The Medical Situation in Iraq is Tragic

Medical System Becomes Sickening
Inter Press Service
Dahr Jamail and Ali Al-Fadhily

BAGHDAD, Nov 23 (IPS) - After three and a half years of occupation, Iraq's medical system has sunk to levels lower than seen during the economic sanctions imposed after the first Gulf war in 1990.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has said Iraqis are now extremely vulnerable in their health needs.

"Several wars and 13 years of economic sanctions left a heavy toll on the nutrition of the population, on the social structure, on the economy and on the health infrastructure and services," according to a statement on the WHO website.

"This is well depicted in the morbidity and mortality rates of the population of Iraq, particularly of infants, children and mothers. The majority of Iraqis completely depend on the food Public Distribution System for their nutritional requirements."

The health situation in Iraq has been in constant decline since the beginning of the U.S.-backed UN-imposed sanctions in 1990. Iraqi doctors were reputed to be the best in the Middle East during the 1980's, but now they are short of medicines, medical equipment and funding to maintain the hospitals.

"We were angry with Saddam's government for the poor health situation in the country, but now we wish we could get that back," 55-year-old teacher Ahmed Zaydan from Sadr City in Baghdad told IPS. "There was not enough medical care, but there was something that one could live with and the private sector market was cheap. We were hoping for the change of regime to improve our lives, but the result is that we practically have no government healthcare."

Saddam Hussein's regime managed to keep basic medical services free of charge for most Iraqis until the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003. There was a hospital in almost every town. Surgeries were carried out free of charge. Medicines were imported by the government and sold at affordable prices to those going to private clinics and hospitals.

Read the rest here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

A Place in Austin for Constructive Political Dialogue

A Small Light Bulb: Artists, activists, spiritual people convene
BY DIANA WELCH

You call yourself a "progressive." You've been down to the Capitol or on the Congress Bridge a time or two, protesting yet another egregious abuse of power by your elected officials. You're familiar with the pro-choice buttons, the UT kids hawking the Socialist Worker, the honking car bearing an impeachment sticker, and the same six people chanting "Whose streets? Our streets!" You know this is a good thing that everyone is doing, but you can't help but wonder: Is this really the only way to do it?

Jim Rigby, Robert Jensen, and Eliza Gilkyson hope to offer Austin's progressive community an alternative to the traditional political response with Last Sunday, a monthly salon where progressives can meet and talk at Saengerrunde Hall, and maybe share a beer next door at Scholz Garten. You know, just get to know each other, exchange ideas, and see what happens.

"One of the things that I think is a hallmark of contemporary America is that everyone is very isolated, very fragmented," says Jensen, a University of Texas professor of journalism who's been involved in Austin activist politics for more than a decade. "There's very little public space for people to just get together to talk. For all the blather about politics on cable news, it's my experience that most ordinary people don't feel that they have places where they can really, honestly engage in political dialogue that goes beyond arguing over the next election."

Read all of it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

The Ultimate Sacrifice for Peace

Malachi Ritscher
Chicago anti-war activist burns burns himself alive to protest Iraq war

The press has almost completely blacked out this news in mainstream press. A long time Chicago activist, artist and contributer to the Chicago jazz scene has burned himself alive in an act of protest against the iraq war. He is only one of 10 Americans in history to have done this. Buddist monks did this during the VietNam war. On Friday, November 3, a man doused his body with gasoline and set himself afire to protest the war in Iraq. He died quietly in flames. His name was Malachi Ritscher.

Haven't seen it in the news? Me neither, which is kind of strange if you ask me, considering that it happened right here in downtown Chicago in front of hundreds of commuters during morning rush hour. The only conventional newspaper coverage to date was a tiny paragraph that appeared in the Saturday edition of the Chicago Sun-Times. Since then...nothing.

Source

This becomes an even more remarkable story when a little Web search reveals a tribute from a friend of his that makes note of Malachi's final words. Here is a brief excerpt from the latter:

I too love God and Country, and feel called upon to serve. I can only hope my sacrifice is worth more than those brave lives thrown away when we attacked an Arab nation under the deception of 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. Our interference completely destroyed that country, and destabilized the entire region. Everyone who pays taxes has blood on their hands.

I have had one previous opportunity to serve my country in a meaningful way - at 8:05 one morning in 2002 I passed Donald Rumsfeld on Delaware Avenue and I was acutely aware that slashing his throat would spare the lives of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people. I had a knife clenched in my hand, and there were no bodyguards visible; to my deep shame I hesitated, and the moment was past.

