Zebra 3 Report by Joe Anybody
Sunday, 4 April 2010
DRONES - CIA use - Questions Not Answered 4.3.10
Now Playing: DRONE - LAWS - QUESTIONS - ALL HERE
WASHINGTON - While welcoming an initial effort by the administration of President Barack Obama to offer a legal justification for drone strikes to kill suspected terrorists overseas, human rights groups say critical questions remain unanswered.
File picture shows supporters of Pakistan's fundamentalist Jamaat-e-Islami party during a protest against US drone strikes in Pakistan. The US government for the first time has offered a legal justification of its drone strikes against Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants, citing the right to "self-defense" under international law.(AFP/File/Tariq Mahmood)
In an address to an international law group last week, State Department Legal Adviser Harold Koh insisted that such operations were being conducted in full compliance with international law.
"The U.S. is in armed conflict with al Qaeda as well as the Taliban and associated forces in response to the horrific acts of 9/11 and may use force consistent with its right to self-defence under international law," he said. "...(I)ndividuals who are part of such armed groups are belligerents and, therefore, lawful targets under international law."
Moreover, he went on, "U.S. targeting practices, including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, comply with all applicable law, including the laws of war," which require limiting attacks to military objectives and that the damage caused to civilians by those attacks would not be excessive.
While right-wing commentators expressed satisfaction with Koh's evocation of the "right to self-defence" - the same justification used by President George W. Bush - human rights groups were circumspect.
"We are encouraged that the administration has taken the legal surrounding drone strikes seriously," said Jonathan Manes of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). "While this was an important and positive first step, a number of controversial questions were left unanswered."
"We still don't know what criteria the government uses to determine that a civilian is acting like a fighter, and can therefore be killed, and... whether there are any geographical limits on where drone strikes can be used to target and kill individuals," he told IPS.
"He didn't really say anything that we took issue with," said Tom Malinowski, the Washington director of Human Rights Watch (HRW), who also complained about the lack of details.
"But it still leaves unanswered the question of how far the war paradigm he's talking about extends. Will it extend beyond, say, ungoverned areas of Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen? Because you don't want to leave a legal theory out there that could be exploited by a country like Russia or China to knock off its political enemies on the streets of a foreign city," he added.
Drone attacks, which have increased significantly under Obama, are widely considered to have become the single-most effective weapon in Washington's campaign disrupt al Qaeda and affiliated groups, especially in the frontier areas of western Pakistan.
In Obama's first year in office, more strikes were carried out than in the previous eight years under his predecessor, George W. Bush.
Conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), they reportedly killed "several hundred" al Qaeda and Pakistani Taliban militants since Obama in 2009, forcing many of them to flee their border hideouts for large cities where precision attacks would be much harder to carry out without causing heavy civilian casualties.
But the strikes - as well as cruise-missile attacks carried out by the U.S. military against suspected terrorist targets in Yemen and Somalia - have drawn growing criticism from some human rights groups and legal scholars, notably the U.N.'s Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings, Philip Alston, who have argued that several aspects of these operations may violate international law.
Their focus has been less on the use of drones in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Washington's forces are engaged in active hostilities and the Pentagon has implemented relatively transparent procedures to maximize compliance with the laws of war, than on the frontier areas of Pakistan and other "ungoverned" areas where al Qaeda and Taliban militants have gained refuge. The CIA, whose procedures remain secret, is in charge of drone operations.
The weapon itself "is one of the least problematic from a civilian-protection standpoint, because drones can hover over their targets and observe whether civilians are present before delivering a payload, and because they carry relatively small and precisely guided munitions," noted Malinowski.
"The question is a legal one: under what circumstances can you use lethal force at all? Our view has always been that it should be limited to zones of active armed conflict where normal arrest operations are not feasible."
A related question involves who may be targeted. While many authorities insist lethal force can be used under the laws of war against those who are actively participating in armed conflict, the U.S. has used defined participation in very broad terms, including membership in - or even financial support of - an armed group.
