« Secret Prisons | Main | The World Can't Wait Kicks Off in DC »
Scott McClellan's Credibility Gap
Yesterday, there was this tense and interesting exchange between reporters and Scott McClellan on the subject of his credibility, and his credibility at the podium:
Q Whether there's a question of legality, we know for a fact that there was involvement. We know that Karl Rove, based on what he and his lawyer have said, did have a conversation about somebody who Patrick Fitzgerald said was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency. We know that Scooter Libby also had conversations.
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think that's accurate.
Q So aside from the question of legality here, you were wrong, weren't you?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, David, if I were to get into commenting from this podium while this legal proceeding continues, I might be prejudicing the opportunity for there to be a fair and impartial trial. And I'm just not going to do that. I know very --
Q You speak for the President. Your credibility and his credibility is not on criminal trial. But it may very well be on trial with the American public, don't you agree?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm very confident in the relationship that we have in this room, and the trust that has been established between us. This relationship --
Q See those cameras? It's not about us. It's about what the American people --
MR. McCLELLAN: This relationship is built on trust, and you know very well that I have worked hard to earn the trust of the people in this room, and I think I've earned it --
Q Is the President -- let me just follow up on one more thing.
MR. McCLELLAN: -- and I think I've earned it with the American people.
Q Does the President think that Karl Rove did anything wrong?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think it would be good for you to allow me the opportunity to respond to your questions without jumping in. I'm glad to do that. I look forward to the opportunity --
Q I haven't heard a response.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, no, I have been responding to you, David, and there's no need -- you're a good reporter, there's no need to be rude or disrespectful. We can have a conversation and respond to these questions, if you'll just give me the opportunity to respond. I'm glad to do that.
We need to let this legal process continue. The special counsel indicated the other day that it is ongoing. And that's what we're going to do from this White House. That's the policy that we have set for quite some time now.
[...]
Go ahead.
Q Scott, let me follow up on what David was asking. You say we know you -- and we do -- but we can't vouch for you; that's not our job. And I wonder, do you really think after --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, wait a second. Let me just interject there. I think there are many people in this room I see expressing their own commentary on TV all the time -- not just reporting. You do a job to report the news, as well, but many people in this room also go on the air and express their views and their commentary. And I've worked with many of you for quite some time now.
Q I didn't follow that. I can't go on TV and say, "America believes Scott McClellan." That's not my role.
MR. McCLELLAN: No, you go on TV, though, and engage in commentary about views and things that are expressed here at the White House.
Q Right. But what I can't do is carry your water for you. And I wonder --
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not asking you to.
Q Well, there -- yes you are.
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm just asking you to speak to who I am. And you know who I am.
Q There's been a wound to your credibility here. A falsehood, wittingly or unwittingly, was told from this podium. And do you really believe that the American people should wait until the conclusion of all of this process and just take on trust everything that comes from that podium now, without the explanation and the answer that you say you want to get --
MR. McCLELLAN: There are a lot of facts that still are not known in this investigation and in this legal proceeding that is ongoing. We also have to work under the presumption of innocence in our legal system. And, again, the reason I can't comment further is because if we were to get into that, we could be prejudicing the opportunity for there to be a fair and impartial hearing.
Q I understand that.
MR. McCLELLAN: And we don't want to do that from this podium. No matter how much I may want to talk about this issue -- and I think you know that I would like to talk further about it -- but I have enough confidence in my relationship with you all, and you all report the news to the American people, to know that we have a good relationship that is built on a foundation of trust. And I have worked hard to earn that trust and I think I've earned that trust with you all. And it's your job to duly report to the American people, and I'm confident that you all will when you look at the facts and look at everything that's been said and where we are today. And at some point, I look forward to talking more about it.
But let me step back for a second, too, because part of my job is to be an advocate for the President, and I'm going to vigorously defend his decisions and his policies, and help him to advance his agenda. But I've another important responsibility, as well -- it's something that we all, I think and hope, share in this room -- that is to make sure that the American people get an accurate account of what's going on here in Washington, D.C. And I work hard to meet both those responsibilities.
Q But don't you think, Scott, that that second part of your job has been damaged, your credibility has been damaged by this?
MR. McCLELLAN: For me to even respond to that question would force me to talk about an ongoing investigation and legal proceeding, and we've been directed not to do that. Whether or not that puts me in a difficult position is another matter. But I have enough confidence in the relationship that we've built over the last few years to be able to move forward, and for you all to know that what I'm saying from this podium is based on the facts and based on me working to provide an accurate account of what's going on here in Washington, D.C.
Q Is Karl Rove back at work --
MR. McCLELLAN: And -- let me finish -- in other words, Terry, you can't answer that question without it being viewed in the context of an ongoing investigation, an ongoing legal proceeding, and that's why I can't go further than that at this point.
Q But doesn't, then, that make it impossible for you to do your job with as much credibility as that podium demands?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, not at all, because of the relationship that we've built between me and the press corps, and I think I've earned with the American people, too. I've tried hard to earn that trust and I think I've done my part to maintain that trust.
Except that last week, Scott McClellan spoke from the podium about the President's view on torture:
Q One other question on Vice President Cheney. Has he met with Senator McCain and asked Senator McCain to exempt the CIA from the amendment that Senator McCain is attaching that is the so-called "anti-torture" amendment? Does the administration want to exempt the CIA from the restrictions --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, as a member of the -- as the leader of the United States Senate, the Vice President engages in conversations with members of the Senate on a regular basis. In terms of the issue you bring up, I think we've made our views known through a statement of administration policy.
In terms of the broader issue that some of the news reports raise, I think the President has made our position very clear. We do not condone torture, nor would he ever authorize the use of torture. We have an obligation to abide by our laws and our treaty obligations, and that's what we do. That is our policy.
Q And the Senate is moving to pass a law that would affirm, confirm, and enforce that commitment. Does the administration want the CIA exempted from that law?
MR. McCLELLAN: And we've stated our views on that amendment. The House passed a different version of the Department of Defense spending legislation. The Senate included some language on that. We'll be working with congressional leaders as they move forward to pass that legislation.
Q I don't get it. Is that a yes or a no?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not going to get into discussions that we're having with congressional leaders about how to move forward on the legislation.
Q You've already said the President is going to veto anything that would exempt us from torture. You have -- this White House demeans --
MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's not correct, that's --
Q -- you demean all Americans when you support torture. And your answer is so fuzzy --
MR. McCLELLAN: No, Helen, our answer is very clear, and that's flat-out wrong what you're suggesting, because this President has made it very clear what our policy is --
Q Didn't you say that he would veto any part of that legislation of defense spending?
MR. McCLELLAN: We did express our views on that legislation, but it is not the way you characterized it, because there are laws and treaty obligations that are on the books. We adhere to those laws and treaty obligations.
Q No, you don't. You are supporting torture.
MR. McCLELLAN: You are wrong. This is a -- the United States is a country that --
Q Is the story in the paper today wrong?
MR. McCLELLAN: -- believes in adhering to our laws and our values. And we do. And this President believes in abiding by our laws and our treaty obligations.
Q Why do we keep reading about torture then?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, if you'll let me respond, I will. The President has made it very clear that he does not condone torture, nor would he ever authorize the use of torture --
Q Condone it, but does he allow it?
MR. McCLELLAN: -- and our policy is to comply with our laws and our treaty obligations. That's what we expect everyone to do. If there are ever instances of wrongdoing, we investigate and we follow through and hold people accountable.
Q That's not the point. He should --
MR. McCLELLAN: Sure it is.
Q -- come out flatly and say he was against torture.
MR. McCLELLAN: He has.
So, according to Scott McClellan, the President is flat out against torture. Does that mean that the CIA has been operating outside of the President's direct policy against torture, or does that mean that the President was completely unaware of what was going on, or does it mean that Scott McClellan was lied to? Again?
In the absence of any answer at all, what are we to conclude?
Another day, another lie exposed.
Dubya - talks about Jesus but acts like that snake in the Garden of Eden.
We are to conclude that the president and Scotty don't know the truth from a lie. Nor do they care.
We are to conclude that the President doesn't have any awareness of cause/effect. (HE breaks geneva accords against torture by following Gonzalez's advice but he disapproves of getting CAUGHT torturing.)
Students in NYC walk out on Bush's policies today.
Keep it up!
http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=8&aid=54682
Van Nuys H.S. Locks down to prevent student walk outs.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5245518
That David Gregory is a bulldog lately. Too bad he works for MSGOP.
However you slice it, Scooty and the whole administration lack credibility.
(That typo was un-intended, but I thought I'd leave it :)
Bolton's chief of staff gave information on outed agent to Libby, lawyers involved in leak case say
by Larisa Alexandrovna and Jason Leopold
John Bolton, the former Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs who is now the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was contacted by I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby in late May 2003 to find out who sent Ambassador Joseph Wilson on a fact-finding mission to Niger. Wilson was attempting to investigate reports that Iraq had tried to purchase yellowcake uraniumm the African country, lawyers involved in the CIA outing investigation told RAW STORY over the weekend.
The attorneys, along with intelligence officials, have provided RAW STORY additional insight into the unnamed identities of key players referred to in the five-count indictment against Libby, who resigned last Friday as Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff.
Specifically, they relayed what two key prosecution witnesses now cooperating with the probe told Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald about the events that led to Libby learning about Wilson's mission and Valerie Plame Wilson's identity. Plame Wilson, the wife of the former ambassador, was outed as a CIA agent working on weapons of mass destruction issues after Wilson begin criticizing the Bush Administration's Iraq intelligence.
Randall Samborn, Fitzgerald's spokesman, told RAW STORY he could not comment or offer "guidance" on the specifics of this story.
The 22-page indictment posted on Fitzgerald's website Friday says that on May 29, 2003 Libby "asked an Under Secretary of State ('Under Secretary') for information concerning the unnamed ambassador's travel to Niger to investigate claims about Iraqi efforts to acquire uranium yellowcake. The Under Secretary thereafter directed the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research to prepare a report concerning the ambassador and his trip. The Under Secretary provided Libby with interim oral reports in late May and early June 2003, and advised Libby that Wilson was the former ambassador who took the trip."
News reports have identified the Undersecretary as Marc Grossman. This is technically correct, in that he is the one who had received the June 10, 2003 classified Intelligence and Research memo for Libby about Wilson's Niger trip, in addition to information about Plame's covert CIA status and her relationship to Wilson.
But the attorneys said that two former Libby aides, John Hannah and David Wurmser, told the special prosecutor that Libby had actually first contacted Bolton to dig up the information. Wurmser, who worked as a Middle Eastern affairs aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, was on loan from Bolton's office.
Both Wurmser and Hannah have been cooperating with Fitzgerald's probe for some time, the lawyers said.
In addition, sources say that the memo was written on Libby's behest as part of a work-up order orchestrated out of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), which operated out of the Cheney's office and was chaired by Special Advisor to President Bush, Karl Rove.
more... http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Laywers_involved_in_leak_case_say_1102.html
Sorry if this isn't so serious. Thought I'd interject a little Asmussen into the picture:
http://sfgate.com/columnists/asmussen/
Subject today: "Monicagate vs. Plamegate"
Totally OT but very interesting. Talk about having an impact. Here's one way.
There are 2 related diaries from kos. One was posted today and is a followup to one posted last week. Both also serve as a primer on micro-credit and how it can be used to address poverty and economic development.
Both are worthy of book-marking and reading and passing on to friends. Today's in particular is chock full of useful info and links to other resources.
Today's post:
Microcredit update and a Message from Kiva's founder
by Chris Kulczycki
http://www.dailykos.com/hotlist/add/2005/11/2/7815/92714/displaystory//
Last week's post:
Microcredit: be a Venture Capitalist
by Chris Kulczycki
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/27/71615/933
Some comments in last week's post also point towards micro-credit and its use inside the US as well as outside the US.
Given today's dreadful anniversary, and listening to the republicans wail like wounded wolves over Harry Reid's actions, the image just entered my mind of these very same folks who donned purple bandaids at the RNC last summer. I don't remember being more offended by anything during the campaign than that, and the smirking images of all those who were wearing them. Chickenhawks to the wishbone.
Would you like some cheese with that whine? Perhaps my tallman violin would entertain you. What, you can't hear it?
Let me turn it up for you....
This trial really amazes me. DeLay pulls all kinds of stunts here in Texas to force ReDistricting on a state that 1. Didn't want to be Redistricted and 2. Only ReDistricts every 10 years and now he wants to benefit from this scheme and have jurrors chosen who are not pissed off by his antics. I am waiting for DeGueren to next insist that only Lakewood Church members living in Sugarland Texas(DeLay's District) should be eligible to be selected as jurrors. Perhaps they should also sign a loyalty oath to the Republican Party before walking into court. This is starting to look like a three ring circus with Deguerin the circus master. Next we will have dancing bears and jugglers running this trial. This is just what I suspected. Travis Cty judges so worried about appearing fair that they stoop to accomodating his every whim.
"The new map split Travis County, a Democratic stronghold, into three congressional districts, and forced longtime Democratic Congressman Lloyd Doggett to run in a district stretching from Austin to the Rio Grande Valley.
"DeLay's request for a venue change contends that congressional redistricting created animosity toward DeLay in Travis County, hindering his ability to get a fair trial in Austin."
All Bush Enemies
Eating Bullets in Sugarland
The Exterminator
Look its HAIKU!!!!!!
Well, looks like I missed all the fun and excitement yesterday!!
I worked late yesterday, came home tired and a tad bitten by the flu bug, and went to bed.
This morning when I turned on the news and heard about Harry Reid I was so excited! Good for him!
The beginning of the end of the Bush administration.
OT again ~ (Casey, enjoyed your article about Scooty, as Carol called him.)
Former President Jimmy Carter is going to be on CNN's Larry King Live tonight at 9:00 p.m. Eastern.
It's being billed as "Jimmy Carter takes on the religious right", and hints Carter says something about the religious right being dangerous to America.
If you don't watch it, please think about turning your t.v. on to that channel, so their ratings go up for shows like this one....thanks.
LOOK LOOK LOOK
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/OH/Ohio-Exit-Polls-2004.pdf
They have the raw polling data from precinct levels in Ohio one year ago today.
Chris Matthews was back on the Alito "italian slur" rant tonight. Maybe it is time for a boycott.
BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE GANG WHO WHOLESALE ILLEGAL WAR AND TERROR AND WILLINGLY OBLITERATE A WOMAN"S RIGHT TO CHOOSE.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051102/ap_on_go_su_co/alito_gang_of14_1;_ylt=ApbftKhBAglQAWxTPQ.YWVluCM0A;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
TIT FOR TAT HAS BEGUN:
Senate's 'Gang of 14' Fractures Over Alito By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer
55 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The 14 centrists who averted a Senate breakdown over judicial nominees last spring are showing signs of splintering on President Bush's latest nominee for the Supreme Court.
That is weakening the hand of Democrats opposed to conservative judge Samuel Alito and enhancing his prospects for confirmation.
The unity of the seven Democrats and the seven Republicans in the "Gang of 14" was all that halted a major filibuster fight between GOP leader Bill Frist and Democratic leader Harry Reid earlier this year over Bush's nominees.
The early defection of two of the group's Republicans, Mike DeWine of Ohio and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, will give the GOP the upper hand if Democrats decide to attempt a filibuster of Alito, the New Jersey jurist nominated Monday to replace Sandra Day O'Connor.
If Democrats do filibuster, Frist wants to change the Senate rules to eliminate the delaying tactic — something the centrist group blocked in May.
"People like Lindsey Graham and I, who were part of that group, I think you can bet we'll be willing to vote to change the rules of the Senate so that we do not have a filibuster," DeWine said only hours after Alito was announced.
The centrist Democrats plan to urge their Republican colleagues at the group's meeting on Thursday to withhold judgment, since Alito's nomination is not even officially at the Senate yet. The defection of even two members of the group — which decided earlier in the year to support filibusters only in 'extraordinary circumstances' — would virtually ensure Frist would ultimately win a showdown.
"The truth of the matter is that it's way too early to talk about extraordinary circumstances," said Sen. Ben Nelson (news, bio, voting record), D-Neb., a founding member of the group. "I'm not hearing any of my colleagues talk about it, and I'd rather not hear any of my colleagues on the other side talk about it as well."
The loss of Graham and DeWine makes the "Gang of 14" less influential.
Republicans hold 55 seats in the Senate, and while confirmation requires a simple majority, it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster.
However, Frist needs only a simple majority — 51 votes — to eliminate the stalling tactic.
That means he needs two members of the centrist group to join the rest of the GOP to make his goal. With a 50-vote tie in the Senate, Vice President Dick Cheney would cast the tie-breaking vote for the Republicans and Alito could be confirmed with majority support.
Bush announced Alito on Monday following the failed nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers, who was undermined by conservatives.
The 55-year-old Alito — who has served for 15 years on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after being a government lawyer and a U.S. attorney — got rave reviews by the Republicans he met on Wednesday.
The Senate's No. 2 Republican, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, called Alito a "very, very impressive intellect and a very well-qualified nominee." Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas added, "Unless something very different comes out that we don't know about, I certainly would intend to support him."
After a brief flurry of filibuster talk immediately following Alito's nomination, Senate Democrats now are taking a wait-and-see stance.
"I don't know a single Democrat who is saying that it's time for a filibuster, that we should really consider it," said Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Senate's No. 2 Democrat, after meeting with Alito Wednesday. "It's way too early."
Nelson said he had received assurances from Alito "that he wants to go to the bench without a political agenda, that he is not bringing a hammer and chisel to hammer away and chisel away on existing law."
Durbin said that the judge never refused to answer any of his questions — as Miers and John Roberts had during their private interviews — and that Alito told him he saw a right to privacy in the Constitution, one of the building blocks of the court's landmark Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision.
Alito said when it came to his dissent on Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a case in which the 3rd Circuit struck down a Pennsylvania law that included a provision requiring women seeking abortions to notify their spouses, "he spent more time worrying over it and working on that dissent than any he had written as a judge," Durbin recounted.
Turned OFF the tv as nothing more interesting than Camilla and Charles going on. Guess as good as anyone's takes the pressure off Bushie boy for a while. Black tie event should be called black day in America...R.I.P!
Found this interesting quote at a blog site called RedState I am sure a right wing site and if anplace would want to slam Dems this would be it.
As usual Matthews is full of himself. He constantly slams Dems with the outrageous allegations that he either just makes or is fed to him directly from the RNC that the DNC made up and is pushing the Scalita nickname. WRONG !
No apparently the name/supposed slur came from Alita's own law cleks:
"Samuel A. Alito, Jr. (called Scalito behind his back by his clerks)"
I have read other reports where the media and his supporters actually came up with that nickname. Nevermind the truth Mr. Matthews.
Someone needs to email this or call Matthews office and tell him to stop his slanderous and fabricated information. My guess is that Rove or Mehlman have started this rumor hoping for a backlash to help confirm Alita. Any ideas how we can get the truth out there to knuckelhead Matthews?
I would love to see the dumb look on his face if just one of his guest stood up to Matthews and said Mr. Matthews you are full of s*** and stop lying. The nickname Scalita was given to him by his law clerks and you have known that all along. Now look in the camera and apologize to your viewers and the Democratic party for your manipulative distortions.
Go wish Christy happy birthday here
http://www.democracycellproject.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=930
dw - link not working
OK - working!
Thanks!
Joe Wilson on Olberman now
Don't miss this one!
new poll, from CBS News: very interesting reading!
Poll: More Bad News For Bush
The President's job approval rating is now 35 percent, his lowest rating since taking office in 2001. More than half the public disapproves of the job he is doing as president.
snip~
The events of this year have also taken a toll on opinions about Vice President Dick Cheney. Today the Vice-President receives only a 19 percent favorable rating from Americans.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/02/opinion/polls/main1005252.shtml
Is Rove a Security Risk?
Because he disclosed Plame’s CIA identity to reporters, the Bush aide could lose his clearance.
According to last week’s indictment of Scooter Libby, a person identified as “Official A” held conversations with reporters about Plame’s identity as an undercover CIA operative, information that was classified. News accounts subsequently confirmed that that official was Rove. Under Executive Order 12958, signed by President Clinton in 1995, such a disclosure is grounds for, at a minimum, losing access to classified information.
Section 5.1 of Clinton’s executive order prohibits “any knowing, willful or negligent action that could reasonably be expected to result in an unauthorized disclosure of classified information.” While the law against revealing the identity of a CIA operative requires that the perpetrator intentionally disclosed such classified information (a high standard, which may be one reason Fitzgerald did not indict on those grounds), the executive order covers “negligence,” or unintentional disclosure.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9899512/site/newsweek/
Yesterday, I read that Chris Matthews was dumping on senate Dems because they want to get to the bottom of the Iraq intelligence farce. Today, I read that he is some TV news hero because he is getting the truth out to the American people.
I'm confused.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/chris-matthews-and-the-po_b_10039.html
snip
"Last night, Matthews said that Fitzgerald’s investigation had shown him things he “never knew” -- including how “the vice president’s office, Scooter Libby in particular, was able to use the press”.
And if a Washington insider like Matthews was surprised, imagine how John Q. Public must feel. Hence the need to drum the facts home like Matthews has been doing. It’s the only way to break through the GOP spin and the static of our 500 channel universe.
So there was Matthews last night, laying it out for his viewers:
MATTHEWS: One of the things we learned in this long investigation regarding the CIA leak was the way in which the Vice President’s office, Scooter Libby, in particular, was able to use the press. He leaked to the New York Times the story that there were aluminum tubes; that there was, in fact, a case for a nuclear weapons program by Saddam Hussein.
And then the three major figures in the administration, the Vice President, Secretaries of State and Defense, went on Sunday television, and all pointed to that story that had been planted there by Scooter Libby."
There's more. Chris Matthews? The same Chris Matthews?
Jimmy Carter is on NPR's "Fresh Air" with Terri Gross tonight. He talked about his religion & how the Southern Baptist Congregation has changed its creed so you don't follow Jesus but follow the interpretation of church leaders. The role of women in the church has been minimized, parts of the former creed have been struck out, & he & Rosalyn actually quit their former branch.
He maintained that the separation of church and state that our founders intended has been badly eroded in the last 15 years and mostly in the last five. When he mentioned his religion, he didn't intend to make the Presidential office a pulpit and didn't.
He is shocked about the doctrine of pre-emptive war, as this country's policy was always to go to war if we were attacked or threatened, not just because we happened to want to change someone's regime. His book takes this slant, as far as morality.
Good stuff. So nice to hear a voice of reason again.
While driving, picked up Canadian radio & heard Mary Lou Finley's show, "As It Happens" - guest was a Middle East/Iran expert (Iranian-born) from London who said the current threatening nutball who is head of Iran - is disliked by the world, by most in the middle east, by most Iranians, by the majority in his own Parliament, & that his "election" was in question & most Iranians don't consider him legitimate. He said that rather than another "regime change" by the west, just let the people of Iran take care of it.
There is so much corruption, there & here, & same problem (matter of degree) about separation of church and state (lack thereof).
Today is also Diwalli, Hindhu celebration like Christmas - broadcast (series) on NPR this morning about city considered to be "heaven on earth" in India. Those worshipping Krishna were every bit as fervent as those in Iran who are waiting for the 12th Imam or those in America who are waiting for Armageddon. It wasn't really very comforting. There was one wise woman though (Hindhu) who believed that all religions basically sought purity and that it was wrong to impose a religion on someone.
On another note, I've heard the student walkout had at least 2000 and the one in Minneapolis at least 1000. I so wanted to be there but this was the one day I really could not leave work or I would be fired. I did wear a black armband and I did answer all questions about what it was for. I was also quite vocal about the war & the madness in administration, rather than quiet, cautious and "professional" as usual. I think people there can sense something in my voice about how strongly I feel & they are probably not used to it - may feel slightly uneasy but damn it, maybe it will make them think!
Everyone filed out to get their flu shots. Not me - I have never had a flu shot and have never had the flu. Good handwashing goes a long way, especially in healthcare facilities, and I don't trust anything medical that Bush advocates. I'd rather build my immune system. Now I've heard from about 5 sources that Donald F'ing Rumsfeld profits from the vaccine development & that the company has the same name as the theocracy in Margaret Atwood's 25 year old but prophetic "Handmaid's Tale." No thanks.
Then driving on, I heard a (Canadian) news story about a guy in Texas who defrauded Medicare by injecting people with "flu shots" at nursing homes, an Exxon health fair, & other places & what was in the serum was water.
One more topic - tv. The only shows I watched in the last 2 years tended to have Chris Matthews or Tim Russert on them and both gave me the creeps bigtime. I innately did not trust either of them. Whereas Dan Rather I had watched since I was a kid - what can I say ..
It's strange listening to Jimmy Carter tonight - then to think Bush has been using the word "integrity" alot lately, which is sick. He doesn't dare use "moral" or "ethics" - Tom DeLay has completely poisoned the meaning of those words, I think, for him.
It makes my day to see that Cheney has a 19% popularity rating. In this town he bats about zero and always has.
STREET ACTION REPORT
(as based on info garnered from Google)
- United States
It's very hard to find much on the student walkouts which happened nationally in over 60 cities. However, CHINESE NEWSPAPERS are reporting it and providing quotations from people attending. I am dying to read eyewitness reports, such as from Karen in DC, Bert in Mpls (& photos) & friends here. I badly regret I wasn't there. I probably could have found another job ..
- France
Suburban riots continue and spread after 6 nights - The Guardian is calling Paris "The City of Fights" rather than "The City of Lights." My take on it is that (having recently been there and wandered as far from the tourist zones as possible) law and order is not the final answer. A big police crackdown will only inflame the situation. Minority and immigrant youth need education, jobs and hope, same as in US. We are one act of police brutality away from same thing happening here as did in the '60s - cities on fire.
- South America
Now here is where it gets interesting. THOUSANDS are already massing in the streets to protest Bush coming to Argentina and he doesn't even arrive for like 3 days, I don't think! Then think of Venezuela! As one article pointed out, US/South & Central American relations were better when those places had US-friendly dictators. Now that they have democratically-elected governors, they are not so keen on our using them for cheap labor, dumping good on them etc.
Here are Bert's photos from the rally today in Minneapolis
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/2/231154/969
Am waiting to hear more from Seattle & there was some up on Portland IndyMedia - the World Can't Wait site has a place to post things.
I miss Mary-Lou.
Just heard from Alan (Seattle), who is a Quaker who has worked with homeless vets for a long time & has a fantastic activist son with whom I recruited voters in nightspots last year:
Went downtown today to the WORLD CAN'T WAIT Demonstration! Sure was great seeing all the high schoolers! Not a bad turn out either! :>
-------------------------------------------------
Another report: (these are from Kos)
Several hundred protesters filled Pine Street in downtown Seattle today to protest the war in Iraq and the Bush administration's stance on everything from Supreme Court nomination to reproductive rights.
The protest was organized by the Seattle chapter of World Can't Wait, a group started in New York City in June but that leaders say has since spread to more than 60 major cities across the country. High school and college students walked out of class to join the rally, which organizers say is dedicated to ousting President Bush.
"People who steal elections and believe they're on a mission from God will not go without a fight," said lead organizer Maggie Lawless
-------------------------------------------------
More than 800 Los Angeles Unified students walked out of their high schools Wednesday as part of a nationwide protest against the administration.
Adults accompanied groups of students "in all cases" as they left from 10 high schools -- Los Angeles High, Van Nuys High, Downtown Business Magnet, Francisco Bravo Medical Magnet, Marshall High, Hamilton High, Fairfax High, Orthopaedic Hospital Medical Magnet, Lincoln High and Belmont High, said Dan Isaacs, the district's chief operating officer. "Our issue... was safety,
and I think we fulfilled our mission, frankly," Isaacs said.
The groups varied in size from 10 to 250, he said. The district sent staff, school police and youth relations personnel to walk with the teenagers and made buses available to take the students back to school when they got tired. Some students may have splintered off from their groups, but Isaacs said he expected the majority either returned to campus or went home for the
day, which was relatively free of incidents.
Van Nuys High was temporarily placed on lockdown after a group of 20 to 25 students left around 11:10 a.m. for the protest, said LAUSD spokeswoman Ellen Morgan.
The principal called for the lockdown "for the safety of the remainder of the students," Morgan said. She said the principal reported that after the group of students left school, other teens were running around the campus "causing a disturbance." The lockdown was lifted around lunchtime, Isaacs said.
She denied students at Reseda High were prevented from joining the protest.
"About 50 kids were thinking about walking out, but, coincidentally, LAPD were bringing some truants back to the school, so when the kids saw LAPD they turned around and went back to their classes."
-------------------------------------------------
New York City
The walkouts were organized in support of a call for such actions by World Can't Wait. They have updates on all the actions across the country. I went to the rally today in NYC at Union Square and there were a couple thousand folks there and I'd guess at least half were High School students from a lot of different schools. I know that in the Bronx students who attempted to walk out were arrested. It was a beautiful action. The spirit of defiance was exhilerating. Its long overdue.
-------------------------------------------------
Portland Indymedia (excerpts)
I organized a walk out in my school which basically included everyone there. When walking down to the square, we would often take the streets and go back on the sidewalk when the max came around. When we arrived, there was a huge amount of people. We thought there would be about 300 people there but there was at least 700 people. A lot of people did some really awesome speeches. A musician played a calm song as the rally began to rage.
The crowd was larger than I expected and it seemed like every sidewalk for 6 blocks was crowded with people.
.......
I did not elaborate on arrests in Seattle and Portland but they did happen & details will be showing up on the respective IndyMedias.
The media will probably ignore this whole thing but these youth are cannon fodder age and the wars continue to rage, so expect more.
from Alan:
Well they had canned music and the usual wild ass speakers! Cops on Horses and Cycles and Bikes! A little overkill! .............Stuck around for an hour and was leaving North on 4th [monorail overhead!] and saw about 300 teens marching South on 4th ..sidewalk to street to sidewalk coming my way...............I stopped and started clapping all by myself! THE KIDS WENT N U T S !! Some bearded gezzer recognising their effort! Got three High 5's! and a mess of kids smiling and yelling and appreciating my recognising them! FELT GREAT!! Then I lost my car...thats another story! Eight blocks later found it!! :>:>:> AC
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002599929_webprotest02.html
I WAS THERE AND IT WAS CLOSER TO A THOUSAND! FUN HANGING OUT WITH THE HIGH SCHOOLERS!
----Sounds like ours was relatively peaceful, only 2 arrested. Portland's, on the other hand, sounded like a fiasco - maybe a little heavy-handed. On the other hand, there are a few little "anarchist" punks - I've seen them esp. n SF. A little too much adrenalin - ah well - better doing this than using it in Iraq.
Bert in Mpls:
I had a meeting and had to bail out before it ended. After the rally, everyone reportedly marched down to the local recruiter station and raised hell. I wanted to get images of teens screaming in front of the recruiting office. Like you say, there will be more opportunities. We can count on 4 more wars.