SDS Olympia Fights Back Against the Police State


SDS Group Banned After Ruckus at Dead Prez Concert: Clampdown at Evergreen
By Ron Jacobs / April 21, 2008

A police car was overturned during a ruckus with local and campus police following a hiphop concert by the group Dead Prez at Evergreen Sate College in Olympia WA. The Evergreen branch of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) was suspended by the college administration from the campus. The suspension of SDS was a reaction to the organization’s refusal to go along with an edict from the administration banning public events at the college.

Evergreen College, commonly referred to as Evergreen, is a progressive college founded by a Republican governor of Washington in the early 1970s. It already has a legacy of activism that runs deeper and stronger than many other US colleges with much longer histories.

Filemón Bohmer-Tapia and Courtney Franz are students at Evergreen and members of SDS. Filemon is also involved in MEChA de Evergreen.and is a community organizer in the immigrant rights and anti-war movements. Courtney is a sophomore at Evergreen State College, where she is studying Political Economy, Social Sciences, and writing. I recently contacted them and asked a few questions regarding the situation at the college. They emphasized that they spoke as members of SDS, not for SDS.

Can you explain the series of events that led up to the suspension of Olympia SDS by the Evergreen State College administration? More to the point, what is your take on the so-called riot by some people that attended the concert by Dead Prez?

Filemon: First, I want to thank Dead Prez and Umi for coming out to Olympia and giving a great concert that promoted social justice and revolutionary change. They are welcome in Olympia anytime. There has been a lot of negative press surrounding the events at the Dead Prez concert. I think it’s important to clear up some of the distortions that have been promoted in the media.

In actuality, members of an unofficial security team, which had no visible identifiable labels, abused their power and started a fight in the crowd. Some fought back in self-defense and an African- American man, Kaylen Williams, attempted to break up the fight. After the scuffle was over members of the security team, uninjured and primarily white, ran to the police (and a couple of them) pointed out Mr. Williams, who was then immediately and unjustly arrested by an Evergreen State College police officer. As the officer was arresting him, members of the crowd and even other members of the security team told the officer that she had the wrong person and that he was only trying to break up the fight. The officer refused to listen and took Mr. Williams out of the concert in handcuffs. Many people began to question the officer’s decision and demanded that she release him. The officer refused and placed Mr. Williams in the back of the police car directly outside of the concert exit. As the concert ended, people began leaving the concert venue and saw that there was a black man under arrest and a growing number of people demanding his release. The police car was surrounded by this time and the crowd of about 300 was chanting “Let Him Go!”

The Olympia police then barged in swinging their clubs indiscriminately and dowsing the crowd with pepper spray. One Evergreen student landed in the Emergency room with internal bleeding. The crowd then began protecting themselves with any material available, throwing bottles, rocks, and sticks at the police. There was already a lot of bad blood between (much of) the Olympia community and the Olympia Police Department as a result of police brutality during the Port of Olympia protests when protesters tried to prevent military weapons and materials from being shipped to Iraq. The crowd was now very unified in the mission of freeing the prisoner and kicking the police off of our campus. The police were forced to release Kaylen Williams and had to retreat as the crowd grew in numbers and intensity. As the police escaped, they left one of their patrol cars behind, and the people took out their frustration on it.

Whether or not people agree with the destruction of the police car, it is important to realize the context in which it happened. There was an unjust and what many would call a racist arrest, and police violence against a peaceful crowd before any there was any property damage. That night, the Olympia community stood in solidarity against the abuse of power that is synonymous with police behavior.

Courtney: Shortly after the “riot,” Evergreen President Les Purce and Vice President of Student Affairs Art Constantino met with representatives from the four jurisdictions of police who were directly involved (Evergreen State College Police, Thurston County Sherriff’s Department, Olympia Police Department, and Washington State Patrol). We learned from a reliable source that when the police asked them to point to likely suspects, the administrators told them to investigate students involved in the port protests, especially members of SDS.

Opinions within SDS vary on the specific tactics protesters used, but everyone understands their motivation; antiracism is in our mission statement. It is vital to remember that a group of students started a spontaneous uprising in response to police actions. It is ludicrous to imply, as the administration has, that SDS or any other student group planned or instigated these actions.

After the melee and subsequent sensationalist coverage of the event in the local media, the Evergreen College administration banned public events. What was their reasoning for this somewhat drastic reaction? What was the general opinion of students and staff to the ban?

Courtney: The Evergreen State College administration did not ban public events per se – they issued a (so-called) “moratorium on student-sponsored concerts and other events that involve substantial safety and security considerations until processes are improved” through a review committee. Students and the public found out about this through this press release and subsequent articles in (the local daily)The Olympian, the Cooper Point Journal (the campus newspaper), and other media. It was never an official written policy. There was substantial confusion about this among students. The administration either reserved the right to review events on a case-by-case basis, simply ignored other musical events following the concert (including one with over 300 attendees), or selectively applied these different standards.

The administration claimed, then, that the problem was safety procedures. From what I understand, some people on the safety review committee have tried to bring up the fundamentally unsafe police violence and racism that instigated the events. It appears that the committee has not yet come to a conclusion; a separate campus police review committee found no racism in the arrest. The attached report details their inadequate response.

Radical views have long been a target for the administration, but SDS knew that the situation would worsen after the concert. We had been planning the San Francisco 8 event and the subsequent performance for months. After the moratorium was announced, members of SDS approached the administration and were told that the event could continue. Shortly before the events were scheduled, the administration went back on its word and cancelled them. It claimed that because one of these two events involved music and both were advertised on the same flier, neither could continue. After much deliberation within our group and with the panelists and guests, we decided to hold the events anyway.

Filemon: The Evergreen administration’s reason for the ban on concerts, called the concert moratorium, was to prevent any future ‘violence’ at future events. Many students, staff, and faculty were outraged with this decision, made solely by the President, Vice President, and the Dean of Student Services. The Evergreen administration has been aggressively cooperative with local police in the investigation that has five people facing felony charges as a result of the events after the Dead Prez concert. Olympia SDS officially criticized both the police actions on the night of the Dead Prez event and the concert moratorium. The concert ban was never actually put into effect though, because the week after it was announced, a musical performance was held at Evergreen with the administration’s knowledge and without any interference.

