A Personal Note from Dennis Kucinich

Dandelion Salad

By Dennis Kucinich
Progressive Democrats of America
February 17, 2008, Cleveland, OH

Friends like those of you in PDA who fearlessly travel the same road and share the same dreams for our country and families are much appreciated. We have traveled together since the first PDA convention at Roxbury Community College on July 29, 2004 where Governor Howard Dean and I linked arms on the stage.

I thank you for all your past help and am asking for your help again. Currently, I am competing against well-financed opponents. Opponents who reject Impeachment and my efforts to defend the Constitution. Opponents who reject the Conyers-Kucinich bill for universal health care – H.R. 676. Opponents who reject beginning an immediate withdrawal of our occupying forces in Iraq. In the last financial report I was being outspent by five to one by just one of those opponents and face a media onslaught.

My political career follows the words of Martin Luther King, Jr. who said: “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”’

And just like PDA I have never been silent about things that matter. I spoke out 140 times on the floor of the House to oppose the Iraq War and over 100 times in the media to explain that no credible evidence about the existence of WMDs had been produced. That the war was clearly illegal because it violated the U.N. Charter which is incorporated in the U.S. Constitution. In fact, I produced a thorough analysis disproving the WMD propaganda. Remember that I appeared on Meet the Press against Richard Perle, an administration defender, just before the war. I charged that the war was about oil. Perle responded that I had uttered “a lie, an out and out lie.”

The same day On Face the Nation, Time’s Joe Klein called me a “buffoon” for my anti-war and oil claims. Apparently their notes did not reach the desk of former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan who recently wrote: “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq War is largely about oil.” Nor did they ever read National Security Directive 54 written on Jan. 15, 1991 by our current president’s father. That NSD directive was sitting under my hand at the Meet the Press taping and started with the following: “Access to Persian Gulf oil and the security of key friendly states in the area are vital to U.S. national security.”

But there is a cost for speaking out about things that matter. Those who wish to preserve their privileges and power fight back. I learned that first when I was defeated in my bid for reelection as mayor of Cleveland after refusing to be blackmailed by corporate Cleveland into selling the city’s municipal light system to its private competitor. While it sidelined my political career for over 13 years, it saved my constituents hundreds of millions of dollars.

From that time to this my constituents have known that I can not be bought or bossed. Like my friends at PDA I have never been one to run away from the important battles to defend and define our party and country. To stop the insane militarism and corporatism subverting our democracy. Next year, the average American family of four will see some $15,818 spent in its name on a wasteful, largely unnecessary military industrial complex. The same family will see more than $30,000 spent in Iraq to make us less safe, free and prosperous. I say “wasteful” because no country on earth dare attack us on a field of battle. The idea that we need more $13.5 billion aircraft carriers to fight an enemy without planes (except those they can steal!), a ship or even an artillery piece is as dishonest as the lies that led us into Iraq.

PDAers recognize that when Americans wanted health care, they got war. When they wanted Social Security and retirement security, they got war. And when they wanted better schools and jobs, they got war. With your help we can silence the rhetoric of fear in Congress.

I need your help to fight back against a well-financed campaign to silence your voice in Congress. Each and every day I wake up knowing who and what I represent. I represent working families who are struggling to survive and know that unless we return to the Progressive values that created the middle class, our Democracy and world peace are at risk.

Please go to my web site at kucinich.us to contribute and to volunteer. The congressional campaign phone number is 216 252-9000. Thank you for responding.

Copyright © 2004-2007 Progressive Democrats of America • All text available for public use with appropriate attribution.

see

BuzzFlash Interviews Dennis Kucinich

Dennis Kucinich: Prayer for America (video)

Vin Gopal on Dennis Kucinich

Contribute to Kucinich for Congress

Kucinich-Dennis

The Global Research News Hour with Michel Chossudovsky & Stephen Lendman (audio link)

Dandelion Salad

Must-listen radio show, complete with commercials. ~ Lo

The Global Research News Hour w/ Michel Chossudovsky & Stephen Lendman

Feb 18 program: The US Economic Crisis and the derogation of the US Constitution

(Starts Monday, February 18th 11:00 AM – 1:00 PM CST)

Audio link

Michel talks with his guest in the first hour Prof. Tremblay and in the second hour Prof. Marjorie Cohn. Michel co-host joins him in the last half hour.

***

AUDIO ARCHIVE: The Global Research News Hour

Feb 18 program: The US Economic Crisis and the derogation of the US Constitution

Global Research, February 18, 2008
– 2008-02-13

The Global Research News Hour
Republic Broadcasting Network (RBN)
Host: Michel Chossudovsky and Stephen Lendman
Time: Mondays 11:00 am – 1:00 pm

February 18th

Michel Chossudovsky and co-Host Stephen Lendman, Guests: Prof. Rodrigue Tremblay on the US Economic Crisis, Prof. Marjorie Cohn on Bush Cheney violation of the US Constitution and the derogation of the rule of law.

