Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts

Thursday, September 17, 2009

The Story of My Shoe by Muntadhar al-Zaidi

Muntadhar al-Zaidi, the Iraqi who threw his shoe at George Bush gave this speech on his recent release.

In the name of God, the most gracious and most merciful.

Here I am, free. But my country is still a prisoner of war.

Firstly, I give my thanks and my regards to everyone who stood beside me, whether inside my country, in the Islamic world, in the free world. There has been a lot of talk about the action and about the person who took it, and about the hero and the heroic act, and the symbol and the symbolic act.

But, simply, I answer: What compelled me to confront is the injustice that befell my people, and how the occupation wanted to humiliate my homeland by putting it under its boot.

And how it wanted to crush the skulls of (the homeland’s) sons under its boots, whether sheikhs, women, children or men. And during the past few years, more than a million martyrs fell by the bullets of the occupation and the country is now filled with more than 5 million orphans, a million widows and hundreds of thousands of maimed. And many millions of homeless because of displacement inside and outside the country.

We used to be a nation in which the Arab would share with the Turkman and the Kurd and the Assyrian and the Sabean and the Yazid his daily bread. And the Shiite would pray with the Sunni in one line. And the Muslim would celebrate with the Christian the birthday of Christ, may peace be upon him. And despite the fact that we shared hunger under sanctions for more than 10 years, for more than a decade.

Our patience and our solidarity did not make us forget the oppression. Until we were invaded by the illusion of liberation that some had. (The occupation) divided one brother from another, one neighbor from another, and the son from his uncle. It turned our homes into never-ending funeral tents. And our graveyards spread into parks and roadsides. It is a plague. It is the occupation that is killing us, that is violating the houses of worship and the sanctity of our homes and that is throwing thousands daily into makeshift prisons.

I am not a hero, and I admit that. But I have a point of view and I have a stance. It humiliated me to see my country humiliated. And to see my Baghdad burned. And my people being killed. Thousands of tragic pictures remained in my head, and this weighs on me every day and pushes me toward the righteous path, the path of confrontation, the path of rejecting injustice, deceit and duplicity. It deprived me of a good night’s sleep.

Dozens, no, hundreds, of images of massacres that would turn the hair of a newborn white used to bring tears to my eyes and wound me. The scandal of Abu Ghraib. The massacre of Fallujah, Najaf, Haditha, Sadr City, Basra, Diyala, Mosul, Tal Afar, and every inch of our wounded land. In the past years, I traveled through my burning land and saw with my own eyes the pain of the victims, and hear with my own ears the screams of the bereaved and the orphans. And a feeling of shame haunted me like an ugly name because I was powerless.

And as soon as I finished my professional duties in reporting the daily tragedies of the Iraqis, and while I washed away the remains of the debris of the ruined Iraqi houses, or the traces of the blood of victims that stained my clothes, I would clench my teeth and make a pledge to our victims, a pledge of vengeance.

The opportunity came, and I took it.

I took it out of loyalty to every drop of innocent blood that has been shed through the occupation or because of it, every scream of a bereaved mother, every moan of an orphan, the sorrow of a rape victim, the teardrop of an orphan.

I say to those who reproach me: Do you know how many broken homes that shoe that I threw had entered because of the occupation? How many times it had trodden over the blood of innocent victims? And how many times it had entered homes in which free Iraqi women and their sanctity had been violated? Maybe that shoe was the appropriate response when all values were violated.

When I threw the shoe in the face of the criminal, Bush, I wanted to express my rejection of his lies, his occupation of my country, my rejection of his killing my people. My rejection of his plundering the wealth of my country, and destroying its infrastructure. And casting out its sons into a diaspora.

After six years of humiliation, of indignity, of killing and violations of sanctity, and desecration of houses of worship, the killer comes, boasting, bragging about victory and democracy. He came to say goodbye to his victims and wanted flowers in response.

Put simply, that was my flower to the occupier, and to all who are in league with him, whether by spreading lies or taking action, before the occupation or after.

I wanted to defend the honor of my profession and suppressed patriotism on the day the country was violated and its high honor lost. Some say: Why didn’t he ask Bush an embarrassing question at the press conference, to shame him? And now I will answer you, journalists. How can I ask Bush when we were ordered to ask no questions before the press conference began, but only to cover the event. It was prohibited for any person to question Bush.

And in regard to professionalism: The professionalism mourned by some under the auspices of the occupation should not have a voice louder than the voice of patriotism. And if patriotism were to speak out, then professionalism should be allied with it.

I take this opportunity: If I have wronged journalism without intention, because of the professional embarrassment I caused the establishment, I wish to apologize to you for any embarrassment I may have caused those establishments. All that I meant to do was express with a living conscience the feelings of a citizen who sees his homeland desecrated every day.

History mentions many stories where professionalism was also compromised at the hands of American policymakers, whether in the assassination attempt against Fidel Castro by booby-trapping a TV camera that CIA agents posing as journalists from Cuban TV were carrying, or what they did in the Iraqi war by deceiving the general public about what was happening. And there are many other examples that I won’t get into here.

But what I would like to call your attention to is that these suspicious agencies — the American intelligence and its other agencies and those that follow them — will not spare any effort to track me down (because I am) a rebel opposed to their occupation. They will try to kill me or neutralize me, and I call the attention of those who are close to me to the traps that these agencies will set up to capture or kill me in various ways, physically, socially or professionally.

And at the time that the Iraqi prime minister came out on satellite channels to say that he didn’t sleep until he had checked in on my safety, and that I had found a bed and a blanket, even as he spoke I was being tortured with the most horrific methods: electric shocks, getting hit with cables, getting hit with metal rods, and all this in the backyard of the place where the press conference was held. And the conference was still going on and I could hear the voices of the people in it. And maybe they, too, could hear my screams and moans.

In the morning, I was left in the cold of winter, tied up after they soaked me in water at dawn. And I apologize for Mr. Maliki for keeping the truth from the people. I will speak later, giving names of the people who were involved in torturing me, and some of them were high-ranking officials in the government and in the army.

I didn’t do this so my name would enter history or for material gains. All I wanted was to defend my country, and that is a legitimate cause confirmed by international laws and divine rights. I wanted to defend a country, an ancient civilization that has been desecrated, and I am sure that history — especially in America — will state how the American occupation was able to subjugate Iraq and Iraqis, until its submission.

They will boast about the deceit and the means they used in order to gain their objective. It is not strange, not much different from what happened to the Native Americans at the hands of colonialists. Here I say to them (the occupiers) and to all who follow their steps, and all those who support them and spoke up for their cause: Never.

Because we are a people who would rather die than face humiliation.

And, lastly, I say that I am independent. I am not a member of any politicalparty, something that was said during torture — one time that I’m far-right, another that I’m a leftist. I am independent of any political party, and my future efforts will be in civil service to my people and to any who need it, without waging any political wars, as some said that I would.

My efforts will be toward providing care for widows and orphans, and all those whose lives were damaged by the occupation. I pray for mercy upon the souls of the martyrs who fell in wounded Iraq, and for shame upon those who occupied Iraq and everyone who assisted them in their abominable acts. And I pray for peace upon those who are in their graves, and those who are oppressed with the chains of imprisonment. And peace be upon you who are patient and looking to God for release.

And to my beloved country I say: If the night of injustice is prolonged, it will not stop the rising of a sun and it will be the sun of freedom.

One last word. I say to the government: It is a trust that I carry from my fellow detainees. They said, ‘Muntadhar, if you get out, tell of our plight to the omnipotent powers’ — I know that only God is omnipotent and I pray to Him — ‘remind them that there are dozens, hundreds, of victims rotting in prisons because of an informant’s word.’

They have been there for years, they have not been charged or tried.

