NH Republican Debate Sept. 5, 2007 (videos; updated)

Ed. Note: will add more vids and/or links to vids when they become available. ~ Lo

Dandelion Salad


SEPETMBER 05, 2007
































GOP Candidates Take Pot Shots at Fred Thompson + Fred Thompson Announces Presidential Candidacy (videos)

Ron Paul Deprecated by Chris Wallace at GOP Debate (video)

GOP Candidates Take Pot Shots at Fred Thompson + Fred Thompson Announces Presidential Candidacy (videos)

Dandelion Salad

PoliticalChase Gov. Mike Huckabee, Sen. John McCain,…

Gov. Mike Huckabee, Sen. John McCain, and former Mayor Rudy Giuliani take pot shots at Fred Thompson for skipping tonight’s presidential debate in New Hampshire.


Fred Thompson announces his candidacy for president on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, September 5 2007.


NH Republican Debate Sept. 5, 2007 (videos)

Ron Paul Deprecated by Chris Wallace at GOP Debate + Ron Paul at GOP Debate (videos)

Dandelion Salad


Sept. 5, 2007

FOX News pundit-wannabe Chris Wallace, proving he is anything but a journalist, literally deprecated Rep. Ron Paul over an answer Paul gave on troop withdrawals from Iraq.

Although put in the form of a question, Wallace said Paul would take his “marching orders from al-Qaeda” to get the U.S. “off the Arabian peninsula.”

FOX News pundit-wannabe Chris Wallace…


dcarrico Compilation of Congressman Ron Paul a…

Compilation of Congressman Ron Paul at the Fourth GOP Presidential Debate held in the Whittemore Center at the University of New Hampshire on September 5th, 2007.


h/t: *RC_REVOLUTION 420 [resistance] and Ron Paul Revolution

Ron Paul and Sean Hannity Spar (09/05/07)

h/t: *RC_REVOLUTION 420 [resistance] and Ron Paul Revolution

2006 Georgia Governor Candidate, Imprisoned, Tortured – Confirming Conspiracy Part I by William Mac (video)

by William Mac
The Mac Manifesto
(no longer available)
featured writer
Dandelion Salad

Sept. 5, 2007

Confirming Conspiracy

Part 1

“Who is Paul Douglas Hale?”

Help spread the word. Distribute the 1 minute trailer for Part 1 of the 4 part series “Confirming Conspiracy” by viewing and embedding the film below (after all, your MySpace could use some substance!): Continue reading

09.04.07 Uncensored News Reports From Across The Middle East (video; over 18 only)

Dandelion Salad


This video contains images depicting the reality and horror of war and should only be viewed by a mature audience.

Selected Episode

Sept. 4, 2007


Two Bomb Blasts in Rawalindi, Pakistan; Al Jazeera
Musharraf Looking for Power-sharing Deals with Rivals; Abu Dhabi TV
Inside Naher el Bared New TV
Lebanese Army Finally Defeats Fateh El Islam; Future TV
Bush’s Visit to Anbar Sends Message to Sunnis; Al Arabiya
British Troops Withdraw from Basra, Al-Alam TV
Palestinian Ambulance Under Attack; Dubai TV
Producer: Jamal Dajani

Australian police warn of full-scale riot over Bush visit (+ video link)

Dandelion Salad

Raw Story
Agence France-Presse
Published: Wednesday September 5, 2007

SYDNEY (AFP) – The largest protest so far during US President George W. Bush’s visit to Sydney ended peacefully Wednesday, but police predicted a “full-scale riot” later in the week.

About 300 students, many still in their high school uniforms, marched through central Sydney chanting anti-war slogans in protest at the US leader’s presence in Australia for this week’s Asia-Pacific summit.

Police allowed the colourful rally, featuring a group of scantily-clad models and a pantomime horse, to march through a section of the city well away from where Bush was meeting with Prime Minister John Howard.

But authorities successfully appealed in the courts for a curb on the main protest action planned for Saturday, which police estimate could attract up to 20,000 demonstrators.

Chief superintendent Steven Cullen, head of the state Public Order and Riot Squad, said he had never been so worried about a demonstration in his career, predicting “horrendous” implications for public safety.

“Police lines will come under attack and a full-scale riot is probable,” Cullen told the Supreme Court.

The Stop Bush Coalition protest group agreed to change the route of the march so it did not pass the US consulate in the centre of the city’s financial district.