Other news issues covered in the second hour include Kosovo and America’s preemptive nuclear doctrine.
Click podcast to access Program archive of the Global Research News Hour.

2008
The Global Research News Hour
Republic Broadcasting Network (RBN)

Host: Michel Chossudovsky

and Co-Host Stephen Lendman


E-Mail: GlobalResearchNews@yahoo.com
Website: www.globalresearch.ca

RBN Call-in Number:
800-313-9443
Show Time: Mondays, 11:00am – 1:00pm CST (12.00- 2.00pm EST, 9.00am-11am PT)

Republic Broadcasting Network (RBN)
http://www.republicbroadcasting.org

Click above for station information in your local area.

This program is a cutting-edge initiative of www.globalresearch.ca. It provides a global perspective on what is really happening in America and around the World – vital information unavailable in the mainstream, with noted guests sharing their expertise with listeners.

Topics discussed will include: the Iraq and Afghan wars, Israel-Palestine, national security, law and justice, Al Queda and the “war on terrorism,” what’s happening at the White House and on Capitol Hill, a review of social, economic and environmental issues, the unfolding financial crisis on Wall Street, corporate power and influence, and other vital topics of national and international concern.

To contact us send an email to GlobalResearchNews@yahoo.com

Award winning author and economics professor Michel Chossudovsky is currently Director of the Center for Research on Globalization which hosts the critically acclaimed website: www.globalresearch.ca. He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

He has worked for the United Nations on missions in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa, has acted as an adviser to governments of developing countries. He is author of several international best sellers including The Globalization of Poverty (2003) and America’s “war on Terrorism” (2005). His writings have been translated into more than twenty languages. He can be reached at crgeditor@yahoo.com

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Center for Research on Globalization and a frequent contributor to the site. He is based in Chicago and has written extensively on war and peace, social justice in America and many other national and international issues. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

© Copyright, Global Research, 2008
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8065

see

Stagflation is Here by Prof. Rodrigue Tremblay

Bush and ExxonMobil v. Chavez by Stephen Lendman

E.U. Police and Military Intervention to enforce Secession from Serbia by Michel Chossudovsky + video

Injustice at Guantanamo: Torture Evidence & the Military Commissions Act by Prof. Marjorie Cohn

BuzzFlash Interviews Dennis Kucinich

Dandelion Salad

After Downing Street
Feb 18, 2008

A Presidential Candidate Until Just a Short Time Ago, Dennis Kucinich Now Faces a Primary Challenge for His Congressional Seat

A BUZZFLASH INTERVIEW

The independent media is a treasure, and we understand how important it is to access independent media to be able to have a viewpoint that is unadulterated by the commercial interests. … There are many people who are trying to get out independent messages. I know BuzzFlash is one of them. Cherish those outlets, because they’re the key to maintaining whatever semblance of a democracy we still have. …

Impeachment is not, per se, removal from office. It really says that there are serious questions that must be asked as to the conduct of the people who are guiding this nation. And in the case of the President and the Vice President, there is incontrovertible evidence that they lied to take us into a war. They should be held accountable.

— Congressman Dennis Kucinich

* * *

Many progressives lamented that the person who most articulated their values in the current presidential primary race was Dennis Kucinich (or John Edwards). But in large part due to media neglect of his campaign, he was never able to get enough exposure to gain traction. MSNBC even went to court to keep him out of a presidential debate.

Kucinich cut short his effort to raise fundamental issues of justice at the national level because trouble was brewing in Cleveland. In short, well-monied interests took advantage of Kucinich’s presidential campaign to back a candidate to challenge Dennis in the March 4th Ohio primary. So Kucinich had to suddenly switch gears from running for president to battling to keep his Congressional seat, due to well-heeled opposition who don’t cotton to Kucinich’s calls for corporate and political accountability.

We don’t normally do this, but you can help Congressman Kucinich by going to http://kucinich.us/ and making a contribution. And if you live in his district or know someone who does, help get out the vote for Dennis on March 4th. We need his fearless truth to power.

Then read our interview with Kucinich conducted on Friday, February 15.

* * *

BuzzFlash: Congressman, many of us have certainly lauded you for your wonderful leadership over the past few years, and your effort to run in the presidential primary. But you’ve got a Congressional campaign now. You’re being challenged in Cleveland. What is happening there?

Congressman Dennis Kucinich: Well, there’s some very powerful, monied special interest groups who may raise and spend as much as $2 million in a Democratic primary to try to knock me out of office. These are people, most of whom do not live in my district, most of whom have their own private, narrow agenda, that is not in any way connected with the agenda of the people of my district, or, in some cases, that of the great mass of the American people. So what I am doing is just getting my record out to the people, letting them know that I have represented them without fear or favor. And I’m confident that with enough people, and with people contributing to make sure we get our message out, that we’ll succeed. But it is a contest. Make no mistake about it.