The violent turmoil initiated by the United States military invasion of Iraq will beget future centuries of slaughter, if the human race lasts that long. First we spit on the United Nations, then we expect them to clean up our mess. Our elected representatives are supposed to find diplomatic and benevolent solutions to these situations. Anyone can lash out and retaliate, that is not leadership or vision. Where is the wisdom and honor of the people we delegate our trust to?

To the rest of the world we are cowards - demanding Iraq to disarm, and after they comply, we attack with remote-control high-tech video-game weapons. And then lie about our reasons for invading. We the people bear complete responsibility for all that will follow, and it won't be pretty.

[snip]

Here is the statement I want to make: if I am required to pay for your barbaric war, I choose not to live in your world. I refuse to finance the mass murder of innocent civilians, who did nothing to threaten our country. I will not participate in your charade - my conscience will not allow me to be a part of your crusade. There might be some who say "it's a coward's way out" - that opinion is so idiotic that it requires no response. From my point of view, I am opening a new door.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Mexican Flag Enchiladas for FF* - M. Wizard

Here are my Mexican Flag Enchiladas. I probably won't ever actually type up a recipe; it's not needed. Any enchilada filling(s) you like in the tortillas of your choice will do; it is the decor which makes this dish festive. Apply two small cans of tomatillo salsa, half-pint of sour cream, small jar of your favorite red salsa, left-to-right; then top the center with bell pepper and carrot slices, browned tortilla, black olives, whatever is handy to invoke the Mexican eagle sitting on a cactus, eating a snake. Sprinkle with any cheese left over from your filling and cook in a medium oven 'til it sizzles. Serve with lots of Corona and Negra Modelo beer on any Mexican holiday. Mariann Wizard

* Note: FF = Foodie Friday

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Failure Is Too Soft a Term

But remarkably after 6 years, if you use Google to search using the term "failure" and click on "I'm Feeling Lucky," you will still get this page. And we still would very much like to know who's paid for that.

The Failure of George W. Bush
By Thierry de Montbrial
Nov 23, 2006, 04:06

Two years from the end of its last mandate, the failure of the forty-third presidency of the United States, sanctioned by the ballot boxes during the midterm elections on Tuesday November 7, affects the entire planet.

Five years after the invasion of Afghanistan, the reality on the ground is anything but reassuring. Between the war lords and the return of the Taliban, the authority of president Karzai is at best symbolic, in spite of the support of the United States and the presence of the NATO forces. The situation has worsened in particular because of the concessions that the Pakistani president, General Musharraf, had to make in order to pacify the tribes in Western Pakistan, and Afghanistan has never before produced such a large quantity of drugs.

In Iraq, the rebuilding is impossible without a return to internal peace, and the preconditions for internal peace are today out of reach. The various communities are tearing each other apart. The country is threatening to explode. The rate of the losses of the occupying forces is increasing. The distress of the American military is clear. As this situation is prolonged, their objective possibilities of intervention elsewhere in the world are reduced. The credibility of the superpower has been severely affected.

Washington has let the situation in the Middle East spoil, since George W. Bush never wanted to or never dared interfere. Prisoner of its ideology, this administration did not understand that no reconciliation between the Judeo-Christian and Moslem worlds is conceivable, unless there is a viable settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian problem. By letting Israel carry out its war of thirty-four days against Lebanon, the position of Washington has weakened even more, from the simple fact that the Hebrew State, even though it did not militarily lose this war, nor did it win it. We are here in the domain of psychology and for Israel not to win a war is to lose it.

Such is the context in which Iran and North Korea scoff at America. Did Iran really make the choice to obtain nuclear weapons fast? A more probable assumption is that Tehran wants to reach the nuclear threshold, i.e. to develop technologies which would one day allow it to cross the final straight line. This is the case of Japan.

Meanwhile, the regime of the mullahs is considered to be strengthened by the international context. With a certain complicity by Russia and China, it intends to show that no stabilization of the Middle East as a whole, in particular in Iraq or in Lebanon, is possible without its participation.

Read the rest of it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

The Phony "War on Terror"

Democrat “Political Upheavals” Mean More of the Same
Published on Tuesday, November 21, 2006.

I will be 84, come the end of the “war on terror.”

“There is every prospect of the ‘war on terror’ extending for 30 years or more,” declares a report released by the Oxford Research Group, an independent think tank in Britain. “What is required is a complete re-assessment of current policies but that is highly unlikely, even with the recent political upheavals.”

Professor Paul Rogers, who authored the report and is associated with the oldest university in the English-speaking world, believes “recent political upheavals,” i.e., the Democrat victory in Congress, will not change the course of events. Democrats are not about to engage in a “complete re-assessment of current policies,” but rather continue them, as there is little difference between Democrats and Republicans when you turn them upside down.

“Most people believe that the recent elections mark the beginning of the end of the Bush era but that does not apply to the war on terror,” writes Rogers. “In reality there will be little change until the United States faces up to the need for a fundamental re-think of its policies.”

I’m afraid the economy will need crash, the world community will turn against the United States, its people reduced to the sort of penury and humiliation suffered by the Germans at the midpoint of the last century before a “re-think” occurs.

Both Democrats and Republicans are on schedule with the “clash of civilizations,” although they differ only slightly in style, not substance.

Democrats have gone out of their way to dismiss the large and growing antiwar faction of their party. Democrats do not consider George Bush and his camarilla of neocon fascists war criminals. Democrats will not impeach Bush. Democrats are traitors to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as they will not repeal the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, or put an end to the high-tech surveillance state. Democrats are soft and fuzzy Republicans. Democrats want to raise the minimum wage, allow stem-cell research, and protect the “right” to abortion (there are no rights beyond those enumerated in the Constitution), but when it comes to the phony “war on terrorism,” they are indistinguishable from Republicans.

Read the rest of the article here. To buy the full Oxford report or for further information about the Oxford Research Group, click here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Cold, Hard (Archival) Facts, Episode X

Quote du Jourk

“God told me to strike at al-Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East.” George W. Bush, in June 2004

Source

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Another Chapter in the Saga, "Bringing Democracy to the Middle East"

Cabinet ministers desert offices following threats
Azzaman, November 21, 2006

Many Iraqi ministers are staying away from work, fearing attacks from militias or insurgents.

Violence has exacerbated in Baghdad with street battles reported daily in several parts of the city.

Despite the presence of tens of thousands of U.S. and Iraqi troops, residents say there is no street in Baghdad where one can feel safe.

“We live in a city which has gone wild,” one resident, refusing to be named, said.

Gunmen have already kidnapped a deputy minister and attacked the convoy of another, killing two bodyguards.

More than 100 people are being killed every day while the government and its U.S. masters are powerless in the face of the spiral of sectarian violence.

Some ministers are reported to have delegated their duties to lower ranking officials, preferring to spend their time traveling outside Iraq.

Others simply stay at home, fearing for their live.

A director-general in one of the ministries said the minister has been away for more than a month and “no one in the ministry knows about his whereabouts.”

Read it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Sy Hersh On Iran

In case you missed it, here's Sy Hersh's latest intelligence about the Bush administration position toward Iran. As usual, it's interesting reading.

THE NEXT ACT
Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Issue of 2006-11-27
Posted 2006-11-20

A month before the November elections, Vice-President Dick Cheney was sitting in on a national-security discussion at the Executive Office Building. The talk took a political turn: what if the Democrats won both the Senate and the House? How would that affect policy toward Iran, which is believed to be on the verge of becoming a nuclear power? At that point, according to someone familiar with the discussion, Cheney began reminiscing about his job as a lineman, in the early nineteen-sixties, for a power company in Wyoming. Copper wire was expensive, and the linemen were instructed to return all unused pieces three feet or longer. No one wanted to deal with the paperwork that resulted, Cheney said, so he and his colleagues found a solution: putting “shorteners” on the wire—that is, cutting it into short pieces and tossing the leftovers at the end of the workday. If the Democrats won on November 7th, the Vice-President said, that victory would not stop the Administration from pursuing a military option with Iran. The White House would put “shorteners” on any legislative restrictions, Cheney said, and thus stop Congress from getting in its way.

The White House’s concern was not that the Democrats would cut off funds for the war in Iraq but that future legislation would prohibit it from financing operations targeted at overthrowing or destabilizing the Iranian government, to keep it from getting the bomb. “They’re afraid that Congress is going to vote a binding resolution to stop a hit on Iran, à la Nicaragua in the Contra war,” a former senior intelligence official told me.

In late 1982, Edward P. Boland, a Democratic representative, introduced the first in a series of “Boland amendments,” which limited the Reagan Administration’s ability to support the Contras, who were working to overthrow Nicaragua’s left-wing Sandinista government. The Boland restrictions led White House officials to orchestrate illegal fund-raising activities for the Contras, including the sale of American weapons, via Israel, to Iran. The result was the Iran-Contra scandal of the mid-eighties. Cheney’s story, according to the source, was his way of saying that, whatever a Democratic Congress might do next year to limit the President’s authority, the Administration would find a way to work around it. (In response to a request for comment, the Vice-President’s office said that it had no record of the discussion.)

Read the rest of it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

The Good Ol' Boys Fearless Leader

Here's number two in a series, this fella being the fearless leader of the Good Ol' Boys Club. In case you missed it, here is the first member. We put up this pic today so we could ensure you got to see the most famous of the three when we post our Saturday Snapshot in a couple of days.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Another Lesson in Winning the Hearts and Minds

These soldiers must've been schooled where Charles Granner, Lindy England, and their compatriots were.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Kick His Ass Up and Down the Street

Crush, Kill, Destroy
Screw bipartisanship; it’s time for revenge.
Allan Uthman

You see it in the movies all the time. The hero, having vanquished his foe after a long and arduous struggle, rescues him from a certain death—usually the villain hangs from a window ledge, begging for his life, and the good guy proves his nobility by saving him. We all know what happens next: The villain pulls out a concealed weapon and tries once again to kill his savior.

In the movies, it’s just a way to morally insulate the hero from the ramifications of killing—this way, the audience’s bloodlust can be satisfied without moral qualms. It’s a nice cliché, but let’s face it: in real life, you’d let the guy drop the first time.

With the Democrats finally in charge of congress again, it’s Bush hanging from that ledge. And, while it might seem kind or even noble to extend a hand, the right thing to do is not just to let him drop; it’s to stamp on his bloodied hands to hasten his fall.

Republicans are scared to death about the Democrats’ subpoena power, and Detroit’s maverick rep John Conyers’ imminent status as chairman of the House Judicial Committee. But it appears they have little to fear. Next House Speaker and fundraising diva Nancy Pelosi has assured us that the new Democratic majority will not impeach Bush.

This is as unacceptable as it is predictable. The case for impeachment is a no-brainer. This administration has broken the law so egregiously and so often the list of charges could fill a book. You know at least some of the list by now—lying about Iraq, torture, domestic wiretapping, war profiteering, paid journalist plants, producing fake news, ignoring laws passed to rein him in, collusion with corporations, negligent homicide in the Katrina disaster, et cetera, et cetera. The Bush team makes Watergate look like a panty raid. Despite their fetish for secrecy, there is ample evidence of at least some of these crimes, and investigations would yield more.

[snip]

Bush needs to be impeached because Bush worshippers just plain deserve it. It was they that were giddy with self-righteous rage, so desperate to take Clinton down that they didn’t care how pathetic their excuse was. They need to be paid back, and to know they asked for it. They need to be demoralized and dismissed before they take the government back and damage it further. They need, after all, to know their reign was a colossal failure, a blight on the record. They need to know that now and forever, George W. Bush will be to presidents what OJ Simpson is to all-star running backs. These people understand things in terms of winning and losing, and they need to know that, in the end, they lost.

Bush needs to be impeached because the only language these people understand is power. Their hearts will not be touched by forgiveness. Any mercy is a sign of weakness to them. If you want to earn a thug’s respect, you’ve got to kick his ass up and down the block. No negotiation. No compromise. Slash and burn. Teach these assholes a lesson. Leave them broken and gasping in a puddle of their own urine. Don’t ever let them forget the humiliation and the shame of it.

But beyond revenge and humiliation—the reasons that Republicans will actually understand—Bush needs to be impeached because he is a criminal of the highest order, and because tolerating criminals at the seat of power is itself a crime against the nation. The core problem in Washington today is not the president’s lack of respect for the law; it’s that congress has done nothing about it. The first step toward restoring a reasonable government is correcting that.

here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Unsavoury One-Up-Manship

This is what happens when it isn't good enough just to be a simple war profiteer - one becomes a torture profiteer. As my daughter Rachel used to say as a young teenager, "Barf me right out the door."

CACI: Torture in Iraq, Intimidation at Home
By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted November 21, 2006.

Dogged by serious allegations of human rights abuses in Iraq, a leading profiteer from the Iraq war engages in intimidation campaigns against journalists in America who seek to expose its practices.

Consider the unique problems faced by the corporate suits at CACI International, a defense contractor whose services have included "coercive" interrogations of prisoners in Iraq -- interrogations most people simply call "torture."

Think about the image problems a major multinational corporation faces after becoming inextricably linked with the abuses at Abu Ghraib, a firm whose employees have contributed to the iconic images of the occupation of Iraq -- the symbols of American cruelty and immorality in an illegal war. What can a company like that possibly do to protect its brand name after contributing to the greatest national disgrace since the My Lai massacre?

CACI's strategy has been two-fold: its flacks have distorted well-documented facts in the public record beyond recognition, and its senior management has lawyered up, suing or threatening to sue just about every journalist, muckraker and government watchdog who's dared to shine a light on the firm's unique role as a torture profiteer.

Read it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

DoD* Day

Another of those ridiculous statements which we can fondly recall. "Stuff happens" in democracies. Yeh, Don, stuff happens in fascist states, too.

Army rebuffs Rumsfeld doctrine
Manual: Troop levels must ensure stability
By Julian E. Barnes
Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times
Published November 20, 2006

FT. LEAVENWORTH, Kan. -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld may be leaving under a cloud of criticism over his handling of the Iraq war, but his invasion plan -- emphasizing speed over massive troop numbers -- has consistently been held up by the administration as a resounding success.

With Iraq near chaos 3 1/2 years later, a key Army manual now is being rewritten in a way that rejects the Rumsfeld doctrine and counsels against using it again.

The draft version of the Army's Full Spectrum Operations field manual argues that in addition to defeating the enemy, military units must focus on providing security for the population--even during the heat of a major combat operation.

"The big idea here is that stability tasks have to be a consideration at every level and every operation," said Clinton Ancker III, head of the Army's Combined Arms Doctrine Directorate and an author of the guide.

The field manual is the authoritative guidebook on how to conduct ground operations, which officers use to develop tactics for military endeavors, including war, counterinsurgency and peacekeeping. When completed, the manual will be taught to officers at all levels.

Before the war, Rumsfeld prodded Gen. Tommy Franks and others to design an invasion plan to fit his beliefs about how modern militaries should fight. When Saddam Hussein's regime collapsed and Baghdad seemed to fall in just 21 days, Rumsfeld and his emphasis on speed over mass got the credit.

But after the initial military success, the Pentagon was criticized for not doing enough to plan for postwar stability. And Rumsfeld drew objections for his dismissive attitude toward the disorder and looting in Iraq, particularly when he said, just days after Baghdad's fall, that "stuff happens" in democracies.

[snip]

"Iraq is the hardest test case you can dream up," said Michael Burke, who works at the doctrine directorate and is one of the manual's authors. "There is a lot of value in overwhelming your enemy and ending intensive combat." But, he added: "In Iraq, military operations were the catalyst for collapsing the Baathist regime and leaving a complete power vacuum."

Read it here.

* Note: DoD = Down on Don; when is that trial in Germany going to start, anyway?

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

The Microsoft Solution to Iraq

Please excuse us if we're exceedingly cynical.

Flaws Cited in Effort To Train Iraqi Forces
U.S. Officers Roundly Criticize Program
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 21, 2006; A01

The U.S. military's effort to train Iraqi forces has been rife with problems, from officers being sent in with poor preparation to a lack of basic necessities such as interpreters and office materials, according to internal Army documents.

The shortcomings have plagued a program that is central to the U.S. strategy in Iraq and is growing in importance. A Pentagon effort to rethink policies in Iraq is likely to suggest placing less emphasis on combat and more on training and advising, sources say.

In dozens of official interviews compiled by the Army for its oral history archives, officers who had been involved in training and advising Iraqis bluntly criticized almost every aspect of the effort. Some officers thought that team members were often selected poorly. Others fretted that the soldiers who prepared them had never served in Iraq and lacked understanding of the tasks of training and advising. Many said they felt insufficiently supported by the Army while in Iraq, with intermittent shipments of supplies and interpreters who often did not seem to understand English.

The Iraqi officers interviewed by an Army team also had complaints; the top one was that they were being advised by officers far junior to them who had never seen combat.

Some of the American officers even faulted their own lack of understanding of the task. "If I had to do it again, I know I'd do it completely different," reported Maj. Mike Sullivan, who advised an Iraqi army battalion in 2004. "I went there with the wrong attitude and I thought I understood Iraq and the history because I had seen PowerPoint slides, but I really didn't."

Read it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Waterfront Mallards on Wildlife Wednesday

This was right in downtown Port Angeles near the Coho ferry terminal. Generally, there is a good deal of foot traffic there, but this pair didn't seem to mind. They only looked when we stopped to admire and photograph them, but returned to napping quickly when they saw we were no threat. The picture was taken in Summer 2004.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Bigger Than Texas

Category: We'll believe it when we see it.

Military Documents Hold Tips on Antiwar Activities
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and MARK MAZZETTI
Published: November 21, 2006

WASHINGTON, Nov. 20 — An antiterrorist database used by the Defense Department in an effort to prevent attacks against military installations included intelligence tips about antiwar planning meetings held at churches, libraries, college campuses and other locations, newly disclosed documents show.

One tip in the database in February 2005, for instance, noted that “a church service for peace” would be held in the New York City area the next month. Another entry noted that antiwar protesters would be holding “nonviolence training” sessions at unidentified churches in Brooklyn and Manhattan.

The Defense Department tightened its procedures earlier this year to ensure that only material related to actual terrorist threats — and not peaceable First Amendment activity — was included in the database.

The head of the office that runs the military database, which is known as Talon, said Monday that material on antiwar protests should not have been collected in the first place.

“I don’t want it, we shouldn’t have had it, not interested in it,” said Daniel J. Baur, the acting director of the counterintelligence field activity unit, which runs the Talon program at the Defense Department. “I don’t want to deal with it.”

Read the article here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

YIKES !!!!

Bush: I would understand if Israel decided to bomb Iran

Haaretz reported yesterday (Monday November 20) that Bush told French president Chirac in a recent conversation that his administration "would understand" if Israel decided to launch an attack on Iran. It is a remark that French officials passed on to Israelis in discussions during the past few days, and the Israelis passed it on the Haaretz. The French officials told the Israelis they thought this would not be a good idea. In fact (according to the Haaretz account) the French officials said it would be a catastrophe that would (1) only set back the Iranian nuclear program by two years at most; (2) ensure Iranian exit from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty; (3) probably trigger a broad Iranian military response that would target more than just Israel; (4) cause enormous uproar in the Arab world; and so on.

Read the post here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

That Painful, Inevitable Moral Question

Trapped in Lies and Delusions
by Jacob G. Hornberger

[snip]

Hanging over the Iraq debacle, however, is that one overriding moral issue that unfortunately all too many Americans have yet to confront: neither the Iraqi people nor their government ever attacked the United States or even threatened to do so. That means that in this conflict, which has killed more than 600,000 Iraqis, the United States is the aggressor nation and Iraq is the defending nation.

Why is that issue so important? Because it involves morality, not pragmatics. Do U.S. troops have the moral right to be killing people, when they are part of a military force that has aggressed against another country? Do they have the moral right to kill people who have done nothing worse than defend their nation from attack or attempt to oust an occupier from their midst? Does simply calling an action “war” excuse an aggressor nation from the moral consequences of killing people in that war?

In other words, does the United States have the moral right to violate the principles against aggressive war, for which it prosecuted Germany at Nuremberg and condemned the Soviet Union in Afghanistan?

By invading and occupying Iraq, Bush and Cheney have put the American people in the uncomfortable position of either supporting their government and its troops or supporting morality. Should a person support the actions of his government and its troops or should he obey the laws of God, when the government has placed its actions in contravention to those laws? What are the moral consequences for each individual faced with that choice?

Read the entire commentary here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Kucinich On Iraq

Now we just need all his Democrat buddies to agree, and we might get somewhere.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich: Cut Off Iraq War Funding
Posted on Nov 16, 2006
By Joshua Scheer

In an interview with Truthdig contributor Joshua Scheer,* Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) reacts to Rep. John Murtha’s failed bid for House majority leader, and explains why cutting off funding for the Iraq war is the only way to truly protect American troops.

[snip]

TRUTHDIG: I was just reading up on your [Nov. 15] appearance on Democracy Now!, in which you talked about cutting off the funds to Iraq as being the only way to make any progress there. Do you want to comment on that?

KUCINICH: Today, it was announced that 2,000 more Marines are being sent to Anbar province—a place which was already declared “lost” for the purposes of military occupation. Why are we sacrificing our young men and women? Why are we keeping them in an impossible situation? Why are we stoking a civil war with our continued presence? We have to take a new direction in Iraq, and that direction is out.

Now, there are many plans out there. The people talking about phased redeployment, the president as the commander in chief ultimately has the authority to determine the placement of troops. Congress’ real authority, and Congress’ constitutional [mandate] as a co-equal branch of government, requires that it be heard from, and I believe that Congress must exercise its authority to protect the troops by bringing them home. And the only way we can do that effectively is to vote against supplemental appropriations—which has kept the war going, or to vote against appropriation bills which fund the war. That’s Congress’ ultimate power—the power of the purse.

If we truly care about our troops, we’ll get them out. It’s the phoniest argument to say that a cut-off of funds will leave troops stranded in the field. There’s always money in the pipeline to pay for an orderly withdrawal. But those who favor continuing the war or escalating the war are using the troops as a tool to further policies that are against the interests of the troops, against the interests of [the] American people, and against the interests of peace in the world.

Read it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Our Shame As Americans

We let the Bush administration do this in our name. We did not lift a finger to stop them. Now we can live in this nest we've built.

Report: Gitmo Detainees Denied Witnesses
By BEN FOX, Associated Press Writer
4:40 PM PST, November 16, 2006

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- The U.S. military called no witnesses, withheld evidence from detainees and usually reached a decision within a day as it determined that hundreds of men detained at Guantanamo Bay were "enemy combatants," according to a new report.

The analysis of transcripts and records by two lawyers for Guantanamo detainees, aided by more than two dozen law students, found that hearings that determined whether a prisoner should remain in custody gave the accused little opportunity to contest allegations against him.

"These were not hearings. These were shams," said Mark Denbeaux, an attorney and Seton Hall University law professor who along with his son, Joshua, is the author of the report. They provided an advance copy of the report to The Associated Press late Thursday and planned to release it Friday on the Internet.

Their report, based on an analysis of records of military hearings of 393 detainees, comes as the U.S. government seeks to severely restrict detainee access to civilian courts, arguing that the Combatant Status Review Tribunals should be their main legal recourse.

Read the article here. Read the Denbeaux's full report (pdf format) here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Depending On Arms to Drive an Economy - Sick

United States Rides Weapons Bonanza Wave
by Frida Berrigan

War, instability, and high oil prices have created a perfect storm of profit for the world's weapons manufacturers. This year, military analysts predict the biggest arms bonanza since 1993 … which is saying something because in the aftermath of the first Gulf War the global industry reaped the benefits of a $42 billion arms race.

As the world's largest producer and exporter, the United States is riding the wave. For fiscal year 2006, which ended on September 31, the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency churned out notices for $21 billion in arms sales offers . In most cases, that agency is required to notify Congress of all potential major arms deals worth more than $14 million. In one typical day—September 28—the DSCA issued notification on $5.5 billion in agreements. South Korea would get $1.5 billion in Patriot missile equipment and other hardware, Turkey was offered a $2.9 billion package including 30 F-16 fighter planes, while Jordan and Chile were also offered weapons packages.

While not all deals are finalized with arms deliveries, these notifications are a way of taking the pulse of the weapons market … and it is racing. U.S. a rms sales offers for 2006 appear to be roughly twice the levels of any other year during the Bush administration. Noteworthy among these are the $5 billion deal for F-16s to Pakistan and a $5.8 billion agreement to completely re-equip Saudi Arabia's internal security force.

Read the rest here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

A Tiny Sliver of Justice Served

At least until the case is appealed ....

Judge: FBI must correct disclosures on evacuation of Saudis after 9/11
Published on Tuesday, November 21, 2006.
Source: RAW STORY

A U.S. district court judge has ordered the FBI to correct disclosures regarding the US government's evacuation of Saudi royals and bin Laden family members after the September 11 attacks in 2001, a conservative watchdog organization announced today.

"Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that U.S. District Court Judge Richard W. Roberts of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has ordered the Federal Bureau of Investigation to submit 'proper disclosures' to the Court and Judicial Watch by December 15, 2006 concerning the U.S. government's evacuation of Saudi royals and members of the bin Laden family from the United States immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks," the group said in a press release obtained by RAW STORY .

Judicial Watch notes that Judge Roberts criticized "the adequacy of redaction descriptions, the accuracy of the sworn statement submitted with the documents, the validity of exemption claims, and other errors in the FBI's disclosures.

Read the rest, with links to pertinent documentation, here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

The Numbers Are Staggering

Death toll in Iraq eclipses record for a month
By Steven R. Hurst
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
11/20/2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq — The numbers are staggering: In the past eight days, at least 715 Iraqis have died in the country's sectarian bloodbath.

They've been beheaded, tortured and blown up while looking for work.

They've been shot, kidnapped and felled by mortars.

The number of killings in the past eight days is more than all but a few U.S. states see in a year. Iraq's death toll has reached at least 1,320 already in November, well above the 1,216 who died in all of October, which was the deadliest month in Iraq since The Associated Press began tracking the figure in April last year.

Read it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Daily Texan Weighs In - Spies of Texas

We called this paper the Deadly Toxin in the 1960's. Seems they've awakened a little since then.

Viewpoint: Keeping students under watch

The Texas Observer has a shining cover story in its current issue by Thorne Dreyer, based on recently unearthed documents that all UT students would be wise to read. The documents can be found on the Observer Web site, www.texasobserver.org, and some are printed above.

This summer, when relatives of former UTPD Chief Allen Hamilton arranged to sell files primarily relating to the chief's experience during the Charles Whitman shooting to Half Price Books, employees found an interesting set of files relating to the surveillance of UT students by the campus police department. The documents show that in the 1960s, UTPD infiltrated meetings of political student organizations and compiled lists of students to watch.

We're not surprised, we're just disappointed.

What is surprising is that the documents show that the editor of The Daily Texan from 1966 to 1967, John Economidy, was an informant to the campus police. He shamefully attended meetings with student groups, noted those who attended and tipped off UTPD as to the place and time of future rallies.

Now, as students are resisting another immoral occupation of a foreign country (or, at least students did about three years ago), the documents raise intriguing questions. Such as, if there was communication over a UT e-mail server in 1968, would UTPD Chief Hamilton's files have been a little fatter?

Source

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

More Timely Tuesday Toons from Loving

Thank you, Charlie.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Delicious Irony

I always find women like [Ann] Coulter who spew nonsense about the evils of feminism and women's rights to be hilariously precious. Coulter is a childless, never-married lawyer who reached the highest point of her professional career in her 40's as a self-sufficient freelance social commentator. Sixty years ago, there is not a single part of that previous sentence that would be considered even remotely plausible as an aspect of a successful American female. Coulter, and career anti-feminists like her, have only one honest statement deserving of any feminist's time, and that statement is "thank you." August J. Pollak (emphasis added)

Source

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Order Out of Chaos

"Anyone who has followed the discourse over the past decade having to do with Iraq; would be aware that ‘liberation’, or weapons of mass destruction was never the intent. The strategy has always been to divide the country – into manageable regions and divvy up the oil resources. Reconstruction was always a joke – nothing has been done except to build more prisons, and a billion dollar (small town – housing 7000) embassy to oversee the business of oil. With hundreds of thousands homeless in America, seniors not able to afford medicines, veterans living under bridges/refused medical compensation, factories closed, foreclosures rampant; a billion + is being spent on this compound, complete with swimming pools, recreation centers, theaters etc. You will not see this reported anywhere on U.S. news (little wonder Iraqis see us as occupiers, eh?) but you will see, some jerk off named Tom Cruise and non-stop coverage, of his obscene materialistic wedding taking place in some castle in Italy or coverage on O.J ( resurrected) and how he might have killed his wife etc. I feel informed!

Isn’t the very existence of an Iraq Study Group a tacit admission that GWB’s administration doesn’t know what the hell they’re doing in Iraq? Don’t we already have legions of people on the government tit to come up with military strategy and foreign policy? If they need Poppy Bush’s friends to come in and tell them how to do their jobs, then maybe (not possible as we can see) we need more competent people making these decisions in the first place. Foggy Bottom sees nothing but a regurgitation of the same old white frat boys, former CEOs, lap dogs, and shills, and cradle to grave politicians (money business that elections are), just shuffling off to new appointments and different buildings."

Anonymous, November 19, 2006

Source

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Blame The Iraqis - Matthew Yglesias

Charles Krauthammer says his beautiful invasion of Iraq was ruined by . . . Iraqis. People who want to blame U.S. policymakers for the disastrous consequences of U.S. policy are just engaged in self-flattery. This is what the French call "bullshit." Obviously, the fact that Iraq is populated by Iraqis was a fact that American policymakers and pundits should have been taking into account before invading the war, not some unknowable contingency. And, indeed, even insofar as unknowable contingencies have frustrated our efforts in Iraq, the fact that war is risky was something to take into account in advance.

Ironically, this mentality helps precisely what's gone wrong. The neoconservative approach to Iraq has always been marked by a remarkable combination of overoptimism about social and political conditions in Iraq with a not-so-well-veiled racist contempt for Arabs. Obviously, however, one of the major elements of Iraqi society that's made reconstructing it into a democracy under our tutelage is that Iraqis have not felt that it would be a good idea to surrender supreme power over their lives to a foreign occupying force led by people who, rather transparently, don't give a damn about them. (emphasis added)

Read it here.

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...

Neutralizing the MCA*

This, once again, falls in our category of "We'll believe it when we see it."

Kill Bill - Neutering Bush's Torture Law

Of the many good things we are beginning to see before the newly-constituted Democratic Congress even assumes power, one of the most gratifying is the move by Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) to neuter the hideous Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA), passed by the Republicans, and signed by George W. Bush in October.

On Friday, Dodd introduced legislation to amend Bush's "torture bill," remove the almost-dictatorial powers it has given the White House and neutralize the bastardizing effect it's had on the United States Constitution.

"I strongly believe that terrorists who seek to destroy America must be punished for any wrongs they commit against this country," said Dodd, in introducing this important measure. "But in my view, in order to sustain America’s moral authority and win a lasting victory against our enemies, such punishment must be meted out only in accordance with the rule of law."

The text of the MCA may fill almost 40 pages, but it only takes a few paragraphs of Dodd's 10-page Effective Terrorists Prosecution Act (S.4060) to render its most onerous aspects moot.

I analyzed Dodd's bill over the weekend and am writing this piece to give you the basics of how it fixes the Constitutional ruin imposed by the MCA and puts the power of the executive branch of government back in its rightful place.

This should tell you all you need to know about both the disease and the cure.

Read the rest here.

Note: MCA = Military Commissions Act (aka "Torture Bill")

[+/-] Read More...

[+/-] Summary only...