When the members of the San Francisco 8 came to speak and were told about the ban, what was their response? I know that you all went ahead with the program and it was well attended. Can you give a summary of how the administration and campus police reacted that evening and in the immediate aftermath? Also, how many people are in Olympia SDS?

Courtney: Olympia Students for Democratic Society (SDS) meetings are usually attended by up to twenty-five people, and about fifty people total come attend some meetings. Hundreds of people have come to our events, cosponsored them, or helped us with our activism.

The San Francisco 8 panelists told us they were proud of us as young activists and expressed support for our resistance against police actions and racism as well as our work in defense of free speech. They largely agreed that the police were a fundamentally and systematically oppressive force.

Campus police monitored the events from outside the building and talked to a few people, but there was little direct interaction at the event itself; things appeared to be going fine. Shortly after the panel and performance, the administration sent us a letter notifying us of our suspension. We held an initial appeal, which was well attended by other students and student groups, and were informed that our suspension was shortened. We have filed a letter of intent to appeal a second and final time.

Filemon: (Regarding the banned event) SDS went ahead with promoting a panel discussion that had been planned for months with the San Francisco 8, former Black Panthers who had been tortured by U.S. Government agencies and were victims of the COINTELPRO campaign (now on trial for charges related to the murder of a police officer in 1971-charges that were thrown out in 1975 in part because confessions were extracted under police torture-Ron). We were also promoting an acoustic performance by David Rovics, Danny Kelly and Mark Eckert that would serve as a benefit for anti-war activist Carlos Arredondo, whose son was killed in Iraq. Two days before both separate events were to occur; the administration abruptly informed SDS that the two events were canceled, because “they were advertised as a concert.” The panel discussion was in no way a concert, and the second, separate event was an acoustic performance, hardly a concert. The decision was obviously politically motivated because there had already been another musical performance (as noted above) since the so-called concert moratorium had began. SDS and many other student groups deemed the cancellation illegitimate, and we decided to proceed with both events. Both the panel discussion with the San Francisco 8 and the later acoustic benefit performance by David Rovics ran smoothly and were very well attended. Both the San Francisco 8 and David Rovics have been very supportive of SDS and were appreciative that we went ahead with the scheduled events. The next week, the Evergreen Administration informed SDS that we were temporarily suspended until they could come to a decision. Eventually they decided to suspend SDS’s group status for an entire year.

Read all of it here. CounterPunch / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Another Leftist Government for Latin America

Lugo Rally

Paraguay Changes: Elections End 60 Years of Right Wing Rule
By Michael Fox / April 21, 2008

Paraguay VotesAsuncion, Paraguay – Even before last night’s official results were announced, Lugo supporters were in the streets celebrating what many called a dream come true.

“I came here to vote for Lugo, and now I’m here for him. I came here to vote, and I voted, and now I’m here, present for my president. President Lugo, President Lugo!” chanted an elderly Graciela Bogadin in both Spanish and Guarani. The people around her cheered. Bogadin is a Paraguayan who has lived in Argentina for many years. She is one of the thousands who came back to vote in yesterday’s historic elections and who descended on Asuncion’s Heroe’s Pantheon last night for the victory celebration.

“I want to pray that the good god bless our Paraguay, that deserves better horizons, better times, for absolutely all of her children, those who are in Buenos Aires, or New York, or Spain or Brazil, in whatever part of the geography of the planet, here is a country that recognizes them, appreciates them, and we also count on them,” said a powerful President-elect Fernando Lugo only an hour earlier at a nearby press conference, as if talking directly to Bogadin.

“We are convinced that this country has the right to better horizons,” said Lugo. “We’ve felt it in the pain and tears of so many mothers, and the hopelessness of so many youth, and the suffering of so many children, and a special invitation to all of the Paraguayan political class, to join together for this country, which was great, and together we believe will once again be great in the concert of Nations.”

Read all of it here. / Upside Down World / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

We Think the BushCo Lie Is Bigger Than That


Pentagon Propaganda & Antiwar Analysts
April 21, 2008

The Sunday Times’ article detailing the massive, secret coordinated campaign by the Pentagon and all the leading television news channels to sell and defend the administration’s Iraq policy is a critical piece of investigative journalism. David Barstow provided meticulous and aggressive reporting, even referencing how The Times’ amplified Pentagon “surrogates” without sufficient disclosure for readers. The Times also deserves credit, both for running the lengthy piece and suing the government to obtain related documents. (Read the whole thing here, or try this YouTube excerpt.)

The Nation’s Katrina vanden Heuvel is urging Congress to investigate the program exposed by the article: In its rigorous documentation of the relationship between the government, the networks and retired military analysts, the lineaments of the corrosive structure and impact of a new military-media-industrial complex are exposed. This corrupt complex demands investigation by all relevant Congressional committees…

Glenn Greenwald, who has written extensively about the media’s pro-war bias and undisclosed conflicts of interest, flags the galling (non)-response of several news organizations, near the end of the article:

The most incredible aspect of the NYT story is that most of the news organizations which deceived their readers and viewers by using these “objective” analysts — CBS, NBC, Fox — simply refused to comment on what they knew about any of this or what their procedures are for safeguarding against it. Just ponder what that says about these organizations — there is a major expose in the NYT documenting that these news outlets misleadingly shoveled government propaganda down the throats of their viewers on matters of war and terrorism and they don’t feel the least bit obliged to answer for what they did or knew about any of it…. The single most significant factor in American political culture is the incestuous, extensive overlap between our media institutions and government officials.

The article reports that most of the news organizations either didn’t know or didn’t care about their paid analysts taking direction from the administration while claiming to neutrally assess its policies; or taking expensive trips paid by the administration; or meeting secretly with senior administration officials and plotting military or political strategy; or competing for military contracts.

