The Great Raid - movie, 2005

The Great Raid
No Mama - No Papa - No Uncle Sam

I saw the movie "The Great Raid" last night and I enjoyed it very much. It brought to life the characters I'd read about in Hampton Sides' "Ghost Soldiers" - and it brought to life a time and place in history I'd heard first-hand stories about since I was a young child. My great Uncle was a prisoner of war after the Bataan March in the Philippines, and for many years later in Japan. The true story was about the 6th Ranger Battalion in the Philippines in 1945, under the command of Lt Colonel Henry Mucci (played by Benjamin Bratt). The Battalion undertake a brave and daring rescue mission against nearly impossible odds. Traveling thirty miles behind enemy lines, the 6th Ranger Battalion aims to liberate over 500 American prisoners-of-war from the notorious Cabanatuan Japanese POW camp.

Fourth Marine Mel Sheya, a Bataan survivor, wrote a first-hand accounting of Bataan and the prison at Cabanatuan in a book titled "The Battling Bastards of Bataan".

I am lucky enough to have an autographed copy of the book, which was given to my great Uncle, who survived the Bataan Death March, thanks to his sheer will and a secret stash of quinine, which he shared with others to help sustain them.

In one section of the book, Mr. Sheya writes:

"In our short stay at Cabanatuan, we had seen our comrades face the firing squad, hundreds die from dysentery, malaria, malnutrition, and shot by guerillas who were after the Japs.

When we left, the camp was in a precarious state, for many men were lying around about to die. The camp looked more like a graveyard than a prison camp. Men weighed from sixty to eighty pounds and were unable to hold anything on their stomachs.

We bid them adieu, knowing that soon many would be buried.

Some of the dying would give buddies their sentimental valuables and ask them to give them to their wives or families when Uncle Sam liberated us. The time for departure came and we lined up ready to march.

You wouldn't realize men could become so close in friendship until you could see the tears shed by the men whose close friends were leaving...."

A review of the movie can be seen here.

I continue to be greatly inspired by the story of the men who, in the face of overwhelming odds, risked their own lives to save their fellow soldiers. It was not for strategic gain, it was bravely done out of loyalty, friendship, and a sense of duty to one another.

I have long been personally touched by this story, and I was thrilled to see it brought to life in the film. I am especially glad to know that these men are getting the recognition they had so deserved.

Why Howard Kurtz and Shailagh Murray Deserve a Raspberry

"The true measure of a Nation is how it treats its Veterans."

~ George Washington ~

Why Howard Kurtz and Shailagh Murray Deserve a Raspberry

Howard Kurtz and Shailagh Murray have used L. Brent Bozell III's right-wing Cybercast-CNS Newswire (given a big thumbs-up review by the human bastion of fairness and balance, Rush Limbaugh) to give big wings to the Swift-boating of Congressman (and winner of two Purple Hearts) John Murtha with literally no independent investigation. CNS has been a supplier of information for GOPUSA, who brought you the fake journalist/propagandist Jeff Gannon. What could Kurtz and Murray be thinking when they passed this off as a legitimate story worthy of the Washington Post?

I am truly disgusted.
Outraged beyond imagination, I am.

I stand by every comment I'd made about Bozell last year at this time.

65% of Americans see the direction of our nation going down the toilet and all we get from Howard Kurtz is this unsubstantiated trash? Is he a gossip columnist or a journalist? If he's a journalist, I'm quite sure that he allowed himself to be manipulated on this one. I've noted that he's been manipulated before. Maybe I just don't agree with the use of (and failure to tell the whole truth about) his sources and his failure to be tough enough on them in order to get to the objective truth. Anything less is gossip. For such a prestigious newspaper, a lack of follow-up would come close to qualifying this particular story as being libelous in nature.

But don't ask me - ask Murray Waas, who has a blogpost on the topic. He's a professional journalist for whom I have immense respect for his objectivity and tenacity - and he rips the reporting to shreds. Speaking about CNS Newswire editor David Thibault, he says

"..the article tells us very little about Thibault himself. Had the reporters done a simple Internet search, they would have discovered this biography of Thibault posted online which describes him as a "senior producer for a televised news magazine" broadcast and sponsored by the Republican National Committee. I dunno, but I for one, would have wanted to know that.

Thibault's background and those engaging in the Swiftboating of Murtha would be relevant to any news story on this issue, I would think.

And so would some independent examination by the Post as to whether there is even any veracity to the charges."

I recommend reading Mr. Waas' post in its entirety. I'm glad I'm not the only outraged soul in the blogosphere. With two professional reporters on the story, you would have thought it would have been much more thorough, much more honest, much more objective. John Murtha was a patriot of this country and he has been done a great disservice here. He deserves a big apology.

Quote from 1stRepbublic/14th Star:

"The Post's ethics suck."

In this case, how could anyone disagree?

Congressman Murtha must be furious over this.

It's time to stop putting stock into the myth that right wing ideologues support our veterans. I wish I could buy into the myth that we have an objective media today.

Mary Karr on J T Leroy and James Frey

Mary Karr on J T Leroy and James Frey

"And now, writing my own memoirs, I know God is in the truth. Only by studying actual events and questioning your own motives will the complex inner truths ever emerge from the darkness..."

- Syracuse University professor and author Mary Karr in self-reflection, from a piece about the J T Leroy and James Frey literary scandals in today's NY Times [NY Times Select

Regarding the ethical nature of the respective scandals, Ms. Karr calls J T Leroy a "fine little prankster" and Mr. Frey a "skunk" - commenting that

"the nitty-gritty is that the novelist creates events for truthful interpretation, whereas the memoirist tries to honestly interpret events plagiarized from reality. And here's how readers know the difference: the label slapped on the jacket of the book."

NY Times: NO on Alito

NY Times: NO on Alito

Could their message be any clearer?