In his remarks to the American Society for International Law, Koh, who was one of the harshest and most outspoken critics of the Bush administration's legal tactics in its "global war on terror", acknowledged some of these concerns, noting that his speech "is obviously not the occasion for a detailed legal opinion."
"(W)hether a particular individual will be targeted in a particular location will depend upon considerations specific to each case, including those related to the imminence of the threat, the sovereignty of the other states involved, and the willingness and ability of those states to suppress the threat the target poses," he said.
Koh added that Washington will ensure the application of the principles of "distinction" and "proportionality" in the laws of war.
While noting criticism that the use of lethal force against some individuals far removed from the battlefield could amount to an "unlawful extra-judicial killing", he insisted that "a state that is engaged in an armed conflict or in legitimate self-defence is not required to provide targets with legal process before the state may use lethal force."
"Our procedures and practices for identifying lawful targets are extremely robust, and advanced technologies have helped to make our targeting even more precise," he said.
Alston, the U.N. rapporteur, was far from satisfied with these assurances, however, calling Koh's statement "evasive".
He "was essentially arguing that 'You've got to trust us. I've looked at this very carefully. I'm very sensitive to these issues. And all is well,'" he told an interviewer on 'Democracy Now' Thursday.
"The speech did not provide essential information about the drone/targeted killing program, including the number and rate of civilian casualties, and the internal oversight and controls on targeted killing, especially within the CIA," said Manes of the ACLU, which has filed a lawsuit to acquire that information.
Tom Parker of Amnesty International was more scathing about Koh's position, suggesting that it was one more concession - along with indefinite detention and special military tribunals for suspected terrorists - to the framework created by Bush's "global war on terror".
"The big issue is where the war is and whether it's a war, and we couldn't disagree more strongly as to the tenor of Koh's comments," he said. "It goes back to the idea of an unbounded global war on terror where terror is hardly defined at all."
Jim Lobe's blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/.
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 4:03 PM PDT
Friday, 2 April 2010
NYC Videographer makes 20 Grand filming the cops / After being arrested
Now Playing: Cops arrest videographer in NYC - 20,000 $ Lawsuit is result
Ah, it's a classic scenario: Citizen videotapes cop, cop gets mad and arrests citizen. But in this case, videographer Robert Carnevale's 22 hour tour through the Tombs earned him $20,001 in taxpayer money after a settlement with NYC. It all happened one night in May 2007, when officers from the 9th precinct confiscated a number of bikes locked to parking meters and signposts on 6th Street near First Avenue. As you may recall, the NYPD maintained that the bikes were abandoned, and they allowed some people to take the loose bikes without showing any proof of ownership.
According to Time's Up, police seized about 15 bikes, even ones locked to D.O.T. bike racks. Carnevale arrived in time to recover his bike, and he started videotaping the scene, asking officers for their badge numbers. Some cops don't like that (a few even went so far as to conceal their badges on another controversial night in East Village history). Plainclothes officer Lt. Robert Corcoran took a special interest in Carnevale, and anyone who's ever had a run-in with a bullying, power-drunk cop will recognize the scene that unfolds at the 1:10 minute mark:
Carnevale got sent through "the system," emerging 22 hours later, which is standard. A bystander, Carole Dale, 59, was also after she started questioning Carnevale's arrest. Both were charged with disorderly conduct for refusing a lawful order to disperse and blocking the sidewalk, and accepted an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (ACD). Then they sued the city.
According to the suit, "Neither plaintiff interfered in any way with the police operation under Defendant Lieutenant Corcoran’s supervision; both simply observed and questioned the officers." "These were First Amendment retaliatory arrests," their lawyer told City Room after the settlement was announced Wednesday. "They had every right to object."
NYPD spokesman Paul J. Browne, reached for comment in Upside Down Land, counters, "It was not retaliation. Period." After legal fees and expenses, the total payout from taxpayers was expected to be about $72,000, all because Officer Dim didn't like anybody questioning his authority
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 9:23 AM PDT
Friday, 26 March 2010
3.26.10 Camp Out Now / POTA - is Gone, but not for Long! by Cindy Sheehan
Now Playing: Camp Out Now - Officially Over - see you all in June 2010
Posted on March 26, 2010
by Cindy Sheehan
Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox Blog
Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox
March 26, 2010
Well, our great experiment didn’t go as well as we planned here in DC. My vision was a Peace Camp that would serve the needs of the campers as far as housing and food were concerned (that part worked) and the campers would then commit aggressive acts of civil resistance (that part didn’t) in the nation’s capital to shut down the violent military-corporate empire that we live in. In the opinion of members of Peace of the Action, living here in the US gives us special responsibilities for stopping it.
Anyway, we had hundreds of people come through camp over the week that we were allowed to keep it up. Dozens were college students that worked very hard while they were here and we were sorry to see them go back to their schools after break. The thing that we were hoping that would happen and never did—was that hundreds of people would stay and help us claim the camp as a permanent presence on the mall.
It’s true that the Park Police thwarted us and watched (and photographed) every move we made. However, if we had the numbers, we could have taken a more credible stand against the repression of our rights. When the Park Police came out and shut down camping on the first day—part of our name “Camp” was shut down, too.
We have wonderful organizers and I know I worked as much as is possible for one person, but we had to face facts that the will is just not in our fellow Americans to sacrifice a few creature comforts to create true and lasting change. It’s so much easier to vote for a smooth-talking snake oil salesman than to roll up ones sleeves and do the dirty, hard, yet gratifying work of empire change.
Even though we had some rough times in DC with the Police State and Camp OUT NOW is physically gone (for the time being), we are not giving up the spirit of shutting down this town for Peace.
Congress is once again taking up war supplemental funding. We can’t just make phone calls and write petitions—we must organize and be in their faces here and in our home districts demanding that not one more penny be spent on killing and maiming people.
By the way, not only was our demand to meet with President Obama not granted—three of our Camp OUT NOW volunteers (including myself) have been given stay away orders from the White House.
We tried to get into the Senate Appropriation’s Committee meeting today at the Capitol and we were followed and harassed the entire time and in the transparent age of Obama, the hearing was closed to us citizens, anyway. I was able to watch the rerun on C-SPAN 3 and I can tell you all one thing, these wars are planned to continue indefinitely. I am not okay with that.
To take advantage of the energy and enthusiasm of our young people, we are planning on returning in June to set up Camp and start our actions again.
So we will be keeping the spirit of the Camp alive until the students get out of school and, hopefully, we can make a go of it in the summer.
It’s really up to you—we have laid the foundation, now it’s your turn to be the builders.
As always, go to www.PeaceoftheAction.org for more info.
Whose Streets? (Our Streets between 1pm and 4pm With a Permit) by Cindy Sheehan
Cindy Sheehan’s Speech at the Anti-war Protest + More videos of her arrest + Going over the barricade!
Cindy Sheehan Arrested At War Protest In D.C.
Scott Horton Interviews Cindy Sheehan on the anti-war movement in the age
Democracy Now!: Cindy Sheehan Sets Up “Camp OUT NOW” in Antiwar Protest
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 6:39 AM PDT
Updated: Friday, 2 April 2010 9:25 AM PDT
Wednesday, 24 March 2010
DRONES and Leagality - AP article 3.24.10
Now Playing: Insane USA KILLING MACHINES
Missiles fired from US drones killed at least six people on Tuesday in a Pakistani tribal area bordering Afghanistan, according to security officials.
It's the latest in a wave of attacks that have been used to target alleged enemy combatants but which frequently kill innocent civilians.
The latest strike came as a congressional committee in Washington DC heard evidence that legal issues surrounding the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or drones have not been fully worked out. A lone protester was told by the chairman: "You're going to have an opportunity to sit down or be asked to leave - it's your choice."
There have been multiple civilian deaths as a result of the use of such drones and the committee heard there are concerns inside and outside the US government that drone attacks violate human rights standards and may constitute extra judicial execution. (AFP/HO/US AIR FORCE/File)
She sat down but soon left the room, allowing the door to slam behind her. The committee went on to hear that while the US has more than 7,000 UAVs and more on order, there is still no legal framework for the operation of this new technology. It's widely suspected the CIA operates a fleet of drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan which they use for targeting Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders.
There have been multiple civilian deaths as a result of the use of such drones and the committee heard there are concerns inside and outside the US government that drone attacks violate human rights standards and may constitute extra judicial execution.
Professor Kenneth Anderson from the Washington College of Law at American University told the hearing:
The long-term effect of that, given that there are not necessarily statutes of limitations, could be the problem of CIA officers or for that matter military officers or their lawyers, being called up in front of international tribunals or courts in Spain or some place that say you've engaged in extra judicial execution or simple murder and we're going to investigate and indict.
The problem, says Professor Anderson, is that administration lawyers haven't justified publically the use of drones, because the administration itself is reluctant to admit drone attacks in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Although nobody in the world doubts what's going on in Pakistan, it's kind of hard for the lawyer to step up and say 'by the way what we're doing is legal and here's why' and give a whole series of reasons and say, 'by the way, we're not admitting that we're actually doing any of this stuff'. It's very hard for the lawyer to get out in front of the client when the client itself has not actually formally stood up and said 'this is what we're doing'.
He says what makes it more difficult is that though the CIA has taken on drone attacks on the Afghan/Pakistan border, it's not doing it as a genuinely covert operation but as an operation that is denied by the administration.
Tuesday's gathering was the opening session of congress's investigation into the use of UAVs.
There will be other meetings like this on Capitol Hill and at them the debate into the use of such drones is likely to continue.
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 3:37 PM PDT
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Cindy SheehanReports Back about Fascist US Goverment Lockup
Now Playing: Cindy Sheehans report back after being jailed like a terrorist
(Our Streets between One and Four When we have a Permit)
Report of our arrest and 50 hours detainment
On the 7th commemoration of the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq, there was a rally and march in DC sponsored by the A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition that was attended by about eight thousand people.
For quite awhile, I have been having problems with marches on Saturday, anyway. It seems like we march past empty buildings and shake our fists at them and promise that if those empty buildings don't change their ways, we will be back next year to do the same thing. The arrests are symbolic and don't shut down anything, except in the case of large arrests, where the police stations are busy for a few hours.
As far as I know, there were no large civil disobediences scheduled for last Saturday's rally, but some coffins were built on the sidewalk in front of the White House and four protesters decided to lie down near them and not move. Two of these protesters were good friends of mine: Elaine Brower of Military Families Speak Out and Matthis Chiroux of Iraq Vets Against the War. When I went over to check the action out, the four were begging the hundreds of others surrounding the protest to join them. The four were cordoned off with barriers and crime scene tape.
I began to plan a way to join Matthis and Elaine when I went to the front of the barrier and saw my dear friends, who have always been there for me, lying on the sidewalk by themselves. Just as I was figuring out how to get over the barriers, the section I was at collapsed onto the sidewalk and I took the opportunity to step over hoping that dozens, if not hundreds, would follow.
As soon as I crossed the barrier, I was slammed by a couple of cops, handcuffed and then actually run around the front of the White House while the cops tried to find a paddy wagon to stick me in-about 50 people were running with the cop and I, yelling: "Let her go, let her go." When the officer and I finally got to the paddy wagon, I was surprised to find that only two others had followed me. One other crossed the line to bring our detained numbers up to eight.
During my speech at the rally, I iterated the importance of "throwing our bodies upon the gears" of the machine, as well as marching-I got a huge cheer and during the march the participants chanted: "Whose streets, our streets." Eight detainees? Apparently the streets are only "ours" when we have a permit--god forbid we take them when the event is not permitted by the Police State!
Why, when the barrier was compromised, did more people not follow us to actually put their beliefs into higher relief than merely marching in a circle on Saturday? While we were being (tightly) handcuffed and loaded onto the hot paddy wagon, the crowd of on-lookers chanted, "This is what hypocrisy looks like."
I was, to say the least, very disheartened that hundreds of people didn't join us. Watching the video of my "crossing over," you can see a couple of people go over and then run back when the police come-but most of the people step back like the downed barrier is a livewire.
After a bumpy and sweaty ride, we eight arrive at the Park Police Station in Anacostia. As we were being processed, it started to become very clear that some of us were going to be detained until Monday. Ultimately, two of us were released and six of us were held. The two that were released were from DC and those of us held were out-of-towners. Immediately, we knew this explanation was total b.s. because I have been arrested in DC about 13 times now and I have always been from "out-of-town," and have never even been held overnight, let alone two nights.
Was it a coincidence that Camp OUT NOW had two major actions over the weekend to try and hold our campsite that I missed due to being jailed? I don't think so
Well, those two days were some of the most miserable days of my life! We were taken to a lock-up and Elaine and I were put into a freezing room and I had a t-shirt and flip-flops on, being unprepared to be arrested. For four women, our cell had one cement block bench that was about 7-8 feet long, so at least one of us always had to be on the stone-cold floor. Sleeping was fitful as it was very chilly all night-and very noisy!
Thirty-six hours, and eight bologna-like and cheese-substitute sandwiches later, we were taken to the court for our arraignment and stayed in that cell for seven hours and were finally released at 5pm after we all pled "not-guilty" and were scheduled for a trial on June 9th.
Basically, six of us stayed in jail for 50 hours for an offense that ends up to be the equivalent of a traffic ticket and we even had to go to traffic court to be arraigned. I am positive that everyone in DC who gets a traffic ticket and is from "out-of-town" does not have to stay over night. Then, I found out that the penalty for my charge "Crossing a police line" doesn't even carry any jail time. I spent two nights in jail on an offense with no jail time! The maximum penalty is $300! Boy, I will be even more pissed if I go through a trial and have to pay $300 dollars after I have already spent two nights in jail.
To make matters even worse, I was the only one who was forced to come back for a trial even though Elaine has more DC arrests than I do. The other seven have chosen to go to trial with me, but they were given the option to "pay and forfeit" which means to pay the fine and forfeit your right to a trial.
The icing on the entire crappy cake came when the eight of us were given a "stay away order" from the White House-I asked the Judge how could that be legal because we weren't convicted of anything, but the Judge assured me that conditions could be placed on our release. I also think this is very suspicious considering our Camp OUT NOW actions were focusing on the White House.
Many times during the 50 hour ordeal, Elaine and I were asked if we thought it was "worth it," to go through so much hardship for so little gain.
My answer is, first of all, if more people crossed the line with me, we wouldn't have had to stay 50 hours in jail and I was very upset that we were left to hang out to dry like that. Secondly, the war didn't end while we were suffering-but knowing how awful it is to spend so much time in jail and be treated like one is a serial killer and not a protester-I would do it again and again, as I have.
There are literally billions of people suffering all over this planet due to my nation's militarism and greed and I know many people would have traded places with me in a heartbeat and think the conditions were pretty damn good.
AND this never happened to me when Bush was president.
UPDATE: Three of us went to pick up our property this morning at the Park Police station and as we were being jacked around, an officer named Thomas (Badge number 628) told me that if I "stopped getting arrested" I wouldn't have to go through all of this.
I said: "when the wars stop, I will stop." He actually then told me: "The wars will stop when we nuke them and take their oil."
I wonder why they are called "pigs."
VIDEO OF THE ARREST
CLICK ON DOVE TO DONATE
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 10:16 PM PDT
Updated: Wednesday, 14 April 2010 7:21 AM PDT
Monday, 22 March 2010
Solidarity Call Out for Camp Out Now in DC - Police force camp out on Monday 12 noon
Now Playing: The Peace Of The Action Camp is being forced to move (no permit)
March 21 Report Back
I went to the Camp Out Now around 9PM on Sunday Night. The popo was there earlier, and informed the activist that the little tents they put up the day before had to be down …as I was arriving all smaller tents were in fact down, they told the group they would be back at 10 pm ..…They never did come back. They also said all of the Camp has to be removed by Noon on Monday.
The Camp Out Now is asking for solidarity at their peace camp on the Washington Monument lawn for the anticipated Monday 3.22. for the 12 noon arrival of the "ENFORCERS"
The camp will "not" be evaporating if and when the popo shows up. Some will risk arrest. some will not. The group is not going to be silenced. If forced to move, a predetermined spot is already in the mix. When forced and arrested out of that new spot another predetermined spot will be used.
As I said Peace Of The Action is not going to leave until the Occupation is called off. Cindy Sheehan (who is still in jail) has requested a conversation with the President. He has ignored her, as he has done with the whole peace Community.
I have posted a dozen tweets from Sunday night on DC My Opinion Page
Help spread the word about Camp Out Now and the White Hose trying to shut it down
Help Spread the news about coming down to show solidarity at 12oclock Monday (or anytime)
Help Peace Of The Action by telling everyone that activists are here in Washington DC on the White House Lawns, demanding peace and holding their ground for peace and justice.
USA is in an aggressive War.... Peace of The Action is in an aggressive Peace mission
Tell everyone to write the President and Congress.... or come to Washington to be a cog in the wheel of the murder machine.
Do what you can in solidarity against the killing machine
From Portland Oregon - In solidarity - Covering the news the Corporate Media Wont Cover
~peace from www.Joe-Anybody.com
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 12:52 AM PDT
Thursday, 18 March 2010
Camp Out Now - Day One Report from Washington DC
Now Playing: Joe Anybody sends his first report back from anti war protest in DC
Hi Z 3 Reader
I am reporting on this anti war demonstration from Washington DC here:
A big march is slated for tomorrow
About 75 folks at the campouttoday 3/18
Read my report / follow me on twitter
Or see me in 9 days back in Portland
Funk This War and the Horse it Rode In On
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 10:55 PM PDT
Sunday, 14 March 2010
Dahr Jamail and Others gather in DC next weekend Iraq Body Count Flag Dispaly
Now Playing: Flag Display out on the lawn - speechs and memorial information
In Wasahington D.C. Listen to Dahr Jamail and Sam Husseini. Help set up the memorial,
participate in the candlelight procession, attend the dedication, and walk the memorial.
Thursday, March 18, at 6:30 – 8:00 pm Remembering Iraq - 7 years of Occupation and Counting
Dahr Jamail and Sam Huseini will present: at Busboys and Poets (V St., Washington D.C.)
Friday, March 19th, the seventh anniversary of the US-led invasion of Iraq, the Memorial will be set-up on
the Mall. Nearby, a memorial to the American soldiers who have lost their lives will tell another story of
the cost of this war. Memorial volunteers will join a candlelight procession at 9:30 pm to light luminaries
throughout the memorial for a 10:34 pm observance of the beginning of the invasion.
Saturday, March 20, at 10:00 am Dahr Jamail, Josh Stieber, Salam Hassan and Mark Johnson will speak as
the memorial is dedicated. (time, only, is yet tentatively)
Dahr Jamail's books, Beyond the Green Zone and The Will to Resist, carry rare accounts of what was - and is
- happening in the wars. Jamail is a respected journalist dedicated to speaking the truth. His “dispatches” arecarried by many independent media outlets and can found at his blog http://dahrjamailiraq.com/.
Josh Stieber, along with Conor Curran, both Iraq War veterans, established the contagiousloveexperiment
and traveled the country on foot, then on bicycle, to share their experiences. A read of the opening page of
their journal is well worth your time and will lead you to explore their experiment.
Salam Hassan assisted Dahr Jamail in Iraq as a translator, and works with media outlets to tell the real story
of Iraq. Salam's brother, Ali, was shot in Baghdad as a result of the war in Iraq while driving to work.Mark Johnson, Executive Director of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, is recognized as an international
change agent committed to social justice and economic and environmental sustainability.
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 5:43 PM PST
Saturday, 13 March 2010
Vietnam--A Beautiful Country and Beautiful People
Now Playing: Written by: Mike Hastie
Vietnam--A Beautiful Country and Beautiful People
Written by: Mike Hastie
We Americans who served in Vietnam,never knew anything about Vietnam's history,nor anything about the Vietnamese people.The American people back home knew even less.Far less.By the time the United States Government left Vietnam,we had turned an ancient culture into an environmental wasteland.We had contaminated the country with mega death.Our government was a non-stop killing machine.Over three million people killed, and millions wounded.Southeast Asia is the most bombed area in the world.So Mike, why do you keep bringing this horrible history up?You seem very repetitious in your writing.You're like a parrot with the same bad news.Jesus Christ, give it a break for awhile.Enough with the shame.I'm sure most of the people who are currentlyreading this stuff already know it.
You're preaching to the choir.
I finally realized,it is not to my peer group who I am writing to.
It is really to my eight-year-old granddaughter'sgeneration who I am writing to.I have to leave a trace of truth for her.She does not realize that Vietnam is happeningall over again in the Middle East.This is happening in her lifetime.The survivor's message is like a loud mantra.Over and over and over again.It's like being trapped under a collapsed buildingafter an earthquake.You keep crying out,until they find you.You have to tell them that the building did notcollapse because of the earthquake.It collapsed because there was never a foundationto support the structure against deceit.It was built on a foundation of lies.They do not realize that they are not preparedto face their future.They do not realize that the U.S. economy is builtover the bodies of millions of people.The survivor is obsessed with bearing witness.The truth has to be told to an audience,even if most believe he is crazy.The survivor is committed until he takes his last breath.His worst torment is not to be able to speak.When he finally steps up on the witness stand,he often speaks with the artless skill of a severelyabused child who has just blurted out some blatantfact of honesty.The survivor's testimony can be so compelling,that it reveals the ultimate evidence--thatLying Is The Most Powerful Weapon In War.Vietnam--A beautiful country, and beautiful people.A people the Americans never knew.Like the teenage girl in this picture.That's why we killed her.
U.S. Army MedicVietnam
Posted on February 24, 2010
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 3:43 PM PST
Updated: Saturday, 13 March 2010 3:47 PM PST
Friday, 12 March 2010
Crooked Shady Government - Earmarks - Lobbiest - Defense Contractor Theives
Now Playing: Finally, Theyre Embarrassed --- No Their Corrupt & Crooked
Topic: FAILURE by the GOVERNMENT
I say theay are crooked rip-off thieves ...ALL OF EM.... read more from the NU Times article I found on 3.12.10
Finally, They’re Embarrassed
House Democrats are suddenly in a rush to ban corporate earmarks, those just-for-our-donors legislative favors that benefit everybody but the taxpayers. It is the right thing to do, but it is also a classic case of closing the barn door just in time for Election Day.
Meanwhile, holier-than-thou Republicans are trying to trump with a call for a much-too-sweeping ban on all earmarks, even those helping nonprofit endeavors.
The quid-pro-quo awarding of government contracts — and the scandals that come along with it — has been especially rampant in recent Congresses. Most notoriously there was the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal that bedeviled Republicans right into minority status.
Democrats should have been feeling endangered ever since the Justice Department began investigating the coziness between defense contractors and high-ranking members of the Appropriations Committee. But their enthusiasm only blossomed after the ethics committee gave all seven members involved a blanket exoneration.
The appropriators — five Democrats and two Republicans — steered more than $245 million in earmarks through a defense lobbying firm now under criminal investigation. The lawmakers received more than $840,000 in political donations from the firm’s corporate clients.
The House ban was announced just days after the committee blithely pronounced the coincidence of generous defense contracts and political contributions as just that — a mere coincidence that does not “support a claim that a member’s actions are being influenced by campaign contributions.” The committee, notably, deep-sixed the recommendation from its new advisory panel, the Office of Congressional Ethics, to open a more thorough inquiry into two of the seven: Representatives Peter Visclosky, a Democrat of Indiana, and Todd Tiahrt, a Republican of Kansas.
Whether this embarrassment can be trumped by a last-minute earmark ban is doubtful. Senate Democrats instantly announced opposition to the House ban. That means, in final conference bills, corporate donor earmarks can be salvaged by grateful senators.
Posted by Joe Anybody
at 8:51 AM PST
Newer | Latest | Older