So what does it take to disqualify a former general from on-air analysis?

Criticizing President Bush.

While the article does not cover this incident, CBS did fire Maj. Gen. John Batiste (Ret.) for criticizing President Bush’s Iraq policy in a television ad. As the former commander of the Army’s First Infantry Division, which was deployed to Iraq in 2003, Batiste had unassailable credentials, but his views were too much for CBS. This larger context is key, because while the Times exposed a sophisticated, deceptive domestic propaganda campaign for the administration, the flip-side is harder to document. But antiwar perspectives are routinely marginalized or scrubbed from televised debate, even when offered by our nation’s brave military leaders.

As ABC News was reminded last week, the public expects more integrity and substance from these news organizations. They are egregiously late in even commenting on these new reports, let alone reforming their policies, which demonstrates why Congress must investigate this propaganda program — and the marginalization of experts who are critical of the war or the government.

Source / Information Clearing House / The Nation / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Michael Moore for Obama : Debate Was Final Straw

My Vote’s for Obama (if I could vote) …
By Michael Moore / April 21, 2008

Friends,

I don’t get to vote for President this primary season. I live in Michigan. The party leaders (both here and in D.C.) couldn’t get their act together, and thus our votes will not be counted.

So, if you live in Pennsylvania, can you do me a favor? Will you please cast my vote — and yours — on Tuesday for Senator Barack Obama?

I haven’t spoken publicly ’til now as to who I would vote for, primarily for two reasons: 1) Who cares?; and 2) I (and most people I know) don’t give a rat’s ass whose name is on the ballot in November, as long as there’s a picture of JFK and FDR riding a donkey at the top of the ballot, and the word “Democratic” next to the candidate’s name.

Seriously, I know so many people who don’t care if the name under the Big “D” is Dancer, Prancer, Clinton or Blitzen. It can be Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Barry Obama or the Dalai Lama.

Well, that sounded good last year, but over the past two months, the actions and words of Hillary Clinton have gone from being merely disappointing to downright disgusting. I guess the debate last week was the final straw. I’ve watched Senator Clinton and her husband play this game of appealing to the worst side of white people, but last Wednesday, when she hurled the name “Farrakhan” out of nowhere, well that’s when the silly season came to an early end for me. She said the “F” word to scare white people, pure and simple. Of course, Obama has no connection to Farrakhan. But, according to Senator Clinton, Obama’s pastor does — AND the “church bulletin” once included a Los Angeles Times op-ed from some guy with Hamas! No, not the church bulletin!

This sleazy attempt to smear Obama was brilliantly explained the following night by Stephen Colbert. He pointed out that if Obama is supported by Ted Kennedy, who is Catholic, and the Catholic Church is led by a Pope who was in the Hitler Youth, that can mean only one thing: OBAMA LOVES HITLER!

Yes, Senator Clinton, that’s how you sounded. Like you were nuts. Like you were a bigot stoking the fires of stupidity. How sad that I would ever have to write those words about you. You have devoted your life to good causes and good deeds. And now to throw it all away for an office you can’t win unless you smear the black man so much that the superdelegates cry “Uncle (Tom)” and give it all to you.

But that can’t happen. You cast your die when you voted to start this bloody war. When you did that you were like Moses who lost it for a moment and, because of that, was prohibited from entering the Promised Land.

How sad for a country that wanted to see the first woman elected to the White House. That day will come — but it won’t be you. We’ll have to wait for the current Democratic governor of Kansas to run in 2016 (you read it here first!).

There are those who say Obama isn’t ready, or he’s voted wrong on this or that. But that’s looking at the trees and not the forest. What we are witnessing is not just a candidate but a profound, massive public movement for change. My endorsement is more for Obama The Movement than it is for Obama the candidate.

That is not to take anything away from this exceptional man. But what’s going on is bigger than him at this point, and that’s a good thing for the country. Because, when he wins in November, that Obama Movement is going to have to stay alert and active. Corporate America is not going to give up their hold on our government just because we say so. President Obama is going to need a nation of millions to stand behind him.

I know some of you will say, ‘Mike, what have the Democrats done to deserve our vote?’ That’s a damn good question. In November of ’06, the country loudly sent a message that we wanted the war to end. Yet the Democrats have done nothing. So why should we be so eager to line up happily behind them?

I’ll tell you why. Because I can’t stand one more friggin’ minute of this administration and the permanent, irreversible damage it has done to our people and to this world. I’m almost at the point where I don’t care if the Democrats don’t have a backbone or a kneebone or a thought in their dizzy little heads. Just as long as their name ain’t “Bush” and the word “Republican” is not beside theirs on the ballot, then that’s good enough for me.

I, like the majority of Americans, have been pummeled senseless for 8 long years. That’s why I will join millions of citizens and stagger into the voting booth come November, like a boxer in the 12th round, all bloodied and bruised with one eye swollen shut, looking for the only thing that matters — that big “D” on the ballot.

Don’t get me wrong. I lost my rose-colored glasses a long time ago.

It’s foolish to see the Democrats as anything but a nicer version of a party that exists to do the bidding of the corporate elite in this country. Any endorsement of a Democrat must be done with this acknowledgement and a hope that one day we will have a party that’ll represent the people first, and laws that allow that party an equal voice.

Finally, I want to say a word about the basic decency I have seen in Mr. Obama. Mrs. Clinton continues to throw the Rev. Wright up in his face as part of her mission to keep stoking the fears of White America. Every time she does this I shout at the TV, “Say it, Obama! Say that when she and her husband were having marital difficulties regarding Monica Lewinsky, who did she and Bill bring to the White House for ‘spiritual counseling?’ THE REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT!”

But no, Obama won’t throw that at her. It wouldn’t be right. It wouldn’t be decent. She’s been through enough hurt. And so he remains silent and takes the mud she throws in his face.

That’s why the crowds who come to see him are so large. That’s why he’ll take us down a more decent path. That’s why I would vote for him if Michigan were allowed to have an election.

