The Forgotten Victims of the Iraq War

The untold story of Iraq’s refugee crisis
Written by: Alex Klaushofer, 19 Mar 2008 16:28:00 GMT

Coming back on the train from a news-free holiday earlier this week, idly flicking through the papers abandoned by commuters, I found myself plunged into the tabloid world of Iraq Five Years On.

One paper devoted half a dozen pages to the anniversary. There was extensive reporting of the ongoing discussion about when ‘we’ will withdraw our forces, an ‘I told-you-so’ piece by a vexed defence correspondent about politicians’ failure to listen when it mattered, and a heart-rending account by a childhood friend of a promising young Englishman killed in the battle against Saddam.

Later, I read a report in the Guardian that the army have picked this week to launch a recruitment drive capitalising on the popularity of soldiers in the eyes of the British public.

This kind of coverage in the mainstream media, running alongside a set of preoccupations which include the effectiveness of the “surge” of U.S. troops, the progress of the Iraqi parliament and the fall of sectarian violence, seems to give voice to an underlying desire that western involvement in Iraq – embarrassing as it has been – is in the process of ending.

Yet, as those in the aid world are all too aware, a humanitarian story of gigantesque proportions has been building for some time, with 2 million Iraqi refugees living in empty buildings and makeshift camps in foreign lands, and a further 2.5 million internally displaced within Iraq.

The figures form the basis of an alternative narrative which, in a rare piece about the plight of the refugees in the Sunday Times, Marie Colvin calls “the untold story of Iraq”. With only around 36,000 refugees having returned since the decline in violence, the story of Iraq’s displaced is likely to go on and on, creating a long term crisis which impedes the rebuilding of the country so longingly evoked by western media and politicians.

Read all of it here.

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

BushCo – Stealing Legislative Responsibilities

No Evidence For Administration’s Claim On U.S.-Iraqi Declaration Of Principles
by Jonathan Schwarz, for Democrats.com

The Politico reported last week that a senior administration official stated that conflict with Congress over the U.S.-Iraqi Declaration of Principles for an ongoing bilateral agreement between the two countries “stems largely from a sloppy Arabic-to-English translation.” However, say Arabic experts, the available Arabic versions of the Declaration of Principles are almost exactly the same as the official English version, and are likely direct translations from it.

The White House did not respond to repeated requests for comment, nor to a request for the Arabic version which had caused the claimed translation difficulties. (Citing administration policy, personnel at the White House Media Affairs office would provide only their first names.) According to Ryan Grim, author of the Politico article, the senior administration official did not provide the Arabic document during the press briefing.

The U.S.-Iraqi Declaration of Principles was signed last November by President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki. The official English version laid out the basis for a “long-term relationship of cooperation and friendship” between the United States and Iraq to be finalized by July 31st of this year. This agreement would eventually replace the current U.N. mandate under which coalition troops now operate in Iraq.

The Declaration of Principles has been the subject of hearings in Congress because it appears to make the U.S. responsible for “[p]roviding security assurances and commitments” to Iraq against “foreign aggression” and for “[s]upporting the Republic of Iraq in its efforts to combat all terrorist groups.” Such security commitments, as the U.S. has made to members of NATO, have in the past always taken the form of treaties, which require Senate approval.

For its part, the Bush administration has suggested the accord will take the form of a standard status-of-forces agreement (SOFA). SOFAs can be concluded between the executive branches of the relevant countries, without the involvement of the U.S. Congress. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reiterated this point in recent congressional testimony, stating that, as with other SOFAs, the agreement with Iraq would “not come to Congress.”

However, previous SOFAs have mainly concerned basic matters such as the legal authority under which U.S. troops fall while in other countries. According to the Congressional Research Service, their review of over 70 SOFAs found that “none contain the authority to fight.”

The administration has recently backed away from the security language in the Declaration of Principles. And now, as the Politico characterized it, the administration says congressional concerns “are much ado about nothing”:

[A] senior administration official, who briefed two Politico reporters on the condition that he not be identified by name, said that the “security assurances” phrase “was something we struggled with. It really was.” He said the original Arabic phrase was “translated in kind of an interesting way,” and that a better translation might have been, “We’ll consult”… The senior administration official said that different words will, in fact, be used in the final version of the agreement between the United States and Iraq.