…continued

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

A Personal Note from Dennis Kucinich

Dennis Kucinich: Prayer for America (video)

Vin Gopal on Dennis Kucinich

Contribute to Kucinich for Congress

Kucinich-Dennis

Eric Margolis: Provoking the Russian bear (video)

Dandelion Salad

TheRealNews

Sunday February 17th, 2008

Eric Margolis: US missile policy stoking Russian nationalism

As contributing editor for The American Conservative and Sun Media, and Founding Committee member of The Real News Network Eric Margolis says: “The reason I was drawn to [The Real News] was the fact it seemed to me to be the voice that I and many others had been looking for.”

Continue reading

Report critical of army in Iraq suppressed (video)

Dandelion Salad
TheRealNews

Monday February 18th, 2008

US army suppresses Rand report

Phyllis Bennis is a Senior Analyst at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington DC. She is the author of Before and After: US Foreign Policy and the September 11 Crisis and Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power.

Continue reading

Mosaic News 2/15/08: World News from the Middle East

Dandelion Salad

Warning

.

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

linktv

For more: http://linktv.org/originalseries
“Pashtuns Change Allegiances,” Al Jazeera TV, Qatar
“Lebanese Public Caught in the Middle,” Dubai TV, UAE
“Sderot Residents Live Under Continuous Threat,” IBA TV, Israel
“Valentine’s Flowers Fed to Sheep,” Syria TV, Syria
“Palestinians Living in Caves,” Al Arabiya TV, UAE
“Children As Bombs,” Alsumaria TV, Iraq
“MIR: There Will Be Blood,” Link TV, USA
Produced for Link TV by Jamal Dajani.

Vodpod videos no longer available. from www.youtube.com posted with vodpod

.

Secret Iraq Dossier Published By Chris Ames

Dandelion Salad

By Chris Ames
ICH
02/18/08 “New Statesman

Read the draft here

The government has been forced to publish the secret first draft of the Iraq WMD dossier written by a Foreign Office spin doctor

The secret first draft of the Iraq WMD dossier written by Foreign Office spin doctor John Williams has finally been published after a ruling back in January under the Freedom of Information Act.

The document contains an early version of the executive summary of the next draft, which was attributed to Intelligence chief John Scarlett. The document places a spin doctor at the heart of the process of drafting the dossier and blows a hole in the government’s evidence to the Hutton Inquiry.

Last month the Foreign Office was ordered by the Information Tribunal to hand over the Williams draft, which I first requested under the Freedom of Information Act in February 2005.

From the time that the row first erupted over Andrew Gilligan’s allegations that the dossier had been sexed-up, the government has claimed that Scarlett’s draft, produced on 10 September 2002, was the first full draft and produced without interference from spin doctors. But the Williams draft, dated a day earlier, shows that spin doctors were sexing up the dossier at the time the notorious 45 minutes claim was included.

Initially the government withheld the draft from the Hutton Inquiry. Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s director of communications, denied its existence. But when Scarlett admitted that Williams had done some early drafting, the BBC asked to see it.

The government then supplied a copy of the draft to Lord Hutton but told him that it was “not taken forward” because a “fresh start” was made with Scarlett’s draft. Confirmation that Scarlett took up elements of Williams’s drafting shows that the government misled Hutton.

Williams did not include the 45 minutes claim in his draft but it is now clear that he did not have access to the intelligence on the claim at the time. However, it has recently been confirmed that Williams attended the meeting that produced Scarlett’s draft.

At this meeting, he and other spin doctors saw the intelligence assessment that contained the claim. Scarlett’s draft then included it for the first time. When he sent his draft to Campbell, Scarlett wrote of “considerable help from John Williams”.

The draft also shows that Williams was responsible for a number of key changes that strengthened the dossier’s claims. His executive summary claimed that Iraq had “acquired” uranium. Previous versions only alleged the material had been “sought”.

Scarlett’s draft also alleged that Iraq had got hold of uranium, stating that it had “purchased” it.

Williams appears largely to have been working on a version of the dossier that was produced during the summer of 2002, before Tony Blair announced in September of that year that a dossier would be published.

He appears not to have made substantial changes to the body text of the document’s section on Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction” (WMD) but it is clear that he was aware that this section was being rewritten. In fact, the WMD section contains a comment: “I don’t propose to rewrite this until I take delivery of the new version.” This shows that Williams intended to continue to rewrite the dossier.

Subsequent versions of the dossier show that the executive summary expressed its claims about Iraq’s WMD more strongly than the main text. In many cases, including the 45 minutes claim, the main text was then brought into line with the executive summary.

The involvement of spin doctors in drafting the summary process suggests that they led the sexing up of the dossier.

Read the draft here

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.