But the question I keep hearing is… ‘can he win? Can he win in November?’ In the distance we hear the siren of the death train called the Straight Talk Express. We know it’s possible to hear the words “President McCain” on January 20th. We know there are still many Americans who will never vote for a black man. Hillary knows it, too. She’s counting on it.

Pennsylvania, the state that gave birth to this great country, has a chance to set things right. It has not had a moment to shine like this since 1787 when our Constitution was written there. In that Constitution, they wrote that a black man or woman was only “three fifths” human. On Tuesday, the good people of Pennsylvania have a chance for redemption.

Yours,
Michael Moore

Source. / MichaelMoore.com / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Heavenly Summons…

The Onion. / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged | Leave a comment

10,000 Smoke Pot on Colorado Quad

Students pack Norlin Quad on the University of Colorado campus to smoke marijuana and celebrate “4-20” on April 20, 2008. Every year, students gather to smoke, despite past attempts by police to control the crowds. Photo By Kasia Broussalian.

CU’s 4/20 pot smoke-out draws crowd of 10,000
Police issue zero tickets during annual marijuana celebration
By Vanessa Miller / April 20, 2008

BOULDER — “Nine, eight, seven …”

A crowd of about 10,000 people collectively began counting down on the University of Colorado’s Norlin Quadrangle just before 4:20 p.m. Sunday.

Yet the massive puff of pot smoke that hovers over CU’s Boulder campus every April 20 — the date of an annual, internationally recognized celebration of marijuana — began rising over the sea of heads earlier than normal this year.

“Oh forget it,” one student said, aborting the countdown to 4:20 p.m. and lighting his pipe early. He closed his eyes, taking a deep, long drag.

“Sweet.”

Although it’s become an annual and renowned event at CU, this year’s 4/20 celebration was different in some ways than in many previous years: The crowd was so large it migrated from the long-traditional site of Farrand Field to the larger Norlin Quad; festivities kicked off earlier than normal with daytime concerts; and CU police handed out zero citations.

“At this point, none are anticipated,” said CU police Cmdr. Brad Wiesley.

Officers in the past have gone to great lengths to catch people in the illegal act of smoking pot on 4/20.

In 2006, CU police dispatched undercover photographers to snap pictures of smokers. Photos of 150 alleged offenders then were posted on the department’s Web site, and witnesses were offered $50 to positively identify the suspects — who then were ticketed. Another year, smokers on Farrand were doused with sprinklers.

“We can’t do the same thing year after year,” Wiesley said hours before Sunday’s smoking began. “So I doubt we’ll do anything like the pictures. … There’s no way our 12 to 15 officers are going to be able to deal with a crowd of 10,000. We just can’t do strong enforcement when we’re outnumbered 700 or 800 to one.”

About 15 CU officers and a half-dozen deputies with the Boulder County Sheriff’s Office had a presence Sunday among the mass of pot smokers, who bounced giant balls and tossed Frisbees through the haze. CU police did handle four medical-related calls for health issues including dehydration; two people were taken to Boulder Community Hospital.

Closer to downtown, a more “adult” 4/20 gathering also took place at Boulder’s Central Park for non-students looking to avoid the CU foot traffic. But that event had a much smaller turnout and was mostly uneventful.

The crowd size at last year’s CU gathering was rumored to have topped 5,000, Wiesley said, meaning this year’s gathering drew about double.

“I guess it’s not like they had to cut a 4 p.m. class to go do it,” Wiesley said, speculating as to why so many more people showed up. “People are not all that busy at 4:20 p.m. in the afternoon on a Sunday.”

From the steps of Norlin Library, some of the thousands present said the turnout appeared comparable to that of a peace march or protest.

“You guys need to go stand on those stairs,” one girl shouted to her friends, who were seated in a circle on the quadrangle grass. “You don’t even understand.”

Smoke-out participants — thousands of whom wore green or T-shirts promoting pot — climbed trees, played the bongos, snapped pictures and had miniature picnics.

That, of course, after they sparked the weed they had come to smoke.

CU freshman Emily Benson, 19, of Kansas City, said she thinks the decriminalization of marijuana will become a hot topic in the upcoming political season and said she felt part of something bigger than just a smoke-out on Sunday.

“We’re at the starting point of a movement,” she said. “This is a big part of the reason I applied here — for the weed atmosphere.”

Although CU junior Max Lichtenstein, 21, isn’t into marijuana or smoking, he also felt Sunday’s event was a chance to do something “bigger” than himself. He passed out 126 Rice Krispies treats with messages attached asking that they act out against the injustices in Darfur.

“Tomorrow, when you’re sober … call the White House at 202-456-1414,” the note read.

“I just like being generous and doing nice things,” he said. “I’m like a good Samaritan.”

CU senior Tyler Molvig, 24, said that rather than condemning the smoke-out, CU and the city should embrace it as a money-making opportunity.

“I mean, it’s gonna happen regardless,” he said.

Entrepreneur Barrett Betz, 20, conceived of the potential financial benefit 4/20 holds earlier this year, and sold peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, Hostess snack cakes and bottled water for a $1.

“Peanut butter and jelly!” he screamed to passers-by who were parched and eager to satisfy their munchies. “I’m doing very well.”

One woman was hopeful Betz’s treats were charged with some special ingredients.

“Are these magical?” she asked, only to be disappointed. “Why aren’t you selling magical ones? I mean, it’s cool — but c’mon.”

Source. / Daily Camera
Thanks to Roger Baker / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

When Will BushCo Quit Being Such Total Morons?

Juan Cole characterises it perfectly: “Rice has her ‘bring ’em on moment’ in Iraq, talking trash to the Mahdi Army and calling Muqtada al-Sadr a ‘coward.’ Muqtada al-Sadr eluded Saddam Hussein for 4 years after Saddam killed his father and two elder brothers; and in 2004 he twice took on the US military. He may be a lot of things, but he is not a coward. Has Rice ever said anything about Iraq that was true or useful? Even as she was talking up ‘improved security’ in Baghdad, mortar shells were falling about her in the Green Zone.”