They’ve only been snatched up from the streets and put into these prisons. And now, in front of you, and in the presence of God, I hope they can hear me or see me. I have now made good on my promise of reminding the government and the officials and the politicians to look into what’s happening inside the prisons. The injustice that’s caused by the delay in the judicial system.

Thank you. And may God’s peace be upon you

The translation is by McClatchy’s special correspondent, Sahar Issa.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

GREEN PARTY CONDEMNS ATTACKS ON GAZA


The Green Party of Minnesota condemns the ongoing bombing of the Palestinian territory of Gaza by the Israeli military. Hundreds of Palestinians have been killed, and many more are seriously wounded. There can be no justification for this violence.

The situation is compounded by the ongoing humanitarian disaster caused by the
18 month long siege imposed by Israel as an illegal act of collective
punishment. The 1.5 million residents of Gaza were already facing
malnutrition and shortages of medical supplies, water, and electricity.
Hospitals that were already barely functioning are now overwhelmed with the
wounded.

We call upon our representatives and our government to condemn these attacks
and to work for an immediate ceasefire. This must be backed up by a cessation
of all aid to Israel as long as it persists in these crimes against humanity
and against international law. The silence of our leaders has allowed the
siege to continue, and it has encouraged this escalation.

We support our 2008 Presidential candidate, Cynthia McKinney, as she
courageously takes part in a shipment of medical aid that will break through
the siege of Gaza. She is onboard a ship leaving from Cyprus on a mission
organized by Free Gaza, a group that has successfully defied the siege several
times in the last five months.

This crisis is urgent, and it is likely to be ongoing. Israel has threatened
to continue and to escalate its violence until it achieves its goals. Our
response must be immediate and ongoing as well. In that spirit, we endorse
the following actions sponsored by WAMM (Women Against Military Madness):

Protest the Israeli Actions in Gaza and U.S. Unconditional Support of Israel
Tuesday, December 30th, 10am to 5pm or office closing
1) Minneapolis office of Senator Amy Klobuchar: 1200 Washington Avenue South, Suite 250
2) Office of Congressperson Keith Ellison: 2100 Plymouth Ave N, Minneapolis

We also encourage our members and the public to contact their representatives.

Green Party of Minnesota

Dave Bicking, Spokesperson, 612-276-1213
Rhoda Gilman, Spokesperson, 651-224-6383

Monday, November 03, 2008

Cynthia McKinney on Energy Policy

Dear Kevin Chavis:

This is in response to your letter a subject line:
Give us an energy policy for the future, not the past!.

I appreciate your message as I value your views on issues facing all Americans. As a Green Party Candidate for President, I also request your sincere consideration as you make your way to the polls Tuesday, November 4, 2008.

After receiving the Presidential nomination from my Party in July, and having named Rosa Clemente, a phenomenal Black Puerto Rican, Hip-Hop Historian / Activist, and esteemed Journalist as my running mate, we have campaigned across this nation for the support of the American people. We will appear on the ballot in 32 states and as Write-in Candidates in 16 other states.

According to Richard Winger of Ballot Access News, 70.5% of the voters will see our name on ballots. We stand a real chance of securing 5% of the votes in this election, thus making the Green Party US a 'third' political party in the nation. A 3rd seat at the table of public policy making can only enhance the chance of real issues facing the majority of Americans being brought to the forefront of those important conversations held on Capitol Hill.

Rosa and I believe that we offer American voters an option which reflects our nation's very best values. We believe that when American voters have the opportunity, they will go to the polls Tuesday and vote THEIR values rather than being forced to vote for the 'lesser of two evils.'

My opponents ask for your vote promising only to continue the Bush Administration's policy of spending a billion dollars a day on illegal and immoral wars of occupation abroad. They threaten to expand those wars into Iran and Pakistan. In their eloquent speeches, written by highly-paid speech writing professionals, your emotions are targeted creating visions of acts of evil from people who 'hate' us. That's not even fair because I know that you know better than that.

The Iraq war is a clear example of an unnecessary war based on inaccurate intelligence. And we have seen upwards of 4000 body bags and countless wounded Americans being brought home. Nobody even talks about the untold numbers of dead and injured foreign human beings; causalities of this unnecessary war.

Besides the illegal nature of our nation's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there are other important issues ignored by my opponents; my campaign has addressed those issues, some of which includes my commitment to universal access to healthcare -- a kind of Medicare-for-all plan; for the restoration of Constitutional Government and for urgent action on global warming. For full details, please visit us online at http://www.runcynthiarun.org and http://www.GP.org/.

Decent Americans deserve a Government as good as its People. As good as you! I invite you to come home to the Green Party today. Come home to the Party of Peace.

Vote Tuesday for Cynthia McKinney for President. Thank you for your vote and support.

Sincerely,
Cynthia McKinney

Paid for by the
Power to the People Committee
Cynthia McKinney for President

Sunday, September 21, 2008

We Agree

The Republican/Democrat duopoly has, for far too long, ignored the most important issues facing our nation. However, alternate candidates Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, and Ralph Nader agree with Ron Paul on four key principles central to the health of our nation. These principles should be key in the considerations of every voter this November and in every election.

We Agree

Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.

Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.

The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.

The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.


We support opening up the debates beyond the two parties and the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), a private corporation co-chaired by former chairmen of the Republican and Democratic Party. It is time for our Presidential Debates to once again be hosted by a truly non-partisan civic-minded association

Friday, August 08, 2008

An open letter to Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner





Dear Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner:

George W. Bush will be within your jurisdiction on September 1 as he speaks to the Republican National Convention in St. Paul. As you know, as President of the United States, Bush ordered military action against the Iraqi government on the false premise that Iraq represented a direct threat to the security of the United States. There have been two significant books published recently that detail the culpability of George W. Bush: Elizabeth de la Vega was a federal prosecutor. Her book, U S v Bush, details the case she would make against Bush before a federal grand jury. Vincent Bugliosi, the prosecutor of the Manson family, has published The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder. His book further documents the legal case to be made against George W. Bush.

I would welcome an opportunity to meet with you and discuss this matter, and at that time I would like to present you with copies of both books.

Young men from Ramsey County died in Iraq as a direct consequence of the lies that were told by George W. Bush: Army Spc. Jacob Vanderbosch, 21, of Vadnais Heights was killed October 3, 2005 in Haqlaniyah, Iraq, when a roadside bomb exploded; White Bear Lake resident Pfc. Elden Arcand's fuel supply truck overturned on a road on August 21, 2005 in Mosul--officials say he was thrown from the vehicle, and it rolled onto him; Army Specialist Gregory Rundell of North St. Paul was killed Wednesday March 26, 2008 while manning a guard tower in Iraq. The crime of reckless endangerment of these young men happened in Ramsey County when they were told they had to serve in Iraq.

If a person in legitimate authority told a lie to someone and that person acted on good faith in believing that lie, then the person who told that lie is guilty of reckless endangerment and must be held accountable for the death of that innocent. If the Chief of Police in St. Paul were to tell someone that they could speed at 95 mph on Highway 35, and that person were to die in an automobile accident in Iowa, then the St. Paul Chief of Police would be guilty of reckless endangerment, and that crime would have occurred in St. Paul. In a like manner, Jacob Vanderbosch, Elden Arcand and Gregory Rundell were lied to in the jurisdiction of Ramsey County. The crime of reckless endangerment or Murder in the Third Degree happened in Ramsey County.

Because Bush committed troops of the Minnesota National Guard to tragic danger and fatalities in Iraq for the sole purpose of enriching his family's business, Halliburton, and, thereby, causing the death of Minnesota citizens, he is guilty of committing murder in the third degree: Section 609.195: MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE: whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years on each count.