The court also ordered the protesters to stay away from a 2.8 metre (nine foot) high steel and concrete fence that snakes five kilometres (three miles) around the city centre, creating an exclusion zone for the visiting dignitaries.

Cullen told the court he had “absolutely no doubt” minority protest groups would attempt to violently disrupt the march and people would be hurt if there was a crush near the fence or they were pushed into glass-fronted buildings.

While police fear a repeat of the violence at last year’s G20 meeting in Melbourne, activists have labelled the unpredented security lockdown over much of Sydney as an attack on their right to peaceful protest.

“Protest is not violent, war is violent,” student Rainee Lyleson told Wednesday’s rally. “We will not be intimidated.”

Students dodged truancy officers and ignored police warnings to stay in their classrooms to attend the rally, organised by the left-wing group Resistance.

There was no sign of protest earlier when Bush held a joint press conference with Australian Prime Minister John Howard at a hotel in the centre of the exclusion zone.

Police searched the bags of pedestrians passing the venue, as helicopters buzzed overhead and officers with binoculars scanned the streets from rooftops.

Many of the city’s usually bustling streets were almost deserted amid the security operation involving 5,000 police and troops, with just a few onlookers hoping to catch a glimpse of the US leader through the security fence.

Some retailers, particularly high-end fashion and jewellery stores, were closed — with signs in their windows saying they would reopen after APEC.

Pavement garbage bins were sealed off with plastic covers while private security guards stood on duty outside office towers.

Some city centre businesses have reported a 50 percent fall in takings, although bicycle courier Rangi Smith said he had not been too badly affected.

“I can get around pretty easy on the bike but it’s the pedestrians I’m worried about,” he said, gesturing to onlookers near the security fence.

“They look like they’re in a cage — it’s like they’re imprisoned in their own city.”

The following video report ran on NBC News.


FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Why Is Bush Smiling? By Robert Scheer

Dandelion Salad

By Robert Scheer
Sept. 5, 2007

OK, throw another $50 billion down the rat hole that is the Iraq occupation. It’s only money, if you ignore the lives being destroyed. That’s what the White House is asking for, in addition to the $147 billion in supplementary funds already requested, and Congress will grant it after Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker follow President Bush’s photo op in Iraq’s Anbar province with a dog and pony show of their own. Meanwhile, the Democrats are totally cynical about this continuing waste of taxpayer dollars and of American and Iraqi lives, and, wanting Bush to hang himself with his own rope, they will deny him nothing.

Continue reading

Iraq: Government Death Squads Ravaging Baghdad By Dahr Jamail and Ali Al-Fadhily

Dandelion Salad

By Dahr Jamail and Ali Al-Fadhily
09/05/07 “IPS News”

Death squads from the Ministry of Interior posing as Iraqi police are killing more people than ever in the capital, emerging evidence shows.

The death toll is high – in all 1,536 bodies were brought to the Baghdad morgue in September. The health ministry announced last month that it will build two new morgues in Baghdad to take their capacity to 250 bodies a day.

Continue reading

Rolling Plunder by Glitzqueen (aka The Other Katherine Harris)


Featured writer
Dandelion Salad

by The Other Katherine Harris

Glitzqueen’s blog post

Sept. 5, 2007

Off and running simultaneously, Mexican truckers and Fred “Rented Red Truck” Thompson will invade our geopolitical landscape — starting tomorrow!

It’s one of those flukes of comically perfect timing, but no laughing matter. Both phenomena underscore the unprecedented power that corporations hold over us now and the urgency of overturning it. We’re in dire straits, indeed, when the latest Republican presidential candidate is an actual lobbyist and the Democratic frontrunner is a corporatist married to the man who gave us NAFTA.

NAFTA, a cruel stroke to workers on both sides of our southern border, was meant also to admit swarms of Mexican cargo trucks back in 1994, but a dozen years of resistance ensued, based on economic, road safety and environmental concerns. Shrub’s Thugs managed to quash the opposition in a San Francisco courtroom last Friday, allowing commencement of a year-long “pilot program” involving about a hundred Mexican trucking companies (many of them formed by transnational American businesses).

The impact on jobs will be massive. Last year 4.5 million commercial trucks from Mexico crossed into the U.S. — a number certain to rise tremendously, when the freight no longer has to be moved into American vehicles after entry. Our truckers are supposed to be satisfied by gaining tit-for-tat access to Mexico, but they don’t want the risks of driving there, besides which our manufacturing sector is so moribund that we have almost nothing to carry.

In addition to crippling our trucking industry, free U.S. access for Mexican trucks will exacerbate the Asian importation trend favoring Mexican ports, with their lower-paid dockworkers. Hardly anybody ever mentions this, even in passing — or the additional wear and tear on our highways that will result, often without any of the alleged low-price rewards to American consumers, because the goods went to Canada.

There’s a lot to worry about on the safety side, too. Compared to cars and light trucks, large trucks are involved in far more crashes, many more of which are fatal — usually to others, not the truckers — and these occur despite their traveling generally on interstates, the safest roads. About 5,000 Americans die each year in large truck smashups and, when one collides with a passenger vehicle, 97 percent of deaths occur in the latter. This is no surprise, based on the Sancho Panza principle. (“Whether the stone hits the pitcher, or the pitcher hits the stone … it’s going to be bad for the pitcher.”) Statistics further show that tractor-trailers with defective equipment are twice as likely to be in crashes as trucks without defects and likewise that truckers on the road for more than 8 hours double their risk of a crash. Even if — and these are huge “ifs” — the Mexican trucks are as well-maintained as ours and the drivers don’t push on beyond the point of fatigue, they’ll be on unfamiliar roads, among those whose driving customs they may not fully understand and impaired by problems that are simply inherent to large trucks: extremely poor visibility, for instance. I was once sideswiped by a tractor-trailer — thankfully, at low speed on a city street — and, although the right side of my car was crushed, the trucker never knew he hit me!

Pollution is another issue, strenuously raised by the Sierra Club in its litigation against the ruling. No doubt the cherry-picked “pilot program” trucks will be exemplary in their emissions control and other equipment, but what about the horde of others that will follow them in a year’s time, if this isn’t stopped?

Do you think Hillary “Lobbyists Are Real Americans” Clinton would knock herself out, trying to stop it? We’d have as much chance of that with Fred Thompson of the lax-lipped dirty uncle leer, Barbie-doll-from-hell wife and stage prop pickup.

William Kristol: Another Dishonorable Chicken-Hawk by Cindy Sheehan

 The Real Cindy Sheehan

By Cindy Sheehan
Dandelion Salad
featured writer

Sept. 5 2007

I know just a little bit about Mr. William Kristol:

He is the son of one of the founders of the “neo-conservative” movement, Irving Kristol.

He is a commentator on Fox News.

He was Chief of Staff for one of the political “geniuses” of our time: VP Dan Quayle.

He is editor of another Rupert Murdoch war-propaganda rag, “The Weekly Standard.”

He is a member, and signer, of the Project for the New American Century, which is a game plan for US global hegemony based on military strength and one of its goals and objectives was the over-throw of the Hussein Regime in Iraq with a next stop in Iran and Syria (because the PNAC plan is going so well, so far).

By all accounts, Mr. Kristol is a brilliant man, who like his father before him, uses his brilliance for destruction. He is a shameless supporter of a failed, murderous, and miserable strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan and one of the “mushroom cloud” crowd.

One thing Mr. William Kristol is not, is a combat vet.

Although he was born in 1952, he never served during Vietnam. I am sure while at Harvard he was a staunch supporter of the American effort to enrich the war profiteers while ostensibly stopping that war’s “enemy” communism from spreading across Asia. Secure in his studies during that quagmire, Kristol joins a long line of neo-con chicken-hawks who are drenched in other people’s blood and love to send other people’s children to die for their lies.

I don’t know anything, or care to know anything about Mr. Kristol’s private life. I don’t care if he is another closeted gay Republican or is a happily married hetero with children. I do suspect, however, that if Mr. Kristol is married, his children are not serving in Iraq, being misused by the very same incompetent and cowardly Commander in Chief (who also did not serve in Vietnam) that Mr. Kristol shamelessly supports while the entire administration and Republican hypocrites are crumbling from corruption and scandal.