Rice praises Maliki after Sadr calls for an open ended war
By Raviya Ismail / April 20, 2008

BAGHDAD — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Sunday called Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al Sadr a coward who’s hiding in Iran and praised Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki for his recent offensive against Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia in the southern port city of Basra.

The March 25 government offensive sparked an uprising by Sadr’s militia, and on Saturday, one day before Rice arrived in Baghdad on an unannounced visit, Sadr threatened an all-out war against the Iraqi government.

The Sadrists have angrily accused Maliki’s U.S.-backed government of trying to undercut their movement prior to provincial elections in October, when they will likely win many of the Shiite southern provinces from their Shiite rivals in Maliki’s government. If Sadr’s militia, conservatively estimated at some 60,000 men, were to rise up, it could mean the end of the drop in violence in Iraq and an inter-sectarian war that could make it more difficult for the U.S. to withdraw any further troops from Iraq.

Thousands of government soldiers already have deserted in Basra and in Baghdad’s Sadr City, refusing to fight the Shiite militia. Some deserted because of threats to their families, others from a moral objection by the mostly Shiite Iraqi security forces to fight their Shiite brothers.

Read all of it here. / McClatchy / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

GI’s Voice Dissent : War-Torn Vets Speak Out

After serving in Iraq, Army veteran Chris Hauff tries to put his war experiences behind him and keep a tight focus on his job, his wife and his daughter. Photo by Eric Kayne, Houston Chronicle.

Haunted by their wartime experiences, some Iraq veterans are protesting.
By Claudia Feldman / April 19, 2008

Watch testimonials from the Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan conference at www.ivaw.org and YouTube. Hart Viges walks the streets of Austin in a tunic and carries a sign that reads, “Jesus Against War.” It’s one of many ways, he says, that he must atone for his actions as an American soldier in Iraq.

Army Sgt. Ronn Cantu says lingering memories of killing a civilian in Iraq led him to start a chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War at his home — Fort Hood.

And in Houston, Chris Hauff, an Iraq War vet who returned from combat two years ago, wrestles with the feeling that his best friend died in a misguided war.

“The idea that American soldiers are there to spread democracy and liberate the people is all smoke and mirrors,” Hauff says.

After five years and more than 4,000 American deaths, hundreds of anti-war Iraq veterans and even some active-duty soldiers are speaking out in protest. Though they make up a relatively small percentage of all the soldiers who have served, certainly they speak from experience. They’ve had their boots on the ground.

Nationally, more than 1,000 have joined Iraq Veterans Against the War, which is calling for an immediate troop pullout. At a recent IVAW conference in suburban Washington, D.C., 60 vets addressed about 400 peers. Collectively, they described American soldiers unraveling under pressure — devolving from fighting for freedom and defending innocents to saving their own lives, protecting their friends and getting revenge.

Viges, tall and reed-slim, spoke as if his entry to heaven were on the line.

“I joined the Army right after September 11th,” he began. He ended with, “I don’t know how many innocents I’ve helped kill. …

“I have blood on my hands.”

His story, common among the speakers, began with good intentions and patriotic zeal. Then he realized he couldn’t tell friend from enemy, and as he dodged mortar fire and roadside bombs, he feared each new day was going to be his last.

In that atmosphere, Viges and other soldiers assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division aimed countless mortar rounds at the town of As Samawah, southeast of Baghdad. They were trying to root out insurgents, but to this day, Viges doesn’t know whom or what they hit.

“This wasn’t army to army,” Viges said. “People live in towns.”

The panelists’ speeches were vetted ahead of time by two groups of veterans who scoured news accounts, researched documents, videos and photographs where available, and interviewed others who were present at the time.

The testimonials were sobering. They included heart-stopping details. But the vets kept talking. Clearly, it was information they felt compelled to share.

Jason Washburn’s testimony is preserved on the Internet. A Marine veteran from Philadelphia, he explained how the rules of engagement kept changing until it seemed there were no rules at all.

“If the town or the city that we were approaching was a known threat, if the unit that went through the area before we did took a high number of casualties, we were allowed to shoot whatever we wanted.

“I remember one woman was walking by, and she was carrying a huge bag, and she looked like she was heading toward us. So we lit her up with the Mark 19, which is an automatic grenade launcher. And when the dust settled, we realized that the bag was only full of groceries. And, I mean, she had been trying to bring us food, and we blew her to pieces for it.”

Jon Michael Turner, a Marine veteran from Vermont, described 3 a.m. house raids in which “problem” Iraqi men were subjected to his “choking hand.”

It was tattooed in Arabic with an all-too-American epithet.

Turner recalled the first time he shot an Iraqi civilian. He offered no context or explanation except, “We were all congratulated after we had our first kills.”

Turner also recalled the blind rage that led him and fellow Marines to start fights, spray bullets indiscriminately and fire on mosques. Eighteen men in his unit were killed by the enemy, he said. After that much bloodshed, the surviving soldiers were damaged mentally, if not physically.

“I just want to say that I’m sorry for the hate and destruction that I’ve inflicted on innocent people,” said Turner, who began his speech by ripping off his service medals. “Until people hear about what is happening in this war, it will continue.”

Lt. Col. Mark Ballesteros, a spokesman for the Department of Defense, read from a one-paragraph response to the conference:

“(We) always regret the loss of any innocent life in Iraq or anywhere else. The U.S. military takes enormous precautions to prevent civilian deaths and injuries. By contrast the enemy in Iraq takes no such precautions and deliberately targets innocent civilians. When isolated allegations of misconduct have been reported, commanders have conducted comprehensive investigations to determine the facts and held individuals accountable when appropriate.”

The vast majority of American soldiers, Ballesteros added, serve honorably in combat.

The veterans who came to Maryland last month called their conference Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan. It was a sequel to a tense 1971 gathering in a Howard Johnson motel in Detroit, where more than 100 Vietnam vets braved frigid winter conditions to speak out against their war.

(Organizers of the original chose the title Winter Soldier Investigation to evoke Thomas Paine, who wrote in 1776, “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”)

Navy Lt. John Kerry, the future U.S. senator and presidential candidate, attended that meeting and, a few months later, lambasted the war before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Proud American soldiers were reduced to acts of senseless destruction, Kerry told the senators, “not isolated incidents but crimes … .”

Many Americans — still recovering from the news of the My Lai massacre — believed Kerry. But lingering resentment from his testimony may have cost him the 2004 presidential election.

During his campaign against President Bush, Vietnam vets still furious with Kerry for somehow staining their service records and their honor struck back. They claimed he wasn’t a war hero, that he hadn’t earned his multiple medals, that in fact, he’d awarded his medals to himself.

The topic is still red-hot, even today. Pennsylvania veteran Bill Perry, who campaigned for Kerry and attended both Winter Soldier meetings, offered his perspective: “Kerry came from a well-educated, wealthy family, and he could have ducked the whole thing. I respect the person who served.”

The comment was aimed at President Bush, who did not fight in Vietnam or any war.

The latest Winter Soldier event coincided with national polls showing two-thirds of Americans disagree with the handling of the war but consider the economy and their own financial logjams more pressing than combat halfway around the world.

Viges, the veteran of the 82nd Airborne, struggled to understand that disconnect.

One of his jobs in Iraq was to stand guard with a .50-caliber machine gun while his buddies searched houses supposedly inhabited by insurgents and enemy combatants. At the conference, searches of that kind were described vividly. Sometimes soldiers kicked in the front doors. Sometimes they upended refrigerators and ripped stoves out of walls. Sometimes they turned drawers upside down and broke furniture.

One day Viges was instructed to search a suspicious house, a hut, really, but he couldn’t find pictures of Saddam Hussein, piles of money, AK-47s or roadside bombs.

“The only thing I found was a little .22 pistol,” Viges said, ” … but we ended up taking the two young men, regardless.”

An older woman, probably the mother of the young men, watched and wailed nearby.

“She was crying in my face, trying to kiss my feet,” Viges said. “And, you know, I can’t speak Arabic, but I can speak human. She was saying, ‘Please, why are you taking my sons? They have done nothing wrong.’ “

The testimonials went on for 3 1/2 days. They were interrupted once, when a middle-age man leaped from his seat and ran toward the stage.

“Liars! Liars!” he shouted. “Kerry lied while good men died, and you guys are betraying good men.”

Others among the counter-protesters tried for a more even tone.

Chris Eaton, a former Houstonian now living in Dallas, spoke for them when he described himself as an average guy doing his best to support American troops.

“I’m not hateful,” he said. “I’m not a warmonger.”

Read all of it here.
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle

Thanks to Alyssa Burgin / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Food Fight! Big Time…

World War II poster.

Food – the ultimate weapon of the ruling elite
By William Bowles / April 17, 2008

Using food as a weapon is as old as the siege but today’s barbarians have upped the anté by several orders of magnitude.

“…There are only two possible ways in which a world of 10 billion people can be averted. Either the current birth rates must come down more quickly. Or the current death rates must go up. There is no other way. There are, of course, many ways in which the death rates can go up. In a thermonuclear age, war can accomplish it very quickly and decisively. Famine and disease are nature’s ancient checks on population growth, and neither one has disappeared from the scene … To put it simply: Excessive population growth is the greatest single obstacle to the economic and social advancement of most of the societies in the developing world.” — Speech to the Club of Rome by Robert McNamara, Oct. 2, 1979

“Overpopulation and rapid demographic growth of Mexico is already today one of the major threats to the national security of the United States. Unless the U.S.-Mexico border is sealed, we will be up to our necks in Mexicans for whom we cannot find jobs.” —Robert McNamara, then World Bank president, March 19, 1982

McNamara’s thinly veiled genocidal utterances took place over thirty years ago, echoing the wealthy and the privileged’s fear of the ’great unwashed’ when ‘over-population’ was the buzzword. So not much has changed has it, we’re hearing the same, tired old messages being rolled out once again by the ruling elites and their spin doctors. McNamara’s cries of fear about being up to his neck in Mexicans is exactly same as the current bogey doing the rounds in Europe, only now they’re Africans.

Thus the current explosions in Haiti, Eygpt, Ivory Coast, Ethiopia, the Philippines, Indonesia and elsewhere over the rocketing price of basic foodstuffs such as cooking oil and rice prompted the BBC to describe them as first and foremost “a potential threat to Western security” (BBC News 24, 13 April, 2008), never mind the threat to human life, but then it reveals exactly where the BBC’s head is at, protecting the status quo.

To add insult to injury, the crétin Gordon Brown has the damn nerve to say,

“Rising food prices threaten to roll back progress we have made in recent years on development. For the first time in decades, the number of people facing hunger is growing.”

Progress? What planet does our glorious leader live on? Standards of living have been falling for everybody (except the rich who, as a consequence, have just gotten even richer by stealing even more from the poor), since the 1970s when the ‘neo-liberal’ agenda was initiated and not only have the poorest been the hardest hit but we’ve seen millions of the formerly ‘middle classes’ dumped unceremoniously back where they ‘belong’, with the poor. Social status doesn’t put food on the table. So much for the capitalist ‘good life’.

These are the facts: real wages in the US have fallen since the 1970s. It’s reckoned that around 40 million Americans now live under the ‘official’ poverty level, but at least they can still eat something, not so the millions of people in the so-called developing world who already immiserated by so-called free trade, have been hit with a double whammy, nay, a quintuple whammy.

Whammy #1: ‘Free Trade’

The poor countries of the world have been ‘persuaded’ that growing food for export so as to earn foreign currency which they then have to use to buy imported food (guess where from?), is better than growing food in their back yard. And to make sure they live up to their end of the ‘bargain’, under WTO ‘rules’ they get punished if they try to control imports.