As you may know, I appealed to Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman to bring charges against George W. Bush. He was extremely cordial but he refused. I filed a writ of mandamus with the 4th District Court asking the judge to order County Attorney Mike Freeman to bring charges. The County Attorney responded, and I answered his response. Finally, Judge Gary Larson denied my writ agreeing with the County Attorney's office that they had discretion in the matter of whom to prosecute. I agree that, generally, the County Attorney's office should have discretion on whom to prosecute, however, exception to this absolute authority can be seen in Minnesota Statute 388.12: "Attorney to Assist. The judge of any district court may by order entered in the minutes at any term of court appoint an attorney of such court to act as, or in place of, or to assist the county attorney at such term, either before the court or grand jury. The person so appointed shall take the oath required by law of county attorneys and thereupon may perform all duties at such term of court, but shall receive no compensation where the county attorney is present at such term, except by the county attorney's consent, and to be paid from the county attorney's salary."

I have attached my Appeal, writ of mandamus, their response, my answer and Judge Gary Larson's order to this email.

I would most sincerely appreciate an opportunity to discuss this matter with you at your earliest convenience,

Ed Felien

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Response from Susan Gaertner

August 1, 2008
Dear Mr. Felien:
Thank you for contacting me via email about your desire to have President George W. Bush prosecuted for various crimes.

I respect the passion and sincerity of your deep concerns about the actions of President Bush and the war in Iraq. You argue eloquently and forcefully for your point of view and desired course of action. Although I have not read Mr. Bugliosi's book, I know and admire Ms. De la Vega and have her book at home.
Many people share your conviction that President Bush should be held accountable, and there are various ways in which that might occur. I do not believe, however, that a criminal prosecution by a county attorney and/or an individual appointed by the court to assist the county attorney is the appropriate way to seek to hold a president accountable for the actions you describe-regardless of the merits of the arguments that might be presented. On the legal issues, I also come to the same conclusions stated in the brief filed by Mr. Diamond and the order issued by Judge Larson.

Even though I have not come to the conclusion you might favor, I appreciate the thoroughness and thoughtfulness of the arguments you presented.
Thank you again for contacting me, and best wishes.
Sincerely,
Susan Gaertner
Ramsey County Attorney


Sunday, May 18, 2008

Weapons can't be green

By Zafrir Rinat

More and more green parties are emerging around the world. Green party representatives from 88 countries, including three from Israel, gathered this month in Sao Paulo, Brazil, for the Second Global Greens Congress. The conference was dedicated to Ingrid Betancourt, the former leader of Colombia's Oxygen Green Party, who was kidnapped by a guerrilla group in 2002 and is still being held hostage.

The conference's discussions centered on mega cities, such as Sao Paulo, Mexico City and New York, and environmental problems, foremost among them global warming. "The main problems occupying most party representatives are too much traffic and air pollution, producing electricity from renewable sources, and waste management," says Hadas Shachnai of the Green Party, who represented Israel along with Mosi Raz of Meretz and environmental activist Eran Binyamini. "For example, representatives from New York complained that while the city has efficient public transportation, it is flooded with garbage."

The congress was the first of its kind with a substantial presence of green parties from Africa and even from Mediterranean countries. However, the strongest green parties come from Europe, Australia and North America, where environmental awareness is more established. In these countries, green party representatives sit in parliament and hold senior positions in the big cities.

So far, the greens' greatest success has been registered in Germany, where the Green Party was a member of the government. The Germans are very involved in the activities of green parties the world over, through the Heinrich Boell Foundation, which promotes the activities of green organizations. The foundation also has offices in Israel.

The greens' situation is completely different in countries like China, the main stage for environmental problems today, because of its accelerated pace of development. The Chinese authorities have banned several parties. Shachnai relates that the green party representative in China openly voiced concern over his own fate and his name was barred from publication.

The situation is a lot better in places such as Paris, where the greens play a key role in city hall. They have recently promoted several environmental initiatives, including setting up the infrastructure for renting and riding bicycles. Green Party member Denis Baupin is the deputy mayor of Paris. In a meeting with Shachnai, he presented several ambitious objectives his party wants to promote: significantly reducing the use of private transportation over the next two decades and, as a result, increasing the use of public transportation. Another objective is to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases within the city by two-thirds.

One of the main objectives of conferences such as the one held in Sao Paulo is to create a common agenda for political movements from different countries. This agenda was formulated in what the greens defined as "the 21-points plan for the 21st century." This is not merely an environmental action plan, but also the herald of decisions calling for supporting democratic regimes and promoting activities to enhance health care, education and nutrition in developing countries. There is even a call to limit the global arms trade, which increased by 50 percent over the last four years.

"We aren't ashamed to state that green politics support peace," the program stated. "Our strategy, which entails conceding the use of gas and oil and opposition to nuclear energy, is intended to provide security for the energy supply and to prevent conflicts."

The first section of the greens' action plan states that they will work to replace the Western economic model, based on the use of different types of gasoline that cause pollution, inefficient energy use and a culture of consuming products and then disposing of them as waste.

The alternative model will consist of an economy whose prices will reflect both social and environmental costs. As such, income tax will be reduced and, simultaneously, a tax will be levied on acts that cause pollution. Subsidies that encourage pollution will be replaced by investment in renewable energies and in activities based on reducing emissions of carbon, the main greenhouse gas.

The action plan calls for reducing greenhouse gases by up to 40 percent by 2020. The greens are also calling for a halt in cutting down natural forests and for imposing strict supervision over wood products, to ensure that there is no trading in wood from forests where cutting has been prohibited. The greens assert that nature preservation in developing countries should be ensured by means of financial aid from the wealthy countries, which are largely responsible for the ongoing destruction of the world's natural resources.

Local butterflies face extinction

Over 100 species of day-flying butterflies are found in Israel. Now hikers can get acquainted with them, thanks to a pocket guide to butterflies. The guide, published by Teva Yisraeli publishers, is a continuation of the series that has already produced guides to flora and mammals.

The new guide, edited by Noam Kirschenbaum, features illustrations by Richard Lewington and Tuvia Kurtz and contains scientific descriptions by Dr. Oz Ben Yehuda. Many of the species appearing in it can be found in Israel, including in urban areas and their outskirts.

Day-flying butterflies live for just a few weeks and feed on nectar. Butterfly larva feed on plant leaves. Many butterfly species today face extinction due to the damage to their natural habitats and collectors' activities. The plans to expand such cities as Hadera and Safed threaten some of the last remaining habitats of particularly rare species. Among the species facing danger are the tree nymph, the largest day-flying butterfly in Israel, and one of the most stunning. Butterfly lovers recently waged a campaign that succeeded in delaying construction plans that would have damaged the butterflies and they are trying to add some species to the list of protected wild fauna in Israel.

Source

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Bin Laden NOT responsible for 9-11?

Osama bin Laden’s role in the events of September 11, 2001 is not mentioned on the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted” poster.

On June 5, 2006, author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 1998 bombings of US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, the poster does not indicate that he is wanted in connection with the events of 9/11.

Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” Asked to explain the process, Tomb responded, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”

Haas pauses to ask the question, “If the US government does not have enough hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11, how is it possible that it had enough evidence to invade Afghanistan to ‘smoke him out of his cave?’” Through corporate media, the Bush administration told the American people that bin Laden was “Public Enemy Number One,” responsible for the deaths of nearly 3,000 people on September 11, 2001. The federal government claims to have invaded Afghanistan to “root out” bin Laden and the Taliban, yet nearly six years later, the FBI said that it had no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.

Though the world was to have been convinced by the December 2001 release of a bin Laden “confession video,” the Department of Defense issued a press release to accompany this video in which Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, “There was no doubt of bin Laden’s responsibility for the 9/11 attacks even before the tape was discovered.”

In a CNN article regarding the bin Laden tape, then New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said that “the tape removes any doubt that the US military campaign targeting bin Laden and his associates is more than justified.” Senator Richard Shelby, R-Alabama, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, “The tape’s release is central to informing people in the outside world who don’t believe bin Laden was involved in the September 11 attacks.” Shelby went on to say “I don’t know how they can be in denial after they see this tape.”