Read all of it, including links to the Arabic, here.

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Brother, can you spare a dime?

Thanks to Harry Edwards / the Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

New Scandal : State Department Violation of Obama Privacy

BREAKING NEWS
Obama’s passport files breached.

[We aren’t normally in the business of breaking news, but this is pretty interesting stuff and could have very significant ramifications. So pay attention. The Rag Blog.]

By Huffington Post / March 20

Two State Department officials have been fired, and another suspended, over repeated unauthorized breaches of Sen. Barack Obama’s passport files, multiple sources are reporting. The State Department has launched an investigation.

NBC reports:

Two contract employees of the State Department were fired and a third person was disciplined for accessing passport records of Sen. Barack Obama “without a need to do so,” State Department officials confirmed to NBC News.

The three people who had access to Obama’s passport records were contract employees of the department’s Bureau of Consular Affairs, NBC News has learned. The unauthorized activity concerning Obama’s passport information occurred in January.

“A monitoring system was tripped when an employee accessed the records of a high-profile individual,” a department official told NBC News. “When the monitoring system is tripped, we immediately seek an explanation for the records access. If the explanation is not satisfactory, the supervisor is notified.”

Explaining why the contractors had access to the files, the official said: “The State Department uses cleared contractors to design, build and maintain our systems and cleared contract employees provide support to government employees and several steps of passport processing including data entry, file searches, customer service and quality control.

“Each time an employee logs on, he or she acknowledges the records are protected by the privacy act and that they are only available on a need-to-know basis,” the official added.

NBC’s Howard Fineman reports that “a State Department official called Obama’s Senate office to inform him in almost a routine, bureaucratic way that a breach had occurred.”>

More from the Washington Times:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was notified of the security breach yesterday, and responded by saying security measures used to monitor records of high-profile Americans worked properly in detecting the breaches.

Mr. McCormack said the officials did not appear to be seeking information on behalf of any political candidate or party.

“As far as we can tell, in each of the three cases, it was imprudent curiosity,” Mr. McCormack told The Washington Times. …

One administration official said the FBI is conducting a preliminary inquiry into the officials involved in the unauthorized access incidents related to Mr. Obama, Illinois Democrat. An FBI spokesman could not be reached for comment. …

Asked whether a political candidate or party is behind the incidents, Mr. McCormack said: “None at this point in time that we have determined.”

Mr. McCormack declined to provide the names of the employees or the contract, but he said they were hired by the contractor involved in producing, processing and approving passports. The dates of the breaches were January 9, February 21, and March 14 — last Friday. Statement from Obama campaign:

“This is an outrageous breach of security and privacy, even from an Administration that has shown little regard for either over the last eight years. Our government’s duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes. This is a serious matter that merits a complete investigation, and we demand to know who looked at Senator Obama’s passport file, for what purpose, and why it took so long for them to reveal this security breach.

FLASHBACK: A senior State Department official under George H. W. Bush breached Bill Clinton’s passport information and was forced to resign in 1992. Read about it here.

Source.

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

True US Power Lies in Its Ability to Inspire

“Today, I weep for my country”

The speech given by Sen. Robert Byrd on the Senate floor on March 19, 2003, just prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq — and John McCain’s response.

Editor’s note: Exactly five years ago, on the afternoon of March 19, 2003, mere hours before bombs began falling in Baghdad, Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., gave a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate condemning the use of military force in Iraq. As soon as Byrd was finished speaking, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., delivered a response defending the Bush administration’s decision to go to war. Both speeches are reproduced in full below.

March 19, 2003 — – Byrd: I believe in this beautiful country. I have studied its roots and gloried in the wisdom of its magnificent Constitution. I have marveled at the wisdom of its founders and framers. Generation after generation of Americans has understood the lofty ideals that underlie our great Republic. I have been inspired by the story of their sacrifice and their strength.

But, today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned.

Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves. We proclaim a new doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. We assert that right without the sanction of any international body. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place.

We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance. We treat U.N. Security Council members like ingrates who offend our princely dignity by lifting their heads from the carpet. Valuable alliances are split. After war has ended, the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America’s image around the globe.

