« Fighting the Class War | Main | Happy Birthday to Violet! »
This Duty is Demanded
Over 50 people gathered together in Highland Park’s Free Speech Park on a cold, cloudy Veteran’s Day this year to dedicate a new exhibit that mourns the death of our Bill of Rights, Habeas Corpus, & the Geneva Convention. The exhibit is sponsored by the North Shore Women for Peace, a local Illinois organization that is 50 years strong in living their motto: “Working for peace, justice & a healthy planet.”
The weather was indicative of the moods & mixed emotions shared by many that day. The short bursts of sunlight through the overcast clouds mirrored the hope we have for our country & our world, as a result of the mid-term elections. The cold & clouds reminded us that we are still a country that is in the midst of an unjust war, a country whose soldiers are dying & being wounded daily, a country that bears responsibility for the death & destruction of Iraq & many of its citizens. We’re a country that is damaged from 6 years of misguided foreign policy & attacks on our Constitution and civil liberties. We have many wounds to heal among ourselves & with others in the world.
Vicki Bailyn, a key member of the North Shore Women for Peace, was cautiously optimistic that we will now have “fresh eyes” in our government. Her warning of “Be careful what’s happening to America” was one of encouragement & hope that people will now step forward & raise their voices because there’s a chance of getting Congress’s attention. Vicki also said, “It isn’t just the war, which is a key issue & will be until our soldiers are home, taken care of, and working. It’s justice. No justice, no peace.”
Tom McMenamin, a business attorney & concerned citizen of Highland Park who has one brother in Afghanistan and one brother in Kuwait, was the invited guest speaker. With the fanfare of the final few bars of our national anthem played on the trumpet as an introduction, Tom delivered this powerful speech:
I would like to thank North Shore Women for Peace for assembling this exhibit in the Free Speech Park in Highland Park’s downtown. As all can see, the exhibit consists of three tombstones representing the current attacks on Habeas Corpus, our Bill of Rights and the Geneva Convention.I would also like to thank North Shore Women for Peace for organizing today’s event and for inviting me to speak.
But as I told these valiant and gutsy women when they extended their invitation—and as I warn you now—I am not a great constitutional scholar, I am not an internationally known human rights advocate, I am not a hotshot criminal defense lawyer. I am just a business lawyer and, like many of you, a resident of Highland Park. But I accepted the invitation today because I am a concerned US citizen. And I am here today at the indirect urging of the President of the largest legal professional group in the world, the American Bar Association (“ABA”).
In his last two letters to the more than 1,000,000 ABA members before stepping down this summer, the ABA President, Michael Greco, reviewed the current attacks by political forces in this country on the independence of the legal profession and our judiciary, as well as on our core legal rights and principles. He referred to recently enacted federal bankruptcy laws that limit or burden the role of lawyers in representing debtors. He wrote of the attacks by political extremists against our independent judiciary under the guise of the myth of “judicial activism”. He mentioned the attempts by religious conservatives to limit the jurisdiction of courts over certain matters. He described the attempts by the Administration to undercut long-standing American judicial principles.
The ABA President called these attacks “direct assaults on our justice system and our democracy” and he urged “all Americans, particularly lawyers, to oppose this insidious trend with every ounce of our might.”
This morning, as part of our November 11th Veteran Days’ activities, our town dedicated across the street a beautiful new memorial, honoring our fellow Highland Park citizens who died protecting our beloved country. It is not just the conduct of these men and women that we honor and respect with our memorial. It is also the freedom and liberty that they defended.
During the wars of the 20th Century, millions of common folk soldiers from totalitarian countries fought bravely and died. And yet the deeds of these soldiers were on behalf of murderous, repressive, dictatorial regimes.
In contrast, those whom we honor with our new Highland Park memorial shine so brilliantly in our collective memory not just for their courage and sacrifice but because their deeds are further illuminated by the bright liberty and freedom that they defended.
The men and women listed on our memorial fought and died for our Constitution, our history of judicial independence, our Bill of Rights, including the right of Habeas Corpus—that is, the right to demand of the government why any individual is being held. Habeas Corpus is our first civil right going back to 1215 and it is our greatest protection against the government arbitrarily holding someone.
The death of a brave Italian soldier during World War II reflects only on the bravery of such soldier. But the death of an American soldier reflects not just on the courage and sacrifice of such American but also on all of the beauty and humanity of American rights and political traditions that such soldier protected.
Our Highland Park residents listed on our new memorial protected our liberties from external threats. But it is up to all of us, it is up to all Americans, all U.S. citizens, to defend our liberties from internal threats. It is for all of us here today to protect our freedoms, our enshrined rights, so that our cherished fellow Americans serving today in our military never fight except for America’s most precious, most glorious principles and liberties. For there is no guaranty that, if we do not maintain vigilance internally, if we do not always fight to preserve our liberties—well there is no guaranty that America will not lose them. There is no Divine rule that says America will never lose them. Other countries have.
Earlier this year, the Chicago Bar Association held a series of programs regarding the 1946 Neuremberg Trials of Nazi leaders. One comment stunned me. When Hitler came to power, one out of every six lawyers in Germany was Jewish. For me, as a lawyer, it is horribly shocking to realize that the majority of the professional German bar—individuals trained to respect laws and the rule of law—quietly permitted one out of every six of their fellow lawyers to be exiled, imprisoned, killed. In just a few years, the German courts yielded to the Nazi thugs, offering no resistance as Jews, political opponents, artists, homosexuals disappeared. Hitler got rid of habeas corpus. No hearings. No inquiries. No independent judicial review of actions by the government. Nazi Germany shows how a civilized country can lose its values, and eventually itself.
America has also strayed in the past from its core legal principles. Let me tell you the story of the name partner of my law firm in Chicago.
In 1929, a young American, Tom Masuda, graduated from law school. During the Depression, he slowly built a small practice in Seattle, representing members of his minority community and, eventually, a number of Japanese corporations importing into the United States.
As so often happens, when a society is attacked as America was on December 7, 1941, it becomes fearful and the majority can look suspiciously and fearfully at the minority.
Two days after the attack on Pearl Harbor, Tom was arrested. Because habeas corpus had not been suspended, the government was forced to bring formal charges against Tom in a court of law. He was charged with treason. There was no evidence, however, of any treasonous conduct. The only facts that the government had against Tom was that he was a lawyer active in the community and that he had been representing Japanese corporations on commercial transactions prior to World War II. But from the government’s perspective, Tom’s main crime was that, although a U.S. citizen born in the United States, Tom was of Japanese descent.
One of Tom’s law school classmates tried to deliver to the court funds in order to get Tom out on bail. This classmate was arrested.After a full trial in which one of Tom’s classmates was the prosecutor, Tom was acquitted, only to be released from the court house and sent directly to the State Fair Grounds where his wife, Kay, awaited him. Tom and Kay were part of the 125,000 American citizens of Japanese descent who were forced into crude camps in the western states, where they lived behind barbed wire for two-to-four years, some of them in converted horse sheds.
Tom was eventually allowed to leave the camp ---- but only on the basis that he move his home, his wife and his law practice to the Midwest. Tom and Kay moved to Chicago and Tom restarted from scratch his law practice, which grew into the law firm where I now work, Masuda, Funai, Eifert & Mitchell. Thomas Masuda and his wife, Kay, were the most gracious, generous, decent Americans that one could imagine, living full lives into their late 80’s and early 90’s, active in civic and charitable organizations and giving away the bulk of their estate--more than a million dollars--to charities.
As Tom’s experience demonstrates, our country has strayed in the past and it is straying again today. Under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that President Bush signed last month, Tom could have been declared an unlawful enemy combatant. He could have been charged as a person who materially supports hostilities because he had given charity to a Japanese-American service community charity or because he had opposed the early efforts of the federal government to lock up all Americans of Japanese descent.
Under the Military Commissions Act, my wife, a British subject and permanent resident of the United States, could be declared an alien, unlawful enemy combatant because she has opposed the war in Iraq or contributed money to the Quakers who have been monitored by the federal government for their work for peace. Grabbed by the authorities, my wife could be held and the government would not be required to present her before a court of law. There would be no review of the reasons for her detention, or the location of her detention or the evidence supporting her detention.
And under the Military Commissions Act, the President or his designee has sole authority to decide what is cruel, degrading, inhuman treatment to be used against an alien unlawful enemy combatant. The President or his designee can unilaterally reinterpret Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.
Some of you may think that I am exaggerating. But it is important to realize some of the disturbing developments in our country over the past 5 years—developments so contrary to our core American beliefs.
-- An honored West Point graduate, a captain and chaplain in the Army—a U.S. citizen---was thrown into solitary confinement for more than 60 days, without access to counsel, and charged with aiding the enemy because he complained about the treatment of the detainees at Guantanamo. Eventually, under public pressure, the Army was forced to grant him an honorable discharge.
-- A U.S. citizen was arrested in Illinois and held without a court hearing for two years, charged with being an enemy combatant.
-- Our government has indirectly acknowledged kidnapping and secretly detaining individuals, offering them for torture in other countries.
-- In South Dakota, political extremists, angry with judicial decisions upholding fundamental rights, proposed a state constitutional amendment (known as “JAIL for Judges”) that would have allowed litigants to sue judges on allegations that they deliberately disregarded material facts.
-- After four years of incarceration, more than 400 detainees at Guantanamo have still not had a hearing to determine why they are being held.
-- Ten years ago, in the Balkan conflict, our government complained loudly and appropriately regarding the abuse and torture of one of our downed pilots. Amnesty International stood with us. Today, our President and our outgoing Congressional leaders have openly discussed what limited forms of torture are permitted. Today, Amnesty International condemns us.
Many of our political leaders proudly profess their Christian faith and declare their belief in Jesus Christ, himself a victim of torture. And yet these same political leaders appear to have no scruples in abandoning our country’s 200-year-old tradition, started during our Revolutionary War, of not torturing the enemy. Fully aware of the Bible’s lengthy description of the horrible abuse of Jesus Christ, they have no problem radically reinterpreting the Geneva Convention so as to permit horrific abuse.
And so, here we are on this cold, gray November day, gathered around these symbolic graves, just a bunch of citizens, just regular people with children and parents and friends, with jobs and mortgages. We are just common Americans. But we have the formidable task to preserve our liberties from political extremists, protect our rights in spite of our fears, honor our judicial and constitutional traditions in spite of harassment and sneers, and defend our freedoms from internal threats.
This responsibility has been bestowed on us by the wise founders of our wonderful country; this calling has been placed on us by our forefathers and mothers; this duty is demanded from us by each of our Highland Park residents whom we remembered this morning; this sacred obligation is owed by us to all of our troops and their families serving our country today. And because of those Americans who have gone before us, and those Americans serving today in our military, and because of our love for our children and future Americans, we are not allowed to fail in our duty. Because of our love of our country, we cannot fail in our responsibility.
Thomas Paul McMenamin
(The foregoing represents Tom's personal views and should not be attributed to his law firm.)
GREAT piece. Thanks MD! We need this inspiration, or RE-inspiration and we do need to stay attentive.
That said, Dick and I are both pathetically sick--head colds, or head cold (we appear to be sharing!).
I did want to respond to the Dean/Carville thing and say that I agree with battlebob that this is a yes, AND issue and not an ether/or. When we were doing the early JK campaign, it was nice to know Terry McA. had raised a comfortable amount of money (although there was so much being raised online--to their surprise, I might add). However the local connections and networks were not only broken; they were resentful too. Dean had the right idea as a preparatory and remedial approach.
But last minute mioney is also critical and Carville is right about that too. We just do not need the top-down and somewhat arrogant "we know best" attitude that goes along with it.
The national parties are not going to be exercising the kind of controls over the will of the people that they have in the past. And if they all need some therapy to deal with that, well, so be it.
The bloggers' train has left the station; it is full of everyday people (cue monkey for the lyrics) and there is no stopping it. Those not onboard will not get to their destination. And the train is well into visual imagery--YouTube--as well as words.
Christy mentions JE and the South in another comment. I have to say that as much as I like JE (and I adore Elizabeth) I did not see him on a short leash. I saw a man floundering to find his voice, even in the South, very little media coverage for his front porch talks, and most folks responding to, but not discussing the heart-filled messages he brought into the campaign. Especially the Carvilles and the rest of the Clintonistas, who wanted more of a warrior, he was considered a weak VP candidate.
JE is just a really caring and honest guy. He is not an attack dog. If that was what they wanted, he was the wrong choice and they should have gone with someone with more taste for blood. Don't get me wrong; he is a strong and smart guy. But he's also GOOD.
Last Train
by Arlo Guthrie
I want to hop on the last train in the station
Won't need to get yourself prepared
When you're on that last train to glory
You'll know you're reasonably there
Maybe you ain't walked on any highway
You've just been flyin' in the air
But if you're on that last train to glory
You'll know you've paid your fare
Maybe you've been Iying down in the jailhouse
Maybe you've been hungry and poor
Maybe your ticket on the last train to glory
Is the stranger whose been sleeping on your floor
I ain't a man of constant sorrow
I ain't seen trouble all day long
We are only passengers on the last train to glory
That will soon be long, long gone
I want to hop on the last train in the station
Won't need to get yourself prepared
When you're on the last train to glory
You'll know you're reasonably there
I think the thread topic would include BushSpeak as a threat to free speech. I wanted to repost this item as it seemed to be overlooked yesterday. Despite the regime's flagrant disregard of scientific data, this year they needed a "scientifically" rigorous term help mask the absence of a safety net... and the shrub, who never forgets, once again took vengeance for a past embarrassment.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Some Americans Lack Food, but USDA Won't Call Them Hungry
WaPo: http://tinyurl.com/y55nw6
The U.S. government has vowed that Americans will never be hungry again. But they may experience "very low food security."
Every year, the Agriculture Department issues a report that measures Americans' access to food, and it has consistently used the word "hunger" to describe those who can least afford to put food on the table. But not this year.
Mark Nord, the lead author of the report, said "hungry" is "not a scientifically accurate term for the specific phenomenon being measured in the food security survey." Nord, a USDA sociologist, said, "We don't have a measure of that condition."...
~snip~
In 1999, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, then running for president, said he thought the annual USDA report -- which consistently finds his home state one of the hungriest in the nation -- was fabricated.
"I'm sure there are some people in my state who are hungry," Bush said. "I don't believe 5 percent are hungry."
Bush said he believed that the statistics were aimed at his candidacy. "Yeah, I'm surprised a report floats out of Washington when I'm running a presidential campaign," he said.
~snip~
This year, when the report failed to appear in October as it usually does, Democrats accused the Bush administration of delaying its release until after the midterm elections. Nord denied the contention, saying, "This is a schedule that was set several months ago."
Love the visuals (graves) and sounds (trumpet!)
