The grown ups?

BULLY BOY PRESS &   CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

FOR BARRY O, IT'S ANOTHER TOUR AND MORE WORDS.

FIVE YEARS NOW, THAT'S FAILED TO PRODUCE RESULTS. 

BUT HE LOVES TO BE IN FRONT OF THE CAMERAS.

REACHED FOR COMMENT BY THESE REPORTERS, BARRY O SAID A NEW IDEA WOULD PARALYZE THE COUNTRY, "WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.  TRUST US.  WE'RE THE ADULTS IN THE ROOM.  WHAT!!!! OH COME ON!  GUYS, WHO TOOK MY JUICE BOX?  YOU KNEW THAT WAS MY JUICE BOX!"


FROM THE TCI WIRE:



Lynne Stewart is a US political prisoner.  For the 'crime' of issuing a press release, she was eventually tossed in prison.  The'crime' happened on Attorney General Janet Reno's watch.  Reno has her detractors who think she was far too tough as Attorney General.  She also has her supporters who see her as a moderate.  No one saw her as 'soft.'  Reno had her Justice Department review what happened.  There was no talk of a trial because there was no crime.  No law was broken.  The Justice Department imposes guidelines -- not written by Congress, so not laws -- on attorneys.  Lynne was made to review the guidelines and told not to break it again.  That was her 'punishment' under Janet Reno.  Bully Boy Bush comes into office and the already decided incident becomes a way for Attorney General John Ashcroft to try to build a name for himself. He goes on David Letterman's show to announce, after 9-11, that they're prosecuting Lynne for terrorism.

Eventually tossed in prison?  Even Bully Boy Bush allowed Lynne to remain out on appeal.  It's only when Barack Obama becomes president that Lynne gets tossed in prison.  It's only under Barack that the US Justice Depart disputes the judge's sentence and demands a harsher one (under the original sentence Lynne would be out now).  Lynne's cancer has returned.

Her husband Ralph Poynter  and Mya Shone and Ralph Schoenman provide an important update this week:


A major milestone has been reached in the struggle for Lynne Stewart's freedom. Lynne Stewart wrote on April 26 to confirm that the Warden at FMC Carswell recommended Compassionate Release to the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
“So Happy that the Compassionate Release was granted at Carswell and we are on the road!!!
"Who DID It? --- The People Yes – and we certainly deserve a VICTORY and this is one for sure!!”
With this dramatic development, the International Campaign to Save the Life of Lynne Stewart crossed a critical threshold. We directed our attention immediately to Charles E. Samuels, Jr., the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
Following two expedited communications from former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, a probation officer charged with inspecting the residence designated for Lynne Stewart's recovery was dispatched to the home of her son, attorney Geoffrey Stewart. Soon afterwards, we were notified that the residence was approved.
Thus, another hurdle has been overcome, paving the way for Lynne Stewart's Compassionate Release.
There is no time to lose. Lynne Stewart has been in quarantine for several weeks at FMC Carswell since her white blood count dropped precipitously. As Ramsey Clark wrote to BOP Director Samuels:
"Further medical tests reveal that the cancer that had metastasized rapidly to her lungs, lymph nodes and shoulder remains aggressive. If the series of chemotherapy treatments slowed its spread in certain areas, it has not attenuated in her lungs. … The sustained treatment and preparations by the medical team at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City are critical to her survival.”
This is the moment to intensify our global mobilization. We must prevail upon the director of the Bureau of Prisons to file the motion for compassionate release with Judge John Koetl, the sentencing judge.
ASK FIVE OF YOUR FRIENDS OR COLLEAGUES TO SIGN THE PETITION. PUT THE PETITION ON YOUR FACEBOOK PAGE AND SEND A TWITTER MESSAGE NOW.
Among the latest signers are: Fr. Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, Bianca Jagger, Margaret Ratner Kunstler, Mark Lane, Noam Chomsky, Medea Benjamin, Rosa Clemente, Kathy Kelly, James Ridgeway and William Blum. 


On Law and Disorder Radio last month, Michael Ratner (Center for Constitutional Rights) provided the work address for BP Director Charles E. Samuels, Jr.:


Charles E. Samuels Jr.
Federal Bureau of Prisons
320 First Street, NW
Washington, DC 20534

Lynne's been there when people have needed her -- everyone from so-called 'respectable' people to people no one else would help.  That's how she earned the title of "The People's Attorney."  She never should have been put in prison in the first place and she needs to be out now to get the treatment she needs, to have the support system of her family and her friends (and a support system is very important when you're being treated for cancer).  She turns 74 this year.  She's not a threat to anyone and she needs to be home.




Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.  I referred in the Tuesday snapshot to how Julian loses his case.  A number of people want clarification.  If the goal is to get Julian Assange out of London to Ecuador, then they're again bungling everything.

Julian Assange is a divisive figure.  You may not like that fact if he's your hero or someone you support but the ugly truth needs to be told and it needs to be recognized.  What his legal team wrongly thinks is that they can 'humanize' Julian Assange.  No.

That will not happen.  Assange is not an unknown where the problem is people just don't know him.  He's not a cypher that you can write a new pattern over.  He is a known.  And he pisses a number of people off.  If you want him out of the Embassy in London, you need to quit lying and start recognizing reality.

Before the rape allegations emerged, Julian Assange were already divisive.  Long before they emerged, South Park was mocking him (he was a rat).  He's also seen as an ego maniac.  We can list all of his negatives but, if you're honest with yourself, you know how he's seen.

The key to Assange's freedom is not Celebrity Profile Assange!

And every time one of those appears, he looks stupid (and trivial) to all but his small fan base.  That's not enough support.  To garner more support, his legal team needs to grasp that WikiLeaks is more popular than Julian.  When he gives interviews, he needs to be talking about WikiLeaks.  No one needs his thoughts on today's 'hot topics.'  He needs to give interviews where he talks about what WikiLeaks has done but, most importantly, what WikiLeaks can do, what's up next.

Julian Assange's value is limited.  He's one person and not someone who polls well.  (As his legal team knows from repeat polling but they keep kidding themselves that they're just one soft feature away from convincing the people that they actually love Assange.)  WikiLeaks is where the value is -- provided WikiLeaks is publishing.  WikiLeaks as a curio from the past?  Not going to motivate people.  WikiLeaks still active today (which it is) and that the focus of any Julian Assange interview is what lets his issues become issues that matter.

You tie him into WikiLeaks, you make the case for WikiLeaks.  He doesn't become more likable in the process but he's off the table.  It's no longer bout what Julian does as Julian Assange it's about what WikiLeaks does.  I've made this argument repeatedly.  People nod (I'm thinking of two of his attorneys) and claim insight.  But then we get the nonsense like the Chris Hedges interview.  Chris is going to softball Julian.  He's going to fluff.  He's the best (most favorable) interviewer Julian could have.  And Julian and Michael Ratner wasted that interview with crap like what Julian Assange thinks about gay people in the military.

No one cares.  Leave aside that the repeated use of "homosexual" at a time when most say "gay and lesbian" made it seem as if Julian was ridiculing gays and lesbians, there was no need for the topic and it had nothing to do with WikiLeaks.  Every time he goes off topic, he risks saying something offensive and his favorables are so low he can't afford to turn off any more people.

The topic has to be WikiLeaks.  By hard selling its past impact, its current work and, most important, where the future leads for WikiLeaks, you're suddenly on the issues that more people care about and you're making a case for extraditing Assange by sketching out something much more important than one person.

Matt Sledge (Huffington Post) reports, "Fed up with the military's limits on access to the court martial of Bradley Manning, the Army private who has admitted to sending hundreds of thousands of sensitive documents to the transparency organization WikiLeaks, a nonprofit group announced Thursday that it is crowdfunding a court stenographer to create daily trial transcripts." That's a topic that should have been raised with Chris Hedges.  That's the sort of thing that WikiLeaks needs to be doing.

Vivienne Westwood revolutionized fashion beginning with the punk movement in the 70s so she was a natural for the Metropolitan Museum of Art's gala this week celebrating the exhibit PUNK: Chaos To Courture (which runs through August 14th).  Karen Dacre (Evening Standard) reports, "The inimitable Vivienne Westwood -- a vision in a pale pink kimono and grey ruched waist dress from her own label -- led the charge.  And rightly so, the British designer is the godmother of the era this whole evening was devised to celebrate." But not everyone was impressed.  Lucy Waterlow (Daily Mail) explains that, on the red carpet, Vivienne was questioned by Vogue's Billy Norwich on a live feed and Norwich quickly cut her off.  Norwich was bothered by her brooch and her discussing it.  Michael Dickinson (CounterPunch) explains Vivienne's brooch was a large photo of Bradley Manning with the word "TRUTH" on it and that Norwich cut her off after Vivienne said:

The most important thing is my jewelry, which is a picture of Bradley Manning.  I’m here to promote Bradley.  He needs public support for what’s going on with secret trials and trying to lock him away.  He’s the bravest of the brave, and that’s what I really want to say more than anything. Because punk, when I did punk all those years ago, my motive was the same: Justice, and to try to have a better world. It really was about that. I’ve got different methods nowadays.



The background on whistle blower Bradley Manning.  Monday April 5, 2010, WikiLeaks released US military video of a July 12, 2007 assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters journalists Namie Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh. Monday June 7, 2010, the US military announced that they had arrested Bradley Manning and he stood accused of being the leaker of the video. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) reported in August 2010 that Manning had been charged -- "two charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first encompasses four counts of violating Army regulations by transferring classified information to his personal computer between November and May and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system. The second comprises eight counts of violating federal laws governing the handling of classified information." In March, 2011, David S. Cloud (Los Angeles Times) reported that the military has added 22 additional counts to the charges including one that could be seen as "aiding the enemy" which could result in the death penalty if convicted. The Article 32 hearing took place in December. At the start of this year, there was an Article 32 hearing and, February 3rd, it was announced that the government would be moving forward with a court-martial. Bradley has yet to enter a plea. The court-martial was supposed to begin before the November 2012 election but it was postponed until after the election so that Barack wouldn't have to run on a record of his actual actions.  Independent.ie adds, "A court martial is set to be held in June at Ford Meade in Maryland, with supporters treating him as a hero, but opponents describing him as a traitor."  February 28th, Bradley admitted he leaked to WikiLeaks.  And why.


Bradley Manning:   In attempting to conduct counter-terrorism or CT and counter-insurgency COIN operations we became obsessed with capturing and killing human targets on lists and not being suspicious of and avoiding cooperation with our Host Nation partners, and ignoring the second and third order effects of accomplishing short-term goals and missions. I believe that if the general public, especially the American public, had access to the information contained within the CIDNE-I and CIDNE-A tables this could spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in general as [missed word] as it related to Iraq and Afghanistan.
I also believed the detailed analysis of the data over a long period of time by different sectors of society might cause society to reevaluate the need or even the desire to even to engage in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations that ignore the complex dynamics of the people living in the effected environment everyday.




RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"The flooding continues in Iraq -- and it should ha..."
"Nouri rushes to prevent outbreak of peace"
"Peace?"
"What those CODEPINK crazies won't do"
"Crazies on the Committee (Ava)"
"Biggest Coward at today's Committee hearing"
"An order to stand down"
"If today were a movie . . ."
"TV"
"Body of Proof"
"Fred Mazelis begs on his knees"
"Lauren Wolfe is the new Judy Miller"
"The White House plans a field trip -- if Barack promises to be good!"
"THIS JUST IN! PARTNER UP FOR THE FIELD TRIP!"