Haas attempted to secure a reference to US government authentication of the bin Laden “confession video,” to no avail. However, it is conclusive that the Bush Administration and US Congress, along with corporate media, presented the video as authentic. So why doesn’t the FBI view the “confession video” as hard evidence? After all, notes Haas, if the FBI is investigating a crime such as drug trafficking, and it discovers a video of members of a drug cartel openly talking about a successful distribution operation in the United States, that video would be presented to a federal grand jury. The participants identified in the video would be indicted. The video alone would serve as sufficient evidence to net a conviction in a federal court. So why, asks Haas, is the bin Laden “confession video” not carrying the same weight with the FBI?
Haas strongly suggests that we begin asking questions, “The fact that the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11 should be headline news around the world. The challenge to the reader is to find out why it is not. Why has the US media blindly read the government-provided 9/11 scripts, rather than investigate without passion, prejudice, or bias, the events of September 11, 2001? Why has the US media blacklisted any guest that might speak of a government-sponsored 9/11 cover-up, rather than seeking out those people who have something to say about 9/11 that is contrary to the government’s account?” Haas continues. “Who is controlling the media message, and how is it that the FBI has no ‘hard evidence’ connecting Osama bin Laden to the events of September 11, 2001, while the US media has played the bin Laden-9/11 connection story for [six] years now as if it has conclusive evidence that bin Laden is responsible for the collapse of the twin towers, the Pentagon attack, and the demise of United Flight 93?”

UPDATE BY ED HAAS

On June 6, 2006 the Muckraker Report ran a piece by Ed Haas titled “FBI says, ‘No hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.’” Haas is the editor and a writer for the Muckraker Report. At the center of this article remains the authenticity and truthfulness of the videotape released by the federal government on December 13, 2001 in which it is reported that Osama bin Laden “confesses” to the September 11, 2001 attacks. The corporate media—television, radio, and newspapers—across the United States and the world repeated, virtually non-stop for a week after the videotape’s release, the government account of OBL “confessing.”

However, not one document has been released that demonstrates the authenticity of the videotape or that it even went through an authentication process. The Muckraker Report has submitted Freedom of Information Act requests to the FBI, CIA, Department of Defense, and CENTCOM requesting documentation that would demonstrate the authenticity of the videotape and the dates/circumstances in which the videotape was discovered. CENTCOM has yet to reply to the FOIA request. After losing an appeal, the FBI responded that no documents could be found responsive to the request. The Department of Defense referred the Muckraker Report to CENTCOM while also indicating that it had no documents responsive to the FOIA request either.

The CIA however claims that it can neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of records responsive to the request. According to the CIA the fact of the existence or nonexistence of requested records is properly classified and is intelligence sources and methods information that is protected from disclosure by section 6 of the CIA Act of 1949, as amended. Therefore, the Agency has denied your request pursuant to FOIA exemptions (b)(1) and (b)(3).

Many people believe that if the videotape is authentic, it should be sufficient hard evidence for the FBI to connect bin Laden to 9/11. The Muckraker Report agrees. However, for the Department of Justice to indict bin Laden for the 9/11 attacks, something the government has yet to do, the videotape would have to be entered into evidence and subjected to additional scrutiny. This appears to be something the government wishes to avoid.

Some believe that the video is a fake. They refer to it as the “fat bin Laden”video. The Muckraker Report believes that while the videotape is indeed authentic, it was the result of an elaborate CIA sting operation. The Muckraker Report also believes that the reason why there is no documentation that demonstrates that the videotape went through an authenticity process is because the CIA knew it was authentic, they arranged the taping.

It is highly probable that the videotape was taped on September 26, 2001—before the US invaded Afghanistan.

Source:
The Muckraker Report, June 6, 2006, and Ithaca Journal, June 29, 2006
Title: “FBI says, ‘No Hard Evidence Connecting Bin Laden to 9/11’”
Author: Ed Haas
http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html

Student Researcher: Bianca May and Morgan Ulery
Faculty Evaluator: Ben Frymer, Ph.D.

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/16-no-hard-evidence-connecting-bin-laden-to-9-11/

Monday, April 21, 2008

Minneapolis citizens calling for Bush arrest at GOP Convention

by Ed Felien, Polly Mann, Kate McDonald

An appeal to Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman:

Arrest George W. Bush when he steps off the plane for the Republican Convention in September.

George W. Bush has committed horrible crimes against humanity. His war against a weak and defenseless country; his use of torture and kidnapping, his illegal incarcerations of foreign nationals and the shelling of Fallujah are crimes in violation of international law. As long as he is President he cannot be tried for these crimes in another country, but once he is a private citizen, then, like Kissinger, Pinochet and Donald Rumsfeld, he will be a hunted criminal with little refuge in any foreign country that believes in the rule of law. But those are matters for foreign countries and the international court.

He has violated and undermined the Constitution by illegally spying on citizens, by refusing to enforce laws passed by Congress, by invading a country without a Declaration of a State of War by Congress and by entering into agreements with foreign countries and not submitting those agreements to the United States Senate for their advice and consent. But these are matters for the U. S. Congress to enforce. Unfortunately, Congress is unwilling to hold the President accountable to the Constitution and has refused to begin impeachment proceedings against him.

But what concerns us as Minnesotans is whether George W. Bush's actions have caused serious and grievous harm to the citizens of our state and whether that harm was incidental to the legitimate performance of his official duties as President or whether his actions were motivated by private and personal gain. As the highest elected law enforcement official in Hennepin County, it is Mike Freeman's duty to enforce the laws of this state. If it can be shown that there is probable cause that George W. Bush caused harm to the people of Minnesota and that this harm was caused by his willful pursuit of personal gain, then it is the duty of Mike Freeman to arrest George W. Bush and hold him accountable to Minnesota law.

There are three areas in which the criminal acts of George W. Bush have violated Minnesota law.

First, his pursuit of a war against the government of Iraq was not done in legitimate defense of national interest but rather in pursuit of personal wealth. His administration lied about the threat of weapons of mass destruction, and they lied about a connection between Iraq and international terrorists. They knew Iraq did not pose a threat to the United States. The only reasonable explanation for George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq was that he stood to personally benefit from the war.

To fully understand the Bush family financial interests in war profiteering it is necessary to understand their history.

Great-grandfather Samuel Prescott Bush was president of Buckeye Steel Castings. He manufactured railroad couplings for railroads owned by the Morgans, Rockefellers and Harrimans. During World War I he was on the War Industries Board and chaired the section on forgings, guns, small arms and ammunition, and he got to work with people from Dupont, Remington, Winchester and Colt. Sam Bush founded and became the first president of the National Association of Manufacturers, an organization whose principal cause was defending industrial capitalism from the threat of unions. He became an indispensable part of the military-industrial complex, and he sent his son Prescott off to Yale where he could associate with the sons of his friends in the Skull and Bones fraternity.

Along with many of his college chums, Prescott joined Brown Brothers Harriman after college and started making serious money. The biggest buck to be made in the 1920's was in re-arming Germany. Harriman & Co. set up Union Banking Corp with Prescott as Manager to trade with Nazi financier Fritz Thyssen. They bought a steamship line to ship Remington arms to Germany through a dummy corporation in Holland.

Harriman & Co. bought Dresser Industries (manufacturers of oil pipeline equipment) in 1929 and Prescott became a Director, and he continued to run Dresser from the Board for the rest of his life. They, along with John Foster Dulles and others, bankrolled Hitler as a shrewd business strategy. Prescott became Managing Director of Union Bank in 1934 at the height of trade with Germany. In 1939 he took direct management of some of the slave labor camps in Poland to aid Nazi armament, according to Dutch intelligence sources.