This is from one of a blogger you may know - Tela! She has her own show! I don't have the newspaper link but this is from the transcript she sent me. Good example of "Be the Media" - if you have Public Access TV, you can do the same thing.
Political activist launches show
WILLIAMSTOWN — WilliNet public-access Channel 17 may see a boost in ratings with political activist Tela Zasloff's new prime-time television program, "With Justice for All." Zasloff, 67, a retired English professor and published author, launched the show Nov. 8 and plans a new program of at least a half-hour each month featuring a documentary film and interview with a guest speaker.
"Local access TV is really freeing," she said in an interview Wednesday at her Williamstown home. "I've been in a rage since the Florida elections in 2000 and especially the Ohio election of 2004. Everything is being destroyed that we hold precious, by the (Bush) administration."
Struck by power of documentaries
Zasloff said she at first wanted to focus in on environmental issues but it wasn't enough to motivate the kind of change she wanted to see in politics. "I was struck by the power of documentary films," she said of her medium of expression.
The first documentary, "The Road to Clean Elections," hones in on a "lively" City Council primary election in Brooklyn, N.Y. The guest commentator for the session afterward is Peter Vickery, executive director of Mass Voters for Fair Elections (who lost his seat on the Governor's Council in the Nov. 7 election to Tom Merrigan). The show will next air on Wednesday, Nov. 22, at 8:30 p.m., and will be broadcast again on Wednesday, Nov. 29, at 11:30 a.m. and 8:30 p.m., and Sundays at noon on Nov. 26 and Dec. 3.
Zasloff doesn't produce the documentaries. She buys them or gets them free from organizations such as the Media Education Foundation of Northampton and the roving Solar Bus Election Justice Center, based in California. Most of her guests are local, but she has toted Willinet cameras as far as Boston searching for opinions on issues such as the environment, elections and the war in Iraq.
WilliNet's executive producer, Debby Dane, encouraged Zasloff to produce her show a year ago. "This is a true, cable-access program. This is such a success story," Dane said at the station Wednesday. "It's about citizens informing citizens."
Opinions on electronic balloting
Zasloff's next show, beginning Dec. 6, will feature the film "Invisible Ballots," a documentary showing experts' opinions on electronic ballots. Elizabeth Wright, president of the Williamstown League of Women voters, is the guest speaker. The show will appear Wednesdays, Dec. 6, 13, 20 and 27, at 10:30 a.m. and Sundays, Dec. 10, 17, 24 and 3, at 11:30 a.m.
A third installment, "Illegitimate Election 2004," about the presidential election that year in Ohio, will air sometime in January and feature John Bonifaz, founder of the National Voting Rights Institute, as the guest speaker. Zasloff traveled to Boston to interview Bonifaz, who once won a MacArthur award and who works as an activist lawyer. He advocated a recount in Ohio in 2004.
Zasloff said she feels comfortable interviewing guests and producing a program even though her television experience is limited. "I don't have to be the expert," she said. "I just ask two or three intelligent questions and they go with it." She credited production manager Edward Cating with helping with the technicalities. "I have to think about what I'm wearing, the best profile to use, what kind of backdrop," she said. "That's the fun part."
She said she looks forward to purchasing and sharing more films about the environment and about the war in Iraq, but she is hesitant to show films with graphic violence. She also hopes to find war veterans to appear as guests on her show.
Wonderful. Way to go, Tela!
Acc/Center for American Progress = I think they have developed some TALKING POINTS for phased redeployment of troops.
In summary:
CIA has found that Al Quaeda are working again with the Taleban, though Bush has repeatedly said that terrorist networks are in decline worldwide. In Afghanistan, 600 attacks a month, 3700 deaths in 2006, yet roadside attacks were "rare" there a year ago. Administration claims more than half of bin Laden's top people have been captured, but CIA finds there are plenty to take their place. There are enough that they can spread out from Afghanistan to other countries.
CIA finds that Al Quaida are able to recruit disillusioned Sunnis & nationalists in Iraq.
Goal is to turn part of the country into an Islamic emirate. They claim 12,000 fighters.
Marines claim Anbar province has been taken over by insurgents. That is a separate issue from the civil war. According to the UN, while we've been busy in Iraq and Afghanistan, Al Quaida has assembled in Somalia, aided by extremists in Iran, Syria, Egypt, Libya. Somalia may be the new Afghanistan for training insurgents to ship out to elsewhere. Bush calls Iraq the central terrorist fr, so thinks concentrating fighting there is best.
Now the plan:
American Progress' Strategic Redeployment plan details why a phased withdrawal from Iraq is a vital step towards accomplishing several key anti-terrorism objectives:
restoring the strength of U.S. ground troops; shifting military resources to meet the wider regional and global threats from terrorist networks, such as in Afghanistan and Africa;
quelling the growing anti-occupation nationalism in Iraq that is used by al Qaeda to draw new recruits.
(And/or cue Otter for the *other* lyrics, he answered Karen slyly...)
---------------
Sometimes I'm right and I can be wrong
My own beliefs are in my song
The butcher, the banker, the drummer and then
Makes no difference what group I'm in
I am everyday people, yeah yeah
There is a blue one who can't accept the green one
For living with a fat one trying to be a skinny one
And different strokes for different folks
And so on and so on and scooby dooby doo-bee
Oh, sha sha -- we got to live together
I am no better and neither are you
We are the same whatever we do
You love me you hate me you know me and then
You can't figure out the bag I'm in
I am everyday people, yeah yeah
There is a long hair that doesn't like the short hair
For bein' such a rich one that will not help the poor one
And different strokes for different folks
And so on and so on and scooby dooby doo-bee
Oh, sha sha -- we got to live together
There is a yellow one that won't accept the black one
That won't accept the red one that won't accept the white one
And different strokes for different folks
Oh, sha sha -- we are all everyday people
--------------
the family that stones together intones together,
Otter
Troops hunt for Americans abducted in Iraq
Coalition forces are searching "aggressively" for five security contractors, including four Americans, who were abducted Thursday when their convoy was ambushed in southern Iraq. Militiamen posing as police set up a fake checkpoint and seized the men when they stopped.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/17/iraq.main/index.html
Posted by: Otter at November 17, 2006 11:32 AM
Happy Day of Astonement
(formerly known as TGIF)
Better watch that serenity thing of yours, kj. As you know, sometimes things get just a little too Zen out there -- and then, of course, nothing is what you want.
om, om on the range,
Otter
monkey knows.
They'll stone you when you're trying to be so good. They'll stone you just like they said they would. They'll stone you when you're trying to go home. Then they'll stone you when you're there all alone.
moss never grows on a rolling
Otter
And while we are singing of love of each other and getting along:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15759610/
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.
Posted by: Otter at November 17, 2006 11:35 AM
Received some very very good, long awaited news yesterday and it's been a long year with precious little good news. Besides, I'm just a grrrl and "Girls just wanna have fun" "do do, do do, do do doo doo hey I gotta go now" @;-)
Karen
" I did not see him on a short leash. I saw a man floundering to find his voice.."
I think it was obvious at some point Edwards was holding back in the name of political correctness.
As far as a taste for blood, rumor is he is one of the best litigators in this nation. I doubt it would have taken much for him to simply go for the throat.
It was obvious at more than one point that political correctness was more important than raking georgie and dick over the coals.
There is another candidate we could put up that simply has everything we could ever hope for in a leader.
Bill Richardson.
Now that is a man I would vote for with pride on my sleeve. He is as experienced and clear eyed as they come.
Just listening to him talk is comforting.
All you have to do is convince them he won't sleep with all your white women.
Yes, life is shit and worse for SO many millions of people in this world. But (imo) we won't survive in this world without times of hope, laughter, song. Life without hope = bitterness. And we have an excellent model via GWB on what bitterness can do to a soul and all the souls around him.
"Look, here in our round, we still have our fire."
~~from kj's poem "Old Man and The Child"
So, if it's to be "Bad News Friday" I guess I'd better log-off. Don't want to tick off the regulars. I'm just a guest here.
Richardson used to be high on my list too, but he really let the Repubs get away with murder in New Mexico voting in 2004. He refused the recount and refused to investigate.
SO many rumors abound about how JK did not investigate the voting issues, but remember the states had to decide first. Ohio, New Mexico, Florida--they all shot down the idea that there was fraud. New Mexico was the only Dem state that did this. For this I have a hard time supporting Richardson.
As for JE as a litigator; I know he had a strong reputation. He just didn't go there in this campaign. And I cannot tell you why he didn't. Certainly everyone wanted him to.
The fiercest attack dog for JK was Max Cleland. He was on fire. I wish he had gotten more coverage for what he was saying and doing.
madame D:
This piece takes my breath away.
Pay attention, people: this is how they do it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/17/us/politics/17thinktank.html
And we have to be bleeping idiots not to sit there, take notes, and learn how to do it, too.
I mean, how many effective progressive public policy think tanks can *you* come up with for a list?
Right. That's what I thought.
National and especially state-level policy think tanks are incredibly powerful tools.
Their side has got a whole steamer trunk packed chock full of those tools, with more coming every day.
And if we're going to move our progressive agenda any further along than it is right now, then we need to have some of those tools in our toolboxes too.
So, then -- anybody out there ready to start school yet?
because we are all tool-using creatures,
Otter
Yeah, well, so much for the suspicious-sounding Rethuglican sea change slash come-to-kumbaya moment down in Washingtoon:
---------------
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration, trying to push through judicial nominations before Republicans lose control of the Senate, resubmitted six nominees deemed by Democrats too conservative for the federal bench.
Five nominees were the subject of an angry exchange in August when Democrats said their selection was a sop to the president's conservative base.
[snip]
"Democrats have asked the president to be bipartisan, but this is a clear slap in the face at our request," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Judiciary Committee. "For the sake of the country, we hope that this is an aberration because the president feels he must placate his hard-right base, rather than an indication of things to come."
Sen. Jon Cornyn, R-Texas, a vocal backer of many of Bush's judicial picks, said he thought it would be "very tough" to get the nominees through the Senate during the lame-duck session. But, he added, "Hope springs eternal."
---------------
and apparently so does obstinate stupidity,
Otter
Karen, you know, you touched on an interesting point about the media and the deep south that I always have thought was never examined.
It basically has to do with the 'ripple effect' of information that crisscrosses this nation. It has to do with how information works its way regionally across us. How they control it by region.
To make it simple I will just use us as the example pieces.
My thoughts on it has always been that from where I am sitting, you in DC, and those in say LA, are literally between me and the rest of the world.
The information you get is bound to be less filtered, more fresh, and more accurate than my sources because as it filters inward it becomes more nuanced, more obscure, and even more incorrect.
The media did not report the 'front porch talks' and he did not stay long enough here to let word travel, so down here, virtually no one knew they COULD interact with him that way.
On a regional level, they can not stop say New Yorkers from being hip... BUT, if they can throw on the filter for the other 80% then it works. That is exactly what is wrong with Kansas. and Oklahoma.
And, as you know places like Louisiana do not just sit deep into the belly of the nation, they also traditionally have extremely high illiteracy and poverty rates. It makes it that much easier to keep them ignorant of what is going on.
So in effect, the filter becomes so dense with confusion, even those trying to keep up are under wrong or false assumptions. The deeper into the country you go, the worse the quality of info.
The way to break this is to basically come and stay until you are sure the message has ...asorbed... into the population.
I know you remember my complaints about how they come here for 10 hours give 2 speeches and run like hell back east or west or anyplace that ain't here.
Had I ran that campighn I woulda based it out of Shreveport just for the simple fact from there you are staring right at Texas. The symbolisim alone would have stirred up so much movement the earth woulda shook.
The people here are hungry. They are hungry for news, they are hungry to be involved and after Katrina, some of them are literally in danger of starving. The spin is being controlled even now.
The ones controlling the information can only do so in a digital sense. They will never be able to stop sheer word of mouth and the lightening fast way it can overcome that filter.
You can only win it if you come down here and TAKE IT from them. The only way to do that is to rely on a better informed populace.
As long as that filter is on, most of us will never see or hear the full truth of things.
It works the same in reverse too.
Any news coming FROM here is going to be nuanced and riddled with deliberate inaccuracies by the time it filters outward to both coasts.
In effect, yall do not have a clue about what is happening here, right under your noses.
Divide an conquor.
Christy,
In all my years of working in various forms of the professional media business; of living in large cities where the big news happens as well as in small cities where it is only heard second-hand; of dealing with highly-educated people, uneducated people, professional people, blue-collar people, retired people and disabled people; of making my home in the deep south, the far west, and now here on the north coast --
I have never heard that inevitable but widely-misunderstood informational filtration effect analyzed more effectively or summarized more succinctly than you just did in your posts to this blog.
let's hope your analysis works its way on upstream from here,
Otter
Time for some laughs.
Michael Moore's pledge to conservatives.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?id=201
Primitive mentality
First yesterday the story about the town that has made it illegal to fly a flag alone that is not the US flag.
Now - mandatory gun ownership, to fight off refugees, and the Quakers don't care.
Friday, November 17, 2006
Ordinance asks citizens to keep a gun in home
Warning to Idaho town: 'We could get refugees' if a disaster strikes
By JESSE HARLAN ALDERMAN
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
GREENLEAF, Idaho -- After seeing the chaos of Hurricane Katrina, a city councilor in this tiny Idaho town founded by pacifist Quakers came up with a novel idea.
Ordinance 208, passed by the City Council on Tuesday, asks Greenleaf's 862 residents who do not object on religious or other grounds to keep a gun at home in case they are overrun by refugees from disasters such as Katrina.
"This is not an 'it'll never happen here' kind of thing," said Steven Jett, the ordinance's sponsor. "We could get refugees."
In this town about 35 miles west of Boise near the Oregon line -- where an estimated 80 percent of the adults already own guns -- the proposal hardly caused a stir: It went through weeks of public hearings and drew only mild criticism from the pastor of the town's Quaker meeting house.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/292716_gunlaw17.html
I've never found it scarier to go to 3rd world countries than to go to the "outback" here.
Christy
I would like to spend a bunch of time in the south and learn.
The stories I cited were from Nevada (flag limitations) and Idaho (gun issue).
The south gets stereotyped but so does where I live (latte-drinking liberals).
I am open to any kind of travel - if I don't end up on some "list"
My husband lost his position as a physics professor at a university in rural red because he spoke out against the war. He gave this speech to students and their parents at an awards banquet. I was there. The students voted for him to give the talk because he had the highest student reccs on campus. They knew he would be honest with them and speak from his experience, not academica speak. He gave the talk in the context of advising the graduating students to use their brains but to never forget to follow their hearts. In the course of the talk, he advised them to question authority. He talked about discrimination against homosexuality and likened it to discrimination against Africian Americans and women. Afterwards, the head of the academy ordered the students into lockdown, claiming my husband's talk could provoke a riot. (A riot of graduates and their parents, all dressed in suits and ties and dresses and heels?) The speaker the next day, the head of the scientific research facility in KC that funded the campaign in Missouri to put stem cell research on the ballot, refered to my husband's speech four times during his commencement speach. At the time, the "thank yous" to my husband were many. A local preacher wrote him a letter thanking him for mentoring the students in not only physics, but compassion. But he lost his position anyway. We decided not to sue and just get out of Dodge. We've been through a hell of a year.
I just now received another phone call from JBK. He is in the south. One of my husband's colleagues who runs a science education facility, a man who was furious when he learned what happened to JBK, just offered him a year-to-year contract to work from home designing science courses for other professors, among other things. If we were willing to move again, the offer would be for on-site employment. We'll think about it.
I realize there are people here who could care less about our situation, but I know there are many here who do care.
I'm going to leave and go meet him half-way from the airport. We're going to celebrate-- have lunch and go to a book store.
Small stuff in the big world of corruption and chaos and death and torture, but every win should be celebrated, right? Every win. And this was a win for a liberal who spoke his heart and paid the price and then got lucky enough to be rewarded with work that will help students in the future. Too much information? Probably. But damn, you know? I'm happy.
And Madame, your blog is beautiful and the story you told needs to be spread around, imo. I will do my part to spread it around.
:-)
Can't remember all the details of this, though I'm sure they can be called up by way of The Google if anyone's curious. But...
Back in the 1980's, when I was living & working in Atlanta, a small and somewhat reactionary town that had been completely surrounded by their super-sized neighbor to the southeast (not unlike what's been happening in the area around Boise, from what they tell me) passed a civic ordinance required that all its able-bodied residents keep at the ready a working firearm and ammunition in their homes.
The rest of the country thought this was preposterous and all fergit-hell rednecky and all that, of course. And not just the uppity-hip big coastal cities, either -- a similarly small town somewhere in, I seem to recall, the upper midwest or thereabouts promptly passed a matching civic ordinance requiring all its able-bodied residents to keep at the ready a fully-functional set of fishing tackle in their homes.
The original must-own-guns ordinance was immediately thrown out in court, of course, and the residents of that small Atlanta suburban town ended up being the laughingstock of the nation for years to come.
Seems to me like what these people up in Idaho need now is another civic ordinance requiring them to keep at the ready a complete readable copy of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in their homes, not just the Second Amendment.
and I say that as a believer in the actual second amendment too,
Otter
Ah, yup, The Google is your friend. So is The Wikipedia, with this excerpt from its entry on Kennesaw, Georgia::
"Kennesaw has the nickname of 'Gun Town, USA' due to a city ordinance passed in 1982 [Sec 34-1a] that requires every head of household to maintain a firearm with ammunition. It was passed partly in response to a 1981 handgun ban in Morton Grove, Illinois. Kennesaw's law was amended in 1983 to exempt those who conscientiously object to owning a firearm, convicted felons, those who cannot afford a firearm, and those with a mental or physical disability that would prevent them from owning a firearm. It mentions no penalty for its violation. According to the Kennesaw Historical Society, no one has ever been charged under the law."
so there ya go and ain't the internets wonderful,
Otter
Posted by: Otter at November 17, 2006 12:43 PM
Gee, Ottter, ...
Umm, Thanks!
And KJ,
I am sorry about your husband, but honestly, it was worth getting fired over.
To speak the truth directly into the faces of those that need it most, will always be worth it.
C ain't lyin'.
Last night when I said Dean wouldn't have the stigma of the anti-war thing, I was referring to the war of my generation- Vietnam. That's what cost Kerry the election, not his stance on Iraq, though his standing by his vote on Iraq didn't help a bit. Dean didn't go to 'Nam, but he also didn't protest it later. It's the Vocal Protesters that a lot of vets still resent. I know there's disagreement on that,but not from very many who are of my generation who are either married to or know a lot of Vietnam vets. And, as far as the Edwards thing goes, Christy and I might just be on the same side in that one. Edwards could have taken some Southern states where Kerry never had a chance. But, that election is over. I'm looking forward to Edwards running in '08. He's the best orater we have in our party (with apologies to Barack Obama, who I think comes in a close second.) Maybe the two could run together- the sex appeal alone would definitely sweep them into office :-)
Gee, if even me and her can agree on John Edwards, imagine the unifying effect he would have on the nation.
Him and Obama would be UNSTOPPABLE.
And can someone PLEASE shove Hillary in a closet until 2009...?
Just thought I would ask.
Part of the Friday news dump, with hope that no one will notice...
U.S. Announces Troop Deployments to Iraq
By LOLITA C. BALDOR
The Associated Press
Friday, November 17, 2006; 2:25 PM
WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon announced Friday that 57,000 U.S. troops, including five combat brigades, have been told to deploy to Iraq early next year _ a move that will maintain current force levels there.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld signed the deployment orders for about 20,000 soldiers from active duty Army brigades based in North Carolina, Georgia, Washington, Kansas and Italy. Another 10,000 reserves and 27,000 active duty troops are scheduled to go to Iraq in smaller units.
--snip--
In a written statement, the Pentagon said the "U.S. force rotations will be tailored based upon changes in the security situation. Iraqi security forces continue to develop capability and assume responsibility for security in Iraq."
The announcement comes as some Democrats, who are poised to take control of the House and Senate, continue to press for substantial reduction of U.S. troops in Iraq, and a timetable for that drawdown.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/17/AR2006111700863.html
Linda
I think basic training instills a sense of the mission and so it creates cognitive dissonance when some vets see protesters of war and also if they start to question the terms under which they went to war. It's also difficult to admit that American can lose a war, as in Vietnam, or potentially in Iraq. John Kerry went out of a feeling of duty but had some questions before he went there, saw some things he couldn't justify, came back and tried to do something about it. Next war - same process. Tried to work within the system and go along with consensus and available evidence, things weren't working and didn't add up, he started to speak out and some people couldn't deal with it. When his thought process over time doesn't parallel theirs, they tend to rationalize, and it has hurt him politically. Changes of heart are very hard to explain in simplistic Bushian terms.
Edwards wasn't much younger - he's my age. He was preparing to go to college, but I knew plenty his age who served. I'm glad he didn't though and same goes for my husband.
Dean didn't protest but skiied, so it's possible to argue he wasn't that much different than Bush who was AWOL stateside - didn't want to go to 'Nam and get blown away. Not saying I blame either of them or anyone who didn't serve.
I don't think it's anyone's duty to get blown away or wounded physically or psychically without knowing why or being able to question.
Communism and Terrorism have been twin bogeymen but always the soldiers war over resources.
Proof of lack of ethics of corporate CEOs - they ignore misery such as in Darfur but have no qualms about taking hundreds of millions off the top as the "flip" companies for profit without putting money into them, which then results in company bankruptcies and layoffs. (I've listened to a week of broadcasts about what "private equity" companies like Carlyle do and it's pure greed - why die for them)
Speaking of John Edwards, he was on Fresh Air on Wednesday night. He's nice to listen to!
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6491310
Had some very gracious things to say when asked about the JK "botched" joke, at the end of the interview.
JE/BO.....interesting!
I JUST received this in an e-mail:
On Nov 16, 2006, at 6:36 PM, Fernando Suarez del Solar wrote:
On this day, the sixteenth of November, in the year 1982 my son Jesus Alberto was born. Yes, it has been 24 years, 24 years since I experienced the greatest joy of my life seeing him born, his tiny face wrinkled and smiling. And as the days passed I saw him become a beautiful child with a warm heart and gentle ways. His first year passed, and I recall playing baseball with him when the bat was taller than he was. I remember him laughing, barely able to walk, but even then he took the bat in his hands and tried to hit the plastic ball. The years flew by and he became a young man, he excelled in school, and met his girlfriend at San Pascual High School in Escondido.
When he joined the Marines, he was barely 17 years old. He had already begun his own family with his wife Sain and their beautiful son Erick. But life had prepared a destiny for him very different than what he had dreamed. He was deployed to Iraq where the invasion began on March 20, 2003. Jesus was only 20 years old on March 27 when his life was cut short by a cluster bomb made in the USA. He died and so did his dreams, leaving a loving father alone and with only his memories of a wonderful son.
Today, the sixteenth of November of 2006, instead of celebrating his 24th birthday, we cry because we miss him while I, his father, tremble with grief because I cannot embrace him and give him a birthday kiss. Today I say, Happy Birthday, Jesus. Today, I weep.
***
There are so many micro-cultures in this country; so many voices to listen to and honor. Thank you Christy for yours and thank you everyone for the ability to look past the limits of the fences we build around ourselves, and to hear all of those voices.
If you want to respond to Fernando's note, here is the website he set up:
http://www.guerreroazteca.org/
Posted by: madame defarge at November 17, 2006 02:41 PM
One of the units being deployed is the 173rd...
Our best friend's kid is in it.
He has been in Afgan once and Iraq twice.
He wants out but the stop-loss is preventing him from leaving the service.
His parents are really upset about it.
We are his god-parents so we have close ties to the entire family.
Read about attacking Iran and North Korea
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/us-official-says-preempt_b_34344.html
[snip]
Bill Kristol, Michael Ledeen, Richard Perle, Charles Krauthammer, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and the others -- including everyone in the Vice President's office -- should be run out of town. They should be openly derided and mocked as the grotesque failures they are.
Yet I see them daily on Fox News Channel telling us how easy attacking Iran will be. How it will not require ground troops. How the population of Iran is looking forward to having us attack their leaders and their country. How Iran is a real and gathering threat. I've seen this movie before. And it sucked.
Posted by: battlebob at November 17, 2006 04:16 PM
Our prayers are with your God son and his family, and all the troops who are being sent back.
I hate this damn war.
Posted by: battlebob at November 17, 2006 04:16 PM
I'm so sorry, battlebob. I agree wholeheartedly with Carol: I hate this damn war too, and even more so when it affects people I know.
Neocons Blame Bush for Iraq Fiasco
by Helen Thomas
Richard Perle should be tarred and feathered then sent to abu Ghraib for a life of continuous waterboarding and glow-stick testing.
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1117-34.htm
[snip]
And get this: Perle, former chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee, blamed Bush. "The decisions did not get made that should have been made," Perle said. "At the end of the day, you have to hold the president responsible," he said. In retrospect, Perle said, if he had the chance to do it again, he would not have advocated the invasion of Iraq.
Rose said he had expected to encounter disappointment among the neocons but instead found them to be despairing and angry over the incompetence of the Bush administration they once saw as "their brightest hope."
Bush compares U.S. wars in Vietnam, Iraq. "We'll succeed," Bush added, "unless we quit." In other words, "More people will die needlessly, until someone impeaches me or otherwise forces me to stop putting human lives in front of bullets and bombs in a failed war that I started with lies."
did he really say "until someone impeaches me" and then went on to say we won the war in Vietnam?and this from a man that avoided service.
"It's the Vocal Protesters that a lot of vets still resent. I know there's disagreement on that,but not from very many who are of my generation who are either married to or know a lot of Vietnam vets."
but on this point, Linda I can't leave this comment unchallenged b/c I was a Vietnam war protestor in 1972 at the LBJ Library, I am your generation and have zero regrets for my stance then and my borther in law was a helicopter pilot in Nam and quite a few of my college friends were sent there, so it is far from unanimous that we all supported V.N. and in fact that is revisionist history.
rereading that quote of Bush it sounds like someone embellished the word impeach, but I did hear him make a reference to our victory in Vietnam.
"I don't think it's anyone's duty to get blown away or wounded physically or psychically without knowing why or being able to question it." DiAnne
Actually it was the duty of an American soldier in the Vietnam era to get blown away, physically or psychologically wounded, and not to question it. That's what the draft was about, and that's what all the military rules about not questioning the judgement of your superior officers was about. Those were the only acceptable standards of conduct back then. If you questioned the war or questioned war in general, you could apply, but not necessarily be granted, conscientious objector status, and you'd be placed in some support position out of harm's way. But you'd also be ridiculed and reviled by all the other guys who were on the line, and even after you left the military, if you questioned why our soldiers died, you weren't well accepted in this part of the country. I know we come from different places- the west was a hotbed of war protest, but there was never a SINGLE anti-war protest in my part of the country that I can remember. And if there had been, a lot of the locals would have attacked the war protestors. They just would not have been safe. It amazes me sometimes, 150 years after the Civil War, that the South is still the strongest area in the country when it comes to absolute, unbending, unquestioning loyalty to country, but it is. And, as I've said before, no one wanted to question "why" back then, because, if you'd just seen your buddies head blown off by a grenade, you really, really HAD to believe that it was for a good reason. When JK came home and even dared to say that there might not have been a reason for the 50 thousand Americans who had lost their lives over there, it was not a popular thing to do. For what it's worth, it isn't just JK who will carry the stigma of being right about that war to his grave (and it is a stigma to Vietnam Vets), but also Jane Fonda, Muhammed Ali, Benjamin Spock (who already has carried it there) and many others. My dad hated Ali until he died back in 1978, because he said Ali was a coward and a traiter. ( My dad, btw, left the Army when WWII started, because he'd served out his time, and there was a war brewing. He did join the merchant marines though, so he was in harm's way during the war, but not like the guys on the beaches of Normandy.) When I bought a Benjamin Spock book on child rearing after I had my first baby, I had to hide it away, because anyone who came into my house let me know very quickly that he was nothing but a rotten traiter to his country. And don't even mention Hanoi Jane, whose political views have changed 180 degrees since then, but who will never in her lifetime redeem herself to Vietnam Vets. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. At any rate- the old saying "ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do or die," still rings true to a lot of vets. The times are a'changing, that's true, but logically, if everyone asked the reason they had to fignt, there might just be no war at all. And where would we be then :-) Not funny, I know, but psychologically, veterans have to believe their sacrifice meant something, or they'll go crazy with the memories of their dead comrades. That's why old veterans bond at the VA clinics- they honor each other for having served and for having fought even though they might NOT have known why, and even though it might NOT have been logical because, as Ike once said, no soldier ever died for patriotism, or for the flag. Soldiers die for their friends. Once the guys were in Nam, they didn't look for reasons to be there. And now that it's over, they don't want anyone to tell them that there was no reason to be there. Because even if they weren't there for the good of their country, they were there for their unit and their buddies. And they looked on JK as disloyal to that ethic, even though he was, probably, the most loyal of all to it, since he was trying to save their lives. Human emotions are pretty complicated- reason doesn't enter into everything. At any rate- I did think it was funny this morning when I heard that Bush was going to Vietnam, and using it as a justification for continuing our war in Iraq. Does he really plan to say that we have to stay in Iraq because if we leave now it will be a "total disaster," (like Vietnam) and does he really plan to say that in front of the leaders of Vietnam??????? And if he does that, what will their reaction be? And if Vietnam is a total disaster to this day, why is Georgy going over there to court them? Questions, questions- too much to ponder.
Linda,
Not sure I agree with everything you said.
There were many protests of the VN war in the ‘60s. I know because I marched in them. The Democrat ’68 convention in Chicago was a giant war protest. I had just gotten discharged from my forgettable stint in the Army and it was very surreal to me.
Even though I spent only 72 hours in Nam, I was technically a veteran and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (started in 1967) allowed me to join. I felt rather insignificant with true battle-hardened heroes. They welcomed me as a comrade in arms. We marched in streets. We visited wounded soldiers. We were general pains in the asses whenever possible. I never heard anything bad from any veteran.
Which was why the recent flap over Kerry’s 1971 testimony surprised me so much. I saw his presentation with other vets and we cheered. He got it all right. The abomination by the smear vets that were supported by vets attacking a vet whose only crime was trying to bring the troops was/is totally evil. I do not know what happened to these guys. I visit the VFW Hall in Caledonia and there are vets who hate Kerry for speaking out 35 years ago. When I mention he was trying to save your life they get really mad. They really get mad when I say he is trying to save your kids life. Maybe the smear vets struck a nerve dealing with the horrible nightmare that was Vietnam and is now Iraq.
Unfortunately, too much of the protest was directed toward those who fought the war and too little protest was directed toward those who sent people to die. As most of you know, I spent three days in Cook County jail for beating the crap out of a protester who spit on my wounded friend as he was carried through O’Hara airport. His parents were with my friend and I went berserk.
Linda
During the Vietnam war, I didn't live in the West yet. I was born in the West but raised in the upper midwest til my mid-20s. In South Dakota where I lived, we had antiwar protests, believe it or not, but it was at the most liberal university. My husband had a low lottery number and it was a combination of seizures, a letter from George McGovern, preparation to be a C.O. if all else failed & the fact that his lottery number just missed being called - or he would have really had a bad problem. His dad & my dad were both WW2 vets and they didn't agree with us, but they weren't really confrontational about it.
What always amazed me was how the Native Americans were so disproportionately represented in all wars. After European descendants decimated them and took their land, occupied it, they would still fight in all the wars - to be warriors and for the honor they would receive at pow wows.
When I was in Las Vegas I met a police officer from Detroit (African American) who had been in Iraq during the Gulf War and had many friends and acquaintances in Iraq and Afghanistan now. He'd been almost killed AFTER the war, in the line of duty. Coming that close to death, he thought alot about the worth of human life. He concluded that war is not worth it.
By the way, I just had a child come up to me who was carrying a red, white and blue rooster. He looked up at me and said, "Do you know that if you insult the flag you are insulting the Homeland?"
When you mention the strong loyalty to country in the south, I imagine it's not so different than in other parts of the country or world. I keep thinking it's travel and education that has the potential to broaden. When I call myself a world citizen first, I know there are those who would ridicule me or be disgusted. I think I started to feel that way when I found a Geography book when I was a kid - it had stories about the Seven Wonders of the World. One was the Hanging Gardens of Babylon at the junction of the Tigris and Euphrates (Cradle of Civilization).
Its truly amazing that 30 years after the end of the Vietnam war that there are still such emotional scars in this country and even here at the dcp. NBC was actually running a story tonight about the economic development there with a billion dollar Intel plant having just opened. Vietnamese friends that I have speak little of the war and yet Americans apparently still harbor a great deal of resentment of those years. Perhaps it is a generational experience that we share but what is even more disturbing is what little grasp that Bush and many of our young people seem to have of these still raw emotions and his callous willingness to stoke these emotions to somehow justify his inept prosecution of this war. Once again proving to be the Great Divider.
As far as Bush's VN trip...
From CNN...
"It's just going to take a long period of time for the ideology that is hopeful -- and that is an ideology of freedom -- to overcome an ideology of hate," Bush said after having lunch with Australian Prime Minister John Howard, one of America's strongest allies in Iraq.
"We'll succeed," Bush added, "unless we quit."
Bush is telling his hosts the US should have stayed and killed more of you.
Of course, Bush was to busy polishing the silver on his crack pipe to notice VN was going on.
Confronting photo Mme D and great speech too. Thanks. I'm not through reading yet, so not much to say. B-Bob - thanks for Michael Moore's pledge and I really want to sign it but I guess I can't. Drat. I should make the comments as they occur to me rather than reading right through. Till later.
Wendy
Bubba,
I was in the microchip business in the '90s and every chip fab maker waslining up to build in VN. They are a perfect target to exploit.
Government controlled economy and workplace; cheap labor; cheap startup costs. We would train the new workers. We were waiting for US government approval.
They would do anything and offer anything to close the deal. Pollution ... not a problem; labor problems...not a problem...permits and codes...you gotta be kidding.
My father was born crippled, severely club footed.
When he was 2, 6 and ten, the Shriners broke every bone in his legs and feet just to reset them, and he wore Forrest Gump braces until he was 14.
He was also not just an only son but an only child. For many reasons he never was in danger of being called up.
I remember other kids in school used to make fun of my father because all of their dads were vets.
I will never forget one girl called my father a coward and I was making her pay for it when her father broke us up. Of course he was mad at me for jacking up his kid, but I will never forget what he said to me as he walked me to the door.
He said, "Be glad your father was born crippled. He was lucky."
I went home that day and just stared at my dad for a long time.
To this day, I know that man taught me something profound, I was just never sure what.
Its now obvious what the single Democratic Presidential message needs to be for the 2008 campaign.
Healing America after 8 years of absolute division, at home and abroad. Whoever can best deliver that message and move this country forward in 2009, should be our nominee.
Posted by: Linda Enterkin at November 17, 2006 06:16 PM
Linda, you described my brother-in-law, a native of Indiana. And yet both of parents, one Dem, one Repb, were against the war from the start. They moved heaven and earth to help keep their only son in school to earn a deferment. My husband had a low number, he was rejected, as was my other brother-in-law. Lucky, lucky, lucky and they knew it at the time. But my oldest sister's husband? He still believes GWB is a hero and John Kerry is a traitor.
There are people who will go to their graves with their blinders willfully on tight. That war was a disease on this country and if there is any benefit to be had from that, it is that it seems our country as a whole (a majority at least) is now is distraught over Iraq. I may not want to let bygones be bygones to family members who supported that war with all they knew about Vietnam, but I've come to the decision that I have to. Or we'll have another collective disease with Iraq. And there is enough individual disease now as it is.
Germany is going to charge Rumsfled, Gonzolos and... I've already forgotten.
BTW, hub said re: the grants that will be funding his work, that we are to thank "Uncle Bill, not Uncle Sam." Of course I bit and asked why and he said, "Because these grants are part of multi-year project Bill Clinton awarded to the non-profit foundation." Uncle Bill. I don't like to think of Bill C as an uncle. LOL Bubba Bill, okay.
Christy
That guy was right. War is hell. The poor fight for the rich to get richer.
When I was in high school, another girl and I were a debate team and we used a very controversial argument for rural South Dakota.
We argued that unilateral military intervention in Vietnam was illogical, because there was no unilateral Communist threat. We detailed the differences between Marxism, Leninism and Maoism and talked about natural animosity and competition between Russia and China and historic possessiveness over Mongolia.
We'd debate these pairs of guys with their shoeboxes full of US News and World Report quotes and their jaws would drop. We usually lost.
To this day I think we had a good argument. We were basically disputing the "domino theory" whereby if North Vietnam fell to Communism, we all would.
Nowdays it's the "flypaper theory" - we need to fight the terrorists over in Iraq or they'll come over here and fight us. As I cited earlier from American Progress report, Afghanistan is amping up as a terrorist training ground again, with Taleban working in concert with Al Quaida. & according to the UN, while we are focussed on Iraq and to some extent Afghanistan, Sudan is becoming another terrorist training ground, with the help of extremists from quite a few countries.
Not only is what we're doing in Iraq not helping but I don't think fighting terrorism is why we went there - I think it was an excuse. Bush wanted to settle old scores, even though his father had decided not to.
& blasphemous as it is to say this, more people are saying it all the time - Saddam in his own way had things more under control than they are now. He killed with weapons we had given him when we used him as a proxy against Iran much as Bin Laden & the Mujahedin were used as a proxy against USSR.
"To this day, I know that man taught me something profound, I was just never sure what."
~~Posted by: Christy at November 17, 2006 08:30 PM
It sounds to me as if your father found strength by dealing directly with his wound. The ultimate act of transformation. Lemons from lemonade. We really are the creators (or co-creators) of our lives. Anyway, just a guess. Profound, yes.
I am not a psychologist buy I think to VN vets, Kerry is a symbol for all VN war protestors. They see Kerry telling Congress what they did not hear Kerry say about war crimes. They hear Kerry accuse them. They do not hear what Kerry really said; that this is what vets told him happened. He is a symbol of every long-haired draft dodger who ever threw a bag of dog crap at a soldier in uniform; or spit on a wounded vet. Kerry became a symbol of all the stuff dumped on people who should have not been in that spot to begin with. There wasn’t much Kerry could do. It was up to the veterans to support him. Not enough did; or rather; their voices were not loud enough.
I am in the weapons design business and almost all of my coworkers are VN vets. Each one hates Kerry. Mention Kerry and they mention their experiences with protests and protestors that had nothing to do with Kerry. I am really angry at them and really sad for them that their lives are still so messed up.
Posted by: DiAnne at November 17, 2006 08:39 PM
DiAnne, off-topic, but I wrote an editorial for my high school newspaper advocating legal prostitution. It was a Catholic high school. (They didn't print it, of course, and I lost the bid to be editor.)
I'm sure more troops and money will go to BOTH Iraq and Afghanistan - was it worth it? Hell
Keep hearing - we have to train Iraqi forces. Now - we have to train Afghani forces (only the Brits and Canadians are having to do alot of it).
Some estimates say we'll be out in about 15 years. Vietnam war was about a decade, wasn't it? & the French were there before we were? Iran/Iraq war was about 8 years or so human "waves" -
UN chief: Nato cannot defeat Taliban by force
http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1951222,00.html
Official says alliance failing in Afghanistan as Blair admits Iraq is a 'disaster'
Nato "cannot win" the fight against the Taliban alone and will have to train Afghan forces to do the job, the UN's top official in the country warned yesterday.
"At the moment Nato has a very optimistic assessment. They think they can win the war," warned Tom Koenigs, the diplomat heading the UN mission in Afghanistan. "But there is no quick fix."
In forthright comments which highlight divisions between international partners as Nato battles to quell insurgency, Mr Koenigs said that training the fledgling Afghan national army to defeat the Taliban was crucial. "They [the ANA] can win. But against an insurgency like that, international troops cannot win."
He spoke to the Guardian as Tony Blair came the closest so far to admitting the invasion of Iraq had been disastrous.
When Sir David Frost, interviewing the prime minister for al-Jazeera TV, suggested that western intervention in Iraq had "so far been pretty much of a disaster", Mr Blair responded: "It has. But, you see, what I say to people is, 'why is it difficult in Iraq?' It's not difficult because of some accident in planning, it's difficult because there's a deliberate strategy - al Qaida with Sunni insurgents on one hand, Iranian-backed elements with Shia militias on the other - to create a situation in which the will of the majority for peace is displaced by the will of the minority for war."
Downing Street tried to play down the apparent slip last night. A spokesman said: "I think that's just the way in which he answers questions. His views on Iraq are documented in hundreds of places, and that [the belief that it is a disaster] is not one of them." However, Sir Menzies Campbell, leader of the Lib Dems, commented: "At long last, the enormity of the decision to take military action against Iraq is being accepted by the prime minister. Surely parliament and the British people who were given a flawed prospectus are entitled to an apology?"
British commanders have argued that UK troops should be withdrawn from Iraq to allow the military to focus on Afghanistan. But Nato commanders on the ground have pleaded for 2,000 more troops, helicopters and armoured vehicles, to little effect. Last night Nato secretary-general Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said countries should lift restrictions on what their troops could do."My plea to governments would be: 'Please help us in lifting those caveats as much as possible ... because in Afghanistan it is a problem."
Des Browne, the defence secretary, made clear yesterday that the future of the alliance was now bound up with the future of Afghanistan. "The Afghan people, our own people and the Taliban are watching us. If we are indecisive or divided, the Taliban will be strengthened, just as all of the others despair," he said.
Attacks have increased fourfold this year and 3,700 people have died, mostly in the south. The US has made 2,000 air strikes since June, against 88 in Iraq.
Last week Acbar, an umbrella group of Afghan and international aid agencies, said the crisis highlighted the "urgent need" for a rethink of military, poverty-reduction and state-building policies.
(read the rest at the link)
Be on guard for lies.
"& blasphemous as it is to say this, more people are saying it all the time - Saddam in his own way had things more under control than they are now. He killed with weapons we had given him when we used him as a proxy against Iran much as Bin Laden & the Mujahedin were used as a proxy against USSR."
~~Posted by: DiAnne at November 17, 2006 08:39 PM
My grasp of history is sketchy, but the countries created by the "lines in the sand" after WWII seemed to be held together with iron fists and dictator rule. Wasn't the original problem in Vietnam due to what happened re: their borders after WWII? Must google that. At any rate, we haven't come up with a solution. Serbia? Anything learned there we can use?
Battlebob
So curious if all those Vietnam Vets love sending their kids to die in Iraq & Afghanistan.
Who wants to be the last to die for a lie?
Posted by: battlebob at November 17, 2006 08:45 PM
There is currently a troll at Liberal Values saying just this. :-| I am at a loss with what to say to him anymore, although Ron as usual is doing a good job of countering spin with fact.
I know a Vietnam vet who actually likes Kerry. Even in my limited sample, I know that's rare.
Yeah Cristy..I remember...the Domino Theory. If VN falls, the entire SE will fall...Australia will fall. We’ll be fighting Communists in Main Street, USA. The irony of it is our parents bought into it hook, line and sinker…at first.
My Dad is a true WWII superhero. Combat ribbons from Europe, the Mediterranean and the Pacific theaters. He was Mr. SuperPatriot. But he soon figured out that VN was a civil war and our government caused the strife. This was a sewer. When I was drafted, my Dad said head to Canada. He even volunteered to drive and give me expense money. I told him I would serve. Our family never missed a war since before the French and Indian War. We go. He was very active in protesting the VN War during and after my service time.
DiAnne,
To Vietnam, their struggle for independence lasted 10,000 days (30 years).
They fought the Japanese, Chinese, French and the Americans.
Kj,
Ron must be fighting with Michael; who is dumber then a door stop.
Ron is wasting his time; ban him and move on.
http://www.country-studies.com/vietnam/world-war-ii-and-japanese-occupation.html
A brief history via google of the beginning of the conflicts in Vietnam after WWII.
BB, I'll give Ron your recommendation. Michael lost me when he referred to the Abu Graib pictures as "dumb."
Some people are born with a rectal-cranial inversion
Ah, a medical reason. That makes sense of Michael.
BB, my father was in WWII, but was stationed in the US and never in harms way. He was opposed to the war in Vietnam from the start, no way his only son was going. My mother agreed. (Rare political tranquility!) We also had foreign university students that we mentored or welcomed or whatever it was called in the 1960's. They came to dinner on Sundays and spent holidays with us. They were both from Vietnam. One of them ended up fighting with the North. My mom cried when we heard that he'd been killed.
A lot of folks stop being cheerleaders when their kids have to go.
I dunno...if the war keeps going there should be a draft...everybody is eligible.
The war would be over the next day.
When my sibs divied up my parents household, they gave me the little plate and stand that Bao (??) brought from Vietnam. I remember the pictures they showed us of the "Paris of Indochina." Beautiful country. And we bombed them to smithereens, just like Iraq, over false intel and false threats and an unexamined sense of fear.
That is what my husband says as well. Although he isn't all that comfortable with the position... it's the only way he thinks we can drive the reality home.
Over the years, I worked with Vietnamese who immigrated here. Most were picked up at sea in small boats. Horrible conditions.
All have assimilated and are a welcome addition to our society.
It is very moving when they talk about their struggle to leave VN and be free.
But will people come here from Iraq in search of "freedom?" Somehow I don't think many will. Their vision of freedom is "Freedom on the march" aka stomping all the hell over their lives. Al Quaida must be needing more copiers to keep up with the demand for sign-up sheets.
Chertoff says U.S. threatened by international law
By David Morgan
Reuters
Friday, November 17, 2006; 6:31 PM
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A top Bush administration official on Friday said the European Union, the United Nations and other international entities increasingly are using international law to challenge U.S. powers to reject treaties and protect itself from attack.
"International law is being used as a rhetorical weapon against us," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, a former federal appellate judge, said in a speech to the Federalist Society, a conservative policy group.
Chertoff cited members of the European Parliament in particular as harboring an "increasingly activist, left-wing and even elitist philosophy of law" at odds with American practices and interests.
But he said the same pattern could be seen in the policies of the United Nations and other international bodies.
"What we see here is a vision of international law that if taken aggressively would literally strike at the heart of some of our basic fundamental principals -- separation of powers, respect for the Senate's ability to ratify treaties and ... reject treaties," Chertoff said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/17/AR2006111701395_pf.html
Crying Shame
Its such a tired game
Will it ever stop
How will this all play out
Upside out of my mouth
By now we should know
How to communicate instead of coming to blows
We're on a roll
And there ain't no stopping us now
We're burning under control
Isn't it strange how
We're all burning under the same sun
By now we say its a war for peace
Its the same old game
But do we really want to play?
We could close our eyes its still there
We could say its us against them
We can try but nobody wins
Gravity has got a hold on us all
We try to put it out
But its a growing flame
Using fear as fuel
Burning down our name
And it wont take too long
Cause words are burning same
And who we gunna blame now?
And oh, Its such a crying crying crying shame
Its such a crying crying crying shame
Its such a crying crying crying shame, shame, shame
By now
Its starting to show
A number of people are numbers who aint coming home
I can close my eyes its still there
Close my mind be alone
Close my heart and not care
But gravity has got a hold on us all
Its a terrific price to pay
But in the true sense of the word
Are we using what we've learned?
In the true sense of the word
Are we losing what we were?
Its such a tired game
Will it ever stop?
Is not for me to say
And is it in our blood?
Or is it just our fate?
And how will this all play out
Upside out of my mouth
And who we gunna blame?
On and on
Its such a crying crying crying shame
Its such a crying crying crying shame
Jack Johnson
Posted by: Christy at November 17, 2006 09:31 PM
This is why I can't figure out why no one is talking about the possible pending action in Germany against Rummy and Gonzolas and the other guy. ???
Thanks Christy...
Chertoff is really nuts...
"Chertoff said the U.S. Supreme Court decision on Guantanamo prisoner Salim Ahmed Hamdan that required the United States to treat detainees under Geneva Conventions standards showed international law's entry into the U.S. domain."
I hate to tell him but we signed this agreement in 1949. These laws didn't just show up like my inlaws.
Ah well, so many subjects, so little time. It's difficult to decide what to focus on from one day to the next. It is encouraging to me that Germany plans to file suit, although from what I can gather, they tried this before and we bullied them out of going forward. I don't think we have much bully power left internationally, at least, I hope.
"What we see here is a vision of international law that if taken aggressively would literally strike at the heart of some of our basic fundamental principals -- separation of powers, respect for the Senate's ability to ratify treaties and ... reject treaties," Chertoff said."
I was particulary struck by this paragraph and phrase "... separation of powers" HA!
Well, goodnight, Gracie. 5 am comes early. :-)
Great thread, Madame and everyone.
Kj,
Read Joan Chittister of National Catholic Reporter
http://ncrcafe.org/node/677
She reports what is going on in Damascus with Iraq refugees.
It is not for the weak of heart.
You may have to register through
http://nationalcatholicreporter.org/fwis/
night all
bb, got it, thanks. Will read tomorrow morning. Don't want to attrack nightmares tonight. BTW, side note, my husband met several members of Opus Dia (sp?) this week. He has no knowledge of Catholism except my horror stories of the nuns, but he came home with a baseball cap from the publisher of their material. ??!!! (very nice cap with a leather strap in back.)
Everyone has stories. :-) Our stories heal us and each other. Stories are powerful, especially when shared. Good dreams and good transforming stories to everyone.
One more thing...
Another petition to urge the US to talk to Iran instead of bombing them...
http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=action.wnw&item=wnw_main
Yall should see this
Clear Evidence 2006 Congressional Elections Hacked
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_rob_kall_061117_clear_evidence_2006_.htm
Check this out, we have a local congressman that is pulling a Santorum.
I voted against this repellican but he won it anyway. Check it out..
"Unsuccessful congressional candidate Patti Cox filed suit on Thursday saying McCrery does not meet the residency requirements to represent this area.
Cox, a Democrat, claims in her lawsuit she filed herself that McCrery does not live here. She wants to disqualify McCrery and let the second- and third-place finishers -- the Rev. Artis Cash and Cox, respectively -- compete in a second election.
McCrery said that while he no longer owns a house here, he still meets the residency requirements to serve in Congress.
McCrery in 2004 considered not seeking re-election, saying he was torn between his job and his family, which was living in Shreveport. He decided to run again but sold his house in southeast Shreveport and rents part of a house on Monrovia Street. His wife and sons moved to Washington, D.C.
McCrery said the lawsuit is groundless.
"We have been living at an address in Shreveport, paying rent, and it's easily established any number of ways," McCrery said. "She's just wrong in her assertion in the petition."
http://www.ktbs.com/news/local/4681536.html
News shows Sunday:
1. Fox News Sunday: JOHN KERRY
2. Meet the Press: Senators-elect Jon TESTER and Jim WEBB
3.This Week with George Stephanopoulos: John MCCAIN & Steny HOYER
4. Face the Nation: Lindsey Graham and Charles Rangel
5. CSPAN Road to the White House: Chris Dodd
kj- I'm not so sure I'm thrilled by the international court's actions against Rummy, no matter how correct they may be. The American people have already taken action against this administration- in the voting booths only last week. Rummy's gone, he's lost his job, and right now, no one is feeling any sympathy for him. But if a court outside the US begins proceedings against a former member of a US administration, you might find a groundswell of sympathy for Rummy and for the administration growing here in the US, and that's not what I want in the run up to the '08 elections. A lot of Americans aren't interested in any court outside this country trying one of our citizens- they're wrong, of course, but that's the way they feel. I think that history will judge Rummy in the long run, and his reputation is already ruined forever. I don't want to see him become a martyr, or to have this become an issue in the next election- you know, those "democrat liberals" don't mind one of our own being seized by some foreigh power and punished, when all he was doing was just trying to defend America the best way he knew how. I can hear Rush Limbaugh beating his drum about it right now- Rummy is an AMERICAN- we can't let those foreigners have him- we have to Rally around the flag. It could be a very sticky situation politically. I'd just rather see it lie dormant, or at least be tabled until after '08. And then it should be OUR government that does something about it, to let the world know we are not like him. That's my opinion on it anyway.
The Age
Misha Schubert, Hanoi, Vietnam
November 18, 2006
"I understand Hicks has lawyers that may be trying to appeal certain aspects of the law we passed," Mr Bush said. "If that is the case, he is having his day in court in an interesting way. But I believe Hicks deserves a trial."
Note the absence of the word "fair". "the law we passed" - the law we made up? the law that doesn't have rules? And in the same article he has pledged American troops to be there till the end! The end of what? The world? A war? The middle east? The growing number of enemies of America?
I watch the Journal every day - right now actually. It's a German world news program. There's been no mention of Rumsfeld on this program that I've seen. I wouldn't be disappointed though. I'm sorry folks - but as far as I'm concerned Americans are just as responsible to international law as bin Laden is. It's the attitude that America can make its own rules that really makes the rest of us cringe!!! Why should America be the only country on the planet to have WOMD - masses thereof!! And who has killed more people on the planet and ruined the lives of billions more through radiation caused deformities? Sorry folks - you've just lost me. And I thought this blog would give the rest of us some hope. If your country is run by a maniac - get rid of the maniac - give him to bin Laden - now, there would be justice! Whatever. Just don't say, "How dare they prosecute our noble Rummy!" Oh .......what can I say?
What? No more political ads?
Blue Tiger Democrats pushing civic involvement rather than TV ads
http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/news-39/1163787296263780.xml&storylist=newsmichigan
Senate Democrats Plan Overhaul of Military Tribunals Bill
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111706Z.shtml
Gearing up for a major clash with the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress, several key Senate Democrats are planning to overhaul the newly minted legislation governing military tribunals of detainees. Even before it was signed into the law last month, Democrats were criticizing the military commission bill as unconstitutional and a magnet for endless legal challenges.
{{{Not enough, IMHO, to amend that toilet paper legislation. I'm writing to Leahy and Kennedy to urge them to repeal the entire MCA '06. After reading it, there's not one danged thing in there that smacks of being constitutional or legal. It ALL needs to be repealed.}}}
Ann Woolner | Past Sins Might Keep Rumsfeld From Roaming World
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111706T.shtml
"As he packs up his office in the Pentagon, Donald Rumsfeld can look forward to more free time. Before he rings up his travel agent to book any overseas trips, he would do well to consult an attorney," writes Ann Woolner.
t r u t h o u t | Democrats "Divided," or Democratic?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111706J.shtml
It's only 10 days after the Democratic Party's convincing victory on election night, and the corporate media is already trying to find division in the party. Publications across America yesterday focused on Steny Hoyer winning the majority leader race, and called it a loss for Nancy Pelosi.
The New York Times | Still Waiting for Bipartisanship
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111706M.shtml
The New York Times editors write: "The voters sent a clear message last week that they do not want the far right of the Republican Party calling the shots in Washington. But President Bush has ignored the message, resubmitting a group of archconservative, underqualified judicial nominees that Senate Democrats have already said are unacceptable."
Tom Engelhardt | No Exit: Will Daddy's Boys Extend the War?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111706N.shtml
Tom Engelhardt writes: "Now, the dreamers, the greatest gamblers in our history, are departing official Washington and the 'realists' have hit the corridors of power that they always thought they owned. It wouldn't hurt if they opened their eyes. Even imperial defenders should face reality. Someday, it's something we'll all have to do."
Keith Olbermann | Has Fox News Gone Too Far?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111706O.shtml
Keith Olbermann says: "One of the most ingenious aspects of the false charge of an intentional liberal bias in the news media is the unstated inference that if there is a liberal bias there by necessity cannot be an intentional conservative bias."
Military Needs $127 Billion to Fund Iraq, Afghanistan Wars
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111706R.shtml
The Bush administration is preparing its largest spending request yet for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a proposal that could make the conflict the most expensive since World War II.
AP Gets Shocking New Report on Gitmo
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111706B.shtml
The US 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. "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.
madame -
Absolutely stunning picture at the top....
We all need to pause, then load and cock the keyboards and clog the email inboxes of the senators and representatives to repeal MCA '06....
May I have your permission to download the top photo and send it to my email list?
Posted by: battlebob at November 17, 2006 04:16 PM
My nephew (my sister's son) might have been called for the first of the year's re-deployment to Iraq. He is supposedly one third of the way through a 9 month base assignment here in the States, but he was there when they took Baghdad, and then did tour #2 when they fought so heavily in Fallujah. Marine, infantry. I hope not, but I can't imagine them leaving him in the States when he has so much experience.
Pisses me off that they are sending more in when they know the Dems are wanting to re-deploy troops in some fashion.
Saw a clip of Bush on a news program last night where he said "If we leave the troops there, we can win. If we leave before then we won't win."
I see the politics still turning and spinning. Guess Bush figures he can blame the Dems for "losing" the war in Iraq, since they want to get things wrapped up over there in time. I pictured Rove doing this, but was thinking it would be more at the time when the campaign for '08 gets hot and heavy.
Bush was shown playing a musical instrument on a first year level by hitting it with a type of drumstick. I thought he really looked like a dork. He looked like he was very pleased with himself. I laughed. Alot. Incredible that there is disaster all around him and people are busy and shown on the newscast before him trying to work hard to fix what he broke, and he thinks he's the cat's pajamas. Just incredible.
Brings to mind a Mad Magazine picture of Dubya saying "What, me worry?"
It's good to know that the Vatican reaffirmed their commitment to priestly celibacy this week. It's making such a huge difference....
Nab rev. with 1,300 kid porn pix
BY RICHARD WEIR and JOHN MARZULLI
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Saturday, November 18th, 2006
A popular Long Island priest was arrested yesterday on child pornography charges after investigators raided a church rectory and found his computer packed with dirty pictures.
Authorities said the Rev. Thomas Saloy tried to kill himself earlier this week after the FBI discovered 1,300 still photographs and video clips of children engaged in sexually explicit activities.
The frail-looking 45-year-old pleaded not guilty yesterday in a federal court in Central Islip to criminal charges that could put him in prison for 10 years.
Federal Magistrate Michael Orenstein ordered Saloy held in a hospital psychiatric ward.
- more -
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/472597p-397633c.html
Battle Bob,
Woops, sorry. I meant my nephew might be being called back to Iraq in the New Year, thus deployed. Re-deployed is when they leave their tour and get sent back here, is it not?
Howard's supporters strike back.
Carville is clueless
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061118/ap_on_el_ge/democrats_dean
Truth,
Yep...it is troops who go to a different spot before their time ends at the current spot.
Saw a clip of Bush on a news program last night where he said "If we leave the troops there, we can win. If we leave before then we won't win."
Posted by: Truth Shall Prevail at November 18, 2006 06:28 AM
Notice he never says WHAT "we win'?
The Cons just can't get it through their heads that since the invasion itself was a war crime that there is no "winning" or "victory" to be had in Iraq, not now, not ever.....!
The only thing that will happen if the troops are left in Iraq is more death and destruction.
The only "winners" are Halliburton, Bechtel, and the oil corporations.
Posted by: Linda Enterkin at November 18, 2006 12:26 AM
Oh good grief, I didn't think about Rummy on trial in Germany in that light. My enthusiasm to see him held accountable was shortsighted. Bummer, bummer, bummer. You make an excellent point. D*mn!
Everything to Bush is black and white because he is incapable of complex thought. Winners/Losers,
With Us/Against Us, Raise Your Taxes/I'm going to Cut your Taxes.He presumes that we are all idiots and can't understand more than 5 words strung together. It appears that the public is getting fed up with his talking down to us. Yesterday a new PEW poll said only 31% of the country now supports the war, which means that even a lot of Republicans are fed up with up it. He and McCain are claiming they want to send in another 20-100,000 service men. It would be great if Stephanopholous ask McCain tomorrow on This Wekk if that means that he is ready to reinstitute the draft? Its time they start asking the hard questions.
Seriously Linda, damn.
To Linda: But then again, is this a fight we should take on? Take the 'wingers and their theatre on publically the next two years? As part of the campaign for the white house?
Posted by: NonnyO at November 18, 2006 06:06 AM
Absolutely. Please pass it around. Thanks for asking.
Battlebob,
Thank you so much for the link to Joan Chittister's article. I'm off to find out more. What an experience. That's the kind of place I want my $$ to go towards. (There is also a group called Morningstar, based in colorado, that's been working for years with Afghan refugees.)
That story was so real. "And what good does that do?" from a teenager, of course. The voice of the future.
Also from the comments, it looks like Sister Joan is writing a book (I assume from her travels and experiences) called "The Tent of Abraham: Stories of Hope & Peace for Jews, Christians, & Muslims."
http://ncrcafe.org/node/677
I've posted these Nanci Griffith lyrics here before, I know... but after reading through all of the many posts from last night rehashing the still-bleeding wounds from a divisive civil war in a far-away country that we should never have gotten into the middle of, I can't help but feel that they belong at the tail end of this thread this morning, too...
---------------
I am on a riverboat
On the Saigon River
Where the music's too loud
While I try to have my dinner
Stories I've been told of 1954
When the bodies washed ashore
From that distant war
My friend Michael came in '68
The bodies still floating
With the dinner boats sailing
Beside all those souls of the American war
Oh, deliver me to the river of souls
In the heart of Indochine
Deliver me to a river at peace
In this twenty-first century
All those souls that floated free
In these dark war's waters
All the souls now swim together
The French and the Viet Minh
Those American boys
The souls of the Saigon River
At peace in Indochine
I am in a cafe
In Ho Chi Minh City
My friend Bobby Muller
Is sitting with me
This traffic is maddening
In his wheelchair he's napping
I wonder at times
Does he walk in his dreams?
Later I walked all the way from Tu Do Street
To the banks of the river
With the dinner boats sailing
Beside all of the souls
Of a river in peace
Oh, deliver me to the river of souls
In the heart of Indochine
Deliver me to a river at peace
In this twenty-first century
All those souls that floated free
In these dark war's waters
All the souls now swim together
The French and the Viet Minh
Those American boys
The souls of the Saigon River
At peace in Indochine
Hoa binh ... hoa binh
Peace in the heart of Indochine
-----------------
we can't allow this to keep on happening over and over again,
Otter
Thanks, Otter.
There's more than one poet named Bill Bauer, so here's the link to the one I know.
http://www.umkc.edu/bkmk/catalogue/1-886157-12-X.html
These are truly powerful poems.
(FYI #1 -- "hoa binh" means "peace" in Vietnamese. There is a Hoa Binh Province in that country, a century-old Hoa Binh Hotel in Hanoi, and the Mekong River is also known as the "river of peace".)
(FYI #2 -- Sister Joan is a homie here where I currently reside, and she's been at the forefront of the international peace movement for many years.)
more random-access info from yr hmbl otr crspndnt,
Otter
Sr. Joan has a weekly column! Woohoo!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/16/AR2006111601142.html
Thomas E. Ricks reviews:
"A Savage War of Peace" by Alistair Horne
"A classic on France's losing fight against Arab rebels contains troubling echoes of Iraq today."
The review states this is quite the read among military types, with used copies going for as much as $150 on Amazon. It's been reprinted and is now available for $19.95.
I got this in an email and it made me think of yall.
"It is astounding that there is a actually a debate in this country about whether the law should be enforced or not, and not just the law, but the very Constitution itself."
TO THE HAGUE!!!!
And Woz,
Don't get too upset yet.
Not all of us are willing to allow them to escape into history.
For those who are relatively new to the political world, Sara at The Next Hurrah has written a post that opens up a very interesting perspective on the Democratic party and how it is actually constructed.
Her post goes onto discuss why the 50-state strategy made a difference within this structure.
Some of the comments are equally enlightening in how the Democratic parties work in different locales. It's a great short taste of Democratic party history.
Read the whole thing here...
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2006/11/backstory_on_ca.html
A lot of folks stop being cheerleaders when their kids have to go.
I dunno...if the war keeps going there should be a draft...everybody is eligible.
The war would be over the next day.
Posted by: battlebob at November 17, 2006 09:17 PM
*************
Couldn't agree more. Bring on the draft.
I bet they said that during Vietnam too.
If there is a draft I bet the war would be over soon.
But the dying just went on and on.
Posted by: Linda Enterkin at November 18, 2006 12:26 AM
Linda, KJ, and Christy...
All good points about Rummy. Therefore let our own government prosecute all of them as well. Not only "impeach" if the evidence builds up to it, but formally prosecute.
We DO NEED to take care of this ourselves if at all possible.
Christy,
Big difference...there where exceptions...
The priveliged ducked it.
Everyone goes...No exceptions...
Sparrow, we can prosecute georgie here, but why not hand over Rummy just as a consolation gift to the rest of the world...?
AND BB,
As I stated my father was born an only son, an only child, and crippled.
There has to be exceptions, or else our military will falter.
You are only as strong as your weakest link.
There is also something about Rummy being tried in international courts that you are forgetting.
HE was never ELECTED by We The People.
He was appointed by someone who supposedly was elected.
Why not just cut the damn baby in half...?
If there is a draft the rich kids will still get out of going.
The only "winners" are Halliburton, Bechtel, and the oil corporations.
Posted by: NonnyO at November 18, 2006 07:18 AM
true
More recent National Security genius:
Bush approves Lucent sale to France's Alcatel
WASHINGTON, Nov 17 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush approved a deal in which French telecommunications equipment maker Alcatel SA (CGEP.PA: Quote, Profile, Research)(ALA.N: Quote, Profile, Research) will acquire Lucent Technologies Inc. (LU.N: Quote, Profile, Research) in an $11.8 billion deal, the White House said on Friday.
The move came despite some lawmakers' concerns about safeguards for classified work that Lucent's Bell Laboratories conducts for the U.S. government.
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml?articleId=194500105
John Kerry will be on FOX tomorrow.
Joe Galloway on fixing the Army.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/special_packages/galloway/16029992.htm
[snip]
In this dangerous world, Americans must be willing to pay for an Army, and they must be willing to send their sons and daughters to serve in that Army. Nations that are unwilling to defend themselves and are governed by an elite that's unwilling to send its own children to be part of that defense, are doomed.
Not just the rich kids stayed out of Vietnam, anyone who could pony up a semester's college tuition could get a deferment. Mandatory enlistment, ala Israel, might wake everyone up.
the rich kis will merely go to Vancouver DiAnne if there is a draft, but why is no one pressing McCain for his answer about how he plans to find 100,000 more troops?
... meant to add, mandatory enlistment, with exceptions for combat duty, as with Christy's father.
About a draft.
I would think the only exception is for some mental and physical problems. Having worked with physically handicaped folks for many years, I would not deny them the chance to serve in some capacity. if it could be worked out. Unlike the VN war, the rich kids don't get a free pass.
I would remove educational exemptions.
How about Bush's twins? Do you think Dumbya would wrap things up quicker if they had to dodge IED's?
Here is a partial list of countries with a draft.
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Conscription
Israel's model is severe but they are in a perpetual war state.
Israel has mandatory military service for both men and women. All Israeli citizens are conscripted, except;
Haredim can apply for a deferral, due to religious studies, which essentially becomes an exemption.
Israeli Arabs are exempt from service, although they may volunteer. Other non-Jewish communities such as the Druze, Bedouin, and Circassians do serve, except for women from those communities who are exempt.
Religious Jewish Israeli women can apply for an exemption from army service. Although some of them choose to serve, many opt to serve voluntarily in Sherut Leumi (national civilian service).
Young Israeli women can generally opt not to serve if they are married, pregnant, or otherwise — Israel is generally very lenient with Israeli women.
Candidates with certain mental or physical health problems.
Typically, men are required to serve for 3 years and women for 2 years. Officers and other soldiers in certain voluntary duties such as Nahal and Hesder are required to additional service. See also: Israel Defence Forces.
There is a very limited percentage conscientious objection, of military service in general, mostly refusal to serve in the West Bank. Some of these conscientious objectors serve short prison terms lasting a few months to a year and often subsequently receive unhonourable discharges. See also: Refusal to serve in the Israeli military.
In addition, men are liable for up to one month per year of reserve duty (miluim) until they are their early forties. Women are liable for it until they are twenty-four years old, married, or pregnant, though it is only relevant for an extremely limited number of positions, and it is rare for one to get called up for routine reserve duty.
I worked at the same lawfirm as Tom for 5 years. Many of the clients are still the Japanese Americans who were interned during WWII and their children. They still feel the effects and it is part of their collective psyche in many ways.
Please, for just a moment...
I am BEGGING YOU, to listen to yourselves.
You are working out the logistics and practicalities of trying to 'reasonably' throw more lives into this God awful scene that already amounts to MASS MURDER!!!!
A draft is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE.
You are talking about using our childrens lives for political bait and switch.
Saving as many as we can should be our ONLY focus.
A draft...? It should not even be a consideration.
By God if Pelosi can take the talk of IMPEACHMENT off the table then my 5 childrens lives are NOT going to be offered up either.
Ellen,
I worked with folks who grew up with the Japanese Americans who were imprisoned.
These people lost everything For instance, if you owned a fishing boat it was given to someone else.
It is a really shameful episode (one of many) in our history.
The war will either end by us walking away or by getting deeper into it.
The former isn't happening. The latter is unacceptable.
The troops are ground down to nothing. Folks are talking about cutting the defense budget to 'starve the beast'.
The way to end it is to force everyone to take part in it.
As long as the rich don't fight, it won't stop.
Rangel's bill is the death sentence for war support.
battlebob, i see we came up with similar ideas. mandatory enlistment, combat exceptions for people with disabilities.
(a good friend of mine, female, peacenik, served in the Isreali military.)
You really think Mr. Halliburtons kids or the drunktard twins will wind up fighting..?
Yeah, right.
Christy, of course not. But there would be collective and targeted disgust, and possibly less support for a war in the first place, which is the only reason I can begin to justify a mandatory draft to myself.
going out now... enjoyed this discussion.
Do you really think some senators kid will wind up on the front lines...?
And even if a rich mans kid does wind up on the front lines he will be held up as an example for all the rest of us, because HE sacrificed sooooo much for our nation, no matter what his actual contribution is.
Thinking that by drafting everyones kids you will somehow take the kids THAT MATTER enough to get everyone saying 'stop' is just....
I'm not sure what that is actually.
"But there would be collective and targeted disgust, and possibly less support for a war in the first place,"
Again, this makes absolutely no sense.
You are talking about using our childrens lives in the HOPES of generating a targeted disgust by our loss.
How can there be LESS 'support' for the war if there are legions MORE soldiers forced to fight in it..?
I have this very wierd feeling that I must have missed a memo somewhere.
I think any one who doesn't believe in the cause for which the war is being fought or doesn't believe in war in general should not go.
My own son would go over my dead body.
Until this country learns a thing or two about diplomacy and starts putting people over profit, what do we gain by fighting for it.
The ability and desire to make war has gotten out of hand anyway. It must be made very hard. If it is worth fighting then it is worth everyone fighting. Everyone’s kids are important.
First, basic civics class:
For the United States, Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says "Congress shall have the power to ... declare War,"
However, that passage provides no specific format for what form legislation text must have to be considered a "Declaration of War" nor does the Constitution itself use this term. Many have postulated "Declaration(s) of War" must contain that phrase as or within the title. Many oppose that reasoning. The postulate has not been tested in court.
So, we have an arbitrary standard to even declare a war. We don’t even know how to present it.
Second: Blame the UN.
Harry Truman got us into Korea via a UN Resolution. At least other countries were involved. To date, no treaty has been signed.
Third: Create work arounds:
If you can’t come up with clear definitions, create work arounds. What did Congress do? They punted.
Congress voluntarily limited its use of the power to declare war to issuing authorizations of force. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (Pub L 93-148) limits the power of the President to wage war without the approval of the Congress. The United States has formally declared war against foreign nations eleven separate times.
So the President can ask to start a war and Congress can close their eyes and wave him on. Bush II even did it slicker. By promising to use war as the very last resort and calling anyone a traitor who opposed, Congress approved his entry into Iraq.
The most impassioned speech about this came from Kerry who knew we were being set up. He made the mistake of thinking Bush was an honorable man and abide by his own words. Kerry knows sending folks to die is not taken lightly. Bush doesn’t think so.
What next?
Repeal the War Powers Act. We don’t streamline the make war process. If we send troops to fight, a Declaration of War must be issued. After all, fighting is a war so declare it. Every Congressperson has to stand up and justify their actions and demand their own, the rest of the leaders kids and their constituents’ kids go.
A draft is mandatory. If a war is declared, then everyone’s kid who can shoot a gun goes. No exceptions. If you leave the country, you cannot ever come back. If you are caught, you go to jail.
Look, I was too stupid to avoid the draft. But the Amnesty given to draft evaders in 1977 by President Carter really frosted me. The war was over but I thought those who ducked it should have had to do some kind of penance. Community service or cleaning bed pans in the VA ward…something. Not just welcome back where the vets who fought in this thing got screwed. A lot of vets were never able to pick up the pieces and continue their lives.
thanks to wikipedia and a bunch of other sources.
You've probably heard the recruiter's sales pitch -- travel, training, money for college. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it? All advertising does. But if military life doesn't live up to the advertising, you can't bring your enlistment agreement back to the recruiter for a refund. You're in for eight years of your life (including inactive reserve duty). You wouldn't buy a car without looking under the hood. Don't enlist before you check out the reality of military life that lies behind the glamorous television ads and glossy brochures. Check it out carefully.