Today's New York Times editorial speaks of the President's morally challenged lawyers and Samuel Alito is not spared from mention. Alito's "pet theories" are called "offensive".
That's hot stuff.

I quote:

Both of the offensive theories at work here - that a president's intent in signing a bill trumps the intent of Congress in writing it, and that a president can claim power without restriction or supervision by the courts or Congress - are pet theories of Judge Samuel Alito, the man Mr. Bush chose to tilt the Supreme Court to the right.

The administration's behavior shows how high and immediate the stakes are in the Alito nomination, and how urgent it is for Congress to curtail Mr. Bush's expansion of power. Nothing in the national consensus to combat terrorism after 9/11 envisioned the unilateral rewriting of more than 200 years of tradition and law by one president embarked on an ideological crusade.

To any Senate member who understands the implications here (and they all understand):

Vote NO on
the confirmation of
Samuel Alito.

He's nothing but a sinking of the knife to the gut of over 200 years of American tradition.

If we had real fire and passion for the American way in the Senate, we'd see a filibuster - and argument passionate enough so that any partisan attempt to exercise the "nuclear option" would be scorned!

All this BOREDOM in these hearings = getting STUCK with Alito, finally completing the circuit of a new one-party state with an Imperial president.


Kevin Zeese at Raw Story writes:

It is time for the Democrats to stand up and use their power. Stopping Alito is an opportunity to show that they believe in three equal branches of government that provide a check and balance on the actions of the others. Americans support the framework of the Constitution. It is a chance to show they represent the people against the powerful and want a court that reflects that reality.

I couldn't agree more.

Goodbye, Shelly

Goodbye, Shelly

The Power of Oil

The Power of Oil

Dilp Hiro weaves a compelling web of geopolitical strategy and the dependence on oil that necessitates it - often at a cost to human rights - and as we have seen with the Iraq war, at the great cost of truth and public trust. You don't have to be a consipracy theorist to ask yourself: What is our government NOT telling us - and why are they not telling us? Didn't our President tell us, this week, that we were being irresponsible by even raising the issue?

An important point made in the article is that the U.S. is incapable of unilaterally punishing every country engaged in the amoral battle for oil, and we have to get back to the bare bones of good old-fashioned economic competition (after all, that's what capitalism is supposed to be about - not throwing away our support of human rights and democratic regimes.)

We've looked the other way - far too long - in places like Saudi Arabia, and I hope the recent lip service from Washington about cracking down on them is sincere. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals, and hearing that many more of them are traveling effortlessly over the borders to kill our troops in Iraq is no less than disgusting. With a tip of the hat to Whatever Already, today's very important LA Times story by Josh Meyer tells us the disturbing news that

Although Saudi Arabia has cracked down on militants within its borders, the kingdom has not met its promises to help prevent the spread of terrorism or curb the flow of money from Saudis to terrorist cells around the world, U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and other officials say. As a result, these critics say, countless young terrorism suspects are believed to have escaped the kingdom's tightening noose by fleeing across what critics call a porous border into Iraq.

Going back to the Yale online article, Dilip Hiro asks, "How can the US, the prime upholder of capitalist values, oppose such a state of affairs?"

I would begin by asking: What is our government doing about the research and development of alternative energy? Haven't we lost a lot of precious time? The longer we stall, the more wars will be fought in our name - and they will be futile unilateral efforts - much as we've witnessed in Iraq.

If we want to be responsible citizens, we'd better start caring about alternative energy resources.

[YaleGlobal Online]

Tar Heel Tavern

Tar Heel Tavern 47



A fresh new Tar Heel Tavern can be seen at Scrutiny Hooligans.

Don't miss the 46th edition at Nothing Could Be Finer.

I'll be hosting the 48th edition..and the topic will be Humor - send me your favorite joke, funniest photo, anecdote, use your imagination!

It's mid-January and, as your honorary Tar Heeler sitting in the c-c-cold Northeast, I could really use a laugh. After all, the Ground Hog known as Phil from Punxsutawney, PA hasn't even been around to "predict" the six more long weeks of winter we Northern folk know we'll have to endure once he does show his cute little face.

Humor me - please!

Russert Crushes Bremer and Rumsfeld's Credibility

Russert Crushes Bremer and Rumsfeld's Credibility

Tim Russert made mincemeat out of Paul Bremer and Donald Rumsfeld today on Meet the Press. We are left to ask: Which is the real Paul Bremer? The one who rallied for more troops with all his heart and mind - or the guy who wrote in July 2003 that we had enough troops?

Bremer was on vacation while we didn't have enough troops and chaos was reigning - and Rumsfeld was pretending it was all hyperbole.

He was handed control of the CPA and was forced to conduct business "on the cheap."

CPA funds were filtered to God knows who. (We know the Kurds got a big piece of the action - 14 tons, to be exact).

The CPA didn't keep accounts of the hundreds of millions of dollars of cash in its vault; the CPA, under Bremer, had awarded contracts worth billions of dollars to American firms without tender, and had no idea what was happening to the money from the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI),[UN Res 1483] which was being spent by the interim Iraqi government ministries.


** I still want to know what interest certain Washington DC lobbyists suddenly had in the Kurdish Democratic Party less than 30 days after a motherlode of cash - 14 tons, to be exact - was dumped on them by the CPA.**

I don't believe anything Mr. Bremer says about the Iraq war now. Tim Russert exposed him for a sham of logical consistency. His opinions mean absolutely nothing to me. He's a human web of hypocrisy. He misled too long for a misleading administration. He is now a perfect picture of public self-contradiction.

I'm beginning to believe there's something truly rotten - and it's not in Denmark this time. It's likely in a Swiss bank.


______________

Related articles:

+ Financial Times - Bremer claims he was used as Iraq ‘fall guy’

+ Reuters - Pentagon says Rumsfeld nixed Bremer troop request

UPDATE:Arianna Huffington's take:

What made Bremer's appearance on Meet the Press today particularly unuseful is that although Russert challenged Bremer on a few points, he refused to acknowledge the big elephant in the room -- that Bremer's "memoir" is a complete sham.

While I wish Tim Russert would have taken it a step further, I've come not to expect that from him - but I think the answers to the questions he chose to ask spoke for themselves. I can't imagine anyone who'd want to read this book after seeing the interview.

____________

TAGS - International Advisory and Monitoring Board, Bremer, Development Fund for Iraq

The IAMB, audit oversight body for the Development Fund for Iraq, is no longer accessible.

Jill Carroll is Still missing - We Never Knew About Phil Sands

Jill Carroll is Still missing - We Never Knew About Phil Sands

Jill Carroll is still missing.
At Reuters, there is a story about a British freelance journalist whose kidnapping by gunmen for five days was never reported - and he was freed when he was "stumbled upon" by US troops on a farm outside Baghdad. A writer for the Chronicle, Phil Sands, 28, of Dorset, UK, was told by his captors that if he was a soldier, they would kill him.

How strange - that we never knew about this story until now.

There's an interesting article about the hazards of freelance journalism in Iraq at the Telegraph.

I'm waiting for news about Jill Carroll. I pray that she comes back safely.

1/15/06 UPDATE: Still no word on Ms. Carroll. Her captors are silent. Why?

A quote from Phil Sands at an Editor & Publisher article:

"I was treated very respectfully and courteously apart from the fact that I was detained against my will and threatened with beheading," Sands told The Associated Press on Saturday. "I was not beaten, starved or treated badly."

The US military has freed two Iraqi journalists after holding them for several months. [Reporters Without Borders]

Senseless Killing of Innocents in Pakistan

Senseless Killing of Innocents in Pakistan
18 men, women and children were obliterated by a dropped drone detonation, and al-Zawahiri was out for the day.

Oh, well.

What the f**k.

It was only 18 lives.

6 of them were children.

Sanctity of life schmanctity of life.

al- Zawahiri was asking for it.

Hey, but how about that new and improved CIA? They're doing about as well as they did on the WMD beat.

I'm buckling my seat belt for the coming air war phase in Iraq. Let's see how many more innocent villagers we can wipe out while their bad boys are out running errrands.



UPDATE: The Pakistani Foreign Ministry has said that it has lodged a formal protest over the incident with the United States.

Have you heard about the angry Pakistanis - a group of nearly 1000 - who stormed out on a rampage and attacked the offices of two NGOs? President Musharraf is obviously not doing enough for the U.S.; the Bush administration is getting antsy. 2006 elections are coming and, damn it, they need a fresh catch.

Economist - Hillary Not a Shoo-In

Economist - Hillary Not a Shoo-In

Both eyes on Senator Edwards for 2008

A new article from the Economist (posted at the Spectator) says that Hillary Clinton's repositioning on key political issues has opened up space to her left. She is not a shoo-in for the Democratic nomination, they say, and they tell us to keep our eye on candidates like Senator John Edwards.

An excerpt:

Her strategy was based on the assumption that she had the left under her thumb: that she had enough capital as both a feminist icon and a victim of the vast right-wing conspiracy to move to the centre with impunity. Two things have upset that plan.

The first is the furor over the war in Iraq. Many Democratic activists regard the war as such an abomination -- an act of aggression justified by lies and driven by greed -- that they cannot have any truck with someone who supports it, even a liberal martyr.

The second is the rise of the so-called 'netroots.' Clinton may have the traditional feminist and labour groups in her pocket, but the Internet is devolving power from client groups to local activists.

The Internet left is in open revolt against the Washington establishment, and it looks back on the Clinton presidency not as a triumph that should be repeated but as an error that should be avoided -- a time when the party gave in on welfare and public spending and lost control of Congress.

Clinton will probably face a much more formidable field of competitors than Bush did in 2000 (when John McCain was pretty much it). Her repositioning has already opened up space to her left, which is being filled by Russ Feingold and John Edwards.

"Strong and wrong" is not a tolerable alternative to "Weak and right" in the case of the Iraq war. I realize that the DLC theory is to reassure America that the Democratic party is strong on National Security. I don't happen to be one of those people who believes that you show strength by going along with the failing strategy of the party in power - especially when the impression you are giving is that you're making a deliberate move to the right for the sake of politics. Frankly, I believe that turns intelligent people off.

With Americans feeling not only misled, but lied to about the circumstances that led up to the war in Iraq which was based upon an already-questionable pre-emptive war policy, we look to our leaders for some kind of ethical and rational consistency. We look for moral leadership. We want a leader who will stick by their convictions and to be humble enough to admit it when they see that a past decision they've made, in retrospect, was wrong. We're all human beings, and in today's world, the ability to know when to exert the right amount of diplomacy for the sake of international cooperation is crucial to our national security and our economic health. War in Iraq is not the right answer - it has NEVER been the right answer. Any indication our elected representatives give regarding a continued occupation in Iraq is just another shot of poison to our trust, our moral sensibility, our security, and our economy.

We need to indicate to the international community that we desire a transition - and that we will act to make that transition in Iraq now.

If it's our intent that Iraq's government should stand on its own, then let's leave them to stand strong. A new international economic body can be created to help Iraq - and perhaps an international police-support system could be instituted by NATO or the UN.

We have to show the world that we are not enriching our own contractors and private interests in Iraq, a nation with the potential for great oil wealth. Much of the pipeline sabotage will likely end once we have redeployed our troops and Iraqis are reassured that they stand to individually benefit from their oil industry instead of suspecting that their nation's oil benefits are lining of pockets of corruption. If we continue to hang around giving the impression that our private interests are reaping the spoils of the Iraq war, the American people will never be "winners" by any stretch of the imagination.

The Economist article says that Russ Feingold could be the "Howard Dean" of 2008. Looking back on the Iowa caucus of 2004, we can see that Howard Dean's tremendous influence with the netroots did not successfully carry him over the boundaries outside of cyberspace. There was a lesson to be learned from that experience, and it wasn't to discount the netroots, but to use netroots in rythym and rhyme with the political pulse of the "real world."

Senator John Edwards is very much admired out here in the real homes and workplaces throughout America. People appreciate his warmth and his conviction. He showed, in 2004, that he is the real deal. He was the Vice Presidential candidate, and had it not been for electoral shenanigans in Ohio, he may very well have been our Vice President today. His message about Two Americas resonated with the public, and its truth rings even more clearly today than it did when he gave his speeches during the 2004 campaign.

I agree that we should keep an eye on Senator Edwards for 2008.

Both eyes.

Those Who Divide Ignore How Divided We Aren't

Those Who Divide Ignore How Divided We Aren't

I recently engaged in a conversation about religion and politics titled It's time for... "The Religious Left"! - It was begun by blogger Mark Kilmer at RedState.org, a group blog to which I subscribe. I read that it was started up by paid RNC operatives, and I didn't know that when I signed on as a participant quite a while back. I enjoy talking with everyone from all political perspectives, providing that they are respectful. Like anyone else, I always hope I will be treated with respect wherever I go. At Red State, I have not been disappointed. I am respectful, and they are respectful in return. I have had shabby treatment at Little Green Footballs, and they lost their credibility with me a long time ago because of that fact. I'm a nice person. They elect not to give any suspected "moonbat" a fair shake. Problem is, everyone's suspected to be a "moonbat." Any participant who doesn't think in lockstep with the groupview is labeled immediately and unjustly as some kind of imaginary leftist demon instead of a fellow American. Go off the talking-points vocabulary and expect to see the fangs come out. It's an immature kind of place to try to have a good or fair public debate. I cringe every time I see them getting any media attention, because they do not deserve it. I have found them to be a closed-minded little society unto themselves and I certainly do not believe that they reflect our American values of respect, civility, tolerance, freedom, amenability, or truth. RedState.org is far more interesting and inclusive.

To get back to It's time for... "The Religious Left"! - , I was individually pointed out, by a Conservative citizen of whom I have a lot of healthy respect, as a person from an imagined place between Heaven and Earth that many people call "the religious left." I really do consider that to be a divisive and false category, for I am simply a person of faith. With faith, there is no left or right as there is in American politics. Faith is deeply personal. Politics is all-public.

I do understand how the political world works, however, and my faith has put me in some pretty strange and unlikely political corners, some seldom exposed by political liberals' proverbial lamps. Overall, though, I'd have to say that I land where I land on political issues because of my personal faith - and not the opposite. I am faithful first, political second. My faith has made me the "liberal" that others see me as being, and I have to say that, whatever I am, I am proud to be so. If you look at my Political Compass chart, you will see that I don't land all that far from the center, but like Libertarians, I am not trusting of authoritarian institution.



I am not cookie-cutter. I tried to talk to the people who called me to the discussion at RedState,org, but when the conversation got further from the usual talking-points script, people stopped responding to my questions and comments.

I was disappointed. I hope we will see more conversations like this. I think they help us to see how very divided we are NOT. I don't think they want you to discover that dirty little secret.

US Bishops: For Goodness' Sake, It's Time to Get Real

"The great temptation is to try to justify past policies instead of acknowledging where we are and what we need to do."

- John Carr, senior staffer on the Catholic bishops committee

US Bishops: For Goodness' Sake, It's Time to Get Real
Bishops say recent statements by the Bush administration that troop levels would be reduced are not enough.
Story Link: LA Times/Bishops Urge U.S. to Transition Out of Iraq by Larry B. Stammer

______________

It's time to get things morally straight and to see an end to misleading rhetoric and divisive pessimism, according to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. A spokesman said the statement was intended to set the stage for what bishops hoped would be a vigorous but civil discussion on what the U.S. must do next.
The practice of cutting off the freedom to debate with shallow threats and handing false choices to the public about the transition required in Iraq have been condemned by U.S. Catholic bishops. They remind us that, over three years ago, Pope John Paul II proclaimed that he was against the war in Iraq, but now that we're there, we must act responsibly and morally. To see American politicians justifying past policies in order to save political face will not help the people of Iraq, who have suffered long enough under conditions of war with which we have elected to beset them.

It's time for Republicans to grow up - to become accountable - to come up with a strategy for a much-needed transition.

"Our nation cannot afford a shrill and shallow debate that distorts reality and reduces the options to 'cut and run' versus 'stay the course,' " Wenski wrote, speaking for the bishops conference.

In an interview Thursday, Wenski said the bishops purposely decided to avoid the word "withdrawal" in favor of "transition" to avoid the impression that bishops were advocating that the U.S. "cut and run."

"No matter what the debate might have been about going into Iraq, now that we are there, our presence gives us a whole set of new moral obligations that we have to try to fulfill in a responsible way," Wenski said.

"Our nation is at a crossroads in Iraq," the statement said. "We must resist a pessimism that might move our nation to abandon the moral responsibilities it accepted in using force, and might tempt us to withdraw prematurely from Iraq without regard for moral and human consequences.

The time for "happy talk" - a phrase coined by frustrated realists that represents the irrational rosy cast that the Bush administration has too long utilized to deny reality - is over.

"We must [also] reject an optimism that fails to acknowledge clearly past mistakes, failed intelligence, and inadequate planning related to Iraq, and minimizes the serious challenges and human costs that lie ahead," it said.

John Carr, a senior staffer on the Catholic bishops committee, said the statement was intended to set the stage for what bishops hoped would be a vigorous but civil discussion on what the U.S. must do next.

If people of faith choose to deem as "evil" any misleading rhetoric that our President or anyone who supports that rhetoric extends while continuing this occupation of Iraq, they will have this UCCB statement to responsibly support their case. I'm not a big fan of crying "evil", but I do believe that each and every man has the propensity to do what my faith informs me is "evil." If it walks like a duck...

The UCCB has said that as the U.S. pursues the war on terrorism and the rebuilding of Iraq, it should not forget pressing concerns at home and abroad, particularly caring for the poor.

This reminds me of the unreasonably rosy picture the President paints while he's sitting atop an obvious humanitarian disaster in his one of his own country's major cities. Who does he think he's kidding? The cameras cannot hide this story as some third-world stories might get buried.

The president ignored questions about the city's new rebuilding plan, introduced Wednesday night to enormous community criticism, and White House officials traveling with Mr. Bush declined to offer opinions. The plan, which depends on nearly $17 billion more from the federal government, gives neighborhoods in low-lying parts of the city from four months to a year to attract sufficient numbers of residents or be bulldozed.

He ignored these citizens' concerns? They already suspect the government of wanting to take their land by eminent domain - and his administration refuses to make comment? What kind of President is this man? Harvey Bender and Caroline Parker of the Lower Ninth Ward want to know. I think I already know. The worst President I've ever seen in all my years.

About A Dog

About a Dog

High up in the courts of Heaven today
A little dog-angel waits,
With the other dogs he will not play,
But he sits alone at the Gates:
"For I know my mistress will come," says he
"And when she comes, she will call for me."

He sees the spirits that pass him by
As they hasten towards the throne,
And he watches them with a wistful eye
As he sits at the gate alone;
"But I know if I just wait patiently
"That someday my Mistress will come," says he.

And his Mistress far down on the earth below,
As she sits in her easy chair
Forgets sometimes, and she whistles low
For the dog that is not there;
And the little dog-angel cocks his ears
And dreams that his Mistress' call he hears.


And I know when at length his Mistress waits
Outside in the dark and cold
For the hand of Death to open the gates
That lead to the Courts of Gold,
The little dog-angel's eager bark
Will comfort her soul while she's still in the dark.

- The Little Dog Angel
--- by Norah M. Holland, c.1870




For my friend Eliot, who we lost this month.

*dedicated to Barbara, Andrew, Blaire, and Olivia

One Hell of a Week in Kirkuk

One Hell of a Week in Kirkuk

January 9 - Since the election of 15 December 2005, al-Mushayiakhi is the fifth assassination of the ethnic groups Committee of the PUK in Kirkuk. They are all of Arab ethnicity.

January 11 - A body of a translator found near Daquq, Kirkuk, the police source told local radio Nawa in Kurdistan on Wednesday. The translator was identified as Ziyad Umed, whose body was found by the police in the 7-Nisan village of Kurdistani Kirkuk, near Daquq.

January 10 - Police found the unidentified bodies of two men in the city of Kirkuk on Tuesday which had been bound at the feet and riddled with bullets, a Kirkuk police source said.


A coffin holding the body of translator Ziyad Hamdi is taken from the main hospital, Thursday, Jan. 12, 2006, in Kirkuk, 200 kilometers (124 miles) north of Baghdad, Iraq. Hamdi, working as a translator for the US military, was shot dead and found south of the city. [source: ABC News]
AP Photo/Mohammed Ibrahim

January 9 - Judge shot dead in Kirkuk

January 6 - A police source said that militants abducted Kirkuk Governorate Council member Ahmad Akkar Nezar while he was visiting a relative in Al-Shaeb area in Baghdad.

The Kurds in Iraq

Kurds want Talabani re-elected Iraqi president

On US relations

The burgeoning alliance between the US and Kurdistan has a more fathomless and more fundamental basis than is commonly appreciated. The amiable bonds between Americans and Kurds in Kurdistan reflect one of the most unusual and of the essence alliances in the Middle East. Contrary to other authoritarian or undemocratic masking elements in the new Iraq, or some combination of the two, Kurds continue to safeguard American dear lives by their momentous intelligence, defense and military cooperation...

...The two nations confront the analogous dissidents and the same allies. They're both in the balance by radical regimes, notably Iran, Syria and Iraq. They both have similar systems as democratic states. [I found this line to be a curiosity:]They're both distinctive in the region because they are not Arab states.

Isn't the Kurish region autononmous - yet still a part of the nation state of Iraq?


Kevin Sites -
The Kurdish "peshmerga" - Rebels Without a Pause:

Many Kurds would like to see an independent Kurdistan, completely separate from Iraq. Pressure from the United States, as well as threats from both Turkey and Iran - who fear independence could create instability among their own Kurdish populations - is keeping the Kurdish territories in Iraq for now. But pesghmerga soldiers at the KDP Brigade all openly voice their desire for separation. "We prefer independence," says Hakim Kadir Tagarny. "We also know the reality, but if there is persecution again we will fight for our independence."

Voice of America:

Kamal Sayid Qadir is a Kurdish writer who has Austrian citizenship. He was reportedly abducted in October 2005 while on a visit to the Kurdish Region of Iraq.

Mr. Qadir was said to have been taken by the Parastin, the security service of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, or K-D-P, one of the two parties holding power in northern Iraq. He is believed to have been seized because of articles he published on The Internet that were critical of the K-D-P, including its leader Massoud Barzani.

Amnesty International, an independent human rights monitoring group, reports that Mr. Qadir was sentenced on December 19th to thirty years imprisonment for "defamation" in connection with two internet articles criticizing the K-D-P leadership.

....U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said, "The free flow of ideas is the lifeline of liberty." The jailing of people for their political views has no place in Iraq's new democracy. "In the long run," says President George W. Bush, "there is no justice without freedom, and there can be no human rights without human liberty."

I would like to take this opportunity to ask, once again, why the Washington DC lobbyists Barbour, Griffth, and Rogers have been retained by the Kurdistan Democratic Party - the same party that has jailed this journalist? Who are they lobbying (in D.C.) on behalf of the Kurdish political party that the President and his administration are criticizing?

From Kurdish Media: Kurds focus on corruption in Kurdistan administration

From an op-ed in the Kurdish media:

Today, average Kurds are very disappointed with Mr. Sayid Qadir’s arbitrary arrest and imprisonment. The longer this gross injustice continues, the deeper it resides in the subconscious of the Kurds; it will bring their anger closer to threshold levels in any future cases of injustice in South Kurdistan. His arrest and imprisonment is a judicial travesty and an ugly insult to the concept of democracy. It has brought shame on the Kurds and their reputation. Hence, Kurds’ common interests demand that he is released without further delay.

From Uruknet:

Dr Qadir believes that the Kurdish leadership failed, despite the availability of the perfect opportunity, to 'transform Iraqi Kurdistan into a model democracy for Iraq, or even the Middle East, because, instead, the Kurdish parties transformed Iraqi Kurdistan into a fortress for oppression, theft of public funds, and serious abuse of human rights like murder, torture, amputation of ears and noses, and rape. All this was conducted under American protection because the Kurdish parties, and others in the region, know too well that all the privileges and gains achieved since 1991 by the Kurdish parties were impossible without direct American backing and support.

Indeed the Americans, who had established and directly protected the safe heaven in Iraqi Kurdistan in 1991, and after the fall of the former regime in April 2003, were behind the rewarding of the Kurdish parties further privileges in the form of a federal region and a bigger share of Iraqi budget, which no one knows where it went and how it has been spent to this date’. (my emphasis)

I wonder if any Washington DC lobbyists know where the money went?

The Kurds in Iran

IRAN: NEW PARTY SEEKS TO UNITE KURDS

Alito Singalong - All in the Game

Alito Singalong - All in the Game
Parody of the song "It's All in the Game" by Dawes and Sigman
Originally performed by Tommy Edwards



Many a tear has to fall
but it's all
in the game...

All in the wonderful game
That we know as Politics

Ted has words with Spect -
And Sam's future's looking kind of wrecked
But these things
Your heart can rise above

There'll come a day you won't bawl
But it's all in the game
Soon he'll be there in the Court
With a wink, weepy dame.

And he'll find for the Right
And come home to you each night
And our rights will fly away.

Note - In all honesty, I felt sorry for Samual Alito's wife when I saw her crying, which is the way I suppose most people feel. Politics is tough, though. You simply must have a tough skin and a duck's feathers so the water rolls right off your back - and not from your eyes. There are many reasons that people cry - and I'll be curious to hear what Martha-Ann Bomgardner will say if she allows herself to be interviewed about the incident. If she uses it for a dramatic opportunity to criticize our Senators for asking the hard and necessary questions, I would tell her, with all respect, that she should have stayed home if she couldn't take the toughest questions that must be asked. Her husband may be on our Supreme Court for decades.

Peter Daou painfully shows us how a properly functioning "Triangle" could have worked for Democrats on the Alito hearings, if progressive bloggers and the netroots were respected.

From the choreography of Specter and Alito creating the "open mind on abortion" soundbite that media outlets dutifully ran with, to the Sen. Graham/Mrs. Alito tear-fest that should have prompted Dems to slam the Republicans for bringing the Judge's wife to tears but instead turned into another Dem-bashing occasion, to the complete failure of the Democratic leadership to create the appropriate tone of outrage (in soundbite form), the chronic breakdown of the establishment and media sides of the left's triangle is apparent.

This, then, is the reality: progressive bloggers and online activists - positioned on the front lines of a cold civil war - face a thankless and daunting task: battle the Bush administration and its legions of online and offline apologists, battle the so-called “liberal” media and its tireless weaving of pro-GOP narratives, battle the ineffectual Democratic leadership, and battle the demoralization and frustration that comes with a long, steep uphill struggle.

Note - Three major political leaders who do pay healthy respect to the netroots are Senator John Edwards, Gen. Wesley Clark, and the Father of the Netroots Howard Dean.

Sen. John Edwards: Alito is "No Sandra Day O'Connor"

Sen. John Edwards: Alito is "No Sandra Day O'Connor"
Petition - No on Samuel Alito

From the One America Committee:

Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court represents a grave threat to our fundamental liberties. His record makes it clear that he is a conservative activist who will put his personal ideology above the rule of law.

If Alito replaces Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate justice who represented the swing vote in many cases, some of our most fundamental rights are at risk. Alito won't stand up to a president's abuse of power. He has said that the Constitution does not protect a woman's right to choose. And he has consistently used the bench as a launching pad for his conservative activism.

Sign the petition below to urge Senate Democrats to stand together and use every means at their disposal to block the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. The results will be shared with Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

_______________

A statement made by Senator John Edwards titled No Sandra Day O'Connor is HERE.

You can sign the petition HERE.

Dear Democratic Senators:

Let's stand up and fight for what we believe in as Democrats. Samuel Alito should not be on the Supreme Court.

I urge you all to stand together and use whatever means you have at your disposal to block the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

Samuel Alito's nomination represents a grave threat to the fundamental liberties of all Americans. He is an activist who has consistently placed his conservative ideology above the rule of law.

If Alito replaces the moderate Sandra Day O'Connor, who often proved to be the swing vote on important cases, the Supreme Court will shift dangerously to the right, undermining our basic freedoms.

In an era when the president of the United States declares himself to be above the law, it is more important than ever that we have a Supreme Court that fulfills its duty as the ultimate guardian of our rights. Alito's nomination puts those rights in danger, and it is vital that you use whatever means possible to block his confirmation.

Jude Nagurney Camwell-------Date Signed: January 12, 2006 01:41 PM

The New York Times has a chronological summary blogs that are covering the Alito Hearings, links included. A very good resource. [NYT Select]

Podcast #7 - John and Elizabeth Edwards December 2005

Podcast #7 - John and Elizabeth Edwards December 2005

PODCAST #7 - DECEMBER 2005
LINK to audio

Elizabeth Edwards assures all she is doing well in the December John and Elizabeth Edwards podcast. Mrs. Edwards' latest CAT-scan results showed her to be cancer-free. She feels great about where she is in the treatment process. She says that Chapel Hill is terrific - tweleve families in their neighborhood have 37 children, so little Jack and Emma Claire are having a great time. Senator Edwards commented that Jack had been looking slimmer, and when he asked Jack about it, Jack told his dad the secret to his success: He has been "running a lot at recess."

This past month, Senator Edwards visited Miami to campaign with Senator Bill Nelson. Senator Edwards also made a trip to India, and he gave a speech in Delhi. When interviewed by the India Times, he told them that he'd seen incredible things in terms of how some of the people live. He saw children on blankets outdoors while they were in school classes. He saw sewage everywhere; flies, etc. It was eye-opening - very moving. The poverty was a sad sight to see. He was changed from having had that experience. He commented that so many problems in life seem "silly" by comparison.

He spoke about his Opportunity Rocks tour of 10 colleges over a 10-day period. He said there'd been an amazing response from young people. Everywhere they went, they were oversold. At the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, 3000 people showed up - and only 200 were expected. The gathering was held in the courtyard instead of its originally scheduled venue.

A new beta version of the One America blog will soon be featured, where you will be able to start your own diaries and conversations. You'll be able to practice "blogocracy" on the new website. You will be able to vote to see which blog diaries rise to the top. There will be many great new tools for bloggers. The Senator says, if you're already a member of blog community, let's hear from you.

The Bookcast will be next week - watch for it.

Cate's name is on the masthead of Vanity Fair now - and her parents are very proud.

Don't forget to make use of the videoblog - send your questions for teh next podcast in January.

One America blogger NCDem asked a question of Senator Edwards about Iraq - an exit plan - and Rep. John Murtha's position.

Senator Edwards feels strongly about this issue. He felt that he was wrong, in retrospect, about his vote for the Iraq war resolution. He thinks it was a mistake, and his op-ed piece in the Washington Post was written, with much care, by himself. The prewar intelligence was faulty. He made the decision, though, and he took responsibility for it. It was a hard thing for him to say because our military troops who've served this country have not made a mistake. He felt it was important, if the US is going to have moral leadership on the important issues of this world, that the foundation for any decision made by political leadership should be the truth. He told the truth in the Washington Post op-ed. He had to make a judgement. He asked himself, is our presence in Iraq today harmful or helpful? He decided that it was more harmful than helpful. Our military presence is feeding the insugency, as Rep. Murtha has said. We've created an impression that we'll be an occupying force forever, and this causes a cynical view of our nation.

There are several things we'll need to do in the short term:

- We should concentrate on reducing our presence early next year and building Iraq's security capacity.

- We should also get other countries involved - especially others in the immediate region.

- After the Iraqi elections, we should redeploy troops out of Iraq - as early as next year. The numbers could immediately be reduced by 40-50,000 troops, which is the number of National Guard and Reservists.

- There should be more effective training programs for Iraqi forces and serious diplomatic efforts - especially to brring countries in that region in.

Elizabeth says John truly believed he made a mistake in voting Yes for the Iraq War Resolution and she was proud of him for speaking out. When someone says they believe they're wrong, it's good not to slap those people in the face. Inadequacy of information from our government contributed to a system of misinformation. Mrs. Edwards used the example of listening to Donald Rumsfeld saying things that were clearly not true, such as there being 212,000 Iraqi security forces fully trained and equipped when there were not. If that had been true, we could leave Iraq today. We don't have anything close to that number. It feels good we're making some progress. Nobody wants to leave Iraq in chaos - you don't leave the vanquished in disarray if you are an elegant victor. She believes that we need to see Donald Rumsfeld step down from his position as Secretary of State, though. She says that he's a complete disaster and he should be replaced.

Sen Edwards is opposed to Samual Alito's nomination and if George Bush thinks this is HIS supreme Court , he's wrong -- it's OUR Supreme Court. George W. Bush is going to be gone, thank goodness, in a couple of years. and the issue is What's going to be left? This must be a Supreme Court we can believe in.

Elizabeth said that some bloggers have been talking about the memos that have been written by Samuel Alito regarding a woman's right to choose. What Alito said was not that he has a personal right against a woman's right to choose, but he stated it was his legal belief that there is no Constitutional right - which is in direct controversy to standing law in this country.

The Edwards were recently in Charlotte, NC speaking to League of Municipalities. They each spoke separately - to different groups. Senator Edwards said that Elizabeth "rocked the place." He heard, from others at the conference, she was great and he'd read her speech beforehand.

Elizabeth just bought her sister a Christmas present - a plaque that says:

"If there were three wise women, they would have asked for directions, gotten there on time, prepared the stable and helped with the birth, made a casserole, and brought appropriate gifts... (Mrs Edwards jokingly interjected: "What were they supposed to do with myrrh, anyhow?")...and there would be peace on earth."

Senator Edwards wrote a recent NYT op-ed with Jack Kemp - about recent disturbing changes in the US relationship with Russia. Jack Kemp and Senator Edwards have been working together on the Council on Foreign relations - they went to Russia and visited with leaders and activists. The NYT op-ed was about legislation in DUMA keeping NGOs from having offices in Russia suspected of political activities. President Vladmir Putin, through a surrogate in DUMA, is trying to squash political opposition undemocratically. Background: In recent years under Putin, there have been rollbacks in democarcy regulating the eliminating of direct elections of governors, prosecution of oligarchs, and Russian governmentt taking over the mass media - all to squash political opposition. Democratically, Russia is headed in the wrong direction.

Listen to the podcast to hear all the details.

Israel Tourism Ministry Says No to Pat Robertson

Israel Tourism Ministry Says No to Pat Robertson

Forward is reporting that Pat Robertson's most-recent God-gaffe is making him no friends at the Israeli Tourism Ministry. And who can blame them for not wanting to do business with him? The article explains how Rev. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission is separating himself from Robertson's intensely spiteful comments, ensuring that the wider evangelical community will continue to be able to do business with Israel.

I think, if Rev. Pat prays very hard on this, he will see the error of his ways and reconcile himself with something closer to humble faith.

I don't see that Rev. Pat is all that different from Rev. Land or Pastor Ted Haggard regarding their stubborn religious triumphalism when it comes to American politics. If the situation calls for shoring up the "values" wing of the Republican party, these evangelical leaders will push the envelope regarding God's wrath. They'll say just about anything. Pastor Ted has gone along with Pat Robertson's past God-gaffes. Remember the one about Dover, Pennsylvania deserving to be destroyed by God for rejecting intelligent design in the schools? It was just as mean and insane as the comment made about Ariel Sharon - yet Pastor Ted backed Robertson on the creepy statement.

So why is no one coming to Robertson's rescue on this one? The difference is that some of these evangelical leaders have gotten too carried away by their lust for political power and influence. They've left many Christians behind, slapping them out of sight in their race to see how they can garner the most political votes for the most narrow set of "values" that many Christians have ever seen.

It gets more complicated when an evangelical leader says something spiteful about Israel's political leaders because the evangelical supporters of Israel have their own (distictly Republican and divisive) political agenda. As Ralph Reed said,

"The Jewish community has played a strong role in keeping the Democratic party strongly pro-Israel, and Evangelicals have played a similar role among Republicans."

*It's all about false choices for political gain. Reed is saying you can't be Christian and NOT support the Republican agenda. Worse yet, he's insinuating that you can't be Christian and be a Democrat at the same time. Not only does Reed divide Americans on a political line, he divides Christendom. We can't let the evangelical leaders who are tainted with power-lusting political activity continue to get away with these divisive inconsistencies and false choices.

See Joan Bokaer's story on Pastor Ted and his denial of being a man who wields great political influence.


Update: Pat Repents

Bono, Bill & Melinda Gates - Well Done

Bono, Bill & Melinda Gates - Well Done

"For being shrewd about doing good, for rewiring politics and re-engineering justice, for making mercy smarter and hope strategic and then daring the rest of us to follow, Bill and Melinda Gates and Bono are TIME's Persons of the Year."

- TIME magazine, Persons of the Year 2005

I know this is late, but I wanted to publically say that I wish there were more of the kind of high-profile humanitarians that these three people are.

The following are excerpts from the TIME article titled The Good Samaritans by Nancy Gibbs:

As it happens, they have arrived at the right time, as America stirs itself awake from the dreamy indifference with which the world's poor have forever been treated. In ordinary times, we give when it's easy: a gesture, a reflex, a salve to conscience.

....This was already a year that redefined generosity. Americans gave more money to tsunami relief, more than $1.6 billion,than to any overseas mission ever before. The Hurricane Season from Hell brought another outpouring of money and time and water bottles and socks and coats and offers of refuge, some $2.7 billion so far.

The public failure of government to manage disaster became the political story of the year. But the private response of individuals, from every last lemonade stand to every mitten drive, is the human story of 2005.

Katrina created one tragedy and revealed another," Melinda Gates said in a speech after the hurricane. "We have to address the inequities that were not created by the hurricanes but exposed by them. We have to ensure that people have the opportunity to make the most of their lives." That just about captures the larger mission she and her husband have embraced. In the poorest countries, every day is as deadly as a hurricane....

.....[Bono] goes to churches and talks of Christ and the lepers, citing exactly how many passages of Scripture ("2,103") deal with taking care of the poor; he sits in a corporate boardroom and talks about the role of aid in reviving the U.S. brand. He gets Pat Robertson and Susan Sarandon to do a commercial together for his ONE campaign to "Make Poverty History." Then he heads to Washington, where he stops by a meeting of House Democrats to nuzzle them about debt relief before a private lunchwith President George W. Bush, whom he praises for tripling aid to Africa over the past four years.

Everyone from Republican Senator Rick Santorum to Hillary Clinton used Bono's October concert as a fund raiser. "He knows how to get people to follow him," Stonesifer says. "We are probably a good complement. We're more likely to give you four facts about the disease than four ways that you can go do something about it." Bono grasps that politicians don't much like being yelled at by activists who tell them no matter what they do, it's not enough. Bono knows it's never enough, but he also knows how to say so in a way that doesn't leave his audience feeling helpless. He invites everyone into the game, in a way that makes them think they are missing something if they hold back.

"After so many years in Washington," says retired Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina, whom Bono recruited to his cause, "I had met enough well-known people to quickly figure out who was genuine and who was there for show. I knew as soon as I met Bono that he was genuine. He has absolutely nothing to gain personally as a result of his work. In fact, he has opened himself to criticism because he has been willing to work with anyone to find help for these children who have taken his heart."

This is not about pity. It's more about passion. Pity sees suffering and wants to ease the pain; passion sees injustice andwants to settle the score. Pity implores the powerful to pay attention; passion warns them about what will happen if they don't.

The risk of pity is that it kills with kindness; the promise of passion is that it builds on the hope that the poor are fully capable of helping themselves if given the chance. In 2005 the world's poor needed no more condolences; they needed people to get interested, get mad and then get to work.....