In October of 1942, the U. S. government seized the assets of Union Bank and three other of Prescott's industries: the steamship line, the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation (suppliers of steel, wire and explosives to the Nazis) and the Silesian-American Company (the coal mining company he managed along with John Foster Dulles on behalf of the Nazi Economic Minister). This didn't really close them down. Once the war started they simply changed sides and started supplying war material to the Allies.

During the War Bonesmen were active in forming the OSS and its later incarnation, the CIA. Prescott's relationship with Dulles would become very useful during the Eisenhower years, with John Foster as Secretary of State and his brother Allen Dulles as Director of the CIA. Prescott and Dresser Industries were kept well inside the loop. Hans Gisevius, the German intelligence agent who acted as the go-between with Allen Dulles in Switzerland and Admiral Canaris in the German High Command after the war, acted as go-between with Dulles, Dresser Industries and Prescott Bush.
George Herbert Walker Bush, Prescott's son, improved on the CIA connection to the point of becoming its Director in 1976.

After graduating from Yale, George H. W. Bush went to work at his father's firm, Dresser Industries. Eventually, with money from Brown Brothers and Harriman (his dad's parent company) he set up his own company, Zapata. It was really a CIA front. The Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in 1961 was probably George's operation as much as it was Allen Dulles's. The CIA code name for it was Zapata. The boats left for the Bay of Pigs from an island that was leased to George H. W. Bush, and the boats were named Houston and Barbara.

He ran for Congress in Houston in 1964 by campaigning against the Civil Rights Act. He didn't get elected that year, but he did get elected the next time he tried. When he was Chair of the Republican Party in 1972 he set up ethnic heritage groups within the Party. These groups were havens for ex-Nazis.

While Vice President under Reagan, Bush was Chair of the Special Situations Group responsible for defeating the Sandanistas in Nicaragua. He and Ollie North set up, financed and armed the Contras through an elaborate and highly secretive scheme that saw private planes flying cash to Iran, buying Soviet-made guns, flying guns to the Contras at a private CIA airstrip in Costa Rica, trading guns for marijuana and cocaine, then flying the drugs to a private U. S. airbase in Homestead, Florida, where the drugs were traded for cash.

George Bush was Vice President under Reagan from 1980 to 1988. He was elected President in 1988 and served one term until 1992. Dick Cheney was his Secretary of Defense. When Bush lost, Cheney went from being Secretary of Defense to being CEO of Halliburton, probably the largest supplier of goods and services to the Defense Department. The revolving door connecting the military to the industrial complex seemed to be well greased. A few years later Cheney came back through the door to be Vice President for George Bush the younger.

Why did George W pick Cheney. Well, actually, Cheney picked himself. Bush asked him to make a list of candidates for Vice President. Cheney did, then he sold W on the idea that he was the best man for the job.

What makes Cheney so special, so indispensable?

While Cheney was CEO of Halliburton he built up the company by buying other companies. One of the companies he bought was Dresser Industries. Halliburton spent $8 billion buying Dresser. When they bought it, Halliburton's stock dropped by a third. Wall Street thought it was a bum deal. Why did Cheney pay so much? Was it a sweetheart deal because the owners of Dresser were his former and future bosses?

The popular image of Cheney is that he's the brains behind Bush, that Bush is some kind of simpleton and Cheney is an evil genius. The Dresser deal looks like Cheney is still the loyal employee. He's both the bag man and fall guy for the Bushs. He delivers the cash, and, when the Bushs get in trouble, he's willing to stand up and take the hit for it.
During the 2000 presidential election Cheney admitted Halliburton did business with Libya and Iran, but he denied they had done business with Iraq, "I had a firm policy that we wouldn't do anything in Iraq, even arrangements that were supposedly legal. We've not done any business in Iraq since U. N. sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990, and I had a standing policy that I wouldn't do that," he said on ABC-TV's This Week on July 30, 2000. But Dresser was selling equipment through French subsidiaries to Iraq from early in 1997 through 2000. Halliburton didn't buy Dresser until 1998, so, it was the Bush family's company that was trading with the enemy and Cheney just continued the practice. Purchasing the company also covered up the trail.

George W. Bush, in the best traditions of his family, waged war against the people of Iraq so that Halliburton could assign oil leases and control the oil and so that Halliburton would get multi-billion dollar no-bid contracts to supply the military. More than 4000 Americans have lost their lives in Iraq. Of that number 60, as of March 29, 2008, are from Minnesota, which is the justification of this appeal to County Attorney Mike Freeman to arrest George W. Bush.

Because he has committed troops of the Minnesota National Guard to tragic danger and fatalities in Iraq for the sole purpose of enriching his family's business, Halliburton, and, thereby, causing the death of Minnesota citizens, he is guilty of committing murder in the third degree: Section 609.195: MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE: whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years on each count.

Through the sale of oil drilling equipment Dresser Company and the Bush family have had long time relationships with the Saudi royal family. The bin Laden family have been the principal contracting firm for the Saudi royal family, so it was natural for Osama bin Laden's family to give George W. Bush $50,000 to get started in the oil exploration business in Texas. Bush returned the favor by grounding all aircraft after 9/11 except the plane that evacuated those members of the bin Laden family staying in the U. S. There was a touching video of Crown Prince Faisal visiting George W. Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. They were holding hands as they walked, evidence of a stronger relationship than the one Bush had with Tony Blair or Berlusconi.

As head of the Bush family, George W. Bush directs their investment in Halliburton. Halliburton directs the movement of oil out of Iraq, 25% of the world's supply. The Saudi family directs the movement of oil out of Saudi Arabia, 40% of the world's supply. It is reasonable to assume that when George W. Bush and Prince Faisal get together they talk about the supply and price of oil. After their last meeting in Saudi Arabia, supplies dropped and the price of oil rose dramatically. According to Minnesota State law that meeting looks suspiciously like a conspiracy to fix prices.

Because, through Halliburton's control of Iraqi oil, he has acted in collusion with Saudi Arabia and OPEC to fix the price and supply of oil to distributors in Hennepin County, he is guilty of price fixing: Section 325.53: PROHIBITED CONTRACTS, COMBINATIONS, AND CONSPIRACIES: Subdivision 1. Price fixing, production control, allocation of markets, collusive bidding, and concerted refusals to deal. Without limiting section 325D.51, the following shall be deemed to restrain trade or commerce unreasonably and are unlawful: (1) A contract, combination or conspiracy between two or more persons in competition: (a) for the purpose or with the effect of affecting, fixing, controlling or maintaining the market price, rate or fee of any commodity or service; (b) affecting, fixing, controlling, maintaining, limiting, or discontinuing the production, manufacture, mining, sale or supply of any commodity, or the sale or supply of any service, for the purpose or with the effect of affecting, fixing, controlling, or maintaining the market price, rate, or fee of the commodity or service.

Finally, George W. Bush should be arrested and prosecuted for his collusion with the opium warlords in Afghanistan to distribute heroin in Hennepin County. The United Nations and all objective reports verify that during the last year of the Taliban reign in Afghanistan, their government had reduced the Afghanistan contribution to the world supply of opium and heroin to zero, and everyone agrees that since the opium warlords have taken back control of the rural areas of Afghanistan opium production in Afghanistan now contributes 90% of the world supply. The U. S. Army and the CIA worked in support of the opium warlords by granting them control over most of the opium growing areas of Afghanistan, getting them a respected place in the central government. The CIA even insured that an opium warlord would be in charge of the Department of the Interior-the government agency responsible for drug enforcement. This is the pattern the OSS (the early version of the CIA) used to overthrow Musolini's government in Sicily. Through contacts with Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano, they got the Mafia in Sicily to cooperate with the Allies in the invasion of Sicily. The Mafia in America has always been a ready and willing patriot in any CIA off the shelf adventure. When Ollie North brought cocaine and marijuana in from Colombia, the Mafia was ready to pay cash for it and distribute it. Ollie North knew these contacts when he was working with the Hmong and Meo tribes in Laos during the Vietnam War. As part of the golden triangle these tribes produced large amounts of opium that CIA planes would then transport to Marseille, continuing the colonial tradition begun by French forces in Vietnam.

George H. W. Bush was a part of all this because he was Director of the CIA when the golden triangle was active, and he was Vice President during the Contra War and probably in charge of the operation to fund the Contras through the illegal importation of cocaine and marijuana.

Opium poppies have grown in Afghanistan since ancient times. The British began to control the exporting of the drug early in the nineteenth century. The Opium War in China in the middle of the nineteenth century was a result of the Chinese government trying to forbid the British importation of opium. The British won the war and the Chinese were forced to allow the British to sell opium. Early in the twentieth century Sicilians and Italians found the opium through contacts in Beirut and had it manufactured into heroin in laboratories in Marseilles. The heroin was then smuggled into Europe and the United States.

The traditional route for smugglers was over the mountains from Afghanistan, through Iran, Iraq, Jordan and to Beirut, Lebanon. The lack of cooperation recently of the Iranian government in this smuggling conspiracy has created problems for the smugglers and international problems for Iran. But, thanks to the active cooperation of the CIA and the U S government, opium does make its way through the Middle East, to Sicily and laboratories to be refined into heroin and, finally, to the U S and Hennepin County.

Section 609.228 of the Minnesota penal code, GREAT BODILY HARM CAUSED BY DISTRIBUTION OF DRUGS, says, "Whoever proximately causes great bodily harm by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in schedule I or II may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both.

Is it possible that George W. Bush, as President of the United States, has immunity from prosecution? Thomas Paine wrote in Common Sense 57 (Philadelphia, 1776), "In America THE LAW IS KING. For as in absolute governments the King is the law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." The Supreme Court said in an 1882 decision, United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220, 1 S.Ct. 240, 261, 27 L.Ed. 171, that:

No man in this country is so high that he is above the law.
No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity.
All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of
the law, and are bound to obey.

It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every
man who by accepting office participates in its functions is only the more
strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations
which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives.

We respectfully request that the Hennepin County Attorney enforce the laws of the State of Minnesota and arrest George W. Bush when he steps off the plane in Hennepin County in September when he comes here to attend the Republican National Convention.

source: http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_ed_felie_080419_minneapolis_citizens.htm

Saturday, April 19, 2008

Rising food prices a threat to world peace

By KEN KAMOCHE

School debates were noted for their either/or dichotomies. As 15-year olds, fuelled by heady promises that we were the leaders of tomorrow, we engaged in heated exchanges over whether Africa should opt for socialism or capitalism. We racked our adolescent brains over whether we live to eat or eat to live.

The thing about eating and living has been troubling my mind lately as I see a global food crisis looming in the horizon and casting a shadow right across the world.

The world is accustomed to crises. It is the nature of the planet we inhabit and we have seen them all. Energy crises. The threat of terrorism. The threat of global epidemics like the plague and SARS. One financial or economic crisis after another. And now an imminent food crisis.

Throughout history, individual countries, from Ireland to China to Ethiopia, have known the pain of hunger and mass starvation. Many others only read about it. But all that has changed, and in the last couple of years, even the richest countries in the world have felt the pressure of rising food prices.

No one has been spared. And there seems to be no solution in sight as we haggle over democracy and other fine dreams.

In the last six months, there have been food riots in virtually every continent, from West Bengal and Mexico last year to Egypt and Indonesia. More recently, there have been riots in the poorest countries like Haiti and Burkina Faso. Demonstrations have rocked Cameroon, Mauritania, Cote d’Ivoire, Morocco, Philippines, and been felt across the Gulf States. Italy has seen pasta price protests.

Elsewhere, supermarkets have witnessed panic buying over rumours of imminent price hikes. The IMF warns of an escalation in uncertainty and even the threat of war as millions find themselves unable to afford food.

The situation is worrying, and the threats cannot be treated lightly. Consider that during the last year, the global price of wheat has risen by 130 per cent and that of rice by 75 per cent. At some point in Argentina, it was reported that tomatoes had become more expensive than meat.

In countries like Japan where overall inflation, excluding the price of food, hovers around 1 per cent and the where deflation is a way of life, food prices have risen by an average of 15 per cent in the last 12 months. Given that Japan produces only 40 per cent of its food requirements and is as exposed to global food prices as any poor African or Asian country, the prospects are pretty gloomy.

Food production can barely keep pace with demand, which is caused by the growth in world population in real terms and also the emergence of a middle class in developing economies that wants to eat better than their parents’ generation.

According to the Food and Agricultural Organisation, demand for meat in China has grown by 150 per cent since 1980.

Last year, floods destroyed crops around the world from the UK to China and Australia, and vast sections of Africa. Ten per cent of the UK wheat crop was destroyed in the 2007 summer floods. As a result, prices have continued to creep up.

Cutting down rainforests and devoting agricultural land to bio-fuels might have helped relieve the pressure on diminishing oil reserves, although going by current petroleum prices that remains a moot point, but more profoundly, it has exacerbated the food crisis.

George Bush wants 15 per cent of American cars to run on bio-fuel within the next nine years. This has forced American farmers to divert 20 per cent of the maize crop to bio-fuels, in the process leading to a shortage in food and doubling the price of maize. This has had a dire effect on many Asian, Latin American and African countries that rely on American maize. Blithely ignoring the dangers, India and Brazil, among others, are pledging to take land away from agriculture to bio-fuels.

Two hundred years ago, English political economist Thomas Malthus warned that the exponential population growth rate would get out of sync with the arithmetic growth in world food production, leading to catastrophe.

It was a timely warning even though Mr Malthus could not have predicted how industrial and technological progress would boost food production, and he somewhat overestimated man’s capacity to procreate.

The threat of insufficient food remains. But now, it emanates from factors that, to 18th century people, would have sounded like the stuff science fiction is made of. When Mr Malthus was penning his doomsday scenario, cars powered by two cylinder gasoline engines were yet to start rolling down the streets of his native Surrey.

Sky-high oil prices and extreme weather are not helping either. This leaves us facing a food crisis of unbelievable proportions. It brings into sharp focus that old, popular debate topic about eating and living. It evokes images of man reverting back to his hunter-gatherer days, rummaging for scraps of food in wasted landscapes ravaged by drought and scorched by an unrelenting sun.

Democratic governments, as well as those that keep their people subjugated, could soon find themselves facing uncontrollable political activity. Instability in large economies like India and China could have serious repercussions for global peace. The case of the Haitian prime minister dismissed over food riots should force world leaders back to high school-type debates: to feed people or not to feed people.

Professor Ken Kamoche is an academic and a writer.

source:http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=121518

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Green and Democrat: What's the Difference?