The case this Administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence. We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice.

There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11. The twin towers fell because a world-wide terrorist group, al-Qaida, with cells in over 60 nations, struck at our wealth and our influence by turning our own planes into missiles, one of which would likely have slammed into the dome of this beautiful Capitol except for the brave sacrifice of the passengers on board.

The brutality seen on September 11th and in other terrorist attacks we have witnessed around the globe are the violent and desperate efforts by extremists to stop the daily encroachment of western values upon their cultures. That is what we fight. It is a force not confined to borders. It is a shadowy entity with many faces, many names, and many addresses.

But, this Administration has directed all of the anger, fear, and grief which emerged from the ashes of the twin towers and the twisted metal of the Pentagon towards a tangible villain, one we can see and hate and attack. And villain he is. But, he is the wrong villain. And this is the wrong war. If we attack Saddam Hussein, we will probably drive him from power. But, the zeal of our friends to assist our global war on terrorism may have already taken flight.

The general unease surrounding this war is not just due to “orange alert.” There is a pervasive sense of rush and risk and too many questions unanswered. How long will we be in Iraq? What will be the cost? What is the ultimate mission? How great is the danger at home? A pall has fallen over the Senate Chamber. We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq.

What is happening to this country? When did we become a nation which ignores and berates our friends? When did we decide to risk undermining international order by adopting a radical and doctrinaire approach to using our awesome military might? How can we abandon diplomatic efforts when the turmoil in the world cries out for diplomacy?

Why can this President not seem to see that America’s true power lies not in its will to intimidate, but in its ability to inspire?

War appears inevitable. But, I continue to hope that the cloud will lift. Perhaps Saddam will yet turn tail and run. Perhaps reason will somehow still prevail. I along with millions of Americans will pray for the safety of our troops, for the innocent civilians in Iraq, and for the security of our homeland. May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us.

Read McCain’s Senate response here.

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Who Will Control the Seeds We Plant?

Seeds of Destuction
by Stephen Hume, Vancouver Sun

Eating breakfast toast: a simple ritual to start the day. The bread probably came from a bakery or grocery store, but beyond that who knows where the wheat came from – never mind the seeds that grew the wheat. Do we need to know? A new documentary, “Hijacked Future” says yes, because those seeds that became the toast you ate this morning are being hijacked – right into a looming world food security catastrophe.

Catastrophe? Wait a minute. We see plenty of food on our supermarket shelves. Is our food security really at risk – or is this just scare mongering from the fringe?

While our industrial system of agriculture is providing abundance and variety today, this Global Currents documentary warns us that it’s an unsustainable system that will not be able to nourish and provide for us and our grandchildren in the future. It’s a system that literally runs on oil, from fertilizers and pesticides, to the trucks and planes that transport food. And the source of our food – seeds – is being hijacked by a handful of corporations from the farmers who have for millennia, grown and saved them.

But why should we care about a farmer’s seeds? Aren’t companies developing new seeds all the time? They are — and that’s part of the problem — because who controls the seeds, controls our food. More and more, that control is in the hands of a few multinational corporations whose bottom line is profit for their shareholders not necessarily an abundance of healthy food. Should anybody, the film asks, own seeds?

“Hijacked Future” takes us from the grain fields of Saskatchewan, to farmers and seed banks in Ethiopia, to north of the Arctic Circle in Norway, where the “Doomsday” vault is being built to stockpile seeds in the event of a global crisis.

The documentary looks at the increasingly fragile base of our North American industrial food system in order to bring all of us consumers of food to a better understanding of just what’s at stake with our daily bread. It asks us to question the wisdom of a system precariously based on oil and corporate seeds while we’re at the same time witnessing the impact of climate change.

As the film says, “It all starts with the seed, and the stakes are high… because who controls the seed, controls the food… Who will control the seeds we plant, and the food we put on our tables?” Will our future be…Hijacked?

Read all of it here.

From Janet Gilles / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Diplomats Still Say No to U.S. Policy

Why We Said No: Three Diplomats’ Duty
by Ann Wright, John Brown, and Brady Kiesling / Huffington Post / March 20, 2008

Five years ago this month, the three of us left the US Foreign Service in opposition to the war on Iraq. We were not pacifists. We were professional, non-partisan diplomats bound by our oath of loyalty to the US Constitution. Our job was to build effective relationships with key figures outside the United States. We used our language skills, respectful curiosity, and understanding of local politics to promote US national interests as our president and secretary of state directed.

We did not know each other. Ann, who was also a reserve colonel in the US Army, had helped reopen US Embassy Kabul after the fall of the Taliban. Brady was a 20-year political officer who had learned something about tribal politics and the limits of US power. John was a practitioner of public diplomacy with over twenty years’ experience, mostly in Eastern Europe. We shared one key professional judgment, that this war we were ordered to promote would be a disastrous mistake.

Love of country and professional self-respect compelled each of us to speak out, in the only honorable way open to us, by resigning. In our letters to Secretary of State Colin Powell, we opposed invading a country that posed no genuine threat to the United States. We underscored that our invasion would not be understood by our allies, that our occupation would be resisted, and that the consequences of the war would be dire for both Americans and Iraqis.

The war happened, with tragic but predictable consequences. Mistakes by ambitious, ignorant political appointees worsened the fiasco. For domestic political reasons, the Bush Administration could not adapt its policies to the reality that its “war on terrorism” was actually an intricate maze of local conflicts into which it had blundered without a guide.

The invasion of Iraq had a terrible impact on America’s relationship with the world. The tricks of totalitarian manipulation of public opinion the White House used to “sell” the war at home — simplification of the issues, repetition of empty phrases, demonization of foreigners, and falsification of history — simply did not work abroad.

By counting on such methods, Bush appointees tainted the US informational, educational, and cultural programs that once were the beating heart of America’s public diplomacy efforts. The desperate PR campaign by Mr. Bush’s Texas confidante, former Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes, failed utterly to repair the damage.

Five years later, we are convinced that the Bush administration is still on the wrong path for regional stability. Key officials lack the empathy and local knowledge needed to wield the tools of US diplomacy effectively in the Middle East. America’s outsized military presence is the principle around which local fanaticism organizes itself, to the detriment of the ordinary Arabs and Kurds America aspired to help. A rapid withdrawal from Iraq, coordinated with Iraqi factions and neighboring states, is the least destructive option remaining.

Our gesture earned us a brief moment in the media and the cautious respect of our colleagues. Five years later, we do not regret our decision to leave the profession we loved. Faced with a flawed policy we had no power to change, the three of us embraced the hope Brady expressed in his resignation letter, that “our democratic process is ultimately self-correcting; [we] hope in a small way to contribute from outside to shaping policies that better serve the security and prosperity of the American people and the world we share.”

Between now and next January 20 the stakes for our former profession are high. The stakes for the American people and the planet are even higher.

Ann Wright, an anti-war activist based in Hawaii, is touring with her new book Dissent: Voices of Conscience (Koa Books 2008)John Brady Kiesling is a writer in Greece, the author of Diplomacy Lessons: Realism for an Unloved Superpower (Potomac Books 2006).John Brown until recently compiled The Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review. He teaches on public diplomacy at Georgetown University.

Source.

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

Tom Hayden’s Return to Vietnam

[This is a fine article by Tom Hayden, SDS co-founder, primary author of The Port Huron Statement and now California state senator, on his return trip to Vietnam. I recommend it highly. Thorne Dreyer, The Rag Blog.]

The Old Revolutionaries of Vietnam
By Tom Hayden / The Nation

Tom Hayden was cleared of conspiracy charges after leading anti-Vietnam War protests at the 1968 Democratic convention, and he directed the Indochina Peace Campaign from 1972 to ’75. He taught classes on Indochina in 1971 and on the Iraq War in 2007, both at Pitzer College.

During Christmas 2007 I traveled back in time with my family, to Vietnam, for the first time in thirty-two years. I was feeling a deep need to see the place once more, a regret at having withdrawn from a country I had visited four times during the war. I wanted to understand the long-term lessons and, on a personal basis, track down the Vietnamese guides and translators, men and women, who assumed an ideological faith in the American “people” they escorted through ruins inflicted by the American “enemy.” They would become important diplomatic bridges between our two countries in the postwar period. Most were survivors of the French and American wars and would be in their 80s by now.

Were they still alive? How had they suffered? After the exuberance at their victory and reunification after 1975, how had they adjusted to a Vietnam without war? Vietnam’s consul in San Francisco, Chau Do, said many of these old revolutionaries were alive, excited by my return and inquiring whom I wanted to see. I told him that my closest Vietnamese friend was a poet, musician and translator, Do Xuan Oanh, who was perhaps 40 in those days. “I can help you find him,” Chau replied with a smile. “He’s my dad.” My eyes filled with tears. It would be quite a trip.

Before I would reunite with these old friends and contacts, however, I plunged into the shocking contrasts between past and present in Hanoi. Between Christmas 1965 and November 1972, when I made four unauthorized visits to Hanoi, the wartime city was unlit and ghostly. Most people had been evacuated to the countryside. Air-raid sirens and public-safety broadcasts were the only urban sounds.

There was no economic development beyond the construction of pontoon bridges to replace bridges bombed by the Americans. The only motorized vehicles were military ones. Most residents rode bicycles or carried their meager wares on bamboo poles across their shoulders. Water buffalo pulled the heavier loads. To outward appearances, Gen. Curtis LeMay’s plan to bomb Vietnam back to the Stone Age was on track.

Finally came the Christmas bombing of Hanoi and Haiphong by 200 B-52s, from December 18 to December 28, 1972. The United States says that fifteen of the giant Stratofortresses were shot down and ninety-three American airmen went missing before the bombing ended (Hanoi says thirty-four B-52s and eighty-one fighter planes were put out of action). Estimates of civilian deaths range from 1,600 to 2,368 in those eleven days, and Hanoi listed 5,480 buildings destroyed. In the American narrative, the Christmas bombing forced Hanoi to sign the Paris peace agreement one month later.

But under terms agreed to by the Nixon Administration, North Vietnamese units remained positioned in the south, and in 1975 they stormed Saigon. What is beyond dispute is that crowded Hanoi neighborhoods and the Bach Mai hospital were reduced to rubble during the Christmas B-52 raids. The last time I had seen Hanoi was in 1974, when Jane Fonda and I walked through the hospital debris and interviewed still-furious victims of the Christmas 1972 bombs.

Read all of it here.

California Senator Tom Hayden, the Nation Institute’s Carey McWilliams Fellow, has played an active role in American politics and history for over three decades, beginning with the student, civil rights and antiwar movements of
the 1960s.

“Tom Hayden changed America,” wrote Nicholas Lemann, national correspondent for The Atlantic, of Hayden’s role in the 1960s. Richard Goodwin, former speechwriter for John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, said that Hayden, “without even knowing it, inspired the Great Society.”

Hayden was elected to the California State Legislature in 1982, where he served for ten years in the Assembly before being elected to the State Senate in 1992, where he served eight years. Hayden has been described as “the conscience of the Senate” by columnist Dan Walters of the Sacramento Bee, and as “the liberal rebel” by George Skelton of the Los Angeles Times. “He has carved out a key watchdog role,” according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

He is author of over 175 measures ranging from reform of money in politics, worker safety, school decentralization, small business tax relief, domestic violence, lessening gang violence in the inner city, stopping student fee increases at universities, protecting endangered species like salmon, overhauling three strikes, you’re out laws, and a measure signed into law that will assist Holocaust survivors in receiving recognition and compensation for having been exploited as slave labor during the Nazi era.

Hayden is the author of eleven books, including his autobiography, Reunion; a book on the spirituality and the environment, Lost Gospel of the Earth; a collection of essays on the aftermath of the Irish potato famine, Irish Hunger (Roberts Rhinehart) and a book on his Irish background, Irish on the Inside: In Search of the Soul of Irish America (Verso); Radical Nomad, a biography of C. Wright Mills (Paradigm Publishers); and, most recently, Ending the War in Iraq (2007). A collection of his work, Writings for a Democratic Society: The Tom Hayden Reader was published this year .

— The Nation

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

Richard Dawkins and "The God Delusion"

Photo by Bret Gerbe / Austin American-Statesman.

Atheist author draws impassioned crowd in Austin.
By Eileen E. Flynn / Austin American-Statesman / March 20, 2008

Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist with star power, drew some 1,200 people to hear his take on the origins of the universe and the problems of religion.

The Oxford University professor and author of the best-selling “The God Delusion,” spoke Wednesday night at Hogg Auditorium at the University of Texas, where he ravaged creationism and design theories that claim a supernatural being created the universe and held up Darwin’s theory of natural selection as a logical alternative.

“I don’t want to come across as an enemy of religion so much as a friend of truth,” the British Dawkins said, though he admittedly enjoys satirizing and ridiculing the world’s faiths.

During his talk he showed a cartoon depiction of God at a computer engineering the parting of the Red Sea and pointed to images of Zeus, Baal and other ancient deities as delusions.

But his main concern, he said, is debunking the notion advanced by creationists that either God designed the universe or humanity was created by chance.

“Darwinian evolution is not a theory of random chance,” he said. “Very, very far from it.”

He described natural selection as a “powerful and elegant” process that offers hope that science will eventually be able to explain everything.

“The God Delusion” has already sold more than 1.5 million copies. That doesn’t count the foreign translations or the sales of the newly released paperback version.

Over the past few months, Dawkins’ speaking tour has electrified college campuses from Wisconsin to California, according to officials with theCenter for Inquiry who have helped organize the talks.

At the University of California at Berkeley, the 700-seat auditorium filled quickly and hundreds of people had to be turned away, said Debbie Goddard, a field organizer for the Amherst, N.Y.-based center.

Some 1,700 packed the hall at Stanford University, she said, with another 1,300 at the University of Wisconsin.

Organizers had to turn away more than 100 people at the door at UT. Among those who got in were three Oklahoma University students who drove Wednesday from Norman, Okla.

The success of Dawkins and fellow best-selling atheist authors such as Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris has also prompted a slew of books written to defend faith and debunk atheism.

Dawkins’ book has inspired “The God Solution: A Reply to the God Delusion” by James A. Beverley and “The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine” by Alister McGrath and Joanna Collicutt McGrath.

Dawkins doesn’t find the responses worthwhile. In fact, he refers to the books — he’s counted 22 so far — as “fleas,” drawing from a line from a William Butler Yeats poem: “But was there ever dog that praised his fleas?”

But he said he is encouraged to see the religious establishment on the defensive and taking atheists seriously.

One of Dawkins’ “fleas” is John Haught’s book “God and the New Atheism.” Haught, a senior fellow in science and religion at Georgetown University’s Woodstock Theological Center, said he isn’t daunted by the new atheists, whose arguments he finds thin.

Their theories, he said, are based on scientism: “the view that scientific method is the only really reliable way to gather truth and come in touch with reality.”

Ironically, Haught said, that world view — that science can explain everything — requires a leap of faith as well.

He also accuses the new atheists of presenting — and attacking — a literal interpretation of religious texts without acknowledging that many believers have a more nuanced and complex understanding of religion.

“Not only do they not understand religion,” he said, “they themselves have the most literalist and primitive understanding of religion.”

Haught said religion has undergone attacks from skeptics before: philosophers such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean-Paul Sartre challenged Christian belief in the 19th and 20th centuries, prompting a post-atheist theology.

The new atheists, he said, are not theologically challenging.

Dawkins shrugs off the criticism. “The point is that if there is no God, then the whole of theology is irrelevant,” he said. “It would be like saying you can’t say you don’t believe in fairies unless you’ve consulted learned tomes of fairyology.”

Source.

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

Iraq Protesters Gather at Texas State Capitol

Vigil at Texas State Capitol. Photo by Jamie Josephs / The Rag Blog.


There was a liberal turnout at last night’s (March 19, 2008) Peace Vigil which started at 7 p.m. at the front gates of the Texas State Capitol in Austin, Texas. The vigil marked the fifth anniversary of Bush’s war in Iraq.

By the time the speakers began, the crowd had grown to an estimated 200-300 peace-loving folks. Many vigil participants held up anti-war signs and raised their hands high shooting the peace sign at the moderate drive-by traffic on Congress and 11th streets downtown. Most cars honked and shot peace signs back.

Several types of media covered the event. Reporters present were from radio, The Daily Texan U.T, and several photographers were shooting the event — and television film crews covered the vigil. MDS/Austin was strongly represented. Thanks to David Hamilton a lot of the crowd were holding up MDS ‘For Peace’ yard signs.

At dusk candles were passed out and lighted. Many people stayed until the full moon rose around 8:30 p.m. Thanks to all who participated. Click link below to view photos. View more photos here.

Peace,
Jamie Josephs / The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Vigils Mark Fifth Anniversary of Iraq War

Protesters gather in San Antonio, Austin to urge end to Iraq war.
By Michele Roberts / AP / March 20, 2008

SAN ANTONIO — Protesters calling for an end to the war in Iraq gathered Wednesday night near the Alamo, the state’s most famous battle site.

About 30 people stood in Alamo Plaza — surrounded by the buzz of tourists — calling for an end to a war they said was costing Americans too much money and too many lives and preventing the nation from addressing needs at home.

The gathering in San Antonio, which likes to call itself “Military City USA,” was one of dozens held around the country on the fifth anniversary of the war.

“How can we have victory when there’s nothing to win?” said James Berbiglia, a 73-year-old retired Army chaplain who served in Vietnam. “It can’t be made right. It can only be made worse.”

He was among several former servicemembers who spoke at the event, where people held signs and occasionally chanted “Get out now.”

“I was in the military. I know what war is,” said Aaron Flores, who served three tours in Vietnam.

He said he believes more current military personnel would speak out against the war in Iraq if they were free to do so.

Berbiglin said Iraqis simply want American soldiers to leave their country, and if they do, Iraq will get back to normal. If Americans don’t leave, they’ll continue to make more enemies, he said.
“We have to get home before something more terrible happens,” Berbiglia said.

Nancy Russell, a retired Army lieutenant colonel, said the war in Iraq has created more enemies than friends for America.

There were no weapons of mass destruction, the early explanation for the invasion, and Russell believes the conflict was personal for President Bush, whose father didn’t depose Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf War.

Bush “doesn’t want to admit he screwed up. He made a major blunder and he can’t admit he was wrong,” she said.

In Austin, protesters lit candles and held signs as they gathered outside the state Capitol grounds, where one person stood next to two fake coffins representing the deaths of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians. Motorists honked their horns as they passed and two people kneeled in silence, the Austin American-Statesman reported.

“We’re here to give the leaders a message,” Pash Amini said. “We’re here to tell them we have not forgotten.”

Morgan Knicely believes the nation’s leaders are listening.

“I think we have been having an effect,” Knicely said. “It can be discouraging, but … over time, things move.”

At a gathering in Madeline Park in El Paso, a crowd of about 80 people listened as the names of slain soldiers from El Paso and Fort Bliss were read. Protesters read letters from Iraq war veterans and called for a quick end to the war.

“I was completely opposed to it from the beginning, and I didn’t believe in a pre-emptive move from the beginning, even if the evidence thrown out by the administration was accurate, which it wasn’t,” Tammy Cagann, a math teacher at Riverside High School and an organizer of the vigil, said in a story of Thursday’s El Paso Times.

Source.

Protesters fill Civic Center Plaza in San Francisco Wednesday before a march into the Mission District on the five-year anniversary of the Iraq war. Photo by Brant Ward / S.F. Chronicle.

A day of protest across Bay Area
By SFGate / March 20, 2008

San Francisco — War protesters converged in San Francisco Wednesday for the five-year anniversary of the war in Iraq and, from early morning to late evening, rallied, marched, shouted, sang, danced and committed acts of civil disobedience to demonstrate their opposition.

Roughly 150 people were arrested, many of them in front of the office of U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Many of those arrested were participating in an afternoon “die-in” – collapsing en masse to evoke deaths in Iraq – though a few actively scuffled with police.

Demonstrators gathered in the evening at Civic Center Plaza to hear speeches and take an evening march to the Mission District. They carried signs with slogans such as “impeach” and chanted mantras like “money for health care, not warfare.”

In the morning, a crowd of about 500 people snaked its way through the Financial District, periodically prompting police to shut down intersections and city blocks and Muni officials to reroute buses.