US Weapons Systems: Bush Policies Undermine Science, Group Says by Chris Schneidmiller

Dandelion Salad

by Chris Schneidmiller
Global Research, February 17, 2008
Global Security Newswire – 2008-02-15

Fed. officials fabricated scientific data, suppressed findings, pressured scientists to change reports

BOSTON — The Bush administration’s persistent interference in the work of federal scientists has cut experts out of top-level discussions of bioterrorism and served to punish researchers who questioned one White House nuclear weapon initiative, a science watchdog organization said yesterday (see GSN, May 10, 2007).

During the first day of a major science conference here, the Union of Concerned Scientists issued a report accusing the executive branch of committing a host of abuses over the last seven years.

Included among 17 distinct charges are allegations that federal officials misrepresented or simply fabricated scientific data, suppressed certain findings, and pressured scientists to change reports in favor of administration positions.

“This interference in science threatens our nation’s ability to respond to complex challenges to public health, the environment and national security,” states the report, Federal Science and the Public Good. “It risks demoralizing the federal scientific work force and raises the possibility of lasting harm to the federal scientific enterprise. More importantly, it betrays public trust in our government and undermines the democratic principles upon which this nation was founded.”

Physicist Kurt Gottfried, chairman of the organization’s Board of Directors, argued that this behavior is indicative of Bush administration procedure in sectors ranging from economics to arms control.

“I think more broadly than science the administration has tried and often succeeded in distorting and manipulating expert opinion that contradicts its chosen policies or that contradicts the views of some of its important constituencies,” he said in an interview on the sidelines of the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

While this is true to some degree of all presidents, it has become far more systemic in this White House, Gottfried said. The organization points to the elimination of two panels formed to provide federal agencies with expert advice on weapons issues as evidence of this posture.

The National Nuclear Security Administration, the semiautonomous arm of the Energy Department that oversees the U.S. nuclear complex, in June 2003 abolished a 2-year-old advisory panel filled with atomic weapons experts.

Some physicists on the panel had written articles questioning the Bush administration’s research on a nuclear “bunker buster,” a weapon intended to destroy hardened, underground targets. The experts warned that such weapons might not prove effective but would create high levels of radioactive fallout, the UCS report says.

The agency made its displeasure with the articles known, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. While acknowledging it is not “provable,” Gottfried argued that there was a clear connection between those pieces and the subsequent dismissal of the panel.
NNSA spokesman Bryan Wilkes rejected the organization’s claims on several points, starting with the report’s statement that “White House officials” disbanded the committee. The first NNSA administrator formed the group as a source for technical advice; his successor had significantly more experience in nuclear weapons and nonproliferation issues and allowed the panel’s charter to lapse, he said. Any articles critical of the bunker buster would have been “irrelevant,” Wilkes said, also denying that the agency’s work on the weapon had gone beyond the feasibility study stage.

“They don’t have their facts right. They’re wrong,” he said.

Formal pursuit of the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator ended in 2006 (see GSN, March 24, 2006).
A longtime State Department advisory committee on arms control was also disbanded shortly after Bush took office, the organization says on its Web site.

Gottfried used the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty to illustrate the level of expertise that members of these panels could provide. The experts would be able to discuss with policy-makers detection capabilities for underground nuclear blasts, the consequences for failing to detect a test and what a nation’s leaders might learn from setting off a weapon without being caught, he said.

While NNSA managers can reasonably say they have access to a significant amount of expertise through the national nuclear laboratories, there is always value in hearing independent voices who can speak freely without worrying about how their opinion might affect their future, Gottfried said. The State Department could not claim to have the same technical resources when it cut the arms control panel, he added.

The position of presidential science adviser has lost standing under the Bush administration, the organization claims. Losing its “near-Cabinet-level” status meant less access to President George W. Bush and reduced influence within the federal government. “As a result, scientific experts have not been as involved in high-level policy discussions on crucial issues such as climate change, stem cell research and bioterrorism,” the report says.

As another case of the conflict between scientists and the administration, Gottfried pointed to assertions by Bush and high-level administration officials that prewar Iraq attempted to import aluminum tubes intended for a nuclear weapon program. That claim, used to bolster the White House’s case for war, was based on a CIA analysis but was disputed by experts from several U.S. nuclear laboratories (see GSN, March 9, 2006). The scientists’ analysis, though, “didn’t coordinate with the policy,” Gottfried said.

The White House had not returned a request for comment as of press time. A State Department spokeswoman said she could not comment without first reading the report.

The organization issued a statement signed by prominent researchers, including Nobel laureates and former high-level federal scientists, calling for the next administration and for Congress not to meddle in scientific affairs.

Government scientists need to be free of interference when it comes to conducting their work, communicating and publishing their findings, blowing the whistle on abuses of science and undergoing peer reviews, the report says.

Gottfried expressed optimism about the likelihood of change, whether the occupant of the White House is a Democrat or Republican. It will take more than a change of presidents, he said. Federal scientists will have to regain the sense that they are free to speak freely — possibly through legislative protections.