I do know one thing for sure about Mr. Kristol, he does not like to be bothered with those pesky little things called facts. On February 20, 2003, Mr. Kristol incredibly gushed: “If we free the people of Iraq, we will be respected in the Arab world.” This statement shows an amazing lack of knowledge of the Arab world or any kind of foreign policy sophistication (but does show a great use of Rovian-Foxian expolitation of emotion). No one in the Arab world (except maybe, Israel, which is geographically located in the “Arab world”) was calling for the US to “free” Iraqis. No one from Iraq except “Curveball” or the slimy and profit-motivated, Ahmad Chalabi, both Iraqis who weren’t even living in the country at the time of the invasion were calling on the USA to liberate them. In fact, after many years of murderous sanctions against Iraq, a fierce nationalism arose in opposition to the US-UN led sanctions. According to National Intelligence Estimates, since the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq, Islamic Jihadism has increased. Mr. Kristol is also incredibly ignorant of human nature and human history. No peoples like to be occupied. No child, brother or sister, or mother or father, who sees a loved one blown away by American or insurgent’s bombs will love the oppressor. In fact, violence only creates more violence and more life-long enemies.

Now Mr. Kristol is safe behind his desk and computer calling for another attack against Iran. I think he hears the non-existent cries of the Iranian people to be liberated from their regime. The Iranian people are directly next-door to Iraq and they see what US “liberation” brings. It comes with the awful price of high civilian casualties; hospitals bombed, Doctors killed; no electricity or clean water; and eternal occupation.

In a recent op-ed for The Weekly Standard, Mr. Kristol makes many more tactical and fundamental errors. The ANSWER coalition is calling for mass mobilizations begining the week (Sept. 15) that the White House authored Petraeus report on the surge is due. Members of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW), who are leading the September 15th march, are calling for a “die-in” to end the march and begin the rally. The vets, unlike the chicken-hawk neocons, have actually served in war, particularly the one that Mr. Kristol imagines is such a success. IVAW is asking activists to represent a killed service-member and at an appropriate time lie down. Taps will be played and also a simulated 21-gun salute. It sounds respectful to me, being the mom of one of the soldiers, and I will proudly, yet sorrowfully, be lying down for my son that day. Many of the march/rally participants will be “dying” to represent the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who have been killed for Mr. Kristol’s deceptions.

Mr. Kristol calls on the “honorable” members of the anti-war movement to denounce the die-in and lumps MoveOn.org with other organizers of the die-in. MoveOn is not associated with the die-in as they do not support non-violent, direct civil disobedience. What I find so amusing is that Mr. PNAC-Fox News-Chicken-hawk has made himself the judge of what is honorable.

Mr. Kristol has a problem with the anti-war movement using the names of the fallen without the permission of the families. No one got my permission when my sons portrait was used in the pro-war memorial at Arlington Cemetery. Casey’s name and likeness has been used by pro-war people all over the nation without my permission. Why is that okay, Mr. Kristol? I know for a fact such memorials as Arlington West, Eyes Wide Open and our memorial at Camp Casey would remove names of soldiers at the next of kin’s request. If any family member so requests, I am sure IVAW will do the same thing—but a word of caution:

Even though the members of IVAW (all my adopted sons and daughters) have a big problem with the occupation of Iraq and with the Bush crime family, they served their country honorably (unlike Mr. Kristol) and they all fought side-by-side with the fallen. They love their brothers and sisters and they would themselves have died to take the place of any one of them. Do not, never, ever, claim that we families, or the Iraq Vets are dishonoring our sons and daughters killed by the lies of The Weekly Standard, Fox News, BushCo., et al. That is the biggest lie of all, or maybe it’s this one that Mr. Kristol told on March 1, 2003:

“Very few wars in American history were prepared better or more thoroughly than this one by this president.”

I would laugh if I weren’t crying so hard.

If Mr. Kristol gets his PNAC way, by this time next year, we will need a lot more people at a die-in.


Cindy Sheehan is mother of Spc. Casey Austin Sheehan who was KIA in Iraq on 04/04/04. She is the author of Peace Mom.

Who controls the world: the Illuminati or the Market? by Adam Buick

Dandelion Salad

by Adam Buick
Socialist Standard
September 2007

Capitalism is a system where the means of production are owned by a minority class and are used to turn out goods for sale with a view to profit. As a result market forces come into operation. These ultimately determine what is produced, how it is produced and where it is produced. As they used to say of God: Man proposes, God disposes. Under capitalism, Man proposes, the Market disposes.

Continue reading

Can Capitalism Ever Be Green? by Brian Johnson

Dandelion Salad

by Brian Johnson
From the September 2007 issue of the Socialist Standard

Yes, say a new school of green economists. No, say socialists.