Countries grew their own food which not only fed them but also created employment, now grow food and things like flowers, for export in order to ‘earn’ the precious dollar which obviously they have to spend on importing the food they once grew. Worse, the subsidized food imports wipe out what remains of indigenous agriculture, it simply can’t compete. What an insane setup! It only makes sense when you realize that the managers who setup this ‘deal’ work for BIg Business, they call the shots. If it were a ‘Mafia’ deal it would be called criminal extortion.

Of course, we in the West with our wealth subsidize the production of food, so the poor of the planet get hit with a whammy within a whammy. Not having the resources to subsidize their own food production, as the cost of importing food rises but not the price they get for exporting food to us, they are truly caught between a rock and a barren place.

And it’s the same IMF and World Bank policies which created the latest crisis to hit the poor of our planet, that are responsible for creating such an unequal relationship in the first place.

Whammy #2: Energy

And of course to grow all these crops for export needs lots of energy and lots of water, and lots of fertilizer, and lots of pesticides, all of which must be bought with precious foreign currency (and until recently, only dollars would be accepted). With oil now selling at over $113 a barrel, the cost of producing anything has shot through the roof. The winners: The Big Oil Cartels. No need to tell you who the losers are.

But the actual cost of producing the oil hasn’t risen much at all, the entire responsibility for these increases has to be placed where it belongs, on the commodities speculators and the Big Five oilcos. In other words, on all those grimy gamblers in investment corps and pension fund managers. It’s the system.

Whammy #3: ‘Bio-fuels’

The latest addition to the armoury of food used as a weapon and perhaps the most obvious example to date, is converting production from food staples to so-called bio-fuels.

For rather than us just using less energy, we buy it from the poor of the planet in the form of ‘bio-fuels’. Brilliant isn’t it. What poor country needs to produce ethanol? It has no possible use except perhaps to make moonshine.

But we knew that this would happen and everybody told our cretinous, criminal leaders what would happen. They’re too busy producing wheat for export to feed all those damn cows, cows that we turn into hamburgers for our consumption, but now, instead of producing wheat for export to make burgers, we’re producing ethanol to put in our automobiles. Either way it’s madness!

And in any case, as a leaked EU report shows, bio-fuels do nothing to halt the production of greenhouse gases (they may even increase it), the entire ‘bio-fuels’ thing is one gigantic scam, largely to do with what is the most profitable crop to grow (see ‘Industry asks for biofuels policy U-turn).

Read all of it here. / Creative-i

Thanks to Susan Majesta / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

BushCo Strikes Again: The Iraq Lie

It is no wonder the American public has no clue what is really happening in Iraq (or Afghanistan). Systematically, the Bush administration has been feeding you a lie about how well the surge is going, how calm it is in Baghdad, and on ad nauseum. If you continue to believe, you become nothing more than a sad dupe in a criminal’s shell game.

Richard Jehn / The Rag Blog

Retired officers have been used to shape terrorism coverage
from inside the TV and radio networks.

Behind Military Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand
By David Barstow / April 20, 2008

In the summer of 2005, the Bush administration confronted a fresh wave of criticism over Guantánamo Bay. The detention center had just been branded “the gulag of our times” by Amnesty International, there were new allegations of abuse from United Nations human rights experts and calls were mounting for its closure.

The administration’s communications experts responded swiftly. Early one Friday morning, they put a group of retired military officers on one of the jets normally used by Vice President Dick Cheney and flew them to Cuba for a carefully orchestrated tour of Guantánamo.

To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.

Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.

The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.

Those business relationships are hardly ever disclosed to the viewers, and sometimes not even to the networks themselves. But collectively, the men on the plane and several dozen other military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants. The companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller companies, all part of a vast assemblage of contractors scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business generated by the administration’s war on terror. It is a furious competition, one in which inside information and easy access to senior officials are highly prized.

Records and interviews show how the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks.

Read all of it here. / NY Times / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Decision to Torture : It Started at the Top

Forget impeachment for the practical reason that the Democrats in Congress are unwilling to pursue it for tactical reasons. Therefore, it will not happen. Besides, mere impeachment is completely inadequate. In a just world, Bush and his cronies would deserve nothing less than very long prison terms. They are obviously guilty of both torture and waging aggressive war, the crime for which Nazi leaders were hung at Nuremberg.

If the advocates of impeachment started clamoring for the indictment of the whole Bush regime leadership at the International Criminal Court on war crimes charges, there would be no November deadline and much of the world would rally to that effort. Transcend the national perspective. Although it is doubtful that such charges, easily proven, would result in their actual incarceration, the international condemnation and their being unable to travel outside the US would be a historic precedent.

The following is the lead editorial in today’s New York Times.

David Hamilton / The Rag Blog

The Torture Sessions
April 20, 2008

Ever since Americans learned that American soldiers and intelligence agents were torturing prisoners, there has been a disturbing question: How high up did the decision go to ignore United States law, international treaties, the Geneva Conventions and basic morality?

The answer, we have learned recently, is that — with President Bush’s clear knowledge and support — some of the very highest officials in the land not only approved the abuse of prisoners, but participated in the detailed planning of harsh interrogations and helped to create a legal structure to shield from justice those who followed the orders.

We have long known that the Justice Department tortured the law to give its Orwellian blessing to torturing people, and that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved a list of ways to abuse prisoners. But recent accounts by ABC News and The Associated Press said that all of the president’s top national security advisers at the time participated in creating the interrogation policy: Vice President Dick Cheney; Mr. Rumsfeld; Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser; Colin Powell, the secretary of state; John Ashcroft, the attorney general; and George Tenet, the director of central intelligence.

These officials did not have the time or the foresight to plan for the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq or the tenacity to complete the hunt for Osama bin Laden. But they managed to squeeze in dozens of meetings in the White House Situation Room to organize and give legal cover to prisoner abuse, including brutal methods that civilized nations consider to be torture.

Mr. Bush told ABC News this month that he knew of these meetings and approved of the result.

