at them). Al Sabaah notes that the Wafaa Amer Council has issued a call for Baghdad to train the country's security forces on how to interact with protestors.

Regardless of how serious the words are, they indicate grave concern over the protests that have been taking place in Iraq especially when put in context with the other protests in the region.
Meanwhile Nouri is called out for still not naming a Minister of Security with many worrying that armed militias will once again call the shots in the streets. And there is still no National Council -- the body Nouri promised to end the political stalemate, the one that is supposed to be headed by Ayad Allawi. (Anthony Shadid has a lengthy feature article profiling Allawi in the New York Times Sunday Magazine.) Al Rafidayn notes the upcoming meeting between Nouri and Allawi is said to be "crucial" for Iraq's future and survival. Al Mada notes that Allawi released a statement Sunday declaring his belief that the National Council will be created and that it's creation does not conflict with the Constitution. The statement comes one day after Alsumaria TV reported that Allawi was asking KRG President Massoud Barazani to intervene on this issue. Alsumaria TV reports today, "Al Iraqiya List cashed in on the lack of services issue brought to light recently in Iraq to pick holes in the new government which they are still reluctant to take part into. In a meeting with his bloc, Al Iraqiya leader Iyad Allawi stressed the necessity for the Iraqi government to take drastic measures in order to resolve the services shortage in the country."
Today's reported violence? Reuters notes a Taji roadside bombing which left two people injured, a Baquba roadside bombing which left three people wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing which left two police officers injured, 2 Iskandairya roadside bombings which claimed the lives of 1 Iraqi military officer and 1 woman, a Baghdad roadside bombing which wounded four people (two were Iraqi soldiers) and another Baghdad roadside boming which left two people wounded.
Among the many targeted groups in 'democratic' Iraq have been women. Manal Omar is the author of Barefoot in Baghdad: A Story of Identity -- My Own and What it Means to be a Woman in Chaos. At the University of Southern California, she spoke with Professor Najeeba Syeed-Miller about what she found in Iraq -- here for part one, here for part two. Excerpt from part one.
Manal Omar: Amazing, powerful Iraqi women were on the ground. And there's always been a tradition of very strong women in Iraq. I mean, Iraq, like many other things in terms that they were the lead in the region on health care, they were the lead in the region on education and they were the lead on women's rights. The Iraqi Personal Status Law which deals with inheritance and divorce and marriage was one of the strongest laws since 1958. You know, Iraqi women had the right to vote since 1980. A lot of their neighboring countries still don't have that right. So when I came in, you find these really strong, older women who have been working on Iraq -- on rights for a long time. I say older because one grandmother, an Iraqi grandmother, told me 'Iraq is one of those countries where you've actually had to watch generation after generation get worse.' And you know, every grandmother's dream is to see her granddaughter have opportunity to do more than she did. Whereas you'll find in Iraq, the grandmothers who have traveled, who have higher education. You'll find the mother who maybe has a BA but has traveled only to neighboring countries. And the granddaughter who's only finished high school -- if she's lucky -- and never left her area. And that's because of sanctions and the Iran - Iraq War and these other wars. So by the time you got into Iraq, you saw this huge discrephancy between the younger generation and the older generation. And the older generation is where I started forging the allies. A lot of these women that I mentioned in the book, as they become exposed, some of them were participants. So people who were part of the program, as they became exposed to the program, the way that they just started leaping forward -- something that we would plant, they would, you know, start trail blazing in their own way what was important. And other women like Khanim who runs a women's shelter in the north of Iraq, in the Kurdish area, was really very much taking huge risk in providing shelter and support for Iraqi women all across the country. And she did it in a way that I think is very unique in the region itself which is that she didn't just provide protection to women, but she actually would capture all their stories. So, for example, women who were, you know, violence against women or under 'honor' crimes were killed, she had a deal with the hospitals where they would usually call her before they called the police. And she would come to the morgues and she would actually take pictures of the burn victims and all these corpses. And the next time, which is the third component of her work -- So she had this research component -- was when she started campaigning and advocating with decision makers about it, their first response, as we all know, is 'This never happens. This is exaggeration. This is a western ploy' She would show them the pictures. And she would always say that would make everyone automatically quiet because she was able to show them proof. And she also worked within the community. And she always emphasized this isn't part of the culture, this isn't part of the religion. She provided a safe space where people didn't have to be on the defensive and was saying, "This isn't normal in our society. We have to fight it."
Barefoot in Baghdad: A Story of Identity -- My Own and What it Means to be a Woman in Chaos. documents the lives of many Iraqi women and girls. Kalthoum is a young girl, not yet an adult, that Manal Omar attempted to help. She's already been forced into a marriage at 13, then into prostitution. From the book:
I called several Iraqi women's organizations for information, as I knew they would be the only people to tell me the truth about her situation. They all confirmed my worse fears: her return to her family would be a death sentence.
Yet Kalthoum was fully aware of this. In her heart of hearts, she seemed to believe it to be a reasonable sentence. Over the span of a few days, Kalthoum had developed a strong sense of the cosmic powers of karma, and she begged me to allow her to pay her dues to her family so that her suffering would end.
She explained to me repeatedly that her live was over and that the decisions she had made had left little room for her to start over. However, she had four unmarried sisters at home. Her scandal had reached the tribe. Before, she believed that people would think she had been kidnapped or killed, and there would be no way to confirm she had abandoned her husband and broken the family honor. Now it was confirmed. If she were to go back to her family and face her sentence, then honor would be restored. If she were to run away, then her four unmarried sisters would pay the price. They would be shunned by society and would never marry because of their sister's tarnished reputation. Worse yet, she argued, they would be forced into unsuitable marriages as a third or fourth wife. Her mistakes were hers alone, and Kalthoum wanted to be able to face them directly. She smiled at me and explained that she had been given choices in her life, and she had made the wrong ones. Now it was time for her to pay for her poor choices. Kalthoum was only sixteen. That was the lone thought that went directly rhough my mind as she pleaded with me to help her get back to her family. What life was this girl talking about? What choices? Was she really given a choice when she was married off? Or tricked into prostitution? Was her family really given a choice, fighting to survive war after war and a decade of international sanctions?
I shook my head. I knew that the final decision would rest in my hands. For God's sake, how was I supposed to make such a judgment call? Whatever I would decide would mean life or death for Kalthoum and a string of unpredictable consequences for her sisters. Only in a war zone would a twenty-eight-year-old have so much power.
Turning to the US, last week came the news that home foreclosures were increasing among veterans and that 15.2% was the unemployment rate for young Iraq and Afghanistan War veterans. Senator Patty Murray's office issued the following on Friday:



(Washington, D.C.) -- Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), released the following statement after the Department of Labor reported that the unemployment rate for veterans rose to 9.9% overall, and 15.2% for veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"This is a very disappointing report that demonstrates clearly the need for us to move quickly to help our nation's veterans find jobs.

"We all know that veterans going from the battlefield to the working world face a unique set of challenges. And as we see with today's numbers, far too many of our veterans coming home from overseas are having trouble finding work in this tough economic climate.

"Our veterans have the skills, determination, discipline and talent to succeed in the workplace, but despite learning a wide range of technical and leadership skills through their service, they often find it difficult to transfer these skills to civilian professions. And all too often, they fall through the cracks of existing employment assistance programs or do not qualify for their services.

"So I am going to keep working to pass legislation to help our veterans find jobs. Because no veteran should come home from serving their country and not be able find work that would allow them to support themselves and their families."

Last Congress, Senator Murray introduced the Veterans' Employment Act of 2010, which was the first comprehensive approach to address skyrocketing unemployment rates among veterans, especially those returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill included a number of proposals that improve training, skills translation, education, and small business assistance. Murray plans to introduce similar legislation in the near future.

Patty Murray is the new Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. Hal Bernton (Seattle Times) points out she's the first woman to chair the Committee and that "[t]he last time a Washington senator chaired a full committee was in the early 1980s, when Sen. Warren Magnuson chaired the Senate Appropriations Committee and Sen. Henry Jackson led the Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee."
On the subject of veterans, we'll note this upcoming Iraq Veterans Against the War event:

February 25, 2011 9:30 - 10:30 am
Busboys & Poets, Langston room
14th & V st NW Washington DC
This report back will be to answer questions from media and the peace movement about the recent trip back to Iraq by members of Iraq Veterans Against the War. The war is not over but it is not the same as it was in years past. What is the humanitarian situation in Iraq?
How can we do reparations and reconciliation work?
Speakers are all returning from this delegation and include:
Geoff Millard (IVAW) Hart Viges (IVAW) Haider Al-Saedy (Iraqi Health Now)
Richard Rowely (
Big Noise Films)
And next month, A.N.S.W.E.R. and March Forward! and others will be taking part in this action:

March 19 is the 8th anniversary of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Iraq today remains occupied by 50,000 U.S. soldiers and tens of thousands of foreign mercenaries.

The war in Afghanistan is raging. The U.S. is invading and bombing Pakistan. The U.S. is financing endless atrocities against the people of Palestine, relentlessly threatening Iran and bringing Korea to the brink of a new war.

While the United States will spend $1 trillion for war, occupation and weapons in 2011, 30 million people in the United States remain unemployed or severely underemployed, and cuts in education, housing and healthcare are imposing a huge toll on the people.

Actions of civil resistance are spreading.

On Dec. 16, 2010, a veterans-led civil resistance at the White House played an important role in bringing the anti-war movement from protest to resistance. Enduring hours of heavy snow, 131 veterans and other anti-war activists lined the White House fence and were arrested. Some of those arrested will be going to trial, which will be scheduled soon in Washington, D.C.

Saturday, March 19, 2011, the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, will be an international day of action against the war machine.

Protest and resistance actions will take place in cities and towns across the United States. Scores of organizations are coming together. Demonstrations are scheduled for San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and more.

Click this link to endorse the March 19, 2011, Call to Action.