WARNING: Joining the Military is Hazardous To...
Your Education, Your Future, People of Color, Women, Your Civil Rights, Your Health, The Environment, Our Lives
Alternatives to Military Enlistment
You can stay free of the military and still find money for college, job skills training, travel, adventure and discipline.
http://www.objector.org
Posted by: Christy at November 18, 2006 10:51 AM
Christy...
Try him both here and there!
Tim McVeigh got tried in US Courts and in Oklahoma.
We should do both.
Marrianne--great thread header by the way. So very moving...accurate...and insightful!
as far as I'm concerned Americans are just as responsible to international law as bin Laden is. It's the attitude that America can make its own rules that really makes the rest of us cringe!!! Why should America be the only country on the planet to have WOMD - masses thereof!! And who has killed more people on the planet and ruined the lives of billions more through radiation caused deformities?
Posted by: woz at November 18, 2006 12:46 AM
You are right. There are plenty in this country who don't care what the rest of the world thinks and are proud of it. I can't support such blind and dangerous nationalism (faux patriotism).
As for Rumsfeld, he'll probably get off scot-free.
Kissinger did.
Look, everyone loves their kids. But why should some kids do all the dirty work?
Most of the service kids come from the lower ranks of society.
As Galloway said, ur nation, is defended by about seven-tenths of 1 percent of its 300 million people.
If it is worth their deaths, it is worth all of our deaths.
In that way, we only fight when we absolutely must.
Battlebob
If a government operated in such a manner that it didn't end up in wars continually, who had to fight would not be an issue.
This government spends so much on military it can't even keep schools, hospitals and roads in repair.
It isn't doing enough to protect the infrastructure and keep it up to date and up to par.
"Remaking the middle east" is the last adventure we need to embark on. Meanwhile we ignored Rwanda and Darfur, focussed on Bin Laden and Saddam but most people can't tell you who Charles Taylor is.
Screwed up priorities.
Until the rich pay their fair share of taxes in this country, our family is doing enough with property taxes, our underpaid jobs and our taxes. Drivers get licensed because of my husband, kids with problems get helped because of me, and my son serves good bread.
I would rather go myself or send my son to the Peace Corps (do we still have it) or build toilets for Habitats for Humanity.
We don't defend Haliburton.
Battlebob
If you could really argue that those who go are defending our country - they are defending Halliburton.
Amen Sparrow.
BB I understand your point, what I am trying to tell you is that there will ALWAYS be exceptions for those who can afford it.
If we know for a fact this is an ILLEGAL WAR BASED ON LIES....
Why, WHY, WHY would we possibly hand over more of our children to fight it.
We can not even tell them what they are FIGHTING FOR.
We can not even define what VICTORY means.
We have tipped off a civil war that is about to slide the entire region into one hell of a BIGGER WAR.
Why in Gods name would we force more of our own kids into that? The best we can hope for is to get the ones out that are there now and pray no one gets left be hind with these monsters we have created.
I understand your line of thought, but we have to make a stand and tell georgie we will not give him any more lives than we are already doomed to lose for his lies and malfeasence.
His TREASON even.
No more for georgie. Our kids must be protected from him not handed over to him.
Don't be an amputee for the corporate flag.
http://www.northernsun.com/n/s/2404.html
Making people stay and stay in Iraq is part of what made people turn against the war. As it is, the government can already promise people citizenship to serve if they are Mexican. They can hire mercenaries. They can also use our tax money to arm and train Iraqis for 15 years. I don't like to see their kids get exploited for Halliburton either.
We should not have ever gone there.
Our whole foreign policy needs to be changed. Maybe this country will follow the natural course of Empires. Maybe it's even God's will. Too bad for the fools who think "God is On Our Side."
If we know for a fact this is an ILLEGAL WAR BASED ON LIES....
Why, WHY, WHY would we possibly hand over more of our children to fight it.
We can not even tell them what they are FIGHTING FOR.
We can not even define what VICTORY means.
We have tipped off a civil war that is about to slide the entire region into one hell of a BIGGER WAR.
Why in Gods name would we force more of our own kids into
that?
Posted by: Christy at November 18, 2006 01:08 PM
Right on!
President George W. Bush on Nuclear Capabilities:
"I strongly believe he was trying to reconstitute his nuclear weapons program."
"We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents."
"Here's what -- we've discovered a weapons system, biological labs, that Iraq denied she had, and labs that were prohibited under the U.N. resolutions."
"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them."
"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men -- the shock troops of a hateful ideology -- gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the 'beginning of the end of America.' By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed."
http:www.bushoniraq.com
"The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more."
"The regime . . . has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda. The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other."
"He has trained and financed al Qaeda-type organizations before, al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations."
"But the risk of doing nothing, the risk of the security of this country being jeopardized at the hands of a madman with weapons of mass destruction far exceeds the risks of any action we may be forced to take."
"One of the greatest dangers we face is that weapons of mass destruction might be passed to terrorists who would not hesitate to use those weapons. Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraq intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. And an al Qaeda operative was sent to Iraq several times in the late 1990s for help in aquiring poisons and gases. We also know that Iraq is harboring a terrorist network headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner."
"misleading statements" - Rumsfeld
"We said from the outset that there are several terrorist networks that have global reach and that there were several countries that were harboring terrorists that have global reach. We weren't going into Iraq when we were hit on September 11. And the question is: Well, what do you do about that? If you know there are terrorists and you know there's terrorist states -- Iraq's been a terrorist state for decades -- and you know there are countries harboring terrorists, we believe, correctly, I think, that the only way to deal with it is -- you can't just hunker down and hope they won't hit you again. You simply have to take the battle to them. And we have been consistently working on the Al Qaeda network. We've captured a large number of those folks -- captured or killed -- just as we've now captured or killed a large number of the top 55 Saddam Hussein loyalists."
"We said they had a nuclear program. That was never any debate."
"Now people are saying, "Well, why haven't we found anything?" And I would respond by saying, A, it's going take some time, and B, we have found things. The CIA very recently, I believe, issued a declassified document on their website, where someone can actually go and find photographs and data that discusses these mobile laboratories, which are precisely what Secretary Powell talked about to the United Nations."
"And within the last week or two, they have in fact captured and have in custody two of the mobile trailers that Secretary Powell talked about at the United Nations as being biological weapons laboratories. We have people who are telling that they worked in these vehicles. And they look at panels and say, "That was my work station in that panel, and that's what it's for."
"We believed then, and we believe now, that the Iraqis . . . had a program to develop nuclear weapons, but did not have nuclear weapons. That is what the United Kingdom's intelligence suggested as well. We still believe that."
NO MORE FOR GEORGIE!
No more troops.
No more money.
No more torture.
No more lies.
No more wars.
No more power.
No more respect.
No more tolerance.
No more getting away with it.
We are wayyyyy beyond all of these things and NO MORE for georgie!
He has just been drafted to be used as a historical example of what happens when you commit treason against a MIGHTY nation.
A nation of LAWS.
If we do not uphold them, then...
No more nation.
Period.
Just say no.
I disagree that having a no-skip draft put in place now would suddenly make enough people wake up to the stupid pointlessness of getting their kids killed in such a bogus war that they would rise up and demand it be put to a halt.
For one thing, people are *already* rising up and demanding that it put to a halt.
And as Christy pointed out above, they had the draft the whole time in Vietnam and tens of thousands of kids kept getting killed anyway, year after bloody year.
Consider a couple of points here:
Having unhappy and resentful draftees make up a significant portion of combat troops puts the entire group of combatants at far greater risk of injury and death. That's one of the reasons the rank-and-file military resists reinstating the draft as much as they do.
And one of the biggest reasons that so many generals, right wingers, and manifest-destiny types are turning against this stupid pointless war is that the armed forces simply do not have the manpower resources needed to keep on fighting it.
If you give them more cannon fodder, they will feel entitled to use it. If you enable them to go on throwing more troops into a hopeless cause, they will do just that.
Sure, drafting people for combat might horrify their parents, or at least some of them. And that might increase the number of people telling us to get the hell out of there already.
But increasing the number of available troops will certainly encourage the people that started this bogus war -- and the larger group of people who for whatever reasons believe that we've got to keep on fighting it until everything's gone from bad to worse to completely impossible over there -- to keep on throwing more bodies at the problem as though that could somehow turn present defeat into eventual victory.
Drafting more combatants to throw into the hellholes that the neocons have created for them might increase the backlash here at home to some degree. But it would put the lives of all those fighting in those hellholes at far greater risk, while enabling the neocons and militarists to drag the war out for a much longer period than they are currently able to do.
Reinstating the draft now would be, as Christy pointed out, an unethical, immoral, selfish bait-and-switch game. Doing so will not shorten the existing war, it will only prolong it. And it will only make it feasible for those in charge to start more illegal wars of aggression while still not ending this one.
And that will inevitably mean death and dismemberment for thousands, even tens of thousands, more young men and women than those whose lives have been wasted over there already.
The draft? I'm agin it. No way, Jose. You don't buy booze for drunks, and you don't give cannon fodder to power-drunk politicians.
just my peacemongering $.02 but as always ymmv,
Otter
Yes we should not be there. But we are. And how we got there has less and less meaning daily determining how we get out.
What is being missed here...
Because Congress caved, there was no honest discussion.
Congress was allowed to cave because of the War Powers Act. Remove the act.
But that is for future conflicts.
What do we do about Iraq?. Not all are illegals who want citizenship.
I suspect the far majority really, truly are in the military because they want to defend our country.
They aren't gullible or stupid. They are just people with a different calling then we/I have.
I see two choices; either get them out now or support them with greater numbers.
A little history.
During WWII, the only way troops could get home is marching through Berlin and Tokyo. That was the way home. You went in for the duration.
That was changed where the deployment was for a year. That changed the whole dynamics of fighting. When I get to my eleventh month, I am super cautious. I don’t want patrols; limit the risks…everything.
So I make it through a year and I am done. That is supposed to be it for my entire enlistment. That is the deal I made with my government when I enlisted.
When they send the same troops back for year after year, it increases their odds of getting killed or wounded or suffering severe problems after their service. It is just a bad ticket in a bad lottery where losing is fatal. The reason they are serving multiple tours is there are not enough troops.
So here is the deal. There are options.
Get them out after a year and never send them again. Get other troops. If you have to draft them then do it. It is wrong to keep handing the same people a lottery ticket to die.
I bet folks will be real fired up about that one.
Maybe you get Muslim soldiers from other countries who don’t want us there or an Iraq in flames? We give them all the reconstruction money necessary. Maybe the UN plays banker with money we deposited. We leave.
Maybe, just maybe, you back up the trucks, declare mission accomplished again and leave. Leave everyone with a Home Depot or Loews charge card that never expires. Take the capitalist approach.
Good points.
Also for what's being recommended in Iraq now - it's not low-level troops that require training they want. It's officers to train Iraqis, who are cheaper and it's politically correct to suggest that it's a way out of Iraq to train Iraqis.
In truth, our officers and equipment could be there for 15 years. I listened to the week-long NPR series on possible alternatives in Iraq, with everyone from hard-liners to a guy who was writng a book with McGovern.
No one had an answer but it sure ain't the draft.
There are not enough troops because there are too many wars.
In the history of insurgencies, leaving has often slowed them down. An example was Algeria and France.
"It is wrong to keep handing the same people a lottery ticket to die."
Yes, it is. No doubt about that. Get them the hell out, now.
But don't lose sight of the fact that, no matter how they might have gotten conned into it, they still bought those bad lottery tickets themselves.
Handing more bad lottery tickets to different people who never even bought into the crooked gambling game in the first place is not only inefficient and ineffective, it is totally indefensible.
Ethically, morally, practically, legally -- any way you slice and dice it -- reinstating a forced draft in a country that claims to stand for the rule of law and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is just all kinds of wrong.
send less not more,
Otter
Battlebob
I have always felt it's wrong to exploit the Guards and Reserves.
I think the capitalist approach with the Home Depot card is probably what we'll end up using. We had evolved to a point where we fought wars by proxy, which is part of why we ended up in the position we did. We should not have tried to fight a ground war and the only way out may be to get neighboring countries involved and pump in alot of money.
After 9/11 but before the Iraq war, Bush appeared in a bomber jacket at an air force base to announce a big hike in military spending, more than the combination budget of the next 15 countries including Russia and China.
Alot of it had nothing to do with the war on terror. Tanks designed for land battles with Russia. Self-propelled artillery system too big for any cargo plane.
We sold arms to Iran after they had seized our embassy. We used the money to fight the Sandanistas. We turned the other way when Saddam invaded Iran. Nixon encouraged Kurds to revolt against Saddam, to help the Shah of Iran. Then when Iran and Iraq made up, we cut off aid to the Kurds and Saddam clobbered them.
When we take the sneaky approach, "blowback" happens. & nowdays alot of it can't be fought with conventional weapons & armies.
People in other countries tend to know more about what the CIA does than we do. Terrorism happens. Conventional war against terror it doomed. We're still using a cold war model. & we don't have a model to replace it with but making more enemies will make more terrorists.
This is the series at http://www.npr.org - archived to listen
Get Troops Out of Iraq by 2007, Expert Says
November 17, 2006 · We conclude our week of discussions about what the U.S. should do about Iraq. Melissa Block talks with William Polk, co-author of Out of Iraq: A Practical Plan for Withdrawal Now. Polk proposes starting withdrawal this year, and completing it by mid-2007.
For Iraq, U.S. Needs a 10-Year Plan -- At Least
November 16, 2006 · Retired Marine Col. Thomas Hammes says insurgencies last 10 to 30 years, and that the United States will need to maintain current troop levels in Iraq for the next three to four years. After that, he foresees a gradual drawdown over 10 years, with the U.S. maintaining at least 20,000 troops there.
A Strategy for Iraq: Send More U.S. Troops
November 15, 2006 · Rend al-Rahim, executive director of the Iraq Foundation, talks to Melissa Block about what she sees as the best exit strategy for Iraq. She advocates more U.S. troops -- not just advisers. She says the Iraqis need more time to work out a political solution.
For Progress in Iraq, Partition the Country's Rivals
November 14, 2006 · Peter Galbraith, former U.S. ambassador to Croatia who has advised the Iraqi Kurds on constitutional issues, advocates what is known as "partition," allowing the Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq to have their own regions. Citing the autonomous Kurdistan in the northern region, Galbraith says it's already written into the Iraqi constitution.
Weighing Options for the Best Exit from Iraq
November 13, 2006 · Eliot Cohen, professor of Strategic Studies at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, reviews exit strategies for Iraq, and critiques recently aired proposals for early withdrawal; partitioning; and talks with Syria and/or Iran, among others.
Otter,
There is a lot of talk about ending the war. Go downtown and tell me how many protestors do you see? There is lots of talk but because so few are affected, there is very little action.
How many marchers are marching around the Capital or Congress with signs demanding we get out? Is there any action in your area? Are the cops arresting protestors?
In the ‘60s, an entire genre of songs was written in protest of VN. There were nightly marches by those who were going. Jails were filled up with protestors.
What we did not do is fight enough as the carnage lasted for four years after the draft. We did force Johnson not to run in 1968.
Why were we not effective after the draft? Because there were exemptions. The only ones fighting were those who could not get out of it. The Clintons, the Cheneys got their deferments. The Bush’s had daddy pull some strings.
The short story is folks are angry but not committed.
Suppose we institute a draft. The House has to make a bill and the Senate passes it. Bush signs it into law. This is really serious stuff.
Let’s suppose it passes and it is a bill where everyone serves. What happens?
Do we meekly hand over our kids to Bush? I doubt it. I bet every soccer mom in the country rams her minivan into the office of the nearest Congressperson and rips their eyeballs out. That is the only way we end this mess and future messes for all time.
Posted by: Christy at November 18, 2006 12:36 PM
Haven't read any further down that this comment. Christy, in my mind, I thought the conversation was about discussing a draft and ideas, pro and con, about instituting a draft, using the experience of Vietnam as a jumping off point. I didn't for a second think I was advocating to send anyone's children to Iraq today or tomorrow or next month or next year. I often forget how limited an conversation over the internet can be. I'm an anti-war peacenik, have been since I was a kid. I didn't support Gulf War I, and was among the small percentage of Americans who didn't. I forgot you didn't know that.
I'm talking about the idea of preventing wars in the future, and also the best way (in my thinking) to create a military, something in reality every country needs and all citizens in that country (in my thinking) are responsible for, and so far, the idea of a mandatory military service, with few exceptions for deployment into actual combat arenas, is what makes sense to me at the moment.
Again, I'm not talking about sending anyone's child into Iraq today, tomorrow, or next week.
Otter,
"But don't lose sight of the fact that, no matter how they might have gotten conned into it, they still bought those bad lottery tickets themselves." really bothers me. They really bought these tickets in our name. We write the checks and they cash them. Consigning them to more pain and misery then they bargained for is wrong and is opting out of solving the problem.
I gotta go pick Mary up at the airport...
later all.
Whow, battlebob, I was a little freaked when I read your idea to start a mandatory draft for this war. I'd take to the streets to hold national bake sales for the Lowe's card before I could get behind that idea.
But then I read this comment of yours:
Battlebob said: "Let’s suppose it passes and it is a bill where everyone serves. What happens?
Do we meekly hand over our kids to Bush? I doubt it. I bet every soccer mom in the country rams her minivan into the office of the nearest Congressperson and rips their eyeballs out. That is the only way we end this mess and future messes for all time."
And you've really got a point there. I have nephews and nieces in the age range, every single one of their parents supported GWB going into Iraq. Lemme tell you, my sisters would ram a tank into Bush if he came for their kids.
(Tongue in cheek, sorta!)
Hi to Mary. :-)
11 million protesting on a single day didn't stop the war.
Congressional inquiry into the lies and where the money is going and who is profitting is still possible.
We do have people here arrested for protesting, especially at Ft. Lewis and other military installations.
& we have alot of support for people like Lietenant Watada who feel the war is illegal. Others question more the morality.
For me it's been 40 years of this. Gets old.
The shortage of soldiers, to problems with recruitment - they point to the fact that the Administration went in on lies with no plan for once they got there.
If we had a steady supply of troops, what would stop the neocons from deciding the "spread democracy" further?
They don't seem to learn.
There are too many in this country who seriously would "nuke Iran" or "nuke North Korea."
I don't have alot of faith in the threat of the draft to mobilize people. I don't believe that is the only reason people protested the Vietnam war.
I couldn't be drafted.
It's also wrong for people to only be concerned when their own kids necks are at risk. Every life is worth the same.
It's strange when people were gung ho for the war but would try to get their children out of it.
If a draft is to only try to make these people come around, won't work. & there are plenty of use who don't think like that in the first place.
I can say my son would go over my dead body, but I'd try to convince anyone not to fight for Halliburton and have done draft counselling in my teens.
Preventing FUTURE WARS is already impossible.
The only thing we can do and be able to live with ourselves, is to tell georgie NO MORE and get as many out as fast as humanly possible.
Our soldiers are literally dying waiting for US to save THEM! To have the collective courage to make this right in a POLITICAL solution, because they have no way else to WIN.
We do not have to discuss preventing future wars because that is a moot point as long as georgie has the power to do it. More wars are coming no doubt.
The dying is now. The time to act is now.
NOT with protests in the streets but with OUR LAW at our backs in a trial resulting in the IMPEACHMENT of the dick and georgie freak show.
Our remedy is impeachment and I do not give a DAMN what Pelosi said.
This president is commiting acts of treason and mass theft and murder right before our eyes and she better by God DO SOMETHING NOW or there will be no 'later' for this to all work out.
Georgie is MORE DANGEROUS NOW, not less.
No matter what you think happened on election day it did NOT change georgies plans. It just sped them up.
Impeach them all and let God sort them out.
Our soldiers there now need us here and now to do the right thing.
DiAnne, I respect your adherence to your opposition for a draft. I hope you understand that I wrestled with this subject privately (ie, not publically) for awhile. I'm no where near commitment, but more willing to look at options than I was in the past. (For reasons not necessary to post about.)
Battlebob has in the past posted links about 4th Generation Warfare. It was discussed at least a year back at The Democratic Daily. Different model than the coldwar. I'll find the links if you want me to, if you haven't read them.
Thanks for the NPR links. Again, I hear you, I do. I'm just doing some out-of-my-normal box thinking these days about the military.
Right now, there is no disconnect with people who support a war and also have no responsibility or concern that their children will have to serve. There isn't anything "wrong" with that thinking, it's perfectly natural with an all-volunteer military.
And that's sort of the point of a mandatory (with few exceptions) draft. Everyone who chose to have children would have to take the defense of their country into that decision. Everyone but a few people.
Changes the picture. Huge change of picture.
And since the all-volunteer military isn't exactly working out, as we all know, I'm willing to see what can be done to drastically shake up the situation for the future. And I mean drastic change. What we've done so far hasn't worked. At least to my expectations and hopes. For myself along, I have to think differently and bring new elements into the perspective. The anti-war model is broke as I know it as well.
That doesn't mean I'm pro-war or pro-getting anyone's kids killed, just as not supporting a war but supporting the troops doesn't make me anti-military.
I have to agree with Otter 100%.
It is immoral to throw MORE of our kids into a war we know is based on lies and is already lost.
Send them to fight for what? Force them too..? No, that can not be the way.
Impeachment is the only way to end the war abruptly AND find out what in the hell has happened here.
He is not sorry for taking your freedoms and killing your kids for his lies. He will never just give it all back.
You will have to TAKE IT from him and force him to kneel before the rule of LAW. International and domestic.
Only then will we find out the truth of what he has done to us.
No more for georgie. He has wasted enough of our lives, and can never be trusted with any more of them.
There is a reason chertoff is trying to make 'international law' the greatest 'threat' since osama.
BTW, where IS osama...?
Impeachment trial should shed some light on that.
So, we're back to impeachment. I guess this conversation about a draft has maybe gotten too personal, and so too hot, which is understandable.
At least everyone is speaking their minds, which is sort of the topic of the thread (speaking truth to power and truth to each other) at least, as I read the topic. :-)
Later, all. JBK is flying out again today for another round of meetings (yeah!), so I'll go be a wife, which means, see if his jeans need washed. ;-)
Of course we are back to impeachment.
He has committed numerous impeachable offenses.
And until he is held accountable, the dead will just keep piling up for no reason at all.
battlebob,
You know I respect you and don't take your opinions lightly. But somehow this "we had to destroy the village in order to save it" argument you're presenting in favor of a draft to end all wars just makes no rational sense to me at all.
And yes, by the way, there are peace protests going on all over the place, including some right here where I live. I know, I've been part of them. And there are plenty of high-level, high-profile people arguing that this war is unwinnable and must be stopped, stat.
This is not the 1960's. This is not the 1970's. Iraq is not Vietnam. The draft is not in place. Riots aren't happening in the streets. Kids aren't getting shot on college campuses by other kids in olive-drab uniforms.
That was then, and this is now.
To judge the value of our collective efforts to dismantle the PNAC-heads' failed doctrine of pre-emptive war by how many people are and aren't getting beaten up, tear-gassed, and arrested here at home now is simply specious reasoning.
And arguing that it somehow diminishes the guilt the neocons should feel -- hell's bells, all of us should feel -- for killing the kids we have there now by killing different kids there instead is kinda troubling to me, too.
Drafting kids to go fight wars is just plain wrong. Using volunteer kids to go fight wars is just as wrong.
It's *all* wrong. All of it. It has to stop, and stop now. All of it. Not just some of it.
just say no to warmongering,
Otter
Posted by: Otter at November 18, 2006 03:59 PM
Kucinich has some good words to say about this. Basically, we need to do the same thing we did for Vietnam: cut off the war funding.
http://www.truthdig.com/interview/item/20061116_kucinich_cut_off_funding
"Of course we are back to impeachment.
He has committed numerous impeachable offenses.
And until he is held accountable, the dead will just keep piling up for no reason at all."
~~Posted by: Christy at November 18, 2006 03:50 PM
Christy, I've said this before... I think Bush has committed numerous impeachable offenses. I've actively fought this guy since 1999, there are few others on this blog who can say the same, okay? There is no disagreement about whether or not you or I think Bush has committed impeachable offenses. So please eliminate that straw man when you're talking to me. The disagreement we have is what to do about it in the next two years.
I do not think impeachment is the best course of action for this country to take in the next two years.
And... I don't feel the need to continue that discussion... so when impeachment is brought up, I'll probably go find something else to do rather than post and read comments pro and con.
It could actually be used as a way to get rid of me, you know? ;-) Bring up impeachment. KJ logs off. LOL
Tunnel vision, or is denial just another river in Egypt?
~~~~~~~
For all the talk of laying to rest the ghosts of a wartime past, President George W. Bush had a grim reminder on Saturday of some of America's unfinished business from the Vietnam war.
Taking a break from diplomacy on the second day of his trip to Vietnam, Bush visited the joint POW/MIA Accounting Command, where U.S. experts are working to find and identify the remains of American war dead.
It was only a brief stop for Bush, the second post-war U.S. president to visit Vietnam. Bush has made clear that rather than dwelling on old animosities, he wants to focus on Vietnam as an emerging trade partner and economic success story.
In keeping with that approach, Bush asked few questions of his military briefers as he moved briskly and almost without expression from one display to another in the courtyard of a two-storey colonial-style building housing the U.S. mission...
~~~~~~
Bush glimpses Vietnam war's unfinished business
Reuters link: http://tinyurl.com/y23bl2
KJ
I don't feel alot of emotional turmoil when there is debate - over the draft, war, impeachment, whatever. I enjoy the dialogue and especially when people can back up what they say either logically with facts, when that is appropriate, or also with personal experiences, when that is appropriate.
I think it's important that the issues get aired, first and foremost.
I guess it would be harder trying to debate neocons or fundies.
Posted by: DiAnne at November 18, 2006 05:01 PM
"I think it's important that the issues get aired, first and foremost."
~~DiAnne, I agree. Issues not aired openly and quickly tend to fester and mold, in my opinion and experience. :-) I guess my exception to that would be discussing impeachment these next two years. I think the will of the people as a whole will decide that, not me. I hope-- on a subject that broad-- I would be able to state my thinking once or twice, and then chose not to discuss it anymore. Not, of course, because I don't think GWB doesn't deserve to be impeached, but because I've already decided to focus my attention and energy on other things these next two years. Besides, I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind and I don't want to even try. It just isn't my work.
The draft, especially with people who lived through Vietnam, is a subject I'm curious and interested in discussing, because of the sheer amount of time that's gone by and let's face it, the all-volunteer army += Iraq. Blows my mind. It's like our military became the misadministration's personal army, including our Guard and Reserve. I want to think about, and talk about, dispassionatly as possible for such a hot topic, possible ways to avoid something like this in the future. To that end, I've entertained thoughts about the draft that I wouldn't have considered before. Plus, listening to my friend talk about her experience in the Israeli military, (she's an active peace activist, artist (collaborates with Palestians), and mother, has broaden how I see service to a country.
"I guess it would be harder trying to debate neocons or fundies."
~~In my experience debating with neos, fundies and liberals, sometimes, sad to say, it's exactly the same. Group think is a powerful thing, it offers protection. Once in the group, it takes courage to step outside the boundaries that are set. And it's so much easier to throw stones, set up straw men, rant in all caps-- instead of actually attempting to hear what someone else is actually saying. Putting principles over personalities. It's hard face-to-face, double hard in blogland. I think a lot of the blogosphere is high school all over again. Cliques. Gossip. Backchannels. (I'm really going to get hit here, but I think the behavior is cowardly.) Besides, I was a rebel in high school. So were you, as I recall your stories. lol
"I don't feel alot of emotional turmoil when there is debate..."
~~I know this, remember, I know you too. :-) I know that, as you've said, you operate on a sense of banked rage. I understand that banked rage, I have it too. I let the kettle pop more often than you do, but that's just my nature. I have the patience of a hummingbird.
I've always enjoyed discussing things with you DiAnne. I value your perspective, your vast amounts of knowledge and the fact that you share what you learn day-in-and-day-out. You're a whiz! LOL And your temperment is even. It wasn't you who was yelling and arguing with the anti-abortionists in Boston. That was me and a few others-- who shall remain nameless. :-)
I'll never forget that last morning in the Inn. We were all sitting around waiting for the cab and you were talking and I suddenly decided I needed to say something *right then* and started to interrupt you, and you calmly looked me in the eye and said, "Let me finish." I cracked up. It was so you. I have terrible timing. I listen too long and then I interrupt too suddenly. I only have good timing when I give a poetry reading. Otherwise, I'm a sputterer. You, on the other hand, are capable of dissertations, every sentence and paragraph in place.
Too much information, again. Don't shoot me. I'm on a happy high these days.
And yes I know the world is a shit sandwich and being happy is tantamount to being an idiot. But I am, and I'm going to stay this way for awhile. There's some balance being restored here.
If too exerberant, just post the word "impeachment" and I'll run like a rabbit.
kj
Just don't invite me over for sandwiches...
;)
Posted by: aimzzz at November 18, 2006 05:51 PM
Whaaaa? =;-) I'm actually a pretty good cook and am probably the best sandwich maker in the world. Is it the sputtering? You don't want anyone sputtering on your food? LOL
kj, just refer to
Posted by: kj at November 18, 2006 05:48 PM
;)
*aiiiieeee* ;-)
Oh, dear Goddess.... debating with fundies and neocons is one thing, but debating with all these winkeycons is something else again...