The Green Party & Green candidates compared to Democratic leadership &
Democratic candidates on important issues

Green Presidential Candidates: Jesse Johnson, Cynthia McKinney, Kent
Mesplay, Kat Swift Democratic

Presidential Candidates: Hillary Clinton,
Barack Obama


The Iraq War

Green Party & Green candidates
-- opposed the invasion and occupation from the beginning
-- favor immediate withdrawal of all US troops and contracted personnel
from Iraq
-- call for Congress to cut off funding for the war
-- seek to hold the Bush Administration responsible for deceiving the
public with false claims that Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs, posed a
threat to the US and to Iraq's own neighbors, had conspired with al Qaeda,
and played a role in the 9/11 attacks
-- oppose 'benchmarks' that would allow US and UK corporations to take
control over most Iraqi oil resources

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- supported the Iraq War from the beginning and believed Bush
Administration lies; voted with Republicans to surrender Congress's war
power to the White House (Obama was not in Congress yet and initially
opposed the war, but softened his opposition after election to the US
Senate)
-- continued to give President Bush funding for the occupation after
gaining control of Congress: both Clinton and Obama voted for funding
bills
-- offer delayed and vague timetables for troop withdrawal, and would
leave some troops in Iraq
-- support 'benchmarks' giving US and UK corporations control over Iraqi
oil, which would require continued US troop presence in Iraq to protect
corporate interests

Foreign Policy

Green Party & Green candidates
-- strongly oppose President Bush's threat to attack Iran
-- support an end to the US occupation of Afghanistan, opposed invasion
-- support cutoff of military aid to Israel, demand US pressure on Israel
to end the brutal occupation of Palestine and suppression of Palestinian
and Israeli Arab human rights, in accord with international law and UN
directives
-- seek an end to the US embargo of Cuba
-- favor nonviolent solutions to international conflict

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- have signed on to President Bush's threat to attack Iran (both Clinton
and Obama have said that an attack on Iran is not off the table)
-- support continued US occupation and war on Afghanistan
-- do not criticize Israel, dismiss international law and UN directives on
Israeli apartheid and occupation of Palestinian lands
-- favor continued embargo of Cuba
-- have supported most Bush foreign policy agenda: invasion and threats of
invasion; broken international treaties; contemptuous treatment of US
allies

Global Warming, Energy, & the Environment

Green Party & Green candidates
-- call for far-reaching short-term and long-term cuts in greenhouse gas
emissions
-- favor major conservation programs to cut US energy consumption
-- seek widespread economic reorganization and millions of new jobs in
conservation and conversion to safe, clean energy sources
-- oppose nuclear energy, which creates huge amounts of toxic waste and
multiple security risks
-- oppose widespread conversion to bio-fuels that require agricultural land
needed for food production
-- seek restrictions and oversight on genetically modified organisms,
especially food

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- favor modest long-term cuts in greenhouse gas emissions
-- don't talk about conservation and cuts in consumption
-- support nuclear energy and biofuel production (Obama receives major
campaign contributions from nuclear and ethanol industries and supports
their goals)
-- support or are silent on genetically modified organisms and food

Impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney

Green Party & Green candidates
-- endorse impeachment of Bush and Cheney for high crimes and
misdemeanors: deception and manipulation of intelligence to justify the
invasion of Iraq; cover-ups of information about impending 9/11 attacks;
use of torture; denial of habeas corpus and due process; warrantless
surveillance of US citizens; hundreds of 'signing statements' to exempt
the President from executing over 1,000 federal laws; censoring and
tampering with scientific research to conceal the seriousness of global
warming; responsibility for the deaths of as many as one million Iraqi
civilians and over 4,000 US servicemembers

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- oppose and block motions for impeachment, despite Bush Administration's
numerous crimes and abuses of power

Health Care Reform


Green Party & Green candidates

-- support Single-Payer National Health Care (Medicare For All), which
would provide all Americans with quality health care regardless of ability
to pay, employment, age, or prior medical condition: Single-Payer will
remove corporate HMOs and insurance firms from control over health care,
give Americans choice of health care provider, provide no-cost or low-cost
prescriptions based on need, and ease the burden on physicians and other
health care providers

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- oppose Single-Payer
-- favor health care reform plans that leave profit-making HMOs and
insurance firms in control over health care
-- take hundreds of thousands of dollars from corporate HMOs, insurance
firms, and pharmaceutical manufacturers

War on Drugs & the Justice System

Green Party & Green candidates
-- oppose the War on Drugs, calling it a war on African American, Latino,
poor, and young people
-- favor decriminalization (especially for marijuana), medical treatment
for drug abuse instead of prosecution
-- oppose privatization of prisons, which require increasing numbers of
inmates for corporate profits: the US has the highest incarceration rate
in the world
-- call for abolition of the death penalty

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- support the War on Drugs
-- either support or are silent on privatization of prisons
-- support the death penalty

Labor & Economic Justice

Green Party & Green candidates
-- oppose 'free trade' agreements and unelected international trade
authorities (NAFTA, FTAA, WTO, GATT, etc.) that give corporate power and
profit priority over labor rights and environmental protections
-- call for repeal of the Taft-Hartley Act (restricting union organizing),
support democratic workplaces
-- favor a strong safety net for middle- and low-income working people,
support for small businesses and local economies
-- support human rights protection for undocumented immigrants: Greens
call the flood of new immigrants a result of economic policies and
agreements (e.g., NAFTA) that impoverish people and drive them across
borders

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- have supported and voted for 'free trade' agreements and unelected
international trade authorities
-- are silent on Taft-Hartley, don't deliver for working people despite
Election Year endorsements from unions
-- support economic policies that favor the wealthy, major corporations,
and Wall Street, with limited aid for poor and middle-income Americans
(Clinton and Obama support the 1996 Welfare Reform Act signed by Bill
Clinton, which severely hurt millions of Americans, especially women,
during the recent economic downturn)
-- favor policies that scapegoat immigrants for economic problems

Democracy and Fair Elections

Green Party & Green candidates
-- take no money from corporate contributors
-- led effort to expose Republican obstruction of Ohio voters and
manipulation of votes in 2004: Green presidential nominee David Cobb (with
Libertarian nominee Michael Badnarik) initiated the Ohio recount campaign
and raised money for legal fees
-- seek public financing of elections, free time on public airwaves for
all candidates, repeal of ballot access laws restricting third party and
independent candidates
-- support instant runoff voting, proportional representation, and other
reforms to ensure democracy in US elections
-- support statehood for the District of Columbia, with self-government
and full representation in Congress equal to other states

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- take hundreds of thousands of dollars from corporate contributors
-- had minimal response to election irregularities in Ohio, minimal
reaction to the Conyers Commission's evidence that the 2004 election may
have been stolen: only one Democratic Senator (Barbara Boxer) stood up to
support African American Congress-members' protest at Senate's confirmation
of Bush reelection in January 2005
-- are silent on many needed election reforms: Democrats and Republicans
together worked to pass laws limiting third party and independent
participation in elections
-- favor a single voting seat in the US House for DC (statehood for DC was
removed from the Democratic Party platform in 2004)

Human Rights & Social Justice

Green Party & Green candidates

-- oppose the USA Patriot Act and favor repeal
-- support full and equal recognition for same-sex marriage
-- support reparations for the descendants of African American slaves in
the US

Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
-- support the USA Patriot Act: Clinton voted for passage; Clinton and
Obama voted for reauthorization
-- favor limited and unequal recognition for same-sex marriage
-- oppose or have no position on reparations for the descendents of slaves

Produced by: Scott McLarty a member of the Lavender Greens of Minnesota.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Lest We Forget: An open letter to my sisters who are brave.

By Alice Walker | TheRoot.com

The author argues that we must build alliances not on ethnicity or gender, but on truth.

I HAVE COME home from a long stay in Mexico to find – because of the presidential campaign, and especially because of the Obama/Clinton race for the Democratic nomination - a new country existing alongside the old. On any given day we, collectively, become the Goddess of the Three Directions and can look back into the past, look at ourselves just where we are, and take a glance, as well, into the future. It is a space with which I am familiar.

When I was born in 1944 my parents lived on a middle Georgia plantation that was owned by a white distant relative, Miss May Montgomery. (During my childhood it was necessary to address all white girls as "Miss" when they reached the age of twelve.) She would never admit to this relationship, of course, except to mock it. Told by my parents that several of their children would not eat chicken skin she responded that of course they would not. No Montgomerys would.

My parents and older siblings did everything imaginable for Miss May. They planted and raised her cotton and corn, fed and killed and processed her cattle and hogs, painted her house, patched her roof, ran her dairy, and, among countless other duties and responsibilities my father was her chauffeur, taking her anywhere she wanted to go at any hour of the day or night. She lived in a large white house with green shutters and a green, luxuriant lawn: not quite as large as Tara of Gone With the Wind fame, but in the same style.

