Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Take Action: Invest in the Home Front

The Labor-HHS-Education bill provides funding for America's biggest priorities-job training, health services, Head Start, education and more.

Not surprisingly, President Bush has threatened to veto this bill. He says this is just too much money.  He can find hundreds and hundreds of billions to spend on his Iraq debacle, but he can't find money to spend on America's priorities?

Sign our petition to invest in the home front.

We want Congress to pass this legislation with a veto-proof majority. We must override the Bush veto. It's time to invest in America!

(Click on the link below to sign the petition)

Take Action: Invest in the Home Front

Technorati tags: , , ,

Defending Immigrant Driver's Licenses

 by Jonathan Singer, Wed Oct 31, 2007 at 02:18:10 PM EST

Towards the end of last night's debate there was a bit of a kerfuffle over New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's decision to create a class of driver's licenses that cannot be used for identification purposes for airports and the like and, as such, would be available to those in the United States illegally. For those who weren't able to see the debate or experience the televised post-debate spin room antics, Hillary Clinton was put on the spot on the issue, and while not fully embracing the Spitzer plan she seemed to support the idea behind it as well as decry the situation that precipitated it -- namely the failure of the federal government to effectively deal with the immigration issue. Similarly, according to the debate transcript, Barack Obama called it "the right idea" citing "a public safety concern."

Following the debate the chattering class seemed intent on considering this a strong blow against Clinton, if not in the primary then in a potential general election. Indeed, a Sienna College poll of New Yorkers evidences a high level of opposition to Spitzer's plan -- "nearly three-quarters of voters," in fact -- and just 22 percent support for the measure. One could imagine the general reaction around the country not being too dissimilar.

Yet I'd like to do something I don't do too often on this site: Defend a policy position undertaken by the Democrats -- and a not terribly popular one, at that. I don't know a terribly large amount about the Spitzer plan, so I'm not going to address the specifics of it. I do know that Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski floated a similar, though less complicated plan that would create two classes of licenses (as opposed to Spitzer's three), one that would require proof of "legal presence" that could be used as an official identification card for banks, airports and other such places, and one that would be stamped "not for identification" that would be used only for driver's licensing purposes.

As Obama suggested during the debate, there is a real security issue that could be addressed by this tiering of licenses. Specifically, at least some of the 12 million or so people in the United States unlawfully at this juncture drive cars, and when they do so they may be doing so without a full knowledge of driving rules and regulations and without insurance. On the first point, testing these ddrivers before they get on the road could do quite a bit to mitigate this problem, particularly if the tiered licensing system is done in such a way that immigrants don't feel that by applying for a license they are increasing their likelihood of being deported or otherwise penalized. Of nearly equal importance to this issue of safety, getting these drivers licensed would enable them to get car insurance, which could actually decrease the cost for other drivers who do have insurance. (When someone without insurance hits someone with insurance the cost must be borne somewhere.)

No doubt this isn't the most popular move at this juncture. But with a bit of explanation and political capital (and real capital) invested in making the argument, I think there are a lot of people -- particularly the large proportion of Americans in favor of a path to legalization or citizenship for illegal immigrants -- who could be swayed. And even for those whose positions are particularly hardened at this point so that they would not be swayed, it's not clear to me that the issue is salient enough to make them change their mind about a presidential election when other issues like Iraq, Iran, the economy and healthcare continue to loom large.

Update [2007-10-31 14:45:24 by Jonathan Singer]: It looks like CNN polled this question nationally earlier this month and found 23 percent support and 76 percent opposition to this type of plan, so the national numbers do look fairly similar to the New York numbers

MyDD :: Direct Democracy for People-Powered Politics

Mukasey, Rudy and Bernie Kerik

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Oct 31, 2007 at 01:54:46 PM EST

While everyone is focused on Michael Mukasey's refusal to acknowledge that waterboarding is torture, another story is being overlooked.

A must read: Wayne Barrett's latest in the Village Voice, No Skeletons in My Closet.

When Mukasey was nominated, I expressed concern about his closeness to Rudy Giuliani.That concern has just grown exponentially.

After reading Barrett, I'm wondering whether the reason Mukasey is willing to take on the Attorney General job for a short 14 months is because Rudy has promised to keep him in the spot should he become President.

Mukasey has said he'd recuse himself from the expected impending federal indictment of Bernie Kerik. But, as Barrett explains, Kerik is just one of many cases with connections to Rudy that the Justice Department will be handling. Mukasey's son, a partner in Bracewell-Guiliani, plays a key role in many of them.

There's also the question about whether Mukasey has been honest or complete in his description of his political activities on behalf of Rudy, particularly while he was a federal judge and not supposed to be politically active.

Here are but two examples:

Mukasey might also have to deal with a Justice investigation of Ken Caruso, a Giuliani and Mukasey friend who was allegedly involved in the bilking of a prominent Texas Republican donor of millions, according to a recent story by Politico.com. Caruso, who apparently refused to cooperate with a U.S. Senate investigation of the banking scam, is a partner with Marc Mukasey at Bracewell & Giuliani. Both were hired by Giuliani, who set up the firm's Manhattan office in 2005. Caruso is represented by Patterson Belknap, Michael Mukasey's current and Giuliani's former firm.

In addition, one of Giuliani's closest allies in New York politics, State Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, is under federal investigation, and the chairman of Giuliani's South Carolina campaign, Thomas Ravenel, is awaiting sentencing on federal charges of possession with intent to distribute cocaine. The government will have to make a sentencing recommendation late this year in the Ravenel case, and the Justice Department would have to approve any Bruno indictment. Bruno announced his endorsement of Giuliani in May, and Giuliani recently made comments strongly supporting Bruno in his ongoing battle with Democratic Governor Eliot Spitzer.

The conflicts even reach to the NSA wiretapping issue with respect to Verizon:

Even the recent ruckus about Verizon and its cooperation with the National Security Agency's domestic-surveillance program may put Mukasey in a Giuliani-connected bind. The company has admitted that it turned over 94,000 customer records to the NSA, many without a court order, since January 2005, and a Justice Department inspector general's report in 2006 found that similar potentially improper record transfers occurred for years before that. Verizon is a prime client of Bracewell & Giuliani.

In addition, Paul Crotty, the respected federal judge who joined Mukasey on the Manhattan bench in late 2005, was the regional president of Verizon, which is based in New York. Crotty was Giuliani's corporation counsel and contributed $5,500 to his federal campaign committees before he became a judge—$1,000 more than the legal limit (the excess was returned). When Crotty left, a Verizon press release stated that he was "responsible for government relations and regulatory affairs for Verizon's largest telephone operations company," but a company spokeswoman declined to answer questions about his possible involvement in the surveillance decisions, and Crotty did not return telephone calls from the Voice. Justice has already filed lawsuits in an attempt to protect Verizon from the subpoenas served on it by several states, and Mukasey will clearly be faced with a multiplicity of issues arising from the surveillance program.

One more:

Even Mukasey's current clients at Patterson have connections to both Giuliani and the Justice Department that raise disturbing questions. He represents the Renco Group, the private holding company that owns 40 percent of the joint venture that manufactures Humvees and has seen its profits soar in Iraq. Renco chairman Ira Rennert and his wife have maxed out their donations to the Giuliani campaign at $4,600 apiece. The Justice Department is suing a Renco affiliate for a magnesium plant that has polluted the Great Salt Lake in Utah, and federal prosecutors have been described in news accounts as "determined" to make Rennert "personally pay for the way his companies conduct business."

Then there's Linda Lay, widow of Enron's Ken Lay, who was represented civilly by Bracewell Giuliani. Mukasey has represented her in mediation disputes over Ken Lay's estate and the Justice Department is suing her to collect money for Enron victims.

Mukasey says his active involvement in Rudy's campaigns didn't start until his current bid for President.

First, there's the meetings. Was he or wasn't he a member of Rudy's "kitchen cabinet" while a federal judge?

In 1993, Mukasey served as a secret adviser to Giuliani's mayoral campaign while he was on the federal bench in Manhattan, according to sources who were involved at the time. Mukasey was one of the close Giuliani friends who gathered at a house that the mayoral candidate rented for the summer in Oyster Bay, Long Island. That's what two people present at the house for these weekend sessions in the middle of the '93 campaign vividly recall. Asked about Mukasey's attendance at these sessions and any advisory role he might have played in other Giuliani campaigns, White House press aide Tony Fratto limited his response to the summer get-togethers. "Judge Mukasey has never attended any campaign-strategy meetings for Mayor Giuliani in Oyster Bay," he said.

But the people who were at the gatherings say they were not "meetings" per se. Giuliani and then wife Donna Hanover hosted the sessions, usually on weekends, with their key friends and "kitchen cabinet." The talk was often about the campaign, and Mukasey was there, according to these sources.

Mukasey's family worked in Rudy's campaigns:

Mukasey's stepson Marc Saroff (he has since changed his name to Mukasey) is listed on the 1989 campaign filings as a "staff assistant," and Mukasey's wife Susan also worked at the campaign headquarters in 1989 and 1993. The judge himself was seen around the headquarters in 1993, and joined Giuliani in his election-night suite in 1989, swapping stories with him about Al D'Amato, the then U.S. senator who was viewed with great hostility by Giuliani partisans.

Here's what Mukasey said in his Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire:

In his Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire, Mukasey was asked if he had "ever played a role in a political campaign," and he listed only the current Giuliani presidential campaign and his activities as part of the New York Jewish Coalition for Reagan/Bush in 1984, both of which occurred when he was not a federal judge.

Barrett writes:

his involvement in the Giuliani's 1993 race, and even his appearance at the 1989 victory party, appear inconsistent with the judicial rules of conduct, which bar a judge from "engaging in any partisan political activity" or "attending any political gatherings." While Mukasey's role as a casual campaign adviser, and his appearance at a campaign event like a victory party, may seem benign, they are troubling signs of political involvement that take on larger dimensions only because of the great power to influence an election that he will soon enjoy. And if he went beyond the strict interpretation of the guidelines as a judge, might he not do the same as attorney general?

Mukasey and Giuliani have been two peas in a pod in their views on waterboarding and torture:

If Mukasey is in agreement with his potential boss in the White House, he also appears to be on the same page as Giuliani, who has come out in favor of "enhanced" and "aggressive" interrogation techniques. Like Mukasey, Giuliani has also refused to rule out waterboarding. Asked recently if the aggressive technique was torture, Giuliani invoked Mukasey: "I don't believe the attorney general designate was in any way unclear about torture." Reminded that Mukasey said he didn't know whether waterboarding was torture, Giuliani replied: "Well, I'm not sure it is either. . . . It depends on how it's done. It depends on the circumstances. It depends on who does it."

Similarly, Mukasey's suggestion that the president could violate a federal statute if he deems it necessary to defend the country is in sync with Giuliani, who repeatedly ridiculed Mitt Romney for indicating that he might talk to lawyers before going to war with Iran.

The remainder of the article deals with Giuliani and Bernie Kerik, mostly more details of topics previously reported.

The question for Giuliani regarding Kerik is how he spent years ignoring alarms about the man he placed in one top law-enforcement job and then tried to install at the helm of our national defense. While some elements of what Giuliani knew about Kerik have come out in previous news accounts, what follows is an untold chronology that could haunt the presidential candidate, particularly if Kerik goes to trial before Election Day.

Marc Mukasey, as partner at Bracewell-Giuliani, has been tapped for the role of running interference between Giuliani and Kerik.

Marc Mukasey's task to keep an eye on Kerik's criminal investigation shows Giuliani's concern with how the legal fate of his former NYPD and correction commissioner could affect his presidential campaign, sources said.

A source familiar with the Kerik probe said Mukasey's role in monitoring the Kerik case is "obviously trying to distance Giuliani from all [the allegations about Kerik], although obviously it all occurred on Giuliani's watch."

In other Kerik news today, his lawyer Ken Breen's old lawfirm, Texas based Fulbright and Jaworski, is suing him for $200k in unpaid legal bills.

It looks like a Kerik indictment, if it comes, will be on or before November 17.

Unfortunately, the Senate Judiciary Committee members were asleep at the wheel when they questioned Mukasey. They were too focused on waterboarding and not focused enough on these very troubling issues of conflict of interest and partisan loyalty. While Mukasey may not have a strong loyalty to Bush, the same does not appear to be the case with respect to Rudy. Should Rudy get elected and keep Mukasey as Attorney General, it will be too late to ask these questions then.

Mukasey, Rudy and Bernie Kerik - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime

,

Spending & the Democratic Leadership


cover
Book
Humor's Edge
by Ann Telnaes

Ann Telnaes, comics, editorial cartoons, email comics, political cartoons


War Drum



By Mike Luckovich, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
© Cartoonist Group, 2006


War Drum


Bush Thinks Listening to the American People Is a waste of time

This morning, President Bush met exclusively with Republican congressional leaders to discuss the SCHIP bill. Afterward, he held a press conference slamming the Democratic leadership for "not getting its work done" in Congress, stating that the Senate had "wasted valuable time" trying to end the war.

read more | digg story

The Washington Note

 

October 31, 2007
Private Note to Bush from Hagel Calls For Direct, Unconditional, Comprehensive Talks with Iran

hagel clemons salon dinner 10.30.07.JPG

I have just secured a private letter -- not yet publicly released -- from Senator Chuck Hagel to President Bush and copied to Condoleezza Rice, Robert Gates, and Stephen Hadley. I should add that I did not receive this letter from Senator Hagel but from other sources.

The letter urges the President to pursue "direct, unconditional, and comprehensive talks with the Government of Iran."

In the letter, both attached (Hagel letter pdf) and reprinted in full below, Hagel warns that "unless there is a strategic shift [from the current situation], I believe we will find ourselves in a dangerous and increasingly isolated position in the coming months." Hagel continues, "I do not see how the collective actions that we are now taking will produce the results that we seek."

Senator Hagel encourages President Bush to take the bold strategic step of offering a completely different course for US-Iran relations. He writes about direct unconditional talks:

An approach such as this would strengthen our ability across the board to deal with Iran. Our friends and allies would be more confident to stand with us if we seek to increase pressure, including tougher sanctions on Iran. It could create a historic new dynamic in US-Iran relations, in part forcing the Iranians to react to the possibility of better relations with the West. We should be prepared that any dialogue process with Iran will take time, and we should continue all efforts, as you have, to engage Iran from a position of strength.

We should not wait to consider the option of bilateral talks until all other diplomatic options are exhausted. At that point, it could well be too late.

This letter is a call for serious, level-headed rationality from one of the Senate's most stalwart "classic conservatives."

I have since learned that the letter somehow made its way to US Central Command Commander William Fallon, perhaps through Defense Secretary Gates or other avenues, and Fallon allegedly communicated with the Senator that serious articulations of American interests and consideration of the options Hagel recommends are much needed in this current political and policy environment.

I need to also report that while I am in complete agreement with the content of Senator Hagel's letter and had the privilege of moderating a dinner discussion with him yesterday evening, the content of this letter came via other sources to me -- and I trust the Senator and his staff will respect the fact that I felt it important to bring this letter to public attention and have not violated any trust with any person in his office.

Full Text of Letter from Senator Chuck Hagel to President George W. Bush on US-Iran Policy, 17 October 2007:

October 17, 2007

The President

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

I write to urge you to consider pursuing direct, unconditional and comprehensive talks with the Government of Iran.

In the last two years, the United States has worked closely with the permanent members of the UN Security Council, Germany, Japan, and other key states as well as the UN Secretary General and the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency to pursue a diplomatic strategy regarding Iran's nuclear program. I have supported your efforts. Maintaining a cohesive and united international front remains one of our most effective levers on Iran.

In the last year, you have also authorized our Ambassador in Iraq, Ryan Crocker, to hold bilateral talks with Iranian officials regarding the situation in Iraq. I have also supported this effort. Although Iran has continued dangerous actions in Iraq, this channel for dialogue is important.

I am increasingly concerned, however, that this diplomatic strategy is stalling. There are growing differences with our international partners. Concerns remain that the United States' actual objectives is regime change in Iran, not a change in Iran's behavior. Prospects for further action in the UN Security Council have grown dim, and we appear increasingly reliant on a single-track effort to expand financial pressure on Iran outside of the UN Security Council. Iran's actions, both on its nuclear program and in Iraq, are unchanged. Iran's leaders appear increasingly confident in their positions vis-a-vis the United States.

Unless there is a strategic shift, I believe we will find ourselves in a dangerous and increasingly isolated position in the coming months. I do not see how the collective actions that we are now taking will produce the results that we seek. If this continues, our ability to sustain a united international front will weaken as countries grow uncertain over our motives and unwilling to risk open confrontation with Iran, and we are left with fewer and fewer policy options.

Now is the time for the United States to active consider when and how to offer direct, unconditional, and comprehensive talks with Iran. The offer should be made even as we continue to work with our allies on financial pressure, in the UN Security Council on a third sanctions resolution, and in the region to support those Middle East countries who share our concerns with Iran. The November report by IAEA Director General ElBaradei to the IAEA Board of Governors could provide an opportunity to advance the offer of bilateral talks.

An approach such as this would strengthen our ability across the board to deal with Iran. Our friends and allies would be more confident to stand with us if we seek to increase pressure, including tougher sanctions on Iran. It could create a historic new dynamic in US-Iran relations, in part forcing the Iranians to react to the possibility of better relations with the West. We should be prepared that any dialogue process with Iran will take time, and we should continue all efforts, as you have, to engage Iran from a position of strength.

We should not wait to consider the option of bilateral talks until all other diplomatic options are exhausted. At that point, it could well be too late.

I urge you to consider pursing direct, unconditional and comprehensive talks with the Government of Iran.

Thank you for considering my views.

Best wishes.

Sincerely,

Chuck H.

Chuck Hagel
United States Senator

cc: Condoleezza Rice

Robert M. Gates

Stephen J. Hadley

This is a letter benchmarking the views of one of the most grounded, foreign policy savvy, common sense thinkers about the eroding state of America's military and national security portfolio. And he's a Midwestern American Republican who served in the United States Military.

Senator Hagel will be speaking for the Center for Strategic and International Studies on Thursday, 8 November, at the Capital Hilton at 11 am on the subject of America's Iran policy -- and no doubt this letter that I have secured will be among the topics of discussion.

-- Steve Clemons

The Washington Note

Technorati tags: , , ,

Iraq, Afghan Vets at Risk for Suicides

By KIMBERLY HEFLING

(AP) Mary Gallagher poses beside a photograph of her husband Gunnery Sgt. James F. Gallagher at her home...
Full Image

WASHINGTON (AP) - Mary Gallagher did not get a knock at the door from a military chaplain with news of her Marine husband's death in a faraway place. Instead, the Iraq war veteran committed suicide eight months after returning home.

She is left wondering why.

It's a question shared by hundreds of families of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who have taken their own lives in a homecoming suicide pattern of a magnitude that is just starting to emerge.

Preliminary Veterans Affairs Department research obtained by The Associated Press reveals for the first time that there were at least 283 suicides among veterans who left the military between the start of the war in Afghanistan on Oct. 7, 2001 and the end of 2005.

(AP) Mary Gallagher, the wife of Gunnery Sgt. James F. Gallagher, poses for a photograph at her home in...
Full Image

The numbers, while not dramatically different from society as a whole, provide the first quantitative look at the toll on today's combat veterans and are reminiscent of the increased suicide risk among returning soldiers in the Vietnam era.

Today's homefront suicide tally is running at least double the number of troop suicides in the war zones as thousands of men and women return with disabling injuries and mental health disorders that put them at higher risk.

A total of 147 troops have killed themselves in Iraq and Afghanistan since the start of the wars, according to the Defense Manpower Data Center, which tracks casualties for the Pentagon.

Add the number of returning veterans and the finding is that at least 430 of the 1.5 million troops who have fought in the two wars have killed themselves over the past six years. And that doesn't include people like Gallagher's husband who committed suicide after their combat tours and while still in the military - a number the Pentagon says it doesn't track.

That compares with at least 4,227 U.S. military deaths overall since the wars started - 3,840 in Iraq and 387 in and around Afghanistan.

My Way News - Iraq, Afghan Vets at Risk for Suicides

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Now on DVD: The Film That "Has The White House Spooked"

Democrats are trying to find a way to end the occupation of Iraq, but George Bush wants to keep the occupation going... forever.

That's why it's essential for all of us to see No End in Sight, a remarkable and powerful film that will give you the facts you need to demolish Bush's latest lies. Recently in Salon, noted correspondent Sidney Blumenthal wrote that the film 'No End In Sight' "has the White House spooked" by the prospect of former high level officials like Colin Powell being inspired by the insiders in the film to speak out against the shortsightedness of the disastrous Iraq policy, destroying the last vestiges of the administration's credibility.

Monday, October 29, 2007

Iran says documents show U.S. backing "terrorists"

 

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran has access to evidence of U.S. support for terrorist groups in the Middle East, a senior Iranian official was quoted as saying on Sunday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Iran's new chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, made the allegation in comments to visiting Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan, whose country may soon send troops to hunt down Kurdish guerrillas in northern Iraq.

Tehran says the rebels are operating in Iraq with U.S. forces present in the country and this shows Washington is refraining from tackling them.

Like Turkey, Iran also has faced cross-border attacks by Kurdish rebels and has shelled targets inside Iraq in response.

"Escalation of terrorism in the region is one of the direct results of the presence of occupiers in Iraq, particularly America," Jalili, an ally of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said according to the country's state broadcaster.

"And there are documents and information available proving America's support for terrorist groups in the region," he said, without giving details. Jalili is also the new secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council.

The United States often accuses Iran of backing and training militias responsible for some of the bloodshed threatening to tear Iraq apart. Tehran denies the charge and blames the violence in Iraq on the presence of U.S. forces.

The two countries are also locked in a stand-off over Tehran's nuclear program, which Western powers suspect is aimed at developing bombs. Iran says it only wants to generate electricity.

Washington last week dubbed Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction and accused its Qods force of backing terrorists. It also imposed sanctions on more than 20 Iranian companies, major banks and individuals.

At a joint news conference with Babacan, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki on Sunday also accused the United States and Israel of involvement in terrorism in the region.

"We see ... their hand behind some of the regional terrorist activities," Mottaki said.

Babacan, whose country's ties with the United States have deteriorated sharply in recent weeks, thanked Iran for helping Turkey fight the PKK guerrillas and said the two sides had talked about continuing their cooperation.

The Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) launched its campaign for a Kurdish homeland in southeastern Turkey in 1984. More than 30,000 people have been killed in the conflict since then.

Jalili on October 20 replaced Ali Larijani as Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, a move analysts saw as signaling a toughening of Tehran's position in the atom row.

Iran says documents show U.S. backing "terrorists" - Yahoo! News

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Controlled Burn



By Dwane Powell , The Raleigh News and Observer
From the Cartoonist Group.


Controlled Burn


Late Late Sunday: For The President’s Amusement

For The President’s Amusement.

Another week begins. Who will outrage the GOP this week? Pete Stark, a lonely nation turns its eyes to you.

88% of CNN respondents say Stark shouldn’t apologize. Who wants those kind of numbers this week?

(YouTube courtesy of Crooks and Liars)

Firedoglake - Firedoglake weblog » Late Late Sunday: For The President’s Amusement

Technorati tags: , , ,

Forget Impeachment, Put Bush and Cheney in a Straightjacket

"Iran is now a major threat to Europe? The Iranians are going to launch a nuclear missile (that they don't yet possess) against Europe!?" This has got to stop before the megalomaniacs in the oval office destroy this entire planet.

read more | digg story

45,000 March in New York to Call for End to Iraq War | October 27


45,000 stood up to the rain and the Bush administration in New York City today, and marched and rallied for peace. Led by Iraq veterans, veterans of other wars, military families, union members and students, from throughout New York City, New York State, and northern New Jersey, we made our demands to bring the troops home now and no to war with Iran heard loud and clear in the streets of Manhattan.

Feeder marches brought people in from all over the city and New Jersey. 200 hundred marched over the Brooklyn Bridge, while nearly 100 marched from New Jersey over the George Washington Bridge, to join a contingent from northern Manhattan, and then proceeded downtown via subway to join up with the main rally and march. Groups from the Bronx, Queens, Long Island, and Staten Island marched as well.

The day closed with a peace festival, in which people learned more about and how to get involved with numerous peace and justice organizations.

Video coming soon!

45,000 March in New York to Call for End to Iraq War | October 27

US hands over Karbala to Iraqis

 

Iraqi soldiers celebrate handover

Iraqi security forces are now in charge of the province

US forces have handed control of the mainly Shia province of Karbala in central Iraq to local authorities in a tightly-guarded ceremony.

Karbala is the eighth of 18 provinces to be transferred to local control since the US-led invasion in 2003.

The handover took place as at least 27 people died in a suicide bomb attack on a police headquarters in Baquba, north of Baghdad, according to police.

At least 20 people were hurt. Most victims were police recruits.

Correspondents say the attack bears the hallmarks of the al-Qaeda in Iraq militants, who often target recruits.

'Year of security'

Speaking at the handover ceremony in a sports stadium in the city of Karbala, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki said the country had been slow to rebuild its security forces.

See map showing Iraqi-controlled provinces

"Allow me to say that we are late, very late, to reconstruct, to rebuild our forces for reasons that I do not want to mention here," he said.

But he said this year would be the year of Iraqi security while next year the focus would turn more towards reconstruction.

The BBC's Jim Muir, in Baghdad, says that despite the handover the situation in Karbala is far from perfect, with more than 50 people killed in August in clashes between Shia militias and the police.

(Click on the link below to read the entire article)

BBC NEWS | Middle East | US hands over Karbala to Iraqis

Technorati tags: , , , ,

Brooklyn Bridge Feeder March | October 27


200 people braved the wet weather and marched over the Brooklyn Bridge to join the march and rally in Manhattan. More photos by Diane Lent are available here.



Submitted by greenelent on Sun, 28/10/2007 - 8:32pm.


Brooklyn Bridge Feeder March October 27


Video from the NYC Peace Rally

Video from New York Rally, Part 1
45,000 from throughout New York City, New York State and northern New Jersey withstood the rain to rally and march for peace in Manhattan.

Filmed and edited by Ian Cook.



Video from New York Rally, Part 2
2nd half of the rally before the New York march.



Sunday, October 28, 2007

10 Tribal Sheiks Kidnapped in Baghdad

By KIM GAMEL
Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD - Gunmen in Baghdad snatched 10 Sunni and Shiite tribal sheiks from their cars Sunday as they were heading home to Diyala province after talks with the government on fighting al-Qaida, and at least one was later found shot to death.

The bold daylight kidnapping came as the top U.S. commander in Iraq said the threat from the terror network has been "significantly reduced" in the capital.

A suicide car bomber, meanwhile, struck a busy commercial area in the oil-rich, northern city of Kirkuk, killing at least eight people and wounding 26, police said.

A new general assumed control of the region north of Baghdad, acknowledging that violence remains high but expressing confidence that the military has al-Qaida on the run there as well.

The two cars carrying the sheiks - seven Sunnis and three Shiites - were ambushed in Baghdad's predominantly Shiite neighborhood of Shaab at about 3:30 p.m., police officials said.

The sheiks were returning to Diyala province after attending a meeting with the Shiite-dominated government's adviser for tribal affairs to discuss coordinating efforts against al-Qaida in Iraq, police and a relative said.

Police found the bullet-riddled body of one of the Sunni sheiks, Mishaan Hilan, about 50 yards away from where the ambush took place, an officer said, adding that the victim was identified after his cell phone was found on him.

A relative of one of the abducted Shiite sheiks blamed Sunni extremists and said the attackers picked a Shiite neighborhood to "create strife between Shiite and Sunni tribes that have united against al-Qaida in the area."

But, Jassim Zeidan al-Anbaqi said, "this will not happen."

The well-planned attack was the latest to target anti-al-Qaida tribal leaders and other officials in an apparent bid to intimidate them from joining the U.S.-sponsored grass roots strategy that the military says has contributed to a recent drop in violence.

Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Sunday that the threat from al-Qaida in several former strongholds in Baghdad has been "significantly reduced" but the group remains "a very dangerous and very lethal enemy."

He singled out success in what had been some of the most volatile Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad, including Ghazaliyah, Amariyah, Azamiyah and Dora.

"Having said that ... al-Qaida remains a very dangerous and very lethal enemy of Iraq," he said. "We must maintain contact with them and not allow them to establish sanctuaries or re-establish sanctuaries in places where they were before."

Petraeus said the reduced threat from al-Qaida had given way to nonsectarian crimes - kidnapping, corruption in the oil industry and extortion.

"As the terrible extremist threat of al-Qaida has been reduced somewhat, there is in some Iraqi neighborhoods actually a focus on crime and on extortion that has been ongoing and kidnapping cells and what is almost a mafia-like presence in certain areas," he said.

Petraeus made his comments after a transition ceremony as the 1st Armored Division, which is based in Wiesbaden, Germany, assumed command of northern Iraq from the Hawaii-based 25th Infantry Division at Camp Speicher, a U.S. base near Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit, 80 miles north of Baghdad.

The new commander for the region, Maj. Gen. Mark Hertling, said the number of attacks so far in October had dropped by more than 300 from last month, although he did not provide more specific figures.

"The levels are still high in some of the northern provinces," he said. "But while they're still high ... they have been decreasing significantly."

"We are in, I believe, a pursuit operation with al-Qaida," he said, adding that attacks were more focused on local civilians and Iraqi security forces. "They are targeting the concerned local citizens, the police stations and some of the gathering places of sheiks ... specifically to try and deter the Iraqi people from moving forward."

In all, at least 35 people were killed or found dead across the nation, including the decomposing bodies of 12 Shiites found near the Diyala provincial capital of Baqouba, an army officer said.

An explosives-laden car also exploded near a market in Baghdad's northern Shiite district of Kazimiyah, killing at least two civilians and wounding 10, according to local police

The suicide bombing in Kirkuk, 80 miles north of Baghdad, struck a mainly Kurdish area in the city, which has seen a rise in ethnic tensions as Iraq's Kurds try to strengthen their presence there as a prelude to annexing it to their nearby self-rule region.

The city's Arab and Turkomen residents dispute the Kurdish claim.

Several cars and nearby stores and restaurants were set on fire and black smoke rose from the area as panicked people ran over bloodstained sidewalks.

On a separate subject, Petraeus offered some personal reflection on the plight of Sultan Hashim al-Tai, a Saddam Hussein-era defense minister who faces the death penalty after his conviction for his role in the so-called Anfal campaign that killed tens of thousands of Kurds.

The executions of al-Tai - along with Saddam's cousin "Chemical Ali" al-Majid and Hussein Rashid Mohammed, former deputy operations director for the Iraqi military - have been delayed as Iraqi politicians and legal experts wrangle over the refusal of President Jalal Talabani, himself a Kurd, to sign the order.

Al-Tai, a Sunni Arab from the northern city of Mosul, negotiated the cease-fire than ended the 1991 Gulf War, when a U.S.-led coalition drove Iraqi forces from Kuwait. He also surrendered to U.S. forces in September 2003 after weeks of negotiations. His defense lawyers claimed the Americans had promised al-Tai "protection and good treatment" before he turned himself in.

Petraeus, who was then commander of the 101st Airborne division that oversaw the surrender, denied reports that he had promised al-Tai immunity.

"We were very hot on his heels," he said. "So we put the word out to his family through interlocutors that ... I would receive his surrender in an honorable manner and convey him to the central authorities and that's basically what we did. And I did treat him honorably."

Petraeus said they brought al-Tai's family to visit him and he said he personally flew al-Tai in his helicopter to Mosul and spent about an hour with him as they waited for a C-130 transport plane to fly him to Baghdad.

"I actually visited him there one time. Another time we took his some family members and an imam to see him," he recalled. "But the bottom line is that if the appropriate Iraqi process is followed then we will respect that process."

News Story - Verizon Online

Technorati tags: , ,

Iran: The Road to Armageddon?

 

Reminder to the crusading Armageddonists .....  “Thou shalt not kill.” Exodus 20: 13
.
They are at it again. Remember when Milosovic was labelled “the butcher of Belgrade”, the new Hitler?
Then Saddam Hussein was “the butcher of Bagdad” and, of course the most dangerous man since Hitler - with weapons of mass destruction which could be unleashed on the world “in forty five minutes”.
Colin Powell lied to the U.N., about the danger Iraq posed to the planet; George Bush lied to anyone who would listen; Tony Blair lied to Parliament and aides concocted dossiers so dodgy they were laughable, yet in spite of the millions who marched, protested and knew the lies for what they were, there were millions who bought fiction as fact.
And here we go again. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (wait for “the tyrant of Tehran”) threatens the planet, is supplying weapons to Iraq's resistance, is destabilising the region and the paradise that is occupied Iraq.
Whilst there are indeed plenty of Iranians or Iranian sympathisers in Iraq, they came in with the occupiers. Many in high places in Iraq's corrupt, militia driven, American puppet government, speak Farsi, not Arabic.

The increasingly hysterical claims regarding Iran, the latest threat to life as we know it, is being brought to you by the very same warmongers who wrought the duplicity that resulted in Iraq's murderous decimation, the hawks' nest which is the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and their friends.
A glance at the AEI website lists those including:
Paul Wolfowitz (“entrepreneurship and development”),
Michael Rubin (“Arab democracy”),
Richard Perle (“defence ...intelligence”),
Joshua Muravchik (“global democracy”),
John Bolton (“foreign policy”),
Lynne Cheney, whose husband, as ever, is believed a driving force behind the attack plan (“culture and education”),
Michael Ledeen (latest book: “The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots Quest for Destruction”),
Daniell Pletka (“Vice President for foreign and defence policy studies”) who, writing in the “Wall Street Journal” (28th September 2007) referred to Iran's “illegal nuclear weapons ... Washington's impotence” and “clear information of a link to a weapons of mass destruction programme”. This in spite of the International Atomic Energy Authority finding no indication of such programmes.

It all sounds chillingly familiar.

Interestingly, an item on the Institute's list of “Research Projects” is “Global Investment in Iran”. Surely a matter for Iran - or does the AEI already regard Iran's oil fields and assets as their fiscal frolic zone?

Orchestration is continuing apace:
“Even as we are succeeding in Iraq” (really?) “Iran is working against us ... we will not achieve peace in the region if we ignore this threat”, writes Ledeen. Further, there are clear plans to liberate Iran's women, Afghan style: “Since 1979, Iran has changed from a society where women could attend university and have careers, to one where they are second class citizens ... sold as slaves ...”. writes Diana Furchgott-Roth in the New York Sun (14th September 2007.)
There must be two Irans: “Literacy is well over ninety percent, even in the rural areas and in 2005, more than sixty five percent of students entering university were women. The voices that come through most strongly on the Iranian blogosphere are those of this educated, young generation.” Over sixty five percent of this country of seventy million are under thirty years old.

“I feel cold when I think about a possible war against my homeland”, wrote one blogger: “My picture of war hasn't come from Hollywood movies, I have seen the pain, the kids tears, bloody streets ...”  In a picture showing a meeting of the Tehran Photographers Association, the venue is packed with vibrantly dressed women - and one man. (See : Inside Iran, New Internationalist, March 2007: www.newint.org )

Iran is not perfect, but where is? Britain's Prime Minister Brown "refuses to rule out" joining the US military intervention - to decimate for “democracy” and plunder resources. According to the Sunday Telegraph (1st October 2007), a dossier is being drawn up on Iran's violations of International Law, as with Iraq. “Violations of International Law”? Two countries, Britain and America  have not alone violated, but torn up International Law. Yet again, who guards the guards?

Can a nation, which even invaded Grenada (which has no armed forces, main exports: bananas, nutmeg, mace; a war for nutmegs?) in 1983, totalling a psychiatric hospital (24th anniversary, 25th October) population 94.103 (1994) v. United States, population 260.713.000 (1994) because it was a “threat”, be trusted?
But the war drums are beating: “WE MUST bomb Iran”, is the header for Josua Muravchik's Los Angeles Times article (19th June 2007.)
He begins with quotes straight from the Pentagon's Iraq propaganda handbook: “...since the country's secret nuclear programme was brought to light ... the path of diplomacy and sanctions has led nowhere.” Tehran has “spurned” a “string of concessions”; the UN Security Council was derelict in its duty toward the Iranian threat.
The completion of Iran's nuclear arsenal grows closer daily, this “premier state sponsor of terrorism” could “slip nuclear material to terrorists”. The bomb Iran doesn't have, would, of course “constitute a dire threat to Israel's six million population”. No mention of Israel being the fifth largest nuclear power on earth, without a blink towards the non-proliferation treaty, or indeed even an admission of having such weapons.

However Iran's non-weapons: “would spend finis to the entire non-proliferation system”. The “...global struggle” with Iran is “akin” to the forty year one with the Soviet Union and - wait for it – “a clash of civlisations”.

“The only way to forestall these frightening developments is by the use of force ... by an air campaign against Tehran's nuclear facilities. We have considerable information about these facilities; by some estimates they comprise about 1,500 targets.... What should be the timing of such an attack? If we did it next year, that would give time for U.N. diplomacy to further reveal its bankruptcy ...'” is Murachik's conclusion. “Deja vu, all over again.”

Not mentioned, anywhere, in the demented rhetoric regarding an attack on Iran, is the “A” word: Armageddon. “Likely targets for saturation bombing” (that look likely to involve tactical nuclear weapons) “are the Bushehr nuclear power plant” (where Russian and other foreign national technicians are present) “a uranium mining site at Saghand” (near a major city, Yazd) “the uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, a heavy water plant and radioisotope facility at Arak, the Arkedan Nuclear Fuel Unit, the Uranium Enrichment Facility and Nuclear Technology Centre in Isfahan, the Tehran Nuclear Research Cnetree, the Tehran Molybdenum, Iodine and Xenon Radioisotope Production Facility .... a reportedly dismantled uranium enrichment plant at Lashkar Abad and the Radioactive Waste Storage Units in Karaj and Anarak”.(Wayne Madsen: http://www.entimesreport.com/Attack_on_Iran.html )

These were facilities, many begun after the US/UK overthrow of Iran's democratically elected, democratic Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953, after he had nationalised the country's oil. The coup was engineered by the CIA's Kermit Roosevelt, grandson of Theodore. General Norman Schwartzkopf's father then travelled to Iran, to help train Savak, the murderous, ruthless, secret police of America's friend, the Shah.

However, modern history aside, forget global warming.

Consider the enormity of the seemingly proposed attack, apart from the unimaginable horror of those fried and irradiated in the immediate vicinity and surrounding countries (including “allied”, troops throughout the region.).
This is a succinct description of what the explosion of just one nuclear power plant generated, Chernobyl, in 1986:  “Irradiated human cells splinter into fragments called micronuclei ... a definitive pre-cursor of cancer. During the nuclear reactor disaster at Chernobyl, the ...radiation released was the equivalent of four hundred atomic bombs ... Exposed Russians quickly developed blood cell micronuclei ...” (The Radiation Poisoning of America, Amy Worthington, 9th October 2007: http://www.globalresearch.ca )

The plight of the children and the Chernobyl region's cancers twenty one years on, have become an ongoing, tragic, global health study, as Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the residents of the Pacific islands, after the British and French nuclear tests. Chernobyl's radiation traversed the globe within days. In the highlands of the U.K., Wales and Cumbria, livestock straying in affected areas are still inedible and unsaleable. Chernobyl was doused from the air with fire retardant, by crews, which, in spite of protection by heavily leaded cockpit floors, reportedly, not one has survived the ravaging resultant cancers. If Chernobyl was four hundred atomic bombs, see the above list and do the maths. Don't forget to add the “coalition's” democratic nuclear weapons dropped on them.

Norman Podhoretz, one of the founding fathers of neo-conservatism in the United States, is gung-ho, another one reportedly urging Bush to bomb Iran. He told Bush: “You have the awesome responsibility to prevent another holocaust. You are the only one with the guts to do it.”(Sunday Times, 1st October 2007.) A holocaust by any other name ...

Mohammad Mossadegh and Saddam Hussein made fatal mistakes. They nationalised their countries' oil. Saddam Hussein finally tied the noose around his neck, when he switched Iraq's oil revenues out of US Dollars and into Euros in 2000.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has also vowed to switch from US Dollars and move to a currency “further east”.
As Iraq, is this really about a nuclear threat?
Will the millions who believed the last great lie, be fooled again? If they are not, will it make any difference, in the illegal space the US and UK Administrations inhabit?

On the ground in the Middle East (or in this case on the water) it seems not. Here is a communication from a Landing Signals Officer* (an LSO directs carrier aircraft whilst landing) on a carrier attack group that is planning and staging a strike group deployment in the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most strategically vital oil routes, which is controlled by Iran.

The LSO is convinced Iran will be attacked, commenting that “... all Air Operation Planning and Asset Tasking are finished (meaning) all targets have been chosen, prioritized and tasked to specific aircraft, bases, carriers, missile cruisers ...” Further, the LSO comments, there is deep disquiet amongst senior officers about “staging a massive attack on Iran”. However, “I have seen more than one senior Commander disappear ...”; it's weird, because everyone who has “disappeared” has questioned this mission.

How limited would the attack be?
“I don't think it's limited at all. We are shipping in and assigning every Tomahawk, we have an inventory. I think this is going to be massive and sudden (with) thousands of targets. I believe no American will know when it happens, until after it happens.”The LSO ponders that discussing a secret attack is “treason” but is so concerned “something tells me to tell it anyway.”

“Yes, we are going to hit Iran big time. Whatever political discussion that is going on is window dressing ... a red herring. I see what's going on here below deck, in the hangers and weapons bay - and I have a sick feeling about how it is going to turn out.'”

Would the US Administration really endanger the entire planet?
Here is a story told to me by Bernard Lown, one of co-founders of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) during the Reagan era. http://www.ippnw.org Lown worked closely with another eminent fellow cardiac surgeon, the (then) USSR's Yevgeny Chazov. Since physicians know no borders, they had formed a friendship, then a movement, which bridged the cold war, the Reagan “Evil Empire” (re. the Soviet Union) nonsense and within two years, had doctors and surgeons from eighty two countries spreading the word, that even cardiac arrest paled against nuclear war.

In 1995, IPPNW collectively won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Since Lown travelled, lecturing, to the USSR frequently and had built trust over many years at all levels, the US State Department asked if he would engage in some unofficial diplomacy. Relations between the two countries were far worse than most realised. After one such visit to Moscow, I met Lown in Paris. We sat in dappled Spring sun, at a pavement breakfast café - fresh squeezed orange, coffee, croissants.
“I came back two days ago and went to talk (at the State Department) of the concerns in Moscow. Afterwards, a senior official - a household name (he declined to divulge) walked me to the exit. As we neared the exit, he put his arm round my shoulders:

'Don't worry, Professor Lown, if there is a nuclear war, we will be the first ones to rise up and meet Jesus in the sky.'” Lown, used to the vagaries of the unwell, responded: “Tell me, does anyone else in this building feel as you do?”

“Oh yes, many of us do.”

The swathe of “household names”, from the Reagan era, are now in the Bush Administration and the American Enterprise Institute.
The Armageddonists are back.
The world should be very afraid - or should the physicians in white coats move in?

Felicity Arbuthnot is a journalist and activist who has visited the Arab and Muslim world on numerous occasions. She has written and broadcast on Iraq, her coverage of which was nominated for several awards. She was also senior researcher for John Pilger's award-winning documentary,
"Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq".
http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partID=4
and author, with Nikki van der Gaag, of “Baghdad” in the “Great Cities” series, for World Almanac Books (2006.)

Iran: The Road to Armageddon?

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

US Republican Guru: We Must Bomb Iran

A senior foreign policy adviser to the Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani has urged that Iran be bombed using cruise missiles and "bunker busters" to set back Teheran’s nuclear programme by at least five years. The tough message was delivered by Norman Podhoretz, one of the founders of neoconservatism.

read more | digg story

US to order diplomats to serve in Iraq

 

WASHINGTON - In the largest call-up of U.S. diplomats since the Vietnam War, the State Department is planning to order some of its personnel to serve at the American Embassy in Iraq because of a lack of volunteers.

Those designated "prime candidates" — from 200 to 300 diplomats — will be notified Monday that they have been selected for one-year postings to fill the 40 to 50 vacancies expected next year.

A spokesman for the union that represents U.S. diplomats told The Associated Press on Saturday that "assigning unarmed civilians into a combat zone should be done on a voluntary basis."

They will have 10 days to accept or reject the position. If not enough say yes, some will be ordered to go to Iraq and face dismissal if they refuse, said Harry Thomas, director general of the Foreign Service.

Starting Nov. 12, "our assignments panel will assign people to Iraq," Thomas told reporters in a conference call Friday. "Under our system, we have all taken an oath to serve our country, we have all signed (up for) worldwide availability.

"If someone decides ... they do not want to go, we will then consider appropriate action," he said. "We have many options, including dismissal from the Foreign Service."

US to order diplomats to serve in Iraq - Yahoo! News

RIGHTS-EUROPE: 'Non-lethal Weapons' Tackle Protests Against Globalisation

Governments in France, Switzerland, Germany, Spain, and several other countries have ordered such weapons, or are about to, even though human rights groups are warning that the supposed "non-lethality" of the guns is a myth, and that they actually can kill people. The most widespread "non-lethal weapon" is the stun gun Taser...

read more | digg story

Desmond Tutu Likens Israeli Actions to Apartheid

 

BOSTON, 28 Oct (IPS) - South African Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu compared conditions in Palestine to those of South Africa under apartheid, and called on Israelis to try and change them, while speaking in Boston Saturday at historic Old South Church.
'We hope the occupation of the Palestinian territory by Israel will end,' Tutu said.
'There is a cry of anguish from the depth of my heart, to my spiritual relatives. Please, please hear the call, the noble call of our scripture,' Tutu said of Israelis.
'Don't be found fighting against this god, your god, our god, who hears the cry of the oppressed,' Tutu said.
Tutu spoke with political activist and lecturer Noam Chomsky and others to a largely religious audience about 'The Apartheid Paradigm in Palestine-Israel,' a conference sponsored by Friends of Sabeel North America, a Christian Palestinian group.
Israeli policy toward Palestine is an inflammatory topic in the U.S. and is not commonly discussed in large, public forums.
In Boston, complaints were lodged with Old South Church in the weeks prior to the event, in an effort to halt the conference. The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting complained that Sabeel is 'an anti-Zionist organisation that traffics in anti-Judaic themes,' according to press reports.
Outside the church Saturday, Christians and Jews United for Israel demonstrated against Tutu and the conference.
'Sabeel is an organisation that seeks to demonise Israel. Tutu several years ago made anti-Semitic comments,' May Long, president of the group, told IPS. Long did not hear Tutu's speech, she said.
Tutu was an inspirational leader in the South African fight against apartheid, which officially ended 13 years ago. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984 and today continues to speak around the globe for peace and justice, and to call for Palestinian rights.
The 76-year-old Tutu also appears to have won a battle against prostate cancer, which he was last treated for in 2000.
'Because of what I experienced in South Africa, I harbour hope for Israel and the Palestinian territories,' said Tutu, who invoked passages from the Christian bible throughout his talk.
Tutu drew parallels between the apartheid of South Africa and occupied Palestine of today, including demolitions of Palestinian homes by the Israeli government and the inability of Palestinians to travel freely within and out of Palestine.
'I experienced a déjà vu when I encountered a security checkpoint that Palestinians must negotiate every day and be demeaned, all their lives,' Tutu said.
Tutu said that Palestinian homes are being bulldozed, and new, illegal homes for Israeli's built in their place.
'When I hear, 'that used to be my home,' it is painfully similar to the treatment in South Africa when coloureds had no rights,' Tutu said.
Tutu is a pacifist and he said only non-violent means should be used to confront the oppression at play in Palestine.
'Palestinians ought to try themselves to restrain those who fire the rockets into Israeli territory,' Tutu said.
Tutu said that while fighting apartheid in South Africa he drew inspiration from the Jewish struggle as the bible describes it.
'Spiritually I am of Hebrew decent. When apartheid oppression was at its most vicious, and all but knocked the stuffing out of those of us who opposed it, we turned to the Hebrew tradition of resistance,' and the belief that good will triumph over evil, and that a day of freedom from oppression will come, he said.
'The well-to-do and powerful complain that we are mixing religion with politics. I've never heard the poor complain that 'Tutu, you are being too political,'' he said.
'I am not playing politics when it involves children who suffer,' Tutu said. 'A human rights violation is a human rights violation is a human rights violation, wherever it occurs.'
Tutu recently bumped up against U.S. discomfort with discourse about Palestine, when a Minnesota university president yanked an invitation to Tutu that had been extended by a youth group.
Rev. Dennis Dease, president of the University of St. Thomas, in St. Paul Minnesota, said he did not want Tutu to speak because the Nobel Laureate's position on Palestine was viewed by some as anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic.
Dease also fired Cris Toffolo as head of the university's peace and justice programme, who had supported the invitation to Tutu.
Dease apologised to Tutu three weeks ago.
Tutu said Saturday that he accepted Dease's 'handsome apology', but that he will not consider speaking at the school until Toffolo is reinstated and her record cleared.
At the conference, Chomsky said the U.S. provides heavy financial support to Israel and has a profound influence on Israeli policies, including those toward Palestine and foreign trade.
'If the U.S. doesn't like what Israel is doing, it just kicks Israel in the face,' Chomsky said. In 2005, Israel wanted to sell improved missiles to China. The Bush administration halted the sale, Chomsky said.
'It blocked them and refused to allow Israeli officials to come to the U.S. The U.S. demanded an apology from Israel. It dragged Israel through the mud,' Chomsky said.
The U.S. began its close relationship with Israel after the Israeli victory in the 1967 'Six Day War' against Egypt, Syria and Jordan, Chomsky said.

POLITICS: Desmond Tutu Likens Israeli Actions to Apartheid

US leaders of adding "fuel to the fire" about Iran

CHIEF UN atomic watchdog Mohamed ElBaradei said overnight he had no evidence Iran was building nuclear weapons and accused US leaders of adding "fuel to the fire" with recent bellicose rhetoric.

read more | digg story

Protesters call for end to Iraq war

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Anti-war demonstrators marched in a dozen U.S. cities on Saturday to call for an immediate end to the war in Iraq and a cut-off of funding by Congress.

read more | digg story

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Iraq War Protest Draws Thousands of Demonstrators Across the Country

Thousands of people called for a swift end to the war in Iraq as they marched through downtown on Saturday, chanting and carrying signs that read: "Wall Street Gets Rich, Iraqis and GIs Die" or "Drop Tuition Not Bombs."

read more | digg story

Bill would require Congressional approval for war with Iran

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) introduced legislation this week that requires President Bush to seek Congressional authorization before going to war with Iran:

Standing behind him are liberal anti-war groups, which have expanded their focus on Iraq to include a drumbeat of protests against a potential war with neighboring Iran.

"Every day now, it seems that the confrontational rhetoric between the United States and Iran escalates," said Sen. Robert Byrd, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

"President Bush needs to understand that the Congress will not be kept out of the loop while his administration plots another march to war," said Byrd, D-W.Va.

The question is when Bush and Cheney disobey that order and go to war will Congress actually stand their ground for the first time since winning back majority in both houses last November?

Bill would require Congressional approval for war with Iran - Left Politics - MySpace News

7,500 MARCH IN BOSTON FOR AN END TO THE WAR IN IRAQ

 

On Saturday, October 27, some 7,500 protestors marched at a regional demonstration in Boston as part of a national day of protest against the war in Iraq called by United for Peace and Justice. Regional demonstrations were held in 11 cities.

The Boston event started with a rally at Boston Common, with speakers and cultural performers, followed by a march from 2:30 thru 3:30 around Copley Square and back to the Common. The event was endorsed by over 200 organizations.

The demands for the Boston action were: Bring All The Troops Home Now; End All Funding for the Iraq War Now; Support Our Communities, Fund Human Needs; No Attack on Iran; Stop the Attacks on Civil Liberties, Defend Human Rights.

The regional demonstration in Boston was organized by New England United, a coalition of peace and antiwar organizations from around the region. The next general meeting of NEU will be on Sunday, November 11th at 1:00 PM at Encuentro 5, 33 Harrison Avenue in downtown Boston. We will be discussing our plans for the future, and we encourage as many groups as possible to send representatives to the meeting.

New England Mobilization to End the War in Iraq | October 27 -

Antiwar Strategy Poll - What's Next?

What do think?  I think that our next step is:

  • Mass civil disobedience in one or more large cities. One example might be what San Francisco did at the start of the war. Another more recent but smaller scale effort is the No War No Warming action that took place on October 22.
  • Click here to take the poll now - or read on for more info.

    About the choices:

    1. Mass civil disobedience in one or more large cities. One example might be what San Francisco did at the start of the war. Another more recent but smaller scale effort is the No War No Warming action that took place on October 22.
    2. A national march in Washington, DC, such as January 27, 2007.
    3. Counter-recruitment (or "truth in recruiting") and support for military resisters.
    4. Challenging war profiteers, such as Blackwater and Chevron
    5. Connecting ending the Iraq war to other issues, including Iran, global warming, etc.
    6. Local monthly actions, such as the Iraq Moratorium
    7. Congressional pressure, including bird-dogging, sit-ins, visits and call-in days.
    8. Pressure presidential and congressional candidates leading up to the 2008 elections
    9. Targetted boycott (e.g., gasoline)

    Disclaimer: As with all online polls, this poll is far from "scientific." Readers should not assume that United for Peace and Justice or any other group will make decisions based on this poll. You may also be interested in reading the Comprehensive Organizing Program for UFPJ that was adopted at the 3rd UFPJ National Assembly last June.

    Still, we hope that our poll sparks interest and we encourage everyone to take the poll and post their thoughts to this forum topic.  (NOTE: To post to the forum, you will need to login or register.)

    Also, send the link to the poll along to a friend!

    Antiwar Strategy Poll - What's Next? | October 27

    United for Peace & Justice : The Time to Stop a War With Iran Is NOW

     

    October 24th, 2006

    As incredible as it might seem, the Bush Administration appears to be actively planning a military strike against Iran -- the beginning of a war which could dwarf even the Iraq war in its grim potential for devastating global conflict.

    You've probably have heard the warnings of Seymour Hirsh and Daniel Ellsberg. You may have read in The Nation that a strike force, led by the nuclear aircraft carrier U.S.S. Eisenhower, has been deployed to the Persian Gulf off the coast of Iran. Some experts claim that this is a normal deployment, but others believe that it is an intentional �show of force,� if not an active provocation or an attempt to create a pretext for war, like the Tonkin Gulf incident in Vietnam.

    We have now learned that U.S. minesweepers have been ordered to follow the U.S.S. Eisenhower. This is an even more ominous signal of preparation for military action, since such ships would not normally accompany a strike force on routine deployments.

    The national steering committee of UFPJ is actively discussing what can be done to prevent an attack on Iran, as are many of our member groups. We cannot and will not stop our work to end the disastrous U.S. occupation of Iraq, where casualties are rising dramatically with each passing day, and we are not suggesting that anyone stops efforts to use the last few weeks of this election season to push our antiwar message. At the same time, we cannot ignore the signals that an increasingly desperate Bush administration might launch a military strike against Iran.

    Here's how you can help:

    • Please click here and sign Peace Action's "No War with Iran!" petition today! This petition, created by UFPJ member group Peace Action, rejects any U.S. military action against Iran and demands direct negotiations. Working with other groups within UFPJ, Peace Action will deliver these petitions to Congress at the earliest feasible date �- and your signatures are needed to do that effectively! This petition is directed to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice; copies will go to Chairs of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Committee on International Relations.

    • We also want to make sure you know that another member group of UFPJ, the After Downing Street Coalition, also has a petition, directed to Bush and Cheney.

    • To help prevent an "October Surprise" that might change the course of the midterm Election, a group of progressive allies of San Diego Coalition for Peace & Justice is urging people to contact the Democratic Leadership to convince them to stand up to the Republican leaders if Republicans attempt to win the election through the use of an attack on Iran or a similar action.

      Please contact the Democratic Party leaders listed below, and insist that they let the Republicans know that it will be considered an impeachable offense if they attack Iran at this time.

      Rep. Nancy Pelosi, U.S. House Democratic Leader
      sf.nancy@mail.house.gov
      California office voice: 415-556-4802; Washington office voice: 202-225-4965

      Sen. Harry Reid, U.S. Senate Democratic Leader
      Online contact form
      Nevada office voice: 775-882-7343; Washington office voice: 202-224-3542

      Gov. Howard Dean, Chair, Democratic National Committee
      Online contact form
      Washington office voice: 202-803-8000

      Sen. Charles Schumer, Chair, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
      Online contact form
      Washington office voice: 202-224-2447

      Rep. Rahm Emanuel, Chair, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
      Online contact form
      Washington office voice: 202-863-1500

    Help spread the word about these efforts: Circulate this memo, or your own version, to the members of your group; contact other groups in your area; raise the issue in your other ongoing work.

    We'll do our best to keep you informed about developments related to Iran and ideas for action in the coming weeks and months. The first step is to show the largest possible response we can to Congress and policy makers in Washington, letting them know in no uncertain terms that we will not tolerate another war in the Middle East. Sign the petitions today, and pass them on to your friends and colleagues. You can find more resources on Iran on our website.

    peace,

    Leslie Cagan
    National Coordinator
    UFPJ

    P.S. If you're not convinced that the Bush administration would actually do such a crazy thing, you might want to check out the following two articles:

    "Why Bush Will Nuke Iran" by Paul Craig Roberts, a Reagan administration official and former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page, who argues that the Bush administration will decide to use tactical nukes in Iran because they are still committed to military hegemony in the region, but have no more troops to use.

    "Does Bush Think War with Iran is Preordained?" by Chris Hedges, former Middle East bureau chief for The New York Times, which explores the belief of many in Bush�s inner circle that they are on a divine mission to reshape the world, and that Iran is the inevitable next step.

    These are not loose cannons or conspiracy theorists. We are taking their warnings very seriously, and hope you will too.

    United for Peace & Justice : The Time to Stop a War With Iran Is NOW