Saturday, October 07, 2006

Stop funding the war

Rep. Jim McGovern is currently serving his fifth term in the House from the 3rd Congressional District of Massachusetts. He has introduced H.R. 4232, which would end funding for the use of ground troops in Iraq and US occupation of Iraq. Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) has been working and organizing support for HR 4232, including circulating an online petition that has garnered more than 25,000 signatures. PDA urges everyone to sign the petition, and to ask your Congressional member to co-sponsor the bill. Rep. McGovern was interviewed on Wednesday, Oct. 4, by PDA National Board Member William Rivers Pitt, read the interview here.

Thursday, October 05, 2006

Static: Media Manipulation and Fabrication

I just picked up this new book, Static by Amy Goodman and David Goodman, and it looks pretty good from most of the reviews. Amy Goodman is the host of the popular Democracy Now! radio show, which I listen to daily and also recommend to anyone looking for premium and unparalleled journalism.

"In Static, the brother-sister team of Amy Goodman and investigative journalist David Goodman once again take on government liars, corporate profiteers, and the media that has acted as their megaphone. They expose how the Bush administration has manipulated and fabricated news and how the corporate media has worked hand in glove with the powerful to deceive the public. The Goodmans cut through the spin and static to offer the truth about war, torture, and government control of the media. Mixing investigative reporting and interviews, Static presents voices of dissidents, activists, and others who are too often frozen out of official debate, to shed new light on urgent issues of war and peace. Ultimately, Static is a hopeful, fighting rallying call for people to take back our government, our media,and our world." BuzzFlash

Latest News Stories

Here are some links to the latest news topics, situations and developments:

In the U.S.:
Universities give student info to banks
Congress to Blow $20 Mil in Taxpayer Money on War 'Victory' Party

Iran:
Iran invites people to tour it's nuclear facilities

US Gives Iran Until the End of the Week to Suspend Enrichment

North Korea:
Nations confront North Korea about nuclear test
N.Korea calls for U.S. troop pullout in S. Korea

Friday, September 29, 2006

House approves warrantless wiretapping

The House of Representatives has just approved the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act, a bill that would legitimize warrantless electronic surveillance of people within the US who are suspected of having "foreign intelligence information."

HR 5825 authorizes the President to conduct electronic surveillance without a court order for up to a year. The only requirements are that the surveillance is meant to acquire the "contents of communications of foreign powers" and that the Attorney General follows certain safeguard procedures. In order to authorize this type of surveillance, all that the president has to do is have his Attorney General certify in writing that the surveillance meets legal criteria.

The government also requires Internet service providers and other telecommunications companies to assist with any valid request for such surveillance—and they must protect the secrecy of the request. The government agrees to compensate providers for their time and equipment. If companies object to surveillance on a particular target, they are allowed to challenge the legality of the directive before the secret FISA court, where a judge is required to rule on the merit of the directive within 24 hours of being assigned the case.

The Senate has a competing bill in the works which differs significantly from the House version, so the shape of the legislation won't become clear until the bills are hammered out in committee. If what emerges bears any resemblance to the House bill, however, the judiciary will be all but removed from oversight of this kind of surveillance. Congress will be the only group receiving even limited information about how the surveillance is being used—will they have the political will to call out any abuses that might arise?

Via Ars Technica and NY TImes

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Which cover is not like the others?

One reason why are we are misinformed Americans. Which one of these Newsweek covers is not like the others? Hmmm. I thought the Bush Administration's disinformation campagain was enough.

"Check out Newsweek's cover story this week. Actually, Newsweek has a different cover for each region of the world they publish in. If you go to the Newsweek International Edition home page, you can see the listings of the various covers for this week. Check them out and see if the one for the US doesn't stand out a little bit." Via AmericaBlog

Monday, September 25, 2006

War plans? Is an attack on Iran imminent?

By Dave Lindorff, The Nation

As reports circulate of a sharp debate within the White House over possible US military action against Iran and its nuclear enrichment facilities, The Nation has learned that the Bush Administration and the Pentagon have moved up the deployment of a major "strike group" of ships, including the nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower as well as a cruiser, destroyer, frigate, submarine escort and supply ship, to head for the Persian Gulf, just off Iran's western coast. This information follows a report in the current issue of Time magazine, both online and in print, that a group of ships capable of mining harbors has received orders to be ready to sail for the Persian Gulf by October 1.

As Time writes in its cover story, "What Would War Look Like?," evidence of the forward deployment of minesweepers and word that the chief of naval operations had asked for a reworking of old plans for mining Iranian harbors "suggest that a much discussed--but until now largely theoretical--prospect has become real: that the U.S. may be preparing for war with Iran."

According to Lieut. Mike Kafka, a spokesman at the headquarters of the Second Fleet, based in Norfolk, Virginia, the Eisenhower Strike Group, bristling with Tomahawk cruise missiles, has received orders to depart the United States in a little over a week. Other official sources in the public affairs office of the Navy Department at the Pentagon confirm that this powerful armada is scheduled to arrive off the coast of Iran on or around October 21. The Eisenhower had been in port at the Naval Station Norfolk for several years for refurbishing and refueling of its nuclear reactor; it had not been scheduled to depart for a new duty station until at least a month later, and possibly not till next spring. Family members, before the orders, had moved into the area and had until then expected to be with their sailor-spouses and parents in Virginia for some time yet. First word of the early dispatch of the "Ike Strike" group to the Persian Gulf region came from several angry officers on the ships involved, who contacted antiwar critics like retired Air Force Col. Sam Gardiner and complained that they were being sent to attack Iran without any order from the Congress.

"This is very serious," said Ray McGovern, a former CIA threat-assessment analyst who got early word of the Navy officers' complaints about the sudden deployment orders. (McGovern, a twenty-seven-year veteran of the CIA, resigned in 2002 in protest over what he said were Bush Administration pressures to exaggerate the threat posed by Iraq. He and other intelligence agency critics have formed a group called Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.)

Continue reading
.

Saturday, September 23, 2006

War in Iraq worsens terror, period.

An enlightening and well written article by Mark Mazzetti of The New York Times, which talks about how the war in Iraq has most definitely worsened the terror threat, Mazzetti writes:

"The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document." - NY Times

Many people have been agreeing about the fact that terror is worse as a direct result of the "War on Terror" - it's like taking a small wound and contining to irritate and scratch it. It's going to get worse.

"The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official." - NY Times

In an article, "The Phony War" by Robert Dreyfuss of Rolling Stone magazine, Dreyfuss brings up 5 main points about the "War on Terror" and what is wrong with it. In his third point of his article, "The Threat Has Gone Viral", he writes:

"By failing to "smoke out" bin Laden as promised, the president has given hope to a new generation of freelance terrorist cells, Islamist copycats and Al Qaeda wanna-be's. "We let them get away," says a retired CIA station chief. "We took a relatively centralized organization and turned it into a generalized virus. Before Afghanistan, we were facing somewhat of a unified threat. We now have the equivalent of a phantom that we're fighting."

The National Intelligence Council agrees: "The [National Intelligence Estimate] concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to include a new class of 'self-generating' cells." - NY Times

The war in Iraq has ultimately made the terrorism worse in many aspects. The terror net is now larger than ever and has spawned radicalist groups who have anger fueled by the Bush Administration's war and imperial ambitions.

The New York Times via Impolitical (Thanks!)

Friday, September 22, 2006

$70 billion more for Iraq/Afghanistan

Congress approved another $70 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan -- which should last til spring:

"House-Senate negotiators Thursday approved a new $70 billion infusion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan as they wrapped up talks on a $447 billion Pentagon funding bill.

The additional war funds would bring the total approved by Congress for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan since Sept. 11, 2001, to more than $500 billion, with another installment likely to come next spring."

But those funds probably don't take in to account the deteriorating situation in both countries. There will not be a reduction in U.S. forces in Iraq and NATO is beggging for more resources in Afghanistan.

Congress allocates this money because there are U.S. soldiers in harms way and they want to show support for the troops. Unfortunately, that means giving Bush a blank check when he has no plan in either country. He's too busy politicking about terror to deal with the real terror threats. Bush shows the ultimate disrepect for American soldiers by keeping them in war zones without an end game in sight.

Reuters does a daily update on the realities of what's happening on the ground in Iraq. Might help if someone at the White House took a peek at these updates every now and then:

Military and Civilian deaths and Security Developments in Iraq*

According to current estimates, the cost of the Iraq War could exceed $700 billion. In current dollars, the Vietnam War cost U.S. taxpayers $600 billion. The bill also provides for a 2.2 percent pay increase for the military as President Bush requested in his February budget. Via Yahoo News

*Via AmericaBlog

U.N. expert: Iraq torture may be worse

Torture in Iraq may be worse now than it was under Saddam Hussein, with militias, terrorist groups and government forces disregarding rules on the humane treatment of prisoners, the U.N. anti-torture chief said Thursday.

Manfred Nowak, the U.N. special investigator on torture, made the remarks as he was presenting a report on detainee conditions at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay as well as to brief the U.N. Human Rights Council, the global body's top rights watchdog, on torture worldwide.

Reports from Iraq indicate that torture "is totally out of hand," he said. "The situation is so bad many people say it is worse than it has been in the times of Saddam Hussein." Full article.

And it's only going to get worse.

Monday, September 18, 2006

Bush Assassinated In 'Death Of a President'

Death of a President' directed by Gabriel Range, is a new film depicting President Bush's assasination and what follows after. The Toronto Festival jury has praised the film "for the audacity with which it distorts reality, to reveal a larger truth", and it was also given a prestegious award. Range said the film had recently signed a US distribution deal. The assasination scene was created by putting the President's face onto an actor with digital wizardry, shows him being gunned down just hours after driving past an anti-war demonstration while doing a talk in Chicago 2007.


The Republican Party in Texas has said 'Death of a President' is "shocking" and "disturbing" that a TV drama is to depict the assassination of US President Bush. A White House spokesman said of the programme: "We are not going to comment because it does not dignify a response." OF course the White House does see the significance of the film, just doesnt want people to know. Maybe they'll stop lying to us for a while? Or not.

CCTV now with loudspeakers

This is unbelievable - Britain’s first ‘talking’ CCTV cameras have arrived, well, CCTV cameras with loudspeakers next to them. The system allows control room operators who spot any illegal behavior to send out a verbal warning to the offender. Middlesbrough has fitted loudspeakers on seven of its 158 cameras in an experiment already being hailed as a success.

Middlesbrough has fitted loudspeakers on seven of its 158 cameras in an experiment already being hailed as a success.

Control room operators say phrases such as: 'Warning - you are being monitored by CCTV - Warning - you are in an alcohol-free zone, please refrain from drinking'; and Warning - your behaviour is being monitored by CCTV. It is being recorded and the police are attending.'

'It would appear that the offenders are the only ones who find the audio cameras intrusive. The vast majority of people welcome these cameras. 'Put it this way, we never have requests to remove them.' People are comfortable with this? Also, unbelievable. People submit to this like sheep and this is extremely unhealthy for people in this town to not be debating and questioning this.

“Orwell’s 1984 was a dire warning to ward off the totalitarianism of public monitoring authorities. This camera/speaker system is not ‘like’ Big Brother, it ‘is’ Big Brother incarnate,” says one American from Boston. A dire warning indeed. More via Ministry of Tech

U.S. holds AP photographer 5 mos, no charges

The U.S. military in Iraq has imprisoned an Associated Press photographer, Bilal Hussein, for five months, accusing him of being a security threat but never filing charges or permitting a public hearing.

Military officials said Bilal Hussein, an Iraqi citizen, was being held for "imperative reasons of security" under United Nations resolutions. AP executives said the news cooperative's review of Hussein's work did not find anything to indicate inappropriate contact with insurgents, and any evidence against him should be brought to the Iraqi criminal justice system.

"The vast majority of the 420 images show the aftermath or the results of the conflict — blown up houses, wounded people, dead people, street scenes."

He won a Pulitzer Prize for breaking news photography last year. With this in mind, we see that he is photgraphing scenes in Iraq that are potentially bad for the Bush Administrations's image. From this we can conclude why he has been held for so long but never charged with a crime.