During the last hundred years more irreversible damage has been done to the natural environment by human action than in any previous period in recorded history. Rarely a day goes by when our attention is not drawn to the various issues of environmental degradation and how the increase in human activity is impacting on large areas of the natural environment globally. Among these are: climate change; the increase in pollution; the depletion of fish stocks; over-reliance on fossil fuels; nuclear energy; soil erosion and desertification; the pace of species extinction; the increase in skin cancer; forest and wetland depletion; etc.

This has led a dedicated band of economists, with an ecological bent, to make a study of natural resources (which they label “natural capital”) and of the long-term, societal and possible profitable benefits resulting from their careful management. Their premise is that, if capitalism continues on its present course of destroying natural resources by continuing to ignore the real “costs” of the negative effects on the natural environmental and human health, in the long-term it will lose out big time.

Which is a fair conclusion but comes as no surprise to anyone who understands the basic economics of capitalism. However, what these “green economists” propose as a supposedly viable solution – and one which is being vigorously advocated globally – is the creation of an artificial cost-benefit market by the international enforcement of a mixture of environmental taxes and regulations, so there is long-term protection and management of natural resources through market forces. The present trade-offs of carbon emissions is just one example of putting these proposals into practice, and it has been taken up by those who are of the opinion that market forces hold all the solutions to the problem of environmental and health “external costs”, i.e. the money that has to be paid for clearing up the environment or on health care that don’t have to be paid for by capitalist firms whose activities cause them.

There’s a lot more of such proposals in the pipeline, but when stripped of their jargon, in practice it means that for capitalism to go green it must factor in all the possible and the expected environmental and health “external costs” and in effect set limits on the accumulation of capital. If the green economists have their way – and it’s a very big if – it would mean that a brand new set of market conditions will have to be enforced, ignoring the realities of how capitalism actually operates.

The two most difficult problems that would have to be confronted are measuring the value of these external costs and tracking the specific offenders. Obviously to try putting a price tag on natural resources is going to be extremely difficult for several reasons. How do you arrive at a monetary value of the air we breath when it is freely available? Or measure the value of the disappearance of a particular species of wildlife? Or even of a view of a snow-capped mountain peak? What exactly are you going to compare and value it against?

The green economists are seemingly unaware that a measure of value can only be ascertained once labour power is employed to transform ‘natural capital’ into a commodity. For instance, the deserts of the world have little or no value. However, once labour power is used to make them productive and profitable by extracting the mineral properties that deserts may contain either below or above ground, they come to have a use value and exchange value. Until then they remain deserts. In short, it is only possible to measure and apply value through the use and exchange of commodities. Anything outside of this, like attempting to measure the true external costs – and especially as regards the natural environment and human health – only arrives at a value which is largely subjective.

Cooperation versus competition

This lack of understanding of the workings of capitalism and the production of commodities does not stop here because the premise of the green economists also includes the false assumption that a so-called ‘common interest to protect natural capital’ can be created within capitalism and adopted by society as a whole. Obviously, no sensible person is going to deny that the sooner we work with nature, rather than against it, the better. By increasing our understanding of the interaction between the natural environment and the impact of human activity, society will be in a better position to minimise the damage on natural resources, and be able to arrive at rational judgements on whether or not any interference in the natural environment is justified and warranted.

But capitalism is not a rational system when you consider that the capitalist class have their own agenda which is totally blind to the creation of a common interest. The only interest the capitalist class have is to obtain profits through the quickest and easiest way possible so that the accumulation of capital continues. A fundamental contradiction of capitalism is that although the capitalist have a common interest – as a class – to cooperate to keep the system going, by necessity they also have to compete within the market. If they don’t compete they go under or are at best taken over by other capitalists.

This built-in rivalry between the sections of the capitalist class always results in casualties in some form or another. At one end we have the everyday casualties of lay-offs and redundancies. Whilst at the other end from time to time inter-capitalist rivalry erupts into a full scale war – with extensive human casualties, refugees, communities being destroyed – and extensive damage to the environment and the destruction of wealth on a tremendous scale.

It is these conditions of competition which make it extremely difficult to reach any regulatory agreement which can have a global application. But not impossible. When it has been in the common capitalist interest to facilitate an expansion in the global market capitalist governments have drawn up international agreements, for example on postal services, maritime law, air traffic control, scientific research at the poles, etc. These agreements are generally abided by, specifically because they do not reduce the rate of profit. It’s when any such proposals come into conflict with the rate of profit that the competitive self-interest of the various national sections of the capitalist class becomes focused on the problems of winners and losers appears. This is usually announced in the media as, “There was a failure to reach an agreement over who is to pay the bill”.