Yet, despite the often creative costumes and messages, the protests were a far cry from the large and dramatic protests that marked the buildup to the war as well as the conflict’s early months. Tens of thousands came to San Francisco in those days, making it an epicenter of the anti-war movement. Roughly 2,150 protesters were arrested during the first three days of the war, Mar. 19-21, 2003. The city’s hotels were crammed, and mobs tried to shut down the Bay Bridge.

Wednesday’s biggest demonstration in the city occurred in the evening. Answer coalition organizer Richard Becker estimated the crowd of participants at 7,000.

Read more here

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

There Is No Room for Gloating – There’s Work to Do

The Left Was Right
By Curt Guyette

19/03/08 “Metro Times” — – They take no satisfaction in knowing that they were right in opposing this ill-fated Iraq war from the outset. All they want is for people to listen to them now.

And what they have to say is this: If we are ever going to get all of our troops out, it will be because of pressure that starts at the grassroots level and works its way up to the top of the political chain – not the other way around.

When the Bush administration was spewing its lies and the mainstream media marched behind in lockstep, trumpeting myths about weapons of mass destruction and fantasies about invading troops being greeted with tossed bouquets, members of the peace movement were trying to warn us not to make what became a mistake of epic proportions.

But America didn’t listen. The drumbeat for war was too loud, drowning out the voices of opposition. Shoved to the margins, they were all but invisible. When not being ignored by mainstream media they were on the receiving end of ridicule from squawking chicken hawks.

Before the start of the war, nearly 60 percent of the country supported an invasion of Iraq. An invasion supposedly made necessary by Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction and the dictator’s close working relationship with Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist network. An invasion that would cost only about $50 million, we were told, with a majority of the troops expected to be back home within a matter of months.

All of which proved to be untrue.

Now, with 4,000 American soldiers dead and another 30,000 U.S. troops wounded in this conflict, with tens of thousands – and perhaps hundreds of thousands – of Iraqis killed and 4.5 million more displaced, there is no room for gloating by those who urged us not to invade. Instead there is only frustration that their voices were not heard.

After five long and bloody years, the doves aren’t despairing. Instead, they are determined.

“We just have to keep going,” says Phyllis Aronson. “There is no other choice.”

As co-chair of the Huntington Woods Peace, Citizenship & Education Project, Aronson is old enough to have witnessed how public protest helped bring about an end to the Vietnam War more than three decades ago. Memories of that era are like a buoy keeping afloat hopes that another mass movement will succeed in bringing this war to an end.

Public opinion has flipped since the start of the war, with polls showing that about 60 percent of Americans now say that the war was a mistake.

“The peace movement hasn’t been marginalized, we’ve been mainstreamed,” says Leslie Cagan, co-chair of the national antiwar coalition United for Peace and Justice.

But the shift in opinion has not resulted in an outpouring of protesters taking to the streets.

Wendy Hamilton, director of the Detroit peace group Swords Into Plowshares is perplexed by the lack of outrage: “Where’s the anger? Where’s the indignation? Why aren’t people saying we were lied to and doing something about it?”

Part of the answer is cynicism, she says. People believe that nothing is going to change as long as George Bush remains in office, so why bother to protest.

“A lot of people, I believe, think that speaking out won’t make any difference,” she says.

Yousef Rabhi, a 19-year-old sophomore at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, has a similar view.

“A lot of people are fed up with the war. You can see that in the national polls,” he says. “But there’s a feeling that’s like despair. Because the task seems so daunting, some people are afraid to do anything at all.”

It doesn’t help that the 2006 mid-term elections, which were largely seen as a referendum on the war, resulted in the Democrats taking control of both the U.S. House and Senate – yet the Bush administration has continued to wage war unimpeded by the opposition party.

“The Democrats didn’t do what some of us hoped they would do, which was use the power of the purse to force an end to the war,” says veteran activist Al Fishman, a board member of the group Peace Action of Michigan. “Not enough of them had the courage to face the accusation that cutting off funding meant that they were deserting the troops in the field.”

It’s a ridiculous charge, Fishman says. You don’t support troops by keeping them in harm’s way; you show support by bringing them home.

Read the rest here.

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment