MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! SURE!

Mission Accomplished, May 1, Three Years On

Yes, it was three years ago that Mr. Bush went out to some ship and acted like a hot-shot and said the "Mission was accomplished". Now, three years later, tens of thousands of people have been killed and hundreds of thousands injured and millions seriously affected by this illegal, immoral and oh-so-breathtakingly-stupid war.

This is what After Downing Street has to say:

May 1 marks three years since George W. Bush staged his "Mission Accomplished" aircraft landing in San Diego Harbor and "delivered good news to the men and women who fought in the cause of freedom: their mission is complete and major combat operations in Iraq have ended."



Mission Accomplished: A look back at the media's fawning coverage of Bush's premature declaration of victory in Iraq

On May 1, 2003, President Bush landed on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln aboard an S-3B Viking jet, emerged from the aircraft in full flight gear, and proceeded to "press[] flesh," as The Washington Post put it, as he shook hands and hugged crew members in front of the cameras. Later that day, Bush delivered a nationally televised speech from the deck of the Abraham Lincoln in which he declared that "[m]ajor combat operations in Iraq have ended," all the while standing under a banner reading: "Mission Accomplished." Despite lingering questions over the continued violence in Iraq, the failure to locate weapons of mass destruction, and the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein, as well as evidence that Bush may have shirked his responsibilities in the Texas Air National Guard (TANG) during the Vietnam War, the print and televised media fawned over Bush's "grand entrance" and the image of Bush as the "jet pilot" and the "Fighter Dog."

Chief among the cheerleaders was MSNBC's Chris Matthews. On the May 1, 2003, edition of Hardball, Matthews was joined in his effusive praise of Bush by right-wing pundit Ann Coulter and "Democrat" Pat Caddell. Former U.S. Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-CA) also appeared on the program.:

MATTHEWS: What's the importance of the president's amazing display of leadership tonight?
[...]
MATTHEWS: What do you make of the actual visual that people will see on TV and probably, as you know, as well as I, will remember a lot longer than words spoken tonight? And that's the president looking very much like a jet, you know, a high-flying jet star. A guy who is a jet pilot. Has been in the past when he was younger, obviously. What does that image mean to the American people, a guy who can actually get into a supersonic plane and actually fly in an unpressurized cabin like an actual jet pilot?
[...]
MATTHEWS: Do you think this role, and I want to talk politically [...], the president deserves everything he's doing tonight in terms of his leadership. He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics. Do you think he is defining the office of the presidency, at least for this time, as basically that of commander in chief? That [...] if you're going to run against him, you'd better be ready to take [that] away from him.
[...]
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you, Bob Dornan, you were a congressman all those years. Here's a president who's really nonverbal. He's like Eisenhower. He looks great in a military uniform. He looks great in that cowboy costume he wears when he goes West. I remember him standing at that fence with Colin Powell. Was [that] the best picture in the 2000 campaign?
[...]
MATTHEWS: Ann Coulter, you're the first to speak tonight on the buzz. The president's performance tonight, redolent of the best of Reagan -- what do you think?

COULTER: It's stunning. It's amazing. I think it's huge. I mean, he's landing on a boat at 150 miles per hour. It's tremendous. It's hard to imagine any Democrat being able to do that. And it doesn't matter if Democrats try to ridicule it. It's stunning, and it speaks for itself.

MATTHEWS: Pat Caddell, the president's performance tonight on television, his arrival on ship?

CADDELL: Well, first of all, Chris, the -- I think that -- you know, I was -- when I first heard about it, I was kind of annoyed. It sounded like the kind of PR stunt that Bill Clinton would pull. But and then I saw it. And you know, there's a real -- there's a real affection between him and the troops.

[...]
MATTHEWS: The president there -- look at this guy! We're watching him. He looks like he flew the plane. He only flew it as a passenger, but he's flown --

CADDELL: He looks like a fighter pilot.

MATTHEWS: He looks for real. What is it about the commander in chief role, the hat that he does wear, that makes him -- I mean, he seems like -- he didn't fight in a war, but he looks like he does.

CADDELL: Yes. It's a -- I don't know. You know, it's an internal thing. I don't know if you can put it into words. [...] You can see it with him and the troops, the ease with which he talks to them. I was amazed by that, frankly, because as I said, I was originally appalled, particularly when I heard he was going in an F-18. But -- on there -- but the -- but you know, that was --

MATTHEWS: Look at this guy!

CADDELL: -- was hard not to be moved by their reaction to him and his reaction to them and --

MATTHEWS: You know, Ann --

CADDELL: -- you know, they -- it's a quality. It's an innate quality. It's a real quality.

MATTHEWS: I know. I think you're right.

Later that day, on MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Matthews said:

MATTHEWS: We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like [former President Bill] Clinton or even like [former Democratic presidential candidates Michael] Dukakis or [Walter] Mondale, all those guys, [George] McGovern. They want a guy who's president. Women like a guy who's president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It's simple. We're not like the Brits. We don't want an indoor prime minister type, or the Danes or the Dutch or the Italians, or a [Russian Federation President Vladimir] Putin. Can you imagine Putin getting elected here? We want a guy as president.

On the May 7, 2003, edition of Hardball, Matthews asked former Nixon administration official G. Gordon Liddy what he thought of the response to Bush's landing on the Abraham Lincoln. Looking at the footage, Liddy commented that Bush's flight suit made "the best of his manly characteristic."

From the May 7 Hardball:
MATTHEWS: What do you make of this broadside against the USS Abraham Lincoln and its chief visitor last week?

LIDDY: Well, I -- in the first place, I think it's envy. I mean, after all, Al Gore had to go get some woman to tell him how to be a man. And here comes George Bush. You know, he's in his flight suit, he's striding across the deck, and he's wearing his parachute harness, you know -- and I've worn those because I parachute -- and it makes the best of his manly characteristic. You go run those -- run that stuff again of him walking across there with the parachute. He has just won every woman's vote in the United States of America. You know, all those women who say size doesn't count -- they're all liars. Check that out. I hope the Democrats keep ratting on him and all of this stuff so that they keep showing that tape.

MATTHEWS: You know, it's funny. I shouldn't talk about ratings. I don't always pay attention to them, but last night was a riot because, at the very time [U.S. Rep.] Henry Waxman [D-CA] was on -- and I do respect him on legislative issues -- he was on blasting away, and these pictures were showing last night, and everybody's tuning in to see these pictures again.

Various media figures hyped Bush's National Guard experience but made no mention of evidence that emerged during the 2000 presidential campaign that Bush may have received special treatment in getting into TANG and during his tenure.

On the May 1, 2003, edition of CNN's Wolf Blitzer Reports, Blitzer noted that jets like the F/A-18 Hornet "helped win the war in Iraq" and twice commented on Bush's TANG background -- at one point calling Bush a "one-time Fighter Dog."

From the May 1 edition of Wolf Blitzer Reports:

BLITZER: There was a riskier landing that the president wanted to make. The Secret Service, though, just wouldn't let the commander in chief ride in an F/A-18 strike fighter. But CNN's Kyra Phillips will be doing just that in a matter of only a few minutes. She's in the cockpit of this F/A-18 Hornet. Right now, Navy jets like this one, of course, helped win the war in Iraq. Now, they're headed home. We'll talk with Kyra as soon as she catapults off the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. That's coming up.

A little bit of history and a lot of drama today when President Bush became the first commander in chief to make a tailhook landing on an aircraft carrier. A one-time Fighter Dog himself in the Air National Guard, the president flew in the co-pilot seat with a trip to the USS Abraham Lincoln. And he then mingled with the pilots and the crew members of the carrier on its way back from a deployment which covered the war in Iraq and before that, the war in Afghanistan. From that same deck tonight, the president will make more history. He'll deliver a major address to the nation.

[...]
BLITZER: And the president clearly pleased by his own landing aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln.

[...]
And as we mentioned, President Bush is no stranger to military aircraft. He flew F-102 fighter jets in the Texas Air National Guard. He joined at the height of the Vietnam War but was never sent overseas and never saw combat. There's a picture of the young George W. Bush in the Texas Air National Guard.

On the May 1 edition of CNBC's The News with Brian Williams, Williams, now anchor of NBC's Nightly News, said of Bush:

WILLIAMS: And two immutable truths about the president that the Democrats can't change: He's a youthful guy. He looked terrific and full of energy in a flight suit. He is a former pilot, so it's not a foreign art farm -- art form to him. Not all presidents could have pulled this scene off today.

On the May 1 edition of Fox News' On the Record with Greta van Sustern, correspondent Jon Scott reported:

SCOTT: Greta, the president made just about as grand an entrance tonight as the White House could have asked for. He came in aboard an S-3B Viking. That's a sort of a workhorse of the carrier fleet, an aircraft that is sometimes used for aerial refueling. It can also drop targeted and non-targeted bombs, the so-called dumb bombs. It can do a little bit of everything, and today it brought some very important cargo, namely the president of the United States, the first time ever that a sitting president has landed on a moving aircraft carrier.

Now, of course, President Bush flew fighters in the Air National Guard, but no pilot, no matter how experienced, can land on an aircraft carrier first time out. The president did take the stick for a short time during his flight, but he let another pilot handle the landing. Now, he -- when he got here he was absolutely mobbed by the 200 or so crew members who are normally on deck during flight ops, as they call them. The people in the multicolored jerseys reached out for a handshake, a photo, anything they could get of this president. One observer here tonight said it was like the Beatles climbed out of that plane, and that's very much what it looked like from here.

On the May 1 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, White House correspondent Wendell Goler reported:

GOLER: With a tailhook landing on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, President George W. Bush made history in advance of a historic speech to the nation in which he'll declare the war in Iraq is all but over. Mr. Bush traded his suit and tie for a flight suit and took a 20-minute flight to the ship during which he briefly called on his skills as a pilot in the National Guard.

[...]
HUME: Wendell, the president said "Yes, I flew it," right? And you said he did. How much flying did he actually do today?

GOLER: Brit, the president says he flew the plane about a third of the way from North Island Naval Air Station to the carrier Lincoln. He says the pilot asked him if he wanted to do some maneuvers, but he flew it mostly in a straight line. He says he sure misses flying but that the S-3B Viking is a lot more sophisticated than the planes he flew during his time in the Air National Guard.

The print media joined in the collective swoon the following day. From a May 2, 2003, article in The New York Times by staff writer David E. Sanger:

But within minutes Mr. Bush emerged for the kind of photographs that other politicians can only dream about. He hopped out of the plane with a helmet tucked under his arm and walked across the flight deck with a swagger that seemed to suggest he had seen Top Gun. Clearly in his element, he was swarmed by cheering members of the Lincoln's crew.

Even in a White House that prides itself on its mastery of political staging, Mr. Bush's arrival on board the Lincoln was a first of many kinds.

Never before has a president landed aboard a carrier at sea, much less taken the controls of the aircraft. His decision to sleep aboard the ship this evening in the captain's quarters conjured images of the presidency at sea not seen since Franklin D. Roosevelt used to sail to summit meetings.

Mr. Bush was clearly reliving his days as a pilot in the Texas Air National Guard, more than three decades ago. "I miss flying, I can tell you that," he told reporters who bumped into him as he moved around the ship.

Washington Post staff writer Karen DeYoung reported on May 2, 2003:

Bush, who had taken off his helmet and thus avoided photographic comparisons to presidential candidate Michael S. Dukakis's unfortunate episode with a tank helmet during 1988 campaign, jumped down in full flight regalia, a smile splitting his face. The Navy had planned an official greeting, with Bush being piped aboard and walking through two rows of "sideboys" saluting him -- a tradition that dates from the days when visiting officers were hauled up the side of the ship in a boatswain's chair.

Bush ignored it all, swaggering forward and pumping hands with everybody in sight before they could salute. "Here's a man with a birthday," he yelled at a television cameraman as he swung his arm around a sailor. "Put him on C-SPAN." For once, there were no security concerns to keep Bush from pressing flesh, and he made the most of it, hugging and patting everyone on the back -- from the greasy flight deck crew to F-18 pilots waiting to fly home this afternoon.

"Great job, great job," he kept saying. "I flew it," he shouted back to a reporter's shouted question about his flight. "Yeah, of course I liked it. It was fantastic."

Later, Bush explained that he had taken the controls from the pilot, Cmdr. John "Skip" Lussier, for about a third of the 15-minute flight at 360 knots, but had just steered during the "straight" parts. It was, he said, "much more sophisticated" than the jets he used to fly during his tour in the National Guard. Bush had a briefing from the Air Wing Commander and crew members who described their personal experiences flying in combat, watched gun camera footage and heard a battle damage assessment.

The weekend news programs brought even more praise for Bush's performance. On the May 4, 2003, edition of CBS' Face the Nation, host Bob Schieffer and Time columnist Joe Klein had this to say:

SCHIEFFER: As far as I'm concerned, that was one of the great pictures of all time. And if you're a political consultant, you can just see campaign commercial written all over the pictures of George Bush.

KLEIN: Well, that was probably the coolest presidential image since Bill Pullman played the jet fighter pilot in the movie Independence Day. That was the first thing that came to mind for me. And it just shows you how high a mountain these Democrats are going to have to climb. You compare that image, which everybody across the world saw, with this debate last night where you have nine people on a stage and it doesn't air until 11:30 at night, up against Saturday Night Live, and you see what a major, major struggle the Democrats are going to have to try and beat a popular incumbent president.

On the May 4, 2003, edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, Fox News Washington bureau managing editor Brit Hume recounted Bush's bravery:

HUME: But this was risky business. You know, there's grease and oil on the decks of those aircraft carriers. The wind's blowing. All kinds of stuff could have gone wrong. It didn't, he carried it off. Somebody, perhaps he, obviously, believed he could. But this was no slam dunk.

On the May 3, 2003, edition of CNN's The Capital Gang, then-Time columnist Margaret Carlson spoke of the "stirring tableau":

CARLSON: A hurricane couldn't have interfered with that particular parade. It was so well done, and even though we knew that everything was choreographed down to, you know, catching that fourth hook on the ship, it was still a pretty stirring tableau. Cecil B. DeMille couldn't have been done better. And even though you know there's no Santa Claus, Christmas is still great, as it was with that particular moment.

And appearing on the May 4, 2003, edition of CNN's Reliable Sources, syndicated radio host Laura Ingraham discussed her reaction:

INGRAHAM: Speaking as a woman, and listening to the women who called into my radio show, seeing President Bush get out of that plane, carrying his helmet, he is a real man. He stands by his word. That was a very powerful moment.




IT IS ENOUGH TO MAKE ONE SICK.

Eyes Wide Open

Eyes Wide Open is coming to Asheville, NC this upcoming weekend. I have wanted to bring this exhibit to our town for over a year and a half. I worked on this exhibit up in DC during the week of the inauguration in January 2004.

The purpose of the exhibit is to open people's eyes to the reality of war and the human cost of war. More information can be found at the American Friends Service Committee website.

The Grace Lee Peace Award

Last night, I received the Grace Lee Peace Award. Now, first off, it is not often that you hear of someone receiving an award for peace. Lots of awards and promotions and metals given out for war, but usually not for peace. So, I feel this was sweet for them to think of me. The other person they honored was Bob Smith, who speaks at some of our rallies, runs the local Community Action Board and happens to go to my church, or 'meeting for worship' as we call it. Better known as the Asheville Friends Meeting.

It was Buzz Lee who called me to tell me that I had won this award and he also told me that the award was named after his mother, Grace Lee. Grace was a life-long activist for peace and social justice issues, and Buzz, her son, is an activist also. He is also an active member of the local Democrat Party, and he lives in a retirement home lately. Buzz is a sweet guy, and I first got to know him when he sent in a donation and a letter to the WNC Peace Coalition because of an editorial I wrote. That was a few years back.

Anyway, I knew this Peace Award was part of a program called the Davidson Roundtable, which is a lecture series on social justice issues. I never seem to have time to attend these free lectures, but they often have very interesting speakers, and the main speaker is followed by a roundtable discussion with some individuals who are active in the issues being address. Last night they had Hodding Carter III as the main speaker, and I did not know who he was so I looked him up on google, and found out he was a journalist, as was his father, in the deep south during the civil rights era. He also worked as an assistant secretary of state for the Carter administration (no relation) and is currently a professor at UNC-CH.

I found his speech very interesting. He described how his positions on civil rights issues evolved, along with various other issues that he faced in his life. One of these was the issue of violence via guns, or the threat of such violence. His family had guns during the time they had problems with their white neighbors over civil rights issues, and they believed and the community believed that they would use them if they felt a need. One night they sat up all night expecting trouble, but none came. The next night, they were so exhausted they all went to sleep, and that night someone burned a cross on their yard. Hodding said that the family is very grateful today that they were all asleep, because if they were awake, they would have shot at them. Turns out it was a pack of kids, acting out their parent's hatred. Hodding went on to say how he had a gun on him every day for five years, and never took it out of his holster, until 1964. One day that year, he took it off and got rid of all the guns in the family. He did it because he brother had died from a gun accident.

So, he felt the guns kept him and his family safe, until his brother died. One is left to wonder how they would have fared without any guns at all during those years. Would they have been subjected to violence? Would his brother still be alive? The answer to the last one is "most likely".

I found all their discussion very interesting, but before they spoke, I was given the Grace Lee Peace Award. Buzz introduced me by saying that I am an audiologist and that whenever there is a rally or event in Asheville concerning peace or social justice issues, I am always there and nearly always one of the organizers. I spent a few minutes speaking on EYES WIDE OPEN, an exhibit that is coming to Asheville next weekend that I am very involved with currently. I spoke on the WNC Peace Coalition and I spoke on the fact that war does not work and that we need to abolish war altogether.

Sure enough, one of the later speakers had to mention that sometimes "we have to fight". Well, if we "have to fight" how come we never seem to get to the point where the problems are solved and we don't have to fight? One of the main reasons I feel we have to stop war is because if we continue on this path, one day we may find ourselves in a nuclear war. And that would be suicide for most of the planet. I also feel war is a horrible thing to have happen to your home and community.

Anyway, I did not know it until last night, but the Grace Lee Peace Award came with a check. I was thinking it would be $50 or so, and that I would donate it to the Peace Coalition. Well, turns out they gave me a check for considerably more than that, and a W-9 form to go with it. So I will put it in the bank until I figure out how much taxes on it I have to pay. And I have a certificate which I will frame. Here's my ideas for how to obtain a Peace Award:

1. Show Up
2. Do the work
3. Get Lucky!

Really, I have never understood why some good things get attention and rewarded while other things are just ignored, and how some people get recognized and others don't. I guess all you can really do is what you think is a good use of your time overall, and try to better the world. I am very honored to be given an award for peace! And I hope what I do does help promote peace in the world.

Article on "Who Is A Terrorist?"

Who Is A Terrorist?

The scenes from Gaza are heartbreaking. Heartbreaking? That's not for certain. The sight of the Aben family from Beit Lahiya mourning its 12-year-old daughter Hadil last week did not stir any particular shock in Israel. Nor did anyone take to the streets and protest over the sight of her wounded mother and little brother lying in shock on the floor of their shanty in Gaza. On the day Hadil Aben was killed, Yedioth Aharonoth carried a story about Nelly, the dog from Kibbutz Zikim that died of heart failure from the booming noise of the Israeli artillery firing into Gaza.

Instead of expressions of sorrow at the death of children, the upper echelons of the defense establishment came out with a stream of strident statements. The defense minister said that the only thing to do was step up the pressure on the Palestinians. The deputy chief of staff spoke about a possible invasion of Gaza and the head of army operations added, "what we've seen so far are only the previews." The IDF announced it would further reduce the "safety range" that is designed to avoid shells hitting the civilian population.




The article I cited above is excellent at presenting the immorality of the Israeli’s government’s actions. Israel is dropping bombs on Gaza, while the Palestinians are firing rockets at Israel. The Palestinians have yet to kill anyone with the rockets, yet they are the ones labeled a “terrorist” – a name they lived up to the other day when one of them did a suicide bombing in Tel Aviv.

This Israeli author argues that the approach they should try (to quiet down the violence in Gaza) is to lift the embargo, restore aid, and help the Palestinian people. (It is likely that this would save them money also; however the arms manufacturers would lose money.) This is the exact opposite of what they are doing. In spite of the fact that Israel’s policy is not working, they continue to use their failed policies. And, as one can see, some Palestinians also apply their failed policies to achieve justice and freedom. They care enough to give their life in the process, and they are so desperate, or so ill, that that is all they have to give.

I think he is a HERO

Malcolm Kendall-Smith took a stand and refused to go back to Iraq. I think he is a TRUE HERO of this war, because he stood up for what was right and what was just. He is paying a price for that stand, but I hope he knows that there are many people who admire him and recognize that he is the one who is doing what is morally right.

A Letter from the Guardian (more at the link):

RAF Doctor's Duty and Conscience

When sentencing Flight Lieutenant Malcolm Kendall-Smith to eight months in prison (RAF doctor sent to jail for refusing to serve in Iraq, April 14), judge advocate Jack Bayliss explained that the crime of aggression under international law "can only be committed by those responsible for the policy of a nation, at the top of government or the armed forces, and that responsibility for it does not trickle down to those at lower levels of the chain of command". The judge had also said: "Obedience of orders is at the heart of any disciplined force."

This judgment means that in any conflict - if instructed to murder, torture or maim - those of the lower orders cannot be held responsible for their leaders' commands. Those involved in conflicts from the second world war onwards, including Iraq, could claim that they were only carrying out orders. The hypocrisy of this stares you in the face. Flt Lt Kendall-Smith didn't have a chance of winning. I add my support to his stand. JR Faulkes London

Don't Attack Iran!

Please go to www.dontattackiran.org and sign the petition telling the US government not to attack Iran. This is truly insane to do this, and I am afraid they just might try.

What is takes for protests to really work....

Below is an article I took from Daily Kos. I agreee whole-heartedly: for a protest to work, it has to be serious, respectful, focused and large. I don’t see that happening with the anti-war movement, unfortunately. I have reprinted most of the article here.



Sometimes it ain't what you do, but the way that you do it, that matters. Some demonstrations have changed the world. But in my long and jaded experience some demonstrating is a waste of time. Some demonstrating is even counterproductive. What makes effective protest? I've been thinking about that since the big antiwar march in Washington last September. I started thinking about it more after Coretta Scott King died.


Rule #1. Be serious.

Study the great civil rights marches of the 1950s and 1960s. People in those marches looked as if they were assembled for a serious purpose. They wore serious clothes. They marched both joyously and solemnly. Most of all, they carried themselves with the dignity befitting a great and noble cause. And if they chanted or carried signs, the chants or signs didn't contain language you couldn't repeat to your grandmother. The antiwar protests I've attended in New York City, by contrast, were often more like moving carnivals than protests. Costumes, banners, and behavior on display were often juvenile and raunchy. Lots of people seemed to be there to get attention, and the message they conveyed was LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME LOOK AT HOW CLEVER I AM, not NO IRAQ WAR. Really. And, please, nix the street theater. It isn't that I don't enjoy some of it -- I am fond of Billionaires for Bush -- and a display of flag-draped coffins moving down the street has real impact. But most of the time street theater is juvenile and tiresome and reminds me of bad summer camp skits. Except raunchier. Which takes me to --


Rule #2. Be unified of purpose.

One of my ongoing gripes about antiwar marches is the way some groups try to tack their own agenda, which many others in the demonstration may not share, onto marches. ANSWER is a repeat offender. Most of the marchers last September were in Washington for the sole purpose of protesting the war. But ANSWER hijacked CSPAN's attention and put on a display so moonbatty it made The Daily Show. Message control is essential. During the Vietnam era, I witnessed many an antiwar protest get hijacked by a few assholes who waved North Vietnamese flags and spouted anti-American messages, which is not exactly the way to win hearts and minds --


Rule #3 -- Good protesting is good PR.

I know they're called "protests," but your central purpose is to win support for your cause. You want people looking on to be favorably impressed. You want them to think, wow, I like these people. They're not crazy. They're not scary. I think I will take them seriously. That means you should try not to be visibly angry, because angry people are scary. Anger is not good PR. Grossing people out is not good PR. Yelling at people that they're stupid for not agreeing with you is not good PR. Screaming the F word at television camera crews is not good PR.


Rule #4 -- Size matters.

Size of crowds, that is. Remember that one of your purposes is to show off how many people came together for the cause. But most people will only see your protest in photographs and news videos. The number of people who marched for immigration reform over the past few days was stunning. It's the biggest reason the marches got news coverage. A sub-rule -- IMO, an occasional REALLY BIG demonstration that gets a lot of media attention is way better than a steady drizzle of little demonstrations that become just so much background noise..


Rule #5 -- Be sure your opposition is uglier/more hateful/snottier than you are.

In the 1950s and 1960s white television viewers were shocked and ashamed to see the civil rights marchers -- who were behaving nicely and wearing suits, remember -- jeered at by hateful racists. And when those redneck Southern sheriffs turned fire hoses and attack dogs on the marchers, it pretty much doomed Jim Crow to the dustbin of history. I think Cindy Sheehan's encampment in Crawford last August, although a relatively small group, was successful because of the contrast between Sheehan and the Snot-in-Chief cruising by in his motorcade without so much as a how d'you do. Truly, if Bush had invited the Sheehan crew over for lemonade and a handshake, the show would've been over. But he didn't. At the same time, if Sheehan's crew had yelled obscenities or thrown rocks at Bush's motorcade, it would have helped Bush's approval ratings considerably. But they didn't. This takes us back to rules #1 and #2. You don't win support by being assholes. You win support by showing the world that your opponents are assholes.


Rules #6 -- Demonstrations are not enough.

It's essential to be able to work with people in positions of power to advance your agenda. And if there aren't enough people in power to advance your agenda, then get some. Frankly, I think some lefties are caught up in the romance of being oppressed and powerless and can't see beyond that. Remember, speaking truth to power is just the first step. The goal is to get power for yourself. Fortunately, the netroots revolution is showing us the way to do just that.


Other observations:
I don't know how to persuade people who march against the war to let go of self-indulgence and exhibitionism and get serious. I once posted the opinion that I am weary of the "old fringe that's stuck in a 1970s time warp of identity politics and street theater projects and handing out fliers for the next cause du jour rally," and boy, did I get slammed for that. Clearly, I had just slaughtered a whole herd of sacred cows. Imagine whistling "We Shall Overcome" at a Klan meeting.


This blog post ended with:
I also believe the antiwar movement today is floundering because of lack of cohesive leadership. The dignified presence of Martin Luther King guided the great civil rights protests and made them exemplary. Judging by some demonstrations I've seen, the antiwar movement is being guided by Sideshow Bob.

The Death of a General

I saw this report on CBS news on Sunday night. It was very disturbing, for many different reasons. I am going to present some of the "facts" of the case, as stated by Mr. Welshofer, and my interpretation of those "facts". Mr. Welshofer is in the US military, but he does not deserve any title that was given to him, so I will not use them.

Mr. Welshofer says: "And you just tell yourself, you know what? This has got to stop. You have to protect these guys."

He's not talking about Iraqis here, he's talking about injured US soldiers. Of course, the US soldiers would not be injured if they WERE IN THE USA, would they?

The story goes on: "The way to protect them, according to the military, was by finding Saddam Hussein — who was then still at large — and by cracking the insurgency. One day, the key to the solution appeared on Welshofer’s doorstep: an Iraqi major general with close links to Saddam. His name was Abid Hamed Mowhoush. Welshofer says he thought Mowhoush might know where Saddam was hiding and also help him understand how the insurgency was organized and financed."

At this point in time, we all know that Saddam was not behind the insurgency at all. He's been in prison for over two years and the insurgency rages on. This story fails to mention why this Iraqi Major General showed up at Mr. Welshofer's door. The General was there because they had abducted his sons. He was turning himself in - to get his sons free. Keep in mind here that Mr. Welshofer wanted to get INFORMATION from the General.

Mr. Welshofer wasn't getting any information out of this General, so he started hitting him. "I put him on his knees and I used the facial slap," recalls Welshofer. (I think he is lying. I think he started right off with this type of physical abuse, and quickly moved into torture.)

The General still wasn't giving him any information. (I wonder if Welshofer is intelligent enough to ponder the idea that maybe, just maybe, the General did not know where Saddam was hiding. I doubt it.) So, according to the CBS program, Welshofer got "creative". That is an interesting choice of words for Welshofer's behavior: it is not every day that we call killing other people "creative".

So, he beats the crap out of the General, breaking his ribs among other things, and then stuffs him inside a sleeping bag, ties a cord around him, and sits on him. And proceeds to hold his hand over his mouth from time to time. Of course, the sleeping bag is not see-through, so maybe he covered his nose with his hands and/or the sleeping bag. Apparently, this possibility does not cross Welshofer's puny brain. He claims he didn't cover the General's nose.

In spite of broken ribs (established on autopsy), someone sitting on him, and someone putting his hand over his "mouth" - somehow the General keeps talking. (This is, of course, a pile of stinking lies.) But the General does not say what Welshofer wants to hear. Welshofer gives up, and removes the bag from the General, and has this to say:

"The general had a smile on his face. An honest-to-God grin on his face. So I’m thinking he’s messing with me. So, I grabbed a little bit of water and sprinkled it on the general’s face, because he was not responding to any questions, any type of conversation at all. I saw that the water pooled in his mouth, and it was at that point that I realized there was a problem here. The general’s dead," Welshofer recalls.

First off, if he "grabbed a little bit of water and sprinkled it" there is no way he would see that water "pooled in his mouth" - so he is flat-out lying here. He dumped a bucket of water on the General, and because it was a significant amount, it pooled in his mouth. Then Welshofer figured out the General is dead. Welshofer is again lying here or he is dumber than dirt. Here's a clue, Mr. Welshofer: living people breathe, which makes their chest move. You will see that in EVERY living person on the planet, I guarantee you.

Then the lying and stupid Mr. Welshofer claims he didn't think he killed the guy!

The second autopsy said the General died "asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression". This autopsy also says " “Findings included rib fractures, numerous contusions (bruises), some of which were due to impacts with a blunt object(s).” The first autopsy was a sham.

But here's the part that shows that Welshofer is truly incapable of intelligent thought and totally deficient in moral development:


"Asked if he would do all this again, Welshofer says, "I helped save soldiers lives. I'm 100 percent convinced of that. If I had done anything less than what I did, if one soldier more had died because I had done anything different, I find that even more reprehensible — even more unacceptable."


How do you get information from a DEAD guy? How stupid is this man not to realize that murdering a surrendered Iraqi General would inspire more Iraqis to join the insurgency? What other choices do they have? If someone who is a General surrenders and cooperates with the American troops and then is brutally murdered, what chance does a regular person have? Why would ANYONE cooperate with such individuals acting like such evil immoral animals?


Not only did Welshofer's killing of the Iraqi General make sure they did not get any information from him, it also made sure that hundreds of Iraqi soldiers picked up arms against the US troops. He inspired them to kill Americans. Welshofer helped promote the violence in Iraq, and some American funerals are directly thanks to him, even if he is too stupid to realize it.


Now, I have no doubt that people in Welshofer's chain of command authorized these evil acts also, and they are probably as convinced as Welshofer is that acting like this is saving American lives. (They don't give a damn about saving Iraqi lives.)


They are evil, they are stupid, and they are a disgrace to the military, to all Americans and the entire human race.


They don't even deserve to consider themselves part of the human race. Mr. Welshofer and his commanders are lower than dirt.

Stopping war

I posted the comment below to Talking about Iraq blog



What happens to the people who say "no" to the corruption and don't play the game? They get sidelined or silenced, or in Iraq, probably killed.

I am wondering these days how we deal with people who believe in "power over" vs. "power shared".... how do we stop them if they think they can impose their agenda and their will on people, even by violence? How do we stop them?

In the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the people who were behind this war on Iraq wrote how they want "global dominance" for the pursuit of American interests, using American's military might to achieve it. And the Americans voted them into office - and the Americans don't object to spend a huge amount of money on weapons. Even more surprising, the American people do not object to American companies selling arms all over the world. Even the military guys, who have got to know that those arms make their fighting wars more dangerous, don't object. So, we have the American military with more weapons than any reasonable useage would suggest, and American companies arming the rest of the world to an unbelievable degree. If the goal is the end of the world, then we are making the correct choices.

I would say that all wars about about power and greed, and it is nothing new to lie to a people about the reasons for war (that happens all the time) and the underlying reasons for starting up any war is to control the area and the resources.

And, I would say that responding to violence with violence does not work too well either..... it only leads to more violence.

How do we stop these people??



His answer was very simple, and probably correct: stop giving them money.

What the FCNL wants

Friends Committee on National Legislation

We seek a world free of war and the threat of war
We seek a society with equity and justice for all
We seek a community where every person's potential may be fulfilled
We seek an earth restored.

Life in Baghdad today

Iraqis search among bodies laying outside a morgue of a local hospital in Baghdad, for missed relatives. Insurgents killed six in more attacks in Iraq as officials pressed on with efforts to form a unity government amid mounting frustration at their sluggish progress.(AFP/Ali Al Saadi)

For more updated information on what is happening in Iraq, go to Today In Iraq blog.

Dr. Rashad Pleads with You: Call Congress

This was sent to me in an email:


*******************************************************************
Dr. Rashad Pleads with You: Call Congress!

Long but a lot of very good info

*******************************************************************

On Wednesday Dr. Rashad Zidan, an Iraqi pharmacist and humanitarian, gave a powerful, moving, eloquent talk at NCSU at a wonderful event organized by the CodePink, NC Peace & Justice, the NCSU campus democrats, NCSU campus greens, MENASA (Middle Eastern & North African Student Association) and with great assistance from Dr. Gerald Surh. With over 130 people in attendance, Dr. Rashad spent nearly 2 hours answering audience questions about the reality of war and occupation in Iraq. An outstanding article by Saja Hindi and Curtis Martin in Thursday's Technician outlines many of her arguments for a speedy withdrawl by US occupation forces - online at: http://www.technicianonline.com/media/paper848/news/2006/03/23/News/Iraqi.Pharmacist.Relates.Experiences-1713981.shtml?norewrite200603231425&sourcedomain=www.technicianonline.com

At the heart of many Iraqi's call for an end to the occupation are many of the same concerns of the peace & justice movement:

*The presence of US troops puts ordinary Iraqis in a catch 22 - If they work with the occupation forices, they are collaborators. If not, they are targeted as insurgents.
*Occupation troops fuel the fire of a growing insurgency, which attracts foreign fighters and terrorists into the battle, and creates divisions among Iraqis where there were none before.
*The US Occupation has used divide and conquer tactics, arming the very militias which commit acts of atrocity against fellow Iraqis.
*The Occupation forces and mercenaries in Iraq are getting away with crimes that undermine any attempt at establishing a justice system or civil society.

Once US troops leave, the majority of Iraqi's can put their energy into building a coalition government, holding accountable elections, rebuilding their society, and providing for their security. The hard-core foreign and fundamentalist fighters still represent a small proportion of the resistance, and Iraqi society will better be able to handle this element once the fuel to their fire has been removed. The sooner the occupation ends, the more likely it is that Iraq as a society can survive.

Dr. Rashad met with Representative Price and Miller during her visit, pleading with them to end the suffering by ending the occupation. She also asked that all of us support her and all those in Iraq working for peace by being a voice for change with our elected officials.

NC Peace & Justice again encourages everyone across the state to contact members of Congress while they are on recess in their districts. If you haven't already, please make a call or fax to your Representative and Senator to their district and DC offices by Monday - you can even leave a voice mail over the weekend!

House Votes to Spend Another $72 Billion on War; Peace Movement Victory on "No Permanent Bases"March 17th, 2006

First, the Bad News ...Rushing through debate in order to get out of town for the St. Patrick's Day Recess, the House passed Bush's $92 billion Emergency Supplemental Appropriation request. The request included $19 billion for hurricane relief, which caused some Representatives to vote for the bill.

Silver Lining:In a voice vote, the House approved the Lee-Allen-Hinchey-Schakowsky Amendment, assuring that "None of the funds in this Act may be used by the US government to enter into a basing rights agreement between the United States and Iraq." This victory is a direct result of the pressure the peace movement. Although the House passed the supplemental spending bill, we can take heart in the 71 votes against the bill. Last year only 43 members of the House were willing to stand up against the war.

Some Resolutions to ask Congress to Support:

Rep Conyer’s H.Res.635 - Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HE00635:@@@P No NC co-sponsors

Rep Murtha’s H.J.Res.73 - To redeploy U. S. Forces from Iraq. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HJ00073:@@@P - Cosponsors include NC Rep Butterfield

The Senate will begin to consider the supplemental appropriation on March 30, aiming to finish before their Spring Recess (April 7–24). The Senate is generally more willing and able to consider amendments to appropriations bills, and we can expect a "No Permanent Bases" amendment to be offered in the Senate. Your Senators will be in their home states March 17–26, make sure they hear from you. Your message: Support a "No Permanent Bases" amendment, and vote against any appropriation for the War in Iraq.

Free Call to All Congress… 877-762-8762House of Representatives

(Name, DC Phone, NC Phone, Office Location)
Rep. G. K. Butterfield (D - 01) 202-225-3101, 252-237-9816 Wilson
Rep. Bobby Etheridge (D - 02) 202-225-4531, 910-814-0335 Lillington
Rep. Walter B. Jones (R - 03) 202-225-3415, 800-351-1697 Greeneville
Rep. David E. Price (D - 04) 202-225-1784, 919-967-7924 Chapel Hill
Rep. Virginia Foxx (R - 05) 202-225-2071, 828-265-0240 Boone
Rep. Howard Coble (R - 06) 202-225-3065, 336-333-5005 Greensboro
Rep. Mike McIntyre (D - 07) 202-225-2731, 910-735-0610 Lumberton
Rep. Robert Hayes (R - 08) 202-225-3715, 888-207-1311 Concord
Rep. Sue Myrick (R - 09) 202-225-1976, 704-362-1060 Charlotte
Rep. Patrick McHenry (R - 10) 202-225-2576, 828-327-6100 Hickory
Rep. Charles H. Taylor (R - 11) 202-225-6401, 828-251-1988 Asheville
Rep. Melvin L. Watt (D - 12) 202-225-1510, 704-344-9950 Charlotte
Rep. Brad Miller (D - 13) 202-225-3032, 919-836-1313 Raleigh

Senator Burr http://burr.senate.gov/
Washington, DC Office 217 Russell Senate Office BuildingWashington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3154 Fax: (202) 228-2981
Asheville OfficeFederal Building151 Patton Avenue, Suite 204Asheville, NC 28801
Phone: (828) 350-2437 Fax: (828) 350-2439

Gastonia OfficeCity Hall181 South Street, Room 222Gastonia, NC 28052
Phone: (704) 833-0854 Fax: (704) 833-1467
Rocky Mount Office100 Coast Line Street, Room 210Rocky Mount, NC 27804
Phone: (252) 977-9522 Fax: (252) 977-7902
Wilmington Office201 North Front StreetSuite 809Wilmington, NC 28401
Phone: (910) 251-1058 Fax: (910) 251-7975

Winston-Salem Office2000 West First StreetSuite 508Winston-Salem, NC 27104
Phone: (800) 685-8916 Add. Phone: (336) 631-5125 Fax: (336) 725-4493

Senator Dole http://dole.senate.gov/ 555 Dirksen Office BuildingWashington, DC 20510
Ph: 202.224.6342 Fax: 202.224.1100

Raleigh Office:310 New Bern AvenueSuite 122Raleigh, NC 27601
Ph: 919.856.4630 Fax: 919.856.4053

Salisbury Office:225 North Main StreetSuite 304Salisbury, NC 28144
Ph: 704.633.5011 Fax: 704.633.2937

Western Office:401 North Main StreetSuite 200Hendersonville, NC 28792
Ph: 828.698.3747 Fax: 828.698.1267

Eastern Office:306 South Evans StreetGreenville, NC 27835
Ph: 252.329.1093 Fax: 252.329.1097

Forwarded by N. C. PEACE ACTION

Letter to the Washington Post

I find it curious indeed that a majority of Americans have the opinion that Muslims are disproportionately prone to violence, per your article on "Negative Perception of Islam Increasing." After all, it was the American goverment that authorized the war on Iraq, even with no evidence (just mistaken beliefs) that Iraq was a threat to the USA.

And it was the American military that dropped thousands of bombs on this country and killed at least 30,000 of it's citizens (actually, the number is probably much, much higher) when Iraq did not attack or threaten us.

Who is more prone to violence here? Who has killed more innocents?

(This letter has not been published by the Washington Post.)

Bush lies yet again

From press conference:

Q I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet -- your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth -- what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil -- quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it?

THE PRESIDENT: I think your premise -- in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- is that -- I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect --

Q Everything --

THE PRESIDENT: Hold on for a second, please.

Q -- everything I've heard --

THE PRESIDENT: Excuse me, excuse me. No President wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. We -- when we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day, Helen. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.
Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq -- hold on for a second --

Q They didn't do anything to you, or to our country.

THE PRESIDENT: Look -- excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where al Qaeda trained --

Q I'm talking about Iraq --

THE PRESIDENT: Helen, excuse me. That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.
I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences --

Q -- go to war --

THE PRESIDENT: -- and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it.



Saddam did not deny inspectors, and he did disclose that he had no WMDs. So, Bush is a bigger liar than Saddam. What a sad day for America that we elected such a flat-out stupid liar.

I put this on my blog to document how badly Bush lies. Also, he said yesterday that he does not intend to leave Iraq, and that is for a future president to do........ well, let's hope he does not shread the constitution and declare himself "leader for life".

I never believe the fear-mongering about the WMDs, and I was sure they would not find any nuclear WMDs. And while I could not establish that there was no chemical or biological WMDs there, I knew they could not hurt the USA.

No matter how many lies Bush tells about "the terrorists".

I have never believed Bush when he talked about "freedom and democracy" for Iraq. I seems to me that he is bringing them the freedom of the grave and the democracy of death.

Another picture of setting the flags up

This is again from the Asheville Citizens Times website. This gives a better idea of the number of the flags. There are 1,400 for Iraqi civilian fatalities, and 23 for American fatalities.

May they all rest in peace.

May our country find peace.

Photo of the setting of the flags

This photo was taken by the Asheville Citizen Times and published on their website.

March 19, 2006

Rally for Peace 2006

On March 19, 2006, the Western North Carolina Peace Coalition held a Rally for Peace. This was the third annual rally to mark the start of the Iraq war, and this followed large pre-war rallies in 2002 and 2003. Our theme for this Rally for Peace was "the wages of peace".

This rally was held at Pack Square in downtown Asheville. We had over twenty different groups doing tables at the rally, and they included NOW, Women in Black, Kindness Campaign, Mountain Greens, Veterans for Peace, and Department of Peace Campaign. We had even more sponsors, and they included Physicians for Social Responsibility and several local churches.

We had 450 stickers to pass out to attendees that said "End the Occupation of Iraq". These stickers were from the Progressive Democrats of America, and we handed out all of them shortly before the program started. But people kept coming, and we estimate that another 150-250 people came after the start of the program. We had an activist table for the Peace Coalition, with petitions to be signed and pre-made postcards to send to our elected officials. The postcards said "WAGE PEACE for a better world" on the front along with a peace dove and "I believe in peace and ask you to support an end to the war in Iraq" on the back. We had hundreds of postcards signed and returned to us for mailing.

Several of our speakers were ministers from local churches, including one who was a member of the Fellowship of Reconciliation and Voices in the Wilderness. He was in Iraq in 2003. We had a speaker from the local Department of Peace campaign and several music acts. We had a couple of exhibits at the rally. One was five display boards of the names of Iraqi civilians killed by this war and another was a sculpture by DeWayne Barton. That sculpture spoke to the Iraq war and the Katrina disaster. It showed how we waste our money on destructive activities instead of helping our own people.

The very best part of our program was, in my opinion, the ending. We had a musical group called Pure Energy that consisted of two young men, with one playing bells and another playing the didgeridoo. The music was both inspiring and mystical. Along with that, two young women released their Peace Doves, which were trained homing pigeons. They were snow white, and they started by releasing two doves, then a few more, and then an entire box full of doves. The doves were trained to fly together in formation, and they formed two distinct groups that flew above us, dipping and gliding and circling around, as we listened to the magical music.

It was the most spiritual experience that I have ever experienced while attending a public event. It was both moving and hopeful, and this was a feeling shared by all who watched the doves and listened to the music. It was inspiring to see some young adults show such creative talent and energy into expressing their personal desires for peace.

It was awesome.

We did get some coverage in the local paper, but we did not feel it was an accurate portrayal of the Rally for Peace.

Also, the WNC Peace Coalition made flags to commemorate the casualties of the Iraq war, and they are now on display at Unitarian Universalist Church in Asheville. The picture above is a close up of the flags. We made 1,400 of them for the Iraqi civilians and 23 for the US military casualties. I don't have any good pictures of the Rally for Peace 2006.

US Legislation

Good News from Friends Council on National Legislation in DC:

This week the House voted to approve one of two key components of FCNL’s Iraq STEP Resolution and to protect civilians in Darfur. These victories are the result of your hard work: the thousands of emails you’ve sent to your representatives on Iraq and Darfur, the in-district lobby meetings with your members of Congress, your efforts to gain endorsements for FCNL’s STEP proposal, and your phone calls. Congratulations!

The STEP resoluton is to ban any permanent military bases in Iraq. So, the House of Representatives passed a bill saying they can not do that.... but will Bush follow the law?

Bless the children

This picture is from Yahoo news, and it shows a child killed in a US bombing raid.... or, a US shooting raid, depending on who you talk to, in Iraq. There are more pictures on Yahoo news that show the 11 people killed in this incident. The US admits to 4 being killed, and say they were going after an insurgent. The pictures tell a different story. I printed up two copies of this picture and I am putting it on the back of an envelopes that will go to my Senators. That would be Dole and Burr.

Tomorrow is our Rally for Peace here in Asheville, where will will have speakers, music, poetry and peace doves released. We will think about and talk about what has happened in Iraq over the last three years, but we will never know the extent of it. And, our elected leaders will know even less. They don't care at all about the innocents who have lost their lives in Iraq.

More pictures of these children are on this website. This is not Yahoo News, so the pictures are even worse than above. They show the true reality of war. They also support the claim that the children were killed by shooting, not by a bomb blowing up their home.

God bless the children caught in this horrible conflict.

This is the weekend to Rally for Peace

Regarding this war, I can claim a lot less guilt than most Americans since I have put a LOT of effort into stopping this war. I will/have only done moral things, which means no violence. I have worked on it for hours per day, nearly every day. I have phone numbers of elected officials memorized by 2004 since I called so many times.


I feel sorry for the civilians, not the combatants. Particularly not for combatants that are not in their own homeland or doing it for defense. US troops are fighting for profit for Bush cronies.

Of course, we don't hear the stories of civilians who go through horrible things (like the dead children in today's news) and in Iraq, they not only lack press coverage, they lack medical care too (usually). They just die. Anyone should be able to use their imagaination to know what is happening to the citizens of Iraq.


This war is wicked evil, and the Americans who participated/supported/glamorized all this: shame on you.


This is the weekend to go to a rally and show the world where you stand on the issue of this war. United for Peace and Justice has the most complete list of events, if you are unsure of what is going on in your area. Asheville will have a Rally for Peace on Sunday at Pack Square from 2 to 4 PM. We expect better than 500 people.

Demonstration against Israeli government actions

URGENT: Demonstration at 5 PM at Vance Monument on 3/15/06 against the recent actions of the government of Israel (with USA and British help) in Palestine. This will be at Pack Square in downtown Asheville, NC.

UNCA students are organizing this event. This is their announcement:


EMERGENCY DEMONSTRATION TOMORROW (Wednesday March 15), VANCE MONUMENT, 5PM


Today the Israeli occupation forces launched a brutal and illegal raid on Jericho Prison with the goal of capturing or killing Palestinian resistance leader Ahmed Sa'adat. Sa'adat is the General Secretary ofthe Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. He has been imprisoned since 2001 but has never been officially charged or tried. When the new Hamas government announced its intent to release Sa'adat and other prisoners of conscience held in the jail, the Israeli military responded with massive military force. Over 80 military vehicles, including two bulldozers and two helicopters, were sent to the prison in an all-out assault, only fifteen minutes after US andBritish overseers left the facility. The Israeli force attacked prisoners and guards indiscriminately, showing its willingness to kill whomever it needed to in order to keep the popular and respected resistance leader from going free. Two prison guards were killed anda number of other guards and prisoners were wounded before Sa'adat surrendered. Now his fate, in the hands of the Israeli military, is uncertain.Tomorrow at 5pm we will stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people to denounce this, the latest in a long list of Israeli crimes. We ask everyone who can to come out and show your support.

Color Coding

What happened to all those wonderful color coding exercises we did before the 2004 elections? How come we don't have Code Red days anymore? Did they catch bin Laden or something?

Well, that last one is probably never going to happen.... the Bush administration is either to incompetent or they just don't care. Hard to tell which.

Bush needs to be impeached, along with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales and all the evil neo-cons.

Andrew Sullivan is dumb

From Andrew's blog: "Thanks for all your emails. I'm aware of one person who clearly stated before the war that he believed that Saddam had no WMDs. That was Scott Ritter. This is not the same as saying that we didn't know for sure, or should have waited some more; or that containment could have worked for a few months or years longer. I mean: an anti-war commentator, writer or speaker who clearly said that Saddam had no WMDs before we invaded and that therefore the war was illegitimate. I remember being told by many who were against getting rid of Saddam that we shouldn't invade precisely because he had WMDs and our invasion would be the only occasion in which he'd use them. But I don't recall anyone saying flat out that there were no WMDs in Iraq. But I may have missed someone. I'll happily post such pre-war statements if you send them to me."


I went around to co-workers, family, friends saying that Iraq had no nuclear WMDs. And I also said that it was possible that they had chemical or biological WMDs, there is no way they could hurt the USA with them.... unless they Fed-Ex them to us???

I figured this all out with a six year old notebook computer and a phone line connection to AOL.

Two really, really BIG clues: Rice and Powell. Both were on record saying that Saddam was contained and not a threat... way back in 2001. Then, a year and a half later, Saddam supposed was in possession of nuclear WMDs without the IAEA even being aware of it. It takes longer than a year and half to make those things.

Furthermore, there were UN inspectors all over Iraq.... YET, AMAZINGLY, Rumsfeld (who claimed he knew where the WMDs were) COULD NOT TELL THE UN INSPECTORS WHERE THERE WERE!!!! WELL, DUH...... WHAT ABOUT THAT?

And then there was the silly performance of Powell in front of the UN Security Council in February, 2003. I watched that and thought "it's all circumstantial evidance" and thought that would easily be debunked. It was - by the foreign press. Apparently, the US press is incapable of thinking!!!!

This past Friday, someone from my Representative's office claimed that Saddam may have moved his chemical WMDs to Syria. That is total nonsense. These people are out of touch with reality. It is not possible to move a chemical weapons plant (lock, stock, and barrel) without even a trace left behind. Never mind that such a claim defies common sense!

And this morning, while still half asleep, I heard someone on NPR go on and on about what we need to do in Iraq to "win" this conflict. He was spouting bullshit. Turns out it was Ken Pollack.... who has been wrong about Iraq for 16 YEARS. How long do you have to get things wrong before you are no longer interviewed on NPR?? How many decades??

We seriously, seriously, seriously need media reform here in the USA. They are pitiful.

It is with great sadness.....

That I have to report the death of Tom Fox. Below is an email sent to me by a local friend:


Our Friend Tom Fox, , the Christian Peacemaker of Langley Hills Meeting, who was captured last November by the "Swords of Righteousness Bridgade" in Baghdad, has been killed. CNN reports that Fox's body had two bullet wounds, his hands were bound, and there were cuts and bruises on his body that indicated physical abuse.

According to ABC News, "The State Department continues to call for the unconditional release of all other hostages in Iraq". This of course is completely and utterly false. The State Department is calling for the unconditional release of all hostages except the 20,000 or more being detained by Occupation forces. These hostages, some of whom have been tortured and killed, are used by terrorists as a convenient excuse to capture, torture, and kill innocent Americans.

Cynical warmongers claim that Fox and his compatriots were on a fool's errand. Nothing could be further from the truth, IMHO. It is the military that is on a fool's errand, one that has cost us over a half trillion dollars and 2,400 American lives. Anyone who thinks that Peacemakers are less safe because they are unarmed has forgotten what happened in Fallujah.

On Nov 25, 2005, the day before he was captured, Tom wrote this in his diary:

"Why are we here?" We are here to root out all aspects of dehumanization that exists within us. We are here to stand with those being dehumanized by oppressors and stand firm against that dehumanization. We are here to stop people, including ourselves, from dehumanizing any of God's children, no matter how much they dehumanize their own souls."

A true Peacemaker, Tom recognized that the first place to look for what stands in the way of peacemaking is within. Rest in Peace, Tom.

May your legacy live on, and triumph, before it is too late for all of us.


QUOTE OF THE DAY: “Too many are willing to die for war and too few are willing to die for peace.” – Thomas Fox, American member of Christian Peacemaker Team in Iraq.

Just says it all.....

And some people think our "image" in Muslims/Arabs/Iraqi minds are affected by such things as port deals or Americans speaking out against their government's policies.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

From Dede Miller, Gold Star Families for Peace

I got to meet Dede last year when she came to Asheville with her sister, Cindy Sheehan. Cindy was speaking at the Asheville Peace Rally in March 2005. I first met Cindy up in DC in January 2005, and I had asked her to speak in Asheville. She did, and she mainly did it at her own expense. The WNC Peace Coalition did make a donation to Gold Star Familes for Peace. Cindy and Dede are both great women. I agree with what Dede is calling for. I have long spells of calling the White House, Senators Burr and Dole and Representative Taylor every day. Lately, I have only been calling once or twice a week. They need to hear from other voices: they know me. I visited DC last year three times (and you can read about those trips on this blog) and I lobbied Burr, Dole and Taylor each time. And each time, I bumped into one of them in the halls of DC's office buildings. I am going to talk to Taylor's office staff again this Friday.

It does not take special knowledge or skills to lobby. All it take is time...... time to make a phone call or visit and tell them what you think. It pays to be polite, because you will have more of an impact that way. But you dont' need to know any facts, you can just speak from your heart.

Also, there is a RALLY FOR PEACE in Asheville on March 19, 2006 from 2 to 4 PM at Pack Square. There will be speakers, live music, poets, displays, tables, and a peace dove release. If you are in the area, we hope you will stop by for our rally.


Let's Go Gandhi -- By Dede Miller, www.gsfp.org

Yesterday my sister Cindy Sheehan was arrested outside of the U.S. mission to the United Nations. A contingent of Women which included Cindy, Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin, Missy Beattie a GSFP member whose Nephew Chase Comley was killed in Iraq and eight Iraqi women were attempting to deliver the Women Say no to War petition to the U.S. mission. This visit was pre approved by the mission. As the women arrived one of New York’s finest “cited a change of plans from “higher up” and moved in to arrest them. Four of the women, Cindy, Medea, Missy and code pink member Patti Ackerman were handled very roughly during their arrest. The women linked arms when it became apparent they were to be arrested. For this they were physically abused and charged with resisting arrest.

What will it take for the majority of you who don’t support the occupation of Iraq or the Bush regime to rise up? Polls tell us that 59% of you believe the occupation is wrong and we are being lied to by Bush. I do not see 160 million of you out in the streets. Again, what will it take? I will tell you what it took to get me off of my ass. It took my sweet beautiful nephew Casey’s blood spilling in Sadr City Baghdad. It took watching my sister and family suffer a pain I don’t think I can ever explain well enough but know it is a pain I would not even wish on the Bush family. I feel an indefensible guilt because of my apathy. I live daily thinking maybe Casey and 2300 other kids would still be alive if I had been in the streets prior to March 19 2003. Our civil rights are slowly being taken from us.

The Senate voted 89-10 to renew the Patriot Act. It still must pass the house. After hearing of the Dubai port deal and learning of the illegal wire tapping of Peace activists it is very apparent to me that the Patriot Act is used more to curtail the actions of U.S. citizens than to protect us from Terrorists. Patriot Act II will further increase the powers of the Bush regime and further diminish our rights.

So when will you wake up and rise up?

Will it be when you are arrested for trying to deliver a petition to a Government entity that your tax dollar pays?

Will it be when you are arrested for wearing a shirt a government official finds offensive?

Will it be when your e-mails and phone conversations are monitored by the NSA?

Will it be when your Child's brains are blown out in a foreign country?

Tell me please what it will take?

I was having this conversation with a dear friend of mine. Someone on our side. But a person comfortable in life and as yet untouched by the last 5 years. When I asked her to speak out, call her congressman, newspaper, etc. She said to me “who would listen?” My answer to her, no one if you don’t do anything.

I can’t stress it enough to you. At some point your life is going to be impacted by this administration of evil and greed. I implore you, I beg you, don’t wait until it is too late. The time is now to take our country back. The time is now to make our elected official do our will.

Non Violent Civil Disobedience is a time tested and proven tool to effect change.

To quote Gandhi:You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance.Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil.A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul.

We must as Rep. Maxine Waters puts it “put street heat” on congress. It is time for us to as Ralph Waldo Emerson put it “cast our whole vote”.

You must now be willing to do as much as you can to reclaim our country. Can you make daily phone calls to your Senators and Congressmen? I think you can. Can you get out one hour a week in front of the homes of your Congressional reps demanding they do our will?

I think you can. Will you dig your heals in and stand your ground when they will not listen? I think you should.

It is time to go Gandhi on them……will you?


.

In Peace,Dede MillerProud Auntie of Casey Sheehan KIA Iraq 04/04/04Gold Star Families for Peace
www.gsfp.org
Please visit our website for ways to get active

Another response to another blog

First off, Bush will make a "show" of drawing down troops, but there will be no complete withdrawal of US forces while he is around. Not going to happen. Those bases are expected to be "permanent" and to insure the oil companies and others make a ton of money there in Iraq. That was the point of the whole war, and they do not intend to abondon that.

That does not mean you should not make them as miserable as possible right here in the USA. It is your moral duty. Call them everyday and tell them what poor excuses for human beings they are. By "them" I mean the White House, Representatives, Senators. Go visit them and tell them. Write them. Do this as often as you possibly can. Do it daily.

And, what the French did in Algeria is exactly what will happen in Iraq, and the sooner we get out of there, the better. Saying we should stay is like a violent drunk claiming he has to stay with his family to provide for them. No, he has to GET OUT and SEND SUPPORT CHECKS. This is what needs to happen in Iraq.

And, just like we can expect to see US troops come home and do violent crimes from PTSD, we can expect that from Iraqi citizens too - except that they have even more PTSD than the US troops, since they have lost their homes, jobs, business, neighborhoods and country, and don't have hardly any access to health care. Those factors are not true for US troops.

I support allowing any Iraqi who wants to come to the USA to come.... but I'm sure that among that large crowd will be terrorists who want revenge.

It would be well for you to keep in mind that there are "loyal-to-America" Iraqis RIGHT NOW working with US troops and US occupation authorities in Iraq who are INFILTRATORS. This is how guerilla wars go. They may want to come over here also. How can we tell them apart? How can we know what PTSD will do to Iraqi citizens who immigrate over here? We can't.

I am willing to pay the price, are you?

I am also sure that getting Iraqis over here is in the hands of the Bush administration. And we are having great difficulty getting them to do anything decent, or even show signs of intelligent behavior.

How to tell if you are a moron

I wrote this in the comment section of another blog:

I thought I would drop in and tell everyone how they can tell if they are the true moron or not.

You are a world class moron if you ever believed any of the following, even for a second:

1. there were nuclear weapons in Iraq
2. Iraq was a threat to the USA
3. Iraq had anything to do with 9/11
4. Bush administration was capable of doing anything right
5. Bush administration ever wanted what was best for other people beyond their "base"
6. Bush administration had any degree of competence, ever
7. Bush administration went into Iraq for WMDs or to bring "freedom and democracy" to Iraqis or to fight terrorism
8. This war in Iraq would reduce terrorism world-wide
9. Bush administration cares about what happens to the Iraqi people or US/UK troops ... or even the vast majority of Americans
10. Bush administration intends to get Iraq to a point where they are functioning normally and living a decent life
11. Bush administration did NOT intend to make a big, fat pile of money off of Iraq (with American taxpayer's help, of course)
12. Bush administration intends to leave Iraq permanently and not have any US bases left behind
13. Iran has nuclear weapons
14. Iran is a threat to the USA
15. Iran had anything to do with 9/11
16. Bush administration cares about democracy in Iran or cares one whit about the people of Iran
17. Bush administration would allow large scale immigration of poor Iraqis into the USA - (rich Iraqis may qualify as part of the "base")

Now, if you have, at any point in your life believed two or more of the above, then you are a huge moron. And you should get some red lipstick and write on your bathroom mirror: I AM A TRUE MORON AND A GULLIBLE FOOL, just so you don't forget it.

If you believe three of the above, then you should tattoo the word MORON on your forehead so the rest of us can identify you and look out for you when you try to cross streets or go vote or something.

Update on an Iraqi town that had "wall" built around it

Siniyah: An Iraqi Town That is Now a Prison

Twice now, an IPS correspondent has been refused entry to this town that has become a prison for its inhabitants. Contact with residents of the town came only at the checkpoint. A month back, the United States military built a 10 kilometre wall of sand around the town of Siniyah, 220km north of Baghdad. The town is close to Saddam Hussein’s hometown Tikrit and the oil refining centre at Beiji. Construction of a sand wall around the town began on January 7 in response to repeated attacks against the 101st Airborne US forces stationed in the area. A night curfew has been imposed in the area. “Journalists have not been limited or prevented from travelling in and around Siniyah,” US military spokesman Major Tim Keefe told IPS.

“Coalition and Iraqi Forces go to great lengths to make sure journalists are able to do their job in a safe environment.” That was after soldiers stopped the IPS correspondent entering the town on two occasions. But in the queue to the main checkpoint many people were more than willing to speak to IPS about the situation within.“On the 7th of January, the US troops started building this wall around Siniyah,” said Mohammed, a 34-year-old engineer from Siniyah.

“They are trying to isolate Iraqi fighters who are attacking them every day. The troops have been exposed to attacks near Siniyah by roadside bombs and by different weapons... Also, the resistance blows up the petrol pipelines leading to Turkey.” The issue of the pipeline is a salient one for residents of Siniyah. The town has been sealed off not because of attacks within the town, but due to the belief it is being used as a staging ground for attacks outside. The coalition forces are attempting to halt attacks directed mainly at the Beiji refinery and at convoys serving the coalition.

The chosen targets have brought general support for Iraqi resistance within Siniyah. Mohammed says the attacks are taking place because “this petrol will go to Turkey and is stolen by occupation forces, or when Turkey buys this petrol the money is taken by the occupation forces.” Residents of Siniyah speak also of injustices by the occupation troops. The wall of sand is now dividing residents from the Iraqi government, they say.“Siniyah has become a real battlefield now, and the occupation forces have destroyed many of our homes,” said Sumiya, a 33-year-old housewife. “There is no security inside Siniyah and it is worse than any place in Iraq now. The occupation forces and Iraqi National Guard are raiding Siniyah houses everyday and arresting many people. There is a curfew from 5pm to 5am; in Baghdad it is only midnight to 5am.”

Some info on national security

The War At Home: National Security: Live Discussion with Post writer Dana Priest

Fairfax County, Va.: Dana, What could you tell us about the intelligence community's view of the President's persistent claim that the war in Iraq is not creating more terrorists? It has been my impression that the war was at the very least contributing to radicalization in much of the Arab and Muslim world. Is the president being, at the least, disingenuous in continuing his emphasis only on the potential benefits of the intervention, and not on the costs? Thanks as always.

Dana Priest: It is now a core belief, among every single intelligence person--inside and outside government, both foreign and domestic--that the Iraq war is pouring fuel on the fire, boosting recruitment and given individuals an anti-American ideology and the commitment to undertake suicide bombings. There is no dispute here.


So, this tells us that all the evil bombing and war-making is not even making us any safer here at home.

It is surely making us more hated.

An Army interrogator speaks out

"Following orders that I believed were legal, I used military working dogs during interrogations. I terrified my interrogation subjects, but I never got intelligence (mostly because 90 percent of them were probably innocent, but that's another story). Perhaps, I have thought for a long time, I also deserve to be prosecuted. But if that is the case, culpability goes much farther up the chain of command than the Army and the Bush administration have so far been willing to admit....
In training, we learned that all P.O.W.'s are protected against actual and implied threats. You can never put a "knife on the table" to get someone to talk. That was clear. But our Iraqi prisoners weren't clearly classified as P.O.W.'s, so I never knew what laws applied. Instead, a confusing set of verbal and written orders had supplanted the Geneva Conventions."
- Anthony Lagouranis, who served as an Army interrogator from January 2004 to January 2005.

My heart breaks for Iraq

PHOTO: Iraqi women grieve over a dead child under a blanket at a hospital after a mortar attack in Baghdad February 27, 2006. Mortar fire killed 15 people and shooting erupted around two Baghdad mosques on Sunday but pleas for unity and a third day of curfew in the city seemed to dampen sectarian violence that has pitched Iraq toward civil war. REUTERS/Namir Noor-Eldeen



Toll in Iraq's Deadly Surge: 1,300

Grisly attacks and other sectarian violence unleashed by last week's bombing of a Shiite Muslim shrine have killed more than 1,300 Iraqis, making the past few days the deadliest of the war outside of major U.S. offensives, according to Baghdad's main morgue. The toll was more than three times higher than the figure previously reported by the U.S. military and the news media.

Hundreds of unclaimed dead lay at the morgue at midday Monday -- blood-caked men who had been shot, knifed, garroted or apparently suffocated by the plastic bags still over their heads. Many of the bodies were sprawled with their hands still bound -- and many of them had wound up at the morgue after what their families said was their abduction by the Mahdi Army, the Shiite militia of cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Aides to Sadr denied the allegations, calling them part of a smear campaign by unspecified political rivals.

By Monday, violence between Sunni Arabs and Shiites appeared to have eased. The disclosure of the death tolls followed accusations by the U.S. military and later Iraqi officials that the news media had exaggerated the violence between Shiites and Sunnis over the past few days. The bulk of the previously known deaths were caused by bombings and other large-scale attacks. But the scene at the morgue and accounts related by relatives indicated that most of the bloodletting came at the hands of self-styled executioners.


Violence in Iraq-from Monday and Tuesday (Sure does not look like it has calmed down to me. These are from Reuters Alertnet.)

NAHRAWAN - Interior Ministry police commandos killed five suspected Sunni insurgents and captured 25 in an evening battle near Nakhrawan just southeast of Baghdad, an Interior Ministry source said. Eight police were also killed and six wounded.
BAGHDAD - Iraqi Interior Ministry forces have captured a senior aide to al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, state television said on Monday. Iraqiya television named the man as Abu Farouq and said he was captured with five others in the Sunni insurgent stronghold of Ramadi, west of the capital.
ISKANDARIYA - Two insurgents were killed and another wounded while they were trying to plant a bomb which exploded prematurely in the main road between Iskandariya and Latifiya, south of Baghdad, police said.
RIYADH - Three civilians were killed when a roadside bomb exploded in Riyadh town, 60 km (40 miles) southwest of Kirkuk, police said.
BAGHDAD - A mortar attack killed four people and wounded 17 in Shola, a Shi'ite district in Sunni-dominated western Baghdad on Monday, police said.
BAQUBA - Gunmen shot dead the owner of a glaziers and an employee and wounded five others in Baquba, 60 km (40 miles) north of Baghdad, police said.
KERBALA - Iraqi police arrested three suspects while they were planting bombs near a Shiite Shrine of al-Hur al-Riyahi near Kerbala, 110 km (68 miles) south of Baghdad, police said.
FALLUJA - A civilian was killed by Iraqi soldiers while he was heading to work in Falluja, 50 km (30 miles) west of Baghdad, police said.
TUZ KHUMATO - Iraqi police arrested 16 suspects on Saturday and Sunday in Tuz Khurmato, 70 km south of Kirkuk, and Dibis, 40 km (25 miles) northwest of Kirkuk, police said. Two of them were arrested while they were trying to plant bombs near a Shi'ite mosque, police added.
TUZ KHURMATO - The head of the education directorate escaped an assassination attempt when gunmen threw a hand grenade at his office in Tuz Khurmato, police said.
BAGHDAD - A U.S. soldier was killed by small-arms fire on Sunday in central Baghdad, the U.S. military said in a statement.
BAGHDAD - Jawad al-Samara'i, a member of Iraq's student union who was abducted on Saturday by gunmen in the northeastern Hurriya district of the capital, was found dead with several marks of torture, the union said.
TIKRIT - The mosque over the grace of Saddam Hussein'a father was badly damaged by a bomb, police and officials said.
BAGHDAD - A U.S. soldier was killed by small-arms fire west of Baghdad on Monday, the U.S. military said.
BAQUBA - Nine bodies of shooting victims were found just south of the city of Baquba on Tuesday, the army said. The corpses were found in wastelands in the hamlet of Tarfaya, the officials said.
BAGHDAD - Interior Ministry sources said that a Sunni Arab mosque was damaged by a bomb early Tuesday morning.


May God forgive Mr. Bush for the evil he has unleashed on these poor people.

An Israeli response to what his government is doing

I just wanted to present a view on what one Israeli thinks about his government's actions in relation to Hamas:


”Even if we put aside the awful political inanity of pushing Hamas into a corner instead of giving it a chance to change its ways, and even if we ignore the fact that Israel plans to confiscate tax revenues that do not belong to it, the policy of the Kadima government raises questions about its humanity. Where do we get the right to abuse an entire people this way? Is it only because of our great power and the fact that the U.S. allows us to run wild and do whatever we want? . . .

What country would dare to exacerbate the living conditions (which are so miserable in any case) of the residents of a territory under its occupation? What was the sin of the 4,000 lucky people from Gaza whom Israel still allowed to work within its borders, and to whom it is now closing the gates? Did the decision-makers call to mind the sight of these downtrodden people, crowded and humiliated at the Erez crossing on their way home from an exhausting day of work?

More than half of all Palestinians are already living in poverty according to the last United Nations report, published in December. Last year, 37 percent had difficulties obtaining food and 54 percent of the residents of the "liberated" Gaza Strip cut back the amount of food they consume. Child mortality rose by 15 percent and the average unemployment rate reached 28 percent. To travel in the West Bank, the Palestinians have to traverse no fewer than 397 checkpoints and, in addition to this, Israel now wants to wield an even heavier hand. . ."

It is opinions like this, and the actions of the peacemakers in Israel that give me hope.


Full article is here.

2006 Precinct Meeting

This morning, we held a precinct meeting for the local Democratic party. One of the points of this meeting is to present and vote on resolutions that will go on to the county convention, then the district convention and finally the state convention. Anyone can come to the precinct meeting, but to go on to the next step in these meetings means you have to be elected. This is not hard, since there are generally more available slots than people wanting to fill them.

At first, we did not have enough to have a quarum for the meeting, but one guy there called his wife and got her to come in, so we then had five people: Kathy (chair), me (vice chair), Charles, Melody and Merlinda. Merlinda came with one resolution, about the Dept of Peace. I had this resolution also, and that one passed. I presented a resolution on NC Energy Future, and that passed. I also presented a resolution on stopping the transport of nuclear materials, and that passed. We had a resolution on Health Care reform, and that passed also.

I presented a resolution on Campaign reform and voter owned elections, and that one failed, mainly because Charles thinks that non-partisan elections are dirty elections. He claims that when you have a non-partisan race, then there are back room deals were they decide who is going to get the spot instead of a race between the Democrats and Republicans. I don't agree with him on that one, and have seen no evidence to support his claim. So, that one was voted down, even though it really dealt with how campaigns are financed, not if they are non- partisan or not.

There was a resolution for a temporary moratorium on Big Box Developments in Buncombe County. That also did not pass, so I can only surmise that this group feels the more big box stores, the better. We already have one big box Wal Mart here in Asheville, and they are talking about making another one.

But the one that really got me was the resolution to withdraw troops from Iraq. These four individuals feel we have to stay there and "do right by the Iraqis" and Charles also objected to the resolution saying we should leave no "structures" behind. He was concerned that it would be wasteful to tear down buildings instead of leaving them for the Iraqis. Well, I am sure when we do get kicked out of Iraq, the Iraqis themselves will burn the buildings down. I am also sure that Bush does not intend to EVER leave Iraq, which is why he is building permanent bases there. Anyway, it was clear that these four folks, like most Americans, are very ignorant of what is happening in Iraq. But I truly find amazing, and very depressing, is to run into Democrats who support Bush's policies. If they want to be Republicans, what are they doing at a Democratic meeting? Can't they see how bad Bush and his policies are for the USA? I guess not.

More folks that are doomed to learn the hard way, which means America will learn the hard way also.

Kathy is stepping down as chair, and I know I am too busy to do the job, so finally Charles took on being chair for the precinct. I think he has a lot of Republican policies, which really means he is not very well informed.

oh, well............

Really....

Congressional Probe of NSA Spying Is in Doubt

(Never was any doubt in my mind that they would not go through with this. They already have the goods on these Republicans. - Susan)

The Senate intelligence committee is scheduled to vote tomorrow on a Democratic-sponsored motion to start an inquiry into the recently revealed program in which the National Security Agency eavesdrops on an undisclosed number of phone calls and e-mails involving U.S. residents without obtaining warrants from a secret court. Two committee Democrats said the panel -- made up of eight Republicans and seven Democrats -- was clearly leaning in favor of the motion last week but now is closely divided and possibly inclined against it.
They attributed the shift to last week's closed briefings given by top administration officials to the full House and Senate intelligence committees, and to private appeals to wavering GOP senators by officials, including Vice President Cheney. "It's been a full-court press," said a top Senate Republican aide who asked to speak only on background -- as did several others for this story -- because of the classified nature of the intelligence committees' work.



An Arrogance of Power

The most recent example of politicized intelligence was President Bush's statement on Feb. 9 that the United States had "derailed" a 2002 plot to fly a plane into the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles. Bush spoke about four al Qaeda plotters who had planned to use shoe bombs to blow open the cockpit door. But a foreign official with detailed knowledge of the intelligence scoffed at Bush's account, saying that the information obtained from Khalid Sheik Mohammed and an Indonesian operative known as Hambali was not an operational plan so much as an aspiration to destroy the tallest building on the West Coast. When I asked a former high-level U.S. intelligence official about Bush's comment, he agreed that Bush had overstated the intelligence.

