Monday, January 15, 2007

Media

Although Clear-Channel is the villain-of-choice at all media reform conferences, the biggest corporate footprint in African American radio, is Black. Radio One, with 69 stations in 22 of the top Black markets, geographically outweighs Clear-Channel, with 51 Black-oriented stations. But they have a critical element in common: neither provides local news. In political terms, they should be viewed as identical.
Yet most discussions of media reform simply decry the general distress among surviving (small) Black radio owners, while leaving blameless those Black corporate players that have benefited from consolidation – such as Radio One, whose star rose to mega-heights following passage of the corporate-written Telecommunications Act of 1996. "The company's voraciousness mirrored the consolidation throughout the radio industry after rules limiting the number of stations one company could own nationally were lifted in 1996," wrote the Washington Post, in
February 5, 2003. This, despite the general decline in minority owners' fortunes. Or plausibly, because of it.
If there is to be effective action to bring back Black local radio news, it must take the form of an organizers movement, spearheaded by those groups that still labor in the trenches of social change in the various localities – grassroots organizations whose predecessors’ struggles, decades ago, were catapulted from the paper-flyer age into the mass broadcast arena, when news from a Black radio source was available to be acted upon by millions of people. The Internet will not suffice; neither will alternative broadcast forms, as valuable a contribution as these mediums represent. The people listen to commercial Black radio, and the struggle must be taken to the proprietors' doorsteps – regardless of race. Indeed, it is most crucial that activists rid themselves of the atavistic, counterproductive urge to embrace Black corporations that commit the same anti-Black crimes as whites. Such behavior is rooted in Jim Crow yesterdays, unfit to confront today’s crises.
"The Internet will not suffice; neither will alternative broadcast forms."
So long has it been since Black local radio news was a fixture of life, even activists who should know better fail to demand its reinstitution. New York City Councilman Charles Barron, a tireless fighter and former Black Panther, recently appeared on the venerable Gil Noble’s WABC-TV program "Like It Is" to protest the conversion of Black-owned WLIB-AM to an
all-Gospel format. Barron and a fellow activist were insistent that the new WLIB provide "information" as well as music, but somehow could not "fix their lips" to utter the word "news." Instead, they limited themselves to lobbying for the reinstatement of their favorite talk show hosts. Apparently, activists as well as radio audiences have forgotten that it is a regular diet of relevant local news, not subject to the whimsies of personality talk radio, that far more effectively empowers those who are engaged in the serious work of sustained social transformation in an electronic age.
The segmentation of radio -- slicing it up into isolated demographics, sealed off from one another’s conversations -- that is the hallmark of corporate consolidation, becomes even more destructive to the social fabric in the absence of regular news broadcasts. When massive immigrants rights demonstrations were held in Los Angeles and other cities last year, Black-oriented
Emmis Communications station KKBT-FM "completely ignored one million people in the streets," Davey D told this writer. It was "similar to the Million Man March right on their doorstep," yet to KKBT and its listeners, it "didn't exist."
Without local news operations to keep highly segmented listening audiences aware of what the other "demos" are doing, there is little prospect of truly mass political action across lines of age and ethnicity. Substituting for news, Black-oriented radio offers celebrity crap. Davey D, again:
"Cam'ron wanted to 'battle' JZ and would come after him… Cam-ron put out a song, held a press conference, and everybody showed up, not just the entertainment media.
"I can go from New York to California, and everyone has an opinion on JZ vs. Cam’ron. But people don’t know about the Latino march -- in a city that’s filled with racial conflict!"
People's power can only trump corporate power when the people are enabled to learn of each other’s struggles and make decisions on whether commonality exists, or not. That's a job for news operations that are in tune with the concerns of local communities. It is also the spirit of the founding
Communications Act of 1934, which Black journalists and activists followed to its logical, empowering conclusion in the Seventies, until Black radio news was snuffed out by both Black and white corporate power.

That's from Glen Ford's "Bring Back Black Radio News -- The People's Network" (Black Agenda Report) and the struggle for equality did not end with MLK's death so, if you do something today, think about what Ford is writing about (and you can read his full essay by using the link).
I read that Sunday and thought it was worth noting (and thanks to C.I. for noting another section for me Sunday at The Common Ills).

Today, we ended up doing a group post and the topic of that is media reform as well. I think Ford's right that media reform has to include the African-American media (and he's right on that it dishes gossip in place of news too often). I think we need to expand the topic of media reform and I include independent media in that expansion.

As an African-American, I'm aware both that African-American media tends to sell us celebrity and that the mainstream media reduces us to criminals, sports stars and singers. I'm equally aware that our contributions are ignored or dismissed beyond the mainstream media, I'm speaking of the general independent media.

The death of Coretta Scott King will always be a standout point to me as I saw who in independent media thought it was worth seriously noting (a paragraph doesn't cut it -- though Bob Herbert and The Nation both thought it did). There weren't many. But they tell us we're included. We're not. When Coretta Scott King dies and they have nothing to offer, we're not included. If we can play cheerleader for some Democratic candidate, we can be included. If we're dead for several years, we can be included. If we have thoughts and ideas, we're generally shoved to the side because page after page, hour after hour that space and time is needed to find out what White Males think. Apparently, White Males, especially middle-aged ones, need so much independent media air time and space because their opinions are ignored by mainstream media -- ha, ha.

So I was glad to be asked to participate. I'll note that Blogger/Blogspot had serious problems today and we lost sections throughout. I am proud of what we do have to offer and glad that we addressed it. Hopefully, you will be as well.



The media's collapse, said actor and activist Jane Fonda in an earlier speech, shielded the government's own failures.
Telling the story of
Abeer Qasim Hamza, a 15-year-old Iraqi who was raped and murdered by U.S. soldiers, Fonda criticized the news media's impotence in covering the war.
"The cold-blooded murder of Abeer and her family is a tragedy," Fonda said. "But it's almost as great a tragedy when her story and all the other stories that are difficult to hear and difficult to accept are buried in the back of news pages and quickly shuffled off the nightly news." She added: "A truly powerful media is one that can stop a war, not start one."
A founder of the Women's Media Center, which advocates for greater representation of women in media and in newsrooms, Fonda said American journalism takes pride in balance but "forgets that the world is not divided only by right and left."
"During the coverage of the 2004 elections," she added, "journalists were more than twice as likely to turn to a male source than a woman."


The above, noted by Cindy, is from Trevor Aaronson's "Fonda Wraps up Media Conference: Advocate for women in newsrooms says journalism forgets divide not just right and left" (Memphis Commerical Appeal via Common Dreams). That's a jumpoing off point for a joint entry. Participating are:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and, me, Jim;
Rebecca of
Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude;
Kat of
Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills);
Betty of
Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man;
C.I. of
The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review;
Cedric of
Cedric's Big Mix;
Mike of
Mikey Likes It!;
Elaine of
Like Maria Said Paz;
and Wally of
The Daily Jot


Fonda's comments strike at the heart of the problems with media today. They address the issue of Abeer, Iraq, and the portrayal of the 'other' (anyone who's non-White, non-middle-aged, non-straight, and non-White). As Rebecca has argued, Abeer's story is the story of Iraq.And what did the media do with it?

Independent media ignored it. Early on (June), it looked like there might be some interest in but that was quickly dropped as independent media marched off elsewhere. It never really bothered to pick up the story after it was done completely ignoring Iraq. No article in The Nation ever ran on Abeer or has run as of today. A fourteen-year-old girl was gang raped, murdered, her five-year-old sister was murdered, her parents were murdered and the initial blame for the war crimes was 'insurgents.' The reality was that the war crimes were committed by non-Iraqis. In November, James P. Barker admitted to his involvement in the war crimes (he entered the home as part of a plan to rape Abeer and kill her and others in the house). His court confession also included the actions of others. Since they've yet to be tried, or to confess, you can toss "alleged" in front of their names if you like.

But Abeer was raped and killed and where was the media when the details emerged?
The Washington Post, the Associated Press, Off Our Backs and Robin Morgan were accounted for, they weighed in. Where was everyone else?

The New York Times specialized in a funny sort of reporting. Before the defense could present their legal argument in an Article 32 hearing that was held in August, the New York Times, supposedly presenting objective reporting, managed to run an opinion piece as reporting and somehow managed to argue the defense's case. In a piece published before the defense had presented their case. In a defense that a military legal expert said had no known basis in legal history. Wow. Those New York Times reporters (Carolyn Marshall and Robert F. Worth) are certainly amazing. They predicted it all -- and without any help from the defense! What seers are they.

The New York Times specialized in another kind of reporting on the war crimes -- never mentioning Abeer's name. To name the victim would be to give a face to her and since their own 'reporting' had already crossed the line into advocacy journalism (not anything wrong with advocacy journalism but the paper self-presents as 'objective') it was very clear that their interest wasn't in the truth, wasn't in reporting what happened, but in rendering Abeer and what happened to her invisible. How do you, as reporters at the paper repeatedly did, cover the trial of men accused of gang raping and murdering Abeer and never manage to mention her name?


You do it very carefully when you're interests are in managing and mitigating public opinion. Better to make her a faceless victim if you're interested in continuing to sell the illegal war which the paper is interested in doing.


Now the paper's actions should have been called out. So you might think you got that. You didn't. If in no other way, The Nation could have covered Abeer as a media topic. There media columnist could have addressed the way the paper of record rendered Abeer invisible. But he wasn't interested in that. AlterPunk was interested in useless articles such as his lengthy take on why the New York Times shouldn't run unsigned editorials -- a column that ran in a magazine (The Nation) which runs unsigned editorials.

He was interested in getting upset that he'd recently learned the New York Times' policy on quoting from comments on websites was questionable. In a piece where they rushed to lynch Janet Jackson -- a piece riddled with inaccuracies, only a few of which resulted in corrections by the paper -- it was apparently okay to 'doctor' a quote from a website. The paper is aware of the docotring -- at every level -- and they issued no correction on that. If AlterPunk wants to feign shock about the Times' 'quoting' from websites, he might do better to know the paper's history on it.) (Altering quotes, failure to research your articles, presenting half-baked theories that blow up with the most basic examination and not even grasping that just because you say something was or wasn't a number one doesn't make it true didn't result in the arts section's version of Judith Miller being banned from the paper for anyone interested. We could also touch on the topic of allowing people to create titles for themselves and the paper running with them. That started in the arts section and then, as the Times well knows up through the editorial offices -- carried over to the front page of the news section. The defense on that, expressed by the editor responsible for the front page piece, was that the executive in question didn't like his actual title so he preferred to use a title that doesn't exist. That may be the executive's wish but if the company wanted him to have that title, they'd give it to him. (They haven't and his being billed by a title he doesn't hold has caused anger at the company and caused those still expressing disbelief to note that when you're 'friends' with writers at the paper you can write your own ticket in what passes for 'objective' reporting.) Maybe the Cindy Brady of the faux left can next tackle that?

Probably not because it's safer for all involved (safer translates as coverage and book reviews) to offer up useless topics (unsigned editorials? A pressing issue in the bull pens of high school papers, no doubt) .

And independent media played 2006 safe and cowardly with few exceptions.

Today, John Nichols and Katrina vanden Heuvel write of Dr. Martin Luther King. It may be less than generous to note that the magazine's choosing to note him on the federal holiday in his honor. It's pointing the obvious to note that the passing last year of Coretta Scott King produced no article -- in print or 'online exclusive.' So it strikes us as a more than apalling that the same magazine who didn't appear to give a damn about Coretta Scott King now rushes pieces on MLK to their website.


Like Abeer, Coretta Scott King meets the defnition of an 'other.' African-American, a woman, she couldn't get any traction. The media critic for The Nation couldn't even note that the paper of little record didn't editorialize about her passing -- though, in the same week, they could note a playwright (and personal friend of Gail Collins) who died. Her passing didn't rate a column either. The closest to a column, and the only mention in the editorial section, was Bob Herbert's tacked on one paragraph noting she had died.

What does that say? What does the above say?

Quite a lot and if people want to address media reform, they better do seriously. The Nation is the left magazine with the largest circulation so we'll focus on it.

In 2006, when both Katha Pollitt and Naomi Klein were on leave while they worked on books, two prime spots were open to be temporarily filled. When two strong voices are absent and they happen to be female, you might think The Nation would fill those spots with women. But apparently having nearly wall to wall contributions from male writers wasn't quite enough for "Nobody Owns The Nation," they needed more male voices.

This operating belief goes a long way towards explaining why a freelancer placed her article on Abu Ghraib last year not with The Nation but with a fashion magazine (Marie Claire). The Nation should be leading and it isn't. That's in terms of what gets covered and who gets to cover it. (Already in 2007, their appalling low number of pieces written by women threaten to match the disgraceful numbers for 2006.)

Is the nation White, male, middle aged and straight in all regards? No, but if you got that impression from reading The Nation in 2006, your mistaken beliefs were certainly supported by the magazine.

Alternative media is supposed to provide an alternative, to present what media could be. (On a lower budget, granted.) Offering what the mainstream provides (often the worst it provides -- such as handicapping political races as though they were horse races) but with a left/Democratic spin (for many in independent media, the 'left' view is determined by what the DNC decides it is) isn't an alternative. It's a negative, a photographic negative, it's the bizarro world, it's just not an alternative.

An alternative requires providing an alternative. That requires covering topics that the mainstream isn't interested in. That requires creating the kind of media that demonstrates what is wrong with the current system.

If the extent of 'wrong' is that more Republican hacks are tossed on the airwaves than Democratic hacks, then The Nation is doing a wonderful job. If being a party organ for the Democratic Party is an alternative, congratulations to The Nation.

That would explain why coverage of students qualifies in the magazine as covering what an Iowan poli-sci student deemed "Eisnhower Democrats." Look, they're War Hawks, well funded one with the usual crowd of useless names speaking to them and funding them! Oh, look, here's another piece about 'activists' who are overjoyed by their 'success' (they farmed out volunteers to Congressional campaings) and who explain that sometimes you have to stop 'hugging a tree,' 'put on a suit,' and get down to business. Such business doesn't include serious concern over the environment as the dismissive 'tree hugging' reference telegraphs.

Meanwhile, in the real world, students organize to end the war, organize to rebuild in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, organize to halt the imprisonments at Guantanamo, organize (and lead!) on the immigrations rights issue.

The immigration rights issue? "Alternative" coverage apparently means you go down to the deep south and speak to White people opposed to immigrant rights. You also toss in a male (of course male) activist. You avoid the students who led the protests, who woke a sleeping nation.You avoid their bravery and maybe you even offer a slap to them that the Mexican flag shouldn't be carried at a protest. Now those words generally come from people who didn't participate in any of the protests so the words are as useless as the owners of the mouths uttering them.

Where is the place at the table for people of ethnicities and color, for women and LBGTs?

The Nation is looking for a publicity director. That's not going to change the opinions of students opposed to the magazine, students who see it as useless and judgmental of them, students who see their own work and the issues that matter to them ignored.

A new publicity director won't conceal the fact that 'equality' has a funny meaning at The Nation. Equality doesn't mean when two female columnists are on leave, you fill their posts with other male voices. Equality does seem to mean that you demonstrate how fair you are by criticizing Harry Belafonte. At last! African-Americans can be slammed equally at The Nation! (If undeservedly.) Now they can't get covered, Coretta Scott King's death demonstrates that, but they've 'achieved' enough at the magazine that they can be slammed.

Will a publicy director speak to the staff about how they conduct themselves in on air interviews?

We think she or he should. We think that's now a requirement after Laura Flanders was called everything but stupid on air. (Flanders an astute journalist, critic and broadcaster.) That hostile, patronizing, impatient and dismissive treatment didn't come from a guest billed as being on the right, it came from a Nation staffer (and Lyndon La Rouche refugee). We think that interview, the hostitility expressed towards Flanders, says a lot. How does anyone at the magazine come to believe it's okay to treat Flanders, or any woman, in such a manner? (It was bullying. Flanders stood her ground.)

Well it helps when the culture is predominately male, predominately straight, and predominately White. And we're speaking of the culture at the magazine. Media reform is suddenly an issue (for a week or so) and we're reminded of the 2006 issue on media reform which played like celebrity even if it didn't make for good reading. Having something to say wasn't apparently a requirement, just name value. (Which led to it playing out like the what-are-they-reading feature in Vanity Fair -- though in fairness to Van Fair, that's a tiny item in the magazine, not something they provide for pages and pages.)

Margaret Kimberley (Black Agenda Report) is very popular with this community, so let's get practical: when does she get invited to the table?

Or does she have to blindly cheer every Democrat to be included?

If impeachment was a topic worthy of a January 2006 cover, why is it a topic dropped when Nancy Pelosi announcing she is pulling it off the table? Last time we checked, she wasn't listed on the masthead of The Nation.

Independent media needs to show some independence. That's independence in thought and in coverage. Talk of media reform is meaningless if alternative outlets aren't willing to provide an alternative currently.

As 2006 drew to a close, CounterSpin finally found a woman they could interview for the full program (a practice common with male guests). We see that and her topic (the way the press covers war) as a big step in the right direction. But having lived through one of the worst years for independent media (2006), we're not about to act like media reform is something required of the mainstream and that the bulk of independent media has done a good (or even an okay) job in the last year. It hasn't.

It has not reaffirmed the core of democracy (that would require covering actions that included more than running for office or urging that readers vote). It has not practiced anything resmembling Brown v. Board in their own coverage. And we're all dying for the moment where a host (male or female) of a panel has the guts to stop a male, who repeatedly cuts off a female guest, by pointing out just how dismissive he's treating the woman and asking him why he thinks that treatment is acceptable? We're also dying to get something other than The Elector.

We're not interested in The Elector and we're not interested in linking to sop. A perfect example would be an article that David Enders has written. Does the writing qualify for sop? No. It's well written. But The Nation feels it's only worthy of 'online exclusive' status -- implying that they grade outside writers much more harshly than they do insiders. (Possibly they're under the mistaken belief that their print editions are awash with Iraq coverage?) While we're glad that both John Nichols and Katrina vanden Heuvel chose, on the MLK federal holiday, to note MLK, we're not interested in linking to the articles because of the magazine's own silence on Coretta Scott King. In fact, community wide we probably won't to link to anything from The Nation other than Naomi Klein or Katha Pollitt. Why?

Why bother? Why bother to link to a magazine that refuses to cover war resisters? They can't get ahold of Kyle Synder? (Puts them in the minority.) No, they just don't want to. They've demonstrated that throughout 2006 and the slam they printed on Ehren Watada is so offensive and does not pass the 'free speech' phrase that's used as a bully club.

Isn't it funny how free speech lets in Christopher Hitchens, La Rouche refugees and sexual predators but it doesn't let it people of color, it doesn't let it in women, it doesn't let in coverage of peace activists and demonstrations, and it doesn't let in war resisters.

Ehren Watada's beliefs about the illegality and the immorality of the war could be backed up with citations from (much earlier) coverage of Iraq that The Nation provided. So he takes a stand and they play dumb. That's not cutting it. At some point, when you know the war is wrong, you have to take a stand. Ehren Watada has done that. The Nation reads like its unsure. A war resister is a cover story, not a sidebar and especially not a sidebar after you've just printed a useless (unneeded and uninformed) quote from a man slamming Watada. That a magazine which says it is opposed to the illegal war continues to be unable to offer one editorial or column in support of Watada or any of the other war resisters to go public in the summer of 2006, while filling pages of the magazine week after week with useless trash like AlterPunk's nonstop shout outs to various men (someday he'll prove he's a real boy, just like Pinochio!) (and when that happens, he still won't correct his lie that Naomi Klein was a fashion consultant to the Gore campaign).

We're tired of it and we think media reform is a useless topic until independent media is willing to practice some of it themselves.















Friday, January 12, 2007

Examing Bully Boy's base

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.

A NEW CNN POLL FINDS THAT 2/3 OF AMERICANS OPPOSE THE BULLY BOY'S PLAN TO SEND MORE U.S. TROOPS TO IRAQ.

WHICH MEANS THAT 1 IN 3 AMERICANS SUPPORT IT.

IN AN EFFORT TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THOSE NUT JOBS, THESE REPORTERS
CONSIDERED THE RATE OF MENTAL ILLNESS IN THE AMERICAN POPULATION AND DISCOVERED "ONE-QUARTER OF ALL AMERICANS MET THE CRITERIA FOR HAVING A MENTAL ILLNESS WITHIN THE PAST YEAR".

HIS BASELINE OF SUPPORT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED.



FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Turning to news of war resistance, Ehren Watada became the first officer (June 2006) to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq and now faces a February 5th court-martial. He is scheduled to speak tomorrow at the Coupeville Recreation Hall, 901 NW Alexander ST., Whidbey Island in Coupeville, Washington at 1:00 pm. Also tomorrow, there will be a benefit performance for him Corvallis, OR when Crooked Kate and the Childers-Carson Duo take the stage of the Sunnyside-Up (116 N.W. Third St.) at six pm. In addition, later this month A Citizens' Hearings is being convened January 20-22 at Evergreen State College to address the illegality of the war. In addition, Iraq Veterans Against the War are staging Camp Resistance in support of Watada.

Writing at the blog they've set up for Camp Resistance, dockyne reports:

www.kboo.fm The oldest public radio station in the states hosted IVAW Deployed and had Darrell [Anderson] and Dennis [Kyne] on Friday morning for one hour and a half. Discussing Darrell's experience in this illegal war and his 18 months in exile to Canada, as well as the fact that thousands of other soldiers are refusing to deploy to this illegal war. Hosted by Ani and Melody on their weekly progam (7:30-9 am) Absolutly revolting.
This interview was in depth...it covered the draft, the anti war movement, depleted uranium and allowed multiple callers to learn about the Gulf War, which the VA handbook of benefits states began on 2 Aug 1990 and will end on a date to be determined by congress. When will they end it? We discussed the court martials of Suzanne Swift and Ehren Watada...and the support from Portland, Oregon is massive. Darrell stated, "this is the most radical community I have been too."

Dennis Kyne, writing at U.N. Observer, gives the details on Camp Resistance:

Please support this move
....as troops are gathering to support Ehren Watada in his stand against the lies that have gained our nation nothing more than death and despise. Purple Heart, 'Winner' Darrell Anderson returned from 18 months in hiding when he heard that Lt. Watada had refused to deploy. Darrell Anderson would have deployed to his third tour had he not gone north. Anderson asked me to get on the ( http://www.ivawdeployed.org ) with him and get to Fort Lewis to open up Camp RESISTANCE!!!
We are here, in the mud. It is not warm here
...nor dry
.....however, you should stand with us
....in support of a man who stands up against the military mahine and a nation of millions who don't have the foggiest notion that our troops do not want to serve in this war. Lt. Watada is speaking for thousands of enlisted soldiers like Darrell Anderson and myself, a fifteen year veteran of the Army. Watada is a true leader
.....leading and doing
....he knows he should never ask enlisted soldiers to do things he would never do
....that is part of the requirement. NEVER ask nor order your troops to do things that you wouldn't do. There are more violators of this rule in the military now, than ever (or at least in my 15 years.) Lt. Watada is not one of them
...and with that, the soldiers, who have always followed good leaders
....will follow Lt. Watada.. Mike, Damon, Ethan and I, slept on the rig last night
...it was night one of Camp RESISTANCE!!!
There is a RESISTANCE!!! going on. Thousands of troops are refusing to deploy
....please let everyone know we are here
.....working from the wi fi hot spot, let them know they should stand here too. If not for a month as we will, than for a day or even an hour. We are at off ramp 119, gates of Fort Lewis.We are meeting up at the gates of Fort lewis to support the Lt. Why? We have had enough
...we want the war to stop
....we want the government to stop using the troops as pawns in their game. If you know of a veteran who is opposed to this war, please help them get here
....if you are ok with the weather, please get here also.I, personally, will always think it an honor and a privilege to have served the United States people
...I know Ehren does too. It is with that same pride and honor that I, personally, ask you to do something for this man
....who has, without question stood, with more integrity in his little pinky, than most of these Generals have in their entire skin. I am honored to know his family, they are a wonderful display of family values
...something we don't see a lot of.
To support him
.... ( http://www.thankyoult.org ) you will find the news to follow the days up to the trial......

Meanwhile, John Powell writes to the Capital Times to weigh in on the argument that Watada signed a contract and any responsibilities he had for war ended right there: "Perhaps Piek has never served in the military, but I remember the oath I took when I was inducted into the Army as a lowly buck private in 1968. The oath for soldiers is virtually the same as the oath taken by the president of the United States and every other official of every level of government in the country: an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States. There is nothing in that oath about obeying orders. In fact, the Geneva Convention and the Uniform Code of Military Justice make it clear that a soldier's duty is to disobey illegal orders. Watada alleges that the Iraq war is unconstitutional and therefore illegal, and that he is duty-bound to refuse to serve in it. This should be the issue - not whether he refused to obey orders (clearly he did), but whether those orders were legal."

Watada is part of a movement of resistance within the military that also includes Kyle Snyder, Ivan Brobeck, Darrell Anderson (noted abovein the Camp Resistance post), Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"And the war drags on . . ."
"Other Items"
"NYT: "In Baghdad, Bush Policy Is Met With Resentment" (John F. Burns & Sabrina Tavernise)"
"dennis bernstein speaks with military families on flashpoints"
"Carly Simon, Sunsara Taylor, Robert Fisk"
"Brief"
"THIS JUST IN! IT'S CALLED PROJECTION!"
"He needs help, seriously"
"2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)"

Thursday, January 11, 2007

He needs help, seriously

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.

BULLY BOY SPOKE AT FORT BENNING TODAY AND REPEATED HIS USUAL LIES INCLUDING TROTTING OUT SEPTEMBER 11TH AGAIN BECAUSE, AS ONE WHITE HOUSE WAG PUT IT, "IT'S THE ONLY SUCCESSFUL MARKETING TOOL HE'S EVER STUMBLED UPON."

SPEAKING, SUPPOSEDLY ABOUT 'THE ENEMY,' BULLY BOY DECLARED:


See, their vision of life, their ideology can't stand the thought of free societies in their midst. They're totalitarians. You do it this way, or else, is their attitude about government. They don't believe in freedoms, like freedom to worship. I, frankly -- well, speaking about religion, these are murderers. They use murder as a tool to achieve their objective. Religious people don't murder. They may claim they're religious, but when you kill an innocent woman, or a child to create a political end, that's not my view of religion. And yet, there are a lot of peaceful, religious people in the Middle East.

TO ANYONE LIVING IN AMERICA SINCE JANUARY 2001, THAT SOUNDS A LOT LIKE THE BULLY BOY AND HE PROVED IT WITH HIS 'SOLUTION:'

These people need to be stopped.

LADIES & GENTLEMEN, THE PEACEFUL, EASY BULLY BOY.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:


United for Peace & Justice's Leslie Cagan echoed Professor Goldring's thoughts on Democracy Now! today where she stated, "This war has to end. It never should have started. It was a war totally based on lies. It has to end. It has to end now." Cagan noted actions taking place around the country today and also noted that "in just a few weeks, on Saturday January 27th, people from every corner of the country are gathering here in Washington, where I am right now, to march around the Capitol, to deliver our message: it is time to end the war. The people spoke. The voters of this country had their opportunity in November to make their voices heard. Now we're saying to Congress, 'You need to act on the will of the people of this country.' So on Saturday January 27th, people will be getting on buses and trains and carpools and every other manner of transportation and gathering here in Washington on the Mall between 3rd Street and 7th Street at 11:00 am in the morning and delivering this message. And on top of that, we're asking people to stay here in Washington for a few more days to do a massive lobby day on Monday the 29th". Information on the actions this month on the 27th and 29th as well as today can be found by clicking here.

Thulasi Srikanthan (Toronto Star) reports the only real 'surge' and it's in Canada as War Resisters Support Campaign's Lee Zaslofsky notes the "surge in the number of calls from American troops during the past week" which has resulted in the War Resisters Support Campaign requesting "help in housing soldiers fleeing the U.S." The War Resisters Support Campaign helps American troops who are seeking asylum in Canada. In other news of war resistance, Paul Boring (Whidbey News Times) reports US war resister Ehren Watada will be speaking this Saturday (January 13th) at 1:00 pm at the Coupeville Recreation Hall (901 NW Alexander ST., Whidbey Island in Coupeville, Washington).

In June of last year, Ehren Watada became the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq. He faces a court-martial on Feburary 5th. Camp Resistance is set up outside Fort Lewis where Watada is serving and it's a project of Iraq Veterans Against the War (each day they gather at off I-5, exit 119 in Dupont, Washington). Damon Murphy notes that today: "We were approached by a Sgt. of the Dupont Police Department. He brought news that the property owner wanted us off of his land; the reason given was due to a misunderstanding about the amount of time we'd be there. The impression was that we'd be there for the two or three days surrounding Lt. Ehren Watada's Court Martial Pre-Trial; the reality, is that IVAW is deployed. When you're deployed you’re stuck. When you’re deployed, all you have is what is next to you: people, tools for your survival, and the mission at hand. Our mission at hand, regardless of where it takes place, is standing in solidarity with Lt. Ehren Watada as he awaits his pending Court Martial, twenty-seven days from now."

Watada is part of a movement of resistance within the military that also includes Kyle Snyder, Ivan Brobeck, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.

In "Oh, Condi" news -- the Senate testimony today . . . Rice noted that Sadr's bloc "pulled out and the government didn't collapse"; however, she fails to note how little got accomplished or the attempts to woo the bloc back. She boasted that, "We know why sectarian violence didn't come down" -- apparently now that Negroponte's under her, he's spilled all the beans on the death squads. She declared, "We're not going to stay married to a plan that isn't working." But failed to ask the important question: Should This Marriage Be Saved? She refused to be pinned down on 'specifics' but did note, "The oil law is important." (Well, they did name a tanker after her.) (Here's an AP article -- my remarks are based on watching it on TV.)


Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"Kat's Korner: Carly Simon, Into the Real"
"The killer awoke before dawn, he put his boots on"
"Other Items"
"Carly Simon's Into White"
"norman finkelstein v. gil troy (democracy now)"
"How The Nation isn't cutting it"
"Bully Boy's Latest Lies"
"Iraq, Ann Wright, Ron Jacobs, United for Peace & Justice"
"He's full of it"
"THIS JUST IN! HE'S ALL SOMETHING!"

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

He's full of it

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.

IT ONLY TOOK 6 YEARS BUT TONIGHT THE BULLY BOY WILL ANNOUNCE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT HE HAS MADE 1 "MISTAKE" WHILE INSTALLED IN THE OVAL OFFICE -- NOT SENDING ENOUGH U.S. TROOPS INTO HIS ILLEGAL WAR.

IRONICALLY HIS "MISTAKE" ALLOWS HIM TO JUSTIFY ADVOCATING MORE U.S. TROOPS BE SENT TO IRAQ TO BE USED AS TARGETS IN HIS ILLEGAL WAR.

HE'S A BIT LIKE THE HUSBAND CAUGHT CHEATING WHO PLEADS HE'S JUST A MAN WHO LOVES TOO MUCH.


FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Turning to news of war resistance, Robert Fantina (CounterPunch) writes of Ivan Brobeck. Yes, Ivan Brobeck -- the war resister independent media forgot. Or those who keep up. The Full Brobeck is a term the community uses to note what passes for coverage of war resisters in independent media -- so named when only KPFA's Flashpoints covered Brobeck when he returned to the US from Canada to turn himself on election day (November 6, 2006 -- day before the election -- is when the interview conducted by Nora Barrows-Friedman aired). Robert Fantina (CounterPunch) writes: "Lance Corporal Ivan Brobeck, Sergeant Ricky Clousing, Sergeant Kevin Benderman, Sergeant Camilo Mejia: each a veteran of the Iraq war, and each charged with desertion. Mr. Benderman, Mr. Mejia and Mr. Clousing were convicted, sentenced and have completed prison time. Mr. Brobeck is currently serving an 8-month sentence. Yet with government studies indicating that thousands of soldiers have deserted during the Iraq war, why are only a few charged, while so many others are basically ignored? This is not a new phenomenon. As communication has improved over the two centuries of America's life, the ability for war resisters to reach a wider audience has greatly increased. The four brave men listed above demonstrated their courage first on the battlefield. They then not only further showed their bravery by leaving the U.S. military -- a tremendously brave act in and of itself -- they went the additional step of speaking out publicly against the war. This, it seems, is what brought down the wrath of the U.S. government upon them."

In Peggy Got A Message For Me, From Jesus news: Wonderful article but can someone get it to The Nation -- with sections highlighted? ("Peggy Get . . ." line from Tori Amos' "Cooling" off To Venus And Back.) Elaine will be addressing that topic this evening at Like Maria Said Paz. That topic? The Nation's refusal to cover war resisters.

Meanwhile William Hughes (San Francisco Indymedia) reports that, in a recent speech, Daniel Ellsberg opposed the escalation option (that Bully Boy will be pimping in the Big Speech), opposed expanding the war and "lauded Lt. Ehren Watada for his principled stand against the Iraqi war." Ehren Watada is the first US officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq. Last week, a pre-trial hearing began which preceeds the planned February 5th court-martial. John Catalinotto (Workers World) reports that Camp Resistance is across from Fort Lewis (where Watada is stationed) and "plans to stay until the end of Lt. Watada's court-martial" while there will be "nationally coordinated demonstrations for Feb. 5, the day his court-martial is scheduled to open."

Information about Camp Resistance can be found in The Nation. Did you laugh at that idea? Me too. Seriously, information about Camp Resistance can be found at Iraq Veterans Against the War which has a page for it and other actions entitled Iraq Veterans Against The War Deployed with photos and blog posts.

Watada and Brobeck are a part of a movement of resistance within the military that also includes Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress next week (MLK day). [Yes, that is a federal holiday and, yes, Congress won't be in session.]