If they do arrive at some agreement on the international regulation of environmental external costs they can only adopt one of two options. Either an approximation of the real external costs is to be shared out amongst the global capitalist class as a whole through a general environmental taxation. Or the costs are to be paid by the individual capitalists, and managed through the nation-states acting as the main agents and international bodies set up to supervise payments and trade-offs and also to regulate environmental impacts and damage. It’s the latter that’s in the early stages of being adopted with the “carbon trading”.


If market forces essentially cause and create environmental damage by literally encouraging an irrational human impact, how can you realistically expect those self-same forces to solve it? This conundrum will almost certainly intensify if globalisation picks up pace and the competition gets even tougher for the possession of scarce resources, especially energy and water. But the conundrum does not end there since the system of capitalism is also dependent on economic growth and the accumulation of capital on a larger and larger global scale. And in order to achieve an accumulation of capital, market forces must not only create and produce commodities on a mass scale but also destroy them in a systematic fashion never known in human history. When confronted by barriers of environmental legislation which are designed to diminish the rate of expected profits and the accumulation of capital, the capitalists will do what they have always done in their search for short-term profits: finding or creating loopholes, moving the goalposts, corrupting officials, trying to bribe the local population with empty promises, or shifting the whole concern to an area or region where a more favourable reception is expected and profits maintained.

Unlike the green economists, socialists conclude that in a class-divided society where the means of living are used to serve the interests of the owners of private property any talk of finding a ‘common interest’, so that there is a change of course of market forces and consequently a greening of capitalism, is a fool’s errand. We have, therefore, consistently argued that, where classes exist, there are class divisions in the production and distribution of wealth with the subsequent inequality manifesting itself in a class struggle between two classes with diametrically opposed interests.

Arising out of this analysis we recognise the need for a majority of the workers to actively engage in a political struggle to bring about a revolutionary change in the social relationships – from private property ownership to a system of common ownership, a society of free access where wage slavery has been abolished, money is obsolete, hierarchical structures pointless, class laws transformed into social rules, and production is geared to satisfying human needs. Only when we are living in such a society will we be in a position to minimise any environmental damage caused by human activity.

Once we have reach this stage in human development and social evolution – where our interaction with the natural environment not only enhances our understanding of ourselves but also converges with a social recognition that we are as much dependent on nature as is nature dependent on us – so we will be able to start to tackle a rational clean up of the environmental damage which capitalism will have left in its wake.

h/t: Socialist Standard

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.


Who said Marx wasn’t Green? by William Bowles (John Bellamy Foster)

Can’t do DC on 9/15? Telephone Protest for September 2007 + Write to YOUR Elected Officials!

Dandelion Salad

by xxdr_zombiexx
The Smirking Chimp
Sep 4 2007

I have dropped a couple comments recently about setting up a telephone protest to coincide with the the massive 9/15 Iraq Moratorium Protest. These have received a few positive comments in return.

I think it would be a popular idea if communicated to enough people fast enough. Thus, my next step is to post the formal suggestion. Are YOU interested in protesting the Bush Administration but cannot get to the 9/15/07 Protest in DC?

Most people cannot go to this. Lots of people can and thats as it should be but America is huge and transportation and days off from work are scarce for a lot of people. Most people that really want to go likely cannot.

There is a way to join in in solidarity and it’s pretty easy.

One problem with protesting in a physical location is it is usually a day or a weekend and then it disperses.

IF the Old Media Cartel wasn’t so focused on minimizing protests these would likely be sufficient, but the OMC does a serious job of underreporting the numbers and limiting photographic evidence of a protests’ size. They actively work against the people they are supposed to inform.

The Telephone Protest

I say one very viable solution is a “telephone protest”. We all agree to call certain political offices from one date and time to another. That’s all.

I like it because it’s simple. And cheap.

For example, I have more rollover minutes than I know what to do with. I can lay siege to some government phones for many hours at no actual cost. Lots of Americans can, I think, join in this.

I am posting this at Daily Kos, Smirking Chimp and Chimpster Nation, Diatribune. Others – please feel free to post this other places you think are going to be responsive. E-mail me and I’ll give you the article’s html so you can just paste it into the submission box of your preferred site.

The Million Phone March

I have sent an e-mail to The Million Phone March an organization I remembered and searched for today. I have asked them what they think. If this will get off the ground I will post their feedback, if any.

Dates: 9/10/07 – 9/28/07

1: The Phone Protest of 9/2007 should start on the 10th and last through the rest of the month. The protest should be ongoing when the People arrive in DC for the protest on the 15th. This phase, if it is sufficiently robust, should be an excellent preface to the massive turnout on the weekend of the 15th.

2: Monday through Friday, 8:30 am to 12:00 Noon and 1:00pm to 5:00 pm for the phone siege. E-mails and faxes – no limitations, no mercy. Flood ’em.

3: The Phone Protest should continue until the 28th. From the 10th to the 28th is likely long enough to really have gotten attention and, if sustained this long could have a very significant impact.

Phones, Faxes and E-mails.

I am figuring that at first we target

  • Harry Reid
    Phone: 202-224-3542
    Fax: 202-224-7327
    NO conventional e-mail. Use his contact page
  • John Conyers
    Phone: (202) 225-5126
    Fax: (202) 225-0072
    e-mail: john.conyers@mail.house.gov
  • Nancy Pelosi
    Phone: (202) 225-4965
    Fax: (202) 225-8259
    e-mail: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
  • On this page the Million Phone March has the following numbers listed as 24 hour numbers. Doubtlessly a good place to start.888-818-6641 or 888-355-3588
  • Congress.org: Find more contact info here.

Message in a nutshell

Flood the e-mail and faxes with these 3 basic messages:

* US out of Iraq !!
* No Attack on Iran !!

Note: Be polite and brief. I will be on good behavior. If I can do it, most others can.

Diversity and Tolerance

So often when a protest happens, one finds all sorts of “causes” coming out of the woodwork. This is fine for a variety of reasons but we cannot be distracted by the diversity. If you want to use the duration of the protest to focus on your pet issues (mine’s cannabis relegalization) go for it. I am not going to be focused on anything but the 3 messages above.

Of course your message is OK too; I merely suggest these as a away to consolidate the message. 3 simple ones are best for addressing government agencies. (I was told this by a Fulton County commissioner when I was in her office protesting the elimination of mental health services here about 5 years ago. She said: Keep it simple and no more than 3 points.)

Dare to have fun!

Oh… almost forgot. We are currently “Officially in Historic Times”.

The Bush 43 Administration is the most corrupt in American history, without peer. It has obscured the massive criminality of the Reagan Administration and makes Richard Nixon seem like a disgruntled little boy selling lemonade on a corner.

This is the context for your participation in making a phone protest work as intended. If it works even moderately, it will be a success and it will be part of history. That’s a pretty good deal for a few cell minutes.

And I so totally encourage you to think that this could be a LOT of FUN. IF we can all get a 2 and a half week Phone Siege flooding targeted offices with work-disrupting levels of calls it will be fun to be part of it and to do it.

Assessing the Surge

It doesn’t have to be more than noticeable for this to be effective. It doesn’t have to obliterate their communication ability, though that would be good.

If it just complicates their communication tasks a few times a day it will be noticeable.

Here are 2 goals to listen for in your efforts:

* exasperation in the answerer’s voice.

* Busy signals for long periods of time. That will indicate this is going desirably.

Here is the 3rd goal that I don’t expect to be met:

* Congress people or their aides posting reactions on Daily Kos or other sites asking for the phone action to stop. That would be perfect.

I am posting this now and will post follow-ups as the 10 and the 15th approach. I would certainly love for others to post their own works on this issue.

Once it starts – if it actually takes off – we can post some “liveblogging” or open threads to discuss particular incidents (busy signals, exasperated office staffers, bright ideas, new phone numbers).

Thank you for reading and I hope you will choose to do some phone calling sometime this month.

GreenState Project | Flag Draped Box
It’s not a war; it’s a crime.

About author Doc is a long-time cannabis relegalizer and Director of GreenState Project, voter, homeowner, taxpayer and human services professional. He plays a mean guitar, loves dogs, camping/hiking/backpacking and is very happily married.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.


Write to YOUR Elected Officials!

Ed. Note: here’s where you can find YOUR elected officials info. From a blog I made a long time ago: Write to YOUR Elected Officials!

On this website, you put in your zip code and up comes your Senators’ and Congressperson’s name and email address and it also covers your statewide senator and representative. I like that it shows how YOUR elected officials voted on various bills.


Go there often and keep on writing these guys/gals.