Bush and Cheney are in the bunker. That's the only way I can make sense of their actions. They are steaming in a broth of daily intelligence reports that highlight the grim terrorist threats facing America. They have sworn blood oaths that they will defend the United States from its adversaries -- no matter what. They have blown past the usual rules and restraints into territory where few presidents have ventured -- a region where the president conducts warrantless wiretaps against Americans in violation of a federal statute, where he authorizes harsh interrogation methods that amount to torture.

When critics question the legality of the administration's actions, Bush and Cheney assert the commander in chief's power under Article II of the Constitution. When Congress passes a law forbidding torture, the White House appends a signing statement insisting that Article II -- the power of the commander in chief -- trumps everything else. When the administration's Republican friends suggest amending the wiretapping law to make its program legal, the administration refuses.

Let's say it plainly: This is the arrogance of power, and it has gone too far in the Bush White House.


(Could not have said it better. I suspected from the start that the claims about the terrorist bombing of LA was fabricated or overblown. - Susan)

Rank Ignorance

The following is a part of an article about how Americans are being misinformed and deceived by our "news" media. The drumbeats for a war (or bombing raid) on Iran are getting stronger, and if our government does this, we will all be sorry.


Rank Ignorance Reigns

In keeping with its established role as purveyor of disinformation, Fox "News" talking head Brit Hume misreported Fox’s own poll. On "Special Report" (January 26) Hume said that 51% of Americans "would now support" air strikes on Iran. What the poll found is that if diplomacy fails, 51% would support air strikes. Can we be optimistic and assume that the American public would not regard an orchestrated failure by the Bush administration as a true diplomatic failure?

Alas, we cannot expect too much from a population in thrall to disinformation.

The "evidence" that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons consists of mere assertion by members of the Bush administration and the neoconservative media. Iran says it is not pursuing nuclear weapons, and the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors have found no evidence of a weapons program. Iran is a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Under the treaty, signatories have the right to develop nuclear energy. All they are required to do is to make reports to the IAEA and keep their facilities open to inspection. Iran complies with these requirements.

There is no Iranian "defiance." When news media report "defiance," they purvey disinformation. The "seals" on Iranian nuclear facilities were placed there voluntarily by the Iranians while they attempted to resolve the false charges brought by the Bush administration.

The "Iran crisis" is entirely the product of the Bush administration’s determination to deprive Iran of its rights as a signatory of the non-proliferation treaty. It is one more demonstration of President Bush’s belief that his policies are not constrained by fact, law and international treaties. Despite the clear and unambiguous facts, the Fox/Opinion Dynamics poll reports that 60% of Republicans, 41% of Independents, and 36% of Democrats support using air strikes and ground troops against Iran in order to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This poll indicates an appalling extent of ignorance and misinformation among the American public. The Bush administration will take advantage of this ignorance to initiate another war in the Middle East.

Moonlight and moon shadows

I saw the rising moon tonight as I left work (I work kinda late) and it was a beautiful yellow full moon, hanging low in the sky. I decided to go up to the Blue Ridge Parkway and take a longer look at the moon on this cold winter night. I'm sure if I was allowed to drive further on the Blue Ridge Parkway, I would have found snow, but they close the parkway down when there is snow or ice. They don't want people going headfirst into the closest ravine, not to be discovered for weeks or months, maybe. But such thoughts as that were not on my mind tonight.

I pulled off the side of the road and walked up the Parkway to the bridge over the Swannanoa river. The moon was higher in the sky, and a clearer shade of white, and still very beautiful. My shadow was easy to see. I walked to where the moon was shinning down on the river, not in a perfect circle, but a messy oblong white reflection. The ripples in the Swannanoa were pretty to watch, but it is overall a calm river..... not like the wild whitewater rivers I used to kayak.

And as I stand there in a beautiful spot that I am fortunately enough to live close to, I thought again of what is happening to my country, the USA. I remember the energy and enthusiasm that went into the Dean campaign a few years back. The slogan we had then was "Let's take our country back!" Well, we did not succeed in doing that. We are still meeting, organizing, trying to improve things, but my fear is that we are losing our country, in spite of all our efforts. And the people we are losing our country to are not conservatives. No, they are radicals who are trying to destroy our constitution. They are trying to ruin our country with debt and our world with war.

If the US goes and bombs Iran, the Iranians will be in world of hurt and we will be stepping into a world of shit. It is impossible to say how far this will go, or where it will all end. I used to wonder how the Germans could elect someone like Hitler and follow him, and then I see the same sort of thing happening before my eyes in my own country. This is not to say that Bush is a bad as Hitler. Hitler killed about 50 million people, and Bush has killed less than a quarter million. I guess things will never get that bad here in the USA.......... I don't know. I sure don't feel good about it. Americans are amazingly gullible or stupid: a great many of them now think Iran is a threat to our country. It, of course, is not. And there is no evidence that they are planning on building a nuclear bomb, but even if they did it would not be nearly as dangerous as Pakistan having a nuclear bomb.... which they already do.

How can people be so dumb?

And how can they be so blind to the suffering we have visited on the Iraqi citizens?

It is pathetic that Americans cannot see that.

Wiretaps and spying

I, like most Americans, feel the US government should listen to my calls and read my email and my mail just as much as they feel like. I just don't care, because, you see, I have nothing to hide. I'm not connected to anyone who engages in criminal behavior, and I certainly am not doing criminal things myself. As a matter of fact, I hope they read every last word I write. Maybe they will learn something.


But, unlike most Americans, I object to doing wiretapping or surveillance of any American without a warrant. This is a violation of our laws, for starters. Secondly, without judicial oversight, the presidential administration could use wiretapping and surveillance of people to maintain their hold on power. They could spy on their political opponents and thereby run an unfair campaign. They could collect "dirt" on people and then hold on to this to blackmail them or control them. And that is why the courts need to issue a wiretap permit for each and every wiretap the Bush administration (or any administration) wants to do....... to stop them from blackmailing their political opponents, and to stop them from running political campaigns unfairly. There are probably a host of other good reasons why warrantless wiretapping is a really bad idea. And actually, I think the people most likely to be hurt will be Republicans.

So, all you Republicans better keep your noses clean and don't go and get a blow job from someone who you are not married to, or something, cause they can use it against you.

How much will it cost us?

National Priorities Project Bulletin


Check figures for Bush's Budget and Cost of Iraq War

************************************************************************


The Bush administration released its budget request for fiscal year 2007 on February 6th. It proposes deep cuts in domestic programs, totaling a $15 billion loss in non-security domestic discretionary spending.


NPP has just released "The President's Budget: Impact on the States," which provides a brief publication for each state with an overview analysis and local numbers showing the impact of the proposed budget. The publication addresses seven different programs or issue areas: food and nutrition; community development; the environment; Head Start; Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP); education and community policing.


To find your state, click here.


While the administration claims that the proposed cuts are necessary to reduce the deficit, the budget would make the 2001-2003 tax cuts permanent, which would reduce revenues by $1.7 trillion over the next decade. The budget also does not include complete funding for the Iraq or Afghanistan wars, which could add another $70 billion to the deficit. Excluding war spending, the Defense Department budget would increase by 7 percent.

Breakdowns of the cost of the Iraq War by state are included in this release.

This candidate is a fool

This past Saturday, I attended the NC Democratic Party had a state executive meeting. This was about 400-500 people from around the state who gather a few times per year to do the work of the Democratic party. There was a Progressive Democrats caucus before the meeting, and I covered what we accomplished under the blog post "Voting to Impeach" below.

While at this meeting, I met a man named Mr. Tim Dunn, who is running for the US House of Representatives in the Eighth Congressional District in NC. He was at a table there that was promoting his campaign. He is a tall, good looking, articulate man who is also a veteran of the Iraq war. He is a lawyer. He is in the Marine Reserves. He claims he can "help America chart a better foreign policy course" on his campaign materials. He is one of the "fighting Dems".

He told me that while he was in Iraq, he was responsible for investigating for the upcoming trial for Saddam. This man does not know how to read, write, or speak Arabic, yet he is supposed to prepare data and evidence for this trial. I suppose that one cannot tell the Marines that one is incompetent to do the job. I suppose you do what you are told.

While talking to him, he claimed that we (meaning America) can make Iraq a success, if we "finish the job" which to him means getting an Iraqi army and police force to defend the country. He showed no signs that he understood the overall purpose of what the Bush administration intends to do there. He seems to believe that we (meaning America) can make a success of this project called 'the war in Iraq.'

I left him for a few minutes and then started thinking: if he has been in Iraq, and he thinks that we can make the invasion of Iraq a success, he should be able to respond to the common greeting in Iraq. So, I went back up to him and said "assalam aleikom". He had no clue what that meant or how to respond. So, I finally told him the response is "aleikom assalam" and what these expressions mean ("peace be to you" and "to you, also peace"). I went back to the meeting.

After the meeting, I was walking out with a group of my friends from here in the mountains. I bumped into Mr. Dunn again, and again said "assalam aleikom" to him. He grabbed my hand, and I don't really remember what he had to say, since I was saying "you can let go of my hand now". I don't know why men do this, but it creeps me out when they grab hold of your hand without asking and then don't let go.

But, Mr. Dunn still did not know the common response to the Iraqi greeting. I turned to a friend and said "assalam aleikom" and he immediately said "aleikom assalam" back to me. Neither of us has been in an Arabic country. I turned to Mr. Dunn and said "see, it's not that hard!"

My opinion of Mr. Dunn is that he is patriotic, loyal to the Marines, well educated, but he is also a fool.

Bush is full of......

Bush said: "Dictatorships shelter terrorists, feed resentment and radicalism, and seek weapons of mass destruction."

So, why are we arming and supporting Pakistan and their dictator? Then he goes and says that Iran is not a democracy. It is certainly closer to a democracy than Iraq or Afghanistan is!

Bush said: "and we will never surrender to evil."

When the US government does kidnapping, torture, rape, murder and starting up a war where none existed, they are not surrendering to evil. THEY ARE EVIL!!

Bush again: "I am confident in our plan for victory … I am confident in the will of the Iraqi people … I am confident in the skill and spirit of our military. Fellow citizens, we are in thisfight to win, and we are winning."

Johnson said in 1967: "Overall, we are making progress. We are satisfied with that progress. Our allies are pleased with that progress."

Bush again: "The same is true of Iran, a nation now held hostage by a small clericalelite that is isolating and repressing its people."

Someone should tell him that the Iranian people elected their leaders, and they had a healthy majority, more of a majority than Bush ever enjoyed.

Bush is so full of shit.

Should have listened to some more silence

Instead, I turned on the radio and heard the ending of the Democrat reply. He said the main thing we needed to do was "become one people" and overcome our partisan divide.


Why on earth would I want to "become one people" with people who promote kidnapping, torture, murder, and optional wars for bogus reasons? Why on earth would I want to walk with evil?


It is beyond me to understand that one.

Listening to Silence

Tonight, I will listen to silence rather than listen to the SOTU address.

Silence has more meaning.