And remember that Lisa Brobeck is requesting people write her husband, war resister Ivan Brobeck, "so he is constantly reminded that he is not alone during this time in the brig and that he is supported in his brave and courages stand." The address:

LCPL Ivan S. Brobeck
MCB Quantico Brig
3247 Elrod Avenue
Quantico, Virginia 22134

Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"Other Items"
"NYT: The Drama Critic of the Green Zone"
"iraq, dave lindorff, etc."
"A professional ass e-mailed Rebecca"
"Iraq, Law & Disorder, Guantanamo, Ann Wright"
"Iraq, Lizzie West, Stacy Bannerman"
"Bully Boy agrees with Ted Kennedy"
"THIS JUST IN! BULLY BOY AGREES!"
"2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)"

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Bully Boy agrees with Ted Kennedy

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.

US SENATOR TED KENNEDY HAS DECLARED THE ILLEGAL WAR IN IRAQ TO BE "GEORGE BUSH'S VIETNAM."

WHEN REACHED FOR COMMENT TODAY BETWEEN NAPS, THE BULLY BOY OF THE UNITED STATES CHUCKLED AND SAID, "SURE IS! AND JUST LIKE VIETNAM, DADDY'S GOING TO GET ME OUT OF THIS ONE!"

OTHERS WERE LESS SURE.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Starting with US war resister Ehren Watada who, in June 2006, became the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to the illegal war. Last Thursday, at the Fort Lewis Army, a military pretrial, presided over by Lt. Col. John Head, heard arguments to outline the scope of the scheduled February 5th court-martial.Today, the supposedly educated (if not enlightened) members of The Seattle Times editorial board issued their own journalistic ruling -- one that they apparently hammered out with bully clubs. Representing the finest of mob mentalities, if not journalism or democracy, The Seattle Times argues that Ehren Watada should be convicted on both counts (missing deployment and conduct unbecoming an officer) because . . . well the system just won't survive otherwise. Having killed the invidual to "save" what they see as a weak and dottering system (otherwise Watada wouldn't have to be convicted -- if they had any faith in the strength and resiliency of the American system, the Nervous Nels wouldn't have argued for his conviction for the good of the system), they embrace a long history of knuckle draggers who chose expediency over true democracy because there's nothing like a moral imperative to have the most closed minded reaching for the white sheets and rope.
For the system to struggle on, the editorial board argues, the individual must be stamped out and the accusers of Socrates couldn't have said it better in ancient times. If they've learned anything from their (limited) education, the only evidence is that, while calling for a judicial death, they stop short of imprisoment because they fear a martyr who could galvanize a public.
So, by their rudimentary and flawed logic, Ehren Watada must be found guilty to give pause to any other service member that might follow in his footsteps thereby defending the "good Nazi" argument overruled in the Nuremberg Trials which found that following orders was not a valid excuse and that each soldier is an individual agent responsible for his or her own actions.
The Seattle Times sees service members as worker bees and one wonders how far they'd be willing to carry out their flawed logic. Were it The Berlin Times in the immediate aftermath of WWII would they editorialize in favor of Nazis sending Jews, gypsies and gays to the gas chambers? Doubtful because the only basis for their stand today is that the individual must be stamped out at all costs due to the board's own deluded belief in the weakness of the American system. (Possibly they'd term it "the American experiment"?). In an apparent correction to Max Weber (and a dismissal of Robert K. Merton's work on Universalism), the editorial board argues that the state must not only use military might as they see fit but also narrowly define "justice" when it suits their own purposes.
In a decade of journalistic cowardice, the editorial echoes many of the themes that saw the punishment of those journalists who, in real time, called out the Bully Boy for his Bunny-Fu-Fu hop around the continental United States on September 11th for what it was (cowardice), and saw a rush to pass off press releases as investigative journalism. The system will survive, it always does, it's modern day journalism that has decayed.
In the real world, where a spine is required to stand erect, Ehren Watada is part of a movement of resistance within the military and The Seattle Times hoped for guilty verdict hasn't stopped the movement which includes people such as Watada, Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Ivan Brobeck, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress next week (MLK day).

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq Snapshot"
"'Terrified Soldiers Terrifying People' (Dahr Jamail and Ali al-Fadhily)"
"Other Items"
"thaw on war (theater special - wbai) & law & disorder on guantanamo"
"New York Times, Iraq, Third Estate Sunday Review"
"Carly Simon, Iraq , Gary Younge"
"Carly Simon, Jeff Leys, Iraq"
"Primetime Bully Boy"
"THIS JUST IN! HE THINKS HE'S READY FOR HIS CLOSEUP!"
"2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)"

Monday, January 08, 2007

Primetime Bully Boy

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.

BULLY BOY IS BUSY PREPPING FOR HIS 2007 PRIMETIME DEBUT.

THOUGH WILLIAM KRISTOL IS PEPPERING HIM WITH "BOFFO" ONE LINERS, BULLY BOY IS SAID TO STILL BE NERVOUS.

EXPLAINED WHITE HOUSE FLACK TONY SNOWJOBS, "THIS IS A BIG MOMENT AND HE WAS NERVOUS ABOUT WHAT VIEWERS WOULD THINK AS THEY MISSED THEIR FAVORITE PROGRAMS? SO WE WENT WITH WEDNESDAY WHERE HE WOULD BE TAKING THE PLACE OF ABC'S LOST, NBC'S THE BIGGEST LOSER AND CBS' CRIMINAL MINDS. LOST, CRIMINAL MINDS, THE BIGGEST LOSER? WE STRONGLY BELIEVE A SPEECH FROM THE BULLY BOY OF THE UNITED STATES BRINGS TOGETHER ELEMENTS OF ALL THREE PROGRAMS."



FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Starting with US war resister Ehren Watada who awaits the decision of Lt. Col. John Head, the presiding judge in the pretrial hearing that will outline the parameters for his February 5th court-martial. Teresa Watanabe (Los Angeles Times) boils the awaited decision down: "Do military officers have the right to publicly voice dissent about their commander in chief and U.S. war policy? That question highlighted a pretrial hearing last week at Fort Lewis Army base near Seattle involving 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, the nation's first commissioned officer to refuse deployment to Iraq." As Mike Hersh (OpEd News) notes, if court-martialed and found guilty of all charges, Ehren Watada faces six years in prison. Chanan Suarez-Diaz (Socialist Worker) observes that Watada is part of "the movement of military resisters" and notes that "January 21 and 22, Watada's supporters will participate in a 'Citizen's Hearing on the Legality of U.S. Actions in Iraq' -- designed to put the war on trial, rather than the brave men and women who resist it. Among the antiwar figures who will testify are former Pentagon analyst Daniel Ellsberg, Denis Halliday, who resigned in protest as United Nations coordinator of humanitarian aid in Iraq; and international law expert Richard Falk."

Meanwhile, Kyle Snyder, another US war resister, continues speaking out and resisting around the United States. In a co-authored post with Vietnam war resister Gerry Condon (Soldier Say No!), Snyder looks back at 2006 -- a year that for him started in Canada, found him returning to the US to turn himself in October and then self-checking out again after the US military again went back on their word -- and notes that Synder continues to speak out, asks that you contact General William McCoy, Jr. and demand the military discharge Snyder -- 573-596-0131; or, Public Affairs Office, 573-563-4013; fax: 573-563-4012, e-mail alleym@wood.army.mil with the message: "Discharge Kyle Snyder with No Punishment."

Snyder and Watada are part of a movement of resistance to the illegal war within the military that also includes Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Ivan Brobeck, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.


Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress this month.


Recommended: "Iraq snapshot""Other Items"
"NYT: Preparing readers for more years of the illegal war"
"And the war drags on . . ."
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts 'The Butcher's Wife'"
"NYT: 'Bomb's Lasting Toll: Lost Laughter and Broken Lives (Sabrina Tavernise)"
"Ruth's Report"
"NYT: The wrapper should be brown, not blue""Egg Drop Soup in the Kitchen"
"'The First Factually Challenged Fool"
"Lizzie West, students, Iraq, etc."
"chatty city"
"Carly Simon, Matthew Rothschild, Jorge Mariscal, Iraq"
"Matthew Rothschild, Iraq"
"Bully Boy's cosmetic changes"
"THIS JUST IN! MINOR CH-CH-CHANGES"
"A Note to Our Readers"
"Editorial: Ehren Watada stands and independent media heads for the bathrooms"
"Only the Dumb Asses Love Patti"
"Roundtable"
"Rush Limbaugh has lacatation envy"
"The Nation's sense of perspective"
"Democracy Now!'s sense of perspective"
"How to throw a civil war"
"The New York Times snubs Coretta Scott King one la..."
"Green Party: "Alternative Views on the State of th..."
"10 CDs we listened to during this edition"
"Highlights"

Friday, January 05, 2007

Bully Boy's cosmetic changes

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.

BULLY BOY STRUTTED THROUGH THE WHITE HOUSE TODAY, ALL EXCITED ABOUT THE "CH-CH-CHANGES" HE WAS MAKING.

GENERAL JOHN ABIZAID IS OUT AT THE HEAD OF CENTRAL COMMAND AND ADMIRAL WILLIAM FALLON IS IN, GENERAL GEORGE CASEY IS OUT AS GROUND COMMANDER MAJOR TOM IN IRAQ AND LT. GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS IS IN; JOHN BOLTON IS OUT AS THE UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR & KILL JOY TO THE UNITED NATIONS AND ZALMAY KHALILZAD IS IN, AND RYAN CROCKER (NO RELATION TO BETTY CROCKER THOUGH THEY DO SHARE SIMILAR HAIRSTYLES) WILL REPLACE ZALMAY AS THE UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO IRAQ.

BULLY BOY SEEM PUZZLED WHEN THESE REPORTERS ASKED HIM WHETHER HE WOULD MAKE THE MOST IMPORTANT CHANGE HIMSELF OR DEPEND UPON THE U.S. CONGRESS TO DO SO?

"WHAT'S LEFT?" BULLY BOY WONDERED.

STEPPING DOWN OR IMPEACHMENT OFFERED THESE REPORTERS.

ASSUMING WE WERE JOKING, BULLY BOY BURST OUT IN LAUGHTER AND BEGAN HOLLERING, "DICK! DICK! GET IN HERE! YOU GOT HERE THIS!"


FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Monday, February 5th, the US military attempts to court-martial Ehren Watada. Watada is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq. Yesterday, at Fort Lewis in Washington, a pretrial hearing began that will determine what arguments are allowed in the court-martial and what arguments will be disallowed. The hearing was presided over by Lt. Col. John Head, the court-martial would have a jury made up of *a panel of* officers, and the AP reports that he will make his decision on "the parameters of the case" next week. Melanthia Mitchell (AP) reports that on Thursday: "Watada's parents sat in the back of the courtroom during the hearing, his father at times leaning forward on the bench with his hands clasped in front of him." As Linton Weeks (Washington Post) noted, Carolyn Ho, Ehren's mother, is a high school counselor who went on leave to raise awareness about her son and is on leave for the pretrial and the court-martial. Bob Watada, Ehren's father, has also been engaged in speaking tours around the country to raise awareness about Ehren and, for any wondering, Bob Watada recently retired (and recently remarried, Rosa Sakanishi, Ehren's step-mother, has accompanied Bob Watada on his speaking tours).

The US military wants to reduce the court-martial to a "yes" or "no" -- Did you refuse to deploy to Iraq? They wish to prevent Ehren Watada from explaining his decision -- in effect that are hoping to prevent him from making the best defense possible when he is facing six years in prison.

As Hal Bernton (Seattle Times) reported: "At a hearing Thursday at Fort Lewis, there was little dispute about the action taken by 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, who last June refused to deploy with his brigade to Iraq. But defense and prosecutors sparred much of the afternoon about whether Watada's motives for opting out of the war should affect the outcome of a February court-martial trial that could result in a six-year prison term." If the military was interested in justice (and sure of their case), they wouldn't be attempting to shut down Watada's defense.

The prosucetor, Captain Dan Kuecker has stated, "There is no rational doubt in this situation; . . . it's a lawful order." Were he as sure of himself as he pretends to the press, there would be no attempts to prevent Watada from explaining both his actions and the reasons behind them.

Watada explained the reasons most recently to Kevin Sites (Kevin Sites in The Hotzone): "I think that in March of 2003 when I joined up, I, like many Americans, believed the administration when they said the threat from Iraq was imminent -- that there were weapons of mass destruction all throughout Iraq; that there were stockpiles of it; and because of Saddam Hussein's ties to al-Qaeda and the 9/11 terrorist acts, the threat was imminent and we needed to invade that country immediately in order to neutralize that threat. Since then I think I, as many, many Americans are realizing, that those justifications were intentionally falsified in order to fit a policy established long before 9/11 of just toppling the Saddam Hussein regime and setting up an American presence in Iraq. . . . I think the facts are out there, they're not difficult to find, they just take a little bit of willingness and interest on behalf of anyone who is willing to seek out the truth and find the facts. All of it is in the mainstream media. But it is quickly buried and it is quickly hidden by other events that come and go. And all it takes is a little bit of logical reasoning. The Iraq Survey Group came out and said there were no weapons of mass destruction after 1991 and during 2003. The 9/11 Commission came out and said there were no ties with Iraq to 9/11 or al-Qaeda. The president himself came out and said nobody in his administration ever suggested that there was a link. And yet those ties to al-Qaeda and the weapons of mass destruction were strongly suggested. They said there was no doubt here were weapons of mass destruction all throughout 2002, 2003 and even 2004. So, they came out and they say this, and yet they say it was bad intelligence, not manipulated intelligence, that was the problem. And then you have veteran members of the CIA that come out and say, 'No. It was manipulated intelligence. We told them there was no WMD. We told them there were no tides to al-Qaeda. And they said that that's not what they wanted to hear'."


In essence, Ehren Watada is on trial for the media -- the media that sold the illegal war and the media that told the truth (eventually for some) about it. So it has been surprising to see nothing on Watada in the leading independent magazines in 2006. In 2007, The Nation discovered Watada on page 14 of the January 8 and 15th double issue in an article written by Marc Cooper (click here for Yahoo version -- subscribers only at The Nation website). Like many Americans, Watada believe the spin/lies from the US administration (repeated near word for word by most media outlets with little skepticism). Like many Americans, he's since come to see that reality and spin were two different things.


This new awareness is reflected not only in the civilian population but also, as Rachel Ensign (Citizen Soldier) reminds us, within the military as well: "A new poll conducted by the Army Times newspaper at the end of 2006 found that a majority of soldiers polled now disapprove of how Bush has conducted the Iraq war to date. . . . Only 41% of soldiers polled today think that we should have invaded Iraq -- down from 65% in 2003. This closely mirrors sentiment among civilians; only 45% of whom now believe that the war was a good idea."


Michael Gilbert (The News Tribune) reports that, based on comments and questions during the pretrial hearing, Lt. Col John Head "likely won't allow Lt. Ehren Watada to defend himself" by making the case for his actions and why he acted as he did and that Head declared, "At this point I'm not inclined to grant a hearing on the Nuremburg defense." The Nuremburg defense is in reference to the Nuremberg trials during which soldiers stating that they were only following orders were told that was not a legal excuse for their actions. As Ruth noted, following the August Article 32 hearing of Watada, "The message that Lieutenant Colonel Mark Keith appears to be endorsing is follow all orders but, if it later turns out that they were illegal, you are on your own and will take full responsibility. At best, like with Lieutenant Calley, the War Monger in the oval office may pardon you after you are convicted. What is the message? Why teach the obligation to follow only legal orders, why refute 'I was only following orders' as a defense and then punish Lieutenant Ehren Watada for doing just that while advising him that it is not his place to make such a determination when, in fact, the invididual who obeys the unlawful order is the one who will be held responsible by the military justice system?"


Why teach? Refer to Ruth's Report where she goes over retired Col. Ann Wright's testimony at the Article 32 hearing on what she taught soldiers at the JFK Special Warfare Center at Fort Bragg while teaching the Law of Land Warfare. Taught is FM 27-10 (Law of Land Warfare):


Section IV. DEFENSES NOT AVAILABLE 509.
Defense of Superior Orders
a. The fact that the law of war has been violated pursuant to an order of a superior authority, whether military or civil, does not deprive the act in question of its character of a war crime, nor does it constitute a defense in the trial of an accused individual, unless he did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the act ordered was unlawful. In all cases where the order is held not to constitute a defense to an allegation of war crime, the fact that the individual was acting pursuant to orders may be considered in mitigation of punishment.


Ehren Watada could be prosecuted for actions committed during war by the above; however, the US military does not want to allow him to use the same law to defend himself. Only a fool would call that "justice." This is what Eric Seitz, Watada's attorney, is noting when he told Linton Weeks, "The United States talks out of both sides of its mouth. We've prosecuted soldiers in other countries for following orders to commit war crimes. But God forbid you should use that refusal as a defense in this country."


Christian Hill (The Olympian) reports, however, that the military prosecution may have outfoxed itself: "The judge, Lt. Col. John Head, told prosectors that he was not inclined to grant the evidentiary hearing, but 'they opened the door for him allowing it by prosecuting his statements'" thereby making it "relevant. Some of those statements have become relevant by the sheer nature of how the government has charged this case."

Head was not referring to the charge of missing deployment but the charge ("conduct unbecoming") based upon remarks Watada made about the war such as ""The wholesale slaughter and mistreatment of Iraqis is not only a terrible and moral injustice, but it's a contradiction to the Army's own law of land warfare. My participation would make me party to war crimes." Remember: A Citizens' Hearings is being convened January 20-22 at Evergreen State College.

Ehren Watada's awakening mirrors that of many Americans. It also has echoes
in the growing resistance within the military to the illegal war as many resisters vocalize sentiments similar to Watada's (usually noting the works of Howard Zinn). Others that a part of this growing resistance within the military include Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Ivan Brobeck, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress this month.


Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"And the war drags on"
"And justice for none?"
"Other Items"
"nora barrows-friedman interviewed dahr jamail on flashpoints"
"Snooping, Monica Benderman, Jane Fonda, Iraq "
"Carly"
"Naughty Negroponte, Nosy Bully Boy"
"THIS JUST IN! NEGROPONTE GOES BAILING! BULLY BOY GOES SNOOPING!"
"2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)"

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Naughty Negroponte, Nosy Bully Boy

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.


QUICKER THAN YOU CAN SAY "CONTRAS LOST!" JOHN NEGROPONTE BAILED OUT AS THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE DIRECTOR AND SLITHERED OVER TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT WHERE HE WILL SERVE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE & ANGER CONDI RICE.

WHEN ASKED IF HE WAS BAILING BECAUSE "DEMOCRATS TAKING CONTROL OF CONGRESS ON THURSDAY HAVE PROMISED GREATER OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT AGENCIES" WITH THE SENATE INTELL COMMITTEE "PLANNING HEARINGS THIS MONTH ON THE INTELLIGENCE OVERHAUL THAT NEGROPONTE HELPED PUT IN PLACE", NEGROPONTE TOLD THESE REPORTERS WE WERE "BARKING UP THE WRONG TREE" AND "IF WE WERE IN EL SALVADOR RIGHT NOW, I'D KNOW JUST HOW TO HANDLE YOU BOTH."

AS WE WERE LEAVING THE WHITE HOUSE, WE BUMPED INTO THE BULLY BOY WHICH GAVE US A CHANCE TO ASK HIM ABOUT HIS DECEMBER 20TH PRESIDENTIAL SIGNING STATEMENT THAT, HE ASSERTS, GRANTS HIM PERMISSION TO READ ANY AND ALL MAIL IN THE UNITED STATES WITHOUT SEEKING A COURT WARRANT BEFORE SNOOPING. BULLY BOY EXPLAINED THAT NO ONE NEEDED TO WORRY, "I JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHO THE PUBLISHER CLEARING HOUSE WINNER IS EACH YEAR AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE."

"BESIDES," HE TOLD US, "MISS MILLIE IN DAYTON, OHIO WRITES ONE JUICY NEWSLETTER ABOUT HER NURSING HOME!"


FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Starting with Ehren Watada. In June, Watada became the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq. In August, the US military held an Article 32 hearing. Now the court-martial is set for February 5th and the pre-trial hearing began today at Fort Lewis is Washington. The pre-trial hearing will determine the framework in which arguments can be made. As noted yesterday, Eric Seitz, Watada's attorney, has stated that the military is attempting to prevent Watada from making his case for why he refused to deploy.

During the Article 32 hearing, Watada's defense called three witnesses, Francis A. Boyle of the University of Illinois' College of Law, Champagne; Denis Halliday, the former Assistant Secretary General of the UN; and retired Colonel Ann Wright. These three witnesses addressed the issue of the war, it's legality, and the responsibilities of a service member to disobey any order that they believed was unlawful. The testimony was necessary because Watada's refusing to participate in the illegal war due to the fact that he feels it is (a) illegal and (b) immoral.

What the military would like to do in today's pre-trial hearing is reduce everything to whether or not Watada deployed with his unit? The answer, of course, is that he did not. The military does not want the issue of the legality of the war addressed. By closing off this discussion, they not only would destroy Watada's right to defend himself, they would be able, as the Bully Boy long has been able to, set the terms of the discussion and control what is and is not discussed.

Robbing Watada of his ability to present a full defense is a very serious issue and much more serious than fretting over whether a journalist might have to decide "Do I testify or not?" (No journalists will be testifying at the pre-trial.) But the most serious issue today is whether or not Watada will be allowed to present the best defense or if he will only be allowed to say "yes" and "no" in answer to the prosecution's questions or if, as Aileen Alfandary noted on KPFA. this morning ( The Morning Show), he will be able to argue that
the war is illegal? This stance, putting the war on trial, is one that worries the US military.

On the December 9th RadioNation with Laura Flanders, Carolyn Ho (Ehren Watada's mother) noted that her son felt the decision was "the best thing he could do for his men .. . remain behind and speak truth" and that he feels his duty is to the Constitution which is the supreme law of the land in the United States.

Mark Tran (Guardian of London) reports: "Peace activists, international law experts and war resisters past and present are girding themselves for events designed to drum up support for Lt Watada, recently described by Rolling Stone as 'one of this year's greatest mavericks'. Mike Barber (Seattle Post-Intelligencer) reports that both sides "are expected to file several motions in preparation for his court-martial. Depending upon the motions, the judge could rule immediately or take several days to decide". Hal Bernton (Seattle Times) observes that this "opening round . . . could be key to defense hopes of putting the Iraq war on trial". As Sir! No Sir! noted in an e-mailing yesterday (click here), "The military's intention IS to SILENCE VOICES OF RESISTANCE and make an example out of Lt. Watada."

While much has been made of the press being asked to testify, Jeff Paterson, reporting for Courage to Resist, notes that activists have also received military subpoenas including Phan Nguyen (Olympian Movement for Justice and Peace) and Gerri Haynes (Veterans for Peace). If found guilty of all charges, Watada could be sentenced to six years.

A Citizens' Hearings is being convened January 20-22 at Evergreen State College will take place in Tacoma, Washington later this month.

Ehren Watada is part of a growing resistance within the military that includes Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Ivan Brobeck, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress this month.

Recommended: "Iraq Snapshot"
"US war resister Ehren Watada's pretrial hearing starts today"
"Other Items"
"tillie"
"What the reaction (press) to the 3,000 mark means"
"I get e-mails :D"
"Guns and Butter"
"THIS JUST IN! BULLY BOY STARTS 2007 WITH LOTS OF LAUGHS!"
"Bully Boy the cut up and those who prop him up"
"2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)"

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Bully Boy the cut up and those who prop him up

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.

BULLY BOY WAS CHUCKLING TODAY AT HIS LATEST PLAN -- SELL THE COUNTRY AND THE DEMOCRATS ON BALANCING THE BUDGET!

IT'S FUNNY 'CAUSE BULLY BOY RAN UP THE DEBT AND CALLING FOR A BALANCED BUDGET AFTER ALL OF HIS GIVE AWAYS (AND HIS CONTINUED CALL FOR TAX BREAKS FOR RICH FAT CATS) MEANS THE BUDGET GETS BALANCED ON THE BACKS OF THE PEOPLE.

BULLY BOY EXPECTS THIS PLAN TO GO OVER AS WELL AS THE INTENTIONAL AND COLASSOL SCREW UPS INVOLVED IN THE SHOW DEATH OF SADDAM HUSSEIN.

LAUGHED BULLY BOY, "I COULD KISS AMY GOODMAN'S POINTY FOREHEAD! I KNEW THAT IF WE MESSED THIS UP JUST RIGHT IT WOULD TAKE ALL ATTENTION OFF THE FACT THAT I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATHS OF 3,000 AMERICANS."

BULLY BOY THEN SLAPPED HIS KNEE AS HE CONTINUED LAUGHING ABOUT THE "DUMB ASS" INDEPENDENT MEDIA AND INCLUDED CHORTLES OVER THE NATION MAGAZINE AS WELL.



FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Starting with news of Ehren Watada. In June, Watada became the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq. In August, the US military held an Article 32 hearing. This week, Thursday, a pre-trial hearing begins leading up to his February 5th court-martial. The AP reports that Watada's attorney, Eric Seitz, has been informed that his client's reasons for refusing to deploy will be exlcuded which would rob Watada of the ability to defend his own actions.

As Leila Fujimori (Honolulu Star-Bulletin) observes these decisions could "decide the trial's outcome before it even gets under way, his supporters fear." The Seattle Post-Intelligencer notes that "Seitz has filed motions that include declaring the intent to defend Watada based on the claim that under international law the war in Iraq is a 'war of aggression' in which he has the right to refuse to participate." Seitz explains to Rod Ohira (Honolulu Advertiser) that
"The Army is way out on a limb on this case. If they are successful (at the hearing), the trial will be a farce. . . . Missing movement is like not going to work; it's not criminal, but this is a miliatry court. They're singling him out as a deterrent for others speaking out."

The pre-trial hearing takes place tomorrow at Fort Lewis, Washington. Also tomorrow, there will be at least two rallies in support of Watada. One rally will be held at Fort Lewis, off Interstate Five, exit 119. Among those scheduled to participate are Bob Watada (father of Ehren), Sara Rich (mother of Suzanne Swift), US war resister Darrell Anderson, Chanan Suarez Diaz, Michael Cuzzort, Pia Rivera and Carrie Hathorn. The actions begin at eight a.m. and the speakers' program begins at at ten a.m. Another rally will be held in San Francisco and begin at 11:15 a.m. (Thursday, January 4th) at Japantown Peace Plaza (corner of Post and Buchanan) which will then move to the San Francisco Federal Building at noon and culminate in a Die-in at the front enterance of the Federal Building (one p.m.). More information can be found at ThankYouLt.org.

As Ann Wright (Op-Ed News) observes: "GI resistance to the war is increasing. AWOLS are increasing. War resisters are speaking out and are willing to go to prison rather than participate in an illegal war of aggression. Over 1500 active duty soldiers have signed an 'appeal for redress' to the Congress asking for the 'prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq.' They will go to Washington and deliver the appeal to individual Congressmen and women on January 15."

That resistance includes Ehren Watada and many others such as Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Ivan Brobeck, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress this month.

Recommended: "Iraq snapshot"
"'U.S. Army war resister's lawyer says Army is attempting to silence his defense' (AP)"
"Other Items"
"the 3,000 mark matters"
"The Notion/The Nation & Amy Goodman don't care"
"Celeb reporting or the 3,000 mark -- which is news?"
"Short one"
"The comics: Nouri al-Maliki, Amy Goodman, Deb Riechmann"
"THIS JUST IN! GET YOUR 2007 YA-YAS!"
"2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)"
"The 3,000 mark has been reached"
"Truest statement of the week"
"Editorial: The 3,000 mark looms"
"A Note to Our Readers"
"TV: Fall 2006 -- like so much bad sex"
"Life With Elmo . . . and Warren Bell"
"Let's Make Bad Film: Destroying Marilyn"
"Joke of 2007"
"10 2006 Songs That Made It For Us in 2006"
"10 Songs We Made Our Own In 2006"
"The Nation Stats"
"Joan Mellen lecture on JFK assasination 1-28-07"
"Highlights"

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

The comics: Nouri al-Maliki, Amy Goodman, Deb Riechmann

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIX MIX -- DC.


2007 ALREADY OFF WITH SOME HA-HAS!

1) GOT PUPPET?

PUPPET OF THE OCCUPATION, NOURI AL-MALIKI DECLARED TODAY THAT "HE HAS NO INTEREST IN A SECOND TERM" AND THE U.S. ADMINISTRATION SHOUTS BACK, "WHO CARES WHAT OUR PUPPET WANTS? DANCE, PUPPET, DANCE!" WHILE THE IRAQI PEOPLE NOTE THAT THEY HAVE NO INTEREST IN AL-MALIKI SERVING A SECOND TERM EITHER: "WHAT ARE WE, CRAZY?"

2) GOT GAMS?

TODAY ON DEMOCRACY NOW, THE ISSUE OF THE 3,000 MARK FOR U.S. TROOPS WHO HAVE DIED IN IRAQ WAS REDUCED TO A HEADLINE AND NOT JUDGED WORTHY OF A DISCUSSION. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT IN THE HEADLINES MORE TIME WAS GIVEN TO "COVERING" THE FUNERAL OF JAMES BROWN THAN TO NOTING THE 3,000 MARK.

WHEN ASKED OF THAT, AMY GOODMAN, HOST OF DEMOCRACY NOW, EXPLAINED THE PROBLEM WAS WITH A NEW CAMERA OPERATOR. SAID GOODMAN, "HE WAS SUPPOSED TO ZOOM IN ON MY LEGS RIGHT AFTER WE PLAYED MICHAEL JACKSON LONG QUOTE. I'M GOING FOR THE MARY HART ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT AUDIENCE THESE DAYS!"

3) GOT HACK?

DEB RIECHMANN IS SUPPOSED TO BE A REPORTER FOR THE ASSOCIATED PRESS BUT SHE WANTS TO BE SO MUCH MORE: EDITOR, HEALER OF THE NATION, YOU NAME IT!

FROM A RECENT REPORT BY LITTLE DEBBIE: "AMERICANS ARE A PATIENT LOT AND LIKELY WILL GIVE BUSH THE TIME AND BACKING HE NEEDS TO TAKE ANOTHER SHOT AT GETTING A U.S. POLICY IN IRAQ THAT WORKS."

IT'S NOT CALLED REPORTING! BUT THEN DEBRIECHMANN IS NO REPORTER!

TURNING TO THE REAL WORLD, FROM THE TCI WIRE:

In the real world, Courage to Resist reports that Lisa Brobeck is asking people write to her husband, war resister Ivan Brobeck, "so he is constantly reminded that he is not alone during this time in the brig and that he is supported in his brave and courages stand." The mail does not run (in the US) today (apparently Gerald Ford is honored by the government stopping its business) but the way to address your postcards or envelopes is:


LCPL Ivan S. Brobeck
MCB Quantico Brig
3247 Elrod Avenue
Quantico, Virginia 22134



Ivan Brobeck self-checked out of the US military after serving seven months in Iraq. He went to Canada in April 2005 and remained there until he returned to the US in November to turn himself in on election day with an open letter to the Bully Boy. The day before he turned himself in, November 6, 2006, he was interviewed by Nora Barrows-Friedman on Flashpoints which remains one of the few media outlets to note his decision to return then or since. "The Full Brobeck" is the term coined for a brave stand that media outlets bend over backwards to avoid noting.

As noted earlier, Ehren Watada faces a pre-trial hearing on Thursday. On Thursday, there will be at least two rallies in support of Watada. One rally will be held at Fort Lewis, off Interstate Five, exit 119. Among those scheduled to participate are Bob Watada (father of Ehren), Sara Rich (mother of Suzanne Swift), US war resister Darrell Anderson, Chanan Suarez Diaz, Michael Cuzzort, Pia Rivera and Carrie Hathorn. The rally will begin at ten a.m. January 4th (this Thursday). Another rally will be held in San Francisco and begin at 11:15 a.m. (Thursday, January 4th) at Japantown Peace Plaza (corner of Post and Buchanan) which will then move to the San Francisco Federal Building at noon and culminate in a Die-in at the front enterance of the Federal Building (one p.m.). More information can be found at ThankYouLt.org.

Jason Leopold (Truthout) notes that the pre-trial hearing "comes on the same day the new Democratic-controlled Congess returns to work and begins to investigate one of the lingering questions surrounding the nearly four-year-old war. It's the same question that Watada said led to his decision to publicly challenge the legality of the war and refuse deployment -- whether the intelligence that led to the US-led invasion was cooked by Bush administration officials."

Ivan Brobeck and Ehren Watada are part a movment of resistance within the military that includes Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Mark Wilkerson, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Key, Ivan Brobeck, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress this month.


Recommended: "Iraq Snapshot"
"NYT: 'Few Iraqis Are Gaining U.S. Sancturary'"

"Other Items"
"Ruth's Report"
"NYT: "3,000 Deats in Iraq, Countless Tears at Home""
"And the war drags on . . ."
"The US military fatality count since the start of the illegal war now stands at 2,999"
"NYT: In The Garden of Judith and Miller"
"December is the deadliest month of the year for US troops in Iraq"
"3,000 US troops have died in bully boy's illegal w..."
"gerald ford did not heal the nation"
"Ham and Potato Casserole in the Kitchen"
"3,000 US troops dead in Bully Boy's illegal war"
"Iraq, Cindy Sheehan, Arianna Huffington, escalatio..."
"Impeach him already!"
"A sad and tragic milestone"
"The truth emerges from his fat mouth"
"Bully Boy, what have you done?"
"Saturday"
"The 3,000 mark"
"Friday finally"
"THIS JUST IN! THE DUCK AND COVER BULLY BOY!"
"Bully Boy is responsible for 3,000 US troops dead and 655,000 Iraqis dead"
"Coward-in-chief"
"3,000"
"2006: The Year of Living Dumbly (Year in Review)"