Experts on arms control will only have influence if the next administration favors that work more strongly than seen in the Bush White House, Gottfried said.

“I’m hopeful,” he said. “What is the saying, hope springs eternal?”
emphasis added.

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 Chris Schneidmiller, Global Security Newswire, 2008
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8112

Sean Penn Comes To Cleveland To Support Rep. Kucinich

Dandelion Salad

Newnet5.com
February 17, 2008

CLEVELAND — Actor Sean Penn took time off his busy schedule to support Rep. Dennis Kucinich Saturday night.

While the eyes of the nation are focussed on Ohio’s presidential politics, the Academy Award winner was mindful of the adage that all politics is local.

…continued plus video

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

Dennis Kucinich: Prayer for America (video)

Vin Gopal on Dennis Kucinich

Contribute to Kucinich for Congress

Kucinich-Dennis

Pakistan’s Make Or Break Election by Eric Margolis

Dandelion Salad

by Eric Margolis
February 18, 2008

Pakistan’s national elections today are critically important for this strife-torn country’s future. They are almost as crucial for its western backers. Unless honestly conducted – and this seems highly unlikely – the vote will ignite further violence, plunging the highly strategic nation of 163 million into new dangers.

As of this posting, the turnout is disappointingly low, averaging less than 35%, caused by apathy, political fatigue, fears of attacks and the widespread belief that the elections will be manipulated by the government of President Pervez Mushattaf.

Only one thing is certain about today’s vote. If President Pervez Musharraf and his PML-Q party do well enough to retain power or head a coalition, the election was likely rigged.

Musharraf has rigged every vote since seizing power in a 1999 military coup. Polls show only 15-20% of Pakistanis support him. The majority backs the late Benazir Bhutto’s People’s Party, and former prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s Muslim League (PML-N). A coalition of Muslim parties, and cricket star Imran Khan’s PTI, may also garner some new voters, though Islamists have been trailing in the polls.

However, Musharraf’s powerful friends are determined to keep him power. In spite of Musharraf’s having muzzled the media, jailed thousands of opponents, purged the judiciary, and stuffed the electoral commission with henchmen, Washington, London and Ottawa still support his dictatorship and continue to hail him as a `democrat.’

While piously claiming to be waging war in Afghanistan to bring it democracy, the western powers have been encouraging and abetting dictatorship in Pakistan.

The reason is clear: Musharraf has rented out much of his army and intelligence service to battle Taliban in Afghanistan and tribal militants at home. His fee: up to $1 billion monthly in secret and overt US payments. Without them, Musharraf wouldn’t last very long.

Musharraf and his US and British patrons are hoping the opposition will split the vote and become deadlocked, leaving the former general as last man standing. The opposition, by contrast, is talking about ending the war against Taliban and reasserting Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan and Kashmir – something Washington and London do not want to hear.

The powerful military still supports Musharraf, though for how long depends on the level of post-election violence. Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani, the new armed forces chief, was selected by Musharraf and Washington as a loyal anti-Islamist who would follow America’s lead. But this capable general remains an enigma. Indian intelligence sources say the US decided in early 2007 to ease the floundering Musharraf from power and make Gen. Kiyani Pakistan’s new strongman. One is reminded of Henry Kissinger’s cynical quip that the only thing more dangerous than being America’s enemy is being its ally. Musharraf’s usefulness to Washington is rapidly nearing its expiry date.

If Pakistan is rent by widespread protests and violence over brazen electoral fraud, or suffers political deadlock, the military may overthrow the widely detested Musharraf and seize power. Gen. Kiyani is said to be reluctant to see the military re-engage in politics, but there could be no alternative if veteran politicians Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto’s widower, Asif Ali Zardari, cannot produce a viable government.

The best outcome would be for the military to exile Musharraf and impose temporary martial law until the independent judiciary can be restored, the electoral commission made fair, media ungagged, and political repression ended. Then genuine, honest elections could be held and Pakistan returned to parliamentary government. But once the soldiers taste power again, they may be reluctant to give it up.

Until Pakistan gets a legitimate government representing its national interests, rather than those of the western powers, the country will remain in turmoil, and Pakistanis disgusted by the political process.
This, in turn, will pour fuel on the rising flames of anti-Americanism and extremism.

Pakistan is facing spreading civil war, and possible secession by two of its four provinces. The Pashtun tribal uprising ignited by the US/NATO occupation of Afghanistan is now spreading into Pakistan, risking a full-scale uprising by that nation’s 25 million Pashtuns. Any of these earthquakes could provoke an invasion by India, met by a nuclear riposte from Pakistan.

The war in Afghanistan and heavy-handed efforts by the US to bend Pakistan’s military regime to its will ignited much of the current turmoil. A majority of Pakistanis don’t want their soldiers to be western mercenaries, or their leaders to appear western yes-men. They support Taliban, and the struggle for Kashmir. But the US is so consumed by its war of revenge against Taliban over 9/11 – in which Taliban as not involved – it cannot see any of this.

Pakistan is the Muslim World’s most important nation and sole nuclear power. By treating Pakistan like a banana republic, arm-twisting Islamabad into battling its own people, and ignoring its own national interests, the US is playing with fire and damaging its own long-term strategic interests.

Copyright Eric S. Margolis 2008

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

Frost over the World: Pakistan’s Election (videos)

US Court shuts down leaked doc emporium by Nick Juliano

Dandelion Salad

by Nick Juliano
Raw Story
Monday February 18, 2008

Wikileaks, the Web site that has revealed countless government secrets, has been forced offline by a California judge.
The site, which allows whistleblowers to post documents anonymously, is being sued by a Swiss banking group implicated in money laundering in documents obtained by Wikileaks. The BBC reports:

However, the main site was taken offline after the court ordered that Dynadot, which controls the site’s domain name, should remove all traces of wikileaks from its servers. The court also ordered that Dynadot should “prevent the domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or any other website or server other than a blank park page, until further order of this Court.” Other orders included that the domain name be locked “to prevent transfer of the domain name to a different domain registrar” to prevent changes being made to the site.

Versions of Wikileaks from Great Britain and other countries are still accessible.

In taking Wikileaks offline, the US joins China and Thailand in censoring the watchdog site.

In its report on the injunction, Wikileaks compares the case to the New York Times being ordered not to publish the Pentagon Papers.

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.

What Do We Stand For? By Paul Craig Roberts

Dandelion Salad

By Paul Craig Roberts
February 17, 2008

Americans traditionally thought of their country as a “city upon a hill,” a “light unto the world.” Today only the deluded think that. Polls show that the rest of the world regards the US and Israel as the two greatest threats to peace.

This is not surprising. In the words of Arthur Silber: “The Bush administration has announced to the world, and to all Americans, that this is what the United States now stands for: a vicious determination to dominate the world, criminal, genocidal wars of aggression, torture, and an increasingly brutal and brutalizing authoritarian state at home. That is what we stand for.”

Addressing his fellow Americans, Silber asks the paramount question, “Why do you support” [these horrors]?

His question goes to the heart of the matter. Do we Americans have any honor, any humanity, any integrity, any awareness of the crimes our government is committing in our name? Do we have a moral conscience?

How can a moral conscience be reconciled with our continuing to tolerate our government which has invaded two countries on the basis of lies and deception, destroyed their civilian infrastructures and murdered hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children?

The killing and occupation continue even though we now know that the invasions were based on lies and fabricated “evidence.” The entire world knows this. Yet, Americans continue to act as if the gratuitous invasions, the gratuitous killing, and the gratuitous destruction are justified. There is no end of it in sight.

If Americans have any honor, how can they betray their Founding Fathers, who gave them liberty, by tolerating a government that claims immunity to law and the Constitution and is erecting a police state in their midst?

Answers to these questions vary. Some reply that a fearful and deceived American public seeks safety from terrorists in government power.

Others answer that a majority of Americans finally understand the evil that Bush has set loose and tried to stop him by voting out the Republicans in November 2006 and putting the Democrats in control of Congress–all to no effect–and are now demoralized as neither party gives a hoot for public opinion or has a moral conscience.

The people ask over and over, “What can we do?”

Very little when the institutions put in place to protect the people from tyranny fail. In the US, the institutions have failed across the board.

The freedom and independence of the watchdog press was destroyed by the media concentration that was permitted by the Clinton administration and Congress. Americans who rely on traditional print and TV media simply have no idea what is afoot.

Political competition failed when the opposition party became a “me-too” party. The Democrats even confirmed as attorney general Michael Mukasey, an authoritarian who refuses to condemn torture and whose rulings as a federal judge undermined habeas corpus. Such a person is now the highest law enforcement officer in the United States.

The judicial system failed when federal judges ruled that “state secrets” and “national security” are more important than government accountability and the rule of law.

The separation of powers failed when Congress acquiesced to the executive branch’s claims of primary power and independence from statutory law and the Constitution.

It failed again when the Democrats refused to impeach Bush and Cheney, the two greatest criminals in American political history.

Without the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, America can never recover. The precedents for unaccountable government established by the Bush administration are too great, their damage too lasting. Without impeachment, America will continue to sink into dictatorship in which criticism of the government and appeals to the Constitution are criminalized. We are closer to executive rule than many people know.

Silber reminds us that America once had leaders, such as Speaker of the House Thomas B. Reed and Senator Robert M. LaFollette Sr., who valued the principles upon which America was based more than they valued their political careers. Perhaps Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are of this ilk, but America has fallen so low that people who stand on principle today are marginalized. They cannot become Speaker of the House or a leader in the Senate.

Today Congress is almost as superfluous as the Roman Senate under the Caesars. On February 13 the US Senate barely passed a bill banning torture, and the White House promptly announced that President Bush would veto it.

Torture is now the American way. The US Senate was only able to muster 51 votes against torture, an indication that almost a majority of US Senators support torture.

Bush says that his administration does not torture. So why veto a bill prohibiting torture? Bush seems proud to present America to the world as a torturer.

After years of lying to Americans and the rest of the world that Guantanamo prison contained 774 of “the world’s most dangerous terrorists,” the Bush regime is bringing 6 of its victims to trial. The vast majority of the 774 detainees have been quietly released. The US government stole years of life from hundreds of ordinary people who had the misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and were captured by warlords and sold to the stupid Americans as “terrorists.” Needing terrorists to keep the farce going, the US government dropped leaflets in Afghanistan offering $25,000 a head for “terrorists.” Kidnappings ensued until the US government had purchased enough “terrorists” to validate the “terrorist threat.”

The six that the US is bringing to “trial” include two child soldiers for the Taliban and a car pool driver who allegedly drove bin Laden.

The Taliban did not attack the US. The child soldiers were fighting in an Afghan civil war. The US attacked the Taliban. How does that make Taliban soldiers terrorists who should be locked up and abused in Gitmo and brought before a kangaroo military tribunal? If a terrorist hires a driver or a taxi, does that make the driver a terrorist? What about the pilots of the airliners who brought the alleged 9/11 terrorists to the US? Are they guilty, too?

The Gitmo trials are show trials. Their only purpose is to create the precedent that the executive branch can ignore the US court system and try people in the same manner that innocent people were tried in Stalinist Russia and Gestapo Germany. If the Bush regime had any real evidence against the Gitmo detainees, it would have no need for its kangaroo military tribunal.

If any more proof is needed that Bush has no case against any of the Gitmo detainees, the following AP News report, February 14, 2008, should suffice: “The Bush administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to limit judges’ authority to scrutinize evidence against detainees at Guantanamo Bay.”

The reason Bush doesn’t want judges to see the evidence is that there is no evidence except a few confessions obtained by torture. In the American system of justice, confession obtained by torture is self-incrimination and is impermissible evidence under the US Constitution.

Andy Worthington’s book, The Guantanamo Files, and his online articles make it perfectly clear that the “dangerous terrorists” claim of the Bush administration is just another hoax perpetrated on the inattentive American public.

Recently the non-partisan Center for Public Integrity issued a report that documents the fact that Bush administration officials made 935 false statements about Iraq to the American people in order to deceive them into going along with Bush’s invasion. In recent testimony before Congress, Bush’s Secretary of State and former National Security Advisor, Condi Rice, was asked by Rep. Robert Wexler about the 56 false statements she made.

Rice replied: “I take my integrity very seriously and I did not at any time make a statement that I knew to be false.” Rice blamed “the intelligence assessments” which “were wrong.”

Another Rice lie, like those mushroom clouds that were going to go up over American cities if we didn’t invade Iraq. The weapon inspectors told the Bush administration that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, as Scott Ritter has reminded us over and over. Every knowledgeable person in the country knew there were no weapons. As the leaked Downing Street memo confirms, the head of British intelligence told the UK cabinet that the Bush administration had already decided to invade Iraq and was making up the intelligence to justify the invasion.

But let’s assume that Rice was fooled by faulty intelligence. If she had any integrity she would have resigned. In the days when American government officials had integrity, they would have resigned in shame from such a disastrous war and terrible destruction based on their mistake. But Condi Rice, like all the Bush (and Clinton) operatives, is too full of American self-righteousness and ambition to have any remorse about her mistake. Condi can still look herself in the mirror despite one million Iraqis dying from her mistake and several million more being homeless refugees, just as Clinton’s Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, can still look herself in the mirror despite sharing responsibility for 500,000 dead Iraqi children.

There is no one in the Bush administration with enough integrity to resign. It is a government devoid of truth, morality, decency and honor. The Bush administration is a blight upon America and upon the world.

Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider’s Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.

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

Condoleezza Rice: Liar, Secretary of State, War Criminal Part 2

Military Tribunals and You by Cindy Sheehan

The Real Cindy Sheehan

by Cindy Sheehan
Dandelion Salad
featured writer
February 18, 2008

I have just returned from five days in Egypt. To me, visiting foreign countries is so enlightening as an American who grew up as parochial and nationalistic as the next. However, since my son was killed in Iraq, I have had a crash course in foreign “relations” and cultures that came with a too steep price.

Ironically, I was in Egypt because 40 members of the Muslim Brotherhood are being tried in military tribunals. Trying civilians in a military tribunal is against every law one can name (except in the US where we have the Military Commissions Act that contradicts international law and our own Constitution). While I was in Egypt to stand in solidarity with the families of the accused, I heard on the BBC about six men being tried at Guantanamo for the crime against humanity that occurred here on 9-11.

I turned on the TV in my motel room just as a military officer was reading the charges against the six detainees and for a brief moment my heart skipped a beat with joy. I mistakenly believed that the officer was reading charges against BushCo: “killing civilians; destroying civilian property and committing acts of terrorism.” My happiness that someone-anyone in our nation was taking his oath to “protect and defend our Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic” seriously was short-lived, though, as the pictures of the six accused flashed on the screen.

Although the case against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, et al and the 40 members of the Muslim Brotherhood could not be more different, there are also some similarities. We all know that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is accused of being the “mastermind of 9-11” (hey, wasn’t that Osama bin Laden before it was Saddam Hussein?), however very few Americans know about the case of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Of course, when some people hear the term “Muslim Brotherhood” they are automatically going to be translating that into “terrorist.” These are the same people who get their “news” from Fox and believe that almost 5 million “terrorists” have been killed wounded or displaced in Iraq. These people could not be more wrong about the people of Iraq or the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). According to a scholarly article in Foreign Affairs (March/April 2007), the MB “reject global Jihad while embracing elections and other features of democracy.” The MB is a moderate Islamist group that is the largest and most influential in the world. The MB promotes change through the ballot box, non-violent protest and charity. As a woman, I may not like that the men (always nicely garbed in Western suits) wipe their hands off on their coats after they shake my hand, but they are in no way terrorists and are often targeted by radical Islamist groups that do not agree with the MB’s moderate positions.

It seems that the “crime” that the MB has committed in Egypt is winning too many seats in Parliament (as Independents as the MB is an outlawed organization in Egypt) and in coalition could have been an effective opposition voice to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak who has been a puppet of American Imperialists since 1981. I heard many citizens in his country from cab drivers to tour guides derisively (and quietly) refer to Mubarak as “President for Life.” Anyway, in an early morning raid over one year ago, 40 members of the MB were rounded up in tactics that reminded me of stories that my Iraqi friends have recounted: yelling soldiers bursting into their homes wearing riot gear and brandishing terrifying weapons; frightening women and children and hauling off the breadwinner to be swallowed by the depths of a prison in moves calculated to instill terror and suppress dissent.

After four civilian courts exonerated the accused, Mubarak had the prisoners transferred to a military prison and given a kangaroo court trial. The families are expecting a pre-determined guilty verdict that could carry strict sentences. And of course, George Bush, who is a paragon of virtue and respects “human rights and human dignity” (BBC interview, Feb 15th) has harshly condemned Mubarak and has threatened to withhold some American largesse (Egypt is second only to Israel in US aid) due to the gross violations of international law and human rights, right? Well, not exactly. While Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, among others, has condemned the Egyptian government for this travesty, BushCo has been oddly silent.

Of course, although George can say that he has the “moral high ground” (BBC, again), of course the US is one of the international leaders in detaining people without due process and has committed water torture and other inhumane practices in the Middle East and in our own backyard in Guantanamo.

While I was in Guantanamo, Cuba and Cairo, Egypt advocating for human rights, I dared not make any judgment of an individual detainee’s guilt or innocence. Although the MB 40 have been acquitted four times, I cannot presume to judge the “evidence” that I haven’t seen, anyway. And although the confessions of the six that will be on trial for 9-11 were garnered through torture, I of course, cannot judge their guilt or innocence, because I have not seen (nor will see) the evidence against them. This is the inherent problem of military tribunals: they are neither transparent nor fair and there is almost always a foregone verdict. This secrecy is not fair to the victims either who deserve to know the “truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” and rarely receive anything resembling “the truth.”

How do these military tribunals in Egypt and Guantanamo affect us here in the US? Americans always receive fair and equal treatment under the law, right? Wrong! Madam Justice’s fabled scales are heavily weighted to benefit the wealthy or the established ruling class. Ask any person of color or poor citizen here how the American justice system works for them. There is no place for secrecy or suppression of dissent in any free, open or democratic society. In allowing these military tribunals to continue the very cornerstone of human rights is being shattered.

One does not have to be clever or have a particularly vivid imagination to fear an even harsher police state in America where any of us can be rounded up, tortured, and tried for opposing the government. Detention centers are already being built.

Besides, for argument’s sake, even if these military tribunals have absolutely no implication here in America, humans are being profoundly hurt by the policies of our allied governments that are dancing the “Totalitarian Two-step” and as MLK, Jr wrote from the Birmingham Jail:

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

 .

FOX News Exposes Diebold Electronic Vote Flipping in Florida

Dandelion Salad

DrRonPaul4President

Added: February 1, 2008

Vodpod videos no longer available.  posted with vodpod

.

h/t: After Downing Street

see

$700 bribe buys access to voting machines (video)

Hacking Democracy (must see videos; 2006)

Celebrating Un-President’s Day: Why I Will Not Vote For A President In 2008 By Carolyn Baker