We lived in a shack without electricity or running water, under a rusty tin roof that let in wind and rain. Miss May went to school as a girl. The school my parents and their neighbors built for us was burned to the ground by local racists who wanted to keep ignorant their competitors in tenant farming. During the Depression, desperate to feed his hardworking family, my father asked for a raise from ten dollars a month to twelve. Miss May responded that she would not pay that amount to a white man and she certainly wouldn't pay it to a nigger. That before she'd pay a nigger that much money she'd milk the dairy cows herself.

When I look back, this is part of what I see. I see the school bus carrying white children, boys and girls, right past me, and my brothers, as we trudge on foot five miles to school. Later, I see my parents struggling to build a school out of discarded army barracks while white students, girls and boys, enjoy a building made of brick. We had no books; we inherited the cast off books that "Jane" and "Dick" had previously used in the all-white school that we were not, as black children, permitted to enter.

The year I turned fifty, one of my relatives told me she had started reading my books for children in the library in my home town. I had had no idea – so kept from black people it had been – that such a place existed. To this day knowing my presence was not wanted in the public library when I was a child I am highly uncomfortable in libraries and will rarely, unless I am there to help build, repair, refurbish or raise money to keep them open, enter their doors.

When I joined the freedom movement in Mississippi in my early twenties it was to come to the aid of sharecroppers, like my parents, who had been thrown off the land they'd always known, the plantations, because they attempted to exercise their "democratic" right to vote. I wish I could say white women treated me and other black people a lot better than the men did, but I cannot. It seemed to me then and it seems to me now that white women have copied, all too often, the behavior of their fathers and their brothers, and in the South, especially in Mississippi, and before that, when I worked to register voters in Georgia, the broken bottles thrown at my head were gender free.

I made my first white women friends in college; they were women who loved me and were loyal to our friendship, but I understood, as they did, that they were white women and that whiteness mattered. That, for instance, at Sarah Lawrence, where I was speedily inducted into the Board of Trustees practically as soon as I graduated, I made my way to the campus for meetings by train, subway and foot, while the other trustees, women and men, all white, made their way by limo. Because, in our country, with its painful history of unspeakable inequality, this is part of what whiteness means. I loved my school for trying to make me feel I mattered to it, but because of my relative poverty I knew I could not.

I am a supporter of Obama because I believe he is the right person to lead the country at this time. He offers a rare opportunity for the country and the world to start over, and to do better. It is a deep sadness to me that many of my feminist white women friends cannot see him. Cannot see what he carries in his being. Cannot hear the fresh choices toward Movement he offers. That they can believe that millions of Americans –black, white, yellow, red and brown - choose Obama over Clinton only because he is a man, and black, feels tragic to me.

When I have supported white people, men and women, it was because I thought them the best possible people to do whatever the job required. Nothing else would have occurred to me. If Obama were in any sense mediocre, he would be forgotten by now. He is, in fact, a remarkable human being, not perfect but humanly stunning, like King was and like Mandela is. We look at him, as we looked at them, and are glad to be of our species. He is the change America has been trying desperately and for centuries to hide, ignore, kill. The change America must have if we are to convince the rest of the world that we care about people other than our (white) selves.

True to my inner Goddess of the Three Directions however, this does not mean I agree with everything Obama stands for. We differ on important points probably because I am older than he is, I am a woman and person of three colors, (African, Native American, European), I was born and raised in the American South, and when I look at the earth's people, after sixty-four years of life, there is not one person I wish to see suffer, no matter what they have done to me or to anyone else; though I understand quite well the place of suffering, often, in human growth.

I want a grown-up attitude toward Cuba, for instance, a country and a people I love; I want an end to the embargo that has harmed my friends and their children, children who, when I visit Cuba, trustingly turn their faces up for me to kiss. I agree with a teacher of mine, Howard Zinn, that war is as objectionable as cannibalism and slavery; it is beyond obsolete as a means of improving life. I want an end to the on-going war immediately and I want the soldiers to be encouraged to destroy their weapons and to drive themselves out of Iraq.

I want the Israeli government to be made accountable for its behavior towards the Palestinians, and I want the people of the United States to cease acting like they don't understand what is going on. All colonization, all occupation, all repression basically looks the same, whoever is doing it. Here our heads cannot remain stuck in the sand; our future depends of our ability to study, to learn, to understand what is in the records and what is before our eyes. But most of all I want someone with the self-confidence to talk to anyone, "enemy" or "friend," and this Obama has shown he can do. It is difficult to understand how one could vote for a person who is afraid to sit and talk to another human being. When you vote you are making someone a proxy for yourself; they are to speak when, and in places, you cannot. But if they find talking to someone else, who looks just like them, human, impossible, then what good is your vote?

It is hard to relate what it feels like to see Mrs. Clinton (I wish she felt self-assured enough to use her own name) referred to as "a woman" while Barack Obama is always referred to as "a black man." One would think she is just any woman, colorless, race-less, past-less, but she is not. She carries all the history of white womanhood in America in her person; it would be a miracle if we, and the world, did not react to this fact. How dishonest it is, to attempt to make her innocent of her racial inheritance.

I can easily imagine Obama sitting down and talking, person to person, with any leader, woman, man, child or common person, in the world, with no baggage of past servitude or race supremacy to mar their talks. I cannot see the same scenario with Mrs. Clinton who would drag into Twenty-First Century American leadership the same image of white privilege and distance from the reality of others' lives that has so marred our country's contacts with the rest of the world.

And yes, I would adore having a woman president of the United States. My choice would be Representative Barbara Lee, who alone voted in Congress five years ago not to make war on Iraq. That to me is leadership, morality, and courage; if she had been white I would have cheered just as hard. But she is not running for the highest office in the land, Mrs. Clinton is. And because Mrs. Clinton is a woman and because she may be very good at what she does, many people, including some younger women in my own family, originally favored her over Obama. I understand this, almost. It is because, in my own nieces' case, there is little memory, apparently, of the foundational inequities that still plague people of color and poor whites in this country. Why, even though our family has been here longer than most North American families – and only partly due to the fact that we have Native American genes – we very recently, in my lifetime, secured the right to vote, and only after numbers of people suffered and died for it.

When I offered the word "Womanism" many years ago, it was to give us a tool to use, as feminist women of color, in times like these. These are the moments we can see clearly, and must honor devotedly, our singular path as women of color in the United States. We are not white women and this truth has been ground into us for centuries, often in brutal ways. But neither are we inclined to follow a black person, man or woman, unless they demonstrate considerable courage, intelligence, compassion and substance. I am delighted that so many women of color support Barack Obama -and genuinely proud of the many young and old white women and men who do.

Imagine, if he wins the presidency we will have not one but three black women in the White House; one tall, two somewhat shorter; none of them carrying the washing in and out of the back door. The bottom line for most of us is: With whom do we have a better chance of surviving the madness and fear we are presently enduring, and with whom do we wish to set off on a journey of new possibility? In other words, as the Hopi elders would say: Who do we want in the boat with us as we head for the rapids? Who is likely to know how best to share the meager garden produce and water? We are advised by the Hopi elders to celebrate this time, whatever its adversities.

We have come a long way, Sisters, and we are up to the challenges of our time. One of which is to build alliances based not on race, ethnicity, color, nationality, sexual preference or gender, but on Truth. Celebrate our journey. Enjoy the miracle we are witnessing. Do not stress over its outcome. Even if Obama becomes president, our country is in such ruin it may well be beyond his power to lead us toward rehabilitation. If he is elected however, we must, individually and collectively, as citizens of the planet, insist on helping him do the best job that can be done; more, we must insist that he demand this of us. It is a blessing that our mothers taught us not to fear hard work. Know, as the Hopi elders declare: The river has its destination. And remember, as poet June Jordan and Sweet Honey in the Rock never tired of telling us: We are the ones we have been waiting for.

Namaste;

And with all my love,

Alice Walker

Cazul

Northern California

First Day of Spring

Locations of visitors to this page