50 years ago, 50 years from now (video; Kucinich; updated)

Updated: Newer version of video as previous one was removed.  ~ Lo

Dandelion Salad

erkd1

Vote Kucinich 2008

50 years ago JFK created a massive government program to send a man to the moon because of a perceived threat from the Soviets. We have a new threat now, and one Presidential candidate is facing it with the same courage.

We can do it.

If not us then who?
If not now then when?

Its time for a new moon shot, a new vision, and the added bonus of releasing us from our dependence on oil and war. Have courage, be strong…

Vote Kucinich

Before you spam me with “is Global Warming real” issues, watch this*:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF_ana…

*Please note that wonderingmind42 has not endorsed any candidate, nor have I asked him to, and I reference him purely for informational purposes.

Added: November 06, 2007

see

Kucinich to Move Impeachment of Bush After Cheney By David Swanson

It’s Time to Impeach Cheney by Dennis Kucinich

Brazilian Land Activist Killed In Dispute Over Experimental GM Farm by Leonard Doyle

Dandelion Salad

by Leonard Doyle
Global Research, November 6, 2007
The Independent – 2007-11-05

When a Brazilian peasant organiser led a group of landless farmers on to a European-owned farm last month he was making an environmental protest as well as seeking farmland for about 20 families to cultivate.

Within hours, Valmir Mota de Oliveira, 42, and known as “Keno” would be dead, killed execution-style by two shots to the chest. A security guard was also killed in the shooting.

Keno died trying to stop the development of a research farm for genetically modified soya and corn next to the environmentally sensitive Iguacu National Park, becoming in the process a martyr for the anti-GM movement.

What happened at the seeds research site of the Swiss multinational Syngenta is hotly disputed. What is agreed is that the land invaders – who had been evicted from the same farm in July – set off fireworks as they arrived on the morning of 21 October, causing the unarmed guards to flee and seek help. Within a few hours, an armed militia showed up at the farm on a minibus and, shortly afterwards, Keno was killed and several more protesters were seriously injured. What role Syngenta may have played in ordering the militia to drive away the peasants is at the centre of a bitter dispute. It has turned the incident at its Cascavel research farm into a cause célèbre for the landless workers movement in Brazil where four million peasant families are trying to get access to farmland.

For Syngenta, which was formed from an alliance of Novartis and Astra Zenica, the episode has turned into nightmare of accusation and counter-accusation amid suspicion that it gave free rein to an armed militia to protect its lands as it develops GM corn and maize seed for the expanding Brazilian market.

“Here we have a European company, Syngenta, effectively going around shooting people on its farm,” said Sarah Wilson of Christian Aid which helps fund the Movement of Landless Workers (MST) in Brazil.

Syngenta says it does not know exactly what happened on its farm 10 days ago and that it has sent a team of lawyers from its headquarters in Basle to investigate.

“We don’t know what happened and we are waiting for a full police report,” said a company spokesman, Medard Schoenmaeckers, while strongly denying accusations from the landless farmers that it sent an armed militia to the farm to evict them. “We have a specific clause in our contract with the security firm stating that at no time can the guards carry or use arms,” he said. “Until the police issue a report, I don’t want to speculate about what happened.”

The farmers organisation has issued a detailed description of what it claims happened. “A Via Campesina encampment located at Syngenta’s 127-hectare farm … was attacked by an armed militia. During the brutal attack, a leader and activist … was killed at point-blank range.”

Two other MST leaders were pursued by the gunmen but managed to escape. “We are sure that they came here to kill Keno, Celinha and me,” said Celso Barbosa, one of those who escaped, adding that they had both received death threats since the beginning of the year. Several workers were seriously injured in the clashes.

Amnesty International was quick to express its concern with the apparent use by Syngenta of an “armed militia” which the landless farmers movement says acted through a front company, NF Security, controlled by a rural producers organisation linked to agribusiness.

Threats and intimidation by landowners are common in Parana province, according to Amnesty. As recently as 18 October, local human rights groups presented a dossier of evidence to the state human rights commission complaining about armed men hired by landowners and agricultural companies.

They complained that they often used violent and illegal methods forcibly to evict, threaten and attack activists squatting on land.

Global Research Articles by Leonard Doyle
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Leonard Doyle, The Independent, 2007
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7270

Antiwar Radio: Scott Horton Interviews Eric Margolis (+ video)

Dandelion Salad

Antiwar Radio

Monday, November 5th, 2007

Eric Margolis, foreign correspondent for Sun National Media and the American Conservative magazine, discusses the state of emergency in Pakistan, the history of the Musharraf dictatorship, his relationship with Dick Cheney, …

LINK

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. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

***

Why What Happens In Pakistan Matters To Everyone

CSPANJUNKIEdotORG

NOVEMBER 05, 2007 CBC THE NATIONAL

Added: November 06, 2007

see

Pakistan Police Beat Protesting Lawyers + Pakistan Rounds Up Musharraf’s Political Foes + video

Olbermann: Musharraf Coup + Tortured Reasoning + Worst Person (videos)

Pakistan shakes off US shackles By M K Bhadrakumar

Punishing Gaza by Stephen Lendman

Dandelion Salad

by Stephen Lendman
Global Research, November 6, 2007

On September 20, Haaretz reported: “The security cabinet voted unanimously yesterday to increase sanctions against the Hamas-run Gaza Strip (and declare) the region a ‘hostile entity.’ “A further statement read: “We will reduce the amount of megawattage we provide to the Strip, and Hamas will have to decide whether to provide electricity to hospitals or weapons lathes.” Israeli officials also decided to punish Gazans by restricting:

— fuel as well as electricity from Israel to Gaza;

— the passage of goods and people through border crossings that are already severely restricted; and

— visits to prisoners even further than how limited they are already.

An increased monitoring of funds was also announced as well as stating border crossings would be closed for up to 48 hours in response to (crude small homemade) Qassam rocket fire, and that Israel would supply nothing further to Gaza residents “except for (whatever Israel considers) humanitarian needs.” Hamas’ response was swift and sharp. Spokesman Fawzi Barhoum called the cabinet’s decision and sanctions a “declaration of war” and said “we must unite the ranks to come together in the conflict with the cruel enemy….This is another attempt to force us to surrender (our sovereignty).”

At first, the world community hardly blinked with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon acting as irresponsibly as his predecessor. He urged Israel to reconsider its decision but denounced Hamas for its “continued indiscriminate rocket fire….into Israel (and that he) understand(s) Israel’s security concerns over this matter.” Nothing in his statement mentioned Israel’s daily attacks and killings of Palestinians or the deepening humanitarian crisis in Gaza after Israel closed its borders last June, isolated the Territory from the outside world, and cut off most essential supplies and services to its people.

Karen Koning-Abu Zayd is the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) Commissioner-General for Palestine Refugees. On October 30, she showed more concern than her boss by saying Israel’s decision to cut fuel and electricity to Gaza violates international law. She noted Israel’s concern, but stressed “how can you want to punish people, all of them in Gaza (as) most of them….are not behind these activities….if you don’t have electricity, you don’t have water, you probably don’t have food.” This action will have a “very serious” effect on the population.

Two other UN officials also went public with their criticisms. UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Jean Ziegler was one of them. He called on the European Commission to suspend commercial relations with Israel until it stops preventing Palestinians from receiving food without restrictions. He reported to the General Assembly that 22% of Palestinian children already suffer from malnutrition because they lack access to food.

UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, John Dugard, also weighed in. He called on State Members in their capacity as High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention. He asked them to ensure Israel complies with its provisions regarding the protection of civilians in times of war. One of them under article 54 states: “Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited,” as well as “attack(ing), remov(ing), or render(ing) useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas (for their production), crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works….” Article 55 then obligates an occupying power to ensure “the food and medical supplies of the population.”

Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) chief Walter Fust also expressed alarm after a recent Gaza visit. He called conditions “untenable” and “shocking” with 30% of children (in his judgment) malnourished and hospitals and health centers in a precarious state.

Things then changed on October 30. Haaretz reported Israel’s “High Court of Justice ordered the state to respond within five days to a petition submitted by dozens of human rights groups (10 of them according to other reports) to halt its (Gaza fuel and electricity) cutoff,” but it stopped short of banning the action. Justices may have been concerned after the European Union (EU) criticized Israel’s move on October 29 calling it an act of “collective punishment.” EU commissioner for external relations, Benita Ferraro-Waldner, said she was “very concerned” about the decision, that it’s not a solution, and that the EU doesn’t “want the population to suffer.”

It’s hard knowing if this signals change or whether to take the commissioner’s concern seriously. The European community, along with Israel and the US, denounced Hamas’ democratic election in January, 2006 as the legitimate Palestinian government. It’s response ever since was to end all outside aid and impose crushing sanctions and an economic embargo on the Territories as well as politically isolate the new Hamas government.

The results were devastating. Even before the latest crisis, Gaza’s industrial production had fallen 90% and its agricultural output was half its pre-2007 level. In addition, nearly all construction had stopped, unemployment is around 80%, and the level of poverty is shocking based on World Bank data showing over 80% of Gazans live on less than $2.40 a day. Further, the Palestinian Al Huq association of jurists called Israel’s summer, 2005 Gaza disengagement fraudulent as “Israel retains full control of the Gaza Strip’s land borders, population registry, airspace and territorial sea,” and the IDF invades the Territory at will.

The EU was silent about this and Israel’s overall repressive rule, land expropriations, daily incursions, and regular attacks and killings in the Territories. It was unconcerned about the internal violence on Gaza streets last spring and gave tacit support to anti-Hamas US and Israeli-armed Fatah (Protective Security Force) paramilitary death squads led by warlord Mohammed Dahlan. It ignored Hamas’ months-long unilateral cease-fire, its ending all suicide bombings, its call for peace, and its willingness to recognize the Jewish state if Israel accepts and recognizes a Palestinian one.

Its founder, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin said at the time Hamas would end its struggle “if the Zionists ended its occupation of Palestinian territories and stopped killing Palestinian women, children and innocent civilians.” Israel and the West rejected the offer and all good faith efforts. They opted instead to punish Palestinians collectively and deny them their legitimate rights.

After Hamas defeated Fatah paramilitaries, the EU backed Mahmoud Abbas’ quisling West Bank government. It ignored Gaza’s punishing isolation and Oxfam Great Britain’s grim warning of the “increasing desperation of Gazans as shortages of fuel, water and food are reported.” It failed to denounce Israel and the US for creating the crisis affecting 1.5 million people. It stood allied instead with Washington and the Olmert government and did so ever since. The same is true of the UN. It’s hard thinking that’s changed, and it’ll take more than occasional high-sounding comments from a few officials to prove it.

In the meantime, Israel began reducing fuel supplies on October 28, and Gaza’s deputy Petroleum Authority director, Ahmed Ali, said diesel fuel and gasoline deliveries were 30% lower than usual. He then added: “This is a serious warning (and) the people of Gaza….are now in danger. The hospitals, water pumping station and sewage will be affected by the lack of fuel.” Israel’s Dor Alon energy company confirmed the reduction, and the Defense Ministry said the Sufa crossing used for transporting fuel to Gaza was closed.

On October 25, Defense Minister Ehud Barak ordered the phased cutoff, and his deputy, Matan Vilnai, said “We will dramatically reduce the flow of electricity (by about two-thirds) from Israel over several weeks” to let Gaza supply its own electricity that’s impossible as Israel knows. He added this measure is part of Israel’s “deeper, broader disengagement.” He neglected to say it’s an illegal act of collective punishment as Gaza relies on Israel for all its fuel (that includes diesel, gasoline and natural gas) and most of its electricity.

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights reported Gaza needs over 220 megawatts of electricity and consumes about 200 megawatts, 60% of which is bought from Israel. The Gaza Electricity Generation Plant supplies 65 megawatts and another 17 megawatts are bought from Egypt. When Israel directly controlled the Strip, it let Gazans establish enough electrical capacity for only 38% of their needs. Then during “Operation Summer Rain” in June, 2006, the IDF assaulted the Territory, bombed its only electrical power plant, and destroyed its main transformers with missiles. Months of rebuilding restored less than two-thirds of its original 100 megawatt capacity and made the area mostly dependent on Israel for supply.

After declaring Gaza a “hostile entity” on September 19, that’s now in jeopardy unless Israel reverses its stance and reconsiders other collective punishment measures as well. Currently, its authority allows only nine basic materials to enter the Territory. That hit local markets hard, and most ran out of many items causing sharp price rises up to 500% in some cases. Items banned include some medicines, furniture, electrical appliances, cows and cigarettes while others restricted are fruits, milk and other dairy products.

Then there’s the energy plan. It’s to begin cutting electricity for 15 minutes, then a half hour with daily increases as long as the punitive measure remains in effect that doesn’t apply to hospitals and other “vital installations,” Vilnai said. Things are now on hold, however, after Attorney General Menachem Mazuz temporarily halted the electricity cutoff following a “debate” in his office on October 29. He was apparently acting on UN and EU comments as well as his own High Court’s order to respond to a petition by 10 human rights organizations in five days to stop this punitive action. Mazuz said Israel had a right to sever economic and commercial ties with Gaza, but its government is responsible for the Territory and more “research” was needed before cutting off electricity. What he meant, of course, is he’ll await a High Court ruling and then act.

Haaretz reported on November 3 that “State Prosecution on (November 2) defended the government’s decision (to cut fuel and electricity in a letter to the High Court) claiming it is not a form of collective punishment.” It said that the decision was appropriate and gave the same tired reasons it often uses to justify its harshest actions. Defense Minister Ehud Barak agreed. In a November 4 Jerusalem meeting with Condoleezza Rice, he assured the Secretary that “The sanctions (won’t) cause a humanitarian crisis” without further elaboration.

Israel’s infrastructure minister, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, agrees as well and feels these measures are needed and are a final attempt to avoid a military action some observers see coming. Israel’s Gaza commander, General Moshe Tamir, already admits to almost nightly incursions into the Territory and practically signaled a planned assault.

Haaretz also reported on October 30 that Israel’s Defense Forces (IDF) conducted their largest military drill in the north Galilee region since the 2006 Lebanon war. It ran four days and involved ground, air and naval forces as well as intelligence and S4 units. The paper noted a similar exercise preceded the Lebanon war so it happening now is ominous.

The Jerusalem Post echoed that sentiment on October 31. It quoted Defense Minister Ehud Barak saying a large-scale IDF operation against “Palestinian rocket squads” was drawing near, and “the time is approaching when we’ll have to undertake a broad operation in Gaza.” The report mentioned Gaza commander Tamir saying Hamas was “building an army” and had smuggled in unprecedented capabilities. Israeli Shin Bet Security Agency chief Yuval Diskin claimed Hamas had accumulated over 112 tons of explosives, and Tamir signaled Israel is prepared to act as a result. The Jerusalem Post earlier quoted IDF Southern Command chief General Yoav Galant saying he’s been “pushing for a massive operation for the past year” and now may be close to getting one.

Hamas responded to this growing threat on November 1. It called on all Palestinian resistance factions to declare a high state of alert in anticipation of a large-scale Israeli incursion into the Territory. It issued a statement saying: “Hamas is well-prepared to engage in a battle with the Israeli army, once (Gaza) is invaded, as Hamas is confident of victory, given its strong trust in God.”

A major IDF assault may be imminent as Israel continues attacking civilians in Gaza and the West Bank daily. The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights report for the last week of October said 15 Palestinians were killed, 29 others wounded, and 78 more arrested. In addition, during the seven day period, IDF forces made 49 hostile incursions into the Territories, and for the past 16 months maintained a devastating siege on the population.

Washington’s Upcoming Annapolis Peace Offensive

Middle East observers know what most honest ones will admit. The intermittent, now revived “peace process” is merely pretense head fake. It’s more theater than substance or a serious effort to resolve this long-running conflict, and look at the proof:

— daily IDF incursions, attacks and killings in the Territories;

— continued land expropriations;

— crop destruction and agricultural restrictions;

— home demolitions;

— restricted movement through hundreds of checkpoints as well as curfews and border and other closures any time for any reason;

— building permit restrictions and construction prohibitions;

— denial of essential services; and

— other politically motivated daily repression and “matrix of control” harassment.

This all continues without letup with the full acquiescence and support of the West plus billions in annual aid from Washington.

Furthermore, Hamas is barred from the peace process, and without its participation there can be none. Its exclusion and the desperate conditions in the Territories expose the glaring hypocrisy overhanging the staged affair. Just like the fraudulent “road map,” this latest incarnation is going nowhere with more proof on November 4 from Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. She told Secretary Rice Israel’s security comes first, and “only then (can there be) a Palestinian state.”

Electronic Intifada editor Ali Abunimah compares the process to “one of those big budget Broadway extravaganzas; they go on for years (and) with each revival the cast changes,” but the outcome is always the same as intended.

Abunimah notes the “latest revival” has Condoleezza Rice in a lead role play-acting to end the long-running conflict. George Bush is on stage as well trying to cast off his image as a warmonger and enabler of “Israeli colonization” and now pretends to want peace “with an eye on his legacy.”

And so it goes with the other key actors in this melodrama pretending the process is real – quisling Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas who agreed to let Washington act as a “neutral arbitrator,” Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert who jumped on the idea, and “special guest star” and reinvented war criminal Tony Blair in his new role as Middle East peace envoy. Last June he ended a failed 10 year run as UK prime minister when his audience booed him off the stage. He’s been practically invisible since but will resurface in Annapolis later in November once a firm date is announced.

Abunimah notes how reality at times intervenes. It did in mid-October after Abbas’ representatives met with Israeli counterparts to arrange a “declaration of principles” for the Annapolis meeting that are still unresolved. The IDF expropriated 300 more acres of Palestinian land near “occupied East Jerusalem (to expand the huge) Jewish-only settlements (bisecting) the West Bank (that) render a contiguous Palestinian state impossible.”

Land seizures have been continuous since the 1993 Oslo Accords. For the past 14 years, Israel expropriated an area the size of Washington, DC for Jewish-only development knowing none of the “peace process” participants would object. It’s been so extreme that noted Israeli historian Ilan Pappe believes the settlements, army bases, roads and separation wall will let Israel annex almost half the West Bank by 2010 and dispossess Palestinians now living there.

And now Abunimah explains “Rice feigns (gallingly hypocritical) frustration saying: “Frankly it is time for the establishment of a Palestinian state.” She knows Israel won’t allow one nor will Palestinians accept it under the current bantustan configuration and the condition Pappe describes.

Nor is one possible given the power of extremist elements in the Israeli government led by proto-fascist Deputy Prime Minister Avigdor Lieberman. Haaretz reported he insists any Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution “include Israel’s Arab citizens (on) the basis (of) a land swap and population transfer.” He means no peace is possible unless 1.4 million Israeli Arab citizens are ethnically cleansed from the country. Nor will he allow core Palestinian issues to be discussed in Annapolis (or elsewhere) like “borders, settlements and the (right of return for) Palestinian refugees expelled by Israel.”

And the beat goes on. Life in occupied Palestine is intolerable and worsening as the latest sham peace extravaganza is heading to Annapolis once its “opening night” is announced with fanfare and phoniness.

A different sort of event will take place in London November 17 and 18 hosted by the London Middle East Institute and organized by the London One State Group and SOAS Palestine Society at London University. It’s called “Challenging the Boundaries: A Single State in Palestine/Israel.” It will include panel discussions and individual speakers featuring noted participants like author and Middle East expert Gilbert Achcar, Electronic Intifada editor Ali Abunimah, noted author Nur Masalha, and Israeli historian and expert on Israel and Zionism Ilan Pappe who’s now teaching at the UK University of

Exeter. The conference is about alternatives to a two-state paradigm and will advance ideas of a one-state vision that can become a workable political agenda for what seems to be the only credible way forward.

In another development, Al-Ahram Weekly reports Hamas will air its views at a “national conference” in Damascus that will coincide with Annapolis. Other Palestinian factions will also attend including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) in a significant break with Fatah. Participating as well are the Damascas-based PFLP-General Command, the Islamic Jihad organization and senior Fatah members Farouk Al-Qaddumi and Hani Al-Hassan in a show of protest against “Abbas’ line” and “his subservience to America and Israel.” In addition to organized groups, hundreds of Palestinian and Arab intellectuals may attend that will add credibility to the event.

Conference organizers state they wish to reassert their opposition to “the attempted liquidation of the Palestinian cause” with special emphasis on “the right of return of five million (or more) Palestinian refugees.” They also intend “not to give political cover to US-Israeli schemes to terminate the Palestinian cause in Annapolis (that is) hypocritical (and) insincere.” And they further state: “The PLO leadership in Ramallah no longer represents the Palestinian people (because) it is a prisoner of the Israeli occupation and has lost whatever semblance of independence and free will it may once have had.” In addition, “the PLO leadership (lacks legitimacy as it’s) unelected, undemocratic and anachronistic.”

Hamas also revealed plans to follow Damascus with meetings in Gaza and the West Bank to further highlight what Hamas and others call “this mockery” of a US-Israeli-Abbas effort to compromise or scrap issues vital to the Palestinian people like the right of return and status of Jerusalem. Ideas to be discussed include selecting “alternative and parallel national bodies” to counter Fatah’s disregard for “the Palestinian national consensus.” Under consideration is a new National Council and Executive Committee in direct opposition to Abbas who (along with Secretary Rice) tried unsuccessfully to abort Hamas’ initiative. Little is expected from Annapolis, and some believe that may trigger a third Intifada and swing momentum to Hamas.

Shin Bet’s Yuval Diskin thinks not but others disagree. Oslo came out of the first Intifada, and Israel’s Gaza disengagement followed the second one. Nothing is off the table this time. Stay closely tuned.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Steve Lendman News and Information Hour on www.TheMicroEffect.com Mondays at noon US central time.

Global Research Articles by Stephen Lendman
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Stephen Lendman, Global Research, 2007
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7269

see

Will Middle East Conference Bring Peace? By Liam Bailey

Israel Cuts Gaza Fuel: To End the Qassam Rocket Attacks? By Liam Bailey

Don’t Enlist by Laurence M. Vance

Dandelion Salad

by Laurence M. Vance
LewRockwell.com

Over 181,000 people joined the U.S. military during the fiscal 2007 recruiting year. This is more than joined the military during fiscal years 2006 and 2005. All four of the services met or exceeded their recruiting goals for 2007, as did four of the six reserve components.

Why?

Why are all these people joining the military? Why, in spite of multiple duty tours, ever-increasing deployment terms, an increase in sexual assaults, post-traumatic stress disorder, the breakup of military families, and the suicide rate, and almost daily reports of U.S. military personnel being killed or maimed in Iraq, are so many men and women joining the military?

It could have something to do with the military:

  • Spending over $4 billion a year on recruiting
  • Raising the maximum enlistment age
  • Accepting lower entrance scores on aptitude tests
  • Granting more medical waivers
  • Giving more moral waivers
  • Permitting ex-convicts to enlist
  • Relaxing the physical fitness requirements
  • Loosening weight restrictions
  • Allowing non-citizens to gain their citizenship after one year of active duty

[…]

Continued…

h/t: Antiwar.com

see

Should Anyone Join the Military? by Laurence M. Vance

Before You Enlist

Kucinich to Move Impeachment of Bush After Cheney By David Swanson

Dandelion Salad

By David Swanson
After Downing Street
Nov. 5, 2007

Congressman Dennis Kucinich said on a conference call Monday evening that after moving to impeach Vice President Cheney on Tuesday he will also introduce, at a future date, a resolution to impeach President Bush. Or rather, he would have said that on the conference call if not for several technical SNAFUs.

The call was advertised as a one-way call on which only Kucinich could speak, but Kucinich was unable to get through because of the incredible number of people on the call (I have no count yet, but the dings of the new people coming on were a steady stream of noise for half an hour).

So Kucinich phoned me, and I held one of my phones up to another so that everyone on the call could hear him. That was working fine for about 20 seconds, until the geniuses running the call chose that moment to mute everyone except Dennis (without stopping to realize that by muting me they were muting Dennis). So, Kucinich gave a nice speech through my phones, but I was the only one listening.

Here’s what he said. He is going to introduce a privileged resolution on the floor of the U.S. House Tuesday morning to force a vote on his resolution to impeach Cheney (H Res 333). While that bill includes offenses related to Iraq and Iran, Kucinich plans to focus his remarks on Iran and the fact that the current Pentagon bill includes funding to retrofit bombers to carry 15-ton bombs.

Kucinich said he would hold a press conference at 3 p.m. in 2456 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C., and would post on his House website and at http://impeachcheney.org an account of what transpired on the floor.

He said that there might be an actual debate on the substance of the charges, for which he said he was prepared, or there might be a motion to table the matter (effectively killing it if successful), or it might be referred to a committee. If it is sent to committee, Kucinich, said, it will be the House Judiciary Committee. I asked whether (as has been done with impeachment resolutions in the past) he would be able to insist on a time limit for the committee to report back. Kucinich seemed unsure whether that could be done, but proposed that whether or not the matter is sent to committee he might start a discharge petition as another tool for forcing real action on the floor of the House.

Currently H Res 333 sits in the Constitution Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, where Chairman Jerrold Nadler has done nothing with it for months.

Kucinich expressed great appreciation for what all the activist groups and individuals on the call are doing to help promote impeachment. He also wanted to let everyone know that he will not only continue pushing for the impeachment of Cheney but will also take up the impeachment of Bush with a new resolution.

This was terrific to hear. I wish I had not been the only one to hear it.
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. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

It’s Time to Impeach Cheney by Dennis Kucinich

H. Res. 333: Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors

It’s Time to Impeach Cheney by Dennis Kucinich

Dandelion Salad

By Congressman Dennis Kucinich
After Downing Street
special to www.ImpeachCheney.org

Nov. 5, 2007

As a member of Congress, I have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution and the laws of our nation, and I have pledged to represent the views of my constituents and of all Americans.

That’s why I feel both duty and sorrow in pursuing the path of impeachment against Vice President Richard B. Cheney.

While the impeachment movement has generated intensely strong sentiment and activism, there have been only two polls published on the question of impeaching Vice President Cheney. In a national poll, 54 percent of Americans favored impeachment. In one state poll, 64 percent of Vermonters favored impeaching the Vice President.

Twenty-one of my colleagues have heeded the public demand and signed on as cosponsors of my resolution, H Res 333. Others in the Congress have claimed they have more important priorities, but have told their constituents they will keep their views in mind if the matter ever comes up for a vote.

Well, the issue is coming up for a vote this week on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, and the “distraction” will require members to balance their priorities between Constitutionally proscribed justice and recourse and the alternative: Constitutional abuse and dictatorial power.

Only by taking up impeachment can we reinstitute a balance of powers and slow down the rush to launch a new war of aggression against Iran.

I am urging my colleagues to recognize that impeachment will not create a crisis by briefly disrupting their schedules on Capitol Hill. The crisis, as Americans outside the Beltway know, is upon us. Congress, the first branch of our government, to which the first half of the Constitution is devoted, has been reduced to almost a bystander as the policies of the wealthiest nation and the largest military ever known are set in secret by the Vice President’s office. Under Bush/Cheney, we have become a nation that illegally threatens and launches aggressive wars for political – not national security — reasons. For this crisis of confidence, this denial of our Constitutional beliefs and rights, impeachment is the only cure available.

I urge you, my fellow citizens, to share your sentiments with your Members of Congress and with your family, friends, and the news media in support regarding the rule of law and the imperative of impeaching a vice president who has misled both the public and the Congress about the gravest matters possible: war and peace. Please join with organizations like www.ImpeachCheney.org in making your voices heard as soon as possible! Every individual Member of Congress will have to decide within days where they stand.

On Tuesday, when I introduce my privileged resolution to force this issue to a vote, some other member of Congress will almost certainly move to table (kill) it. A Yes vote to table is a vote to delay the enforcement of the rule of law aside. A No vote to table is a vote to give impeachment a chance for a full and fair hearing. Please help me get this message out.

And, please help me sustain and expand YOUR platform on this and other issues by voting for me in Democracy for America’s presidential poll: http://democracyforamerica.com/pulsepoll?c=6

Right now, before the primaries and the caucuses and February’s Super Tuesday, your vote – TODAY — can change the tenor and direction of public debate by letting the other candidates, Congressional leaders, and political power-brokers know that some issues are too important to side-step, table, or ignore. You know what you believe and what you stand for.
Now, today, your vote may mean more than ever again.

Thank you for everything you are doing. Now is the moment to step forward, whatever the challenge or struggle. Now is the moment in which we must preserve and defend our Republic by using the tools that its authors provided. Tell your Congressional Representative what you think. Tell the nation – through Democracy for America — what you believe. Let’s save our pessimism for better times.

Peace,
Dennis

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. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see
H. Res. 333: Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors

Phone Numbers for Impeachment CoSponsers of HRes333

Myanmar activists on the run (video)

Dandelion Salad

AlJazeeraEnglish

Pro-democracy activists in Myanmar live in fear for their lives after anti-government demonstrations in September were crushed by the country’s military rulers.

Al Jazeera looks at the plight of the activists, many constantly on the move to avoid arrest. (less)
Added: November 06, 2007

see
We Are Compassionate, Why Are You Killing Us? by Paul Levy

Goodbye, Ruby Tue – and Wed – and Every Day Until the Burmese Generals Bow Out by Glitzqueen (aka The Other Katherine Harris)

Fresh protest by monks in Myanmar

H. Res. 333: Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors

Here is the actual resolution. ~ Lo

Global Research, November 5, 2007

US Congress

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 333

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

April 24, 2007

Mr. KUCINICH submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

[For status of bill: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hr110-333&page-command=print]

RESOLUTION

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

    Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Article I

    (A) `We know they have biological and chemical weapons.’ March 17, 2002, Press Conference by Vice President Dick Cheney and His Highness Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Crown Prince of Bahrain at Shaikh Hamad Palace.

    (B) `. . . and we know they are pursuing nuclear weapons.’ March 19, 2002, Press Briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem.

    (C) `And he is actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time . . .’ March 24, 2002, CNN Late Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (D) `We know he’s got chemicals and biological and we know he’s working on nuclear.’ May 19, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (E) `But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons . . . Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.’ August 26, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at VFW 103rd National Convention.

    (F) `Based on intelligence that’s becoming available, some of it has been made public, more of it hopefully will be, that he has indeed stepped up his capacity to produce and deliver biological weapons, that he has reconstituted his nuclear program to develop a nuclear weapon, that there are efforts under way inside Iraq to significantly expand his capability.’ September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (G) `He is, in fact, actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.’ September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (H) `And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.’ March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (A) Vice President Cheney and his Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby, made multiple trips to the CIA in 2002 to question analysts studying Iraq’s weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration’s policy objectives accounts.

    (B) Vice President Cheney sought out unverified and ultimately inaccurate raw intelligence to prove his preconceived beliefs. This strategy of cherry picking was employed to influence the interpretation of the intelligence.

    (A) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate stated `Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute it’s nuclear weapons program INR is unwilling to speculate that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result INR is unable to predict that Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.’.

    (B) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate also stated that `Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR’s assessment, highly dubious.’.

    (C) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate references a Department of Energy opinion by stating that `INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the US Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose.’.

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction:

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.

(3) The Vice President’s actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002, and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002, vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President’s actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article II

    (A) `His regime has had high-level contacts with Al Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to Al Qaeda terrorists.’ December 2, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at the Air National Guard Senior Leadership Conference.

    (B) `His regime aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against us.’ January 30, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to 30th Political Action Conference in Arlington, Virginia.

    (C) `We know he’s out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the Al Qaeda organization.’ March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (D) `We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on biological weapons and chemical weapons . . .’ September 14, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (E) `Al Qaeda had a base of operation there up in Northeastern Iraq where they ran a large poisons factory for attacks against Europeans and U.S. forces.’ October 3, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney at Bush-Cheney ’04 Fundraiser in Iowa.

    (F) `He also had an established relationship with Al Qaeda providing training to Al Qaeda members in areas of poisons, gases, and conventional bombs.’ October 10, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to the Heritage Foundation.

    (G) `Al Qaeda and the Iraqi intelligence services have worked together on a number of occasions.’ January 9, 2004, Rocky Mountain News interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (H) `I think there’s overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government.’ January 22, 2004, NPR: Morning Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (I) `First of all, on the question of–of whether or not there was any kind of relationship, there clearly was a relationship. It’s been testified to; the evidence is overwhelming.’ June 17, 2004, CNBC: Capital Report interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (A) A classified Presidential Daily Briefing ten days after the September 11, 2001, attacks indicating that the United States intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that there was `scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda’.

    (B) Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, which challenged the credibility of information gleaned from captured al Qaeda leader al-Libi. The DIA report also cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy: `Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.’.

    (C) A January 2003 British intelligence classified report on Iraq that concluded that `there are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network’.

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda:

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including:

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article III

    (A) `For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.’ March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.

    (B) `But we’ve also made it clear that all options are on the table.’ January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (C) `When we–as the President did, for example, recently–deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.’ January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.

    (D) `But I’ve also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.’ February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.

    (A) `I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.’ Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

    (B) Iran indicated its `full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council’. IAEA Board Report, February 22, 2007.

    (C) `. . . so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.’ Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

    (A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.

    (B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.

    (C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.

    (D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organization.

    (E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.

    (A) Article VI of the United States Constitution states, `This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.’ Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States.

    (B) The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, `All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.’ The threat of force is illegal.

    (C) Article 51 lays out the only exception, `Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.’ Iran has not attacked the United States; therefore any threat against Iran by the United States is illegal.

(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:

(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:

(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:

(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S. Constitution’s adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force.

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:

The Vice President’s deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President’s recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.

In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

see
Kucinich Campaign update 11-05-07 with Dennis on Impeachment (video) + Live Call-In

Phone Numbers for Impeachment CoSponsers of HR333

Kucinich Will Introduce Privileged Resolution To Force Up Or Down Vote On Cheney Impeachment

Kucinich: Impeachment! (video)

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright , US Congress, 2007
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7265

Could those loose nukes have been meant for the Syrian strike? by The Other Katherine Harris

Editor’s note: I can’t seem to get to this link, Jerusalem Post at the end of Katherine’s post. She says that it works, so please let me know if you can or cannot view it. Thanks, Lo

The Other Katherine Harris

by The Other Katherine Harris

Featured writer
Dandelion Salad

The Other Katherine Harris’s blog
Nov. 4, 2007

If it’s true, as recently reported, that one of two USAF planes carrying low-power tactical nukes bombed the alleged nuclear facility being built in Syria — with Israeli planes along just to fly cover (never mind that their government belatedly said they did it) — this might relate to yet another mystery. There’s an awfully close coincidence of date between the raid (Sept. 6) and when six nuclear warheads were illegally moving around within the U.S. (August 29 and 30) on missiles attached to the launch rack of a bomber from Minot AFB. Because those ended up at Barksdale AFB, the principal staging base for B-52s going to the Middle East, the speculation has been that they were meant eventually to pound targets in Iran. But what if two of them had a more immediate purpose? Very interestingly, these particular warheads afford the ultimate in versatility, being adjustable to detonate with explosive power from as low as five kilotons up to 150 kilotons.

Both the air strike in Syria and the loose nukes episode have been cloaked in secrecy extreme even for our obsessively Delphic despots in Washington. Adding an extra frisson to the murky and sinister picture, an Oct. 31 blog by Dave Lindorff pointed out a stunning number of recent deaths among personnel at Minot and Barksdale and others conceivably associated with the nukes’ movement.

If you’re behind on news of the nukes, Lindorff’s blog will catch you right up. As for the strange evolution of the Syrian bombing story, everybody involved has been trying like the devil to keep a lid on it. A sequence of events through Oct. 26 is nicely presented by BBC News and what seems to be the latest update of substance came out today at Jerusalem Post.

see

US Bombed Syria: Report

The Air Force Cover-Up of That Minot-Barksdale Nuke Missile Flight by Dave Lindorff

Air Force Confirms Nuclear Warheads Flown Across US (short video)

Simple Error My Ass – Loose Nukes by Larry C. Johnson

B-52 Nukes Headed for Iran: Air Force refused to fly weapons to Middle East theater by Wayne Madsen

U.S. Staging Nukes for Iran? by Larry Johnson

A Major Mistake Involving Nuclear Warheads (video) + B-52 flew nuclear bombs across US by mistake

Why was a nuclear-armed bomber allowed to fly over the US? by Bill Van Auken

The Big Fix by Dennis Kucinich (Jan 2006; Katrina)

Dandelion Salad

by Dennis Kucinich
The Nation
January 19, 2006 (February 6, 2006 issue)

Soon after Hurricane Katrina ripped through New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, destroying hundreds of thousands of homes and jobs, President Bush said the region looked like it had been obliterated by a weapon. It was. Indifference is a weapon of mass destruction. And the Bush Administration’s indifference to the economic security of New Orleans residents continues to this day.

For the 500,000 evacuees still not back in their homes, unemployment is epidemic: About one-quarter of whites, and one-half of African-Americans, are still out of work. It’s not because jobs are scarce; in fact, there is a labor shortage in New Orleans. Most of those who have returned from the Katrina diaspora have found jobs. The massive unemployment is caused by the lack of housing near the reconstruction job sites.

The indifferent Bush Administration, through the now-infamous FEMA, is compounding the unemployment problems of hurricane victims. FEMA located the largest temporary housing facility for evacuees ninety-one miles from New Orleans, in Baker, Louisiana. That’s hardly a reasonable commute, especially for low-income folks. Barry Kaufman, business manager of Local 689 of the Construction and General Laborers, told the New York Times he had “at least 2,000” evacuees willing to take cleanup jobs. The trouble was getting them there; the local’s hiring hall, along with thousands of evacuees, has been displaced to Baton Rouge, more than an hour’s drive away.

Continued…

h/t: ^Kucinich for President^

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. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Olbermann: Musharraf Coup + Tortured Reasoning + Worst Person (videos)

Dandelion Salad

heathr234

Countdown: The Musharraf Coup

Keith gives his report on the recent coup by Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan and President Bush’s response to it. Hillary Mann Leverett weighs in on the United State’s foreign policy our relations with Pakistan.

Added: November 05, 2007

Countdown: Tortured Reasoning

Keith gives his report on the retired Judge Advocates General who criticized the nomination of Mukasey due to his stance on waterboarding and on former acting AG Daniel Levin who was willing to subject himself to waterboarding to see if it was torture. After he determined it was and gave his report he was fired. Retired Rear Admiral John Hutson who was one of the authors of the letter weighs in.

Worst Person

And the winner is…..Rudy Giuliani for pretending he knows more about torture than John McCain and for possibly saying he had people tortured in New York. Runners up Kevin McGee of Fox Business Channel and Brit Hume of Fox News for his statements on the diplomats who didn’t want to go to Iraq.

see

Olbermann Special Comment: Waterboarding is Torture (videos)

Action Alert: Do Not Confirm Mukasey!

Waterboarding Torture Demonstration at Justice Department (video; over 18 only)

Pakistan shakes off US shackles By M K Bhadrakumar