Those who have followed the story of the administration’s policies on prisoners may not be shocked. We have read the memos from the Justice Department redefining torture, claiming that Mr. Bush did not have to follow the law, and offering a blueprint for avoiding criminal liability for abusing prisoners.

The amount of time and energy devoted to this furtive exercise at the very highest levels of the government reminded us how little Americans know, in fact, about the ways Mr. Bush and his team undermined, subverted and broke the law in the name of saving the American way of life.

We have questions to ask, in particular, about the involvement of Ms. Rice, who has managed to escape blame for the catastrophic decisions made while she was Mr. Bush’s national security adviser, and Mr. Powell, a career Army officer who should know that torture has little value as an interrogation method and puts captured Americans at much greater risk. Did they raise objections or warn of the disastrous effect on America’s standing in the world? Did anyone?

Mr. Bush has sidestepped or quashed every attempt to uncover the breadth and depth of his sordid actions. Congress is likely to endorse a cover-up of the extent of the illegal wiretapping he authorized after 9/11, and we are still waiting, with diminishing hopes, for a long-promised report on what the Bush team really knew before the Iraq invasion about those absent weapons of mass destruction — as opposed to what it proclaimed.

At this point it seems that getting answers will have to wait, at least, for a new Congress and a new president. Ideally, there would be both truth and accountability. At the very minimum the public needs the full truth.

Some will call this a backward-looking distraction, but only by fully understanding what Mr. Bush has done over eight years to distort the rule of law and violate civil liberties and human rights can Americans ever hope to repair the damage and ensure it does not happen again.

Source. / New York Times / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The On-Going Battle Over What Seattle Will Be

There was an article in the Seattle Times last October about the transformation of the area around south Lake Union. I was visiting for a little big city culture, and I could see from the hotel window all the cranes and the new condos going up. The Times article talked gushingly about how trendy it is. Yes, as it drives out those who can no longer afford to live much of anywhere in Seattle. Even the tiniest one-bedroom apartments are well over $1,000 a month, and small two-bedroom condos start at $350,000. Even Capitol Hill, a long-time lower-income area, is changing. Nouveau riche moving in everywhere, in Seattle and all its satellite cities such as Bellevue, Kirkland, Redmond to the east, Des Moines and Federal Way to the south, and so on.

And gentrification is an issue in every majour city in the US. Segregation through economic sanction, in effect. Capitalism is not the wonderful, fair, equitable system that those in power would have us believe. It is a racist, ugly methodology that seems certain to fail ultimately for any number of rational reasons, but it is enough to say that it cannot be sustained in a truly human world.

Richard Jehn / The Rag Blog

Taken from the Holiday Inn on Dexter looking east, April 20, 2008. Denny Lutheran Church and Denny Park on the right, construction cranes in the background. I counted 9 cranes from this view.

Whose Streets?
by Jacquelyn Hermer and Andrew Hedden

“From the places with plenty / to the space with no pity / forces changing our city / If I don’t change what’s been given / what can I say to my children / who going to be claiming this city?” –Macklemore & Abyssinian Creole, “Claimin’ the City”

Seattle today is a tale of two cities. For developers, government officials, and many new residents, Seattle is about its places of plenty: shopping opportunities, property values, beautiful views, and potential profits. Look beyond the skyscrapers and a different image of Seattle emerges: that of a blue-collar port city with an immigrant soul–a place of strength, survival, and struggle against racism and poverty. When these two Seattles collide, it’s called gentrification: the displacement of poor and working class people by upper-income residents. It’s a conflict over values, over purpose: who is claiming the city?

Before gentrification, there was Jim Crow segregation. The Central District (CD) was one of the few areas black residents could live. As they moved there, the predominately Jewish community fled. Now, with gentrification, white residents are returning. This dates back to the 1970s, when deindustrialization forced US cities to reorder their economies. Since then, Seattle officials have scrambled to build a profitable economy around those who don’t even live here: suburbanites, tourists, and international investors. In the 1990s alone, over $700 million in public money went to developers to build upper-class amenities like convention centers, museums, and retail stores, a decade that also saw the city lose large amounts of its working-class residents. [Ed. note: plus over $1 billion in new sports stadiums, “needed” primarily due to their lucrative luxury suites.]

The trend continues today, as rising housing prices push people of color further South–even out of Seattle altogether–and new sweeps on homeless encampments physically remove people from public property. Yet people are resisting across the city. In February, when the new South Lake Union Trolley was tagged with graffiti, it was not hard to see it as a statement against the city’s priorities and the millions of dollars spent on a trolley that goes nowhere except Paul Allen-owned real estate. But the resistance goes well beyond small isolated acts.

In Little Saigon, Seattle’s Vietnamese district, lies the Goodwill site on Dearborn St. and Rainer Ave. This prime piece of real estate is the location of a proposed new development, including retail space three-quarters the size of Northgate Mall and 550 housing units. Fearing the project threatens the vitality of their neighborhood, community members formed the Dearborn Street Coalition for Livable Neighborhoods. After several years of protest and pressure, they are now in negotiations with the developer to reach a Community Benefits Agreement (CBA) which would ensure good jobs, low-income housing, traffic mitigation, and support for Little Saigon are part of the development.

Elana Dix, an organizer with Puget Sound SAGE, one of the coalition’s 40 organizations, explains, “Reshaping how redevelopment and growth happens in the city is a good way to build a movement for workers.” According to Dix, the CBA is a potential model for other neighborhoods in the city threatened by harmful development. She also admits, though, the strategy is limited to instances where a large development is planned. If the Dearborn Coalition succeeds, it will represent a massive victory. But fighting gentrification in other areas proves harder if the forces changing the area cannot be attributed to a single site or developer.

“All I want to do is live quietly, take care of my property , pay my taxes, and listen to the Commodores at Red Apple when I buy groceries.” –anonymous new CD resident, blog post

Also looking east from the Holiday Inn Dexter, but showing
the real business of Seattle gentrification a la condominium.

Read all of it here. / Eat the State! / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment